Connect with us

Health

Lancashire Care Services Face Strike Threat Amid Closure Review

editorial

Published

on

The future of care homes and day centres across Lancashire is under serious threat as union leaders and community members rally against proposed closures. This escalation follows an announcement from the Lancashire County Council, which oversees facilities in areas including Chorley, Fylde, and Hyndburn. The council placed five care homes and five day centres under review in October, citing their “significantly poor condition.”

At a rally held on March 18, 2023, in Preston, UNISON General Secretary elect Andrea Egan addressed a crowd of hundreds, demanding immediate answers from the council. Egan criticized the council’s decision to delay finalizing a plan, which was initially set for next month, stating, “If you think this is satisfactory, you are insulting these workers. We don’t want delays; we demand answers.” She emphasized that if any resident is forced to relocate, union members are prepared to strike.

The council’s review process has sparked widespread concern among local families and care advocates. Egan stated, “There’s only one group of people who stand to benefit from cuts in social care—it’s not the residents; it’s the private care companies.” She also lamented the long-standing issue of underinvestment in public services, arguing that it has persisted under various political administrations for the past 30 years.

The ruling Reform UK authority has faced criticism for its handling of the situation. Council leader Stephen Atkinson defended the review, asserting that the estimated £4 million in savings from potential closures was not included in the draft budget for 2026/27. He claimed this omission demonstrates that the consultation with the public is genuine and focuses on the state of the buildings rather than financial motives.

Families of care home residents shared their views at the rally, reflecting the emotional stakes involved. One poignant voice was that of Julie Lindley, who spoke on behalf of her 94-year-old mother, Annie, a resident of Grove House in Adlington. Lindley conveyed her mother’s fears about the consequences of relocation, stating, “Forcing me to move against my will is not a choice; it’s a human rights issue.” She urged the council to explore alternatives to closure, emphasizing the need for stability and dignity for elderly residents.

Atkinson responded to the rally in a statement to the Local Democracy Reporting Service, indicating that the council is still reviewing the public consultation responses. He noted the importance of the feedback received, highlighting that there are ongoing assessments of the care homes’ conditions. “We want to make it clear that no decisions have been made about the future of any of these homes,” he stated.

The ongoing review affects several facilities, including Favordale in Colne, Grove House, Milbanke in Kirkham, Thornton House in Thornton Cleveleys, and Woodlands in Clayton-le-Moors. The day centres involved are Byron View, Derby Centre, Milbanke Day Centre, Teal House, and Vale View. Notably, Byron View and Teal House have remained closed since the onset of the pandemic under what was intended as a temporary measure.

As the situation unfolds, Azhar Ali, leader of the Progressive Lancashire group, remarked on the significant opposition faced by the Reform authority. He called for a clear commitment to no closures, no privatization, and no job losses.

No timeline has been established for when the council will announce its decision regarding the future of these vital care services, leaving residents and their families in a state of uncertainty. The outcome of this review will significantly impact the lives of many vulnerable individuals and their families throughout Lancashire.

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © All rights reserved. This website offers general news and educational content for informational purposes only. While we strive for accuracy, we do not guarantee the completeness or reliability of the information provided. The content should not be considered professional advice of any kind. Readers are encouraged to verify facts and consult relevant experts when necessary. We are not responsible for any loss or inconvenience resulting from the use of the information on this site.