20 February 2010
11:0541086#1
I've checked back a bit on the earlier postings but couldn't find a thread for this (might need new glasses!) so apologies if this subject has been done to death elswhere.
As most of you know, for the last 27 months I have been living and working in Nigeria. Before I left in 2007 there was approval for the ASDA development, and we'd successfully fought off turning Connaught barracks into a prison. I'm now back from my warm and sunny sojourn to find pretty much nothing has happened to either location.
There is still talk, something politicians do very well, but no action in getting a hospital for Dover & District. Suggestions of re-using Buckland come from the group that can clearly be labelled "living in the past". We've seen a succession of lorries whacking the bridge over the only road in, and the ensuing mayhem and inconvenience. Some have suggested using the abysmal premises in Maison Dieu, obviously because they have a desire to go to a 1950's building where they can enjoy the feel of post war modernity.
And yet, as someone rightfully pointed out, the hospital will be for the district, and therefore a town centre location would so obviously not be sensible or practical. Add to that the impending arrival of thousands of new Whitfield residents (shock horror, fresh life in the town) and it seems almost too obvious a solution to convert the Connaught Barracks into the new hospital.
I'd be interested to hear reasons why this cannot be done, after all, nothing else is happening up there.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
20 February 2010
11:2741087#2
i think that the connaught barracks have been ear marked for a housing development.
it seems likely that we will actually not have a new hospital of any sort, the money will not be on offer for much longer yet the arguments over location continue.
Guest 651- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 5,673
20 February 2010
11:5241090#3
The hospital has been at Coombe Valley for over 50 years so I don't know why there is a problem with it being there now ?
Been nice knowing you :)
20 February 2010
14:0241091#4
I guess the surroundings have developed and changed, and facilities have to develop i tandem with local need.....?
Ross Miller
- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 17 Sep 2008
- Posts: 3,709
20 February 2010
15:2041094#5
Coombe Valley has terrible access issues as highlighted by the recent bridge issues plus the existing Buckland site has poor quality. poorly maintained Victorian buildings that would be very expensive to re-use
Connaught has been earmarked for an eco-village
The town centre proposal for a poly-clinic is a new build on the current ca park next to the college on Maison Dieu Road - not sure what building Sid thinks is going to be used?
The only other proposal is a site up at Whitfield near the proposed new development/council offices.
The majority of people I talk to favour the town centre site, the council and a small vocal group of activists favour a Whitfield site,
"Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today." - James Dean
"Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength,
While loving someone deeply gives you courage" - Laozi
20 February 2010
17:0941095#6
Hmm, eco-village v hospital. I think Harry Hill has a way of dealing with such matters......
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
20 February 2010
18:5541099#7
The District Council's favoured location is Mid-Town. The building may not have in-patient beds, but "step-up and step-down" beds will be provided locally.
It never was and never will be, an all singing, all dancing, full general hospital.
I know about the saying "you can't please all the people all of the time", but this long-running hospital debate has split Dover so much that those providing the service (PCT/EKHT) are almost walking away.
I'm sure that if the Mid-Town site had been supported, then everyone would have got behind it and the flood-risk problems could have been resolved.
I still think the flood-risks need to be resolved anyway, because if they aren't, then no Mid-Town development can go ahead; also many houses in and around the Maison Dieu area will have their flood-risk issues resolved.
Part of the Mid-Town problem is that there is an increasing amount of money being made available for the alleviation of the flood-risks, but maybe it'll (probably) be outside the time limit set by the PCT/EKHT.
Roger
Unregistered User
20 February 2010
19:4841101#8
Roger , you have it in a nutshell. I was posting at the same time as you and regretably lost my posting.
Your posting tells it straight and true.
Watty
21 February 2010
09:2241112#9
Sid
You summed it up correctly.
The order of events was that the powers that be made a decision to put it in the middle of the town then a sham of expensive public consultations and a lot of money spent getting a full design before a further decision (without consultation) to put it in the most awkward out of the way situation with bad access on a site that should be housiing land instead of green fields.
It wasnt a minority that saw the light - 30000 petition, a public rally of over 1500 and at every consultation meeting the majority of the public shouting for Whitfield on an area ready and zoned for industrial where even Nadim Aziz stated that 50% of the population of Dover went shopping to each week. To where the bus station has be relocated and where the new Grammar schools will go as well a the new sports centre.
You are quite right that the hospital should serve the district as parking is crucial and expansion must be considered.
The decisions about delay and argument are ridiculous as no-one in Authority is taking ANY notice of the people but acting on their own agendas.
At one meeting when it was pointed out that the new Clinic at maison dieu was to have inadequate parking a DDC rep said that patients should walk or catch a bus to it!! He patently doesnt live in the real world.
Its all a farce intended to give Dover a second class result and no doubt the change of venue has little to do with flood risk but more to do with the PCT having misspent the funds elsewhere - or if not why is there no consultation about this location.
A proper location with space to grow acessible to all the district and linked to Deal and aylesham as well as good links to Ashford is so obvious one can only ask why. Did you see how gridloccked Dover can be - even a helicopter cant land there!
The decision makers should be held to account as extortionate sums have been wasted.
21 February 2010
11:2741114#10
Roger/Watty, is this a decision for the District Council? Has the public been asked to choose from a seclection of available/potential sites?
Has the introduction of the eco-villagers and the 30,000 new Whiltfieldians been taken into account when selecting a geographically limited site?
Do we know what facilities will be provided by what appears to be a day clinic? Do we know how many patients this will attract and if it is enough to stop the place being closed down no sooner that is has been opened?
Won't the cost of flood plain work make a clinic financially non-viable?
I am sure a lot of work has gone into this, but maybe moreso to justify a decision to provide something the public doesn't really want, than getting the right solution for the district.
To put it bluntly, Dover does NOT need an eco-village, but it DOES need a hospital, and so does the district.
I'd strongly recommend a re-think.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
21 February 2010
19:3041136#11
sid
their can be no firther discusions or re-thinking, we are days away from losing all the funding.
i have always gone along with the view of roger on this, a fully fledged general hospital was never very likely.
buckland is not perfect,but better than nothing, and that is what we will be left with if any more arguments go on.
Guest 670- Registered: 23 Apr 2008
- Posts: 573
21 February 2010
19:4241138#12
You are absolutely right Howard, with the renovations going on at Buckland I would say the decision has already been made.
Unregistered User
21 February 2010
20:1141139#13
Sid, not a DDC decision. The Health sector did their own consultations and decisions are theirs. DDC were a consultee.
If an all singing dancing District General Hospital was the option then Whitfield WOULD be the preferred site. This not the case as others have stated.
You need populationsof 500k+ to justify a DGH.
East Kent has AshfordDGH, ThanetDGH and a diluted CanterburyDGH for 600K+ population. End of case.
We lost the case in 1998 when nobody bothered to join for the fight for Buckland and shouted for Canterbury.History tends to be retold, however uncomfortable for some.
Watty
21 February 2010
22:0741146#14
Paul and Roger
Well put
East Kent has the main "specialist" hospitals (William Harvey/QEQM) and to a lesser degree Canterbury. In many cases these hospitals give a wider facility as in the past one was often referred to London hospitals where now many such operations are dealt with locally in Ashford/Margate.
It is the after care that is required wherby patients can get this locally after discharge rather than travelling to WH and QEQM also "minor" ops.
I have always favoured a Central Dover location as it has good public transport links from accross the district as well as close to the railway station and would help regenerate the town but one has to, reluctantly, accept the facts.
Due to the continuing "Whifield" scenario the Town location was lost although with forethought the problems could,I feel, have been resolved and would have stopped alternative sites being proposed.
What is needed is for the work to start and get the facility to Dover that it deserves and stop winging about Whifield otherwise yet again the oportunity is lost.
22 February 2010
07:1541153#15
Well Sid - you see the problem.
1. "Due to the continuing "Whifield" scenario the Town location was lost" Utter unsupported rubbish! doesnt matter what anyone says the decision is made in private and unaccountable - those who state that arguments over whitfield have lost money or detract are kidding themselves and us. the delays and loss of money is entirely PCT responsibility ( supported by DDC )
2. Everyone who states the the " numbers dont justify a DGH " are masking the requests for a Satelite Hospital with local recovery beds that Pat has mentioned. A hospital with emergency services and local clinic services and a birthing unit is not a DGH! If we had that now then it could grow as the population grows - that is what has been asked for here. What hospital has enough parking anywhere.
I am afraid that all those who support the PCT in this are either blind to the arguments or just wish to detract for their own purposes.
The people of Dover have spoken and have been ignored. No-one has had proper consultation except the petitioners.
Thanks for the interest Sid - you see why its a waste of time though...
22 February 2010
12:2641169#16
Howard, far better no hospital than the wrong hospital in the wrong place. We should not be so desperate as to take anything the PCT says for fear of getting nothing.
I do seem to recall lots of paper waving publicity regarding no loss of BH to Dover, but that was obviously just political posturing rather than any determined effort to keep what we needed. So very disappointing.
However, we do have the opportunity to state clearly what we want and where we want it, and we should do so. But, despite asking the question, the only reason given for not using Connaught is because of some hippy idea about eco life. If DDC/KCC want an eco village they could start by making the Whitfield expansion eco friendly and handover Connaught for conversion to a DGH.
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
22 February 2010
14:3841171#17
I think that Connaught is already sold off and that is the end of the matter.
Unregistered User
22 February 2010
20:4541192#18
David, the people of Dover did not say build a polyclinic or even one with a few beds at Whitfield. The people of Dover said town centre.
Sid you are right about people waving paper about Buckland. They switched to Whitfield!
As for Connaught I believe the Health bodies discounted it.
Sid, it seems your first paragraph contradicts your second.
Frankly, I believe the Buckland site the worst of all options and have consistently said that.
Watty
22 February 2010
21:0041193#19
PaulW, Roger et al - right on! The mid-town site has considerable, realistic support. Let's just get on with it for goodness sake. Parking can be addressed - where there is a will................
22 February 2010
21:0541197#20
It does seem contradictory I agree. However, when the "appeasement papers" were being waved to the press, BH provided many more services than now. Since that day of "good news", BH has relentlessly had its services stripped away in order to make final closure easier.
The arguments for keeping BH where it is seem to be based on PCT funding being taken away if we don't toe the line. For my money that's not reason enough to accept the status quo. BH is in a bad location for a District facility, that much should be obvious to everyone. The inappropriateness of the site will be exacerbated by the growth in population that we are expecting.
It also seems to me the local PCT doesn't really want BH and all this investment, if it happens, is just a sop to get us off their backs. Once everything quietens down the final dagger will be inserted on cost, location and needs basis, and BH will be no more. I suppose it could be turned into another eco-house site.
Worryingly, generations to come will blame us for getting this wrong and not standing up for what is really needed.