---

Health Care (Sutton)

I have to accept the view of hon. Members who know that community and the decision-making process. Planning considerations were one issue that the Secretary of State took into consideration. The primary issue, though—she was clear about this—was that the socio-economic nature of the communities concerned had to be regarded as a priority when the decisions were being looked at. The next thing that happened in this long process was that the London strategic health authority wrote to the Secretary of State to ask that she refer the matter back to it so that it could review the whole situation. On 16 August, the Secretary of State responded to NHS London, noting the developments and supporting the SHA’s requests to carry out a review. Again—this is consistent with her views—she asked that the review should pay particular attention to the needs of disadvantaged communities in the context of the Government’s determination to tackle inequalities in health. That review is being carried out and it is being led by Sutton and Merton PCT. It is scheduled for completion by the end of next month. I hope that hon. Members on both sides of the House respect the fact that it would be inappropriate for me, in the midst of that process, to make any pronouncements or judgments from the Dispatch Box. The only point I would make is that a constant part of the brief that has been given to people and organisations that have been asked to consider the matter is the socio-economic conditions and the health inequalities that exist within the relevant health economies. Let me deal with the local financial situation raised by the hon. Members for Sutton and Cheam and for Carshalton and Wallington. The trust has a recovery plan that identifies an estimated £24 million in savings to be achieved by March 2008. It has sought to create a plan involving minimum disruption to staff and patients. While the trust cannot rule out staff redundancies entirely, there is a public commitment to keep them to an absolute minimum, and an assurance that in most circumstances staff will be redeployed. The requirement for NHS organisations to bring their budgets into balance is one that we should all support. It seems wrong to me that over the years overspending organisations have been bailed out by those that have not overspent. I agree with the hon. Member for Sutton and Cheam about the dreadful report on learning disability services in the community, which we all received with shock. That applies particularly to Orchard Hill. In the aftermath of the scandal in Cornwall, we must take practical and decisive action not only to close Orchard Hill as soon as reasonably possible—it provides outdated, inappropriate care for people with learning disabilities in a modern world—but to learn the lessons from Cornwall and Orchard Hill in the development of future national policies and the way in which we treat adults with learning disabilities. We must respect their views and the rights of their families. The hon. Members for Sutton and Cheam and for Carshalton and Wallington spoke of their personal histories in relation to the hospital. I began my working life working with children and adults with learning disabilities. If there is one thing I am passionate about achieving in this job, it is ensuring that we never see another Orchard Hill. My job is to minimise the possibility of people with learning disabilities ever experiencing such problems again, although I can never promise to eliminate it.