Watford General rebuild could be 'one of the biggest hospital building failures'

A vastly experienced building expert has warned plans to rebuild Watford General Hospital could lead to a massive and very expensive 'building failure'.

The dire warning came in a letter to Hemel Hempstead MP David Taylor from Bob Scott,  a former senior executive of major construction and property development companies. His experience covered many NHS hospital projects as well as other major building projects.

In the letter Mr Scott, a member of the New Hospital Campaign:

  • SLAMMED the decision to press ahead with rebuilding Watford General as being driven by political considerations rather than public need,
  • WARNED that extensive demolition, civil engineering works and removal of contaminated soil would bring 'adverse environmental conditions' for patients in Watford General wards,
  • POINTED TO the risk of high construction costs from building very tall tower blocks at Watford.

Mr Scott concluded:

I fear that, as matters stand, if the Trust’s redevelopment proposals proceed, they have all the ingredients to result in one of the biggest hospital building failures the country has experienced.

Mr Scott's letter is below:

Letter as sent to D Taylor MP 12 Aug 24

 


'PLAN B' FOR WATFORD GENERAL WILL MEAN 'SIGNIFICANT DISRUPTION' TO PATIENTS AND STAFF

Patients and staff at Watford General face nearly ten years of turmoil as the West Herts Trust is forced to fall back on refurbishing old buildings.

A likely Plan B will mean building work going on to 2033.

  • Unaffordable £1.4bn triple tower hospital likely to be replaced by cheaper option, responding to cuts demanded by Reeves Review of failed 'New Hospital Programme'
  • Report drawn up in 2022 gives details of cheaper option, including refurbished main block and smaller new build
  • Architects admit likely £800m Plan B option will bring 'significant disruption to the existing services while the site continues to operate during construction.'
  • Plan will 'inevitably prolong the overall duration of works increasing cost.'
  • Option 'provides a convoluted path to some services. This includes the diagnostic services that are split across three locations.'

The plans (Option 3) are set out in a paper known as the RIBA Stage One report.

 


WATFORD GENERAL ISN'T THE BEST FOR MANY - IN WATFORD

FOR MANY WATFORD PEOPLE, WATFORD GENERAL WOULD NOT BE THE BEST OPTION FOR A NEW HOSPITAL - LOOK AT THIS MAP

  • Watford General is not easy to get to from much of Watford - close to the southern edge of the Borough
  • Possible new hospital sites in Wayside Farm, south of Kings Langley and Bricket Wood/Chiswell Green (near the M1/M25 junction) would be closer than Watford General for many thousands of Watford people
  • People in Garston, Leavesden and other parts of Watford would find it easier to get to alternative sites - to say nothing of the hundreds of thousands who live outside the Borough
  • Other sites could emerge if the NHS encouraged them
    There is now NO funded plan for Watford General, with the Government reviewing the project
  • Time for a major rethink of the stalled Watford General project - let's go for a new West Herts Hospital

WATFORD GENERAL PLANS DELAY PROGRESS FOR CANCER CENTRE

Vital work to provide a new building for the Mount Vernon Cancer Centre MVCC) is being held up by wrangling among NHS bureaucrats.

The delay - which could mean cancer patients waiting ten years for much-needed new premises - is being caused by the determination of West Herts Trust to press ahead with rebuilding Watford General.

New analysis by Dacorum Health Action Group explains that:

  • Cancer centres, where patients are treated with chemotherapy and radiotherapy, need to be located next to acute hospitals where facilities like intensive care units are available
  • The MVCC buildings at Northwood, Middlesex, are in very poor condition and are far from the necessary acute services, making care difficult for patients and staff
  • Watford General has been put forward by the NHS as the site for a new MVCC
  • But the NHS is giving priority to the 7-year rebuild of Watford General, with the MVCC move taking second place
  • Dacorum Health Action Group (DHAG) is calling on the NHS to explore clear new accessible sites where a new MVCC could be located alongside a new West Hertfordshire A&E hospital

DHAG's new analysis of the MVCC situation is below:

Briefing Note on Mount Vernon

 

 


HEALTH ACTION GROUP SEND TOUGH QUESTIONS TO WEST HERTS TRUST

Dacorum Health Action Group (DHAG) has demanded answers from West Herts Hospitals Trust to a series of tough  questions from the general public about the way the Trust is running our services.

Issues raised in the questions, submitted at last week's pre-election public meeting organised by DHAG, included:

  • Why is the Trust refusing to own up to the likely cost of the Watford General rebuild?
  • How will the deficit-ridden Trust pay for the Watford General rebuild?
  • How will the impact on patients and staff of the Trust's £27m annual cuts be monitored?
  •  How will the Trust keep services running at Watford General during the disruptive seven-year rebuild?

The questions are at the link below:

Questions West Herts for Candidates meeting 24.6.24

 

 


NEW GOVERNMENT TO GAMBLE YOUR MONEY ON WASTEFUL WATFORD GENERAL

The new government is now certain to risk at least £1.4bn on rebuilding at Watford General.

Labour yesterday committed itself to the towering infirmary project at Watford General. The Tories have said they would do the same.

BUT A DEVASTATING AND DETAILED NEW ANALYSIS BY DACORUM HEALTH ACTION GROUP AND THE NEW HOSPITAL CAMPAIGN SHOWS THAT THIS WILL BE A BIG FINANCIAL GAMBLE - AS WELL AS A BAD DEAL FOR PATIENTS ACROSS WEST HERTS

The report, 'Unaffordable and Unfair - the Wasteful Watford Hospital Project' reveals that the plans for Watford General:

• Will cause years of disruption that will affect patients and staff
• Are unaffordable and unfair
• Will not meet the needs of people across West Herts
• Are likely to place the West Hertfordshire Teaching Hospitals Trust in a very difficult financial position, which would have worrying repercussions for patient care.

The link to the report is below:

Wasteful-Watford-DHAG

 

 


BED CUTS ON WAY IN WATFORD REBUILD?

Recent changes to the plans for Watford General's new facility will likely mean a slightly lower set of tower blocks.

Instead of the threatened 16 storey, 260 foot monster, a video shows one that features three towers of 12 or maybe 13 storeys each - the hospital equivalent of 18 or 19 residential floors.

That's good news - the New Hospital Campaign has been attacking the plans for the tallest NHS building outside central London, so we won't complain if it's scaled down a bit.

BUT THERE IS A BIG CATCH

Reducing the scale of the buildings may mean lopping several wards off each tower - with the loss of a fair number of beds.

That could well mean that the new Watford Hospital facility will have too few beds for our future needs.

The original plans for the new Watford building would have seen enough room for the 960-plus beds needed for the next few decades in West Hertfordshire.

But a lower building at Watford would not be able to accommodate the beds we should have. It would probably have fewer beds than we have now.

The problem, of course, is the tiny site left for redevelopment at Watford  - it's just not big enough.

New thinking is needed about a new site - but don't expect it from our local NHS bosses

 


VERDICT ON FUTURE OF MOUNT VERNON SEEMS TO BE 'ANYWHERE BUT WATFORD GENERAL'

People commenting on the social media network Nextdoor have given a big thumbs down to the idea of moving the Mount Vernon Cancer Centre (MVCC) to Watford General.

It's unscientific, but the outcome from over 70 comments to a post asking for opinions on Mount Vernon (with over 10,000 views) was that:

  • The proposed move of MVCC to Watford General was not supported by a single commenter
  • Many people want to keep MVCC where it is, with greenery near at hand
  • Few people accept the argument that it would be safer and better to move MVCC next to an acute hospital where patients who need it can easily get life-saving treatment quickly

Hers is the link to the Nextdoor post and comments:

https://nextdoor.co.uk/p/cdFXHTR75nY8?utm_source=share&extras=MTc1OTIyMDU3MzExNjE%3D&utm_campaign=1715790018169

As it happens, there is a fairly strong case for moving cancer treatment centres close to acute hospitals with all the backup, ICUs etc.

But what people seem to be saying is that they want treatment to be in a place where they can enjoy some light and space while going through their often difficult times. Of course Watford General will have even less light and space after the towering infirmary has been built.

ONE OBVIOUS OPTION IS TO BUILD A NEW MVCC TOGETHER WITH A DECENT, WELL-PROPORTIONED, HUMAN-SCALE NEW WEST HERTS ACUTE HOSPITAL ON A NEW SITE AWAY FROM CRAMPED VICARAGE ROAD.

BUT THE NHS WON'T LISTEN TO THAT AND WON'T EVEN TRY TO LOOK FOR SUCH A SITE 

 


MOUNT VERNON CONSULTATION COULD UPEND WATFORD GENERAL PLANS

There was very bad news for the West Herts Trust recently as the NHS decided to ask the public what should happen to the Mount Vernon Cancer Centre (MVCC). A public consultation is being planned for later this year.

MVCC is an excellent facility and serves a big population in the south and east.

But it's falling down and urgently needs replacement next to an acute hospital where patients can be supported if they are very ill during cancer treatment.

The NHS want to build a replacement building squeezed in between Watford General and Watford FC, but that would almost certainly mean one of two very poor outcomes. Either:

  • Building at the same time as the towering West Herts infirmary is constructed at Watford General, causing even more chaos, contamination, noise and dust for patients in the existing hospital, or
  • Waiting to start building until the tower blocks are finished - 2031 is the target but 2032 is more likely.

The second is much more likely. That will mean a decade more of crumbling at MVCC.

Surely the NHS should urgently consider a potentially quicker and certainly better solution - a clear new site for both West Herts new acute hospital AND MVCC.

The Trust will be upset with the consultation as it opens up the possibility of a solution that does not involve their beloved Vicarage Road site.

The New Hospital Campaign will be putting this case when the MVCC consultation starts.

 

 

 

 


TRUST AT ODDS WITH HEALTH SECRETARY OVER START DATE FOR WATFORD'S TOWERING INFIRMARY

West Herts Trust caused confusion last week when it disagreed with the Health Secretary over the target start date for building the proposed Watford General towering infirmary.

A Trust release claimed on Friday that building work for the 260-foot triple-towered redeveloped hospital is 'expected to get underway in 2025'  This contradicts a recent statement by Health Secretary Victoria Atkins that construction was 'due to start at the end of 2026'.

As well as the muddle over the date, the Trust's Friday release reheated the discredited claim that the hospital would be 'fully funded'. Press reporting recently exposed this as meaningless because

a) there is no final clarity about what the project will provide, and

b) all figures are subject to government spending reviews - at a time when budgets are being tightened

The release also appeared to show little understanding of how health professionals are trained, claiming that:

'As one of the biggest employers in the area, with 5,800 staff, the Trust will continue to develop a pipeline of future doctors, nurses and clinicians from the local area, working in close partnership with West Herts College and other partners.'

This suggests that staff will come entirely from West Herts.  It also hints that doctors and nurses are not clinicians.

Most oddly of all, the release gives the impression that West Herts College has a medical school. That College is an excellent institution but it does not train doctors.  

People want facts about their hospitals, not muddle and spin.