Agenda item

 The Committee to consider the attached plan which provides a vision for Health Infrastructure in the London Borough of Haringey over the next 15 years.

The Committee received the draft Health Infrastructure Plan (HIP) for the St Ann’s site. Representatives from NHS Haringey, Barnet Enfield and Haringey Mental Health Trust (BEH MHT) and the Council’s Assistant Director for Planning, Regeneration and Economy were present to take questions from the Committee and to provide an overview of the report.

It was noted that the draft HIP provided a vision for health infrastructure in the Borough for the next fifteen years. In developing the plan, key public sector health providers had been brought together and had agreed a physical plan setting out where health services would be delivered from and how this would relate to service quality and health outcomes in the future. The plan included analyse of existing and planned services and facilities and a summary of planned infrastructure facilities, setting out when and where they would be located.

It was noted that the HIP was a supporting document to the Haringey Community Infrastructure Plan, which had no statutory status.

The Committee put questions to the

The Chair requested that Manor House Underground Station and St Luke’s Hospitalwere included within the relevant maps included in the document.

It was noted that the terminology used with regard the Hornsey Medical Centre was not consistent throughout the document and it was requested that this was amended in order to avoid confusion.

The Committee was advised that guidance was awaited from the Department of Health (DH) regarding the governance arrangements for LIFT schemes and it was requested that once this became available a briefing note was circulated to the Committee.

It was noted that the document did not make provision for the impact that the cap in Housing Benefit (and the likely rise in the number of vulnerable families moving into the Borough as a result of this) would have upon health services. It was requested that this was addressed and reflected in the document.  

It was noted that arrangements for the monitoring of the document had not been finalised as yet and the Chair requested that the Committee was kept informed of plans with regard to this. The Chair also noted that it would be important that the Committee played a role in reviewing the document in the future and that a formal process with regard to this would need to be put in place and it was requested that the Committee was consulted with regard to this.

There was a general consensus that ensuring that the planning of public services and public transport and the alignment of these was vital to ensuring that all residents were able to access the appropriate services. It was requested that contact was made with Transport for London (TfL) to discuss the document and the potential future needs of the site in terms of public transport and that an update was provided to the Committee with respect to this.  

The Committee was advised that the term ‘upgrading GPs’ referred to the approach within the NCC Primary Care Strategy. In practice this meant that single handed GP practices and smaller GP practices were encouraged to share services and facilities in order to provide patients with a better range of services. It was requested that a briefing note was supplied to the Committee with regard to how this would improve the standard of GPs services in Tottenham.

It was noted that it was difficult for the Committee to gauge performance without proper statistical information in relation to the performance of GPs and it was requested that this was supplied to the Committee

It was noted that the term ‘these services’ was used throughout the document with respect to The Laurels and it was requested that this was amended as it implied that the service currently offered would continue to be provided in its current form. 

It was requested that Borough boundaries and the fact that there was not a hospital within the Borough was not referred to as it immediately set a negative tone, which was provocative and unhelpful. Instead reference should be made to the fact that Haringey residents were able to access two major local hospitals.

With reference to page 36 of the document it was noted that ‘reducing deprivation’ was referred as being the key to reducing the number of emergency admissions and the associated costs; however, it was contended that identifying ways of improving people’s understanding of the services on offer and encouraging them to access the most appropriate services, should be focussed on. It was requested that the document was amended to reflect this.

It was requested that buildings that were not fit for purpose should referred to in the document and it was contended that several of the Victorian buildings within the St Ann’s site fell into this category. It was also suggested that reference should be made to the need to demolish and replace buildings that were not fit for purpose.

It was noted that there was no reference to The Royal Free and how its use by residents living in the west of Borough affected how services were accessed in Haringey and it was requested that this was addressed within the document.  

It was noted that the transient nature of Haringey’s population was an important characteristic of the Borough that needed to be considered in the strategic planning of services. It was requested that reference to how this characteristic would be addressed was included within the document.

With reference to page 46 of the report a financial calculation based on £400 per square metre was referred to and this appeared to be inconsistent with other figures reached on the same page and clarification was requested with regard to this. 

It was requested that a briefing note was provided to the Committee setting out what the process would be for the transferral of estates and the sale of property and land owned by NHS Haringey.  

It was noted that the Council had agreed that the services offered from Children’s Centres would be reconfigured in the light of reduced funding and that the document was based on the assumption that the services currently offered by the Children’s Centres would continue on the current basis. It was requested that the Deputy Director – Clinical Commissioning Development NHS Haringey should liaise with the Council’s Children and Young People’s Service to assess the impact of this.

Throughout discussion members of the Committee had expressed their frustration at the lack of authority that the Council and NHS Haringey had to make GPs and dentists establish practices in the east of the Borough. It had been noted that several significant developments in the east of the Borough, where provision had been secured for health services through Section 106 Agreements, had not come to fruition. Given this it was requested that the Committee was provided with an overview of how NHS Haringey would use its influence to encourage GPs and dentists to set up practices in the areas of most need. 

It was noted that pharmacies had a key role to play in providing support to primary care and it was requested that a list of all of the pharmacies in the Borough was included within the document and circulated to the Committee and that this should also illustrate where pharmacies were offering extended services. 

Building on the point above it was also requested that details of how pharmacies that issued health appliances would store this equipment.

The report above was noted on the basis that a further iteration of the document would be drafted taking into account the points made by the Committee and that additional information would be provided where requested.