News

Campaigners criticise experimental design plans for Whipps Cross redevelopment

Campaigners fear the cheaper design, known as ‘Hospital 2.0’, will make patients ‘guinea pigs for untried methods of construction’, reports Josh Mellor, Local Democracy Reporter

Whipps Cross Hospital

Patients at the proposed new Whipps Cross Hospital risk being “guinea pigs” for a cheap new building method, campaigners have warned.

The Leytonstone hospital is one of the “40 new hospitals by 2030” promised by the government in October 2020.

But almost three years later, doubts have emerged about the cheaper standardised design, known as “Hospital 2.0” and the Treasury is unlikely to approve funding until “after 2025”. This standardised design is also called the “minimum viable product”.

According to a National Audit Office (NAO) review of the government’s plans, the Hospital 2.0 buildings will have the same cheaper modular design.

The NAO says this plan – to build hospitals as quickly and cheaply as possible to provide the “minimum viable set of services” – risks resulting in buildings that are “too small”.

The “minimum viable product” is also a marketing term for products that have just enough features to be usable by early customers, who can then provide feedback for better future models.

Speaking at a committee formed to scrutinise the Whipps Cross redevelopment plans, campaigners from Action4Whipps urged local councillors to challenge the government’s plans.

Eva Turner said patients will be “guinea pigs for untried methods of construction” because Whipps Cross is in the first group of hospitals to be built using the modular design.

Quoting the NAO report, she added: “It’s understandable that the National Hospital Programme continues to want to build the hospitals, but there continues to be substantial risk to value for money and that the hospital is either too small for the community or that the costs are inflated because so many hospitals are being built at the same time.”

Eva pointed out that a new low-cost, ahead-of-schedule hospital in Wales, The Grange University Hospital, has an emergency area that is “too small and unfit for purpose”.

She asked: “Will we face same sort of scandal as that of aerated concrete in our school buildings?”

Other concerns raised by the NAO and repeated by the campaigners include safety concerns about high bed occupancy in the new hospital, which is currently designed to have about 600 beds.

The government is hoping to take future pressure off acute hospitals by “shifting” care into the community to “cancel out” the demands of an ageing and growing population.

Most councillors and NHS representatives at the committee appeared not to respond directly to the campaigners’ warnings.

However, Redbridge councillor and committee deputy chair Beverly Brewer said she was “concerned” about the Hospital 2.0 methodology and rising costs of construction.

The exact budget for the new hospital, or the national programme, is unlikely to be confirmed before the next General Election, which must be held before January 2025.

However, according to the NAO report a new Whipps Cross Hospital will cost between £500 million and £1 billion.

Hospital redevelopment director Alastair Finney said the government has given him a budget estimate for the new hospital but only “in confidence” due to commercial sensitivity.

He added that a “clear explanation” of how the government reached that figure “remains elusive”.

Earlier this year, Alastair told the Health Service Journal a new hospital will cost at least £900 million.

Waltham Forest’s cabinet member for health and wellbeing Naheed Asghar later repeated the council’s commitment to redeveloping the hospital with facilities that are “fit for purpose”.

She added: “We’re very happy with the funding for the next stage works but there’s still a lot of work to be done with MPs, residents and councillors across the board to hold the government to account to ensure this happens without further delay.”

Meanwhile, the site of the proposed hospital at Whipps Cross remains a large temporary car park that needs to be replaced by a multi-storey car park that has not been funded.


No news is bad news 

Independent news outlets like ours – reporting for the community without rich backers – are under threat of closure, turning British towns into news deserts. 

The audiences they serve know less, understand less, and can do less. 

If our coverage has helped you understand our community a little bit better, please consider supporting us with a monthly, yearly or one-off donation. 

Choose the news. Don’t lose the news.

Monthly direct debit 

Annual direct debit

£5 per month supporters get a digital copy of each month’s paper before anyone else, £10 per month supporters get a digital copy of each month’s paper before anyone else and a print copy posted to them each month.  £50 annual supporters get a digital copy of each month's paper before anyone else.

Donate now with Pay Pal

More information on supporting us monthly or annually 

More Information about donations

Our newspaper and website are made possible by the support of readers and by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Please consider helping us to continue to bring you news by disabling your ad blocker or supporting us with a small regular payment.