A single acute service for both Epsom and St Helier Hospital would “save lives,” according to hospital chiefs.

This possible new emergency facility – estimated to cost £300 to £400 million - is being encouraged in the Epsom and St Helier University NHS Trust ‘2020-2030’ engagement document.

Such a move would result in the loss of acute services -such as maternity, A&E, surgical - in either or both Epsom and St Helier Hospitals.

Three potential sites are outlined in the scheme for a new acute facility, which are Epsom, St Helier or Belmont, which is home to the old Sutton Hospital.

Dave Ash, member of Keep Our St Helier Hospital Campaign (KOSHH), believes extending travel times for people to access acute services would result in deaths.

He said: “I don’t think anyone could argue that moving acute services like emergency services and maternity further away from most people would not result in a loss of lives.”

Epsom and St Helier Hospital disputed this.

A spokesman responded: “Quite the opposite (would happen). This will save lives. Evidence shows that, in the case of major trauma such as heart attack or stroke, it is far better to be seen in an appropriate acute setting where you would be cared for by a consultant, regardless of the time or day of the week you arrive in hospital.

“That’s what saves lives, and that’s what we want to deliver for our patients.”

Mitcham and Morden MP, Siobhain McDonagh, is against the “2020-2030” engagement plan and believes losing acute services would be perilous.

She said: “Of course we all want investment in our hospitals. We don’t need an engagement costing tens of thousands of pounds to decipher that.

“But that is not the question at stake here. The question is whether this unlikely investment, if the Trust have their way, should come at the expense of both St Helier and Epsom’s acute services.

“History has shown the damage a loss of such services would cause and I fear this would be the beginning of the end for St Helier. As such, I wholeheartedly oppose this engagement.”

Epsom and St Helier NHS Trust chief Executive, Daniel Elkeles, and MP for Carshalton and Wallington, Tom Brake, argue that St Helier is no longer “fit for purpose”.

Mr Elkeles said: “We are held back by our ageing buildings, many of which were designed before antibiotics were discovered.

“We want to continue improving and we aspire to deliver great quality care despite the many challenges we all know that the NHS faces in the short and medium term."

Mr Brake also commented at the beginning of September: “For the sake of the thousands who depend on its care, we need to secure up to £400 million to make St Helier Hospital fit for purpose.”

According to Mr Elkeles, 85 per cent of patients “will see no change to where they receive their care” if a single acute site is built.

KOSHH member, Dave Ash, said: “The Trust has spent a lot of time and public money finding ways of telling people their buildings are not fit for purpose.

“But they are also saying that if there’s a new facility, 85 per cent of patients would stay where they are.”

“We already have one of the best performing hospitals in the country. Why don’t we use any investment we need to fix what we have already got?”

An Epsom and St Helier spokesman said: “The issue with our current wards is that there is not sufficient space between beds for us to protect our patients’ privacy and dignity, and keep them safe from infections.

“If we do build a new acute facility with 500 beds, we could then convert our existing four bedded bays into two bedded bays – giving us room to protect our patients and improve the environment without reducing bed numbers.”