Meeting documents

Also present at the invitation of the Chairman

Ms Amanda Brown (Locality Director, NHS North Yorkshire and York) – for Item 4

Mr James Hayward (Director of Facilities, Scarborough and North East Yorkshire Healthcare Trust) – for Item 5

Mr Mike Proctor (Deputy Chief Executive, York Teaching Hospital Foundation Trust and Interim Chief Executive, Scarborough and North East Yorkshire Healthcare Trust) – for Item 5

Members are reminded of the need to consider whether they have a personal or prejudicial interest to declare in any of the items on this agenda.  If so, the nature of the interest must be declared at the start or as soon as the interest becomes apparent, of the meeting.  In addition, the attached form must be completed and passed to the Committee Administrator.  The Officers will be pleased to advise, if necessary, and any request for assistance should be made, in the first instance, to the Committee Administrator whose name appears at the end of this agenda.  Ideally, such advice should be sought before the day of the meeting so that time is available to consider any uncertainty that might arise.

Councillors Abbott and Mrs Turner each declared a personal interest in agenda item 4, Development of a Strategy for Healthcare Services in Whitby and in agenda item 5, Integration of Scarborough and North East Yorkshire NHS Trust and York Teaching Hospital Foundation NHS Trust, since they were members of Whitby Hospital Action Group.

To approve as a correct record and sign the Minutes of the meeting held on 23 November 2011.  (Minutes attached).

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on 23 November 2011 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

Public questions of which due notice has been given and which are relevant to the business of the Scrutiny Committee.

The Chairman reported that no public questions had been submitted.

To consider a report by the Locality Director (Hambleton, Richmond and Whitby), NHS North Yorkshire and York, to be submitted to the County Council Scrutiny of Health Committee on 27 January 2012 (to follow)

The Committee received a verbal report by Amanda Brown, Locality Director (Hambleton, Richmond and Whitby), NHS North Yorkshire and York regarding progress in developing a strategy for healthcare services in Whitby, in particular the stakeholder event which had been held on 20 January, and had been attended by Councillors Abbott, Billing and Mrs Turner.  Ms Brown explained the purpose and format of the event which had been to consider the public’s views about health services in Whitby, how and why commissioners had reached this point in their thinking about services, the financial context, clinical guidelines particularly on procedures requiring anaesthesia, patient flows, the needs of the local population, and options available to meet those needs.  There was a clear wish to develop a broader vision for Whitby Hospital, but this needed to be a clinically led process, with the public and other stakeholders involved at an early stage.  Councillor Mrs Turner expressed disappointment with the event, which she felt had been primarily about seeking endorsement for the closure of the theatre at Whitby Hospital.  She had wanted to hear more about the vision, and what services would be delivered in future in the form of positive proposals.  Ms Brown acknowledged there still needed to be engagement with stakeholders on the broader vision, but the event had served especially to convey the clinical parameters of the debate.  Councillor Abbott asked about the cost of leasing the building.  Ms Brown explained that there were depreciation costs and these were an accounting treatment of the value of the asset.  Councillor Lawn commented that it was important that the emerging strategy for healthcare services took into account the planned economic development in the area as a result of the offshore wind farm and potash mine.  The Chairman thanked Ms Brown for her attendance.

RESOLVED that the report be received.

To receive a joint presentation by Mike Proctor (Deputy Chief Executive, YTHFT and Interim Chief Executive, SNEYHT) and James Hayward (Director of Facilities, SNEYHT)

The Committee received a presentation by Mike Proctor, Deputy Chief Executive of York Teaching Hospital Foundation NHS Trust and Chief Executive of Scarborough and North East Yorkshire Healthcare Trust in respect of the context and benefits of the proposed integration of the two Trusts.  Mr Proctor began by explaining how much the NHS had changed over the last 20 years in terms of the sub-specialisation of medicine, technological advances, payment by results according to numbers treated, better informed patients and higher patient expectations.  These changes had adversely affected Scarborough Hospital as a small, remote district general hospital.  He referred to a number of interrelated factors: the geography and demography (large rural area, small population and high percentage of elderly patients); the ageing estate some of which dated back to before the NHS; the difficulty in recruiting and retaining doctors and nurses because of the small teams, lack of specialist services, remote location and limited private practice; clinical quality issues caused by small teams/single consultants, difficulty covering rotas, heavy dependence on locums and low procedure volumes ; and the additional financial support required to address these clinical quality issues.  In terms of the strategic context, a strategic review in 2009 had concluded with commissioner and provider agreement on which services must be delivered at Scarborough, that is, Accident and Emergency services supported by a number of other services, such as trauma, general and elective surgery and obstetrics.  Professor Mascie-Taylor’s North Yorkshire Review of 2011 argued for investment in improved health and social care community services and a shift from acute to community care which further undermined SNEYHT’s ability to cover costs and maintain an adequate emergency response.  Mr Proctor then outlined the benefits of a merger in terms of recruitment/retention, clinical mass, cost and governance.  He cited the example of Scarborough Hospital’s single breast surgeon who could provide a service for some 40 weeks of the year; however, he had resigned to join a larger team in Hull.  Because of the difficulties in finding a replacement, a team of surgeons from York now provided this service for both hospitals, ensuring the service was delivered 52 weeks a year, as part of a larger team with higher volumes of work, and standardisation of clinical practice through agreed clinical guidelines and protocols.  To have a viable out of hours rota, a minimum of six consultants was required, and when they were not on call, they needed enough elective work to keep them busy.  Members then questioned Mr Proctor.  He explained that although a team of breast surgeons serviced a hospital, there would still be continuity of care, so that once a patient was treated by a consultant, she would continue to see the same consultant.  He also alluded to the opportunities for further specialties to be delivered at Scarborough, if there was enough volume of patients, and for services to be repatriated to York/Scarborough from South Tees and Hull, making the whole organisation more viable.  He confirmed that he  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

To consider a report by the Head of Tourism and Culture (Reference 12/075 attached)

The Committee considered a report by the Head of Tourism and Culture (Reference 12/075) in respect of proposals for the future management of Pindar Leisure Centre.  Members were reminded of the history of this facility which opened in 1995 on the site of George Pindar Community College, Eastfield.  The College uses facilities during the school day with community access on evenings, weekends and school holidays.  A Joint Use Agreement for a term of 21 years was established in 1995 with the Council responsible for managing the Leisure Centre during community time.  On 1 April 2008 George Pindar Community College became a Foundation School and Charitable Trust, also acquiring the site from the County Council.  On 1 December 2008 the management of the Leisure Centre was transferred from the Borough Council to the College, and was subject to a service level agreement for the management of the Leisure Centre during community time.  Members were advised that the service level agreement included a break clause and the College had given the necessary notice to cease managing the Leisure Centre from 31 March 2012 due to the financial burden of the net operating cost and drain on its administration resources.  When the management was transferred to the College, the Council made an annual revenue saving of some £50K, since no financial contribution towards the operating costs was sought by the College.  It was considered prudent to base future net operating costs on figures known to the Council from its previous period of operation and £60K had been allocated for the annual net deficit in the budget strategy for 2012/13.  This calculation was based on the annual £50K deficit figure prior to the transfer in 2008 plus inflation plus adjustment for recent loss of income.  Both the fitness suite and the all weather pitch were nearing the end of their lifespans and would both cost in the region of £125K to replace, although the College would return a sinking fund worth £23K which had been created and remained unspent for the replacement of the all weather pitch.  Members then questioned the Head of Tourism and Culture, Mr Bennett about his report.  He did not believe that the College’s decision to relinquish control of the Leisure Centre was connected with any issues surrounding Scarborough Town Football Club, but felt that by not contributing to the operating costs, the Council had benefited from an advantageous deal in 2008.  He could not guarantee that the all weather pitch would be replaced like for like, since the facilities at Pindar College needed to be viewed in the context of the broader leisure strategy which was being drawn up for the Borough – a strategy based on a principal sports village at Weaponness Valley Road, and satellite sites including Pindar Leisure Centre.  The leisure strategy sought to co-locate facilities on individual sites, but also to avoid duplication and ensure that facilities complemented each other.  He noted that usage of the all weather pitch had reduced because of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

To receive a presentation by the Environment and Parks Manager

The Committee received a presentation by the Environment and Parks Manager, Steve Reynolds in respect of the Council’s investigations to identify and remedy incorrect private sewer connections which were causing pollution in Bagdale Beck, Whitby.  Members were reminded that pollution in the beck had been investigated jointly by the Borough Council, the Environment Agency and Yorkshire Water. The latter had carried out works in various areas to eliminate pollution related to sewerage infrastructure.  This included the installation of a dividing wall in dual manholes from a housing estate to prevent the foul and surface water intermingling during heavy rainfall.  The Council had focused its investigations on an underground culvert between Station Square and Victoria Square through extensive dye testing.  This laborious process testing hundreds of connections had narrowed down the number of faulty sewer connections to two: to the George Hotel and to a block of flats in Windsor Terrace.  In respect of the George Hotel, this was a single connection that takes cellar waste and was an original discharge to the beck which pre-dated the public sewer.  Legally, the connection was ‘satisfactory’ when originally constructed and so fell outside of the scope of the Building Act 1984 – the legislation used by Environmental Services.  Therefore the matter had been referred to the Environment Agency as a polluted watercourse.  The EA had written to the owners requesting that the connection be changed.  Environmental Services was also seeking further legal opinion to see if they could take action directly if the EA was unable to secure remedial action.  The problem at Windsor Terrace was more serious since it involved a number of properties.  It was likely to be the result of an error of construction of the properties and so did fall within the scope of the Building Act 1984.  Environmental Services was currently gathering full ownership details to instigate formal action.  This could entail extensive excavation works and the costs were likely to be high; hence it was important that any legal notices were correctly served.  Mr Reynolds expected the work to commence before the summer.  Members then questioned Mr Reynolds.  Asked about the potentially high costs of the remedial works at Windsor Terrace which would fall to the owners, he was acutely aware of this, but believed that some of the flats belonged to a Housing Association and others possibly to a private landlord.  The problem ideally should have been prevented by building regulations, but until they had started excavating, they would not know for sure how difficult/expensive it would be to resolve. A Member referred to an outbreak of illness among some residents of Auckland Way which they had attributed to heavy rain affecting the sewers.  Mr Reynolds replied that when tested there had been no problems with pollution in the open section of Bagdale Beck near Auckland Way; rather the pollution had been found in the culverted section much farther away.

RESOLVED that:

(i)                 the presentation be received; and

(ii)               a further report be submitted  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

To consider a report by the Head of Legal and Support Services (Reference 12/062 to follow)

It was reported that this item had been deferred to the next meeting on 28 March to allow Ingham Play Park Committee greater opportunity to comment on the proposals.

To consider a report by the Head of Legal and Support Services (Reference 12/07 attached)

The Committee considered a report by the Head of Legal and Support Services (Reference 12/07) to assist Members in planning the Committee’s work for 2011/12.  The Overview and Scrutiny Manager commented that there had been several changes to the work programme since the last meeting which had been agreed by the Chair and Vice-Chair.  He referred to the new standing items on the Local Health Partnership (which had been the subject of a briefing to Members earlier in the day) and the developing healthcare strategy for Whitby.  The Vice-Chair requested that a member of the Hambleton, Richmondshire and Whitby Clinical Commissioning Group also attend the next meeting to address the Committee on the developing strategy.  It was also agreed that the Committee’s views be sought on the new draft Leisure Strategy referred to under item 6, and that this be added to the work programme.

RESOLVED that, subject to the amendments agreed above, the report be received.