Appendix 2

PUBLIC MEETING – GATESHEAD 11 JANUARY 2017

  1. What do you think about the STP vision for our area? Is there anything missing or more we should aim for?
  • There is very little mention of the role of the CVS in the draft plan and the impact from the withdrawal of council funding
  • Funding for the community and voluntary sector has been stopped – not just cut or reduced, there is no funding.
  • The waterfall diagram within the plan is a very niche way of explaining of where funding can be saved. This could be supported by an explanation of how the diagram works.
  • Acknowledged that it is a draft plan but need to show different ways of explaining the STP
  • I hear a lot of statutory bodies saying that they’re working with the voluntary sector, when in fact they’re just working with one organisation…” There needs to be a better understanding of the size of the community and voluntary sector to work with it effectively.
  • Examples given of local health bodies and voluntary sector working together - Learning disability health checks and cancer screening - this is saving the CCG money
  • There needs to be a balanced structure from the voluntary sector so that the NHS knows to go to one central organisation that can be speaking on behalf of the whole structure.
  • GVOC has closed in a crucial time that we feel under –represented ( CVS)
  • To attempt consultation on this level of detail seems to be not the correct process ( explained it was pre-engagement and not at consultation stage)
  • This is a plan which needs to fundamentally accept the funding gap – we do not accept it – we should reject this plan.
  • Question 1 at this stage should be ‘Do people agree with this funding cut?’
  • The plan just seems to lead us all by the nose to just go along with this.
  • We need to address the whole population in terms of getting everybody’s views on this
  • If health system doesn’t learn to use CVS and talk to us the whole preventative aspect of this is lost - we cost very little for the amount of work that will save on prevention.
  • The last bulletpoint on Q1: ‘Local people are empowered and supported to play a role in improving their health and wellbeing’ – this consultation isn’t helping with this, it’s very hard to understand these materials. There are different ways to present things. Accessible standards across the board.
  • Groups – CBS, to consult and assist on this to make things more accessible, also Healthwatch can help with this. Example of Better Health Programme given; VONNE partnered with the CCG to facilitate ‘100 conversations’ CCG gave them a toolkit and worked with them to shape materials.
  • If the voluntary sector expires, vital work like this can’t be done, the NHS won’t be able to cope.
  • To tackle austerity measures, examples given of social prescribing model work and community reassurance where Newcastle Gateshead CCG has worked with the voluntary sector to make effective efficiencies.
  • Everybody isn’t totally angry or negative – we want to help, I’m excited about the 20% where prevention lies and we (CVS) are talking more with the NHS.
  • I applaud this attempt but it is fundamentally flawed, there is too much detail to provide feedback on
  • This STP fundamentally accepts the gap in the funding plan, I do not accept this and people in this region do not accept it
  • Statutory bodies say they are working with the voluntary sector but it is not representative. CCGs need to find a more creative and balanced way to speak to CVS. There has to be a balance as there is regularly just one voluntary group at the table and one group does not speak on behalf of all CVS.
  • It is helpful to be asked what it missing, the second bullet point.
  • The plan remit is to reflect the view of local communities but at the beginning it should say we do not accept this.
  • Do the people in this STP agree with the funding cut?
  • The last bullet point (in Q1), if we can’t start with accessible consultation then how can we get things done. People do not have access to this consultation.
  • Everyone in the room today is angry (talking about the group at the front who did not participate in the discussion at the table), we can’t down tools and we are not all angry. It is 20% prevention and 80% fire fighting. You can’t consult the public on every single decision.
  • There is a gap in the conversations at an executive level. I speak to people at the local authority and when I mention STP they say they’ve heard of it but not sure what it is!
  1. What can we do to make VCS feel involved, to help and make things easier?
  • Use other forums, learning disability forums, GVOC
  • In Tees Valley, the better health programme through VONNE, on behalf of the CCG in the area facilitated 100 conversations
  • At Citizens Advice Bureau the audience serviced has changed, people are coming to us with debt and homelessness, people are in crisis
  • It is the same at the bereavement charity, under Well Being the NHS should be doing this. We have had to cut the number of people we see. Access to money from the NHS would really help.

General questions

  • It’s good that proposals are vague and you want our input, but 80% is already going on in the background and we have no detail. How can you consult if you don’t know the acute configuration?
  • Is there a Learning disability transformation plan?
  • Why not advertise better to let more people know about these events – tv for example?
  • Will there be preventative health service cuts?
  • Is this going to be an honest consultation, unlike the closure of the paediatric A&E at Queen Elizabeth where there were over 2000 replies which were ruled out and only 300 included because they didn’t come to the right conclusion? What confidence should we have? It doesn’t seem to be independent from the government.
  • The Local Authority is accountable to people and the NHS report to Secretary for State of Health – there should be more accountability given to carers. Engaging with Carers has not been mentioned. Working more effectively with carers and the voluntary services, recognising the role could help funding go further. Charitable funding through the Local Authority and PCP affects cuts. How are you going to do that?
  • It is ambitious – one size fits all, doesn’t work here. The massive reduction in council funding by 20/20 will fail. There is a chronic shortage of funding already for the adult and social care element. Agreement is needed to go ahead with the plan. What percentage relies on the Local Authority?
  • How are our local services going to be affected. We need to be clear because the government is not prepared to fund the NHS. I would like to see this recorded: Mental Health – this isn’t the way to do it, we need cash up front.
  • Have you addressed the issue of Local Authority areas - NECCA?
  • Understanding the £641M gap – what’s the spend, what percentage is cut?
  • Under NHS operational planning guidance stats’contracts’ would be signed 23rd Dec. What are these contracts and have the already signed?
  • If on about care closer to home for mental health care – how is this going to happen when you’ve cut beds in Gateshead. People are being transported miles to be cared for.
  • Do and can the CCG lobby parliament to request more funding? Based on risk etc and duty of care?

General comments

  • Provide acronym guide – glossary required for diagrams. Too much jargon.
  • I’m questioning the language and tone of the presentation – does ‘stretching’ not mean ‘reduction of money spent’ We are heading to 6.5% - why not be transparent. £441k aren’t cuts – the growth of the budget doesn’t keep pace with the ageing population.
  • Be open and honest – if there are going to be closures/ reduction in services – then tell us.On the overview slide – hospital facilities are going to be cut. It should say you are doing it.
  • Advice and guidance – this should come from our NHS consultants not expensive private bodies.

1