Agenda and minutes

At this point in the meeting, Members are asked to declare:

·        any personal interests not included on the Register of Interests

·        any prejudicial interests or

·        any disclosable pecuniary interests

which they may have in respect of business on this agenda.

Members were invited to declare at this point in the meeting any personal, prejudicial or disclosable pecuniary interests, other than those listed on the standing declarations attached to the agenda, that they might have had.

Councillor Fraser declared a personal interest in the general business on the agenda as a retired member of UNISON and Unite (TGWU/ACTS sections).

Councillor Funnell declared a personal interest in Agenda Item 4 (Report from NHS North Yorkshire & York- Merger of GP Surgeries) as a patient at one of the surgeries mentioned in the report. One of the surgeries was situated in her ward, and so she also declared a personal interest as a Ward Member

Councillors Hodgson, Riches and Richardson also declared a personal interest in Agenda Item 4 as they were patients at a Priory Medical Group surgery. In Councillor Richardson’s case, his partner was a patient at one of the surgeries mentioned.

No other interests were declared.

To approve and sign the minutes of the meeting held on 24 October 2012.

RESOLVED:       That the minutes of the Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee held on 24 October 2012 be approved and signed by the Chair as a correct record subject to the following amendment;

Minute Item 36: [That a further £24 million still needed to be achieved through efficiency savings in order to cover the deficit, and that KPMG had been brought in to look at how this figure could be achieved and whether it was viable.]

At this point in the meeting, members of the public who have registered their wish to speak regarding an item on the agenda or an issue within the Committee’s remit can do so. The deadline for registering is Monday 10 December 2012 at 5:00 pm.

It was reported that there had been no registrations to speak under the Council’s Public Participation Scheme.

This paper provides a briefing on the engagement process undertaken by the practices (Priory Medical Group Surgery and Abbey Medical Group Surgery) to merge their GP surgeries.

Members received a paper which provided a briefing on the engagement process undertaken by the practices of Priory Medical Group Surgery and Abbey Medical Group Surgery to merge their surgeries.

Members made a number of comments and asked questions in response to the paper such as;

·        In some areas of the city there seemed to be a lack of information about the merger, for example some patients of the affected surgeries did not receive letters informing them of the proposals.

·        That opportunities to get more public involvement in the process, such as through patient consultation groups had been scarce due to venue and time changes.

·        Were Members contacted directly about the merger?

·        That the benefits of the merger had not been clearly shown to patients.

Representatives from the Priory Medical Group and Abbey Medical Group attended the meeting and answered questions from Members. They noted that Members had not been contacted directly to share their views on the merger. They explained this was because the co-ordinator of the consultation process had left her post.

The Chair then allowed for questions and comments to be taken from the floor.

Questions asked included the following;

·        Whether the merger would influence commissioning of services in the future?

·        Would the merger lead to a trend to create a very small number of powerful businesses involved in providing health care?

·        Would the advent of seven day working for GP surgeries arrive sooner rather than later?

·        With a larger number of GPs close to retirement would more nurses be hired to work in the surgeries?

Members were informed that the two companies employed specialist nurses, and that they would replace like for like in relation to GPs. They added that through the merger, workloads for GPs would increase but with specialist nurses also providing treatment and care it was hoped that GPs would have more spare time to focus on other aspects of care.

Members were encouraged that some patient consultation had taken place, but that GPs needed to promote further patient involvement in relation to the developments. It was suggested that as both groups represented and treated a significant percentage of the population that some issues still needed to be resolved for example about data sharing. Members thought that it would be valuable if a further report on progress could be presented to the Committee at a future meeting, especially as the newly merged They  were also keen that any future report included information on how the newly merged surgeries were working with the Out of Hours Service and how data was shared with them.

RESOLVED:       (i)      That the paper be noted.

(ii)      That a further progress report be considered by the Committee at a future meeting.

REASON:           To inform the Committee of the proposed merger between Priory and Abbey Medical Group Surgeries.

The report provides an update on the number of complaints received by Yorkshire Ambulance Service NHS Trust (YAS) during the period 1 April 2011 to 31 March 2012 compared to the number received from 1 April 2012 to date.

Members received a written and verbal report which updated them on the number of complaints received by Yorkshire Ambulance Service NHS Trust (YAS) during the period 1 April 2012 to 31 March 2012 compared to the number received from 1 April 2012 to date.

Questions from Members to YAS representatives included;

·        Could a breakdown of compliments/complaints be provided to show how many of these were received by email or in the post? i.e. if a majority of these were received by email this would highlight that leaflets within emergency vehicles were not being picked up by patients.

·        That service response time was not included in the figures shown in the report. What measures had been implemented to improve current figures?

Members were informed that there was not a specific breakdown relating to the origin of complaints, but that the service could look at this. In relation to service response times, it was noted that YAS had a performance system which notified their staff if a patient had been waiting for more than an hour for transport. They were also investigating having vehicles that could take two wheelchairs for a better use of resources.

Some Members congratulated the service on the figures which showed a reduction in complaints and suggested that there was not a need for the Committee to consider future updates on performance.

The Chair allowed for a further question from the floor which related to the impact that obesity had on patient transport. It was reported that YAS had to buy new bariatric vehicles and that they needed to have a risk assessment before they could be used. It was also noted that wheelchairs contributed to the weight that a vehicle could carry and that ramps were more likely to be used than a lift.

RESOLVED:       That the written and verbal report be noted.

REASON:           In order to keep the Committee informed of the performance of Yorkshire Ambulance Service’s Patient Transport Services.

This report presents the Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee with work undertaken to date by the Task Group appointed to this review. It specifically presents the remit for the review, which the Committee are asked to agree.

Members received a report which presented the work undertaken to date by the Task Group who were reviewing Community Mental Health Services in the Care of Young People.

It asked them to choose between two options;

Option 1: To agree to the remit and key objectives for the review as highlighted in the Officer’s report.

Option 2: To amend the remit and key objectives for the review.

Some Members felt that a larger number of Primary School Headteachers should be involved in the review, as there would be a larger variation on how schools were dealing with the issues raised by the Task Group.

RESOLVED:       That Option 1, to agree the remit set out in Paragraph 5 of the Officer’s report be approved.

REASON:           To enable the Task Group to commence this review.

Members are asked to consider the Committee’s updated work plan for the municipal year 2012/13.

Members considered the Committee’s updated work plan for the municipal year 2013.

Discussion on the work plan took place regarding the item about the North Yorkshire Review, which was due to be considered by the Committee at their January meeting. It was suggested that this item be moved back in the plan to be considered at the Committee’s meeting in February 2013, due to further data, the KPMG report and other information being made available following a NHS North Yorkshire and York Board meeting.

RESOLVED:       That the following changes be made to the Committee’s work plan¹;

(i)           That a progress report on the Merger of GP’s surgeries be added to the work plan.

(ii)          That the Update on the North Yorkshire Review be moved to be considered in February 2013.

REASON:           In order to keep the Committee’s work plan up to date.