Burnell

Burnell Division elects one Councillor.

Candidates:
Division Name Party Survey
Burnell HAYEK, Tereza Grn (Did not respond)
Burnell KING, Kate LD  
Burnell MORRIS, Dan Con (Did not respond)
1. Will you support sufficient funding to enable all Shropshire’s Public Health programmes to continue, and to allow the development and implementation of new programmes to improve the health of Shropshire people?

Name Party Q1
KING, Kate LD Yes
Comments and explanations:

Name Party Comment1
KING, Kate LD As with education, Shropshire should get its fair share of national resources which should also reflect the demands within a disparate, rural community with a relatively aged population.
2. Will you support sufficient funding for health visiting in Shropshire to ensure the full implementation of NHS England’s recommended model: ‘The universal health visitor reviews’ – five mandated reviews?

Name Party Q2
KING, Kate LD Yes
Comments and explanations:

Name Party Comment2
KING, Kate LD In principle, yes. Health Visiting is vitally important in a rural, dispersed community such as ours where many are unable to drive (through incapacity or un-affordability) and there are absolutely no options for public transport. I also believe we should be striving to engage with best practice such as NHS England’s recommendations. I will commit myself to better understanding the detail and the impact of these reviews strategically in Shropshire once elected.
3. Will you support Shropshire Council commissioning and subsidising public transport sufficient to enable all patients without their own transport to access health services reliably?

Name Party Q3
KING, Kate LD Yes
Comments and explanations:

Name Party Comment3
KING, Kate LD Again, in principal I would say yes. However, a full strategic review of public transport is incredibly necessary. The recent superficial ‘tick box’ consultation put out by the current administration on buses only considered subdsidised bus routes; it did not include commercial bus routes or indeed parts of our hugely sparse and rural county where there is no provision at all. THIS IS NOT STRATEGIC and is superficial at best. It does point to tick boxing and seeking evidence to support possibly dubious funding decisions that may already have been made. A serious review should take into account current siting of surgeries and capacity in relation to public transport; for example, residents in Pulverbatch prefer to go to Radbrook surgery because it is on their main bus route whereas their intended provision is not. However, the capacity at Radbrook is not sufficient to accommodate them. I think in a climate of reduced budgets, innovative approaches, where possible, should at least be considered, such as using nextdoor.com website or similar for lift sharing etc. Fundamentally though, removal of services such as the ‘Link Bus’ to rural residents who don’t drive has been seriously detrimental to their well-being. A proper, meaningful strategic review of county public transport and provision should certainly seek to achieve sufficient public transport to access health services that is affordable and reliable for those that really need it, yes.
4. Will you support the funding of Healthwatch at a level sufficient to fully exercise its statutory role, and do you agree that it should be able to determine its own programmes of work independent of any Council veto?

Name Party Q4
KING, Kate LD Yes
Comments and explanations:

Name Party Comment4
KING, Kate LD Again, in principal, yes. As one resident said to me on the doorstep ‘”no decision” should not be an acceptable position’. Shropshire needs clarity on the decision making and direction. Healthwatch should absolutely be enabled to exercise its statutory role, all bodies should be. Again, I would commit to working hard on being certain of the detail of this upon election. I would trust that this would be in meaningful consultation with bodies such as the Council, but absolutely it should not be subjected to Council Veto.
5. Do you agree that the Health and Wellbeing Board should only apply the Better Care Fund on programmes that will improve health and wellbeing, rather than transferring the cost of provision from the NHS to the Council, voluntary organisations, and individual patients?

Name Party Q5
KING, Kate LD Yes
Comments and explanations:

Name Party Comment5
KING, Kate LD In principal, yes. Much more effort and funding needs to be focused on health and well-being to reduce critical demand on overstretched services. I would again want to understand the detail of the figures and I will commit to doing exactly this. Fundamentally though, budgets should be coordinated jointly through delivery of joined-up, properly strategic and collaborative approaches. However, in principal, I do believe it is much more appropriate that funding for health and well-being programmes remain with the NHS.
6. Will you vote against endorsement of the current Shropshire Sustainability and Transformation Plan (STP) in which Shropshire Council is a partner?

Name Party Q6
KING, Kate LD Yes
Comments and explanations:

Name Party Comment6
KING, Kate LD As far as I can understand it, there is not sufficient data, detail and clarity in the current STP to vote ‘for’ it. A proper, strategic analysis needs to be conducted at County Level to understand the demands of needs within the very relevant contexts of accessibility or inaccessibility through lack of physical capability or lack of transportation. This also needs to take into account the impact of poor provision for addiction and mental health on local policing provision etc. Engagement with services such as voluntarily funded Air Ambulance and voluntarily run Shropshire and Staffordshire Blood Bikes should also be included.
7. Will you vote against endorsement of future versions of the STP if it does not meet the following red lines: (a) no reduction of provision or access to in-County secondary care, including emergency care; (b) no reduction of hospital beds in either RSH or PRH unless bed occupancy rates have been running at 85% consistently for 12 months; (c) no reduction in acute/secondary care services that are being transferred to the community without high quality evidence based community provision being in place, fully operational, and proven to be successful; (d) no reduction in beds and service provision at our community hospitals; (e) a real increase in community mental health provision; (f) the continued provision of accessible Midwife-Led Maternity Units, in line with national guidance and with no reduction in current services; (g) a real improvement in ambulance provision to ensure NHS England target response times can be met across the County; (h) no increase in the fragmentation or privatisation of services?

Name Party Q7
KING, Kate LD Yes
Comments and explanations:

Name Party Comment7
KING, Kate LD Yes, in principal. Although, I believe it is important to understand in detail where these ‘red lines’ are derived from and how these would be revisited with a changing picture of provision. As far as I understand the detail, the current focus is far too centrallised in Shrewsbury and Telford with inadequate consideration of efficient and effective delivery of services through community based provision (huge swathes of which have been reduced and removed in recent decades). This flies very much in the face of the challenge that we face with transport in rural areas. Too many hours and money are wasted travelling and waiting in our urban hospitals. The current approach seems likely to diminish greater joining up of urgent care and social services etc. and increase the pressure on hospital resources, clinics and beds.
8. If a member of the Health and Adult Social Care Scrutiny Committee, or the Joint Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee, will you ensure that there is full public consultation on any proposed changes to NHS service that might negatively impact any patients, and if such proposals are subsequently agreed by the relevant NHS body, will you vote to refer the proposals to the Secretary of State for Health?

Name Party Q8
KING, Kate LD Yes
Comments and explanations:

Name Party Comment8
KING, Kate LD Furthermore, consultation MUST NOT be ‘tick box’ exercises to ‘prove’ or ‘negate’ pre-decided outcomes. They must be GENUINE, joined up, strategic listening exercises which enable us to TRULY understand the REAL needs, concerns etc. of residents as well as opportunities and suggestions, taking advantage of residents and patients’ knowledge as ‘experts’ (‘customers’) within the care system.