Since the appalling announcement in September 2018 of the Joint Committee of CCGs’ decision not to place a 24/7 hyper acute stroke service here in Medway, the Conservative Group has continued to fight every step of the way to see the service retained at Medway Maritime Hospital.
The review of stroke services across Kent and Medway established that Medway Maritime Hospital cares for more stroke patients than any other hospital in the county, but despite this the Joint Committee of CCGs decided that a unit would not be provided in Medway. This decision effectively forces over half a million people across Medway and Swale who currently receive their stroke care at Medway Maritime Hospital to seek care at other locations – often further away from their homes - which is utterly unacceptable to Medway Conservatives, given that time is of such critical importance when it comes to responding to stroke.
Since the decision was announced, Conservative Councillors have met with our three local MPs, and together we have pursued every avenue available to make sure the voices of our residents are heard. This ultimately resulted in a judicial review into the decision of the Joint Committee of CCGs in December 2019 with the High Court handing down its judgment in that case on 21 February 2020.
Medway Conservatives were extremely disappointed for the Court to rule that the Joint Committee of CCGs had acted lawfully, and as an interested party in the case Medway Council holds the right of appeal.
Today Medway Conservatives can therefore confirm that the Council have launched an appeal against the High Court’s decision to find that the Joint Committee of CCGs had acted lawfully.
Councillor Alan Jarrett, Leader of Medway Council and the Conservative Group, said:
“Medway Conservatives have not and will not rest in the continued fight to save stroke services here in Medway.
It is my strong belief that first the Joint CCG committee and now the High Court have failed to consider inequality appropriately when making their decision – leaving us no choice but to seek judicial review. In addition, it is entirely contrary to every piece of medical advice regarding the need to ‘act F.A.S.T.’ in response to stroke to claim that forcing over half a million people to access these critical services further afield will not have a negative impact on our residents’ wellbeing.
We are committed to ensuring our residents have access to the high quality health services they deserve, and will continue to ensure that those making these crucial decisions are held to account.”
