Earlier this week, the States voted to rescind the decision to make Gloucester Street the preferred site. The decision meant that the project is back to square one without an approved site.
Senator Le Fondré has confirmed that an ‘engagement programme’ with States Members to look at alternative sites had begun and that a meeting would be held next month to discuss the future of the £466 million project. He added that work to speed up the selection process could bring the estimated finish date for a new hospital forward.
Meanwhile, Health Minister Richard Renouf apologised to hospital staff for being unable to start work on the much-needed new building.
He also said it was ‘regrettable’ that the People’s Park had been removed from the shortlist. States Members opted to rule out the park, as well as Parade Gardens, Victoria Park, the Lower Park and Westmount Gardens from development following proposals from St Helier Constable Simon Crowcroft.
The States’ decision to rescind Gloucester Street as the approved site does not rule it out of consideration in the new selection process.
Senator Le Fondré said: ‘It was right that the States Assembly should debate this important matter. Members have now reached a considered position, so we will look again at potential sites and ensure that our new hospital is built in the right place for Jersey.
‘We are now discussing how we can develop a new process for assessing possible sites that involves consultation with hospital staff and Islanders. We are also looking for ways to speed up the site selection, planning, procurement and construction process, by running some of this work in parallel rather than completing each piece of work before moving onto the next.
‘This would bring the estimated completion date forward, while still following proper processes. We want to assess alternative sites and reach a final decision as soon as possible.’
In a message to all States Members, the Chief Minister set out five key actions to push the process forward. They are:
- Facilitating a new, transparent site selection process and working with States Members in workshops, with healthcare staff and other stakeholders, to determine which of a small number of deliverable sites should be appraised.
- Considering public interest issues and increasing assurance around a future planning application.
- Committing to maintaining a good standard of care for patients.
- Reviewing, producing and publishing an indicative timeline for site selection.
- Publishing an explanation and outline of costs.
During the States debate, Deputy Renouf outlined a series of concerns he had about overturning the original decision, but ultimately agreed to support the rescindment of Gloucester Street.
He has now said that he agrees to ‘take a step back’ and review the options.
‘It is not just my responsibility to build the hospital: it’s the responsibility of the Council of Ministers,’ he said. ‘We have got a determination to get the hospital built.
‘We have been saying that we have to have more consultation and public engagement. You can’t expect us to have a clear plan now before we have got on with that. We are planning that [engagement] with States Members and Health and Community Services staff.
‘I would have still built it [on the current site] if we had planning consent. If we can’t have a planning consent for any of the sites we have got to address that.
‘We have got to reassess again. This is where it is not about people’s opinion – it is about a technical assessment on any environmental and traffic issues and the clinical use of the building as well. It’s pointless asking an opinion – on the basis of opinion we are going to end up with a rubbish solution.’
He added that he believes the People’s Park should have been up for consideration but admits that it would have been ‘controversial’ and that Members already ‘know a lot about the sites’.
‘I’m sorry the States have not been able to provide a new hospital as yet but clearly many staff were not assured about building on Gloucester Street,’ he said. ‘I have to accept that. There was a degree of public confidence lost when we could not get planning permissions. That is the reality of the situation.
‘We will keep the existing hospital safe for patients and staff.’
A total of £41 million has been spent on the current project – at least £27 million of which will have to be written off with a change of site.
