Contact David (Constituents Only)

If you wish to contact me in my role as a Health Minister, you can do so here

As of 3rd May, Parliament has dissolved and therefore there are no Members of Parliament until a new Parliament is elected on June 8th. Parliamentary rules prevent me from taking on any new casework or acting as an MP. Warrington South will elect a new MP on June 8th.

If you do not wish your comments to be published on this page, please make sure you check the "Don't post this publicly" box.

Showing 762 reactions

  • commented 2017-02-15 09:45:50 +0000
    I wanted to gain support in opposing the new school l finding. Is it not important to educate the next generation correctly and adequately?

    If Warrington children could suffer is it not work fighting?

    Could this not cause behavioural problems?

    Please help finding reforms to be equal.
  • commented 2017-02-14 18:13:00 +0000
    Dear David,

    I am a parent of a child at Lymm High School. I am writing to express my horror at the proposed funding cuts to Warrington schools. I understand your party wishes to reduce state spending. But to cut education funding is contrary to the ethos of any civilised (and wealthy) society. Please do not respond with a cut and paste answer talking about protected funding. This protected funding is ‘flat’ and does not account for year on year costs such as increased pension contributions and the apprenticeship levy. I heard some of your colleagues in parliamentary debate blame the situation on the Labour Party giving too much to other schools. Well, that is not the fault of my child and they should not be punished for something which you claim happened over 7 years ago. As soon as South Warrington voters realise that voting for austerity cuts as per your 2015 manifesto, means losing teachers, increasing class sizes, reduced A level choices, no trips, no TAs no foreign language assistants, no text books….you will surely find it hard to fight the next election claiming to be the best person to represent us.
  • commented 2017-02-11 13:51:54 +0000
    Dear Mr Mowat,

    As I’m sure that you’re aware, the term for Warrington’s current MYP is ending next month and so the youth council are looking for a new candidate. Since I am applying for the position, I have been researching some of their campaigns, including mental health services for young people. Currently, the time a child has got to wait after being diagnosed with a mental illness to receive counselling from CAMHS, is around 3 to 4 months. Which I’m sure you’ll agree with me,is not an acceptable length of time for a mentally ill young person to go without professional help. What is of severe concern for me, is that you, as Under Health Secretary of State and the MP for Warrington South, actually voted against increasing the funding for children’s mental health services.Despite the fact that the fact that the youth parliament of your constituency are actively campaigning for improved mental health facilities; which isn’t particularly surprising given how hard it is for young people to access these services.

    I hope what I’ve said has helped you reflect on your decision.

    Yours Sincerely,

    Imogen Walsh, 15
  • commented 2017-02-10 14:33:09 +0000
    I write to you concerning the Unitary Patent Court Agreement (UPCA) , details of which have just come to light in the press. It is disturbing that MPs , having just voted through consent to invoke article 50 were, it seems, planning to push this agreement through Parliament in defiance of the wished of the British people to sever all legal ties with the EU.

    It seems that Douglas Carswell, MP for Clacton, is today putting down and EDM objecting to the UPCA.

    I would like to know why no other MP has seen fit to do so, since it would tie the UK to the ECJ when the British people have clearly voted for complete withdrawal from the EU and it’s influence over the UK. I have seen a video clip of a briefing about the UPCA showing one of the key supporters of the UPC, lawyer Kevin Mooney, saying he hopes the Daily Express does not find out about the treaty. Well the press HAS found out and now so has the British people.

    It would appear that the Government has recorded the UPCA as a ‘negative statutory instrument’ which means it will automatically be passed unless an MP formally objects. The Government should be made aware that the people will not tolerate this underhand attempt to bind us in any way the EU or the ECJ, which we have instructed them we dot wish to happen and which MPs through their vote on Wednesday 8th February, have accepted.

    It is this kind of action that has caused the British people to lose faith in it’s elected representatives and will, no doubt, be reflected at the ballot box at the earliest opportunity.

    I would be interested to hear your views on this matter.


    Barry Eckersley
  • commented 2017-02-09 07:41:08 +0000
    Dear Mr. Mowat,

    Once again I find myself writing to you absolutely appalled by your vote in the commons. How could you, in any sane conscience, vote against guaranteeing EU citizens rights? EU citizens that have been living, working and positively contributing to our society? Many of them for a number of years or even the majority of their lives!

    Yet again, this is an incredibly insular and isolationist view that the Conservative party has taken; this will be to the detriment of our economy and more importantly our fantastically diverse society.

    Your political party and yourself are destroying the progressive legacy that this nation has held so dearly for so many years.


    Best regards,

    A Troubled Constituent (Catherine Buchanan)
  • commented 2017-02-08 18:19:20 +0000
    Dear Mr Mowat,

    In August last year, I emailed you, pointing out that I was about to embark on a three month placement in the Palestinian West Bank in a voluntary capacity as a human rights monitor. I asked to meet you to give you a briefing on the present situation in the West Bank either before I went to the Occupied Palestinian Territories, or upon my return in December 2016. Sadly I received no response from you. I now reiterate that request to meet you.

    A parliamentary debate takes place tomorrow following on from the adoption of United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334 which the UK voted in support of. The resolution reaffirms that Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territories have no legal validity and that their continued existence constitutes a flagrant violation of international law and a major obstacle to the achievement of the Two-State Solution which the British Government supports.

    Can I urge you strongly to attend the debate tomorrow and to vote in favour of the motion. The Israeli Government appears to be laughing in the face of foreign opposition to their increasing occupation of Palestinian lands, knowing that whatever the United Nations says, the international community will do nothing, and is now protected by the new US administration of President Trump.

    I am not “pro-Palestine” and “anti-Israel”. I am for the observance by all parties to the conflict of international humanitarian law and human rights. If Israel is allowed to continue to occupy and annexe Palestinian land, there can be no Two State Solution. The alternative will be violent and bloody.

    I look forward to your response.

    Yours sincerely,

    John Booth
  • commented 2017-02-06 06:39:02 +0000
    t’s a new year and it might be time

    to give your website a lifting (web redesign), have you thought about that?

    Would it be valuable if we could redesign your website?

    So people can find your website showing up at the top of search results

    and take action when they land on it?

    If you want to see a new version of your site for free.

    Please just reply to this email “Send me a free Mockup”.

    With no obligation to work with us to redesign your website.


  • commented 2017-02-05 19:37:47 +0000
    I was appalled to read about your statement to the Health select committee recently concerning your views on care of elderly parents. The implication of your statement was that basically it is our, and not the state’s responsibility to care for our elderly relatives. Having spent about year up to February 2016, caring for her dying father, my wife has just about recovered from the mental anguish of what she had to go through. She had been a District Nurse for many years, but despite her professionalism I was shocked at what she had to do to care for her ailing father. As well as the personal care she provided, she had to deal with the mental anguish of watching him die. The level of personal care she provided because of her professional background I myself could never provide. Would you, yourself, take your parent to the toilet, clean up soiled bed linen, give a bed bath after defecation or vomiting, or would you pay someone else to do it? Mr Mowat, the answer lies in a coherent plan, suitably funded, for care of our increasing elderly population.

    I am not one of your constituents but I feel I have the right as a citizen and member of the electorate to be able to make my views known to a Minister of our government. I will be informing my own MP that I have contacted you about this matter.
  • commented 2017-02-05 14:55:36 +0000
    I gave up a 30 year career in local government to care for my father. I claimed carers allowance up until his death 2 years later. However now I am able to look for a job I am unable to claim JSA as carers allowance doesn’t not count towards this. I now qualify for no benefits having saved the local council 2K a month for 2 years in care home fees. Feeling a bit let down.
  • commented 2017-02-05 10:47:23 +0000
    Dear Mr Mowatt,

    I have an extremely important proposal which WILL address and overcome the non payment by overseas users of our National Health service. Could you please call me at your earliest opportunity so I may present it to you.

    I have many years experience in Systems Analysis, and the design and implementation of systems, and would be happy to be involved in the preparation and implementation of the system if it would be of assistance.

    (I have also sent this email to Jeremy Hunt without realising that you are also a Health Service minister).

    I look forward to hearing from you at your earliest opportunity regarding this urgent matter.

    Many thanks,

    Kind regards.

    John Fowles

    Mobile : 07831 227572
  • commented 2017-02-03 23:05:06 +0000
    Mr Moway. Regarding your comments about caring for relatives, has it ever occurred to you or the government, that the grossly unfair hike in women’s pension age has had a profound effect on the care crisis. There would have been an army of women (And they are mostly women) who would have looked after their elderly relatives but are now unavailable because they’re working. I believe it’s called the law of unintended consequences.
  • commented 2017-02-03 17:17:36 +0000
    Seeing the Telegraph article & as minister for care I write to you as a carer of 21 years of my disabled mum.

    TAKE A LOOK at what a monopolised by the bar, court system of FRAUD & RACKETEERING, has done to us???
  • commented 2017-02-03 13:48:03 +0000
    Hello Mr Mowat,

    What are your plans for re-unifying the population of your constituency?

    The ‘will of the people’ (yes actually 37% of the electorate) must apparently be followed despite the incredible risks and the current government appear to be interpreting in a bizarre way.

    I do not remember the arguments for exiting the single market, I remember many of the Brexit campaign even talking up the Norway or Switzerland option whilst obviously secretly knowing this would require us to keep the freedom of movement and stay part of the single market.

    The UK doesn’t even enforce all of the controls on the right for residency that it could as part of the EU, how was this never part of the debate?

    Watching Question Time last night I heard that people apparently even voted based on urban myths regarding the shape of bananas. What more do you need to hear to start questioning the standard of the referendum debate? In a previous email reply to me, you said that the referendum was good for democracy. That’s a head in the sand moment for me.

    Going full head on for this hard line exit is not going to benefit the UK, it’s not what people voted for and it certainly isn’t going to unify the population. The specter of UKIP and it’s effect on the Conservative Party is shaping the future for our children, I can’t see how the vote can be interpreted in these terms.

    For now the loud voices and veiled threats are coming from the right leaning sections of the public, but I can’t help feel that the country will never be united on this matter and there will be massive repercussions in the future, and the direction Mrs May is taking us isn’t going to help this in any way.


    Neil Allen
  • commented 2017-02-01 15:15:18 +0000
    Mr Mowat, I am heading towards 60 – a retired, Cambridge educated doctor who now works on a voluntary basis for my local Age UK. I have no children and I feel rather upset by your recent comments regarding our duty to take care of our elderly parents.

    I think most of us would & do, if we can, however you need to appreciate that this is a very personal issue. Moreover, who is going to care for those of us ageing without children? Have you a response to that one?

    I haven’t needed this country provide healthcare or school/university for children with the cost to the tax payer and now am I to feel that I don’t have any “home grown carers for my future”?

    I believe that far more care and money is put into children’s health, education etc insofar as pound for pound if you compare what is spent on older people; most who have paid a lot of money into our National Insurance scheme. If there is, and quite rightly, an obligation to provide for the younger end of the spectrum then the same should be said for those as vulnerable but who are older. We are going to find out, going forward, that ageing without children is far more prevalent and increasingly so.

    You might wish to remember this in future.
  • commented 2017-02-01 11:14:46 +0000
    It is a disgrace Carers Allowance is akin to 65p an hour….and for 24/7 round the clock care

    only 35 hours is allocated……Carers save NHS £1,000’s Please pay cares a living wage for the work they do…..
  • commented 2017-01-31 23:37:08 +0000
    What an absolute bell end. And how would that work economically you stupid fuck? You live in a parallel world. Totally out of touch with society. My parents paid their stamp and state pension throughout their lives.
  • commented 2017-01-31 20:56:56 +0000
    Dear David

    This week when Brexit and article 50 are being debated we expect that you will protect the values and economic strength of the UK.

    The reasons for voting for Brexit were very broad from immigration to global trade and sovereignty. It was a simple question which did not clarify the impact of the decision. We were horrified in the misleading statements justifying the benefits of Brexit in the lead up to the referendum. If the statements had been made by a large corporation it would have been sued and fined hugely our MPs should hold similar responsibilities for clarity and truth.

    The hugely complex and costly process of Brexit has not been clarified for the voters and the political preferences cannot override the impact on the wealth of our State.

    Although we are now committed to a Brexit process, parliament does not have a mandate for a hard Brexit. The process chosen for Brexit debate and management should be controlled by Parliament to minimise the risks which were recognised by all major parties meaning they could not support a leave vote prior to the referendum.

    We must not leave the institutions which benefit our society, we must recognise that Europe is our largest and closest market and the EU is a club we will still have to work with even if we leave. We need to maintain friendship with our closest allies rather than take an arrogant approach that we can be too nationalistic.

    Many countries particularly the USA are turning in a direction which is against our values and the rhetoric around Brexit leads us dangerously down a similar road. We do not want to support policies seen as good by Trump or Marie Le Pen, but conflict with our national values.

    We hope that in your debates and votes you will review each of the multitude of issues from the perspective of what is best for our society even if this conflicts with political mandates. Our children need great leadership in this period.

    Kind regards

    Mike and Victoria Bellerby
  • commented 2017-01-31 20:22:31 +0000
    You are disgrace for your views, do you not think we look after our parents?? I just lost my mum, looked after all I could, do u think I could look after her and give my job up?? She lived with me and I paid the mortgage, she would have had to go into care !! Are u living in normal life or is it that ur a typical politician oblivious to hardships normal people face every day ?? You should resign for your comments and insitivity
  • commented 2017-01-31 20:09:12 +0000
    Dear David

    Could you please work with Local Govenment to establish and communicate a contingency plan, which will adequately deal with the now inevitable Traffic Gridlock which will ensue on Warrington (particularly West Warrington) once the tolls are introduced.

    I believe the fall back position should be to Toll the Warrington estuary crossings (I assume estuary means tidal), make them free to Warrington residents. I think that this may be a unfortunate but necessary step to protect the travelling public of Warrington from intolerable traffic chaos and suspect the precedent set by tolling the existing Silver Jubilee bridge in Halton makes it lawful.

    Your thoughts on this matter on would be appreciated.
  • commented 2017-01-31 09:59:34 +0000
    Just reading today’s mail find it amazing that comments about Trump or Brixi from the likes of Gary Lineker and Lilley Allan and the others are all very very rich not on basic wages trying to manage.Hope all those protester are back in work today.So treets should be empty or once again is the government paying them to do nothing so have time to tell all the millions of us who want to see strong goverment stick up for us on low wages looking after are elderly and dont have time or millions in the bank to sit in streets telling the rest of us and the way we voted is wrong.
  • commented 2017-01-31 09:42:09 +0000
    I said in September that Donald Trump will get in just like I said we will vote brexit.the world is changing and the morgority have had enough of seeing people that feel they are entitled to every thing a country has to offer while never putting into it.its just common sense when people are fleeing from desperate situations it’s common sense you stop at the first free safe country you come to, settle and make a life for your self, not carry on traveling thinking you can get to a softer country that you don’t have to contrabute to just sit back and,houses.ect some come with up to 8 children.I was brought up when in Rome do as the Romans parents said in the 50s the do gooders in this country will bring it to its knee,s you only have to read the news paper and the head lines about are a and e departments,housing situation. It can not go on.Did not see the streets all over the world protesting when those thousand school girls were taken to be raped torchered forced into marriage,But a leader of a country says we are closing are boarders for a time till we sort are own people out and every one in up raugh, don’t let him visit don’t trade with him.I just wish he was doing the same for the UK. We need to take back control of are boarders.
  • commented 2017-01-31 09:15:57 +0000
    You are right to say elderly should be cared for by the children they have raised.they had to in the 40’s and would free up hospital beds.but all new houses should be built with wide door ways and bathroom down stairs.when I was growing up all my friends had an elderly grand parent living with them no old people homes costing the goverment hundreds of pounds a week those days.
  • commented 2017-01-30 10:54:37 +0000
    I contacted you some time ago about the traffic speed on Rushgreen Rd Lymm,also about the width of the road outside number’s 40,42,44,46.

    The traffic regularly has to mount the pavement ( especially buses,lorries,coaches) it’s extremely dangerous for pedestrians,we also regularly find wing mirrors,wheel trims etc outside our house and the other day my partner got hit by a wing mirror on s white van as we walked into the village ( the van didn’t even stop!!!!! Please could somebody look into this as my original post fell on deaf ears.

    Kind Regards

    Deborah wardle
  • commented 2017-01-30 09:22:28 +0000
    Dear Mr. Mowat

    I am writing to inform you that I have signed the petition to cancel the proposed State visit of Donald Trump to the United Kingdom.

    Like the vast majority of UK citizens, I abhor the recent executive orders Trump has signed, in particular the immigration orders which fly in the face of both American and British values. Any country will be judged by how it treats its weakest citizens and how it provides succour to innocent victims of war and persecution from other nations. For if we are driven by irrational fear, if we see ugliness in the stranger, those who are different, it is but our own ugliness projected onto the other. In our failure to acknowledge our common humanity, we become small, shrivelled and less human.

    It is my fervent hope that The Government and citizens of this Nation will open their hearts and minds, put aside blind self interest and stand up firmly for what its right. Not allowing such a man as Trump into our country at this time is one way of doing this.

    Mr. Mowat, I urge you to do everything you can to bring this to parliamentary debate and to vote for justice to cancel Trump’s visit.

    In hope,

    Laraine Goddard
  • commented 2017-01-28 15:43:10 +0000
    Mr Mowat

    I wish to protest in the strongest terms at the proposed imposition of tolls to cross the soon to be opened Mersey Gateway.

    This flies in the face of promised made by the then Chancellor and your self that tolls would not be imposed on Warrington. Now it seems that this is too expensive. The result will be your government increases traffic in Warrington and the surrounding motorways – they are already causing traffic problems and this will get worse. In addition the pollution and fumes will affect the citizens, especially the most vulnerable. Is the the Tory Party living up to Mrs May described as the hasty party?

    I am a chair of governors of a Halton primary school but live in Warrington. I’m happy to give up my time and indeed pay for petrol to go to frequent meetings. However a toll may a punishment too far. You didn’t sat the Big Society was going to punish pensioners!!

    I beg that you oppose this and bake a stand by resigning from the government with immediate effect. As you opposed tolls your position is untenable.
  • commented 2017-01-27 12:06:14 +0000
    Dear Mr Mowat,

    Please see below my response to the consultation from the GSHS Governing Body concerning the admission arrangements. I would appreciate your thoughts and comments on the below.

    Kind Regards

    Dear Mr Wright & Mr Bent,

    Great Sankey High School – Multi Academy Trust and Admissions Consultation

    I am writing to register the upmost objection to the proposed changes to the admissions arrangements for Great Sankey High School (GSHS) as set out in the GSHS Consultation Document.

    I am a parent of a Yr 1 pupil and foundation governor at St Philip Westbrook CE Aided Primary School. The excellent reputation and values are what steered us towards St Philip Primary School, that and the majority of St Philip’s pupils have progressed to GSHS with excellent outcomes and continued to add so much value to the GSHS community.

    GSHS is an outstanding school and the nearest high school to our home. I am therefore very concerned that the proposed changes to GSHS admissions policy will significantly disadvantage our daughter’s chance of securing a place at GSHS in favour of pupils from outside the local Great Sankey area.

    Having thoroughly read the consultation document and attended the consultation evening I would like to make the following objections and raise some questions for consideration and response:

    1. The consultation states, ‘it is hoped that this proposal will lead to an improved system that better supports local people in gaining access to their high school.’ If you were to implement the proposal this would have the opposite effect on local people. Having considered the numbers from the feeder schools, this would lead to approximately 71 places (average for 2018-2020) left for non-MAT schools. With an average of 7 Children in Care, per year, gaining a place at GSHS over the last three years this would reduce to 64 places for ‘local people.’ Having obtained information from Warrington Borough Council admissions, for the last 3 years, this would mean that the distance criteria would shrink from 1.4 miles currently to around 0.5 to 0.59 miles. I would strongly argue this is not serving the local community. How does GSHS Governing Body intend to serve the local community, when the distance is likely to reduce further when houses are built on the Omega site?

    2. The Admissions Code states that when naming feeder schools this must be ‘reasonable’. It does not seem reasonable that St Philip’s, a local primary school and one that provides GSHS with its second largest intake of pupils each year, is put at a disadvantage. This will mean that local students will be not be given an opportunity to attend their local high school. Students from Bewsey, Orford, Dallam (that attend Old Hall & Callands) and St.Helens (that attend Burtonwoood) will have place at GSHS when local students will not. The additional travel and subsequent transport for these pupils will place a greater deal of strain on the local road infrastructure. This will be further exasperated by the needs of local students traveling away from their local area to a secondary school which will be at least double the distance. I would argue this does not allow for safe and reasonable walking distances and will place a financial strain on some families. How is GSHS Governing Body demonstrating their commitment to safeguarding of students and meeting the needs of the local community? A Competency Framework for Governance, DFE (2017) outlines that effective governors should be, ‘prepared to listen to and work in partnership with others and understanding the importance of building strong working relationships……staff, parents and carers, pupils/students, the local community and employers’ and ‘considers the impact of the board’s decisions and the effect they will have on the key stakeholder groups and especially parents and carers and the local community.’

    3. The GSHS consultation suggests strongly that continuity of education is important and ‘logic suggests that priority should be given to MAT schools…..this promotes continuity of education.’ As I stated at the consultation evening, there is no evidence to suggest that education from 4-18 have a positive effect on outcomes for young people, this was accepted by Mr Wright. Given the importance of continuity, why has the siblings criteria not been omitted? Over the last 3 years an average of 40 pupils have gained a place at GSHS from primary schools that sit outside the proposed MAT primary schools, (information from Warrington Borough Council admissions). Surely if continuity of education was fundamental to the consultation the sibling criteria should be removed and how do you intend to ensure these 40 pupils are not disadvantaged by the lack of continuity as they sit outside the OMAT?

    4. The consultation document states that ‘there is capacity to accommodate the traditional numbers from these schools which remain outside of the MAT’. This statement appears to be based on the assumption that the number of pupils from the MAT schools who apply for a place at GSHS will remain at their current levels, this is a presumption and based on little evidence. The GSHS consultation document further states that, ‘the most likely reality is that not all existing students in the six schools will transfer.’ This statement has no foundation and appears to be nothing more than an unsubstantiated opinion. Common sense would conclude that pupils at the proposed MAT schools, who would not have previously have selected GSHS as their preferred choice of secondary school due to the ‘proximity of the school’ criteria, will now do so under the new proposed admissions policy due to their significantly increased chances of success. Again, this will be the detriment of pupils living in the local community. I would implore the GSHS Governing Body to question, ‘Is there a reason why the proposed MAT primary schools cannot join the OMAT, but the admissions criteria remain the same as it does now?’

    5. St Philip’s Primary school is unable to join the OMAT due to a diocese decision which does not permit local CE schools from becoming members of MATs except where these are formed of a majority of church schools. As this decision is not with the Leaders and Governing Body of the school, I believe that your decision not to recognise St Philips & Sankey Valley St. James’, within you proposed admissions policy represents indirect discrimination on the grounds of religious belief in contravention of the Equality Act 2010. There are other high schools in neighbouring authorities that are the lead school in a MAT which do not include MAT partner schools as ‘feeders.’ Is this a model that could be considered by the GSHS Governing Body?

    6. The recent precedent of the Rivers Academy Trust, where identical changes to the admissions policy were overturned by the Schools Adjudicator, supports my belief, that the proposed changes by GSHS are not compliant with the Admissions Code.

    As a parent and governor I am fully aware of the distress and upset that this proposal has caused the parents and students at St Philips. However, as a committed educator and governor I have a moral obligation to challenge this proposal, not only as a parent, but for the benefit of the local people in my role as a school governor. I do not wish to see local children travelling unreasonable distance to attend a high school and putting additional financial strain on local families.

    I would implore the Governing Body at GSHS to reconsider this proposal under the grounds I have previously stated. As governors, we came into education to improve outcomes for children and serve the local community with a strong moral purpose. If you were to keep the admissions policy as it is now, and continue to allow the six primary schools to join the OMAT then I believe you are fulfilling the duties of a Governing Body.

    I would be grateful if you could acknowledge receipt of this letter by return email. A copy of this letter has also been emailed to David Mowat (MP) and Warrington Borough Council.

    Yours Sincerely,
  • followed this page 2017-01-26 20:49:51 +0000
  • commented 2017-01-26 20:47:18 +0000
    I am writing this to bring to your attention what a mess our local hospital is in

    I spent 21 days in Warrington hospital and I could write a book and it would be titled horror hospital upport

    I seen alot of things

    Staff under pressure

    Bed shortage

    No qualified doctors especially at weekends

    Agency staff costing NHS more

    Not enough staff to tend to patients hence mistakes with medication and communication breakdown

    little support with recovery and eager to get you out of the bed and home for they need the bed back

    Staff unhappy and complaining about what they have to do within their shift and feel they cannot achieve what needs doing

    I also witnessed a lady press her buzzer and 15 minutes later some one turned up by this time the lady was slumped in bed very ill and needed a doctor urgently

    I also had my own personal experience of being very ill and there was no bed or side ward available for me so I had to stay in the bay on the ward with blood poisoning after my operation

    I also did not get any after care when i finally got out of the hospital and I ended up being very ill again at home and was left in the hands of my own GP

    I had no one to help me bathe or attend to my needs after a big operation after telling the staff in the hospital that I had no one at home but the cat

    I can only assume no resources again

    I am very concerned over our local hospital and the NHS as whole and I am very unhappy to see standards have slipped and it is crippled with people coming and using it

    I have waited over 15 hours also in the past for a bed and I have a life threatening condition which really worries me. for I am in the hands of NHS and this does not fill me with confidence.

    Do you think when students have to pay to be nurses they will want to train? I dont think so from what I heard and most of these nurses who were looking after me or trying were looking at other career options or even going on bank where they said they would get more money

    I have shared my views with you and I know I sit with thousands of other people worrying over our NHS

    I would like to know if anything what can be done not just nationally but locally?


    Carla Heath
  • commented 2017-01-26 18:51:44 +0000
    David, I would like to express my extreme disappointment regarding the u-turn on toll free travel for Warrington residents on the Mersey Gateway bridge. I live in Warrington and work in Runcorn. How can it possibly be fair that I will now pay close to £1000 per year to travel to work but someone who lives in Runcorn and works in Warrington will make the journey for free?

    The pre-election “promise” made by the Chancellor was the single main reason that you got my vote and I’m sure it was a significant reason why you won this marginal seat. This feels like a complete betrayal to me and I’m sure to many others who voted for you. Please do everything you can to ensure the Government sticks to their promise.
  • commented 2017-01-26 17:10:42 +0000
    David, as a resident of Warrington South and a person who has family in Runcorn, the promise that you made in 2015 of no tolls for those in warrington was very enticing. However, upon hearing about the U-turn made by the government on this I believe you should resign for lying to your constituents during the campaign since you lied to everyone who voted for you.