CAMPAIGNERS have told bosses behind the closure of Bootham Park Hospital to stop passing the buck and get on with restoring mental health services.
Pressure group Mental Health Action York (MHAY) said it was now time to move forward after the organisations involved in the closure were quizzed by councillors yesterday.
City of York Council's Health and Adult Social Care Policy and Scrutiny Committee heard from all four public bodies which played a part in Bootham Park shutting on October 1.
That decision was ultimately taken by health regulator the Care Quality Commission (CQC) and saw patients transferred as far away as Middlesbrough.
It came as Tees, Esk & Wear Valleys NHS Foundation Trust (TEWV) took over running the hospital from Leeds & York Partnership NHS Foundation Trusts (LYPFT).
Chris Brace, a member of MHAY, said: "I want them to stop passing the buck and to commence a meaningful consultation programme.
"By that I mean listen to what the people need.
"We know York and there is a lot of experience amongst the group.
"We have a view of what is needed. We don't want to be offered two options, neither of which is appropriate."
Mr Brace urges health bosses to get on with bringing patients back to York.
"People should not have to travel 50 miles to receive mental health services in the 21st century."
Dr Paul Lelliott, CQC deputy chief inspector of hospitals and lead for mental health, said it had no choice but to close Bootham Park after inspectors ruled the building unsafe.
He told the committee: "We stand by what we said. This wasn't a safe hospital and it was in breach of regulations.
"The responsibility for providing services and making the changes where necessary sits with the local heath community."
Dr Lelliott said LYPFT had drawn up an action plan to improve the Bootham Park building in January 2015, but that did not succeed.
"Leeds and York trust had a plan which we assumed would be implemented," he said.
"We were expectant and hopeful that the problems would be rectified, but that's not what transpired."
The committee also heard from those personally affected by Bootham Park's closure.
Sarah Lazenby spoke of the suicide of a friend who had been a patient.
"I'm here because I hold responsible the closure of Bootham Park Hospital," she said.
"I'm very upset with this unnecessary waste of life. Bootham Park Hospital staff and buildings have saved my life many times.
"Was it (closure) really worth it? I think not."
Independent expert John Ransford, who was commissioned by the committee to investigate the closure, said: "I'm very clear in my mind that there was a lack of strategic leadership.
"I doubt anyone here knows where the buck stops.
He added that "NHS complexity" had contributed to the problem.
Mr Ransford suggested LYPFT may not have been fully committed to managing Bootham Park after losing the contract to TEWV.
"If you are the unsuccessful tenderer you are unlikely to put in the second and third mile," he said.
But LYPFT director of nursing Anthony Deery insisted: "There was no eye taken off the ball around safety issues.
"We weren't able to staff to the numbers we wanted. We were able to supply some of it with bank and agency nurses.
"It wasn't just a question of supply and demand. People just voted with their feet unfortunately."
Dr Lelliott added in a statement: “We welcome today’s discussion as an opportunity for all parties to understand the issues which led to the closure of Bootham Park Hospital in September.
“The transfer of services between Leeds and York Partnership NHS Foundation Trust and Tees, Esk and Wear Valleys NHS Foundation Trust was a complex process.
“We had serious concerns about the safety of patients at Bootham Park Hospital, and in particular the risk posed to people who may be suicidal.
“CQC will always put the needs of people who use services first. In this case we could not agree to register a service that was unsafe.
“We will reflect on the recommendations made in the NHS England report, particularly the need to ensure that all organisations work together for the good of patients.”
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel