Land purchased for Basingstoke hospital construction in 2037
Hampshire Hospitals is expected to receive at least £2bn of funding as part of the Government's New Hospital programme.But it is part of the third wave of the scheme, meaning work will not begin on the new building for at least 12 years.Ms Whitfield said they needed to secure this land so that the option "doesn't disappear on us".She admitted this did not guarantee that the hospital would be built at the site."It is entirely possible that in a decades time the world might have changed a bit," she said."It's very clear that Basingstoke needs a new hospital and it will happen."She said health minister Karin Smyth visited the trust recently and confirmed it "will get built".
'Utterly bonkers'
Roy Lilley, a former NHS trust boss, who is now an independent health commentator, is less optimistic and does not think the hospital will be built."It's just totally and utterly bonkers," he said, adding that the government and economy could change by 2037."The money that we are spending at the moment to prop these places up, we could actually use that money to build new hospitals," Mr Lilley said.
Kit Malthouse, Conservative MP for North West Hampshire said: "Waiting until 2037 is not just unacceptable — it's senseless. "Forecasting that far ahead is unreliable; by then we'll have had three general elections and a completely different spending landscape. Delaying now risks killing the project entirely."Our population has grown and will grow further. Our existing hospital buildings at Basingstoke are outdated and under strain. "Other communities in the national programme are seeing their hospitals delivered much sooner — why not ours?"
A spokesperson from the Department of Health and Social Care said: "The New Hospital Programme we inherited was undeliverable, with funding due to run out in March."This government has confirmed a funding plan and an honest, realistic timetable to put us on track to deliver the rebuild of Hampshire Hospital, and we will work closely with the trust as we progress through our delivery plan."We have also allocated £1bn to address the backlog of critical NHS maintenance and repairs to help ensure hospitals are safe and sustainable."
You can follow BBC Hampshire & Isle of Wight on Facebook, X (Twitter), or Instagram.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
10 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Terror arrest over Palestine Action RAF attack
Counter-terrorism police have made a further arrest over an attack on two aircraft at an RAF base claimed by Palestine Action. A 22-year-old man, of no fixed abode, was arrested on Friday in Bedford on suspicion of the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism, contrary to Section 41 of the Terrorism Act 2000. The arrested man is currently in police custody, Counter Terrorism Policing South added Two Voyager planes were damaged at RAF Brize Norton, Oxfordshire, on June 20. The action, which was claimed by the group Palestine Action, caused £7m worth of damage to the aircraft. Four people were charged last month in connection with the incident. The Government subsequently moved to proscribe the group under anti-terror laws after the group claimed responsibility for the action. The ban means that membership of, or support for, the direct action group is a criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison. Yvette Cooper, the Home Secretary, announced plans to proscribe Palestine Action on June 23, saying that the vandalism of the two planes was 'disgraceful'. However, Palestine Action's co-founder has since won a bid to bring a High Court challenge over the group's ban as a terror organisation. Lawyers for Huda Ammori asked a judge to allow her to bring the High Court challenge over the ban, describing it as an 'unlawful interference' with freedom of expression. In a decision on Wednesday, judge Mr Justice Chamberlain said two parts of the arguments on Ms Ammori's behalf were 'reasonably arguable' and would be heard at a three-day hearing in November. However, he later refused a bid to temporarily pause the ban on the direct action group until the outcome of the challenge. In his first ruling, he said it was arguable that the proscription 'amounts to a disproportionate interference' of Ms Ammori's rights to freedom of expression and freedom of assembly. He said: 'That being so, the point will have to be determined at a substantive hearing and it would not be appropriate for me to say more now.' The judge continued that a second argument, that Ms Cooper failed to consult Palestine Action 'in breach of natural justice', could also go to a full hearing. Mr Justice Chamberlain said: 'As a matter of principle, I consider that it is reasonably arguable that a duty to consult arose.' He continued: 'Having considered the evidence, I also consider it reasonably arguable that there was no compelling reason why consultation could not have been undertaken here.' The judge refused to allow Ms Ammori to challenge the Government's decision on several other grounds, including a claim that the Home Secretary failed to gather sufficient information on Palestine Action's activities or the impact of the proscription on people associated with it. He also refused the request for a temporary block, finding there was a 'powerful public interest' in the ban continuing and there was not a 'material change of circumstance' since a previous hearing. Following the first ruling, Ms Ammori said: 'This landmark decision to grant a judicial review which could see the Home Secretary's unlawful decision to ban Palestine Action quashed, demonstrates the significance of this case for freedoms of speech, expression and assembly and rights to natural justice in our country and the rule of law itself.' She continued: 'We will not stop defending fundamental rights to free speech and expression in our country and supporting Palestinian people against a genocide being livestreamed before our eyes.' Raza Husain KC, for Ms Ammori, previously told the court at the hearing on July 21 that the ban had made the UK 'an international outlier' and was 'repugnant'. Mr Husain added: 'The decision to proscribe Palestine Action had the hallmarks of an authoritarian and blatant abuse of power.' The Home Office is defending the legal action. Sir James Eadie KC, for the department, said in written submissions that by causing serious damage to property, Palestine Action was 'squarely' within part of the terrorism laws used in proscription. Previously, Ben Watson KC, also for the Home Office, said Palestine Action could challenge the Home Secretary's decision at the Proscribed Organisations Appeal Commission (POAC), a specialist tribunal, rather than at the High Court. Sir James said that an 'exceptional case' would be needed for it to go to the High Court, rather than the POAC. Mr Justice Chamberlain said on Wednesday that a High Court challenge could take place in the autumn of this year, whereas an appeal to the specialist tribunal would take much longer. He said in a summary of his ruling: 'If it were necessary to appeal for deproscription, it is very unlikely that an application before POAC would be listed before the middle of 2026.' In his 18-page written judgment, Mr Justice Chamberlain said: 'If the legality of the proscription order can properly be raised by way of defence to criminal proceedings, that would open up the spectre of different and possibly conflicting decisions on that issue in magistrates' courts across England and Wales or before different judges or juries in the Crown Court. 'That would be a recipe for chaos. 'To avoid it, there is a strong public interest in allowing the legality of the order to be determined authoritatively as soon as possible. The obvious way to do that is in judicial review proceedings.' The judge also said that people protesting in support of Palestine and Gaza, but not expressing support for Palestine Action, had 'attracted various kinds of police attention, from questioning to arrest'. He continued that it was 'important not to draw too much from the fact that police and others appear to have misunderstood the law on some occasions'. But he added: 'Nonetheless, reports of the kind of police conduct referred to… are liable to have a chilling effect on those wishing to express legitimate political views. 'This effect can properly be regarded as an indirect consequence of the proscription order.' Mr Justice Chamberlain later dismissed a bid by the Home Office to bring an appeal over his decision about the POAC. Sir Mark Rowley, the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, said on Wednesday that he understood Ms Cooper's decision, adding: 'As long as that's the law, we'll enforce the law rigorously, because supporting a terrorist organisation is a serious offence.'
Telegraph
10 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Influencer sues Guardian for defamation in Mumford & Sons review
A Right-wing influencer is suing the Guardian for defamation over its review of a new Mumford & Sons album. Andy Ngo, an American social media influencer and journalist, has filed a High Court claim against Guardian News & Media (GNM) over allegations about his political leanings in a recent article. The 200-word review was published in March in The Observer, when GNM still owned the Sunday title. The Observer was taken over shortly afterwards by news start-up Tortoise Media. The Telegraph is not reproducing the part of the text believed to be allegedly defamatory. The scathing two-star review described Mumford & Sons' latest album Rushmere as 'utterly insipid balladry', adding that the mood was 'self-pitying and self-justifying'. The article referred to the fact that the folk rock band have reverted to being a trio following the departure of guitarist and banjo player Winston Marshall in 2021. Mr Marshall, the son of Sir Paul Marshall, the co-founder of GB News, left the band in a storm of controversy after he praised Mr Ngo's book Unmasked, a critical account of the Left-wing Antifa movement. In a post to Mr Ngo on social media, Mr Marshall wrote: 'Congratulations. Finally had the time to read your important book. You're a brave man.' Following an outcry, Mr Marshall stepped back from the band saying he would 'examine my blind spots', before quitting just weeks later. In a blog post, he wrote: 'The truth is that my commenting on a book that documents the extreme far-Left and their activities is in no way an endorsement of the equally repugnant far-Right. 'The truth is that reporting on extremism at the great risk of endangering oneself is unquestionably brave.' Mr Ngo, who is represented by London-based Patron Law, is a senior editor at The Post Millennial, a Canadian news website. He is an outspoken figure who has garnered controversy for his coverage of Antifa and Muslims. Reposted by Elon Musk The influencer, who lives in the UK, wrote an opinion piece published in the Wall Street Journal in 2018 titled 'A visit to Islamic England'. He has live-streamed coverage of rallies and protests to his 1.6 million followers on X. Mr Ngo's political views and prominence on social media have brought him into contact with Elon Musk, who has reposted the influencer's videos. In 2022, several high-profile Left-wing Twitter accounts were banned after Mr Ngo and other prominent figures urged Mr Musk to take action against the 'large number of Antifa accounts' operating on the site. A Guardian spokesman said: 'This relates to a 190-word review published by the Observer in March.' The lawsuit comes as the Guardian awaits a judgment in a separate defamation claim filed by Kidulthood actor Noel Clarke. Mr Clarke is suing GNM for libel over seven articles and a podcast in which more than 20 women accused him of sexual misconduct. Mr Clarke denies the allegations. GNM is defending its stories, with editor-in-chief Katharine Viner telling the court there was a 'very high public interest' in reporting the claims.
BBC News
10 minutes ago
- BBC News
More than 100 attend demo at Faslane nuclear base
More than 100 people have attended a peace vigil outside the Faslane naval base, home to the UK's nuclear-armed submarines. The event was timed to mark the upcoming 80th anniversary of the atomic bombs being dropped on Japan. The peace vigil was organised by Scotland's three largest Christian churches, which are calling for an end to all nuclear protest came as President Trump announced he had ordered two nuclear submarines to be deployed "in the appropriate regions" in response to comments by former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev on social media. The No To Nuclear Weapons event took place at the south gate of Faslane, which is officially called His Majesty's Naval Base (HMNB) Clyde. It is the home of all the Royal Navy's nuclear submarines, including the Vanguard-class ballistic missile submarines, which carry Trident nuclear four Vanguard submarines are the sole platforms for the United Kingdom's nuclear weapons and are due to be replaced by the new Dreadnought-class submarines after 2030. The vigil was attended by the Most Rev William Nolan, the Catholic Archbishop of Glasgow, Rt Rev Rosie Frew, Moderator of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, and the Most Rev Mark Strange, Primus of the Scottish Episcopal of the Quakers, the Iona Community and the United Reform Church also took ahead of the event, Archbishop William Nolan said: "The phrase 'never again' gained much currency 80 years ago."But the actions of nuclear powers, including our own, run contrary to that."As the late Pope Benedict articulated, the very concept of a nuclear deterrence has instead fuelled an arms race as those on opposing sides keep seeking to outdo the other."We have seen this in the replacement for Trident. Deterrence itself, therefore, has increased insecurity and does nothing to build up trust which is necessary to encourage disarmament and build up peace." An estimated 140,000 people were killed at Hiroshima and a further 74,000 at Nagasaki when the USA dropped the first and only atom bombs ever used in a conflict, on 6 and 9 August 1945. The UK began developing a nuclear weapons programme at the end of World War Two and held its first bomb test in the 1950s and 1960s the main platform for the UK's nuclear weapons was the air-based V-bomber fleet, named after the three strategic bombers used to carry the missiles - the Vickers Valiant, Handley Page Victor and Avro 1969, the UK has operated continuous at-sea deterrence, with first Polaris and then Trident missiles stored and launched from nuclear-powered submarines with the capacity to remain submerged at sea for which sits on the Gare Loch - is also the home of Astute-class nuclear powered but conventionally armed attack UK's stock of nuclear warheads is based at the Royal Naval Armaments Depot (RNAD) Coulport on nearby Loch Long. The Faslane base has long been the focus of anti-war protests from groups such as the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND) and Trident Ploughshares.A peace camp has been based just outside the site since 1982.
