AN 11th-hour message over the future of county care homes rang out across Lancashire today: "It's still not too late to save them."
MPs, councillors and the relatives of residents living in 32 homes facing the axe made joined the call as the council prepared to rubber stamp its proposals tomorrow.
The ruling Labour group will meet in the morning to decide whether to insist on a three-line whip. If it is imposed, Labour councillors who votes against the closures could be disciplined.
Already, campaigners have managed to save three homes from the axe, including Lower Ridge in Burnley and Cravenside in Barnoldswick.
They claim the plans will cause distress to residents who have to be moved and the implications have not been thought through. Now, after seven months, they are pinning their hopes on backbench councillors standing up to the ruling Labour Cabinet.
In February, when it announced the plans to close 35 of their 48 homes -- 19 of which were in East Lancashire -- the council said it would cost £14million to bring its homes up to new standards. The proposals would have involved selling off the 35 homes to fund the repairs to the remaining homes and increase domiciliary -- at-home -- care.
But revised proposals to close 32 homes and build a new one in Preston were announced last month.
A five-year phased closure would ensure that elderly residents only had to move twice at most during the re-organisation.
Only half of the 32 homes earmarked for closure would be sold off. The other 16 would be used for non-residential OAP services run by partner organisations such as housing associations.
The plans could mean 300-plus staff being made redundant, leaving hundreds of families 'on the breadline,' according to Unison.
Members of the Lancashire Care Homes United Action Group -- made up of relatives of residents across Lancashire -- intend to fight the closures in the courts on human rights grounds.
The High Court is due to hear a case brought by the Lancashire Care Homes Association -- which represents private sector homes -- in November.
Borough councils are also considering legal action.
More than 70,000 people have signed petitions against the closures, while hundreds of people took to Burnley's streets in April in a Lancashire Evening Telegraph protest march.
Hyndburn MP Greg Pope said: "I hope that even at this 11th hour the county will scrap these proposals.
"It is clear they are causing widespread anxiety. I think they were wrong to produce a hitlist in the first place."
Ribble Valley MP Nigel Evans said: "The county council has got this wholly wrong. They have upset old people, their families and the public at large. Tomorrow is our last chance to put it right. I hope that at this late stage they will have a change of heart which is needed in the name of humanity."
Tim Ellis, the regional organiser for Unison, which represents care home staff, said: "The councillors need to remember that their job is to express the views of their constituents.
"Our members are concerned primarily with the welfare of the people they look after but they will suffer a lot of hardship if made redundant."
Today, Lynne Atkinson, an Accrington woman whose mother Marian Storey, 75, lives at Hill Top, Baxenden, said: "We will continue fighting these plans."
The member of Lancashire Care Homes United group added: "The Labour councillors tomorrow need to remember who voted them in and think about the old people, not their political careers."
Independent Coun Tom Sharratt said: "Coun Chris Cheetham and Coun Hazel Harding should talk to those other authorities and work with the Local Government Association to lobby for extra money to solve this problem. I have suggested this to them in private, in writing and in public but it has not been acted on."
Coun Cheetham, the man who announced the proposals, added: "This is not about saving money. If anything, we are now spending money to create a service people want for the future."
Council leader Hazel Harding said: "Our proposals are designed to make sure we can provide the service older people want in the future. Most people would rather be cared for at home.
"We have listened and we have modified our plans and given assurances that existing residents are at the forefront of our minds when any decision is taken."
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