Agenda and draft minutes

18.1     The minutes of the meeting held on 18 September 2025 were agreed as a correct record.

19.1     Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Sam Adeniji, Councillor Kara Bishop, Councillor Christine Brett, Councillor Terry Byrne, Councillor Graham Shaw and Jennifer Twist.

Disclosures by all members present of personal interests in matters on the agenda, the nature of any interest and whether the member regards the interest as prejudicial under the terms of the Code of Conduct.

20.1     There were no disclosures of interest.

Notification of items which the Chair considers to be urgent and proposes to take at the appropriate part of the agenda. Any members who wish to raise urgent items are asked, wherever possible, to notify the Chair before the start of the meeting. In so doing, they must state the special circumstances which they consider justify the matter being considered urgent.

21.1     There were no urgent items.

22.1     The Committee considered a report on the NHS Sussex Winter Plan 2025/26. The Winter Plan sets out how the local health and social care system planned to effectively manage the capacity and demand pressures anticipated during the Winter period. The Winter Plan is both a Sussex-wide plan and a whole-system health and social care plan, recognising the needs of the local population. The Winter Plan 2025-26 reflected on lessons learned from winter 2024-25 and other system pressures. The plan included: progress to date; key risks impacting services provision; preparation and performance of elective and non-elective services; a staff wellbeing focus; continued focus on discharge and admission avoidance; plans for seasonal illness including infection control and vaccination plans; and key system performance measures and monitoring. Identified from learning in winter 2024-25, the system would continue to focus on patient discharge, flow, vaccination and supporting the workforce.

22.2     The Committee asked what the current status of flu cases was in East Sussex.

22.3     Richard Milner, Chief of Staff, East Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust (ESHT), responded that although ESHT sites had observed a spike in the rate of flu and Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV) cases recently, this was not uncommon and not unplanned for. Communications were being deployed to encourage staff and patients to wear face masks in high volume areas and minimise face-to-face meetings, to promote a safer environment and manage the spread. The flu was not causing concern from an operational management perspective, but ESHT were investing in planning and prevention, to keep staff and patients safe over the winter period.

22.4     The Committee asked what the system was doing to promote vaccination, including in the workforce, schools and the wider population.

22.5     Rachael Kramer, Deputy Director of Emergency Preparedness, Resilience and Response, NHS Sussex, responded that the flu vaccination uptake in East Sussex was at 57% of the target population (those that are eligible for vaccination). The ICB was doing a range of communication work in the lead up to Christmas to promote vaccinations, including advertorials in Sussex World, weekly newsletters online, messaging from the Chief Nurse advocating vaccination, advertisements on bus stops (particularly those in Hastings), and a social media Q&A with Lewes District Council leaders. The ICB aimed to increase staff flu vaccination uptake by a minimum 5% across all NHS Trusts in East Sussex, which was being addressed by offering staff bookable clinics, delivering vaccinations on wards directly to staff via roving vaccinators. An informal community of practice was developed with the support of the ICB to support staff to get vaccinated and address challenges, such as with the booking system, sharing best practice and mutual support to improve vaccination rates.

22.6     The Committee noted that the plan highlights the need for timely discharge to improve patient flow in hospitals, and asked what capacity Adult Social Care (ASC) has to support timely discharge.

22.7     Mark Stainton, Director of Adult Social Care, East Sussex County Council (ESCC), responded that patients are often discharged to the independent  ...  view the full minutes text for item 22.

23.1     The Committee considered a report on the ESHT Capital Works Programme, which sets out the major works in ESHT sites as well as hospital equipment and ongoing repairs to infrastructure. Chris Hodgson, ESHT Director of Estates, introduced the report, highlighting the now-operational Sussex Surgical Centre (SSC) and it’s attached endoscopy unit; the cardiology programme; the refurbishment of the thrombolysis (East Dean) ward at EDGH; upgrades to radiology at the Conquest site; and £10.3m in grant funding for the upgrade of infrastructure such as electrical and ventilation systems and fire compartmentation on sites.

23.2     The Committee noted residents’ concerns about the need for repairs, especially to the roof, at Conquest Hospital, asked what proportion of the £10.3m grant funding was planned to be allocated across hospital sites.

23.3     Chris Hodgson responded that the funding was planned to be split across all three sites, and that repairs to the roof at Conquest Hospital were significant and ongoing; £350,000 had been spent in 2025 on repairs to the roof. The roof needed to be replaced, but funding so far had been insufficient to carry out a full replacement. Additionally, the majority of electrical infrastructure repairs would be conducted at the Conquest site, due to the way equipment is distributed throughout the site. There was not a large discrepancy in spending between EDGH and Conquest Hospital, but EDGH occupied an older site than Conquest, which meant more repairs were required. Andrew Strevens, ESHT Chief Finance Officer, noted that the £10.3m had been distributed between EDGH and Conquest Hospital, and exact figures could be provided to the Committee outside of the meeting.

23.4     The Committee asked what the impact of delays to the New Hospitals Programme has been on service provision at EDGH.

23.5     Chris Hodgson explained that ESHT is part of a number of replacement hospitals through the New Hospitals Programme, which is managed by the Department of Health and Social Care. The new hospital at EDGH was in Wave 2, which will now not commence until 2037, leaving a number of years to allocate that funding. The original plans involved all three hospital sites, but EDGH was at greatest risk due to the age of the site. This was the reason for securing critical infrastructure risk funding to repair the site, using ESHTs own funds and national funding. £750m was being allocated nationally over for four years for the programme, and they were confident this funding could be secured in future years also.

23.6     Andrew Strevens clarified that the £750m of national funding had been allocated across 7 regions nationally, and that the allocation for the South East was around £150m. Within the funding, ESHT were given indicative allocations of expected funding per hospital, as well as expected funding for critical infrastructure risk. The estates team had drawn up a 10-year plan in terms of the infrastructure that needs to be replaced and modified, which would be used as a basis for placing funding bids.

23.7     The Committee noted from previous site  ...  view the full minutes text for item 23.

24.1     The Committee considered a report regarding ESHT’s proposals for changes to the Uckfield Day Surgery Unit (DSU), including whether this change represents a ‘substantial variation’ to services, requiring a consultation with HOSC. Simon Dowse introduced the report, which highlighted the reasons for the proposals, including only being able to support local anaesthetic on site, progression in day surgery services, some activities no longer requiring surgery or being offered in other settings, and some NHS pathways no longer being supported. ESHT conducted a review of the site and found that: there were limited opportunities to increase utilisation of the unit; significantly more of the services provided at Uckfield DSU could be provided at EDGH, with the same capacity; 88% of patients using Uckfield DSU lived closer to EDGH or Conquest Hospital were travelling across county to access the site; and that moving the DSU to acute sites would have a beneficial impact on waiting times.

24.2     The Committee noted a correction to the covering sheet to the report, which reads:

            ‘The Day Surgery Unit (DSU) delivers approximately 13% of ESHT’s overall day surgery activity’.

And should instead read:

‘The DSU activity contributes approximately 13% of Trust activity at the site’.

Uckfield DSU contributes a total of approximately 1.2% of Trust overall elective activity.

24.3     The Committee asked what the impact of the service reprovision would be for staff employed at Uckfield DSU.

24.4     Mike Farrer responded that focus groups were conducted with staff throughout the pilot scheme and there were a mixture of views among staff wishing to relocate to acute sites or continue working at Uckfield. However, staff recognised the benefits for patients that were shown during the pilot and understood the reasons for the move. Staff were on temporary redeployment and were keen for the process to be concluded as soon as possible. ESHT were in contact with staff regularly to find appropriate permanent positions for all staff from Uckfield DSU and were not seeking to reduce staffing levels.

24.5     Alys Morris, Consultant General and Colorectal Surgeon ESHT, confirmed that work had been undertaken to try and increase activity on site at Uckfield DSU, however it had not been possible to make maximum use of the facility. The Getting it Right First Time (GIRFT) programme requires that procedures are conducted in the appropriate settings and the DSU only being equipped for local anaesthetic limited the surgeries that could be carried out on site. Most patients would be more appropriately treated in procedure rooms or the Sussex Surgical Centre (SSC).

24.6     The Committee asked if patients were able to elect to receive treatment at other non-ESHT sites such as Princess Royal or Royal Sussex hospitals.

24.7     Simon Dowse confirmed that the service could be accessed wherever it was available, but that this should be discussed between patients and their GP when the referral is made for treatment.

24.8     The Committee asked how local and national guidance about bringing services closer to the local community is being applied in this  ...  view the full minutes text for item 24.

25.1     Ashley Scarff provided an update from NHS Sussex regarding national and local changes to the NHS, including some service changes. This included the following updates:

• Following the decision to merger NHS Sussex and Surrey Heartlands from April 2026, the new Chair of the ICB and Chief Executive were appointed from 1 October and the first public joint board meeting between NHS Sussex and Surrey Heartlands had been held.
• There will be a national funding mechanism in place to facilitate the redundancy scheme resulting from the merger, and in line with other ICBs, voluntary redundancy was being offered to staff. A further redundancy programme would take place following the merger in April 2026.
• The ICB were reviewing planning and commissioning intentions for 2026-27, including the localisation of the 10-year plan for health.
• The ICB were moving from a 12-month planning cycle to a 5-year planning cycle, to make more strategic plans for the medium-term.
• NHS England had published its Strategic Commissioning Framework, which clarified the remit of the ICB in its reduced capacity, and the increasing role of providers in commissioning services.

25.2     The Committee asked for an update on Integrated Community Teams and on the merger of the South East Coast Ambulance Service (SECAmb) and the South Central Ambulance Service (SCAS).

25.3     Ashley Scarff responded that an update regularly is given to the East Sussex Health and Wellbeing Board about Integrated Community Teams, so information about this was in the public domain. He added that SECAmb would likely want to be involved with any future updates to the HOSC about changes to their service.

25.4     The Committee asked if the voluntary redundancies would be frontline or back room staff.

25.5     Ashley Scarff responded that the ICB is largely not a frontline workforce, but frontline capacity was being ringfenced by the ICB where appropriate to protect those jobs that did exist where possible. The ICB did not anticipate frontline job losses, this would likely be in management and back room staff.

25.6     The Committee expressed concerns about future staff losses impacting working relationships with the ICB and asked how the ICB was ensuring continued engagement with the VCSE sector.

25.7     Ashley Scarff responded that the ICB have been holding vacancies for a number of months to downsize in a more managed way. The ICB were assembling an executive team and assessing its underpinning structure but remained committed to engaging locally. He confirmed that some touchpoints might change, and that the VCSE sector would still be able to engage with providers and Integrated Care Team leaders to continue engagement with the health system.

25.8     The Committee asked how the ICBs capacity for engagement with scrutiny might look in the future.

25.9     Ashley Scarff responded that the ICB and NHS commissioning were undergoing significant changes, that had been determined nationally, which would change the ICBs functions and responsibilities. This included a potential increased role of the Department of Health/NHS England in oversight of the performance of providers. The Strategic Commissioning  ...  view the full minutes text for item 25.

26.1     The Committee considered a report providing an overview of progress made by ESHT on the implementation of the Cardiology Transformation programme, including in relation to the recommendations made by the Committee in its review conducted in 2022 and the response from that. Mike Farrer noted that there had been some small delays to the implementation of the programme, which was complicated by ward moves, but the cardiac response teams had been put in at both sites, and the programme was doing very well operationally.

26.2     Cllr Mike Turner raised concerns that patients weren’t able to access the stroke centre at Conquest Hospital, to be stabilised before being transferred to EDGH, and asked how ESHT were ensuring that residents were being treated as soon as possible to prevent conditions from worsening.

26.3     Professor Nik Patel, Senior Consultant Cardiologist ESHT, responded that it would be in patients’ best interest to access the stroke unit at EDGH, as this is a Centre for Excellence. In an emergency, if a patient is unstable, it is imperative that residents must go to their local A&E, where patients can then be transferred to EDGH if needed; a pre-screening call would be conducted to assess if it is appropriate to transfer stroke patients from other hospitals to the stroke centre at EDGH. The ICB were working on a pan-Sussex model of care for a single stroke service, whereby a stroke physician would instruct and deliver treatment using AI and telemedicine. He added that NICE guidelines advise that patients go to a stroke centre as soon as possible for treatment, and to go to the closest A&E if the patient is unstable. He confirmed that he was not aware of any issues in the community-to-Eastbourne pathway.

26.4     The Committee requested to be provided with information regarding the distance travelled by patients to access the service and asked how transport information was provided to patients who lacked internet access.

26.5     Mike Farrer confirmed that transport information was provided on letters to patients, as well as a phone number that could be contacted for support, in addition to the existing information on the website.

26.6     Professor Nik Patel added that the pathway for cardiology remains predominantly the same, as acute heart attacks remain directed to either Trust site. Around 200 patients are transferred to the single site at EDGH per year for angioplasty, 50% in hours and 50% out of hours. ESHT have found that staff have been engaged in delivering the transformation programme, and since 27 October 2025, 425 patients have been admitted to specialist cardiac teams at Conquest Hospital, with a response rate of less than an hour. Of those patients, around 11% (approximately 50) were discussed for transfer to EDGH for either assessment or procedure.

26.7     Cllr Mike Turner asked if ESHT had any plans to introduce thrombectomies to EDGH.

26.8     Professor Nik Patel responded that the procedure for stroke is always thrombolysis followed by thrombectomy, and patients will be transferred to a centre  ...  view the full minutes text for item 26.

27.1     The Committee discussed the items on the future work programme.

27.2     The Committee RESOLVED to: 

1)    Schedule a report on NEPTS to its meeting on 5 March 2026;

2)    Schedule a report on the new Neighbourhood Mental Health teams to a future meeting; and

3)    Receive an update on the SECAmb CQC report as a written report via email.

28.1     None.