Elderly residents hit out at plans to cut emergency alarm system funding

Brian Hurford, Lily Gostill and Delphine Pay

Brian Hurford, Lily Gostill and Delphine Pay

First published in News by , Reporter

RESIDENTS at a sheltered housing estate in Basingstoke have hit out at Hampshire County Council after it announced plans to cut funding for emergency alarm systems.

The council is planning to cut services that are provided under its Supporting People programme in a bid to make £7.66million of savings by 2016.

The Supporting People programme is a Government-funded scheme that enables vulnerable residents, including the elderly and those with disabilities, to get housing-related support to live independently.

As part of the proposals being considered by Councillor Liz Fairhurst, executive member for adult social care and public health, the county plans to cut funding to emergency pull cord alarm systems in sheltered housing schemes around the borough by the end of September.

But residents at John Eddie Court, in St Michael’s Road, South Ham, have criticised the proposal.

The alarms, which are connected to a control centre in Newbury, allow elderly residents to signal if they need help, and then a warden or care worker can be sent to help them.

If plans are approved, residents in the greatest need could be given the option of the alternative Telecare system – a button alarm worn as a necklace or wristband – and other residents could be given the option of paying for the service.

Grandfather-of-six Brian Hurford, 67, told The Gazette: “If they (the county) keep cutting, what have we got left?

“I feel safer in knowing I have got the alarm, and that is what has made us all disgusted. We have got no protection, no one to call and all we will have are relatives to call – and some people haven’t got any relatives.”

Seventy-three-year-old Delphine Pay has gathered 100 signatures on a petition protesting about the planned cuts, and this will be handed to the county council.

She added: “We feel safer with the alarms and when a manager is here.”

But Cllr Fairhurst said the county “remains fully committed” to supporting vulnerable residents. She added: “We are in discussions with Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council as well as the other 10 district councils, support providers and other stakeholders about how services in Basingstoke and the rest of the county could be delivered in the future.”

In addition to the cuts proposed for the emergency alarm systems, contracts for housing projects for homeless people in the borough are to be extended until 2015, but will be subject to review.

The projects include the Joshua Tree Centre, in Worting Road, and Sandringham Court, in Paddock Road, South Ham.

A decision on the proposals will be made by Cllr Fairhurst on July 30.

Comments (1)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

10:14am Tue 29 Jul 14

Ambivalent says...

I'm baffled by the sense in making these cuts to something that in the big picture costs little and yet saves money.
Alarm systems provide security for elderly, frail and vulnerable. Without these alarm systems, it may be considered 'independent' housing is inappropriate, meaning more people will have to access some sort of residential care which would be a whole lot more expensive. Without access to the alarm systems, things like falls, health problems and emergencies and other issues may result in much more serious consequences including greater hospital admissions, people remaining in hospital longer and god forbid, increased deaths. That will cost a whole lot more money than the alarm system.
Maybe the most important thing that will be lost is the sense of security and safety, for elderly individuals and their families.
They are a form of insurance. In many cases they are probably rarely used, but having it there can prevent serious consequences.
I'm baffled by the sense in making these cuts to something that in the big picture costs little and yet saves money. Alarm systems provide security for elderly, frail and vulnerable. Without these alarm systems, it may be considered 'independent' housing is inappropriate, meaning more people will have to access some sort of residential care which would be a whole lot more expensive. Without access to the alarm systems, things like falls, health problems and emergencies and other issues may result in much more serious consequences including greater hospital admissions, people remaining in hospital longer and god forbid, increased deaths. That will cost a whole lot more money than the alarm system. Maybe the most important thing that will be lost is the sense of security and safety, for elderly individuals and their families. They are a form of insurance. In many cases they are probably rarely used, but having it there can prevent serious consequences. Ambivalent
  • Score: -2

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree