Sensible solution would be to scrap Future Fit project
Goodness me who would ever have thought it?
The projected cost of the ill-fated, ill-managed and unwanted Future Fit project has in 12 months increased by £188 million to a current guesstimate of half a billion pounds.What will the guesstimate in another 12 months be, £650m?
What does this say for the commercial abilities of our combined CCGs who were the masterminds behind this vanity patchwork project designed to boost egos and empire build?
The project means that the majority of seriously ill patients will still be transferred out of the county for the treatment that they require. Is that what the architects call a success?
Not a brick has yet been laid and a probable legal challenge will hinder its progress further whilst adding to the final bill.
If this white elephant is allowed to continue it will take up to 10 years to come to fruition. What will the cost be by then, one billion or more maybe? And how about the ongoing costs, which will increase in tandem? By comparison the latest forecast for a brand new state-of-the-art super hospital between the two largest conurbations in the county is around £600m.
The CCG’s and other stakeholders knew from the moment they made the decision one year ago that their figures were absolutely incorrect, the main criteria being to fall within the parameters that NHS England had already set them.It was a case of get the decision approved and then we will reveal the true cost.
Future Fit will only further deteriorate the very poor local health service.
The only sensible solution is to scrap Future Fit and start again looking at other solutions if a new hospital is not possible whilst at the same time disbanding the CCG’s and health trust replacing them with a competent regime whilst bringing those unelected executives responsible for the years of failure and the wasted millions to account.
Alan Barnett, Stirchley Park
Send us your letters for publication:
Email us at starmail@shropshirestar.co.uk or write to: Readers’ Letters, Shropshire Star, Ketley, Telford, TF1 5HU. Letters MUST include the writer’s name, address and telephone number. Letters will only be published anonymously in exceptional circumstances. The editor reserves the right to condense or amend letters.
