Leeds Crisis Centre: Stay of execution as watchdog investigates

Axe-threatened Leeds Crisis Centre has won a stay of execution after councillors “called in” a controversial decision to close it.

It’s understood both a Liberal Democrat and a Conservative councillor have called in the decision and asked for it to be scrutinised by the adult social care watchdog at a special meeting in Leeds Civic Hall on 4 March.

Watchdog members are being asked to seek ‘cast-iron assurances’ that the NHS in Leeds will cover the services provided at the Leeds Crisis Centre should the facility close.

Board members will have a choice whether to send the decision back to executive board to reconsider or release the decision to close the centre.

A Leeds council spokesman confirmed the scrutiny board date but said today’s debate over setting the council’s budget would go ahead and be unaffected by the scrutiny call in.

As reported previously, the council is looking to close the Headingley-based Leeds Crisis Centre as it seeks to negate £50 million of government cuts and £40 million of other budgetary pressures over the coming financial year. The centre costs in the region of £700,000 to run and the council argues that there is a duplication of services on the NHS – and that the service would be better run by the NHS.

Only last week, the same scrutiny board agreed to look into the public consultation aspect of the closure following concerns over how the process had been carried out.

The closure has been opposed by the Save Leeds Crisis Centre Campaign. A spokesman for the campaign welcomed the decision to hold an inquiry, but acknowledged the board only had limited powers and that any inquiry was only likely to delay the closure decision, rather than reverse it. He said:

    “We were reassured from last week’s scrutiny board that councillors from all parties appeared to be concerned that the consultation was woefully inadequate and the decision-making process was poor.

    “We’re also looking to challenge the closure decision under equality laws and are receiving support from the Equalities and Human Rights Commission. I believe the equality impact assessment carried out by the council was so poor that there could be scope for action.”