I am delighted by the fact that my office has been inundated with letters (the majority of which originate from Ilkley and Addingham!) and petitions expressing opposition to war with Iraq. I will, of course, continue to ensure that the overwhelming views of my constituents continue to be heard by the Prime Minister.

Whilst I acknowledge that this is probably the dominant political issue, on both the national and international stages, it is vital that we do not, in the meantime, lose sight of other important issues.

The future of Ilkley's Coronation Hospital remains uncertain and it is imperative that those people who enjoy the benefits of the services that are currently available take an active role in deciding its future. After all, the level and extent of National Health Service provision is likely to affect everyone in Ilkley at some time or another.

We are, of course, waiting for the publication of a consultation document that is currently in the process of being drafted by the Airedale NHS Trust and the Airedale Primary Care Trust (PCT). The drafting of this document is taking a little longer than was initially anticipated by both the NHS Trust and the PCT.

I am looking forward to receiving a copy of the document and am ready to scrutinise every aspect of the proposals. Without wishing to anticipate what the report might or might not say, I suspect that the crux of the argument proposed by the Airedale NHS Trust will be along the lines that both Trusts are operating a budget with an underlying deficit

In essence, they are operating beyond their means and something has to give and, in basic terms, Coronation Hospital is (in their view) a 'luxury' that the Trust can ill-afford. Indeed, their argument may be that diverting resources to the Coronation Hospital is likely to have serious repercussions on the level of service that can be provided at Airedale General Hospital.

I am more than happy to listen to what the Airedale NHS Trust and the PCT have to say and assist in any way I can to iron out any problems they are facing. However, as things stand, I remain unconvinced that any proposal to reduce service provision in Ilkley is anything other than a sticking plaster approach to solving underlying problems.

How could the loss of physiotherapy services in Ilkley, for example, (which would inevitably result in an extra burden being placed on the already stretched resources at Airedale) have any beneficial effect? It appears to me that it would simply result in longer waiting times at physiotherapy out-patient clinics at Airedale and a greater demand on already limited available space.

Further, on my numerous visits to Airedale, I have always found the car parks to be well used if not, at times, filled to capacity. How would the hospital physically cope with an increase in the number of people who would need to attend on a daily basis if Ilkley Hospital was to close? More importantly, how would many people manage to get to Airedale?

There is no direct bus or rail route. I cannot believe that an increased demand on the ambulance service is a cost effective, long-term solution.

At a time when Government spending has increased enormously in the National Health Service (indeed, we are witnessing the largest levels of investment since its establishment) and when National Insurance contributions are about to rise by one per cent to support the increased investment, I am sure that many people are wondering as to why we are even considering the possibility of closing the Coronation Hospital. The Airedale NHS Trust and the PCT would, I am sure, quite correctly point out that much of the investment has been 'ring-fenced' in particular areas: coronary care; cancer; mental health; and care of the elderly.

I do not believe that anyone can question the value and worth of the increased attention and investment in these specialist areas which is having results. Indeed, between 1998 and 2000, deaths from cancer have fallen by six per cent and heart disease by 14 per cent.

The UK has witnessed both the largest fall in lung cancer amongst men and the largest decline in breast cancer in the European Union.

However, I do not believe that it can be reasonably argued that other services (not identified as such a high priority) are under-funded. Indeed, as of April 2003 more than 75 per cent of the NHS Budget is to be controlled by local PCTs as opposed to being in the hands of Whitehall. The aim is to ensure that PCTs are able to use their allocated resources to address the particular needs of local communities.

What are these increased resources? Over the next three years Airedale PCT will receive an increase in funding of £26.75million (equivalent to a cash increase of 28.08 per cent). Indeed, the annual allocations will be £103.17 millions

in 2003/04, £112.40 millions in 2004/05 and £122.01 millions in 2005/06.

It is imperative, therefore, that - when the consultation document is published - the people of Ilkley are prepared to actively voice their opinions as to what type of services they would like to see.

I, for one, believe that the Coronation Hospital, itself, is a thoroughly delightful building. However, that said, I appreciate that the age of the building may not lend itself to the practical needs of modern medicine.

That said, I will be concentrating my efforts on ensuring that the provision of services in Ilkley meets the needs and requirements of the people of Ilkley.

Whether those services are provided at the Coronation Hospital per se or at an alternative, suitable and local venue is not, I believe, of significance.

However, any attempt to transfer services from the Coronation Hospital to an alternative venue cannot be done so on the basis of a plan. There can be no hiatus in service provision: the new venue should be up and running (or, at

the least, cast iron guarantees must be in place as to the surety of the new venue) before services are transferred.

Following the intervention of Jacqui Smith, the Minister of State at the Department of Health, the Airedale NHS Trust was informed that it could not close the Minor Injuries' Unit without prior public consultation (the Trust's initial plan was to close the Unit before Christmas 2002).

The purpose of my requesting the Minister's intervention in this regard resulted from my desire to ensure that the public had an opportunity to consider and discuss every aspect of the proposals rather than any belief that the MIU should be maintained come what may. Indeed, I tend to believe that there are logical and understandable arguments (already accepted by the CHC) to suggest that this could be something for concession.

In essence, I am prepared to give the Airedale NHS Trust and the PCT a fair hearing. I look forward to the publication of the consultation document and will consider all the arguments and recommendations that are made.

However, I did not become the Member of Parliament for Keighley and Ilkley to stand by and see the erosion of National Health Services in my constituency.

I hope that I can count on the support of the people of Ilkley.