St James Medical Practice – relocation of the practice surgery.

Many ward residents are patients of the practice and since the first proposal to relocate from County Court Road to a location well away from the town centre, have been very distressed at the idea and opposed to the move.

In 2018 therefore the forum was in discussion with the partners and the practice management. We were told that the move was imperative because of the very poor and cramped accommodation at the surgery and the desperate need for up-to date premises with sufficient parking to satisfy the doctors who practise there. At the time we were aggrieved that few patients were aware of a consultation that had been held and therefore had not participated, and that despite this the practice claimed overwhelming support for the move.

As the ward forum had heard nothing from the practice in the interim, (despite an assurance that we would be kept informed) and there were rumours that the entire move was on hold, indeed was unlikely now to take place, so we did not enquire further. This was, of course, remiss of us as headlines in the Lynn News on September 11 informed us of the latest situation and the commissioning of a developer.

We therefore wrote to the executive and senior partners, whom we had not previously met, once again expressing the concerns.

It is our understanding that a number of options and/or sites are being considered. These are:
1. The practice to remain where it is.
2. Removal to a site off Edward Benefer Way (opposite the fire station).
3. Removal to a site close to Hall Lane
4. The former Debenhams department store, High Street.
5. Removal to a site adjacent to the Innovation Centre, Nar Ouse Way, South Lynn.

In the absence of any information to the contrary, (there is nothing on the website to give any information on options or sites), we have had to make assumptions that these options and sites are correct.

On consulting our constituents – and SJMP patients – the overwhelming view is that the practice should remain where it is. This is because of ease of access which, we must emphasise, overwhelms all other considerations; even those with cars are loth to have to travel to the Edward Benefer Way, Hall Lane and Nar Ouse sites even with the advantages of ‘improved’ facilities.

For the same reason the former Debenhams store, situated in the town centre, runs a close second to option 1 – the practice remaining where it is.

We would hope that as medical practitioners the partners would appreciate the advantages of being able to walk to the surgery. The main objection to the more far-flung sites is the lack of public transport, which for those located to the north, south or east would entail a change of bus or train at the town centre. Even though there are buses to the Innovation Centre those living in the south of the borough do not necessarily have a stop nearby.

Previously we have been assured by the practice that public transport is available, but it is run by commercial operators and there is no assurance that any service will continue, especially as public funding is being systematically curtailed.

Taxis: in King’s Lynn school contracts dominate in the afternoon with the result that for long periods it is nigh impossible to get a taxi– even for those who do not find the cost prohibitive.

Changes in medical practice because of coronavirus.
The pandemic has shown that it is possible for face to face consultations to be replaced by telephone, email, Zoom and Skype and this has been vigorously adopted by most practises, including St James. Although we would certainly not advocate doing so, we do wonder whether practices will ever return to the former system. If so, are surgeries such as yours going to need facilities as they do now? Could the government be planning a complete change? And is this the time to reconsider before investing in what might well prove to be unnecessary investment?

Patient survey
Some of our elderly constituents are ignorant of the existence of the patient survey because
a) they have not been alerted to it, b) have not yet been invited to fill in a paper version, c) access to the reception desk, (where the previous one was available) is not easy at present and d) do not have access to computers.

We therefore forwarding on such information as we have on the proposed move to our constituents and urging them to complete the questionnaire.

The letter was copied to the NHS Norfolk and Waveney, CCG, in the hope that there would be consideration of our views. However in mid November we learned that intent upon relocating, the Hall Lane site was now being worked on; Debenhams had been rejected.