Home   News   Article

Subscribe Now

Reader’s letter: Failing to ask the important question

With reference to your article NHS Leaders Pledge to Listen to Urgent Treatment Centre Fears (Advertiser, September 14) I take issue with several statements.

‘We want to make sure people are really listened to..’ and ‘the information you (we) want to receive from people is not mapped out for them..’

This survey says different.

Letters stock image
Letters stock image

If ever there was a biased survey, this is one great example.

There cannot be a resident who does not want the urgent treatment centre to be open as a proper A&E department 24/7, 365 days a year — and with good reason.

Instead, we are offered a choice of start early, finish early, start late, finish late or the status quo.

They claim only about one person used the centre an hour each night. So that is 12 hours . Twelve people over seven days is 84 people a week who could have been treated quicker and whose family members would not have had to travel so far either.

It’s not really surprising either, as all emergency ambulances are directed to QMC and King’s Mill with the seriously detrimental effect to those needing immediate care, of the extended travel times involved.

The fact that opening times were restricted 'as a temporary measure' three years ago seems to matter little.

This survey is a completely wasteful and expensive farce, designed only to ensure that local people are restricted to voting for one of three options, none of which is what we have wanted for many years.

It is obvious that those who have designed this survey want to be able to claim that they have listened to us and are taking action in line with our wishes.

Is it really surprising that the vast majority of people do not trust those running these services when this is how we are treated.

No criticism is implied or intended, of any medical staff, who provide excellent service at all times.

Even if this survey is completed by as many people as possible, what will it have achieved? A mere tinkering with the service being provided with no actual benefit to anyone, least of all patients. — D. HALL, Newark.

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies - Learn More