GP Masthead
Campaigns

Image of GordonSpeak out and make your voice heard. Campaigns can shift opinions and change things.

You can read about my campaigns, past and present, below...



Burnley Urgent Care Centre Review PDF Print E-mail
Thursday, 25 March 2010 20:01
Burnley Urgent Care Centre (UCC) Review                 March 2010
 
Comments by Gordon Prentice MP
 
1       Overview
 
1.1.     This review by Professor Cooke and Dr Cobden has a narrow focus: how can the performance of the Burnley Urgent Care Centre be improved?
 
1.2.     I believe the reconfiguration as originally conceived was flawed. It has never met the expectations claimed for it. My preference would be the return of a blue light A&E at Burnley General with a publicly available protocol making it crystal clear which conditions could or could not be treated there.
 
1.3.     The key element of the Meeting Patient Needs (MPN) reconfiguration programme was that Royal Blackburn Hospital was to be developed as the ‘Emergency/unplanned’ site and Burnley General hospital as the site for all planned work. The principle of splitting the unplanned and planned work across two East Lancashire sites was sold to the public as a way of delivering improved services to patients and the more effective use of resources.
 
1.4.     However, the implementation of the changes across the NHS in East Lancashire has not achieved all the forecast promised improvements. Blackburn’s Emergency department has consistently failed to reach government performance targets and the patient experience has been consistently poor. While, at the same time, the initial targets set for patient throughput at Burnley’s UCC has consistently been under achieved. The situation is that Blackburn is frequently unable to cope with the number of ‘emergency’ patients turning up for treatment while Burnley’s UCC has been under utilised in terms of patient numbers.
 
1.5.     The reconfiguration of the secondary health care for East Lancashire has resulted in a reduction in mortality rates. This is primarily a result of establishing a well equipped specialist coronary unit attached to the emergency department. Co-location has, indeed, made a difference.
 
1.6.     However, this does not mean that outcomes cannot be further improved by re-examining the overall operation of the health economy of East Lancashire and ensuring that patients are treated at the most appropriate facility. It is a fact that Blackburn Emergency Department is attracting many patients who could be seen at Burnley. And, for its part, Burnley is under utilised for appropriate patients and is not relieving the pressure on Blackburn.
 
1.7.     Below is a more detailed consideration of the issues raised:
 
 
 
2       Blackburn is not coping
 
2.1      The tables below contain data extracted from the Department of Health’s Acute Hospital Trust performance statistics.
 
2.2      East Lancs Hospital Trust (ELHT), (i.e. RBH and BGH) is around 24th most attended in England out of 257 hospital trusts.
 
Year/QuarterAttendancesMost attended from 257 trusts
2009/10 Q335,78424th
2009/10 Q236,68524th
2009/10 Q138,37821st
 
 
2.3      ELHT has only once achieved the government’s benchmark target of attending to 98% of patients, or more, presenting at A&E within 4hours. The performance and rank within the 154 acute trusts is amongst the worst in England.
 
Year/Quarter% seen within 4 hoursRank (worst) from 154 trusts
2009/10 Q397.4439th
2009/10 Q296.382nd
2009/10 Q194.51st
2008/09 Q494.313rd
2008/09 Q395.136th
2008/09 Q298.7210th
 
 
2.4      This is aggravated by having insufficient beds available for A&E patients waiting to be admitted. Again the ELHT has recently been the 12th and 17th worst for lack of bed availability out of England’s 154 Acute Trusts.
Year/Quarter% not in bed within 2hrs after decision to admitRank (worst) from 154 trusts
2009/10 Q354.912th
2009/10 Q265.317th
 
3       Burnley is under-utilised
 
3.1      When Burnley had its own A&E department (2007) it is estimated that there were around 68,700 attendances. 
 
3.2      The MPN estimate was that 85% of 2007 Burnley attendances would be appropriate for attending the new UCC at BGH, that is around 58,400 attendances. The actual number of attendances through BGH UCC is running at around 4,000 per month, that is 48,000 per year or 69% of the 2007 figures.
 
 
 
4       Burnley can justify an A&E facility based on attendances
 
4.1      The last year (2003) when separate figures were published for A&E at Burnley, there were 61,997 attendances. Figures published in 2008 for all Hospital Trusts in England showed around 45 Accident and Emergency Departments had fewer patients admitted than Burnley General Hospital did in 2003 when the East Lancashire Hospitals NHS Trust was formed.  
 
4.2      Professor Alberti, the ex-National Clinical Director for Emergency Access, said: “In particular, the volume of patients (at Burnley) would not justify the employment of the specialist clinicians required to sustain an emergency service and such a service would be unsafe and detrimental to meeting the needs of patients.”  Figures from the Department of Health for 2008 show that 145,055 people attended the single A&E in East Lancashire. 
 
4.3      Also, 131,689 people went to A&E in the Calderdale and Huddersfield NHS Foundation Trust where there are two Type I A&Es, at Halifax and another at Huddersfield. In the Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust there were  115,057 attendances at the two Type I A&Es  at Preston and at Chorley. 
 
4.4      There are many Hospital trusts around the country where A&E attendances are less than the volumes handled by Burnley when it had its own blue light emergency department, handling 61,997 attendances: Yeovil  (42,119); Scarborough (48,841); Harrogate (41,040);  Airedale (50,872) plus others.
 
5       Mortality rate improvement not based on A&E reconfiguration
 
5.1      To what extent can improvements to mortality be attributed solely to the single A&E at Blackburn? The claim is often made that 200 lives have been saved as a result of the transfer of A&E to Blackburn.
 
5.2      Hospital Standardised Mortality Ratios (which throw up the 200 figure) reflect mortality across the Trust – not on individual hospital sites. Some busy Hospital Trusts may have two, three or even four A&Es. In these circumstances, the Hospital Standardised Mortality Ratios could not be use to distinguish performance across the various sites.
 
5.3      The Health Secretary has put in hand a review of HSMRs because of the confusion over their use and the claims which are often based on them.
 
5.4      Lives have been saved. But the question before us is whether more lives still could be saved with a different configuration – by reinstating A&E at  Burnley.
 
5.5      The report on the implementation of MPN for the National Clinical Advisory Team (NCAT), of January 2009, stated that “Improvements in clinical outcomes for patients are striking, for example, deaths of cardiac patients in hospital having halved from 15% to 7% and deaths within 30 days following discharge having reduced from 19% to 10%, a total reduction of 92 deaths.”
 
5.6     I take the view that the improvement in mortality is due to the reorganisation and development of a Consultant–led cardiology service from October 2007. The number of Consultant Cardiologists was doubled to 6 and Consultant Cardiologists replaced General Physicians leading all aspects of the work of the unit. These changes led to a substantial reductions in the length of stay and a reduction in the ‘all cause’ in-hospital and thirty-day post discharge mortality in acute coronary syndromes. The Risk Ratio (RR) that calculates an expected number of deaths, allowing for the factors that affect the local population, adjusted to a 100 base line, has seen the non-elective coronary mortality RR drop from 124.1 in 2005/06 to 80.5 in 2009/10.
 
5.7      However, the total non-elective mortality RR has fallen from 121.9 in 2006/07 to 105.2 in 2009/10 but this still equated to 32 more deaths than ‘expected’ for 2009/10 (i.e 658 deaths against an expected 626).
 
5.8      The mortality rates have dropped substantially, but the majority of the improvement is due to the new Coronary Unit established as part of the reconfiguration. But this is not strictly an A&E change. The non-elective improvements still have some way to go to achieve statistically expected results.
 
6       Current emergency activity at BGH – Maternity and Ophthalmic Units
 
6.1      The Edith Watson maternity unit at Burnley is due to be replaced by a new Mother and Newborn facility in 2010. This will provide services for the whole of East Lancashire. There are currently emergency facilities available to the existing unit and these will be carried forward into the new unit.
 
6.2      Similarly, The Ophthalmic Unit at Burnley covers the work for the entire East Lancashire area, including emergency procedures. This meets the criteria for a Type II A&E.
 
6.3      This is anomalous given Burnley’s primary designation as an elective centre. But it does demonstrate that emergency work is routinely carried out there.
 
7        Ambulance performance significantly worse since reconfiguration
 
7.1      As part of implementing Meeting Patient Needs, three additional ambulances were purchased and extra staff recruited to cope with locating the single A&E department at Blackburn at the extreme western end of the area. Barnoldswick is 23 miles from Blackburn with an average journey time of 30 minutes. There was a promise at MPN that all ambulances would be staffed by at least one paramedic, that is, trained personnel who can deal with heart attacks and administer clot-busting drugs.
 
7.2      The North West Ambulance Service (NWAS) has confirmed that it has been unable to train enough paramedics to ensure that a paramedic is on every ambulance. Figures from 2008 suggest that 11% of ambulances are staffed with technicians who cannot administer clot busting drugs.
 
7.3      There have been significant performance issues with NWAS in East Lancashire. Figures show that the performance in Burnley, Pendle, Rossendale, Hyndburn and Ribble Valley was 70.5% of category A calls being responded to in the target time of 8 minutes. The government target is 75%. The 70.5% in down from 74.6% average performance before the MPN reconfiguration.
 
7.4      For less serious, or ‘category B’ cases, with a 19-minute requirement, the performance is 91.3% against a target of 95%.
 
7.5      The situation for the emergency callers from the east of the area is even worse, with BB18 (Barnoldswick area) having an average category A, 8-minute response performance of 55% between May and October 2009, against a target of 75%.
 
7.6      There is anecdotal evidence from paramedics that ambulance crews spend a disproportionate amount of time in the Blackburn area, because of queuing at RBH and because they get redeployed within the Blackburn area when they become free from the hospital queue because they are the nearest crew. This would explain the very poor performance in the Pendle and Ribble Valley areas.
 
8       Slow progress implementing an effective ambulance emergency protocol
 
8.1      Recently 10% of ambulances went to Burnley and 90% went to Blackburn. The Burnley deliveries were non-emergencies, usually GP referrals. There has been an attempt to establish a protocol that would enable ambulance crews to phone an emergency senior medic to help to decide whether a particular patient should be delivered to Burnley or Blackburn depending upon the severity of the case. The general impression is that this procedure has not been successful and too many cases are being referred to Blackburn unnecessarily.
 
8.2      A review of the operation of the ambulance telephone advice service ha been underway since January 2010. The review includes carrying out an on-going audit of cases arriving at Blackburn from the Burnley area to assess if they could have been handled appropriately by Burnley. The Medical Directors of NWAS and ELHT are liaising on this.
 
9       Very poor Patient and Public understanding of MPN changes and the        impact on service provision
 
9.1      It has been generally accepted, since the start of the implementation of MPN, that public support for the changes was paramount. This has never happened. There has been constant hostile press coverage of the changes and all local political parties have spoken against the changes to emergency services, particularly for the populations of Pendle, Burnley, Rossendale and Ribble Valley.
 
9.2      Attempts have been made by the Primary Care Trusts and the East Lancashire Hospitals Trust to inform residents of the alternative services provided at Burnley and Blackburn but the attendances at Burnley are constant, month on month. This indicates an ignorance of the services available at Burnley or a reluctance to chance a self-referral there.
 
9.3      The Lancashire County Council Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee established a special task group to review the implementation of the MPN changes. A number of recommendations concerned communication with the general public. The O&SC Task Group report was reviewed in early February 2010 to monitor progress. Recommendations concerning (a) communicating the need for change and ‘how each stage of MPN is being implemented’ and (b) proving publicly that “the reconfiguration is giving better outcomes for patients” have got nowhere. Neither of these recommended actions has been completed and an update is due in July 2010.
 
10       Population health-care access better served by Burnley site
 
10.1     During the MPN consultation the split between a planned hospital site and an emergency/unplanned hospital site was given a good airing. However, the option of keeping the emergency site at Burnley was rejected on financial grounds.
 
10.2     The Burnley site is more central geographically than Blackburn. The attendances at Blackburn and Burnley A&E’s prior to the merger of the two hospital trusts was very similar with Burnley having 48% of attendances (62,000) and Blackburn having 52% attendances (68,000).
 
Population in thousands199120012008% IncreaseAverage closest Site
Blackburn with Darwen137.4138.5140.72.4RBH
Burnley92.089.587.3- 5.1BGH
Hyndburn78.681.581.63.8RBH/BGH
Pendle85.589.389.95.1BGH
Ribble Valley51.854.158.512.9BGH
Rossendale65.865.667.32.2BGH
East Lancashire511.1518.5525.32.7 
 
10.3     So, the population that accessed Burnley is disadvantaged as a result of the reconfiguration in terms of access to an A&E facility. Population trends as shown above are likely to make the disadvantage even greater.
 
10.4     The fact that Blackburn is in the south west corner of the East Lancashire area leads to significantly longer journey times for patients and patient’s visitors who are going there. Particularly, public transport services mean long journeys to Blackburn from Pendle, Burnley and Ribble Valley. The journey to Blackburn is seen as much worse than the journey to Burnley particularly for the elderly and the infirm. The eastern parts of Pendle are around 23 miles from Blackburn and 10 miles from Burnley.
 
10.5     Ambulance performance figures are affected by the long journey times to the east and north of the region (See section on Ambulance Performance).
 
11      Patients Choosing Airedale A&E
 
11.1     Figures supplied by the East Lancashire Primary Care Trust show that significantly more patients prefer to use the Emergency Service at Airedale Hospital than was planned. The figures below refer to Pendle Locality activity which includes the patients most likely to choose Airedale because of its closeness to the Pendle towns.
 
11.2     The resulting shortfall in actual income that was planned for the East Lancashire Hospital Trust must be affecting resource availability at the hospital trust. The return of an emergency Department to Burnley would redress this outflow of funding.
 
Pendle Locality A&E Activity to month 7 of 2009/10
 ActivityBudget to Date (£)Actual to Date (£)%age of Total cost (%)Variance (£)
Airedale3,405-291,31420.43291,413
ELHT14,1391,140,6041,111,49377.96-29,011
 
 
 
 
Gordon Prentice MP
25 March 2010
 
 
Plans for Muslim school criticised by Burnley Bishop PDF Print E-mail
Wednesday, 23 December 2009 00:00

(From the Lancashire Telegraph 23 December 2009)

PLANS for a huge faith school in Burnley have been criticised by the town’s Bishop.

The Rt Rev John Goddard said plans for the 1,500-pupil all-girls school on the site of the former Burnley College in Ormerod Road would set back the integration of faiths in the town.

He said he was concerned about the plans, coming as the town continues to get back on track following the 2001 race riots.

“I am concerned about anything that detracts from the growing unity across faiths and race in the town.

“Burnley has made great strides in recent years and a lot of positive things are happening here, including the Building Schools for the Future programme, which is much admired by the Archbishop of Canterbury.

“Anything that detracts and distracts from going forward in integration and having a respectful culture is not good news for Burnley.

“I am not against faith schools in principle but I don’t think this will help Burnley.”

Plans to convert the grade II listed building have been submitted by Birmingham-based Mohiuddin Trust, which said it seeks to promote cohesion by “strengthening inter-community relationships”.

The school would accommodate 1,500 pupils with around 300 boarders at any one time.

The Bishop’s comments come after Pendle MP Gordon Prentice also warned about the dangers of establishing the school in Burnley.

He said: “The last thing we need is single-sex, single faith schools for girls, it pulls against community cohesion.

“It makes me weep to think so much time, energy and effort has gone into the community to get people to mix together. This goes against all public policy.”

Back

© Copyright 2001-2009 Newsquest Media Group

http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk

 
Brierfield Mills: Pendle Boarding School for Girls PDF Print E-mail
Monday, 21 December 2009 00:00

There is a proposal from the Birmingham based charity "Islamic Help" to buy and then convert the former Smith and Nephew medical fabrics plant in Brierfield into a 5,000 place boarding school for girls.

The proposal has been widely covered in the Lancashire Telegraph and the Nelson Leader. Details of the Charity, Islamic Help, can be found on the Charity Commission website.

According to press reports, talks have been held between the Liberal Democrat's Parliamentary Candidate for Pendle, Afzal Anwar, and Islamic Help about the nature and scale of any proposed development.

I raised the issue at a meeting of the Public Administration Select Committee on Thursday 10 December. Here is an extract...

UNCORRECTED TRANSCRIPT OF ORAL EVIDENCE                To be published as HC 109-i

House of COMMONS

MINUTES OF EVIDENCE

TAKEN BEFORE

PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE

  

WORK OF THE CHARITY COMMISSION IN 2008-09

  

Thursday 10 December 2009

DAME SUZI LEATHER and MR ANDREW HIND

Evidence heard in Public                                                                                         Questions 1 - 99

  

Oral Evidence

Taken before the Public Administration Committee

on Thursday 10 December 2009

Members present

Dr Tony Wright, in the Chair

Paul Flynn

David Heyes

Kelvin Hopkins

Mr Ian Liddell-Grainger

Julie Morgan

Mr Gordon Prentice

Paul Rowen

Mr Charles Walker

________________

Memorandum submitted by Charity CommissionExamination of Witnesses

Witnesses:  Dame Suzi Leather, Chair, and Mr Andrew Hind, Chief Executive, Charity Commission, gave evidence.

Q1  Chairman:  Good morning everyone.  Let me welcome the Charity Commission, in the form of Dame Suzi Leather, who chairs the Commission, and Andrew Hind, who is the Chief Executive.  It is always a pleasure to see you.  As you know, it is our job to keep an eye on what you are up to and, if I can say so, you do make a point of reporting your activities to us on a regular basis, for which we are grateful, and we have, at least annually, the chance to ask you some questions about it.  Thank you for your letter in advance of this meeting and all the information that you sent us.  Would you like to say anything by way of introduction?

....

Q11  Mr Prentice:  I am interested in those charities that are raising money for a purpose which is outside their charitable objectives.  I wrote to you, Mr Hind, about this and you told me that between 26 November 2008 and 25 November 2009 there were 33 cases which involved charities acting “outside their objects or misapplying charitable funds”.  I am quoting back to you your own words.  What happened to those charities?  What happened to the 33 cases where they were raising money, basically, under false pretences?
Mr Hind:  Each case will have been looked at on its merits.  If there were cases of members of the public giving funding to a charity on the basis of misrepresentation we would ensure that funding given in those circumstances was returned.  In most cases trustees will recognise the concerns that we are expressing, they will change their behaviour, they will ensure that they either act only in accordance with their objects in the future or, if we think there is merit in the case, agree with us an extension to the objects.
Q12  Mr Prentice:  You said earlier you did not have any sanctions - you used the little red box and so on - but for people who are raising money under false pretences, presumably, there are criminal sanctions: people are prosecuted, put behind bars.
Mr Hind:  Absolutely. 
Q13  Mr Prentice:  Has anything happened to any of those 33?
Mr Hind:  Mr Prentice, I need to be clear.  When I said we do not have sanctions, I was purely talking in respect of the Chairman’s first question, which was about charities filing their accounts with us.  We do not have sanctions to make them do that.  We have a whole range of sanctions to ensure that, where there is abuse of charitable status, where there is fraud, where there is misrepresentation serious things are done about that, including, of course (and there are plenty of examples of this), us passing cases over to the police and trustees are prosecuted.
Dame Suzi Leather:  Actually, in the last month somebody has received an 18-month prison sentence for setting up a sham charity.
Q14  Mr Prentice:  You will know about the case in my own constituency.  I am generalising from the particular here, but Islamic Help is based in Birmingham and its main charitable objective is to be able to respond to emergency disasters quicker, but on its website it has been asking for money.  It wants £1,050,000 by 10 January to convert an old medical fabrics mill into a giant boarding school for Muslim girls.  As you know, the biggest boarding school for girls at the moment is Cheltenham Ladies’ College: 650 girls.  What Islamic Help wants is a 5,000 place boarding school.  I have written to you about this, and I think Islamic Help is operating way outside its charitable objectives.  This is from its website.  I am assuming you are in touch with them and asking them to return money to all the people who gave money thinking it was for this new educational institution.
Mr Hind:  I am not sure that it would be right for me to engage in a dialogue---
Q15  Mr Prentice:  People are still giving money to this charity.
Mr Hind:  ---about the absolute detailed specifics of the case, but, on the general point that you raise, that kind of concern is something that we absolutely involve ourselves with on a robust basis and, if the evidence is that what you say is happening is happening, then we would ensure that something was done about that, yes.
Q16  Mr Prentice:  It says here, and this is from the website: “Muslim watchdog.  In this day and age Islamaphobia, women’s rights within Islam and other issues brought up against Muslims are one of the mainstream topics within the media all over the world.”  In this college it is going to have a Muslim watchdog to advise, not the girls, but the sisters.  The sisters will be given special training in how to tackle these issues professionally and appropriately.
Dame Suzi Leather:  This is the subject of a current investigation.
Q17  Mr Prentice:  Yes.  I only raise it because people may still be giving money to this charity, Islamic Help, and I want people out there to know that you are investigating it.

Mr Hind:  We are in contact with the charity, Mr Prentice.  We will keep you fully informed.  As ever, serious accusations get dealt with robustly by the Commission.

 

Later.....
Q90  Mr Prentice:  Can I just say I think your website is great.
Mr Hind:  Thank you very much.
Q91  Mr Prentice:  I think it is easy to navigate.  I found out a huge amount about charities that I was interested in by going onto your website.  You are going to update it in January, I believe.
Dame Suzi Leather:  Yes.
Q92  Mr Prentice:  We have been talking about accountability.  It is a great tool to shine a spotlight on charities via your website.  Is there a section in the Charity Commission that deals with Islamic charities?  Do you have a little group that just focuses on Islamic charities?
Dame Suzi Leather:  We have for the last 18 months, two years had a Faith and Social Cohesion Unit.  In 2004, I think, we started to do some outreach work with all sorts of faith organisations to find out whether the Commission was providing the kind of support, advice, help that they needed, and one of the main findings of that piece of work was that they wanted a specific unit that came from Muslim charities, they wanted a unit within the Commission that understood their faith, their organisational structures and could support them, and we were able to get some money about 18 months, two years ago in order to set this up, really to support the governance of Muslim organisations and mosques in particular.  It was not ever intended, I do not think, that we would only ever look at Islamic organisations, but we would start with Islamic organisations, faith organisations.  We had historically had a very strong relationship with Christian organisations, many of which actually are excepted from charitable status, but we had done a lot of work with them.  We had much less good understanding of mosques and yet the Muslim faith was the fastest growing faith in this country.  So I think we had a way to go on that.  The purpose of the Faith and Social Cohesion Unit has been to bring more mosques into registered status and to strengthen the governance of the ones that are.
Q93  Mr Prentice:  Are there particular problems, particular issues that affect Muslim charities?  
Mr Hind:  I think we would say there is a lower level of awareness of what it means to be a charity.  I think that is something we see and it is something that is self-confessed, as it were, from Muslim communities, as Suzi was saying.  What we have been trying to do is work with a number of umbrella groups around the Islamic part of the sector to build up that understanding.
Dame Suzi Leather:  I think, from the financial point of view, a smaller proportion of the monies raised within those organisations was going through properly accountable channels.  One of the benefits of this piece of work is that proportion has been increased, and it has been very successful; it has been welcomed.  In terms of registration, since October 2007, when the unit was first started, we have had a 40 per cent increase in registration of mosques.
Q94  Mr Prentice:  Okay.  I spoke about Islamic Help and the 5,000 place Pendle Boarding School for Girls, but next door to me in Burnley there is the Al-Ehya Trust, which has just been renamed the Mohiuddin Trust, and they have purchased the old Burnley College and they are setting up Mohiuddin International Girls College which will have 1,500 places.  I know it is not your job to comment on educational policy, I understand that, but the Mohiuddin Trust, when it talks about its objectives, mentions strengthening inter-community relationships and building stronger community integration and cohesion and, in that context, I just wonder if the Charity Commission would take a view on the number of girls at this International Girls College that would be drawn from overseas or the number of girls that would be taken to the school from the immediate locality because it could have a hugely destabilising effect on other schools in the immediate area.  Do you understand what I am saying?
Dame Suzi Leather:  I do not think that what you are talking about is really a matter for the Charity Commission, but one of the other changes we have brought about is we have introduced an Advisory Committee on Faith within the Commission, and that is a committee which meets two or three times a year and has representatives of all the main faiths in this country.  One of the things we have been talking about recently is how we can strengthen partnership working between faiths an inter-faith activity.  From a governance structure, from a Charity Commission point of view, there is quite a lot of interest in doing that.  I think that in future we could have quite an important role in bringing different charity organisations that are faith based together to share experience, for instance, in how you do strengthen governance, how you do induct trustees, how you do ensure that your organisation is effective and efficient; but one of the benefits that might flow from that would be greater social cohesion.
Q95  Mr Prentice:  I suppose I should know this, but how easy is it for a charity to change its charitable objectives?  Is it a performance or is it relatively straightforward?
Mr Hind:  Relatively straightforward, providing the substance of what the charity wishes to do in the future is broadly similar to what it wanted to do in the past.  If it wanted to do something fundamentally different, then that would be something that we would have to discuss with them and ensure that we were satisfied that it complied with the legal framework.
Dame Suzi Leather:  I would use the word “flex” rather than “change”.  I think you can flex, for instance, the beneficiary class if there are changes to society.  For instance, the Jewish care home based in Cardiff.  No longer is there a sufficient Jewish population there to support a care home, so we have enabled that charity to flex its beneficiary class to include people who are not of a Jewish faith.
Q96  Mr Walker:  Is that mission creep basically?
Dame Suzi Leather:  No, I do not think it is mission creep.

Mr Walker:  If you have got spare money, can you not do more with it?  Would that not be a good thing?  You could find other good causes to support as a charity.

Q97  Mr Prentice:  I do not want to go over old ground.  My main concern is where you have a charity which explicitly is there for the relief of disasters overseas, whether it just requires the stroke of a pen to change the charitable objectives to include educational establishments in the United Kingdom.  That is what I am getting at.
Dame Suzi Leather:  I would say that is well beyond “flex”.
 
Landmark Brierfield mill could be turned into housing PDF Print E-mail
Sunday, 13 December 2009 00:00

By Peter Magill (from the Lancashire Telegraph 13 December 2009)

A LANDMARK mill, once earmarked for a 5,000-place Islamic girls boarding school, could be bought by town hall bosses and turned into housing.

Birmingham-based Islamic Help has until Junuary to raise the cash, believed to be £1million, to buy Brierfield Mills, the former Smith and Nephew site.

But Pendle Council leaders, who were originally told the mill had a £5million price tag, have said they could step in with a rival bid if the offer was not taken up.

Controversy was sparked when Islamic Help promoted plans to create the UK’s largest-ever Islamic girls school at the mill.

These plans are said to have been put on hold in favour of a leisure and business venture following talks between council leaders and the charity.

The borough council has already been named as the preferred bidder for nearby Lob Lane Mill, once home to Veevers.

And if Elevate provides funding then a joint housing scheme would be worked up with the authority’s development company, PEARL2.

Coun Tony Greaves said: “The present position is that Islamic Help expect to complete the purchase in mid-January. If they do not do so this council will make a bid for Brierfield Mills.”

An appraisal study will be made of the mills, which have been empty for a number of years and dominate Brierfield’s skyline.

However it is felt that because the mills were once an employment powerhouse, they should remain as a potential hub for jobs creation.

Town leaders have voiced hopes that the mills could one day echo the transformation of Dean Clough Mills in Halifax.

Once a huge carpet factory, the mill now houses a theatre, art gallery, hotel and cafes and restaurants, as well as apartments.

Coun Tonia Barton, chairman of the Brierfield and Reedley committee, said: “Personally I think that whoever is in control of the three mills, that they should think outside the box.

“We should look at Halifax, where Dean Clough Mills has been transformed. It is absolutely inspirational.

“If we are looking to get on with this site, as we all hope in Brierfield, then this is the sort of thing that we should be aiming for.”

Back

© Copyright 2001-2009 Newsquest Media Group

http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk

 
Campaigners continue opposition to Brierfield school plan despite changes PDF Print E-mail
Monday, 30 November 2009 00:00

(from the Lancashire Telegraph 30 November 2009)

ANGRY residents will continue to fight plans to transform Brierfield Mills into a Muslim school for girls despite major changes to the proposals.

It was announced earlier this week that Islamic Help, a national charity, had scrapped plans to convert the seven-acre site into a 5,000-pupil boarding school for Muslim girls.

But it was revealed that the 50-pupil Ghausia High School for girls, based in Nelson, will still look to move to the site and the trust will look to create a sports centre for the whole community, alongside a ‘commercial village’ housing start-up businesses.

Afzal Anwar, parliamentary Lib Dem candidate for Pendle, said the changes were decided after a meeting with representatives of the trust.

Clitheroe Road Residents’ Association, which now has a 1,000-person petition against the plans, vowed to continue their fight.

The group, which includes members from a range of ethnic backgrounds, raised concerns over the plans.

A spokesman said the group was publicly asking Mr Anwar to withdraw his support of the scheme.

He said business and industrial use of the site, supported and backed by Pendle Council, would be of greater benefits to all the borough’s residents by boosting the local economy, job and housing markets.

Back

© Copyright 2001-2009 Newsquest Media Group

http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk

 
<< Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next > End >>

Page 1 of 7
  Privacy Statement | Advanced Search | Tech Details | Sitemap