MORE pictures from the brilliant Thame’s Got Talent competition, held at the Spread Eagle Hotel recently, are now available.
Paste this link into your browser to view the photographs:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/thamenews/
Contact: editor@thame.net for prints of any of the photographs, or call: 07792 487 030
THE League of Friends of Thame Community Hospital are urging local people to join them on a coach from Thame to attend a crucial meeting about the future of medical cover at the hospital.
The Overview and Scrutiny Committee ? the health watchdog of Buckinghamshire County Council ? will meet next week to debate the recent decision of the Buckinghamshire PCT Review Group that the controversial new arrangements for medical cover should stay in place.
Sarah Taylor, Chair of the League of Friends said: “We are very disappointed about the Review Group?s recommendation and hope that the Overview and Scrutiny Committee will instead recommend that responsibility for medical cover at the hospital is returned to local GPs. We want to see our own local doctors looking after our hospital.”
Doctors from the Rycote Practice have compiled a detailed list of the factual errors in the the report of the review group and are sending this to the committee for consideration in advance of the meeting.
Dr. Richard Harrington said: “The petition supporting our bid to continue looking after the in-patient beds at the hospital has 4,800 signatures, and we very much hope that the Overview and Scrutiny Committee will take account of the strength of local feeling in its deliberations next week. We feel that the Review Group has based its decision about medical cover for Thame Hospital on incorrect information.”
Dr Duncan Keeley said: “The PCT has repeatedly assured us that there are no plans to close the in-patient beds at the hospital, but we are very concerned to make sure that the four closed beds are re-opened as soon as possible. For that to happen better medical cover arrangements are needed.”
The Overview and Scrutiny Committee meeting takes place at South Buckinghamshire Distict Council, Oxford Road, Denham UB9 4LH, at 10am on Friday, December 11, 2009. Anyone who would like a place on the coach, which will leave Thame at 9 am, should contact Elisabeth Orde-Browne on 01844 216515.
QUESTIONS FOR THE OVERVIEW AND SCUTINY COMMITTEE
The following are the comments and questions sent to the committee in advance of its meeting on December, 11, by the Thame GPs.
We hope that the committee will stand by its previous unanimous decision that the change in arrangements for medical cover at Thame Community hospital constitutes a substantial change in service. This remains the strongly held view of local GPs and the local population.
Regardless of its decision in this respect, given the very clearly expressed views of the local community in and around Thame on the changes in medical cover at Thame Community Hospital, and the factual errors of fundamental importance to its conclusions identified in the Review Panel Report, would the Committee consider recommending to Buckinghamshire Primary Care Trust that responsibility for medical cover at the hospital be returned to the Rycote and Wellington House practices?
THE RYCOTE PRACTICE’S RESPONSE TO THE REPORT OF THE BUCKS INDEPENDENT REVIEW PANEL, ISSUED ON NOVEMBER 23, 2009:
? We thank the Overview and Scrutiny Committee once again giving their attention to this matter.
? We wish to draw committee members? attention to important errors of fact in the Review Panel report and we hope that these issues, and the level of public concern in our community will be taken into account in the committee?s deliberations.
? We hope that the committee might recommend a variation in the conclusion of the Report in respect of Thame Community Hospital.
1. We are delighted that the Panel recognizes the need to re-negotiate the hours of medical services provided to the Community Hospital (p21, 24) as we have long argued. We consider our refusal to bid for the lower option of medical cover to TCH (4 hours per week) to have been entirely vindicated by the Panel?s report, more so when one allows for the fact that TCH since the new arrangements started has only had 8 beds open and the original specification was to cover 12 beds.
2. We endorse the development and enhancement of a nurse-led service at TCH which we hope will mirror initiatives in the nursing role long-established at the Rycote Practice. We look forward to a continuing, close and supportive role with our nursing colleagues at TCH.
3. We note that the Panel disagrees with the unanimous view of The Buckinghamshire County Council Overview and Scrutiny Committee that the change in medical cover is a substantial variation in service. We disagree with the Panel?s conclusion (p22) ?that the change in medical cover arrangements was not a substantial variation of service? with respect to Thame. We can conclusively demonstrate that this is because the Panel simply perpetuated the PCT?s failure to understand the previous and interim medical arrangements in respect of TCH; see appendix below.
4. We note that the Panel acknowledges (p3) the level of public concern in Thame . However the Panel makes no detailed reference to the petition, to the unanimous vote in a packed public meeting in support of the petition, and to the vociferous public criticism of the tender process and outcomes. The Report does not mention, and appears to ignore, the Darzi criteria for world class commissioning.
5. We concur with the Panel?s criticisms (p21) of the service specification (including failure to engage with local GPs, insufficient thought with regard to development of a nurse-led model and failure to understand the previous arrangements). However we believe that these failures sufficiently undermine the tendering process to render it untenable.
6. We are disappointed the Panel pays scant regard to the unique educational opportunities provided by the synergy between the Rycote Practice and TCH with regard to the training of nurses, nurse practitioners, general practitioners and medical students. This synergy will be lost if medical cover is not retained by the Rycote Practice given its current role in nurse training (linked to Luton University), GP training (through the Oxford Deanery) and medical student training (through a substantive post with Oxford University medical school).
7. We regret that the Panel fails to recognize the stature of the Rycote Practice as a beacon of good medical practice within the PCT particularly with regard to prescribing costs, referral practice, the continued provision of a Saturday morning service.
8. We disagree with the Report?s conclusion that responsibility for medical cover of Thame Community Hospital should remain with The Practice plc, and believe instead that this responsibility should be restored to our local practices The Report contains a number of significant factual errors, detailed in an appendix to this document. We believe that these errors may help explain why the report has reached the wrong conclusion in respect of Thame Hospital.
9. The Report calls on the PCT/NHS Buckinghamshire to ?explore ways of creating closer links with each community hospital?s League of Friends and local GPs? (Recommendation 5) and to ?redouble its efforts to ensure patient and public involvement in the commissioning of services? (Recommendation 7) , but the main conclusion of the Report is in flat contradiction of these principles.
10. We call on the Overview and Scrutiny Committee to change the Report?s recommendation that the Practice plc should remain responsible for medical cover at Thame Community Hospital and recommend that the responsibility be restored to the Rycote and Wellington House practices.
Appendix: factual errors in the Report relating to Thame Community Hospital
We appreciate that the Panel was required to assimilate, digest and report on a great deal of material in a short space of time. Unfortunately during this process some vital and specific information relating to Thame and some important general details have been misreported or overlooked.
1. The Report attaches major importance to the number of hours for which local GPs attended TCH after the ending of the placement for GP registrars This figure is set at ?up to one hour?s medical cover per day from the Rycote Practice? on page 8 of the report and this figure of one hour per day is given no less than seven times: on pp 8 (twice), 13, 15, 18 (table), 21 and 27. Importantly, this figure is INCORRECT . More than double this level of medical cover was being provided during that period.
The correct situation is that Rycote and Wellington House practices had agreed to provide a minimum of 2 hours per day of GP time to be spent at TCH on a planned, pro-active basis (9-11am) with additional GP visits to be provided on an emergency or urgent basis between 8am and 6.30 pm Monday to Friday and 9-11 on Saturday mornings. These arrangements were in place for one month (not two months as stated in the report) during August 2009 (with the same GP visiting each day as described) and would have continued indefinitely had Rycote / Wellington House been awarded the contract.
It is a matter of the deepest regret that the Panel having attached such importance to this issue provides data which is simply inaccurate. As a result the Report?s conclusions in respect of Thame are incorrect and should altered.
Rycote Practice GPs continue to visit their patients at TCH even under the present arrangements, to maintain contact and liaise with family members as necessary e.g. regarding end of life issues or future locus of care.
2. The Report states (p18) that 8 beds were open at Thame prior to the changes. In fact 12 beds were open. The Panel were fully informed of this by us, and that patient outcomes under the new arrangements could not be properly evaluated as a result.
3. The report fails to mention or acknowledge the letter from Dr Simon Plint of the Oxford Deanery supporting the GP registrar placement at the hospital and the likelihood of its eventual restoration, and the quality of educational supervision provided by the Rycote Practice.
4. The Report states ((p10) that ?the range of duties provided was not being changed? ? but in fact the level of medical cover was being substantially reduced, and key requirements in the original tender specification ( daily ward rounds, attendance at multidisciplinary meetings, support for enhanced nursing practice) had been dropped .
5. The Report states (p13) that there had been ?insufficient? involvement of GPs on the development of the service specification. In fact there had been no involvement of GPs whatsoever, and no involvement of the Professional Executive Committee of the PCT. The Report attaches no importance to this extraordinary failure.
6. The Report states (p14) that ?the GPs felt that eight hours would be sufficient.? We in fact argued that eight hours was also insufficient for the duties as set out in the original tender, but safely sustainable given the easy availability of our practices for urgent and emergency situations and our willingness to work above and beyond the letter of the contract.
7. The Report states (p14 para3) that ?ward rounds were not considered as a key part of the role? despite the fact that these were stated as a key deliverable in the original tender specification.
8. The Report states (p16) ?on the question of safety it was noted that the current system of provision of medical cover was not significantly different from that which was in place immediately prior to the new service.? This is not true. The paragraph goes on to state a need to ?manage admissions avoiding medically unstable and complex admissions? as being ?key to future success?. In fact such a restriction on use of the community hospital in-patient beds would substantially reduce their usefulness and their ability to relieve pressure on the acute Trusts.
9. The Report states (p8) in respect of the role of GP registrars at TCH that ?the level of security even within this system depended upon the varied practice and experience of the Doctor in place at the time as would be the case for all models?. This is incorrect; ?security? was provided by the GP trainer, a Rycote partner with several decades of experience of primary care and GP training and who visited TCH at least once a week. In addition, patients? usual GP?s were available and free to visit and advise on management issues or terminal care.
Other aspects of the report worthy of comment include:
a) The Report refers to ?the views of a large number of local residents? which were reported to the Panel but it fails to set out these views. We ask: What were the views of local residents and why are they not included in the Report?
b) The Report states (p 23) ?The panel concluded that the public?s concern that the tender was awarded to a commercial organization was unfounded. GP practices are similarly profit making businesses, which contract independently with the NHS. Thus there is no material difference between the two types of organization.?
We would point out that 4,947 people have now signed our petition, the wording of which is repeated in pp 3-4 of the Report. It makes no reference to the role of a commercial organization in the tender process. There are however material differences between the Rycote / Wellington House practices and The Practice plc. In the former, care is provided by a small group of GPs, nurses and other colleagues who have a long tradition of providing high quality, personal and continuing primary care limited to a single, geographically discrete and local population ? which forms a significant proportion of the population that is served by Thame Community Hospital.
b) The Report states (p15 para 1 ) in respect of emergencies that ? it is considered inappropriate practice to call a GP first in these circumstances as they would mostly have to call 999 in any case?? This is a strange and incorrect statement, implementation of which would substantially increase unnecessary demand on 999 ambulances and avoidable admissions to acute trusts. It is then acknowledged that ?the Practice plc was not always easy to contact? and suggested that the ambulance service should play an increased role in emergency response to the community hospitals.
c) We regret that the original procurement process did not run its course and wish to put on record the full co-operation of Rycote / Wellington House practices with all aspect of the tendering process and PCT requirements across the whole board of primary care activity.
THIS is a Ringmaster message from Thames Valley Police. On Tuesday, December 1, 2009, between 07:40hrs & 12:30hrs, a White Compass Liberte Caravan was stolen from a property in Thame Road, Chinnor. A White Ford Transit van was seen towing the caravan.
If you have any information relating to this message, please call the police on 08458 505 505 and quote URN 596 of 01/12/09.
OXFORDSHIRE County Council’s Fire and Rescue Service is urging residents to put fire safety at the top of their Christmas list this year.
Government figures reveal that during the month of December, approximately 25 people a day across England are either killed or injured in accidental house fires.
Risk Reduction manager, Mike Bingham, said: “Christmas is a time for having fun – however it?s also a time when extra alcohol is consumed and fire hazards are introduced into the home such as Christmas lights and candles in close proximity to flammable Christmas decorations and parcels. By following some simple safety tips the risk of a house fire can be greatly reduced.”
Oxfordshire County Council’s Cabinet Member for Safer and Stronger Communities, Judith Heathcoat, added: “We really want people to think seriously about fire safety to make this a Christmas to remember for all the right reasons.
“There is always a greater risk of becoming distracted during times of celebration and it’s very important that people are aware of the need for extra vigilance.”
CHRISTMAS SAFETY TIPS
Buy British Standard fairy lights
Place candles in holders away from curtains
As most fires start in the kitchen – never leave your cooking unattended;
Always ensure cigarettes are completely extinguished
Remember the risk of accidents is far greater after consuming any amount of alcohol
General fire safety checks:
Check the battery in your smoke alarm; test your smoke alarm weekly and change the battery yearly
Plan ahead and have an escape plan for the family in the event of a fire
Check the fuses in all plugs are the right size for the appliance
Ensure all lights are turned off and candles extinguished before you go to bed or go out
Check elderly relatives and neighbours are fire safe; ensure they have a working smoke alarm
THE latest news from the CPRE can viewed on the group’s website at:
It includes the latest news about the group’s campaign to preserve the Oxford Green Belt.
PLANNING Applications to be considered by Thame Town Council?s Planning Committee on Tuesday, 8 December, 2009.
8669
P09/E1131 28 YOUENS DRIVE
Conversion of roof space into bedroom.
Amendment No. 1 shows the dormer windows reduced in width from 1800mm to 1200mm. TTC recommended approval of the original application in November 2009.
8671
P09/E1205 123 CHINNOR ROAD
Erection of a single storey rear extension.
8672
P09/E1170/LD 38 WELLINGTON STREET
Erection of a detached timber swimming pool building.
8673
P09/E1189 32 EAST STREET
Erection of two storey rear extension.
8674
P09/E1155 WATERLOO COTTAGE, 2 OXFORD ROAD
New pedestrian gate and wall raised.
8675
P09/E1226 RED COW BARN, 41 AYLESBURY ROAD
Demolish existing single storey rear extensions. New two storey rear extension.
8676
P09/E1233 94 WELLINGTON STREET
First floor rear extension.
A PLANNING decision on a controversial proposal to build new, affordable homes in Park Terrace, Thame, has been deferred until after a site visit by district councillors.
An Oxford-based housing association is seeking planning permission from South Oxfordshire District Council to build six, two-bed affordable homes in Station Yard, Park Terrace. The yard is currently owned by SODC and used as a car park by residents and by the Thame Service Station next door.
Thame Town Council’s Planning Committee has recommended refusal of the application on the grounds of:
1. Traffic generation, parking and safety
2. Over-development
3. Noise generation
4. Potential loss of employment at Thame Service Station.
Planning officers however, support the development.
The site visit will take place on Monday, December 14, 2009, to assess the impact of the proposal on the residents of Park Terrace, prior to a meeting of the district council’s planning committee two days later.
SEE FULL DETAILS OF THE APPLICATION by pasting:
SODC P09/E0846 into your browser.
Photo: Station Yard, Park Terrace, Thame, Courtesy of Coleman Hicks Partnership
THAME Hurricanes 16 pts V Thame Tornadoes 38 pts; MATCH REPORT 01/12/09:
The first and second Thame Netball sides played against each other recently for the first time this season, and it certainly didn’t disappoint. Both teams played exceptionally well and from the first quarter, it certainly looked as though the result could go either way.
The hurricanes played with a lot of determination and their defence proved hard to beat. However the tornadoes retaliated and their attack was fast and furious with some excellent passes mid court. The shooting ability was excellent from both sides, and the tornadoes took the lead from the second quarter and then continued onwards and upwards. However, the hurricanes never gave up and played some excellent netball throughout the court.
A well deserved win for the tornadoes who are continuing to be a team to beat.
Player of the match: Becky Froud (hurricanes)
Vanessa Hake (tornadoes)
PHOTO: Flashback to Thame Carnival in June, 2009
WE may have over a hundred TV channels, but the Victorians had seven hundred different varieties of pear. Almost all of them are now unobtainable, except by some rare fluke.
A few weeks ago, such a fluke happened to me; I went to stay with an old friend and discovered that behind his house was a neglected orchard in which three ancient pear trees were laden with fruit. The apple and plum trees had long ago fallen into decay, but pear trees can live and go on producing fruit for up to two hundred years. These venerable trees, overgrown, unpruned, and unruly, were weighted down with their bronze treasure, and more of it lay all around in the long grass. The pears were oddities by modern standards, funny shapes and sizes, but absolutely scrumptious.
When I last went to the Farmers? Market here in Headington, I was pleased to see pears, but disappointed that they were the same variety stocked by a supermarkets everywhere, the Conference. The reason this has become almost the only variety of pear available on the British market is that it?s very disease-resistant and reliable, cropping every year at the same time. The fruits can be picked while hard and transported. These are great virtues from the point of view of the commercial grower, but what about taste? The flavour of Conference is rather bland and insipid compared to that of older favourites, such as the Bergamotte Esperen or Doyenne du Comice. It is also liable to be a bit mushy in texture.
The older pears the Victorians knew had a range of amazing flavours, some of them like pineapple or muscatel grapes, some sharp and crisp, some perfumed like rose-water. They could be rather small or very big and unwieldy. Not all of them were white inside – they might be pink or yellowish – and some of them had amazing names like Worcester Black or Vicar of Winkfield. They are juicy, drippy and slurpy, and almost nothing you do to them in my opinion really improves on the raw thing. If you are determined to cook dessert pears they go rather well mixed with apples in an Eve?s Pudding, spiced with cloves, cinnamon and powdered ginger. To be a little more decadent, lace them with chestnut liqueur.
The sad fact is that nearly half of Britain’s pear orchards have been destroyed since 1970. So we need to bring back the pear in the English garden, something worth doing if only for its lovely blossom. Go to a garden centre or search the internet: there are plenty of businesses here and there that can supply you with pear trees including a few unusual old varieties. I found a business in Wales that is selling two rare types of ?Heritage? pears, Snowdon Queen and Penrhyn Castle, and I hope that other nurseries will follow suit. As a result of cunning grafting, pear trees can be full-size, dwarf or even small enough to grow in a pot on the patio. Pollination is less of a problem than you might think.
Pear trees need a suitable pollination partner to make them fertile, but experienced nurserymen know that the bees can cross-pollinate them up to a far greater distance than any other kind of fruit, sometimes several miles. So it is quite possible for a single pear tree to have fruit if there is another pear tree anywhere in the neighbourhood. If you want to make sure, plant two or even three, and if you haven?t got room, you can get a ?dual? pear tree, with two different varieties grafted onto a single trunk. These will happily pollinate each other and give you two different sorts of pear side by side.
I always wondered why it was that in the Twelve Days of Christmas, the first gift and most memorable gift was a partridge in a pear tree. Why a pear tree? What was the association between pears and December? In fact, different varieties of pear ripen at different times of year. Some produce fruit in the Spring, others in the summer or autumn and many of the prized older varieties in the middle of winter. The Beurre d?Aremberg, for instance, a French variety, ripens in December to January, so it would be just right for a Christmas feast. The best orchards were planted with a range of pears for different seasons, so that people could have fruit all the year round. The problem of storage was thus completely avoided. You just left them on the tree, right through the freezing winter months, to be picked and eaten long after all the other fruit were finished and forgotten.
As for the partridge, that is a bird which once provided food in the middle of winter too. Under the Normans, game-birds were reserved for the nobles, and it was illegal for mere commoners to eat them, so in the song it is a symbol of luxury. But the partridge is now a threatened species in England. It has almost entirely vanished in Ireland and here it is in serious danger, as its habitats are destroyed year by year. Most of the partridges we have left are the French red-legged ones, while the native grey depends for survival on people breeding it to shoot. The numbers are down to a fraction of what we had only a generation ago. If you want to help the Game & Wildlife Conservation Trust with their partridge-count scheme, you could ring 01425 652381. Of course, you have to know what a partridge looks like, first. And you are certainly very unlikely to see one in a pear tree.
IMAGE: Courtesy of www.egreenway.com
SOUTH Oxfordshire District Council is this year offering a text reminder service to residents for Christmas bin collections.
The council is also offering residents an email reminder service about changes to bin collections over the Christmas period.
This year collections will change between Saturday 19 December, 2009 and Saturday, 9 January, 2010. For some residents collections will be earlier than usual in the run up to Christmas and a few days later afterwards.
To sign up for a reminder, residents simply need to text the word ?waste? and their normal collection day to 07797 870370 and they will receive a reminder the day before their collection. Residents can also register for an email alert through its website www.southoxon.gov.uk/christmas
The council is also reminding residents that if they find themselves with extra recycling that won?t fit in their green bin they can put it in clear sacks, plastic bags or cardboard boxes and leave it by the side of their recycling bin for collection. Residents will also shortly receive a Christmas information leaflet with details of the changed collections.
David Dodds, Cabinet member for waste services, said:
“We know changes to collection days can cause confusion for some residents. This year, we wanted to remove that worry by offering residents an easy-to-use text and email reminder service. It?s simple and will help to remind residents when to put their bins out for collection.
“By visiting our website, residents can also look up their collection day, the changes taking place over Christmas, and whether they?ll be on a recycling or rubbish week.”
IMAGE: Courtesy of Mansfield District Council