Venue: McIlroy Suite, Macclesfield Town Football Club, Moss Ross Ground, London Road, Macclesfield SK11 7SP
Contact: Joel Hammond-Gant Scrutiny Officer
Link: Audio recording
Apologies for Absence
Apologies for absence were received from Councillors G Baxendale, S Brookfield, E Brooks, I Faseyi, G Hayes and D Mahon.
Declarations of Interest
To provide an opportunity for Members and Officers to declare any disclosable pecuniary and non-pecuniary interests in any item on the agenda.
There were no declarations of interest.
Declaration of Party Whip
To provide an opportunity for Members to declare the existence of a party whip in relation to any item on the Agenda
There were no declarations of the existence of a party whip.
Public Speaking Time/Open Session
A total period of 15 minutes is allocated for members of the public to make a statement(s) on any matter that falls within the remit of the Committee.
Individual members of the public may speak for up to 5 minutes, but the Chairman will decide how the period of time allocated for public speaking will be apportioned, where there are a number of speakers.
Note: in order for officers to undertake and background research, it would be helpful if members of the public notified the Scrutiny Officer listed at the foot of the Agenda at least one working day before the meeting with brief details of the matter to be covered.
Ted Wall spoke to need for mental health service provision to change in Eastern Cheshire, in order that it could better support the public, and argued that the continued resource pressure on the NHS and shortfall in service was directly linked to reduced funding from central government.
Mr Wall also referred to two petitions that had been submitted; one signed by over 4000 members of the public that wanted to keep mental health services within Macclesfield, and a second signed by 2800 members of the public who asked for the shortfall in local mental health service provision within Eastern Cheshire be addressed.
To consider reports from the NHS Eastern Cheshire Clinical Commissioning Group on the results on the public consultation on the redesign of adult and older people’s specialist mental health services in east Cheshire.
Jacki Wilkes and Stephen Williams delivered a presentation to the committee that summarised how the consultation process and engagement with the public had been carried out, and how the widely accepted Gunning principles – a set of principles confirmed in 2001 that are applicable to all public consultations that are undertaken in the UK – were adhered to throughout the process.
The committee was advised that, upon conclusion of the consultation period, a two month period of ‘conscientious consideration’ had begun, to allow for the views, comments and concerns of the public and other stakeholders to be taken into account or addressed prior to the development of the formal business cases.
It was reported that the Governing Body for NHS Eastern Cheshire CCG would meet at the end of November to consider the business cases for the three consulted proposals, and make a decision as to which proposal would be selected and taken forward. It was planned for the final business case for the chosen option to be presented to the committee in January 2019.single, more detailed business case on the chosen proposal
(The meeting adjourned for a short break.)
Members put questions and comments in relation to the consultation and engagement process that had been undertaken, which included;
· concern regarding the increased travel times that would be imposed upon people having to travel to Bowmere, Chester;
· a lack of clarity with regard to how the proposed community care services would operate and benefit the public;
· that the finances and cost analyses presented during the consultation were not clear enough to properly inform the public of the financial impacts of each proposed option, nor to allow for informed scrutiny;
· apprehension that the growing and potentially lasting impacts of reduced government funding would lead to further reductions in spending on mental health services, regardless of which proposal was taken forward, and despite Cheshire East having had the lowest reported per capita spend on mental health services in the country;
· what the potential knock-on impacts would be to Cheshire East Council services, and disquiet that this had not been considered in enough detail throughout the consultation process;
· that there was a relatively low rate of return on the consultation, having been informed that the proposed changes to service provision would impact on approximately half a million members of the public;
· concern that some members of the public may not receive adequate support or services during a period of transition and change to mental health service provision;
· that there had been a lack of information on, or feedback from, the emergency services and how the proposed options would impact on their ability to deliver their services effectively and sustainably; and
· whether the engagement work undertaken to engage with different groups and communities within the local public had been considerable or effective enough, given that there had been considerably lower response rates to the consultation from certain community groups.
The Portfolio Holder for Adult Social Care and Integration reiterated the position of the ... view the full minutes text for item 41.