NHS Coventry and Warwickshire ICB Consultation on South Warwickshire 

Community Rehabilitation Beds 

Response from Shipston Town Council 

In response to the Integrated Care Board Consultation on Community Rehabilitation Beds, the Town Council of Shipston on Stour submits the following observations of the predominant views of the residents. These concerns have also been conveyed as the views of the population of Shipston and surroundings during the meeting of the WCC Adult Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee on 22nd January. 

1. The Consultation is inequitable 

This consultation is being run in an almost exclusively digital manner. It was announced at an online meeting. The content is only on the ICB Website. The face-to-face drop-ins and the online meetings are only publicised online. The Shipston drop in was during working hours on a weekday. There are widespread complaints that considerable numbers of the population are completely unaware that the consultation is happening. It is the elderly and infirm, disenfranchised by the form of the consultation who will suffer the disadvantages of the removal of hospital facilities. 

2. It is the wrong consultation 

What was taken away from Shipston and the surrounding area was a fully functioning community hospital which included general-purpose beds, these beds could perform any function. Rehabilitation was an important function and the presence in the hospital of further resources to support that function was also important but that was not their only role. The beds could be a step-up, step-down or short-term rest and recovery beds to avoid admission to acute hospitals. Respite beds to take the load off family carers, discharge to assess beds to judge what extra care would be required at home. Or evaluate what other treatment may be required. This misappropriation of our community beds as rehabilitation only beds in Leamington Spa is completely wrong. The Consultation is therefore the wrong consultation in that the change of service is the removal of the hospital including the beds. The false choice between two different distributions of 35 rehabilitation beds is calculated to put the needs of the residents of rural south Warwickshire in conflict with the conurbations of Stratford. Warwick and Leamington. The recent critical incident declared at Warwick hospital illustrates the need for more beds in total not less. This occurrence does not appear to have been considered by the ICB team during their analysis pre consultation. The SWFT bed review concluded that the number should rise from 35 to 41 and it is known that over 50 are in current use. The argument that only 35 are paid for by the ICB is just an accident of internal accounting. The proposed re-distribution could leave beds in both Stratford and Leamington while locating 12 beds in Shipston. 

3. The strength of feeling in the area. 

The residents of Shipston on Stour and surrounding communities are, in our opinion, firmly convinced that the narrowly passed decision of the HOSC on 27th November to focus on an allocation of 35 rehabilitation beds and the shortening of the consultation to 6 weeks was a mistake and is unreasonable. The consultation requested was on the major change of service resulting from the effective removal of the Ellen Badger Hospital and the complete lack of clarity as to what it was to be replaced with. The current consultation sets Rural South Warwickshire in conflict with the conurbations of Warwick, Leamington and Stratford and increases the health inequalities of the growing, ageing and dispersed rural population of Shipston and the surrounding villages. 

Over 4,000 residents signed a petition presented to Parliament by Manuela Perteghella MP on Wednesday, 8th January. 

There is immense anger in the population of rural south Warwickshire. They were promised an integrated healthcare system with Primary, Secondary and Community care all working and learning together. They feel betrayed that this appears not to be happening. They want to see the restoration of a fully functioning community hospital for Shipston and its surrounding parishes. 

4. The Impact 

The impact of Option A is the reduction of bed availability to people living in the Warwick and Leamington conurbation. We would not wish that. Since the beds were moved to Leamington many more people have been able to make use of them and the demand still exists. 

The impact of option B is that the people of Shipston and surrounding villages remain forced into remote beds in Banbury, Oxford, Chipping Norton, Moreton etc. Others suffer the indignity of inadequate home care provision or must rely on family carers who are removed from the productive workforce to care for their relatives. Others still choose not to accept treatment and deteriorate further until, eventually, they are forced to place excess load on A&E and acute hospitals when that is sorely stretched. 

Shipston Town Council believe the residents of the locality prefer Option A as it brings inpatient beds back to Shipston. We have serious concerns about the consultation and neither of these options is fully acceptable. 

5. The alternative 

Option A is unacceptable to the NHS. Option B is unacceptable to Rural South Warwickshire. Working together we can find a solution. 

There are other approaches, suggested by the Community Hospital Association, that could be considered to enable sufficient general-purpose beds to be provided in all three locations. 

We would urge the ICB to work with the community on alternative solutions to providing truly integrated healthcare with Primary, Secondary and Community Healthcare all co-located on one site at the Ellen Badger Hospital as Identified in the Planning Statement to application 21/00004/FUL. This would then meet the Healthcare needs of the community and be a lasting support to the town’s economy by providing secure employment to qualified professionals and skilled care workers with career development opportunity and providing much needed hospital beds.