The Monitoring Officer to report on the receipt of any Questions, Representations and Statements of Case submitted in accordance with the
Council’s procedures.
The following Questions have been received in accordance with Scrutiny
Procedure Rule 10 (1):
A. From: Brenda Worrall
Have local NHS leads published the document which brings together or offers
a guide to reconfiguration proposals and which was promised in January at the Joint Scrutiny Committee meeting?
B. From: Sally Ruane
1. Will the Health and Wellbeing Scrutiny Commission be requiring the acute
reconfiguration Pre-Consultation Business Case and the details of the
proposed consultation process in advance of the start of the consultation itself?
2. On 31st July Simon Stevens & Amanda Pritchard wrote to all NHS trusts
and health providers outlining priorities for the rest of the year. The focus is on
plans to restore cancer and GP services, expand and improve mental health
services and make preparations for winter whilst also preparing for localised or national Covid outbreaks. Additionally, it sets targets to recover the elective
activity. My understanding is that local systems must return a draft summary
plan by 1 September using templates issued by NHSE and covering the key
actions set out in the letter, with final plans due by 21 September. How were
the public involved in the development of these plans and when will these plans be put in the public domain?
C. From: Robert Ball
On what date does (or did) the national committee meet to consider final
approval of the Pre-Consultation Business Case for the acute hospital
reconfiguration proposals in Leicester? If the committee has already met, what is the outcome? Will the public be consulted on the establishment of an
Integrated Care System in Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland?
Minutes:
The Monitoring Officer reported that no representations or statements of case had been submitted. The following Questions had been received in accordance with the Council’s procedures and were included on the Agenda pages:
A. From: Brenda Worrall
Have local NHS leads published the document which brings together or offers
a guide to reconfiguration proposals and which was promised in January at the
Joint Scrutiny Committee meeting?
B. From: Sally Ruane
1. Will the Health and Wellbeing Scrutiny Commission be requiring the acute
reconfiguration Pre-Consultation Business Case and the details of the
proposed consultation process in advance of the start of the consultation itself?
2. On 31st July Simon Stevens & Amanda Pritchard wrote to all NHS trusts
and health providers outlining priorities for the rest of the year. The focus is on
plans to restore cancer and GP services, expand and improve mental health
services and make preparations for winter whilst also preparing for localised or
national Covid outbreaks. Additionally, it sets targets to recover the elective
activity. My understanding is that local systems must return a draft summary
plan by 1 September using templates issued by NHSE and covering the key
actions set out in the letter, with final plans due by 21 September. How were
the public involved in the development of these plans and when will these plans be put in the public domain?
C. From: Robert Ball
On what date does (or did) the national committee meet to consider final
approval of the Pre-Consultation Business Case for the acute hospital
reconfiguration proposals in Leicester? If the committee has already met, what
is the outcome? Will the public be consulted on the establishment of an Integrated Care System in Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland?
The Chair invited each questioner present in the virtual meeting to read their question. He advised that responses to all questions could be considered concurrently and the following responses were noted:
Andy Williams (Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland CCGs) commented on the pre-consultation business case for the reconfiguration proposals, which had been published and he encouraged the public to engage in the formal process. He acknowledged that the documentation was large and added that there were many forums involved to ensure that the plans were widely accessible.
The role of the Commission to ensure proper and full scrutiny of the proposals was recognised. The Chair added that there would be regular updates and that specific questions from members and the public would be invited to future meetings.
It was confirmed that previous concerns raised had been recorded and noted as part of the public engagement process throughout the consultation period.
The intention and work of the CCGs to ensure public engagement and transparency in the process was welcomed.
In terms of the questions concerning consultation on the role of GPs, including cancer support, and mental health practices during Covid-19, it was accepted that further information was required on the specific patient participation, as it was considered that other than the engagement through Healthwatch, there had been little public participation.
In conclusion, it was noted that as proposals developed and the consultation period continued, any further issues and matters of concern could be referred to the Commission in due course.
The Chair and Health partners highlighted the role of the Commission in the process and reminded the public of the value of their participation as part of the Scrutiny Procedure Rules.