Retirement beckoned – but that didn’t mean I was about to lose interest in SWF. I continued to comment on health issues in ‘Focus’.

In May 2019 I wrote: “Some local politicians have been heard to say that the trouble with Woodham is that the residents are apathetic – the innuendo being that, whatever the issue, the people on the receiving end deserve everything they get because they invariably assume that the worst outcome is inevitable. I’ve seen what can be done when the residents get their act together, however, so I take a more optimistic view. My suggestion is, therefore, that you get behind this survey to find out what those who are most affected by the plans – the patients – really think. Simply moaning about new initiatives is not enough – something more constructive is required – so you need to make your views known. In the words of that famous student of philosophy, Bing Crosby Esq., when it comes to matters that directly affect you, your family and friends: “You’ve got to accentuate the positive, eliminate the negative, latch on to the affirmative, and don’t talk to Mr In-Between!”

The survey in question was an attempt to ascertain the views of the residents on the plans for healthcare in the town.

In June 2019 I wrote: “The survey of patient opinion continues to make waves – I hear on the grapevine that ‘the powers that be’ were behind the request that all mention of it should be removed from the SWF Facebook page. It remains online however – but it must be wound up soon (and the results published) before ‘survey fatigue’ sets in – so make sure you have your say before that day comes.

Then, in July 2019, we published the results of the survey. The same concerns about access as were voiced at the public meeting in January were echoed in the answers published and there was a great deal of support for keeping the existing Health Clinic in the town centre open in order take the wants and needs of the entire population of the town into account … irrespective of where they live, their age, state of health and mobility. Worryingly for David Attenborough and the Green Party , it rather looks as if many of those who previously walked to their surgery will be travelling by car in future.”

I went on to say: “Much of the problem with the project stems from abysmally poor communications. The point made in the survey blurb was that, whilst there was some effort by the developer to explain the plans for the new Medical ‘Centre’ to the public initially, there has been absolutely no meaningful discussion with the public about the closure of the healthcare facilities in the centre of the town.”

Finally the date for opening arrived – but long before this I’d offered to keep the Greenwood Surgery building open in order to cushion the disruption that would inevitably result from the move. On 14th April 2018 I wrote to Kerry Harding (Head of Estates, NHS England Midlands and East) saying: “I have already offered to extend the period during which the existing Greenwood Surgery building remains open from two months to, for example, four months (at no charge to NHS England other than a contribution to the utility bills) as I suspect there will be a public outcry when the surgeries in the town centre close … and it will take those who find it difficult to travel to the outskirts of the town (e.g. the elderly and those with mobility problems who haven’t got their own transport) some time to work out the practicalities of getting to the new health facility.”

Despite this, the decision was made to ignore the suggestion of a staggered move and to close all the practices within the town simultaneously. As expected this resulted in absolute chaos on the first day and relative chaos for the first week, gradually tailing off thereafter. The problems included not nearly enough parking spaces – and there was the predicted computer installation nightmare. Here are some of the comments.

There was ongoing criticism of the difficulty many had accessing the new facility – and the elderly were particularly adversely affected. The comments made in a survey of the opinions of those living in two town centre residential homes were particularly damning.

A very tiny survey of SWF patients conducted in 2024 by a group from Burnham who were alarmed by the prospect of their surgery being moved out of town showed that a majority of the SWF residents who responded preferred the system as it was to the new ‘out of town’ facility.

As for the capacity of the new building, I’ve touched on this before but, interestingly, the SWF Health and Social Care Group and the SWF Town Council appeared to differ on whether or not the Crouch Vale Medical Centre was sufficiently ‘future proofed.’

The SWF Health and Social Care Group stated that: “The Centre was planned, designed and built between 2015 and 2019 and took account of all known plans at that time. The centre will still cope with delivery of its medical services despite the impact of Covid and some additional housing development.”

SWF Town Council, on the other hand, claimed that: ” Regarding health care, there is the Crouch Valley Medical Centre in SWF which is struggling to cope with SWF’s current resident’s needs let alone coping with the thousand plus houses earmarked in the new development at SWF. The Centre currently deals with 10,000 patients, they are understaffed and all available rooms in the Centre are already utilised. There appears to be no room for expansion,”

The SWF Health and Social Care Group also stated that: ” Between 2015-19 it was known that all Town Centre medical services would be transferred to CVMC which was why the developers of CVMC were strenuously lobbied to swap the land at the Sainsbury’s development for some in the Town Centre including that of the Merchant St Health Centre (sic) so CVMC would be in the Town centre, but the developers would not pursue that option.”

It was not clear at the outset that all the town centre facilities were going to be closed – but, as soon as it was recognised that this was the plan (and the developers refused to put any form of facility in the town centre) then surely there should have been a concerted effort to keep the town centre Health Clinic open in order to minimise the disadvantage of having ALL the healthcare provision on the perimeter of the town.

Much of this remains highly relevant given that there are planning applications which, if successful, will place a great deal more pressure on SWF’s GP services. Some of the mistakes that were made, though, could arguably be filed under the heading ‘water under the bridge’ – so are they better forgiven and forgotten? The problem with this approach is that it fails to take account of the fact that the NHS repeatedly makes the same mistakes. Whenever a tragedy occurs, somebody pops up on our screens to say: “We will learn from our mistakes” … but that never seems to happen. Maybe this old saying should be writ large on and in all NHS premises:

“Those who don’t learn from history are doomed to repeat it”

Dr John Cormack