Handling of closure of vulnerable adult day centre branded ‘a disgrace’

Bucks councillors looking over the decision to close Burnham Short Breaks day centre have said they are ‘very dissatisfied’ with how things have been done.

Last month, the council’s cabinet voted through proposals to close this service and others, concentrating the adult care offering for people with complex needs to fewer day centres.

The decision sparked outcry among the family members of the vulnerable people with complex needs using this service.

Parents and carers have long argued that Burnham Short Breaks is an excellent day centre which should have been kept.

Indeed, at a meeting on Thursday, members of the health & adult social care select committee questioned this

Cllr Simon Rouse (Con, Chalfont St Giles & Little Chalfont), said: “I am confused, if I’m honest, about some of the decisions taken on [these] sites – given there had been investment in Burnham, I think to the tune of a million pounds.”

He also raised concerns over the two-month pause on the sale of Burnham Day Centre to allow bids for a community purchase, saying it was too short a time.

There had been ‘zero’ engagement from the council, he said – and families were forced to work in a ‘vacuum of information’ without any clarity on what was expected of them.

Cllr Rouse argued that this was ‘not the right way’ to do things and urged the council to ‘take a breath’ and consider a more ‘reasonable’ period of time.

He said it seemed as though the community saving the day centres ‘wasn’t meant to be a serious option.’

Other councillors agreed that the two-month timeframe is ‘seriously not good enough.’

Cllr Julia Wassell (IMPACT Alliance, Totteridge & Bowerdean) said that in her experience, it would be impossible, and it would take more like two years to jump through the necessary hoops.

“This idea that carers and service users of Burnham Day Centre are going to come up with a model to run this centre in two months is entirely ludicrous.

“It is extremely unfair and verging on unkind. It must have [caused] tremendous panic.”

“I’m very dissatisfied with this [process]. Altogether, it's a disgrace.”

Cllr Wassell also expressed dissatisfaction about where saved funds were going, expressing the view that it should be reinvested into supporting people with learning disabilities, not shuffled back into the council’s general contingency fund.

She accused Bucks council’s administration of ‘fleecing’ its patch of its capital assets.

Cabinet member for health and wellbeing, Cllr Isobel Darby, responded that she did not accept all these criticisms.

She reiterated that the council needs fewer buildings to provide building-based care for the small group of people who require it.

Regarding the narrow window of time for the community bid, Cllr Darby said that the marketing of the building will be delayed, meaning there will be more than two months for the community to decide if they are interested in taking on the facility.

Chair of the panel, Cllr Stuart Wilson (IMPACT Alliance, Flackwell Heath & The Wooburns) acknowledged that parts of the process had been ‘quite tin-eared’ towards carers.

While he acknowledged that Cllr Darby had ‘brought a bit of compassion’ to the table, he said that going forward, these matters ‘really need to be handled with considerably more sensitivity than we’ve seen at times.’