Wednesday, June 27, 2007
"Lib Dems are a strong, independent party"
LIB DEMS REFUSE OFFER OF POSITIONS IN GORDON BROWN'S CABINET
Speaking of the refusal of the Lib Dems to take any posts in Gordon Brown's cabinet, the Lib Dem Leader, Sir Menzies Campbell MP said:"I share his high assessment of the abilities of our parliamentarians! But I have rejected his offer, just as I did that from David Cameron, when he asked me in April to consider proposing a joint candidate for London mayor with the Conservatives.
The Liberal Democrats are a strong, independent party. There is no way that Liberal Democrats can serve in a Labour government – especially this Labour government, which is doing so much that we are fundamentally opposed to: ID cards, mismanagement of the NHS, neglect of the environment, centralisation of power, attacks on civil liberties, nuclear power and Council Tax."
Friday, June 22, 2007
Deputy Mayor on visit to LOURDES
Deputy Mayor Sheila Smith-Pryor (Hale End Ward, Waltham Forest, Lib Dem) about to leave on a visit to Lourdes, as a volunteer with the Chingford "ACROSS" Organisation. The trip takes sick and unable residents to the shrine in South West France by "Jumbulance" for a week.Monday, June 18, 2007
Whipps Cross concerns
At a recent Health Scrutiny meeting, and also at the last Board Meeting of Whipps Cross Hospital, Cllr.John Beanse, Vice-Chair of Waltham Forest Health Scrutiny, expressed his concern about one particular detail in the latest Patients' Survey. This reported that more than a fifth of the respondents said they had experienced MIXED SEX ACCOMMODATION in the hospital - despite frequent assurances about the policies to minimise this. The figure is lower than the London average, apparently, but there is still nevertheless a long way to go at Whipps Cross. John Beanse also drew attention to the disturbingly high rates of DNA [= those who Did Not Attend appointments] in some departments of the hospital and it was agreed there needed to be more attention given to this matter.
Friday, June 15, 2007
It's NO to TESCO !!!
HOT NEWS! The proposed Tesco store for HIGHAMS PARK (off Larkshall Rd. - former C & A site) has been REFUSED.
The long report from the Inspector (now published) following the January Planning Inquiry recommends refusal because the store would be out of keeping in the area and too large. There are also concerns about the residential development that was to be included on the site. The Secretary of State has accepted the recommendation to refuse the development.
Some key sentences from the reoprt:
"The scale of provision and size of store would be out of place, likely to cause material harm to the vitality, character and role of the centre in the local community."
On proposed housing: " "I find that the layout and likely design would fail to meet the policy requirements of achieving good quality residential developments."
"-- the retail and design objections I identify are fundamental to the unacceptability of the scheme and far outweigh the matters I find in its favour."
In the assessment from the Secretary of State on the housing aspect, she speaks of the failure "to create a building of distinctive character which would support a sense of local pride and dignity," and that the development "would also be in stark contrast to the terraced housing in the surrounding area."
The conclusions also state: " -- the Secretary of State has strong reservations about the visual impact of the proposed scheme, its relationship to the existing centre and its potential to provide a high quality of life for those living, working or otherwise using it."
There are some references to the input from local Councillor John Beanse:
"Cllr.Beanse took the opportunity to voice the varied views of his constituents." [Another place in the report refers to Cllr.Beanse representing both sides of the argument "very helpfully (and fairly)".]
"At the Inquiry the applicant failed to demonstrate circumstances of a Tesco having the effect of enhancing a local centre. The opposite is in fact a reality, as evidenced by the effect on Ponders End - - - " [this was in response to a persistent line of questioning from John Beanse].
WHAT HAPPENS NOW? Tesco could challenge the decision in the High Court; or perhaps they might be interested in making a new application, perhaps for a smaller store with a different style of housing development??
Watch this space!
The long report from the Inspector (now published) following the January Planning Inquiry recommends refusal because the store would be out of keeping in the area and too large. There are also concerns about the residential development that was to be included on the site. The Secretary of State has accepted the recommendation to refuse the development.
Some key sentences from the reoprt:
"The scale of provision and size of store would be out of place, likely to cause material harm to the vitality, character and role of the centre in the local community."
On proposed housing: " "I find that the layout and likely design would fail to meet the policy requirements of achieving good quality residential developments."
"-- the retail and design objections I identify are fundamental to the unacceptability of the scheme and far outweigh the matters I find in its favour."
In the assessment from the Secretary of State on the housing aspect, she speaks of the failure "to create a building of distinctive character which would support a sense of local pride and dignity," and that the development "would also be in stark contrast to the terraced housing in the surrounding area."
The conclusions also state: " -- the Secretary of State has strong reservations about the visual impact of the proposed scheme, its relationship to the existing centre and its potential to provide a high quality of life for those living, working or otherwise using it."
There are some references to the input from local Councillor John Beanse:
"Cllr.Beanse took the opportunity to voice the varied views of his constituents." [Another place in the report refers to Cllr.Beanse representing both sides of the argument "very helpfully (and fairly)".]
"At the Inquiry the applicant failed to demonstrate circumstances of a Tesco having the effect of enhancing a local centre. The opposite is in fact a reality, as evidenced by the effect on Ponders End - - - " [this was in response to a persistent line of questioning from John Beanse].
WHAT HAPPENS NOW? Tesco could challenge the decision in the High Court; or perhaps they might be interested in making a new application, perhaps for a smaller store with a different style of housing development??
Watch this space!
Thursday, June 14, 2007
Mental Health Services locally
“FIT FOR THE FUTURE” CONSULTATION – MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES
Although the “main” consultation – involving services at Whipps Cross, is not now expected until October at the earliest, there will be consultation on our Mental Health Services, managed by NELMHT* across 4 boroughs: Waltham Forest; Redbridge; Havering; Barking & Dagenham. *[North East London Mental Health Trust]
The timescale for this is expected to be July-September.
Some of the main features of developments within NELMHT are:
Ø Moving to Foundation Trust status which requires consultation in its own right (some implications and issues below)
Ø Relocating services currently at Mascalls Park (Brentwood) to the Goodmayes site, affecting patients from Havering & Barking & Dagenham – by Dec.2011
Ø A new Detox unit for patients with “dual diagnosis” of having Mental Health problems as well as perhaps alcohol or drug related problems – 16 bed (funding from National Treatment Agency); E.London & City also expected to buy into this service
Ø A new “low-secure unit” for 15 men (originally to be PFI, but now capital funding)
Although the “main” consultation – involving services at Whipps Cross, is not now expected until October at the earliest, there will be consultation on our Mental Health Services, managed by NELMHT* across 4 boroughs: Waltham Forest; Redbridge; Havering; Barking & Dagenham. *[North East London Mental Health Trust]
The timescale for this is expected to be July-September.
Some of the main features of developments within NELMHT are:
Ø Moving to Foundation Trust status which requires consultation in its own right (some implications and issues below)
Ø Relocating services currently at Mascalls Park (Brentwood) to the Goodmayes site, affecting patients from Havering & Barking & Dagenham – by Dec.2011
Ø A new Detox unit for patients with “dual diagnosis” of having Mental Health problems as well as perhaps alcohol or drug related problems – 16 bed (funding from National Treatment Agency); E.London & City also expected to buy into this service
Ø A new “low-secure unit” for 15 men (originally to be PFI, but now capital funding)
- All above developments planned to be adjacent to Chapters House at Goodmayes by Spring, 2009
Ø Emphasis on more care in the community – any implications for Social Services will need to be carefully considered.
Ø Emphasis on more care in the community – any implications for Social Services will need to be carefully considered.
Foundation Trust status: issues & info.-
* The regulator would be not NHS London, but a body called Monitor
* There would be a Trust Board managing NELMHT and making decisions plus a Board of Governors where the majority of places would be the public and service users; opportunity for the local authorities to nominate also. How the 2 bodies would operate alongside each other in practice would need careful working out and is not entirely clear at present.
* One welcome development is to set up a Service Users’ group as a subcommittee of the Board
In the longer term, NELMHT will have an eye on the outcome of the consultation re King George’s and Whipps X to see if there is scope for having some services on either site, depending on any “downsizing” – but this probably won’t feature in the consultation.
The cross-borough Scrutiny group, of which Lib Dem Councillors John Beanse (Waltham Forest) and Ralph Scott (Redbridge) are members, has agreed to do some joint scrutiny of the proposals when the document is published, in addition to individual borough scrutiny.
* The regulator would be not NHS London, but a body called Monitor
* There would be a Trust Board managing NELMHT and making decisions plus a Board of Governors where the majority of places would be the public and service users; opportunity for the local authorities to nominate also. How the 2 bodies would operate alongside each other in practice would need careful working out and is not entirely clear at present.
* One welcome development is to set up a Service Users’ group as a subcommittee of the Board
In the longer term, NELMHT will have an eye on the outcome of the consultation re King George’s and Whipps X to see if there is scope for having some services on either site, depending on any “downsizing” – but this probably won’t feature in the consultation.
The cross-borough Scrutiny group, of which Lib Dem Councillors John Beanse (Waltham Forest) and Ralph Scott (Redbridge) are members, has agreed to do some joint scrutiny of the proposals when the document is published, in addition to individual borough scrutiny.
Saturday, June 09, 2007
CARERS’ WEEK
MONDAY 11th – FRIDAY 15th JUNE is Carers' Week.
– Liberal Democrats recognise the tremendous contribution made by carers. One in eight adults are carers – six million people. Three in five people in the UK will become carers at some point in their life. Carers’ contribution to society has been estimated at £57bn per year.
The Lib Dems recently won a concession from the government which will give around 40,000 carers an entitlement to the basic state pension. Under the new scheme, people who care for more than 20 hours per week for people who aren't necessarily in receipt of disability related benefits, where this is certificated by a social care or health professional, will accrue entitlement to the basic state pension. This was conceded by the government in response to amendments tabled by the Lib Dems at committee stage of the Pensions Bill.
A parliamentary debate on carers is scheduled for Monday 11th.June.
For more information about carers click here.
– Liberal Democrats recognise the tremendous contribution made by carers. One in eight adults are carers – six million people. Three in five people in the UK will become carers at some point in their life. Carers’ contribution to society has been estimated at £57bn per year.
The Lib Dems recently won a concession from the government which will give around 40,000 carers an entitlement to the basic state pension. Under the new scheme, people who care for more than 20 hours per week for people who aren't necessarily in receipt of disability related benefits, where this is certificated by a social care or health professional, will accrue entitlement to the basic state pension. This was conceded by the government in response to amendments tabled by the Lib Dems at committee stage of the Pensions Bill.
A parliamentary debate on carers is scheduled for Monday 11th.June.
For more information about carers click here.
Tuesday, June 05, 2007
Waltham Forest Deputy Mayor
At the May full Council meeting, Lib Dem Councillor SHEILA SMITH-PRYOR was unanimously elected to serve as Waltham Forest Deputy Mayor for 2007/8.Sheila is one of the three Liberal Democrat Councillors in HALE END & HIGHAMS PARK ward.
Monday, June 04, 2007
After the ceremony ---
The photo right, taken after the recent full Council meeting, shows newly appointed Deputy Mayor of Waltham Forest Cllr.Sheila Smith-Pryor with local constituents who had attended the ceremony.Sheila is holding the bouquet that was presented to her during the meeting.
The patient's voice
At the last meeting of Waltham Forest Council's Health Scrutiny Committee, both Councillors Sheila Smith-Pryor and John Beanse [Lib Dem Councillors in Hale End & Highams Park] criticised Waltham Forest Primary Care Trust for what they see as its inadequate patient and public involvement in the workings and decisions of the Trust.
For instance, there has been no representative of the PPI* Forum present at all at Trust Board meetings and opportunities for the public to comment or ask questions are strictly limited to a question at the beginning of the meeting. No further involvement is possible after this for any visitor. The justification given, that "this is a meeting held in public, not a public meeting", does not seem constructive or show any serious desire to engage with the people or public representatives.
These points have been made to the Healthcare Commission and we must wait to see if this aspect of the PCT's work will come under their scrutiny as they have the task of assessing the delivery of our local Trust.
*[Patient and Public Involvement]
For instance, there has been no representative of the PPI* Forum present at all at Trust Board meetings and opportunities for the public to comment or ask questions are strictly limited to a question at the beginning of the meeting. No further involvement is possible after this for any visitor. The justification given, that "this is a meeting held in public, not a public meeting", does not seem constructive or show any serious desire to engage with the people or public representatives.
These points have been made to the Healthcare Commission and we must wait to see if this aspect of the PCT's work will come under their scrutiny as they have the task of assessing the delivery of our local Trust.
*[Patient and Public Involvement]
