New Preston hospital should be built in stages, MP says
The Labour politician was speaking to the Local Democracy Reporting Service in response to being accused of failing residents by voting against a parliamentary bid to speed up the process of replacing the ageing facility.A Liberal Democrat opposition day motion in the Commons last week called on the government to "reverse the delay" to the nationwide New Hospital Programme of which the Royal Preston is a part.
'Reverse the delay'
Councillor John Potter, who leads the Lib Dem opposition group on Preston City Council, condemned local Labour MPs for not backing his party's push and taking Central Lancashire "for granted".He said: "Many Preston residents will be let down that Labour voted down a Lib Dem motion calling for the hospital delays to be reversed."What is even worse is that our two Labour MPs in Preston didn't put the best interest of their residents first. Maya Ellis voted against while [Preston constituency MP] Sir Mark Hendrick didn't bother to vote."Sir Mark Hendrick's office was approached for a comment. The veteran MP has previously opposed the suggested shift of the Royal Preston to Stanifield Lane in Farington – some eight miles away from its current base – calling instead for a "refurbishment" of the existing site and for a new urgent treatment facility to be opened in the city centre.Ms Ellis said: "I absolutely recognise that Royal Preston Hospital is no longer fit for purpose and the government is doing everything it can to ensure it is rebuilt as soon as possible."The maintenance backlog at the Royal Preston was estimated to stand at £157m according to a calculation made in 2021 as part of the case to secure funding for a new building.
Listen to the best of BBC Radio Lancashire on BBC Sounds and follow BBC Lancashire on Facebook, X and Instagram and watch BBC North West Tonight on BBC iPlayer.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
South Wales Guardian
an hour ago
- South Wales Guardian
Bill on Royal Albert Hall seatholders' ticket reforms backed by MPs
Conservative former culture secretary Sir John Whittingdale, who spoke in support of the Bill, said the hall's 'unique' funding model, which included the sale of debentured seats to fund its 19th century construction, was an asset to the institution. Roughly a quarter of the Albert Hall's seats fall into a category of being owned by long-time members. The 316 owners pay an annual seat rate, which this year was £1,880 plus VAT. It brings in about £2.3 million for the venue every year, Sir John said. He said the current arrangements meant on about 100 designated events each year, known as 'executive lettings', the owners give up their 1,268 seats for the venue to sell. They can also forgo their seats on other, non-specified occasions, boosting the venue and its charitable arm's coffers. However, there has been concern that the seat owners can personally sell tickets for their seats for other lucrative events on the resale markets for thousands of pounds. The Bill will amend the Royal Albert Hall's constitution to codify the practice of members forgoing their right to attend events. It will protect the hall from legal challenge over the voting process from seatholders over which concerts will be selected. Sir John, a former trustee of the venue, said: 'A seat in the hall is a property asset, and in the same way that if one's grandfather purchases a property which their descendants then eventually decide to sell, it is highly likely they will retrieve an amount of money way greater than the original investment. 'These are property assets, essentially, without which the hall could not have been built. But it was on that understanding, it was on an 999-year lease, and those who own that lease are, of course, entitled to do what they wish with it.' Labour MP Sharon Hodgson (Washington and Gateshead South) cited tickets for an Ed Sheeran concert which had been sold online for nearly £6,000. Ms Hodgson said: 'I was therefore horrified when tickets for events at the Royal Albert Hall, one of our country's most recognisable and cherished institutions, started appearing on sites such as Viagogo.' She said a 10-seat box was advertised for sale online recently for £3 million. The change needs to be approved in Parliament, because it will amend the Royal Albert Hall Act 1966. The Harold Wilson-era reforms put into law rules around the repair and maintenance of the venue – as well as rights of seatholders. The proposed legislation, which started in the House of Lords, was passed unanimously in the Commons at second reading. It will now return to be debated by peers.
North Wales Chronicle
an hour ago
- North Wales Chronicle
Bill on Royal Albert Hall seatholders' ticket reforms backed by MPs
Conservative former culture secretary Sir John Whittingdale, who spoke in support of the Bill, said the hall's 'unique' funding model, which included the sale of debentured seats to fund its 19th century construction, was an asset to the institution. Roughly a quarter of the Albert Hall's seats fall into a category of being owned by long-time members. The 316 owners pay an annual seat rate, which this year was £1,880 plus VAT. It brings in about £2.3 million for the venue every year, Sir John said. He said the current arrangements meant on about 100 designated events each year, known as 'executive lettings', the owners give up their 1,268 seats for the venue to sell. They can also forgo their seats on other, non-specified occasions, boosting the venue and its charitable arm's coffers. However, there has been concern that the seat owners can personally sell tickets for their seats for other lucrative events on the resale markets for thousands of pounds. The Bill will amend the Royal Albert Hall's constitution to codify the practice of members forgoing their right to attend events. It will protect the hall from legal challenge over the voting process from seatholders over which concerts will be selected. Sir John, a former trustee of the venue, said: 'A seat in the hall is a property asset, and in the same way that if one's grandfather purchases a property which their descendants then eventually decide to sell, it is highly likely they will retrieve an amount of money way greater than the original investment. 'These are property assets, essentially, without which the hall could not have been built. But it was on that understanding, it was on an 999-year lease, and those who own that lease are, of course, entitled to do what they wish with it.' Labour MP Sharon Hodgson (Washington and Gateshead South) cited tickets for an Ed Sheeran concert which had been sold online for nearly £6,000. Ms Hodgson said: 'I was therefore horrified when tickets for events at the Royal Albert Hall, one of our country's most recognisable and cherished institutions, started appearing on sites such as Viagogo.' She said a 10-seat box was advertised for sale online recently for £3 million. The change needs to be approved in Parliament, because it will amend the Royal Albert Hall Act 1966. The Harold Wilson-era reforms put into law rules around the repair and maintenance of the venue – as well as rights of seatholders. The proposed legislation, which started in the House of Lords, was passed unanimously in the Commons at second reading. It will now return to be debated by peers.
Daily Mail
2 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Green energy tycoon and top Labour donor calls for 'climate denial' to be made a criminal offence... as Ed Miliband brands Tories and Reform 'unpatriotic' for failing to back Net Zero goals
A leading Labour donor yesterday called for climate denial to be a criminal offence because it causes 'incredible harm'. Green energy tycoon Dale Vince tweeted in support of Energy Secretary Ed Miliband, who branded the Conservatives and Reform 'unpatriotic' for not backing Net Zero goals. It came as Mr Miliband gave an urgent statement in Parliament on the state of the climate crisis, telling The Guardian he wanted it to be an 'annual exercise in radical truth-telling'. Mr Vince, who donated £5million to Labour in the run-up to the general election, posted: 'Good move from Ed, it's time to tell it like it is. I'd make climate denial a criminal offence – given the incredible harm it will cause, even by slowing down progress to Net Zero.' Speaking to MPs yesterday, Mr Miliband referenced a Met Office report warning that the UK is getting hotter and wetter with more 'extreme events'. 'The central England temperature series shows recent warmth has far exceeded any temperatures observed in at least 300 years,' he said. He also warned that Britain was one of the most nature-depleted countries in the world, and said heatwaves had led to 10,000 excess deaths in England during the past four years. Facing down his critics, he added: 'To those who say Britain cannot make a difference. I say you are wrong. Stop talking our country down. British leadership matters.' But Tory energy spokesman Andrew Bowie said it was 'ridiculous' to accuse opponents of Net Zero of being unpatriotic. 'We need to bring back a sense of rationality, of proportion to this debate,' he said, adding that 'language like this is alienating more and more people'. And Mr Bowie said it was 'shameful' of Mr Miliband to use the Met Office report as an excuse to attack his opponents, while also warning that Labour's climate policies in the race to Net Zero threaten to 'impoverish' the British people. 'It is rather shameful that the Secretary should be using this [Met Office] report as cover, whilst ratcheting up the language, whilst increasing the shrill criticism of all those who question the department and its policies, all to distract from the fact that the plans mean that Britain will be poorer and that no one, no one looking at how we are decarbonised, could ever claim that this is a model to follow,' he told MPs. 'We are proud to have been a world leader, but it isn't a race if nobody else is running. 'If we are leading the way, we need to make sure there's a path others will follow. We must decarbonise in a way that creates energy security and prosperity rather than forcing industry abroad and impoverishing the British people.' Mr Miliband also suggested that the Government-owned GB Energy could fund solar panels on religious buildings, such as churches and mosques.
