Agenda item

Minutes of the previous meetings

Draft Minutes of the meeting on 15 January 2019 (attached)

Draft Minutes of the meeting on 20 February 2019 (attached)

Draft Minutes of the meeting on 5 March 2019 (To Follow at the next meeting)


3.1      The minutes of the Health and Care Scrutiny Committee meeting on 15 January 2019 were agreed as a correct record.


3.2      The minutes of the Health and Care Scrutiny Committee meeting on 20 February 2019 were agreed as a correct record.


3.3      Some district members of the committee expressed their concern with regards to the scrutiny review that had been carried out and led to the split of scrutiny of Health and Adult Social Care. The Health Scrutiny committee no longer had adult social care or public health within its remit and there was not district representation on the newly formed Adult Social Care and Communities Scrutiny Committee. One member stated that there should have been consultation with district councils as well as health colleagues. He asked that district members be invited to the Adult Social Care and Communities Scrutiny Committee. Another member stated that the split in the remit went against the direction of travel nationally of integration and suggested that this was a retrograde step.


3.4      Members noted that the General Surgery Reconfiguration pilot considered by the committee at its meeting on 20 February had now been halted as a result of legal challenge. One member asked for an update regarding this; he explained that following a visit from John Abercrombie and a promise to consider all options to put out for consultation, he was seeking reassurance that ‘option 4’ was being worked on and would be consulted on.


In response Deborah Lee outlined that the proposal as detailed in the pilot remained the preferred option for the immediate term. John Abercrombie had visited the Trust and worked with colleagues to develop ‘option 4’, but this was not an option that could be implemented in the short term. There were immediate and pressing issues and option 2 was considered the best option to meet those needs. General emergency surgery was currently in an unsustainable position. Engagement work would be carried out in the summer to explore options for General Surgery including ‘option 2’ and ‘option 4’. All feasible options would then be consulted on.


3.5      One member stated the need for a genuine understanding of the terminology being used, whether that be ‘consultation’ or the use of terms such as ‘temporary’ and ‘pilot’. He emphasised the importance of genuine consultation reflecting a willingness to listen to the public and be prepared to ‘change your mind’. In response it was explained that the Trust had held constructive discussions with the local authority to receive guidance in this case as the legislation was unhelpful regarding the interpretation of substantial variation of a temporary nature. Work would be carried out with Members to agree a local interpretation. With regards to consultation, this was set out in statute and all NHS organisations were obliged to seek views and consult on options, these would be given full and careful consideration by boards and Governing Bodies.



3.6      Noting that the scrutiny task group on the General Surgery Pilot had been suspended due to the threat of legal action, one member asked that the task group reconvene in order to understand the options being considered by the Trust. In response the Chair noted that the task group work was in-complete but that the situation had changed and she would seek advice and consider the most appropriate action for the group moving forward.

            ACTION                     Cllr Carole Allaway Martin/ Stephen Bace



Supporting documents: