COUNCILLOR Connolly has once again (Your Letters, May 16) attacked "single-issue campaigners". What he will not mention is that had it not been for the likes of Bernard Slingsby, Coun Connolly and his Executive would have closed all the residential homes in question: Beech Grove, Claremont, Whittaker House and Warthfield.
Claremont was closed using the flawed document that a judicial review found unlawful. Beech Grove is scheduled to close in June and the short-stay residents will go to residential homes which have had their long-stay beds reduced and which have been re-named resource centres. Whittaker House and Warthfield are subject to "consultation", which I think was a delaying tactic instigated by the council until after the local elections.
Coun Connolly has also said that £200,000 from the £500,000 set aside to pay fines for elderly people blocking hospital beds has gone back into social services: but for children's services, not for elderly care. Can he inform me where the £500,000 came from in the first place and why it has not all been paid into services for the elderly.
With regards to SSI congratulating Bury social services, I would like Coun Connolly to make this document public, as the last document issued by the SSI (to my knowledge) was October 2002 and no reference to Bury was made.
Furthermore, Coun Connolly has said on many occasions that Bury MBC have been told they have an over-reliance on residential places but the SSI, Audit Commission and Best Value reports have only suggested Bury should consider other ways of supporting elderly people. This is in addition to care provision.
To sum up, are the problems of Bury social services not self-inflicted because they assessed all people in residential homes when, to quote the Prime Minister, they should "provide multi -disciplinary assessment and care plans with the service user at the centre". Had they done so, would not these care homes be staying open?
Finally, what never ceases to amaze me is that Bury can always find funding to provide new staffing for schemes such as START.
Coun Connolly should stop attacking people who only want to defend the frail and elderly.
EILEEN SLINGSBY,
Countess Lane,
Radcliffe.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article