A BID to get the States Assembly to commit to the single-site Overdale scheme has been launched by the politician formerly responsible for the project.
Deputy Lyndon Farnham’s proposition, which was due to be lodged today, would prevent the government from abandoning the approved Overdale plans until it had ‘certainty’ that the multi-site scheme – recommended by the Our Hospital Project review – was a better option both clinically and financially.
The review was undertaken by expert adviser Alan Moore and recommended scrapping the proposed single-site facility in favour of a hybrid model that would include the existing Gloucester Street site, adjacent land at Kensington Place and Overdale.
Infrastructure Minister Tom Binet estimated that the smaller-scale project could achieve a potential saving of around £50 million compared to the previous scheme, which has an approved £804m budget.
If successful, Deputy Farnham’s proposition would require the Council of Ministers to present a report to the States by 20 March, providing ‘direct like-for-like’ comparisons between the multi-site option and the Overdale proposals – including running costs.
It would also prevent the States Assembly from making a decision ‘that would deviate from the decisions previously taken on the Hospital project’ until the report had been presented.
The previous decisions referenced in the proposition include the site selection, preferred access route and land acquisition as well as the approved financing.
In the report accompanying his proposition, Deputy Farnham said: ‘Our existing health estate is deteriorating and the longer we delay in delivering a hospital, the more this will impact on running costs, standards of care and recruitment and retention of clinical and professional colleagues.’
He added: ‘The Overdale project brings clinical services together on a single location in a purpose-built hospital, where patient, staff and visitor experiences will be significantly improved. The greatly improved placement of related medical services, which were established with medical professionals, will ensure that patient flows will be easier and quicker, making the hospital a more efficient and effective place for all.’
He also noted that the published review was subjective ‘at its own admission’, referring to the final paragraph in the 114-page document, which states: ‘All of the assumptions laid out in the above model are subjective and should be validated by a further detailed analysis prior to ratification of the selection of the option going forward.’
Deputy Farnham also challenged the assertion that the Overdale project had become unaffordable as a result of the changing financial markets, adding that it could still be funded using a ‘modified, but similar proposal’.
He included sections from the review, referring to a ‘new approach’ to borrowing that would involve shorter-term debt being replaced by longer-term funding as the project progressed.
Deputy Farnham said: ‘The Treasury team should be praised for continuing their work to produce a more flexible method of financing the project which could be applied to either option.’
He added: ‘The report warrants much greater analysis than I have been able to give in these few pages, and we have a duty to make such important decisions – which ultimately will affect the health and the very lives of every Islander for decades to come – on the basis of good evidence.’
