EMERGENCY general emergency surgery is to be removed from Pembrokeshire’s Withybush hospital as part of a wide range of changes backed following by Hywel Dda University Health Board.

Last year, the Health Board consulted with its communities on options for change in critical care, dermatology, emergency general surgery, endoscopy, ophthalmology, orthopaedics, stroke, radiology and urology.

It said its Clinical Services Plan focuses on nine healthcare services that are “fragile and in need of change”.

At the launch of the consultation it said the services, and potential changes at the four main hospitals of Haverfordwest’s Withybush, Carmarthen’s Glangwili, Llanelli’s Prince Philip and Aberystwyth’s Bronglais, would see no changes to how people access emergency care (A&E) or minor injury care as part of the consultation.

These nine clinical services were selected because of risks to them being able to continue to offer safe, high-quality services, or care in a timely manner, the board has previously said.

The proposed changes included an option for Withybush patients needing specialist critical care being transferred to Glangwili.

Another option, in Ceredigion, included the loss of Bronglais’s stroke service, becoming a ‘treat and transfer’ hospital, with patients transferred to other hospitals in the board area, including Withybush for their inpatient stroke care.

During the consultation, communities shared an additional 190 alternative ideas for the services, which have been narrowed down to 22 alternatives to the multiple options outlined in the consultation.

At a two-day meeting into the proposed changes, held on February 18 and 19, the board backed changes into emergency general surgery which will see no emergency general surgery operations taking place at Withybush, but a strengthening of the same-day emergency care (SDEC).

For the other three hospitals, there would be no change in emergency general surgery provision, other than a strengthening of SDEC at Glangwili.

Members stressed the changes would not happen overnight, with the board hearing from chief executive Phil Kloer the changes were about “improving the quality of service for the public,” adding a Pembrokeshire public-preferred option of emergency general surgery operations taking place on alternate weeks, with a similar arrangement at Glangwili, had raised concerns from clinicians and managers.

The Board also backed changes to the critical care service, which will see the current intensive care units situation remaining the same at all hospitals other than Prince Philip, which will see the Intensive care unit (with transfer of sickest patients) changed to an enhanced care unit.

Reacting to the change, local Senedd member Paul Davies MS: “I’m appalled that Hywel Dda University Health Board has voted to remove general emergency services from Withybush hospital – but I’m not surprised.

“The Health Board is obsessed with removing services from Pembrokeshire and has spent years downgrading and removing services from Withybush hospital. As one constituent has rightly said, the Board should be rebranded the Carmarthenshire Health Board, as it continues to strip assets from other hospitals in west Wales.”

He added: “Removing general emergency services critically undermines the sustainability of Withybush hospital’s A&E department and will result in patients having to be transported for urgent treatment.

“This is not acceptable – I will be taking this to the Welsh Government and urging Ministers to intervene and stop the Health Board from making this catastrophic decision.”

PEMBROKE & MONKTON Local History Society will welcome a leading Tudor historian to its next meeting on Saturday, March 7, promising a fascinating insight into the lives of women in the sixteenth century.

Guest speaker Melita Thomas will present a talk titled The Life and Times of Tudor Women, drawing on research from her acclaimed book 1000 Tudor People. The talk will explore the social, legal, political and economic challenges faced by women during the Tudor period, while also examining how some were able to carve out their own paths in areas such as trade, literature and even warfare.

Organisers say the event will offer a fresh perspective on whether Tudor women’s lives were as restricted as often portrayed, highlighting both the hardships and opportunities of the era.

Melita is the founder of the popular Tudor Times website and a member of the Tudor Players performance group. Alongside researching and writing books, she is currently undertaking a PhD at University College London.

Doors open at 10:00am for coffee, with the talk beginning at 11:00am. The event takes place at Pembroke Town Hall, where the Pembroke Museum and Council Chamber — located on the first floor — will also be open to visitors. A lift is available for disabled access.

The society has also announced that Pembroke Museum has reopened following its winter closure. The museum is open from 10:00am to 12:30pm Monday to Friday, with hours extended until 3:00pm from Easter. Entry is free.

For more information, visit www.pembrokeandmonktonhistory.org.uk or follow the society on Facebook. Enquiries can be sent to [email protected].

PLANS to turn one Pembrokeshire seaside village home into three have been refused by the national park.

In an application to Pembrokeshire Coast National Park, Peter Parker of the nearby New Hedges-based Park House Court Nursing Home, through agent Halsall Lloyd Partnership, sought permission for the reconfiguration of Sunningdale, The Glen, Saundersfoot, from a single family house, to provide three independent dwellings.

The application also included the addition of a storey; reconfiguration of existing internal layout; removal of existing flat roof, and introduction of pitched roof and new vehicle access, along with changes to external hardstanding.

Saundersfoot Community Council objected to the scheme, saying: “There was discussion about how many properties in the Glen have greatly expanded the size of the original buildings and that there was no on-street parking at all.”

It recommended refusal on the grounds there would be a “significant need” for additional parking with the extra dwellings, there was a risk it would become a holiday let, and an established hedge would need to be removed for the extra parking spaces.

The council’s highways department also objected on highway safety grounds, “citing inadequate visibility from the proposed secondary access, insufficient turning provision within the site, and concerns regarding parking provision,” an officer report for park planners said.

The report, recommending refusal, said the scheme would see the creation of one two-bed flat, and two three-bed houses.

It said, following a site notice, members of the public had objected raising concerns including overdevelopment of the site, increase parking demands and traffic congestion, impact on neighbours, and it “could set an unwelcome precedent for similar projects in the area”.

The report said that, while the principle of the scheme is “potentially acceptable” it would represent “a significant intensification of the use of the site,” which is “compounded by the physical alterations required to facilitate the scheme”.

It said the proposed elevations would introduce “a more complex and vertically dominant form, with multiple pitched gables and a markedly increased height to the central section of the building,” which would have the potential for “an overbearing relationship and increased overlooking” impact on neighbouring properties.

It said the highways objections were “of particular significance,” saying: “In this instance, it is considered that the proposal fails to demonstrate that safe and policy-compliant access, turning and parking arrangements can be achieved to serve three independent dwellings.

“The scheme therefore represents an overdevelopment of the plot, in that the intensity of use proposed cannot be accommodated without resulting in unacceptable highway safety impacts.”

It finished by concluding “the proposal fails to demonstrate that the site can accommodate three independent dwellings without unacceptable impacts on highway safety and the amenities of neighbouring occupiers,” adding: “The development is therefore considered unacceptable and is recommended for refusal.”

The application was refused by park planners.