10 signatures reached
To: Matt Hancock, the Health Secretary
Save Charing Cross Hospital
Scrap plans to demolish current hospital and replacing it with a series of Urgent Care clinics also selling off most of the site.
There has been a public inquiry please see : ' Happy 70th birthday, NHS. Now save our hospital! LBHF. ' Also www.lbhf.gov.uk/commission
There has been a public inquiry please see : ' Happy 70th birthday, NHS. Now save our hospital! LBHF. ' Also www.lbhf.gov.uk/commission
Why is this important?
These plans will lose more than 300 acute care beds, and London will lose a hospital with a world class reputation for treatment.
This is important to me on a personal level as my mother was treated there during her illness and received really excellent treatment.
Here are the key findings of the Independent Healthcare Commission regarding the closure:
- There is no completed, up-to-date business plan in place that sets out the case for delivering the Shaping a Healthier Future (SaHF) programme, demonstrating that the programme is affordable and deliverable.
- There was limited and inadequate public consultation on the SaHF proposals and those proposals themselves did not provide an accurate view of the costs and risks to the people affected.
- The escalating cost of the programme does not represent value for money and is a waste of precious public resources.
- NHS facilities, delivering important public healthcare services, have been closed without adequate alternative provision being put in place.
- The original business case seriously underestimated the increasing size of the population in North West London and fails to address the increasing need for services.
This is important to me on a personal level as my mother was treated there during her illness and received really excellent treatment.
Here are the key findings of the Independent Healthcare Commission regarding the closure:
- There is no completed, up-to-date business plan in place that sets out the case for delivering the Shaping a Healthier Future (SaHF) programme, demonstrating that the programme is affordable and deliverable.
- There was limited and inadequate public consultation on the SaHF proposals and those proposals themselves did not provide an accurate view of the costs and risks to the people affected.
- The escalating cost of the programme does not represent value for money and is a waste of precious public resources.
- NHS facilities, delivering important public healthcare services, have been closed without adequate alternative provision being put in place.
- The original business case seriously underestimated the increasing size of the population in North West London and fails to address the increasing need for services.
