The Monitoring Officer to report on the receipt of any questions, petitions, or statements of case in accordance with the Council’s procedures.
The following questions have been received:
From Robert Ball
1. What provider collaboratives are under development or being anticipated?
2. Can ISC leads confirm that commercial providers will be excluded from these provider collaboratives?
From Jean Burbridge
1. At the least meeting ICS leads were asked “How will the Integrated Care Board improve the current reduced accountability and transparency?” but this was not answered. Are the ICS leads now able to answer this question?
2. In the last meeting David Sissling stated that the local NHS is currently making no use of private companies to assist it in moving towards an ICS. Please could you clarify whether any companies have been used in recent years to assist in the transition to an ICS and, is so, which they were.
From Giuliana Foster
1. Has a decision been made by the Treasury or Department of Health regarding the funding of the UHL reconfiguration scheme. If so, what is the decision? If not, when is this decision expected?
2. University Hospitals of Leicester judges that a) some of the information in the templates returned to the National Hospital Programme team setting out alternative versions of the Building Better Hospitals for the Future Scheme was commercially sensitive and b) that it is not in the interest of the public to have this information. What type of information was provided in the templates returned to the National Hospital Programme team which was considered commercially sensitive?
These questions will be considered in accordance with Rule 10 of the Scrutiny Procedure rules of the Council’s Constitution.
Minutes:
The Chair explained the procedure to be followed for taking questions from the public and indicated that questions relating to the Integrated Care System could be taken under that item on the agenda.
The Chair took public questions as follows:
From Giuliana Foster
1. Has a decision been made by the Treasury or Dept of Health regarding the funding of the UHL reconfiguration scheme. If so, what is the decision? If not, when is this decision expected?
2. University Hospitals of Leicester judges that a) some of the information in the templates returned to the National Hospital Programme team setting out alternative versions of the Building Better Hospitals for the Future Scheme was commercially sensitive and b) that it is not in the interest of the public to have this information. What type of information was provided in the templates retuned to the National Hospital Programme team which was considered commercially sensitive?
It was noted that a representative of UHL was not present who could provide a response to these questions.
The Chair expressed dissatisfaction that a response wasn’t available for the meeting and asked for written responses to be provided before the next meeting.
Responses provided post meeting:
Q1 Answer – The plans are currently at the pre-outline business case stage and what we have submitted is being reviewed nationally. Details of the way forward, and timeframes, will be released once this has been agreed with the New Hospital Programme.
Q2 Answer – We have submitted plans which illustrate what can be achieved within the original funding allocation, our preferred option and a phased approach which would deliver the preferred option, albeit over a longer time scale. The Trust considers that this information is exempt from disclosure on the grounds of commercial interests and has applied the Public Interest Test as required.
From Jean Burbridge:
1. At the last meeting ICS leads were asked “How will the Integrated Care Board improve the current reduced accountability and transparency?” but this was not answered. Are the ICS leads now able to answer this question?
2. In the last meeting David Sissling stated that the local NHS is currently making no use of private companies to assist it in moving towards an ICS. Please could you clarify whether any companies have been used in recent years to assist in th transition to an ICS and, if so, which they were?
Andy Williams, Chief Executive ICS responded that:
Q1. The Integrated Care Board (ICB) will hold meetings in public between 6 to 10 times per year, the exact configuration of those meetings was still to be determined by the board. There would typically be an annual meeting held in public. The ICS was still subject to the Act of Parliament being finalised and that would establish the board. The ICB would expect to undertake extensive engagement and it was envisaged that would be transparent.
Q2. This query related to the previous system when the STP linked with big companies. It was clarified that ICS would not be doing that locally and work was being taken forward with an in-house team. There was no private sector partner or big consultancy working with them on that.