A COUNCIL has unanimously condemned plans to cut services at hospitals across south Essex.

Representatives from across all parties on Southend Council criticised a treat and transfer scheme which would stop hospitals being all purpose centres and lead to patients being moved around for treatment.

The sustainability transformation partnership, made up of those commissioning health services in south and mid Essex, came up with the scheme.

It is hoped it will save money but concerns have been raised about reducing services at Southend, Basildon and Broomfield Hospitals.

Labour leader councillor Ian Gilbert called for councillors to back a motion put forward by the party calling for the overview and scrutiny committee to call in the decision for Health Secretary Matt Hancock to examine.

Following the meeting, on Thursday, he said: “I am delighted the council was able to speak with one voice and recognise the fact that we have serious concerns about the consultation process for the plans, and how they will impact people’s care.

“We will have to see the outcome of the joint health overview and scrutiny meeting, however I believe we should be prepared to contact the secretary.”

A spokesman from campaign group Save Southend NHS said: “We are elated that it was a unanimous vote in support of Labour’s extremely well-written motion, which echoed the core concerns we have continually raised throughout the shambolic public engagement and consultation period.

“Our campaign is now looking towards a decision from the joint health overview and scrutiny to refer the plan back to the secretary of state and put in place a transparent and detailed plan which does not disadvantage local people’s care and outcomes in order to save money.”

Dave Murray, Save Basildon NHS campaigner, said: “It’s great that the council has come to its senses on the plans, which I do not believe can possibly serve south Essex efficiently.

“I think this vote will create a ripple – when even Conservative councillors are standing up to their own Government then we need to think about who is convinced by these proposals.”

Committee chairman Bernard Arscott said: “The unanimous decision sends a strong message, but I believe that it would be jumping the gun to refer to the secretary of state before we meet on August 30. It is important we hear opinions from across the partnership and really take the time to challenge and scrutinise.”