New Warwickshire hospital branded a 'fiasco' over beds
Fundraisers donated £635,000 towards the new hospital, which the trust used to buy adjacent land for the redevelopment.The fundraisers said when they made their donation, it was on the understanding it would include inpatient beds.South Warwickshire University NHS Foundation Trust (SWFT) has previously said the donation was not conditional of inpatient beds being provided. Hundreds of campaigners, including GP and broadcaster Dr Sarah Jarvis, have been protesting about the lack of beds at the new hospital. "The vast majority of the residents of Shipston-on-Stour and the surrounding rural community are furious the new building has the barefaced cheek to have the words Ellen Badger Hospital prominently displayed," added Mr Elliott. "We can only assume that the signage was ordered some years ago when we were promised a brand new hospital to replace the existing one."We now have a fiasco which has been eight years in the making."The new three-storey building will provide an activity space and a shared space for community nursing teams. Clinics, including speech and language therapy, community midwifery and screening programmes will take place in treatment rooms, said the trust. A new diagnostic hub at Stratford Hospital would be operational from 9 June, it added, which was "another example of bringing services closer to communities".
Follow BBC Coventry & Warwickshire on BBC Sounds, Facebook, X and Instagram.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
14 minutes ago
- The Independent
Renewables and fossil fuels not ‘either-or', says Reeves after Trump comments
Renewable and non-renewable energy sources are not an 'either-or', Rachel Reeves has said after Donald Trump described North Sea oil as a 'treasure chest'. On a visit to Lossiemouth on the North Sea coast in Moray, the Chancellor described oil and gas as 'incredibly important for the UK and our energy security'. Her appearance in Scotland followed a five-day visit from the US president, who called on the UK Government to 'incentivise the drillers, fast'. Mr Trump wrote on Truth Social: 'North Sea oil is a treasure chest for the United Kingdom. 'The taxes are so high, however, that it makes no sense.' Asked whether she would 'unlock' the 'treasure chest', Ms Reeves told the PA news agency: 'Oil and gas are incredibly important for the UK and our energy security. 'And oil and gas is going to play an important role in our energy mix for decades to come. 'It's why, alongside the private sector, we're investing in carbon capture and storage, which is absolutely essential for supporting energy intensive industries. 'But it's not either-or. 'At the same time, we're investing in clean homegrown energy, including at Berwick Bank in Scotland, which will create thousands of new jobs and power millions of homes. 'And that's what we need to do to make sure that our economy has this energy security that we need, that we bring down bills and bring more good jobs to Scotland.' Berwick Bank in the North Sea has this week received a green light from the Scottish Government. The proposed wind farm, off the coast of East Lothian, could add more than 4.1 gigawatts of capacity, which according to developer SSE Renewables is enough electricity to power more than six million homes annually. But Mr Trump criticised existing wind farms during his visit, when he said: 'When we go to Aberdeen, you'll see some of the ugliest windmills you've ever seen, the height of a 50-storey building.' Gesturing with his hands, he added: 'You can take 1,000 times more energy out of a hole in the ground this big.' Conservative shadow Scottish secretary Andrew Bowie has written to Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, calling for a review of policies affecting the oil and gas industry. 'As President Trump has said, the UK's 'very high' tax on oil and gas companies is a deterrent to investment,' he wrote. 'The extension of the energy profits levy (EPL), coupled with uncertainty around future licensing and investment signals, has created a climate of instability that threatens jobs, innovation and the region's economic resilience. 'President Donald Trump's remarks during your visit – calling Aberdeen the 'oil capital of Europe' and urging the UK to 'bring it back' – reflect a sentiment shared by many in the region. 'May I urge you to consider the president's call to 'incentivise' domestic production of hydrocarbons? 'Oil and gas still have a vital role to play in our energy mix and economic future; British people would rather see the UK benefit from domestic exploration and drilling than import more from Norway and Qatar.' The West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine MP added: 'Will you urgently call a meeting in Downing Street to conduct the review in partnership with industry leaders, our world-leading supply chain business, and the local workforce to ensure a coherent and sustainable path forward?'
Telegraph
15 minutes ago
- Telegraph
The furious Green Blob will try to destroy these Heathrow plans
Just expand the damn airport already. Somewhere in Prime Minister Keir Starmer's 2026 diary an entry has been written marked 'bottle Heathrow decision'. At least that is a reasonable assumption based the current administration's record with hard choices, and a history of similar cave-ins by governments of all stripes since the 2003 Air Transport White Paper first proposed Heathrow expansion. I will not remake the case for encouraging people to visit the UK. It should be self-evident to anyone professing to care about growth that making it easier to move people and things is as essential as having secure abundant energy. To do that we need more planes, and planes need more runways and airports. I will not remake the case for this scheme. There are other proposals, including a second Heathrow option, other airports, and a filing cabinet full of wilder ideas like Boris Island. A serious country would be thinking about doing most or all of them. But Britain is not a serious country, it's a climate cult living in a heritage theme park governed by anxiety-riddled children nannied by lawyers. Gaze if you will for example on the specimens running the capital. Top beetle on the dung-heap of wilfully managed decline is the Mayor of London Sadiq Khan. He helped successfully delay expansion back in 2020, using a legal challenge on the grounds of non-compliance with the Paris Agreement on climate change. He was aided by his predecessor and then-prime minister Boris Johnson who, in the midst of his Glasgow COP-inspired climate mania, bottled the government response. It was left to the airport, who had the mad decision overturned by the Supreme Court at vast cost. Khan however was backed by most of the MPs and councils in London, all of whom were responding to the political incentives provided by British planning rules and net zero. Not that airport expansion is unpopular – more are in favour than against, according to polling. But where there is opposition, it is concentrated and vocal. When you throw in climate laws and environmental permitting, infrastructure decisions can be cynically delayed by activists for years. This is getting worse since international courts like the ECJ and ICJ ruled, some would say reasonably, that governments foolish enough to sign these treaties should abide by them. Khan can now argue that any activity that increases emissions, which more flying certainly will (if we ignore fantasy plans for negative emissions technology), is illegal. We have then a cynical stand-off between the Cabinet, including a disingenuously neutral Ed Miliband, who know the country desperately needs growth, versus local politicians, Nimbys and activists who like growth in theory, just not near them. Unless something radically changes, this proposal will spend years in dismal process and courtrooms before vanishing back into the 'too difficult' box, as those responsible wring their hands and cry 'what could we do?'. It is, however, relatively simple. The Climate Change Act and related targets need to be scrapped, or at the very least reduced from a legally binding commitment to a statement of ambition. The UK either needs to withdraw from the Paris Agreement or make it clear that its contribution to saving the planet from eternal summer will be a dividend of growth through innovation, not a curtailment by banning activities. This approach has the side benefit of encouraging investment in quieter, lower-carbon flight, rather than driving such animal spirits and wealth offshore, where they have airports and fewer taxes. The planning Acts and related nature laws need to be reined in, reduced, and be subject to an absolute veto for the building of major infrastructure. Those are all things this or any future UK government could do if it wished to be serious again. In the interim you would be unwise to book a flight. The UK's ongoing capacity problems are increasing, airport congestion is growing, and as an aside so are global emissions. Our friends and rivals are simply far better at saying no to the climate children and their legal guardians. Change the laws, ignore the moaners, expand the airport.
Telegraph
15 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Reeves tells universities: Let defence firms recruit your students
Rachel Reeves has called on universities to do more to ensure defence companies can attend careers fairs without facing intimidation. The Chancellor told The Telegraph there should be 'no barriers' to young people taking jobs in the sector as the world gets more dangerous and uncertain. The intervention was triggered by concerns that Left-wing student unions protesting the presence of defence firms at careers events was discouraging attendance. Ms Reeves told The Telegraph: 'A strong national defence can build a strong economy too. By backing Britain's defence industry, we can create new jobs, opportunities, and investments in our industrial heartlands. 'We can give the next generation the chance to work in high-skilled, well-paid part of the economy. 'But those opportunities can only be seized if we make them available to everyone. That's why it's right that companies should be allowed to attend university career events or recruitment fairs. 'There should be no barriers to young people having the chance to decide on their own futures or crucial part of the British economy being shut out of hiring the best and the brightest.' The Telegraph has been told of incidents when defence companies have cancelled sending employees to jobs fairs due to fears they will be barracked by vocal critics. Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine and concerns about the growing influence of China have contributed to Western nations, including the UK, markedly increasing defence spending. The Government has for months been taking steps to counter long-standing negative portrayals of the defence sector, talking up its importance to UK national security. Student protests create hostile environment Business leaders whose firms make military equipment have personally complained to the Chancellor that they were effectively barred from some university careers fairs. There is no ban by the university sector or individual universities on defence companies sending representatives to events where students look for future jobs. However, often a hostile environment is created by student protesters, according to multiple well-placed figures in the defence sector and the Government. It means executives are sometimes taking the decision not to attend certain careers fairs, fearing it would be an unpleasant experience for those employees – often recent graduates themselves – who are sent in. A source at one defence company described how they took that decision after learning of a planned protest where the firm would be accused of being 'dealers of death'. The source said: 'We have had instances where student groups on campuses have taken the fact we are there as a problem. We have seen some pretty unpleasant campaigns with those groups to try to agitate within student unions.' Defence firms have anecdotal evidence that confrontational protests have become more common since Hamas's Oct 7 attack on Israel, after which there has been heightened scrutiny of connections between the British defence industry and Israel. It comes amid pro-Palestine protests on campuses across the country in the wake of Oct 7 and Israel's subsequent military campaign in Gaza. The Ministry of Defence (MoD) is also aware of the issue of defence companies feeling they cannot attend some university careers events and is monitoring it. The concerns have emerged at a time when the UK is set to need even more home-grown engineers and scientists for the defence sector as government spending in that space soars. The Chancellor, who an ally said had been a consistent champion behind the scenes of Britain's defence companies, recently signed off a marked increase in defence spending. The UK's defence spending will rise from around 2.3 per cent of GDP to 2.5 per cent GDP by 2027 – or to 2.6 per cent when money for the intelligence agencies is included for the first time. There is also a looser ambition to hit 3 per cent by the early 2030s, as well as a new Nato target to reach 3.5 per cent on core defence spending by 2035. Labour has already pressed financial institutions to change their definition of environmental, social and governance to make sure that defence companies are not being locked out of potential funding. There was a 9 per cent drop in investment in defence companies from UK funds between the start of 2022 and late 2023, according to London Stock Exchange data. Jonathan Reynolds, the Business Secretary, met senior figures at defence firms and banks last December to press his concerns about barriers to investment in the sector. Meanwhile, Labour has also taken steps to protect free speech on university campuses since entering office last summer, retaining proposed Tory legislation in that space after initially signalling it would be dropped. Ms Reeves said: 'The world is changing and we can see that before our eyes. It is becoming more dangerous, more insecure and more uncertain. 'But the job of the Government is not simply to step back and watch that change happen, but to take action to keep our country safe. 'That is why we have announced the biggest sustained increase in defence spending since the end of the Cold War and an ambition to spend 3 per cent of GDP on defence in the next parliament.'
