Dear Dr Brook

Thank you for your reply to the questions I sent in for the 20th January CCGs meeting.
Unfortunately you havent answered my questions - simply referred me back to information
about the financial case for change in the Pre Consultation Business Case, which is full of
assertions that are unsupported by any evidence.
This is why I asked the CCG Governing Body to explain some key aspects of it. So simply
referring me back to the document is no help at all.
Your refusal to answer my or anyone elses questions at the 20th Jan meeting, on the
grounds that they were all irrelevant to the sole agenda item (the CCGs readiness to
consult the public on the proposals in the PCBC) betrays worrisome narrowness in your
thinking.
If the PCBC does not provide enough information for the public to make up their mind
about its proposals - which it is my contention that it does not, hence my questions - then
the CCGs cannot be said to be ready to consult the public, because the case that you are
consulting us on is inadequate.
Your answer to my question 1 Maximising the value/potential of CRH - totally fails to
answer my question, which I asked Calderdale Clinical Commissioning Group precisely
because theres not enough information on p112 of the Pre Consultation Business Case to
answer this question!
All p112 does is make a number of assertions without giving any evidence to support
them.

Here is what it says on p112 3rd box down Value for Money

How does this explain how making CRH the acute/emergency hospital maximises its
value/potential? It simply asserts that it does, on various counts, without any supporting
evidence.
1

Your response to my Question 4 Where are the documents that show the financial
modelling that identified how to maximise the value/potential of the PFI site? - is as
useless as your response to my question 1, and for the same reason.
You refer me to the Pre Consultation Business Case (PCBS) s7.2 page 95, which again
doesnt provide the necessary information which is why I asked the question in the first
place.
I asked for the documents that show the financial modelling you refer me to a table that
summarises the outputs of the financial modelling.
How did the Trust generate these figures? Where are their workings? What is the evidence
that these figures make any kind of sense in the real world? Obviously I shall have to ask
the hospitals Trust. Who will doubtless tell me the information is commercially confidential
or some such evasion.
To jog your memory, here is PCBC section 7.2, page 95

Question 6: What weight did the CCGs assign to maximising the value/potential of the PFI
site (CRH) when they decided to make it the acute/A&E hospital?
2

OK, this is an object lesson in the importance of how to word a question.

You avoided answering this one, because it refers to a decision which you cant admit to
having made, because this would be evidence of pre-determination. And of course predetermination means a consultation is unlawful.
So I should have said something like: when they decided that their preferred option was
to make it the acute/A&E hospital.
As to the evaluation, again youve done the same thing as youve done in your other
replies, which is to refer me to a bit of the PCBC which fails to provide the information I
asked for, which is why I asked the CCG to provide it!
There is a kind of grim comedy in all this.
Where in Section 8 p106 of the PCBC does it:
state what the financial assumptions are
show the comparison of these financial assumptions
state the weightings that the CCGs placed on maximising the value/potential of the PFI
site (CRH), when coming to their preferred option of having this as the acute/A&E
hospital?
Finally, Question 8 - which boils down to: Is the intention to sell off the new planned care
hospital once it is up and running?
Your answer completely ignores my question, in favour of making the irrelevant point that
the new hospital would provide planned care AND an urgent care centre.
Since Calderdale CCG is taking the time to write back to people about their questions which is entirely right and proper - why dont you actually ANSWER our questions? Its not
that difficult, these are all pretty basic questions and surely at least a few people in the
organisation have the answers at their finger tips.
This is an open letter that I am posting on Upper Calder Valley Plain Speaker, as it
concerns a matter of general public interest.
Yours sincerely,
Jenny Shepherd