TADWORTH COURT CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL: FUTURE (Hansard, 14 March 1983)

§ Lord Trefgarne

We have now carefully considered the proposal by the board of governors of the Hospitals for Sick Children to transfer all services from Tadworth Court to Queen Mary's Hospital for Children, Carshalton. The board put forward this proposal only after a thorough review of activities at its three hospitals in order to release funds for developments. Over recent years the board has received some growth in its allocation but has been overspending due to an increase in highly specialised work at Great Ormond Street, particularly the development of new methods of treating malignant disease, the diagnosis and treatment of renal disease and development of new surgical techniques in the neonate. The cost of running Tadworth Court without any changes is estimated to be £1,400,000 in 1983–84. The cost of relocating services at Queen Mary's Hospital would have been about £440,000 and this would, therefore, have freed £960,000 for use at Great Ormond Street and Queen Elizabeth Hospital in Hackney. The whole Tadworth Court site would have been sold and apart from an estimated £330,000 to be spent at Queen Mary's Hospital the whole proceeds would then have been available for new capital improvements at Great Ormond Street and Queen Elizabeth Hospital. The board acted responsibly and properly in putting forward this proposal and we are satisfied that the children from Tadworth Court would have received very good care and treatment at Queen Mary's Hospital.

Subsequently a group of charities led by the Spastics Society has put forward a counter-proposal. They suggest that a trust be established to manage Tadworth Court on the basis that the hospital is reduced to 60 593WA beds at an annual cost of £960,000 and are confident that over a three-year period this sum could be built up through sponsorship by local authorities of individual children requiring respite care. The charities would require the scheme to be underwritten by the department during this period.

The Government would like to provide Great Ormond Street with the money it requires. We are attracted by the charities' proposal as an example of partnership between voluntary bodies and statutory services which we are determined to encourage. Health and local authorities cannot themselves meet all the needs of sick and handicapped children and the contribution of voluntary bodies is an invaluable addition to the services available. We want also to encourage the development of respite care which should, of course, be locally based. The charities believe there is an unmet demand for such care and that local authorities within reasonable distance of Tadworth Court would wish to sponsor children there. We are also deeply conscious of the anxiety felt by parents of children at Tadworth Court, which has been reflected in the representations made to us by many honourable Members, and if possible we would like to avoid the distress and disruption which a move to another hospital would inevitably cause. Under the proposal there would still be a substantial saving in the current cost of running Tadworth Court.

My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Social Services has, therefore, decided to agree in principle to the charities' proposal. My honourable friend the Member for Reigate has received pledges of financial support from private sources which will raise income of £70,000 a year to keep Tadworth Court 594WA open. We are willing to underwrite the remaining £890,000 a year for a three-year trial period by grant aid under Section 64 of the Health Services and Public Health Act 1968 and, subject to parliamentary approval, we will be willing to lease that part of the site required for the hospital at peppercorn rent.

The surplus land and buildings will be sold and the proceeds, less about £90,000 required for a new boiler, X-ray and relocation costs at Tadworth Court, will be retained by the board of governors. The board of governors will also be freed of the revenue cost of running Tadworth Court and, as they will not now need to find the costs of reproviding all services at Queen Mary's Hospital, their financial position will be substantially better than that envisaged under their original proposal.

My right honourable friend is now inviting the charities to set up the trust and he has asked his officials to initiate detailed negotiations with the trust, the board of governors and the staff at Tadworth Court. These negotiations may take some time to complete. In the meantime the department will continue to provide the board of governors with additional funds, in order that the present level of services can be maintained. He has agreed, however, that the transfer of the orthopaedic service, which the charities do not wish to keep at Tadworth Court, should proceed as quickly as possible.

We are most grateful to the board of governors, the Merton and Sutton Health Authority, the Spastics Society and the other charities involved, and my honourable friend the Member for Reigate for the constructive way in which they have dealt with this very difficult problem.