Select a region
Opinion may have trumped fact when a political board recently blasted current Future Hospital proposals, the Health Minister has argued in a leaked report exposing deep divisions within the Council of Ministers over how best to handle the £466m build.
The comments come after a board led by Assistant Minister, Constable Chris Taylor, concluded earlier this month that the site selection process for Jersey’s largest ever capital project was riddled with shortcomings.
Throwing plans to build on the current site into serious doubt, the report suggested that proposals to build on the current site rather than build afresh elsewhere were expensive, impractical and full of risks to patient safety.
But the Health Minister was reported as disagreeing with the majority of those findings, and declined to comment publicly on his view despite numerous requests from both the media and his fellow politicians.
However, a report leaked to Express on Tuesday finally lays bare his reasoning for not supporting the Board’s findings – mainly that he thinks the review was hijacked as a political opportunity to reopen the debate on the Future Hospital rather than being a genuine appraisal of the decision-making process.
Pictured: The Health Minister has broken his silence on the 124-page report reviewing the Future Hospital decision to build on the current site.
It has now been submitted to the Council of Ministers for consideration, while the document is expected to be officially released to the public alongside a press release tomorrow.
Deputy Renouf raises concerns about what he describes as the “deeply unsatisfactory” way in which the Board went about their review, including suspicions of political bias and a favouring of opinions over fact swaying their findings.
“There was good reason to establish the Board, but there was always a risk it might generate more heat than light,” the Health Minister wrote.
Describing himself as “alarmed” at the prospect of delaying the project further in order to find an alternative site, he cited “serious risks to patient safety, the affordability of the project” as well as maintaining the current Hospital which he says is “not fit for purpose” as reasons for his concern.
He further suggested that his colleagues had discredited information that would support sticking to the current plans: “…it quickly became apparent to me that the strong predispositions of some Board members created an automatic distrust of any evidence which supported the decision.”
Pictured: The Board put the Waterfront back on the table as a potential site for the Hospital, but the Health Minister is concerned that the report's findings were swayed by political "predispositions".
It is unclear which of the members the Health Minister is specifically referring to here, however, the Board’s Chairman Assistant Chief Minister Constable Chris Taylor has been a vocal long-term supporter of the Waterfront site for the Future Hospital.
“Political judgements can always be criticised after the event. There will always be controversy around difficult political decisions, but, once made, a decision of a democratic legislature should be respected… it should be only in the clearest and most exceptional circumstances that a further decision should be taken to rescind,” he continued.
The Deputy explained that he had “certain misgivings” with the board’s review, arguing that it appeared opinions were taking precedence over fact – an approach he described as “deeply unsatisfactory” and at odds with their simple task of reviewing whether the previous Council of Ministers had sufficient evidence when they made their site decision.
“Opinions tend to abound on such emotive and important matters. Those who shout loudest are not necessarily wrong, but the views expressed to the Board needed to be tested against the facts. Regrettably the Board did not confine itself to a disciplined framework guaranteed to achieve this,” the Minister explained.
Elsewhere in the document, Deputy Renouf addresses a series of points which outline his concerns with the way the Board reached their conclusions, including their dismissal of a feasibility study undertaken in 2012 and the prioritisation of the Waterfront as a viable site for the new Hospital.
Pictured: The site for the £466million Future Hospital has been thrown into question by the Board's report, but the Health Minister says the States should stick with the current site.
With regards to worries about noise, dust and vibration if construction were to commence on the current site, Deputy Renouf argued that, “if the hospital is not built on the site of the Kensington Place properties, something else will be”, meaning that patients and staff will be subjected to this disturbance either way.
“I know I am asking staff, patients and nearby residents to tolerate the uncomfortable conditions at certain stages of the building project. But I also ask them to consider the consequences of not proceeding,” he added.
Drawing his response to a close, the Health Minister wrote: “I believe we have already chosen a site which is right and we can and should begin to deliver now.”
Comments
Comments on this story express the views of the commentator only, not Bailiwick Publishing. We are unable to guarantee the accuracy of any of those comments.