Viewpoint: Implications of an over-burdened A&E

Email Viewpoint letters to or write to Viewpoint, Newspaper House, 48 Bell Street, Maidenhead, SL6 1HX.

Implications of an over-burdened A&E

Many of us received the message last week advising us not to go to hospital this weekend unless it was a severe or life-threatening condition, and read the Advertiser article (March 17) asking for our continued support.

Unfortunately, my son was very unwell – his doctor advised a call to 111 and after a video consultation he was rushed to Wexham Park A&E, at 6.30pm on a busy Friday night, and diagnosed with a ruptured lung.

While he was sitting in the crowded waiting area, a stream of new patients arrived – including people with a stubbed toe, a sprained ankle and someone who was feeling a bit dizzy.

My son was given CT scans and X-rays, and transferred overnight to John Radcliffe in Oxford for more specialist help.

He is one of the lucky ones – being young and fairly fit he is now recovering well and we are extremely grateful to both hospitals for all their care and attention, in what was a very worrying situation.

But what will we do when all of these new tower blocks are occupied?

When we have 40 per cent extra residents who all need treatment and care?

When all our green space is built on and our local hospital at St Mark’s remains closed?

When the queues of people, who just want the reassurance of speaking to a doctor, are all sent to A&E?

What then if all the people with stubbed toes are being treated by the people who need to be dealing with the more urgent cases and the seriously ill do not receive the care they need in time?

We need St Mark’s Hospital back, we need proper services for Maidenhead residents and their families, and we do not need to build 2,000 flats on the golf course.

We need our green lung in Maidenhead and after this incident that has deeply affected my family, I realise more than ever just how important a lung is.



Have a butcher’s at our old array of shops

Just after World War One, Maidenhead town centre was a vibrant and thriving place, with myriad shops, businesses and public buildings offering a huge variety of services to its customers.

Recollections, recorded in 1992 from a former Maidenhead shopkeeper, reveal a fascinating insight into the types and number of shops in the High Street, Queen Street and King Street at that time.

Here are a few:

Gentleman’s outfitters/tailors – 16

Women’s outfitters – 8

Drapers (fabrics) – 7

Shoe shops/repairers – 11

Tea Rooms – 12

Pubs – 17

Sweetshops/newsagents – 23

Grocers and greengrocers – 18

Butchers – 12

The list is extensive and contains several unusual retailers such as a furrier, basket maker and umbrella maker.

How times have changed.


Thames Crescent


Fewer bin collections could lead to vermin

I am writing regarding the waste collection system in the Maidenhead area.

I fully understand the council is pleased with the recycling which has been achieved.

However, the downside of the black bins being collected every fortnight is the smell of bins each week and the amount of residents taking household waste to various waste bins in Maidenhead, ie the Magnet Leisure Centre, outside Sainsbury’s and various bins in Cookham Road and St Mark’s Road.

This will encourage rats in the Maidenhead area in the summer.


Tavistock Close


Approach is ‘heads I win, tails you lose’

Hurley Village suffers from some parking issues in the summer and RBWM advised the best solution was to have painted lines on some of the village roads.

Not everyone who lives in Hurley is being given a say on the proposals and only the residents (not the property owners) living on the affected roads have a vote.

This contrasts with the approach taken by RBWM on Honey Lane in Hurley.

Here RBWM approved proposals to widen the road, tarmacking over greenbelt land and the unnecessary destruction of a decades old ecologically-sound hedge, to facilitate a planning application by one property owner on one side of Honey Lane.

None of the residents living on Honey Lane (nor any of the other property owners) were given a vote on this.

Why the different approaches in who gets a vote?

Is it because both seem to favour RBWM financially, with the probability of extra parking fines in Hurley (so RBWM want the villagers to vote for lines) and new council taxes on Honey Lane (so RBWM don’t want the villagers to say no to greenbelt destruction)?

Does this make our democracy for the voters, or RBWM?


Honey Lane


Not a great example by any criteria

Yesterday, looking through job vacancies advertised on the website of the Houses of Parliament, I came across a job, about which it said:

“If you would like to apply for this role, please submit an application providing evidence against criteria’s 1-5 in the Job Description.”

Proof – if indeed proof were needed – that this great country of ours is indeed in the best possible hands!


Moneyrow Green


Divide and rule is how Putin sees Brexit

It’s clear from Viewpoint (March 17) that contributors can be mistaken in their understanding of what others have written in previous submissions.

Brexit did not cause the invasion of Ukraine by Russian forces; that was the work of the aptly described ‘psychopath’ ruling the roost in the Kremlin.

What Brexit signalled to Vlad the Invader was that disinformation, either promulgated from Moscow or by the band of Leave-lie politicians, could make a small majority of voters decide in favour of what would weaken both their own country (financially and socially in the case of the UK) and the union of nations broadly opposed to the ethos of modern-day Russia.

Nigel Farage spoke often of his admiration of Vladimir Putin.

Most will know the concept of divide and rule and that’s precisely what this dictator is aiming for.

NATO is indeed the military defensive grouping, but sowing division in political areas will reap the rewards of financially weakened societies and populations arguing amongst themselves.

Indeed, D.R. Cooper seems to find it wrong for free nations with Russian borders to choose to apply to join NATO or the EU in case it upsets the ‘bear’.

Given that NATO is a defensive organisation and the EU is an economic grouping what threat could a Russian leadership feel, except that the threadbare economy and lawlessness over which it presides will eventually lead to internal dissent.

Those, like Evelyn Zivkovic, who wonder why so many Remain voters continue to criticise the outcome of the referendum should perhaps list the material benefits of leaving the EU, and then understand how much many people have lost because of the ham-fisted negotiation efforts of this laughable government.


Sutton Road


Editor's Picks

Most read

Top Articles