Tuesday, December 16, 2008
The waters get even murkier as more truths come to light.
Have a look at this.
http://www.redcarcleveland.gov.uk/main.nsf/AE819EEDFB21A04F80256EE100494ECF/$File/Coatham_Enclosure_Scrutiny_Commission.pdf
We were pointed to this by a source from within the council and have discovered some very interesting information regarding the PCT and their involvement in the Coatham Scheme.
In the Redcar and Cleveland Coatham Scrutiny Committee final report on page 12, it clearly states...
5.2 Health Care Concern
5.2.1 Concerns were raised regarding the ability of the doctors’ surgeries and the dentists in the area to cope with the influx of additional people from the new housing development. It was be anticipated that a development of this size would house approximately 500/600 people.
Responses
"The expert witness from Langbaurgh Primary Care Trust stated that:
5.2.2 Doctors Surgeries
Currently this would not be an issue for the local doctors’ surgeries in Redcar as they had spare capacity and there was an already declining population in the area".
Well, well, well...this shows us quite a few things and once again raises more questions?
Firstly it shows that the PCT had had involvement with, and input into the Coatham Scheme, long before the plans for a five GP surgery were added to the Coatham Planning application, without there being any consultation and without any of the councillors or relevant council committees knowing a thing about it in 2006.
But secondly and most important of all, is the statement made by the "expert witness" from the Langbaurgh Primary Care Trust.
This expert witness clearly told the Coatham Scrutiny Committee in 2004, that there was no need to worry about the influx of extra people coming into Coatham as a result of the houses being built, because existing doctors surgeries in Redcar had spare capacity to accomodate the extra number of people that had been quoted.
Not only that, this expert witness completely rubbishes in one line what Cllr Chris Abbott and countless other individuals from within the council have been saying for years. Cllr Abbott, amongst others, has been telling us since our campaign began, that the population of Redcar was increasing and so we needed to have the houses in Coatham and elsewhere to meet this demand. And yet here is this expert witness telling the Coatham Scrutiny meeting that the area, and I quote, "had a declining population"?
How can Cllr Abbott tell us that the population was increasing to justify building the houses, when an expert from the PCT had already told the Coatham Scrutiny Meeting that the population of the area was declining?
How can Veronica Moore the wife of the ex-chief executive, who was on the board of the PCT at the time and the PCT board state in 2006, that there was a need to move the existing Coatham surgery over to the Coatham Enclosure Scheme because they wouldnt be able to cope with the increased numbers of people, when an expert from the PCT in 2004, approximately eighteen months before that state, that there was enough spare places in existing surgeries to accomodate the influx of extra people that the scheme would bring and so obviously, have no need of another surgery being provided as part of the scheme?
It is clear to see that what PCT manager Mr Stephen Childs said at the meeting at the Coatham Memorial Hall in January 2007, carries far more weight than we could have possibly anticipated. He stated in front of over 100 people, that the decision to add the 5GP surgery was and I quote "a speculative move on behalf of Persimmon and an officer of the council". An officer that for some reason he refused to name?
Any guesses as to who it was?
Whoever it was they, along with the developer and also the PCT, despite Stephen Childs saying that the PCT didnt know that plans for a surgery had been added to the Coatham plans but actually did know, desperately wanted this new surgery to go ahead. They pushed this new GP surgery despite it having had no public consultation before the plans were added to the application, despite councillors having had no knowledge about its addition to the application and despite the most damning fact of all, that one of the PCT's own expert witnesses had already stated months and months before, to the councils own Coatham Scrutiny Committee themselves, that there was absolutely no need for it at all?
Now why on earth would they all do that?
http://www.redcarcleveland.gov.uk/main.nsf/AE819EEDFB21A04F80256EE100494ECF/$File/Coatham_Enclosure_Scrutiny_Commission.pdf
We were pointed to this by a source from within the council and have discovered some very interesting information regarding the PCT and their involvement in the Coatham Scheme.
In the Redcar and Cleveland Coatham Scrutiny Committee final report on page 12, it clearly states...
5.2 Health Care Concern
5.2.1 Concerns were raised regarding the ability of the doctors’ surgeries and the dentists in the area to cope with the influx of additional people from the new housing development. It was be anticipated that a development of this size would house approximately 500/600 people.
Responses
"The expert witness from Langbaurgh Primary Care Trust stated that:
5.2.2 Doctors Surgeries
Currently this would not be an issue for the local doctors’ surgeries in Redcar as they had spare capacity and there was an already declining population in the area".
Well, well, well...this shows us quite a few things and once again raises more questions?
Firstly it shows that the PCT had had involvement with, and input into the Coatham Scheme, long before the plans for a five GP surgery were added to the Coatham Planning application, without there being any consultation and without any of the councillors or relevant council committees knowing a thing about it in 2006.
But secondly and most important of all, is the statement made by the "expert witness" from the Langbaurgh Primary Care Trust.
This expert witness clearly told the Coatham Scrutiny Committee in 2004, that there was no need to worry about the influx of extra people coming into Coatham as a result of the houses being built, because existing doctors surgeries in Redcar had spare capacity to accomodate the extra number of people that had been quoted.
Not only that, this expert witness completely rubbishes in one line what Cllr Chris Abbott and countless other individuals from within the council have been saying for years. Cllr Abbott, amongst others, has been telling us since our campaign began, that the population of Redcar was increasing and so we needed to have the houses in Coatham and elsewhere to meet this demand. And yet here is this expert witness telling the Coatham Scrutiny meeting that the area, and I quote, "had a declining population"?
How can Cllr Abbott tell us that the population was increasing to justify building the houses, when an expert from the PCT had already told the Coatham Scrutiny Meeting that the population of the area was declining?
How can Veronica Moore the wife of the ex-chief executive, who was on the board of the PCT at the time and the PCT board state in 2006, that there was a need to move the existing Coatham surgery over to the Coatham Enclosure Scheme because they wouldnt be able to cope with the increased numbers of people, when an expert from the PCT in 2004, approximately eighteen months before that state, that there was enough spare places in existing surgeries to accomodate the influx of extra people that the scheme would bring and so obviously, have no need of another surgery being provided as part of the scheme?
It is clear to see that what PCT manager Mr Stephen Childs said at the meeting at the Coatham Memorial Hall in January 2007, carries far more weight than we could have possibly anticipated. He stated in front of over 100 people, that the decision to add the 5GP surgery was and I quote "a speculative move on behalf of Persimmon and an officer of the council". An officer that for some reason he refused to name?
Any guesses as to who it was?
Whoever it was they, along with the developer and also the PCT, despite Stephen Childs saying that the PCT didnt know that plans for a surgery had been added to the Coatham plans but actually did know, desperately wanted this new surgery to go ahead. They pushed this new GP surgery despite it having had no public consultation before the plans were added to the application, despite councillors having had no knowledge about its addition to the application and despite the most damning fact of all, that one of the PCT's own expert witnesses had already stated months and months before, to the councils own Coatham Scrutiny Committee themselves, that there was absolutely no need for it at all?
Now why on earth would they all do that?
// posted by Chris McGlade @ 5:52 AM 
