The Petition of a resident of the UK,
Declares that the Petitioner objects to the proposed closure of Suffolk Court Care Home in Yeadon; further that with the increase in numbers and age of older people in our community, Suffolk Court is a vital resource, providing security and practical care for those unable to be sustained at home by community services; further that closing Suffolk Court would undermine services to the elderly and vulnerable in Yeadon.
The Petitioner therefore requests that the House of Commons call upon Leeds City Council to reassess its priorities and keep this essential service open.
And the Petitioner remains, etc.—[Presented by Greg Mulholland, Official Report, 19 June 2013; Vol. 564, c. 1022.]
Observations from the Secretary of State for Health, received 18 July 2013:
Local authorities are responsible for providing social care services, including residential care, in their areas. Local authorities are autonomous public bodies and it is a matter for the local authority concerned to decide how best to meet the need for social services, including residential care, in its area. It would not be appropriate for Government Ministers to intervene in such matters, provided of course that local authorities are acting lawfully.
It is for the local authority concerned to decide how best to meet the need for social care services. Local authorities are entitled to review their direct provision of residential care and other services to see if they can achieve a higher quality of care and better value for money.
Ministers do understand how traumatic it can be for frail, older and vulnerable people who have to be moved from residential care homes which have become their true homes. In considering changes to the extent of their direct provision of residential care, local authorities should ensure that, if care homes have to close and residents have to move, such moves are handled sensitively, with full account taken of the welfare and wishes of residents and staff of the homes concerned.