2nd. October 2009.

Sir,

I feel I must respond to the Letters page in last weeks Courier.

Cllr. Jim Dixon begins by making an unwarranted attack on the current Administration Group in West Lothian Council, claiming that we are “raiding” the Christmas Bonus. This is entirely untrue, and the facts are as stated by Cllr. Johnston. It is interesting to note that he cites the meeting of the Policy-not Performance, as stated further down the page by Cllr. McGinty- Development and Scrutiny Panel. Perhaps if he had taken the time to attend, as some of us did, he would have heard first-hand the support for the proposition of a wide-ranging review of services for the elderly from the very organisations he claims to represent. But then being so close to the consultation might have meant him having to make serious choices, rather than simply political point scoring.

We then have Mary Mulligan and Cllr. John McGinty attacking one of those pensioners their colleague claims they want to protect. Elsie Boyd is a 70+ years young campaigner, who has fought tirelessly for the people of West Lothian. Without the benefit of a political platform, she and her friends trudged the streets of West Lothian, gathering almost 20,000 signatures to secure a bus service for patients and visitors to the new RIE in Little France. Before that, she was ignored by the Labour Party. Her efforts are humbling, and for that alone, she deserves our heart-felt thanks, and not petty vilification from politicians who should know better.

John then goes on to claim that Peter Johnston has not attended a single meeting of the Health & Care PDSP, but he is well aware that I substitute for Cllr. Johnston under an informal arrangement, and have done since 2007. As for the report he claims has not come back to him since April, the minutes of the St. John’s Hospital Stakeholders Group are circulated at PDSP meetings, and meetings of the full Council, so any failure appears to be in his ability to spot them!

Aside from the points above, I have to concede that Mary and John do have one very valid point. When they held the “levers of power” in both West Lothian and Holyrood, they were rightly criticised for the decisions to remove services from St. John’s. The shoe is now on the other foot, and neither I, nor any member of our Party, will criticise the Labour Party for their comments where they accurately reflect the current position.

That position, for the avoidance of doubt, is that despite all the manifesto pledges of the SNP in West Lothian, progress has been painfully slow. Despite our best efforts to work with NHS Lothian, they have been emboldened in their contempt for West Lothian, by the repeated comments of the Cabinet Secretary that “St. John’s is safe”. Oh really? Well, being busier does not mean the return of the emergency and other services removed. Nor does it justify the cancellation of the Stakeholder’s Group meeting today (Friday 2nd), because once again the crucial and long-awaited report on future service delivery at St. John’s from Dr. Alison McCallum, like so many reports, is not ready.

The Stakeholders Group was set up under the auspices of Ms. Sturgeon, and it has, despite our best efforts, become a talking shop, which at best, is treated with contempt by NHS Lothian, and at worst may have been a sop to us from the Cabinet Secretary.

We will work with like-minded colleagues from all parts of the community. What we will not become is cannon-fodder for anyone with an axe to grind, or scapegoats for the failed or failing policies of National Parties.

Councillor Gordon Beurskens
Action to Save St. John's Hospital
West Lothian Council