HANDS OFF THE CONQUEST CAMPAIGN GROUP
MEETING WITH THE INDEPENDENT REVIEW PANEL
ON MATERNITY SERVICES RECONFIGURATION

THURSDAY, 12^TH JUNE 2008

The Friends of the Conquest decided to set up The Hands Off The Conquest Campaign after our President, Michael Foster MP stated that he could not obtain any reassurances from any Ministers regarding the downgrading of the Conquest Hospital. The Group was formed under the Chairmanship of Mrs. Margaret Williams who is the Secretary of the Friends.

Having spent over two years trying to negotiate and co-operate with the Primary Care Trust over this issue, we now believe that the reconfiguration of maternity services was the objective of the Hospital Trust many years ago.

1. The McKinsey Report was written in 2004. The campaign groups have asked many times for a full copy of the original report. This has never been forthcoming. However, we do know that various scenarios were recorded in that report. The first was that the Conquest Hospital would become the Major General Hospital and the Eastbourne DGH the Local General Hospital. In the long term we believe that the other scenario is the true one, in that both the DGH’s would be downgraded in favour of Pembury and Brighton becoming the Centres of Excellence. We also believe that this is why the Hospital Chief Executive was shipped in by the SHA to carry single siting forward. We also believe that our local PCT chairman and Chief Executive were ousted in favour of Nick Yeo who also came from the SHA and Charles Everett who came from the Home Office, both with the remit to single site.
2. In 2004 there was a Maternity Services Review which concluded that 2 consultant led obstetric units should continue.
3. In November 2006, prior to the consultation, Dr. David Scott, Medical Director ESHT, stated, on local television, that the consultation was not about one or two sites for Maternity, merely which site would be downgraded.
4. Since 2002 the ESHT have not been recruiting midwives and consultants to replace those who left the Trust. There were 11 consultant obstetricians in 2002 and only 7 in 2007. Therefore single siting, in fact, became a self fulfilling prophecy.
5. The Maternity Services Liaison Committee was completely ignored from October 2006, even though they had been a party to the review in 2004.
6. The consultation process was a complete sham. The documents had numerous omissions and errors, and the PCT were forced to print an Erratum and Addendum. Even this was wrong. There website was not operating for several weeks after the start of the consultation. Their documents were only available at the first Public Meeting. They were completely patronising to the campaigners, and there was a total disregard of democracy. 80,000 people signed petitions in the two towns demanding no downgrading to their hospitals. These were handed to the Prime Minister who promised to follow the progress. The PCT totally ignored these signatures. 12,000 people marched in both Towns to stop the downgrading of their hospitals, more than protested against the poll tax in Margaret Thatcher’s time in office. This was ignored by the PCT. Rallies and vigils were held in each Town, all exceptionally well attended but totally ignored by the PCT.
7. Option 5 was produced because the PCT did not include a two site option. It was given to the PCT in March 2006 and we were promised that it would be assessed within three weeks. This did not happen and it was not included in the consultation documents. Many meetings were held by the PCT where there was no mention of Option 5. At the public meetings there was nowhere for the general public to comment on either Option 5 or any 2 site option. The campaign groups therefore produced a Support Form for people to add their names and addresses for a 2 site option, however when these thousands of signatures were handed to the PCT they were treated as ONE bulk response.
8. At the Joint Decision Making Meeting in Uckfield the PCT chose, for the first time to employ security guards. The campaigners were not allowed to display posters or placards even though they would have been well out of reach of everyone except the PCT, and the Bishop of Lewes and 2 MPs, Nigel Waterson and Charles Hendry were “escorted” from the floor when they requested speaking to the Chairman after the meeting had ended.
9. The LMC and GP’s responses were not included in the paperwork presented at the decision making Joint Board Meeting.
10. All local MP’s are against downgrading of core services
11. The Bishop of Lewes is against downgrading of core services
12. Staff at the ESHT have been continually gagged and are still frightened of speaking out for fear of their jobs. They have mortgages to pay and it is easy to threaten.
13. Petitions were forbidden in the Friends shops in both hospitals and at the Conquest a volunteer was so upset by the Chief Executive’s outburst on finding one on the counter that she almost left. No posters relating to Option 5 were allowed, and in most areas of the hospitals there was no documentation relating to Option 5 even though the PCT had assured us that where they put their documents Option 5 would also be there.
14. The comments of the Honorary Secretary of the RCOG, Mr. Richard Wilson, who has lived and worked in both Hastings and Eastbourne, and therefore knows the area extremely well, were ignored. He stated in a meeting which was attended by Dr. Hugh Nicholson, Michael Foster MP, Margaret Williams, Mr. Richard Warren, Dr. Tahir Mahmood Mrs. Charnjit Dhillon, Ms Jessica Britton and Dr. Keith Brent (by phone) that there would not be any significant difference in the service by amalgamating the two units. For this to happen it needed at least 5,000 births and this would not occur even if the two units merged.
15. We believe there would be a “domino effect” since if obstetrics is single sited, paediatrics must follow, and without paediatrics it would be very difficult to maintain a full A & E Department. Again this was confirmed by the RCOG at our meeting, and by a Consultant from the A & E Department.
16. We do not believe that a satisfactory risk assessment has been carried out, and have only found out by Freedom of Information what has actually taken place.
17. We believe that instead of enhancing choice, the reverse would be the result.
18. We believe that networking is the key. At the moment there is no networking with Brighton or Pembury. Each Trust works in isolation, this must not happen in the future.
19. We believe that consideration must be given to the fact that both Hastings and Eastbourne are coastal towns with only 180 degree catchment area rather than 360 degree. Therefore access is reduced by half. It must also be remembered that it is not only Hastings and Eastbourne urban areas it is the rural Camber to Eastbourne and Hailsham to Hastings that must be taken into account.
20. Hastings has become a University Town and therefore attracts a great many students. As part of the regeneration more sites are to be built for them and therefore these numbers will increase in the future. Being a coastal area there is a huge influx of tourists all of whom, potentially need a first rate hospital with all the core services available.
21. Both Towns have a growing immigrant population many of whom are young single men who naturally will settle down and raise a family here thereby increasing not decreasing the birth rate.
22. On 20^th March 2009 a Conservative Survey found that larger units seemed to be at more risk of having to close. At present if say, the Eastbourne DGH unit has to close the Conquest is there as a back up. With a single site this will not happen and women will have to travel further and further.
23. It has just been announced that the A259 (the main road between Eastbourne and Hastings) is the ninth worse road in the country. Therefore as we have always maintained, to single site would lead to deaths of babies and mothers.

We would suggest, therefore, that before any single siting is even considered the following should take place:-

1. The Bexhill Link Road is completed
2. The 60 hour consultant cover issue is resolved, although the latest May paper from the RCOG states that units with less than 2,500 births only require 40 hour consultant presence
3. Sufficient Paramedics have been trained in Critical Care Obstetrics and it is shown absolutely how their skills can be maintained. At present there is no National Training Programme
4. Sufficient midwives have been trained in Advanced Life Support in Obstetrics, and it is shown conclusively how their skills can be maintained.

Patient Safety must be paramount. Single siting in either Eastbourne or Hastings is both unsafe and totally opposed to what the residents demand