Unsupported browser

For a better experience please update your browser to its latest version.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We use cookies to personalise your experience; learn more in our Privacy and Cookie Policy. You can opt out of some cookies by adjusting your browser settings; see the cookie policy for details. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies.

Report this comment to a moderator

Please fill in the form below if you think a comment is unsuitable. Your comments will be sent to our moderator for review.
By submitting your information you agree to our Privacy & Cookie Policy.

Report comment to moderator

Required fields.

Headline

New HLM-designed hospital may have to be ‘ripped down’, warns union official

Comment

One would like to know why the AJ publishes such poor, un-researched articles as this. It seems that QEU Hospital had some problems, of drainage etc, presumably now fixed / fixable. Is it the case that Mr Waterson chooses (perhaps imagining hopefully) to project these on the Royal Hospital, implying without substance that it has similar problems. Mr Waterson then seems to use ‘no confirmation of fit for purpose’ to justify his assertions. Sure, major projects (hospitals or otherwise, whether d&b or not) have problems that get fixed (Negatives are harder to prove than positives, and who needs to prove them to Mr Waterson either way?). Whilst it might suit the purposes of Mr Waterson from his union perspective, does this article meet the required integrity standards of architect or associated professions, or indeed of journalism other than the worst tabloid type? I really don’t think so.

Posted date

6 August, 2019

Posted time

4:46 pm

required
required
required
required