Published: 21st February 2014
• YOUR article about staff leaving Whittington Hospital and low morale brought about by continuing uncertainty about the future of the hospital and job cuts is really worrying for residents (Hospital chief latest to quit ‘a sinking ship’, February 14).
The Tory and Lib Dem coalition government keeps telling us that NHS budgets are protected. And yet the new chair of the hospital board, Steve Hitchins, a former Lib Dem leader of Islington Council, talked about making a £20million cut, mainly in staffing, at the February meeting of the board.
I therefore welcome the timely public meeting called by Defend the Whittington Hospital Coalition. Islington North MP Jeremy Corbyn will speak at the meeting in support of maintaining the Whittington as our general hospital that provides first-class jobs and health services to residents.
What is worrying, however, is that, while he has been invited to the meeting, Mr Hitchins is procrastinating about whether he will actually turn up or not.
I find this totally unacceptable as at his first board meeting he gave a commitment to consult local people on the future of their hospital and the health services it provides.
If he really cares about the hospital and the health of local people Mr Hitchins should attend the public meeting at 7pm on Monday, March 3, at St Mary’s Church, Brookfield, Dartmouth Park Hill, Archway.
Non-attendance would speak volumes and pose a serious question mark about Mr Hitchins’ true commitment to the Whittington and the health of local people.
Mayton Street, N7
• YOUR article refers to “long-standing staff who are over 60” (Threat to jobs as hospital chiefs are told they must cut extra £40m, February 7). This is a worrying statement and surely ageist?
What is so insidious about it is the way the language is trying to conceal what they are actually saying. I am totally insulted by these remarks, which are subtly worded, disguising some condescending and unpleasant sentiments.
I have noted how the phrase “loyal service” is juxtaposed with “tackling an ageing workforce”. Why would age alone require “tackling”? Very strange!
NAME AND ADDRESS SUPPLIED