"They did not listen, they did not know how.

Perhaps they`ll listen now."

So wrote the icomparable Don McLean in his homage to Vincent van Gogh.  But perhaps his message is relevant today more than ever before, for we have just witnessed yet another episode of `wide public consultation` being completely ignored by people who really should listen to what other people have to say.

Now it`s arguable that, being in my 70s and with Mrs. Snopper not far behind me, I ought not to concern myself with maternity services in this part of the world; but   for some years there has been an ongoing battle about transferring full maternity services from the General Hospital for Maidstone - the county town of Kent - to a brand new whizzo, state-of-the-art, super sized, all singing, all dancing hospital at Pembury near Tunbridge Wells, about 20 miles away down a long and winding road.

The Health Authorities (there are so many of them I forget which one) supposedly carried out `wide ranging public consultation` on this proposal with the result that virtually all the local GPs were `vehemently against it,` as was the local Member of Parliament and a 20,000 signature petition against the proposal was hand delivered to 10, Downing Street in an effort to ensure that the maternity services move didn`t go ahead.

But yesterday the Health Minister, Andrew Lansley, decided to ignore the results of the `public consultation` and agreed that the move should take place after all.   Conservative MP for Maidstone, Helen Grant, said she was "appalled by the puzzling and irrational decision" which failed to address the strong local opposition to the downgrading of maternity services at Maidstone.   Local campaigner, Peter Carroll, said he feared the extra distance from Maidstone to Pembury could result in the loss of babies' lives.  He described it as a "very bad day for all the mums and mums-to-be in Maidstone.  And most important of all it's a bad day for local democracy."

And his last comment is perhaps the most telling, especially as NHS managers have said that the changes, which will take effect next year, `are in the best interests of patients.`  It seems to me that we have yet another example of people in `authority` telling us what`s good for us, assuming that they know best, whilst all the time choosing, for whatever may be the real reason, to ignore the overwhelming wishes of local people.  If the real reason is to save money, then how can you put a price on the care and wellbeing of expectant mums and the babies on the threshold of life? 

In my simple naivete, I thought that people were appointed or elected to public office to reflect the needs, hopes and wishes of those who pay them to do so; but perhaps I should not be surprised at how often my assumptions are proved wrong.  One thing`s for sure - the last line of Don McLean`s homage to Vincent is particularly apt:-

"They did not listen, they`re not listening still.

Perhaps they never will."