THE future of 10 beds at Farnham Hospital may have to be decided by the government after controversial proposals by health chiefs to close the beds temporarily were dramatically stopped this week. Surrey County Council's independent health scrutiny committee met on Monday to discuss proposals by the Guildford and Waverley Primary Care Trust (PCT) to temporarily close 51 community care beds across Waverley until April 2006, of which 10 belong to Farnham Hospital. While the beds at Farnham Hospital will not reopen until April 2006, 27 other community care beds will reopen immediately for another purpose as the PCT juggles its resources in a bid to save cash. As a result of the meeting, the committee, an independent watchdog set up to represent the health interests of the community, has instructed the PCT to undertake a formal consultation before it decides whether or not to refer the matter to Patricia Hewitt, the Secretary of State for Health, because it found that the PCT's proposals represented a "substantial variation or development of service". It was at the committee's request that the PCT attended the meeting, held at Godalming Baptist Church, to explain why it needed to temporarily axe the 51 community care beds across the Waverley borough. Board members of the PCT advised the committee that they are facing a major financial crisis caused by a predicted £6.2 million overspend on their annual budget. They argued that the bed closures were a necessary cost-cutting exercise as the PCT bids to achieve its £10 million control target so it can avoid a possible £26 million debt next year. PCT members also argued that the bed closures did not represent a substantial variation in service. Chris Grimes, the chairman of the PCT, said: "It is the strategy of the board to achieve financial balance and our financial challenges are only going to be met through better management of costs. The board has taken the only sensible option to take urgent action but the proposals do not amount to a substantial variation of service." The PCT's interim chief executive, Jane Dale, stressed the importance of meeting the £10 million control total. "We have an offer of £10 million support if we can reduce our debt to our control total target. Everything hangs on us meeting that target because otherwise we could start next year with a debt in excess of £26 million. If the 51 beds are temporarily closed there will be a net saving of £219,000." Members of the health and scrutiny committee questioned the PCT's board about the prioritising of their financial problems over patient welfare. Committee members Simon Harding and Kay Hammond criticised the PCT over its proposals to close the beds they believe are needed if the standard of patient care is not to be compromised. They also raised concerns about the PCT's management plan to re-open the beds in April 2006, the financial strain upon other care services because of the bed closures, and the possible loss of nursing staff during the time the beds are closed. Jane Dale of the PCT responded by reassuring the committee that patient welfare was still a high priority and that a management plan was in place to reopen the beds in April 2006. Yet despite the PCT's reassurances, Dave Sargeant, the local social care area director, refused to endorse the view of the PCT that the bed closures would not affect patient services. When his opinion was further supported by representatives from the Guildford and Waverley PCT Public and Patients Involvement Forum and by local elected representatives, committee members voted unanimously that the PCT's proposals represented a "substantial variation or development of service". In a statement, a spokesman for Surrey County Council's health scrutiny committee, said: "A letter has now been written to the Guildford and Waverley PCT, to inform it that though the committee understands the financial pressures which it is facing, the proposals require it to undertake a formal consultation before any action is taken. Should the board of the Guildford and Waverley initiate such changes without formal consultation, the committee may decide to refer the matter to the Secretary of State." The news was welcomed by local MP Jeremy Hunt, who had spoken out against the PCT's proposals at the meeting. "This is a significant victory for all interested groups," he said. "These temporary closures are purely for financial reasons and not in the interest of patient care. I also cannot see that the closures will only be temporary, as the PCT has said it needs recurrent financial balance. We all understand and sympathise with the pressures that the PCT is under from the government, however I feel that it is extremely wrong for the PCT to be held to ransom when it is patient care that is at risk. "I will be putting pressure on Patricia Hewitt, Secretary of State for Health, as she must be held to account for the cuts she is responsible for making through poorly thought-out reform, too many targets and far too much central bureaucracy." Mr Hunt's views were supported by David Munro, who represents Farnham at Surrey County Council. "We all sympathise with the PCT about its financial problems," he said. "There is just not enough money in health and the bed closures would devastate Farnham Hospital if they were given the go-ahead."
