Calendar An icon of a desk calendar. Cancel An icon of a circle with a diagonal line across. Caret An icon of a block arrow pointing to the right. Email An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of the Facebook "f" mark. Google An icon of the Google "G" mark. Linked In An icon of the Linked In "in" mark. Logout An icon representing logout. Profile An icon that resembles human head and shoulders. Telephone An icon of a traditional telephone receiver. Tick An icon of a tick mark. Is Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes. Is Not Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes with a diagonal line through it. Pause Icon A two-lined pause icon for stopping interactions. Quote Mark A opening quote mark. Quote Mark A closing quote mark. Arrow An icon of an arrow. Folder An icon of a paper folder. Breaking An icon of an exclamation mark on a circular background. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Caret An icon of a caret arrow. Clock An icon of a clock face. Close An icon of the an X shape. Close Icon An icon used to represent where to interact to collapse or dismiss a component Comment An icon of a speech bubble. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Ellipsis An icon of 3 horizontal dots. Envelope An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Home An icon of a house. Instagram An icon of the Instagram logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. Magnifying Glass An icon of a magnifying glass. Search Icon A magnifying glass icon that is used to represent the function of searching. Menu An icon of 3 horizontal lines. Hamburger Menu Icon An icon used to represent a collapsed menu. Next An icon of an arrow pointing to the right. Notice An explanation mark centred inside a circle. Previous An icon of an arrow pointing to the left. Rating An icon of a star. Tag An icon of a tag. Twitter An icon of the Twitter logo. Video Camera An icon of a video camera shape. Speech Bubble Icon A icon displaying a speech bubble WhatsApp An icon of the WhatsApp logo. Information An icon of an information logo. Plus A mathematical 'plus' symbol. Duration An icon indicating Time. Success Tick An icon of a green tick. Success Tick Timeout An icon of a greyed out success tick. Loading Spinner An icon of a loading spinner. Facebook Messenger An icon of the facebook messenger app logo. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Facebook Messenger An icon of the Twitter app logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. WhatsApp Messenger An icon of the Whatsapp messenger app logo. Email An icon of an mail envelope. Copy link A decentered black square over a white square.

Angus GPs call for inquiry

Post Thumbnail

Angus GPs have called for an independent investigation following what they claim has been three years’ waste of time and money by local health chiefs exploring service redesign options that were never going to happen.

All 22 GPs in north Angus are opposing drastic beds cuts at Montrose Royal and Brechin infirmaries which they fear would ultimately lead to closure of both hospitals.

Last month they walked out on a consultation by Angus Community Health Partnership, saying they no longer had confidence in the way it was being managed, and around 4000 people in Montrose and Brechin have signed a petition backing their action.

The NHS Tayside board has now instructed the Angus CHP to spend 18 months re-evaluating how community services can be developed and chairman Sandy Watson has categorically assured the GPs that Brechin and Montrose infirmaries will be safe for at least the next five to 10 years, and it had never been on the cards to move the beds to Stracathro.

Welcoming the surprise announcement, the GPs’ spokesman said, “We are delighted to have the chairman’s categorical assurance that Brechin and Montrose infirmaries will be safe from closure for the next 5-10 years, and he recognises Stracathro is not a community hospital, and therefore will not be considered as an option.Confusion”It would be reassuring to hear how the board intends to develop our community hospitals, rather than erode them.”

He claimed the blame lay squarely with Angus CHP for any confusion.

“If the Angus CHP had not been developing a single site proposal, which specifically included Stracathro in the option appraisal it was to present to the board, the GPs would have been less concerned.

“It appeared to us that a single site option probably meant two out of three hospitals had to go.”

He said it had been surprising that the CHP had been allowed to get this far with a proposal that clearly was never going to meet the board’s approval, and more surprising that they must have received little initial guidance from the board, given the huge amount of public money spent on the management process so far.

The GPs’ spokesman said the chairman’s assurances over proposed contract changes were also welcome, particularly as they directly contradicted a document the GPs had in front of them.

He said, “We are also surprised to learn this document will modernise our community hospitals, as the BMA has described Tayside Health Board’s handling of the process as unacceptable, and has itself sought a meetin with the board to discuss this.

“After three years, many meetings and many drafts, the CHP have eventually managed to produce a contract which they were advised from the beginning would be rejected.

“As a way forward, it may be helpful if the board could give the CHP clear guidance as to its vision for the future, and what it expects from it, in order that vast amounts of time and money do not continue to be wasted.

“Most stakeholders who have attended the many meetings and events, must be confused by the chairman’s statement, as it bears little relationship to what we have been hearin from the CHP for the last few years.

“Regretfully, this has done nothin to increase our confidence in the management of this process and we still have no recognition of any problem.”

The GPs felt nothing will be gained by meeting the board at present, and believed an independently appointed body was needed to examine the whole process. Without it, they will be no further forward after the 18-month deferment ordered by the board.