I certainly agree that smaller, friendly units will have a tendency towards fewer interventions. The midwives I met to discuss this issue with, who were concerned—indeed, appalled—by the proposed closure of St. Paul’s, were worried that a bigger, more industrial-scale unit at Gloucester would lead to more interventions, not fewer interventions, thereby achieving exactly the reverse of what Government policy is supposed to be. The notion of patient choice is ludicrous, because Gloucestershire has been left with a single maternity ward. Where is the choice? There is a choice of one, as we will close two maternity wards that would have provided some competition—in new competitive speak.
The increased drive time to the new maternity centre in Gloucestershire poses a risk to Cheltenham. The drive from one of the poorest parts of my constituency, Clyde crescent, to Cheltenham general hospital takes five minutes in the middle of the afternoon. If maternity services move to Gloucestershire royal hospital under the proposal, drive time will increase to 23 minutes, which is a fourfold increase and represents nothing other than an increased risk.
Health Services (Gloucestershire)
Proceeding contribution from
Martin Horwood
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Commons on Monday, 12 June 2006.
It occurred during Adjournment debate on Health Services (Gloucestershire).
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
447 c597;447 c596-7 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 12:16:45 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_329291
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_329291
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_329291