Legacy Report - Future Hospital Review Panel - 25 April 2018

Future Hospital

Review Panel

Legacy Report

Presented to the States on 25th April 2018

S.R.13/2018

Introduction

1. The Future Hospital Review Panel was formally constituted at its first meeting on 7th August 2017. The Review Panel was established by the Chairmen's Committee to review P.107/2017 "Future Hospital: Approval of the Preferred Scheme and Funding" lodged by the Treasury Minister on 31st October 2017. P.107/2017 asked Members to approve the preferred scheme (a new build hospital on a part of the current site and a new build facility at Westaway Court) and the proposals for funding the new hospital.
2. The Panel was chaired by Deputy S.M Brée, with Deputy R.J. Renouf as Vice Chairman. Senator S.C. Ferguson, Deputy J.A.N Le Fondré, Deputy K.C. Lewis and Deputy T.A. McDonald were also members of the Panel. The Review Panel met 27 times since its formation.
3. It was agreed by the Chairmen's Committee that the terms of reference for the Review Panel were:

1. To examine the Outline Business Case documentation and the 5 case model:

1. The Strategic Case
2. The Economic Case
3. The Commercial Case
4. The Financial Case
5. The Management Case

2. To establish how services provided within the future hospital fit into the wider health profile
3. To determine the flexibility of the new hospital in relation to future demand
4. To consider the decision-making process in relation to the funding proposals with particular reference to the level of identified expenditure (£466 million)
5. To assess the appropriateness of the funding proposals and any associated risks

Public Hearings

4. The Review Panel held three Public Hearings with the Minister for Health and Social Services, the Minister for Infrastructure and the Minister for Treasury and Resources. The main focus of the Public Hearings was to question the Ministers on the preferred scheme, the funding proposals and the next steps of the project following the Minister for the Environment's decision to refuse the planning application.

Meetings and Briefings

5. The Review Panel also held the following meetings and briefings with relevant officers:

• Sir W.J Bailhache , Bailiff of Jersey: 8th March 2018

• Future Hospital Project Team: 29th March 2018

Reporting

6. The Panel presented two Scrutiny reports:

1. S.R.13/2017 "Future Hospital Project" presented on 6th December 2017
2. S.R.6/2018 "Future Hospital Project: Follow-up report on 6th April 2018

Future work and Legacy Issues

7. The follow-up report (S.R.6/2018) identified several matters that a future Review Panel may wish to investigate or verify as the Future Hospital Project moves forward:

• Phased approach: The revised scheme will be delivered in a phased approach. This differs from the previous scheme outlined in P.110/2016 which was supportive of a single phase construction stating that it would facilitate a shorter, more efficient and less costly construction than previous schemes. A future Scrutiny Review Panel may wish to consider how the phased approach would work in practice, and assess the cost of constructing the new hospital in this way.
• Mitigation of noise, vibration and dust: As noted in S.R.7/2016, disruption to staff and patients during the construction phase of the Future Hospital should not be underestimated. Comprehensive planning will be needed to mitigate the disruption. A future Scrutiny Review Panel may wish to explore how the Project Team plans to mitigate noise, vibration and dust, particularly in relation to sensitive equipment used in certain clinical areas such as pathology.
• The location of Pathology: As explained in P.110/2016, pathology services were originally going to be provided in the main hospital to ensure close co- location of critical support services. The Proposition outlining the preferred scheme (P.107/2017) explained that pathology would be provided in a separate location at Westaway Court which would reduce the risks associated with retaining the service on site during construction work. The revised scheme explains that pathology will now remain on the main hospital site. A future Scrutiny Review Panel may wish to consider the impact of the pathology service remaining on site during the construction phases of the new hospital.
• Cost of the project and the use of contingencies: Within P.107/2017, the States approved a blended funding solution comprising a £275 million bond with the balance of the £466 million budget being drawn from the Strategic Reserve. The costs of the revised scheme and the use of contingencies will need careful monitoring. A future Scrutiny Review Panel may wish to review the cost implications of the revised scheme and the risks associated with the delay of issuing the bond.