EXCLUSIVE: Cancer services move 'unlawful'
A DECISION to move specialist cancer services from Truro to Plymouth was taken despite legal advice that it was unlawful, the Western Morning News can exclusively reveal.
Last year, the Royal Cornwall Hospitals NHS Trust was given a stark warning that proposed changes to services were so substantial that they warranted full public consultation with the people of Cornwall.
However, the crucial advice was not published and, in the face of fierce public opposition, the go-ahead was given to transfer services for Upper Gastro-Intestinal (GI) cancers.
The trust says its actions are legal, but Health Secretary Andy Burnham will this morning be given a dossier on the controversial move and urged to put it on hold until an independent inquiry is held.
Graham Webster, vice-chairman of campaign group Health Initiative for Cornwall, said it was a betrayal: "We believe this is nothing less than a public scandal. I am beyond anger on this issue and what has happened. People across the county have campaigned for these services to be retained in Cornwall. Heads should roll."
Proposals to move Upper GI cancer services from Truro's Royal Cornwall Hospital to Derriford in Plymouth provoked outrage when first mooted by Cornwall Primary Care Trust. The organisation, which procures health services on behalf of the public, insisted it was not a "substantial" variation in services and a full public consultation was not necessary.
Instead, the PCT undertook a "public engagement" process to explain the plans and allay fears.
However, it is understood that the then chief executive of RCHT, John Watkinson, was so concerned that the board would be breaking the law that he asked for expert legal advice.
The guidance from barrister David Lock, of law firm Mills and Reeve, which has been obtained by the Western Morning News, is unequivocal.
"I regret to advise the trust that the approach of the PCT to force through changes without consulting the public is plainly unlawful," it said.
In his guidance, Mr Lock said there is no suggestion the service for Upper GI cancer patients in Truro was failing. But there was a clear duty to consult extensively on any changes to preserve public confidence in services.
In a damning statement, he said: "I therefore regret to have to advise that I consider both the trust and the PCT would be acting unlawfully if they attempt to move Upper GI services from Truro to Plymouth without prior public consultation."
He also identified a "clear legal duty to engage with the public" and criticised the approach of the PCT, saying it "sought to make final decisions without public consultation".
He added that should local campaigners issue judicial review proceedings against both the trust and the PCT, they would have a "reasonably strong case" for an injunction.
The advice is dated July 29, 2008 and according to the papers for the board meeting of the RCHT a few days later on August 5, it was presented and duly "noted".
The board papers said the chief executive of the RCHT and the chairman, then John Mills, would meet top PCT officials in September, when the matter would be discussed. It is not known whether the information was passed on to the PCT – although earlier this month, it denied ever seeking legal advice on the matter.
However, on September 25, 2008, Mr Watkinson was asked to take a "special leave of absence" by Mr Mills over matters relating to an investigation into his former employment.
Rose Woodward, chairman of the Cornwall and Isles of Scilly Cancer Patient and Carer Group and a cancer patient herself, said it was inconceivable that RCHT and the PCT would not have shared such crucial legal advice. "It would be unrealistic to think that the PCT would not have known. They are in meetings all the time. They talk to each other."
This morning, Health Secretary Andy Burnham, will be briefed on the matter by Jude Robinson, the Labour Party's prospective parliamentary candidate for Camborne and Redruth.
"It is not in Cornwall's interests that the future of NHS services is 'stitched up' behind closed doors," she said.
Last April, a petition signed by 32,000 people was delivered to Cornwall County Council objecting to the transfer of services. A few days later, as one of the last acts of the county council before it was dissolved, the overview and scrutiny committee (OSC) decided the move was not a substantial variation of services, paving the way for it to go ahead.
Earlier this month, at a meeting of the OSC of the new unitary Cornwall Council, Mr Webster pressed for the legal advice to be made public. PCT chief executive Ann James told the committee it had not sought legal advice and therefore had nothing to share.
Last night, the trusts issued a joint statement defending their actions: "Legal advice given to the Royal Cornwall Hospitals Trust was considered by its board in August 2008. Both trusts believe the document, that was shared with the PCT following the last Overview and Scrutiny Committee meeting was based on a very inaccurate briefing, was seriously flawed, littered with inaccuracies and contains subjective and potentially libellous comment.
"The legal advice was not shared with the PCT – even though the legal opinion at the time suggested it should be. This supports the criticism of governance arrangements in place at RCHT at the time of the Independent Review; a significant amount of work has subsequently been done to make improvements.
"Over the last few days, the NHS has sought further legal advice which confirms that a decision not to carry out a formal, public consultation on these proposals was entirely justified and reasonable and there is no proper basis whatsoever to say that such a decision was unlawful. The information leaked today does not provide any information that requires us to reconsider the right way forward.
"We wish to reiterate that these proposals are about improving patients' chances of survival and cure. We have undertaken a substantial engagement programme and responded to the issues raised as far as we are able."














8 Comments
View all
by Jude Robinson, Cornwall
Thursday, October 22 2009, 6:29AM
“Spot on, Lydia
I hope you will think about being one of the next generation of councillors in Cornwall!
This is just the sort of question our councillors should be asking.
You have the right (as long as you are on the electoral roll) to go to the next Scrutiny meeting on this and ask your councillors to find out for you.”
by Lydia (the next generation), St Ives, Cornwall
Monday, October 19 2009, 7:41PM
“So the RCHT previously took legal advice saying one thing and in the last few days the PCT has taken legal advice saying another. What a mess, so which of the legal advice is correct then, they could both be wrong at this rate?. I daren't suggest that Cornwall Council should seek legal advice. They must be as confussed as me. One thing I am not confussed about is the need to refer this to the Secretary of State for Health so he can ensure what is legal and what is not. No one should be above the law, even the NHS. In the meantime, the transfer should be suspended pending his decision.
I am just a young, simple girl but can someone explain to me why expert legal opinion wasn't obtained jointly by the RCHT, PCT, SHA and Council at the start of this process, from day one, wouldn't that be the right way to do it, not wait until there was a treat of legal challenge.
Oh, finally, are the PCT going to publish their recent legal advice?. If not, why not?. The other lot is now in the public domain so why not let those members of the public who are interested in this see the latest opinion and they can make their own minds up.”
by wendyinfrance, France
Monday, October 19 2009, 2:32PM
“Whatever next! The Cornwall I knew is becoming unrecognisable. What with all these new houses they want to build, surely the population is large enough to warrant proper health services etc.?”
by max power, st austell
Monday, October 19 2009, 1:55PM
“None of this is going away until an unbiased independant inquiry is held which includes the sacking of Mr Watkinson.
Take away their shovels as this hole gets deeper by the day.”
by Peter T., U.K.
Monday, October 19 2009, 12:53PM
“This story / decision is an absolute disgrace. People who suffer from cancer, and their friends and relatives, should not be made to suffer even more by making them travel outside of their county for treatment. This decision must be reversed and people able to receive treatment locally again as a matter of decency and urgency.”