East Grinstead Courier & Observer takes up the case of our empty upstairs floor

Three weeks ago Lewis Dean, a reporter for the captioned local newspaper, wrote an article referring to how our neighbouring surgeries in East Grinstead (Moatfield, Judges Crescent and Ship Street) were having to consider merging as a way of relieving the pressure they were under.  In it he said – East Grinstead’s doctors’ surgeries are “bursting at the seams” and the issue could lead to all three being merged under one roof.

Having read the article I contacted Mr Dean to alert him to the fact the CDHC has excellent space available in as much as our upstairs floor has hardly ever been used during the 6 years since the building was opened.  Currently it is completely empty and that surely it was high time the lift was mended and the floor was brought into use.  Mr Dean took the point and wrote the following article which was published in The East Grinstead Courier and Observer’s 3rd October 2013 edition.

Peter Dodds (Co-Chair)

CLICK HERE TO READ THE ARTICLE:

Newspaper article re surgery upstairs use0001

8 comments to East Grinstead Courier & Observer takes up the case of our empty upstairs floor

  • As a resident of Hophurst Drive, where a high number of the patients of the CDHC park ( to avoid having to negotiate Bowers Place)I wonder how much, if any, thought had been given to parking, especially as all East Grinstead patients would probably travel by car.

    • Glynn Roche

      Mike, thanks for your contribution to this topic.

      I think the CCG (and previously the PCT) and other parties that have been engaged in the development and utilisation of the new surgery do understand what the challenge would be with parking space. I guess the question here is what do our patients think we should do?

      Should we:

      a) Simply assume the issue will never be resolved and accept that the upper floor will never be used,or
      b) Challenge the current “low quality” situation to see what can be done to improve the overall efficiency of the building, car park and other facilities?

      As a PPG, we believe that challenging the status quo is more likely to create results but would love to hear in this forum what our patients would want to happen and welcome their comments and thoughts. Over recent times we have had the question of the under utilisation of the premises come up and one person feels strongly enough about it to say they will write to our MP.

      What would your preference be?

  • Without doubt a review of the overall efficiency of “the building, to include its facilities is well overdue”

    Here are a few questions to ‘start the ball rolling’

    1. Who owns the building?
    2. Who is responsible for the Marketing of the building and to seek out potential users of the empty rooms upstairs?
    3. Is it a case of the rental charges being to high?
    4. Why do we always have to write to our MP? Peter Dodds recent campaign has already shown that the government only seem to offer a “softly, softly, even softer, what monkey?” approach.

    I would love to see a response from other patients who may be following this debate.
    “IS ANYBODY OUT THERE?”

    • Glynn Roche

      Mike

      Thanks for your note and your thoughts and the encouragement to others to join the discussion.

      Some responses here:

      1. Who owns the building? The NHS, more specifically the CCG (and before that, the PCT)
      2. Who is responsible for the Marketing of the building and to seek out potential users of the empty rooms upstairs? As for question 1
      3. Is it a case of the rental charges being to high? We are not privy to this information. There are other factors such as the lift being unreliable.
      4. Why do we always have to write to our MP? Peter Dodds recent campaign has already shown that the government only seem to offer a “softly, softly, even softer, what monkey?” approach. Presumably your question is rhetorical? It was just an observation that we learned that one of our patients had chosen to do this.

      You have not said what you would like the outcome to be in relation to your original point re increased use of the building and parking. For us, this is the most important type of information as it empowers us to argue and progress issues on behalf of our patients.

  • It looks like I am the only patient using this communication medium.

    OR AM I????

    • Glynn Roche

      Mike

      I just ran a quick scan and there have been 6 individuals who have contributed comments to the discussion including yourself, myself and Peter.

      it is early days and there are many more people visiting the site and browsing plus a fewer number who have registered but not yet posted anything. In this way, the site is a bit like a normal group of people with different levels of gregariousness.

      I am certain this will grow and is normally a bit of a slow burning process in the early days.

      Lets stay in dialogue and keep things moving.

      Glynn

      • Glynn Roche

        Just to add, we are running at about 300 – 400 page views a day on average. This means that one or more pages (screens) on the site are being viewed and the total number of views is 300 – 400 on average. That could be 1 page viewed by 300 different viewers in a day or 2 by 150 different viewers etc.

        Some of this traffic is by computers that just “crawl” around the internet looking for interesting stuff and others could be hackers etc. We can identify these crawlers fairly easily and they are used mostly by search engines such as google or Yahoo!

        On balance, the net number of humans looking at the site looks pretty good for a site that is this young and somewhat “niche” in its purpose.

  • “Humans looking at the site”

    Even as I type the family cat is looking over my shoulder and the fish tank is within sight!!!

    Sorry Glynn I could not resist.