Action group still seeking support

Published on 14th December 2006 in Letters

Sir - As the chairman of the Holland House Action Group I was always diligent in ensuring that the public were well informed about the campaign. Now, as the former chairman, I am writing to you to clarify the position with regard to the campaign funding requirement, which has been debated (and therefore reported) in a way which could mislead.

The current situation is that the campaign is confronted with an appeal by PD Services Ltd set for the end of March 2007, in which the HHAG is a statutory participant. A second appeal is possible, indeed likely, from Partnerships in Care, although the company has not yet applied. If PiC do appeal then, depending on the timing, this may be heard at the same time as PD Services' appeal in March, thus significantly reducing the cost to the campaign, or it may be set for the end of 2007, which would incur the full cost if the HHAG decides to contest it.

It costs the HHAG around £20,000 to contest an appeal as a statutory participant, depending on the legal complexity and the economy of its approach. Accordingly, in the worst case, the fund needed to meet all legal challenges to the end of 2007 is estimated to be £35,000 to £40,000. While this potential commitment has been discussed many times by the HHAG committee, in which differing views prevail, no formal decision has ever been reached with a view to pulling out of the legal challenges on the grounds of cost. However, the HHAG constitution is clear in this respect in that the Action Group cannot commit to costs unless the money is in the bank.

The immediate need, though, is to challenge PD Services' appeal next March regarding the removal of Condition 2. This is clearly achievable in terms of cost. Our barrister and consultant have always worked with us using a stage-by-stage approach, in line with affordability. We cut our cloth accordingly, too, which often means that the HHAG members carry out much of the clerical work, such as obtaining witness statements, assembling evidence etc, and we are able to instruct our consultant on the use of expert witnesses at the appeal, again in line with affordability. This is how we have operated in the past. It needs commitment and a steady hand on the tiller, but it works and may bring the cost down to a more affordable level, say £15,000. Additionally, the HHAG already has over £6,000 in the bank, there are further potential opportunities to significantly increase this and with the application of some traditionally enthusiastic HHAG fund-raising we should be there.

I was delighted, therefore, that we were able to reach a decision at the HHAG committee meeting to proceed with a legal challenge to PD Services' appeal, as it is essential to the future of Holland House that this appeal is dismissed. Funding is still very much an issue and needs managing, but we can get there if we all try.

I urge you therefore: please support our new chairman, Keith Moore, and do whatever you can to help. The pay back is huge, and the cost is small for a big community. If we were all to contribute a tiny amount, it averages out at the cost of half a pint of beer each. This won't happen (we've tried it before) but the thought of it helps to bring the problem down to size, so let's go for it!

Roger Smith

(Former chairman, HHAG)