The revelation comes after a second Hospital consultant broke rank to say that the new hospital should not be built on the current site.
Dr David Ng, a gastroenterology specialist, has accused Health of ‘gagging’ staff and has questioned how the estimated £466 million build cost could be justified.
The JEP has obtained a leaked draft copy of the survey which includes questions about whether staff had been given the chance to share their opinions about the controversial project, why they would prefer a different site and whether they minded a change in site leading to a delay in construction.
The final draft survey was sent to health staff last week, but differs significantly from an earlier version.
The changes appear to prevent medics from expressing the full extent of their feelings, and follows staff
claims that they were previously unable to speak out in opposition to the plans.
Gastroentirologist Dr David Ng previously told the JEP that staff had been ‘gagged’ from speaking out. This week, he added further weight to the campaign against the on-site rebuild by comparing the cost of a 650-bed hospital in Liverpool that cost £350 million to build, with the £466 million price tag for Jersey’s 350-bed equivalent. He said: ‘Why? And don’t tell me it’s Jersey weighting.’
Dr Ng told the JEP: ‘Everyone in Jersey is questioning why it costs £466 million. If they start knocking down buildings on the current site, you can be sure they’ll find asbestos, and that will push the price up further and lead to more delays. How can you justify that?’
When asked if he had tried to get an explanation for the cost he said: ‘I’ve asked but I’ve never had a satisfactory explanation.’
Last week, hospital doctors and nurses raised their concerns about building on the current site at a public meeting during the planning inquiry. Dr Ajay Kumar said morale among staff had been damaged, and said Jersey could struggle to attract high-quality medical staff if they had to work in a ‘building site’.
The project to build a new hospital next to the existing one in St Helier is being reviewed by the Hospital Policy Review Board, chaired by Constable Chris Taylor. Its remit is to ensure the decision to choose the current site over a number of others is supported by the evidence. Constable Taylor commissioned the staff survey as part of that process.
The four questions missing from the final survey are:
1. Have you had the opportunity to give your opinion on the new hospital?
2. Have you had the opportunity to offer your opinion about the different potential sites for the new hospital?
3. Please give your reasons for preferring an alternative site.
4. The hospital project estimates that the work needed to prepare plans to build on an alternative site would cause a delay of at least two years. In such circumstances, what would be your preference for a new hospital location?
Constable Taylor denied the questions were removed to skew the outcome, adding that they were independently reviewed by outside experts.
He said: ‘We had a number of working drafts. First and foremost, from the setting up of the board, it was agreed we should consult as widely as possible, especially with the staff in the General Hospital. So, right from the start, that was one of our clear intentions. We wanted reasonably simple questions to find out what we wanted to know, including what consultation had previously taken place, and the opinions of staff.’
When asked why a question about whether staff would mind a two-year delay if it meant a different hospital site being chosen, he said: ‘Broadly speaking, we don’t know what the delay would be, so to start quoting a hypothetical delay would have been wrong in a questionnaire.’
Separately, Health Minister Richard Renouf has raised fresh concerns about changing sites for the new hospital, arguing that the final cost of a delay could be tens of millions of pounds.
In a letter to an Islander, which has now been submitted to the independent planning inquiry, he writes: ‘We need to consider the consequences of pursuing another site. I believe this process [approval, design and approval of a contractor] would, conservative, take 18-24 months. Inflation alone on a scheme of this size is likely to add £1million per month to the cost. I would also have significant concerns that the continuing delay would ultimately affect health outcomes for the people of Jersey.’
The Hospital Policy Review Board is due to report back to the Chief Minister before the end of October.
