| home | meetings | events | miscellanea | contacts |
| 2012 |
Executive Committee Members: Patricia Daniels (PD), John Doland (JD), Doris Halls (DoH), David Harper (DaH),Joyce Jarvis (JJ), Chris Stannard (CS), L.M. Stockman (LMS)
Emilio Ceraudo (EC) and Josephine Powell (JP) were absent with apologies.
Surgery Representatives: [none]
Dr Gysbert Fourie (DrGF), Trish Hawitt Palmer (THP), Jenny Moyes (JM) and Dr Susan Stanton (DrSS) were absent with apologies.
Guests: Nick Martensz (NM), Roland Morcom (RM)
The minutes from the meetings of 29 September 2012 and 17 October 2012 were approved. CS was acting chairman.
LMS presented the most recent copy of the local activities leaflet which was generally well-received. It was suggested that a line should be added for people interested in sporting activities, advising them to contact the Bar Hill Sport and Social Club. LMS expressed concern over the effort of keeping the leaflet up-to-date but everyone agreed that it could never be all-inclusive and would serve as a useful starting point for anyone wanting to know about activities in Bar Hill. PD said it could be valuable for new patients. CS said that the church used to have a 'welcome pack' for people new to the village and would check to see if that was still the case; the local activities leaflet would be a helpful addition to it.
Action: LMS will update the leaflet from information gathered from the Bar Hill News and send it to the surgery for printing and distribution. She will also take sample copies to the parish council office as the clerk expressed interest in having them. The leaflet will also be available at the PPG web site for anyone to download.
As was pointed out at the September meeting, not everyone has internet access, making the workings of the PPG a complete mystery to some. LMS suggested that a ring binder with copies of the minutes and reports of PPG activities be left in the reception area at the surgery. If successful, perhaps copies could be put in other places in the village, such as the library.
Action: LMS will speak to Jenny Moyes about this. DaH will prepare the annual report and get it to the Bar Hill News as soon as possible. CS suggested that the Committee also start putting together short articles to be included in editions of the Bar Hill News.
Action: Deferred.
CS went around the table, asking everyone for their opinion of the public meeting of 23 October 2012. It was generally agreed that the meeting was well-run and that many of the Committee's prepared questions were answered before they were even asked. There was a general sense, however, that all anyone could do was wait and see what actually happened.
NM asked which three volunteers were picked to be the patients' representatives on the commissioning board. CS did go forward but then withdrew when he saw that there were so many excellent candidates. John Jarvis and RM were both chosen, along with a third man (name unknown to the Committee) who apparently has a lot of experience in the competitive tendering process. RM said that he put himself forward to offer some diversity. Most of the patients attending the meeting were of an older generation and he thought it was important that the under-50s were represented. He also has experience in the tendering process.
All of the registered patients were supposed to receive a letter about the meeting but it quickly became apparent that many had not. PD asked if that issue had been addressed at the meeting. DaH said that the Primary Care Trust was aware of the problem but was surprised that there were so many people affected and thought it must have been a computer glitch. They did take names, however, so that they could try to trace the problem.
JD said that the main question on his mind was what happens if it all goes horribly wrong. How will we know what services were promised and which ones were actually delivered? RM said that competitive providers had to provide more services than the permanent partnerships but DaH wanted to know which add-ons would be offered. Was there a bare minimum level of service and if so, what was it? JD agreed that we should know which services had been agreed. And DaH echoed JD's concern about what happens if the new provider doesn't perform adequately. CS said that the regular audits, with 20 provisions that had to be met, was reassuring but wanted to know if the PPG could alert the authorities if the patients were not happy.PD wondered if the PPG would even exist after March next year or would be have to start over. DaH said that this was a big unknown and that the new contract holder may prefer something different to a PPG when it came to patient participation. CS insisted that the new provider would both want and need the PPG. DaH wondered if patient participation was one of the selection criteria and RM thought that it would be.
LMS was concerned that we would be in exactly the same situation a few years from now, with a short time to run on the contract and the providers unable to recruit or retain GPs. CS wondered why the current contract holders couldn't recruit salaried GPs on five-year contracts and then TUPE them to the new provider. RM doesn't have the meeting schedule yet but will attend future PPG meetings when possible. Many of the details of the commissioning group will remain confidential so he will be unable to share them with the Committee.Action: DaH will confirm the details with Jenny Moyes.
Action: Deferred.
Action: Deferred.
PD reminded everyone that Walking for Health had been taken over by the Ramblers and Macmillan Cancer Support. PD and JP went to a Walking for Health workshop in London recently and were told that the Bar Hill Health Walks scheme was one of the few in the country which was completely run by volunteers and receiving no funding. The regional coordinator asked how the Walking for Health team could help, including things like funding printing costs and replenishing first aid kits.
Action: CS suggested that PD invite the regional coordinator or other representative from Walking for Health to a meeting next year.
CS pointed out that building work on the Northstowe development between Bar Hill and Longstanton will begin soon, with the construction of 1500 new homes, and raised the question of how will this affect local health care provision. Apparently the surgery in Longstanton is overstretched which means there could be many more patients coming to Bar Hill for their health care needs. JD said that South Cambridgeshire County Council planning department should be asked what the health care provision for Northstowe is. DaH and CS both pointed out that there are many new developments in the works (like at Trumpington) and CS wondered where the medical services are going to come from.
The meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m.
The annual general meeting of the Executive Committee of the PPG will take place at 6:30 p.m. on Wednesday, 28 November 2012, in the Octagon. Tea and coffee will be served before the meeting, from 6:00 p.m.
Copyright ©2012 by the maple surgery patient participation group
Last updated on 1 December 2012 by the Webmaster