From the Trust's two substantive responses (19 May and 2 June 2026):

• £4.6m of ring-fenced NHS England Estates Safety Funding capital, secured January 2026, with a hard expenditure deadline of 31 March 2026.
• A 15-year lease with Torbay Council for Gadeon House, with a Trust break option at 10 years.
• Royal Devon is separately leasing other floors of the same building.
• Cytology relocates to Royal Devon first to release capacity at Torbay, followed by routine cellular pathology to Gadeon House over 12 to 18 months.
• The Trust is a formal partner in the Peninsula Pathology Network and continues to explore "a more resilient and sustainable regional pathology model".
• Active scoping work is underway with clinical teams on consolidation of microbiology and blood sciences.
• Decisions taken 19 March (options appraisal), 25 March (business case), 26 March 2026 (CEO and Chair approval under urgent decision-making arrangements).

From the joint staff briefing by Tapley and Tidman (July 2026):

• Approximately £20 million secured for pathology across the two Trusts, with a stated hope that collaboration will "unlock further funding".
• A joint Programme Board, first meeting April 2026, co-ordinating pathology between the two Trusts.
• Royal Devon Board approval of a full business case in January 2026 for microbiology and blood sciences on floors one and two of Gadeon House.
• Torbay's routine histopathology destined for floor three.
• Business case approvals going to each Trust Board in autumn 2026.
• A commitment to formal staff consultation before any changes are made at either Trust.

The Trust's account of the 7 May Board statement. The Trust attributes Kate Lissett's "no proposals to move any services" remark to a different agenda item, the organisational strategy rather than the Chief Executive's report on Gadeon House, and accepts that "taken out of context, that comment may have caused confusion". In the 2 June response, Lissett draws a distinction between "strategy" and "formally agreed proposals": cellular pathology is the only thing in the agreed category, while wider consolidation work continues "in parallel" through the Peninsula Pathology Network.

1. Clinical consultation. The Trust states "Clinical service leads were briefed" and "the pathology clinical service lead was engaged throughout." This is not the same as formal consultation. What remains unclear is which consultant groups were consulted, on what dates, whether written responses were sought, whether concerns were recorded in meeting minutes, how many clinicians supported versus opposed the proposal, and what specific objections were raised.

2. Concerns raised by clinicians. This is probably the most evasive answer. The original questions asked whether concerns were raised regarding safety, workforce, logistics, transport, turnaround times, recruitment, resilience, and future service implications. Rather than answering "yes" or "no", the Trust states "Our staff have raised many questions" and "The issues you raise are central to the work and are being addressed". That does not tell readers whether those risks were identified, how serious they were assessed to be, whether any were considered unacceptable, or whether any clinicians advised against relocation.

3. Options appraisal. The Trust confirms an options appraisal existed and was presented on 19 March 2026. However, the response does not explain what options were considered, the scoring methodology, who undertook the appraisal, whether retaining pathology at Torbay was fully costed, why refurbishment was rejected, whether temporary modular facilities were considered, or whether clinicians participated in scoring. Merely saying an appraisal occurred does not demonstrate that the process was balanced.

4. Timing of the decision. The Trust's timeline suggests: options appraisal 19 March 2026; CEO email to pathology staff 20 March 2026; business case 25 March 2026; CEO and Chair approval under urgent decision-making arrangements 26 March 2026; all staff informed 5 May 2026; Board meeting in public 7 May 2026. This raises a governance question: if staff were informed of a "preferred option" on 20 March, before the business case was considered on 25 March and before public Board discussion in May, at what point was the decision effectively made, and what opportunity existed for clinicians or staff to influence the outcome after 20 March?

5. "No proposals at this time". The Trust states "There are no further Board approved proposals for other service moves from Torbay Hospital at this time." But it also states "We continue to work with partners through the Peninsula Pathology Network to explore options for a more resilient and sustainable regional pathology model." In effect, the Trust is distinguishing between active strategic planning and formally approved proposals. That distinction may be technically correct, but it does not answer whether consolidation beyond cellular pathology is being actively explored.

6. Major service change. The Trust's argument is that because urgent and time-critical services remain on site, this is not a major service change. That is an assertion rather than an explanation. The unanswered questions are: what proportion of current pathology activity will move; what proportion of staff will move; what impact assessment has been undertaken on clinical pathways; what advice was sought regarding whether this constituted a substantial service variation; and were local authority scrutiny committees consulted?

From: Susie Colley (chair@tqcc.co.uk)
To: Simon Tapley and Chris Tidman
CC: Andy Burnham MP, Layla Moran MP, Andrew George MP, Danny Beales MP, Beccy Cooper MP, Josh Fenton-Glynn MP, Paulette Hamilton MP, Joe Robertson MP, Greg Stafford MP, Dr Phil Keeling, Sally Allen-Gerard and Heart Campaign committee members
Subject: £20 Million unexplained

Good evening Mr Tapley and Mr Tidman,

I have now read the recent pathology programme update. Your briefing states that together you have already secured £20 million of investment in pathology services and that you hope working collaboratively will unlock further funding.

This statement raises several important questions, particularly as no explanation has been provided as to where this funding has originated, what it comprises, or how it is intended to be allocated. Could you therefore please confirm:

1. What is the source of the £20 million investment? Please identify each funding body and the amount contributed.
2. Does the £20 million include the reported £7.5 million Torbay Council loan, or is it entirely separate funding?
3. Is this funding fully approved and allocated, or does it include funding that remains subject to future approval?
4. How much of the £20 million is intended to be spent at Gadeon House?
5. How much of the £20 million is intended to be invested at Torbay Hospital?
6. If approximately £750,000 has previously been identified by experienced consultant pathologists as being sufficient to bring the existing histopathology laboratory at Torbay Hospital up to the required standard, why has investment in upgrading or replacing the pathology facilities at Torbay Hospital not been pursued as the preferred option?
7. Was the construction of a modern pathology laboratory at Torbay Hospital considered as part of the options appraisal? If so, please provide the options appraisal, together with the reasons why that option was rejected.
8. If £20 million has been secured for pathology infrastructure, why is the apparent strategy to concentrate investment in Exeter rather than using those funds to modernise pathology facilities at Torbay Hospital and retain services on the acute hospital site?

The statement that £20 million has been "secured" is, in itself, ambiguous. It does not explain whether this is new NHS capital funding, funding from both Trusts combined, funding linked to the Gadeon House project, or funding obtained from other sources. Nor does it explain whether there are any restrictions or conditions attached to the funding that would prevent it from being invested at Torbay Hospital.

Without this information, it is impossible for staff, patients and the public to understand why refurbishment or replacement of the pathology facilities at Torbay Hospital has apparently not been pursued, particularly when the level of investment referred to would appear, on the face of it, to provide a significant opportunity to modernise pathology services on the Torbay site.

From a public perspective, it is difficult to reconcile the assertion that the current laboratory estate is unsuitable with a proposal to invest many millions of pounds in facilities elsewhere, rather than strengthening pathology services at the acute hospital serving Torbay and South Devon.

I would therefore be grateful if you could also provide the relevant business case, options appraisal, financial analysis and supporting evidence demonstrating why relocation to Gadeon House represents better value for money, greater resilience and improved patient safety than investing directly in new or refurbished pathology facilities at Torbay Hospital.

Given the significance of these proposals for the future of pathology services and the wider hospital, I believe complete transparency regarding the funding, appraisal process and decision-making is essential.

Kindest regards

Susie Colley
Chair of the Torquay Chamber of Commerce and the Heart Campaign

From: Susie Colley (chair@tqcc.co.uk)
To: Simon Tapley and Chris Tidman
CC: John Govett, Mark Hackett, Joe Teape, Andy Burnham MP, Layla Moran MP, Alex McIntyre MP, Greg Stafford MP, Joe Robertson MP, Danny Beales MP, Beccy Cooper MP, Dr Phil Keeling, Sally Allen-Gerard and Heart Campaign committee members

Dear Mr Tapley and Mr Tidman,

Having now read your recent communication regarding the pathology service redesign and the proposed relocation of pathology services to Gadeon House, and having read your briefing carefully, I remain deeply concerned about the implications for patient safety, particularly in relation to the processing of urgent and time-critical blood tests undertaken at Torbay Hospital.

Your communication states that the current pathology estate is subject to "longstanding estates constraints and associated safety risks" and that new facilities are required because they will provide "safe, fit-for-purpose laboratory facilities." If the existing laboratory is considered no longer fit for purpose, I would be grateful if you could explain, in practical terms, how urgent pathology investigations will continue to be safely undertaken during the transition period.

On urgent and time-critical testing:

1. In patients presenting with suspected sepsis, meningococcal disease, acute leukaemia, major haemorrhage or other life-threatening conditions where rapid blood analysis is essential, where exactly will these samples be processed?
2. If the existing laboratory is regarded as unsuitable, what facilities will be used to undertake these urgent investigations, and what evidence can you provide that they are safe, resilient and capable of delivering results within clinically acceptable timescales?
3. Has a formal clinical risk assessment been undertaken examining the potential impact of any delay in obtaining urgent pathology results on patient outcomes? If so, will this assessment be made publicly available?
4. Has consideration been given to developing temporary or permanent laboratory accommodation on the Torbay Hospital site, for example through modular buildings or other purpose-built facilities, rather than relocating routine services to Exeter? If this option has been considered and rejected, please provide the supporting business case, options appraisal and the reasons for that decision.
5. Your briefing states that "appropriate local provision for urgent and time-critical care" will be maintained. Please define precisely what services this includes, where they will be located, which staff will provide them, and whether they will be available on a 24-hour basis.

On the long-term direction of travel:

Our concern extends beyond the immediate proposals. The briefing confirms that approximately £20 million has already been secured for pathology services, together with the establishment of a joint Programme Board overseeing the co-ordination of pathology services between the Royal Devon and Torbay and South Devon NHS Foundation Trusts. Once Gadeon House has been refurbished and equipped with modern blood sciences and microbiology laboratories, there is a legitimate concern that there will be increasing pressure for Torbay and South Devon NHS Foundation Trust to relocate further pathology services into that facility. Such a progression could significantly weaken Torbay Hospital's role as a fully functioning acute hospital.

The public has repeatedly been assured that there are no plans to downgrade Torbay Hospital. However, viewed alongside the proposed relocation of routine histopathology, the establishment of shared governance arrangements, the co-location of pathology services, and references to the Peninsula Pathology Network's Target Operating Model, it is reasonable to ask whether these developments represent a phased consolidation of pathology services away from Torbay Hospital.

Can you confirm unequivocally whether either Trust, the Peninsula Pathology Network, NHS Devon Integrated Care Board, or the Peninsula Acute Provider Collaborative has at any time considered, discussed, modelled, planned or proposed the future relocation of any additional pathology disciplines, laboratory services or other diagnostic services from Torbay Hospital to Gadeon House beyond those currently described? If so, please disclose the relevant Board papers, Programme Board minutes, strategy documents, business cases, options appraisals, modelling reports, risk assessments, consultation documents and any other papers relating to those discussions or proposals. If no such discussions or proposals have taken place, I would appreciate your unequivocal confirmation of that fact.

If the Trust accepts that the existing laboratory estate presents safety risks, it inevitably raises the question of why capital investment has not been directed towards replacing or rebuilding pathology facilities on the Torbay Hospital campus. Given the importance of pathology to emergency medicine, surgery, intensive care and acute medical services, it would appear entirely reasonable to explore redevelopment of laboratory facilities on the Torbay site rather than relocating services some 25 miles away. Please provide the options appraisal, business case and supporting evidence that led to this conclusion.

On Board duties and legal exposure:

Given that pathology is fundamental to emergency medicine, intensive care, surgery and acute medical care, could you also confirm what legal and governance assurances have been obtained by both Trust Boards that the proposed arrangements will not expose patients to avoidable harm? In particular:

• What assurance have your Boards received that the proposals comply with the Trusts' statutory duty of care?
• What assurances have been provided that foreseeable risks to patients have been fully identified, assessed and mitigated?
• Has either Board considered the potential legal consequences should delays or failures in pathology provision contribute to serious patient harm or death, and what governance processes are in place to ensure Board members have discharged their duties appropriately?

Please also confirm whether the relocation of pathology services forms part of a wider strategy under the Peninsula Acute Provider Collaborative or the Peninsula Pathology Network to centralise specialist and acute diagnostic services within the Peninsula. If not, please identify the strategic documents that define the long-term future of pathology services at Torbay Hospital over the next 5 to 10 years.

These are important questions, not only for staff but for the communities served by Torbay Hospital, who deserve reassurance that decisions are being driven by patient safety and clinical need rather than by estate limitations or financial considerations.

Finally, please advise whether Gadeon House is intended to become the single pathology hub for the Peninsula.

I look forward to receiving a detailed response addressing each of the above points.

Kindest regards

Susie Colley
Chair of the Torquay Chamber of Commerce and the Heart Campaign

From: Simon Tapley, Chief Strategy and Planning Officer, Torbay and South Devon NHS Foundation Trust, and Chris Tidman, Deputy Chief Executive Officer, Royal Devon University Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust
Circulated by: TSDFT Communications
Subject: Pathology staff briefing from Simon Tapley and Chris Tidman: pathology service redesign

Download the full briefing (PDF)

What the briefing says, in the campaign's summary:

On the two programmes. Separate programmes have been running at the Royal Devon and at Torbay and South Devon to address what the briefing calls longstanding estates constraints and associated safety risks in pathology services. In January 2026 the Royal Devon Board approved a full business case to establish microbiology and blood sciences laboratories on the first and second floors of Gadeon House in Exeter. At Torbay and South Devon, work is underway to develop the full business case for the relocation of routine histopathology (cellular pathology) to the third floor of Gadeon House, described as building on the direction already agreed earlier this year.

On the money. The briefing states that together the two Trusts have already secured £20 million of investment in pathology services, and that they hope working collaboratively will unlock further funding. No source, breakdown or allocation of that figure is given.

On governance. A joint programme board has been established, meeting for the first time in April 2026, to co-ordinate between the two programmes. The briefing states that each organisation will continue to progress its own governance processes and business case approvals to each Trust Board in autumn 2026.

On urgent care. The briefing states that work is ongoing to ensure appropriate local provision is maintained for urgent and time-critical care through the acute service laboratories.

On staff. The briefing thanks staff for engaging, acknowledges "a mixture of feelings about the work underway", and commits that before any changes are made at either trust there will be a formal staff consultation process. Local and joint Q&A sessions are promised, with programme leads named as Aabha Sharma and Tony Lowe for Torbay and South Devon, and Tim McDonald and Lee Luscombe for the Royal Devon.

From: Susie Colley (chair@tqcc.co.uk)
To: Joe Teape (Trust CEO), David Thomas (Torbay Council), Trust FOI, Malcolm Coe (Torbay Council)
CC: Andrew George MP, Andy Burnham MP, Layla Moran MP, Danny Beales MP, Beccy Cooper MP, Josh Fenton-Glynn MP, Paulette Hamilton MP, Joe Robertson MP, Greg Stafford MP, and Heart Campaign committee members
Subject: Request for Clarification Regarding the Future of Histopathology Services at Torbay Hospital

I would welcome the Trust correcting any aspect of the following if my understanding is inaccurate.

At today's Board meeting, the Chief Executive stated that emergency capital funding had been available and that funding had been successfully secured for the Histopathology service. If that is correct, I would appreciate clarification on the following points.

1. If emergency capital funding was available, why has the Trust not used, or sought to use, that funding to either refurbish the existing Histopathology laboratory at Torbay Hospital or provide a purpose-built replacement on the Torbay Hospital site?
2. If this was considered but rejected, what were the reasons, and will the Trust publish the options appraisal and business case supporting that decision?
3. Who first proposed that Torbay Council should provide a £7.5 million loan to refurbish Gadeon House in Exeter for the relocation of Histopathology? Was this proposal initiated by Torbay and South Devon NHS Foundation Trust, the Royal Devon University Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, NHS Devon, One Devon, Torbay Council, or another organisation?
4. Please advise if the agreement to take over the lease of Gadeon House has been signed and if so when? In the event that it has not, are the terms of the lease a "full repairing lease", what is the term of the lease, and are there any "breaks" available in the term?
5. What evidence demonstrates that relocating Histopathology to Exeter represents better value for money than investing in facilities at Torbay Hospital?
6. What assessment has been undertaken of the impact of relocating Histopathology on the 285,000-plus residents served by Torbay Hospital, together with the significant seasonal increase in population? Please publish that assessment.
7. If Histopathology is relocated to Exeter, where will any remaining Histopathology activity be undertaken at Torbay Hospital? If the existing laboratory is considered no longer fit for purpose, what accommodation will be used for any service that remains on site?
8. Can the Trust confirm whether there are any current or future proposals to relocate Microbiology, Haematology or Blood Sciences from Torbay Hospital to Exeter? If such proposals exist, please provide the supporting clinical and operational rationale.
9. Has the Trust assessed whether relocating Microbiology, Haematology or Blood Sciences would affect the ability of the Intensive Care Unit, emergency surgery and other acute services to operate safely? If the assessment concludes there would be no adverse impact, please publish the evidence supporting that conclusion.
10. If no such assessment has been undertaken, how can the Board be satisfied that relocating these services would not adversely affect patient safety, resilience or clinical outcomes?
11. The Government has consistently stated that, wherever clinically appropriate, healthcare should be delivered as locally as possible. Please explain how relocating essential pathology services further away from the population served by Torbay Hospital is consistent with that principle.
12. If Gadeon House is primarily intended to support pathology services for the Royal Devon University Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, why is Torbay and South Devon NHS Foundation Trust, or Torbay Council, being asked to finance part of that development? Why would it not be more appropriate for the Royal Devon University Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust to assume responsibility for the lease and associated capital costs?

These are matters of considerable public interest involving substantial sums of public money and decisions that could affect the long-term future of acute services at Torbay Hospital. I would therefore be grateful if each question could be answered individually, supported by the relevant evidence and published documentation wherever possible.

Many thanks

Kindest regards

Susie Colley
Chair of the Torquay Chamber of Commerce and the Heart Campaign

From: Susie Colley (chair@tqcc.co.uk)
To: Joe Teape (Trust CEO), David Thomas (Torbay Council), Trust FOI, James Corrigan (NHS)
CC: Andrew George MP, Andy Burnham MP, Layla Moran MP, Danny Beales MP, Beccy Cooper MP, Josh Fenton-Glynn MP, Paulette Hamilton MP, Joe Robertson MP, Greg Stafford MP

Good Afternoon

The Trust latest statement raises more questions than it answers.

If the existing histopathology laboratory is operating safely and experienced consultants advise that around £750,000 would bring the current facility up to the required standard, why is there a proposal to spend millions developing facilities in Exeter instead of investing in Torbay Hospital? Surely the remaining funds could be used to modernise vital clinical facilities at Torbay, such as the cardiac catheter laboratories, directly benefiting local patients.

The Trust says these changes are "not about moving patient care away from Torbay." However, histopathology is not an isolated service. It is a core component of an acute hospital, supporting cancer diagnosis, surgery, emergency procedures and many specialist clinical teams. Removing essential support services from the hospital inevitably raises concerns about the long-term resilience of acute services on the Torbay site.

The Government has repeatedly stated that, wherever possible, NHS care should be delivered "as locally as possible", reducing unnecessary travel for patients and supporting strong local hospitals. If that is national policy, why does it appear not to apply to essential pathology services that underpin so many aspects of patient care?

It is also difficult to understand why Torbay Council appears willing to support investment in facilities outside Torbay rather than prioritising improvements to its own local hospital.

The public deserves complete transparency. The Trust should publish:

• the full business case;
• the independent options appraisal;
• the cost comparison between refurbishing the existing Torbay laboratory and relocating services to Exeter;
• the clinical risk assessment;
• the impact assessment on acute hospital services; and
• the evidence demonstrating that relocating histopathology represents a better outcome for patients than retaining and modernising the service at Torbay Hospital.

These are reasonable questions. Before irreversible decisions are made, the people of Torbay deserve clear evidence that every viable option for retaining these essential services locally has been fully and objectively considered.

I look forward to receiving your answers to our questions.

Kindest regards

Susie Colley
Chair of the Torquay Chamber of Commerce and the Heart Campaign

Source: Torbay and South Devon NHS Foundation Trust news statement, "Statement on cellular pathology (histopathology) services and Gadeon House".

Read the full statement on the Trust website

Published: 26 June 2026, shortly before the Trust Board of Directors meeting in public on Thursday 2 July 2026. The authoritative text is at the link above; the following is a summary in the campaign's own words.

The Trust opens by acknowledging there has been interest and some confusion about the plans, and sets out its position on cellular pathology (histopathology) and Gadeon House. It says cellular pathology at Torbay Hospital is currently delivered from a temporary facility that is no longer suitable for long-term use, that services continue to operate safely, and that earlier plans to replace the facility on the Torbay site through the New Hospital Programme did not progress.

What the Trust says it is doing: it has secured £4.6 million of NHS England capital funding to develop a new purpose-built laboratory at Gadeon House in Exeter for routine cellular pathology. There will be an interim step to relocate cytology activity to release space and address immediate safety risks on the Torbay site. The full transition of routine cellular pathology is expected over 12 to 18 months, subject to detailed design, planning and ongoing engagement. Arrangements for any urgent and time-critical cellular pathology work needed to support care at Torbay will be built into the final operational model.

On patients: the Trust states there are no changes to where patients receive care. It says cellular pathology does not directly support emergency department care in the way that services such as blood tests do, and that most cellular pathology work supports diagnosis and treatment decisions over a number of days, with national standards based on those timeframes. Where results are needed more quickly, for example during surgery or as part of specific cancer pathways, it says arrangements will be in place to ensure this continues safely and within the required timeframe, including through the acute service laboratory on the Torbay site where clinically required. It frames the change as being about how laboratory services are provided, and states the changes are "not about moving patient care away from Torbay."

On colleagues: the Trust acknowledges an uncertain period for pathology staff and says it is continuing to engage them through regular briefings and involving them in the design, fit-out and day-to-day planning of the new laboratory.

On Gadeon House and other organisations: the Trust says it is using the building for its cellular pathology services, funded through NHS England capital and its own lease with Torbay Council. It confirms that Royal Devon University Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust has a separate agreement with Torbay Council and plans to locate its blood sciences and microbiology services in the building.

On the Peninsula Pathology Network: the Trust says clinical colleagues in cellular pathology, microbiology and blood sciences are working together across the network to understand demand, share expertise and consider future options, that this work is at an early stage, and that "no decisions have been taken."

On Edginswell: the statement says the Trust has purchased land at Edginswell Business Park from Torbay Council. In the short term it is being used to ease pressure on the main hospital site, including increasing colleague parking capacity and improving access for patients and visitors. In the longer term, and subject to planning, the Trust says it creates opportunities for some support services and future facilities to be located off the main site, freeing space at Torbay Hospital for patient-facing services. This is the Trust's own account of the Edginswell transaction that the campaign has separately queried in the £7.5m Loan and Edginswell thread.

To: Catherine Lissett
Date: 4 June 2026, 12:55

Good afternoon Ms Lissett,

Thank you for your response. Having reviewed your answers, I remain unclear on several points because a number of the responses describe processes and ongoing work but do not address the substance of the questions asked.

In relation to clinical consultation, you state that clinical leaders and pathology colleagues were briefed and had opportunities to provide feedback. Please could you clarify which consultant groups and clinical leaders were consulted; on what dates these discussions took place; whether concerns were formally recorded in minutes, reports or consultation feedback; what specific concerns were raised regarding safety, workforce sustainability, transport and logistics, turnaround times, recruitment, resilience and future service implications; and whether any clinicians were opposed to the proposed relocation and, if so, how those concerns were considered.

Regarding the options appraisal presented in March 2026, please could you provide further detail on the options considered; the appraisal methodology and scoring criteria used; whether refurbishment or redevelopment at Torbay Hospital was fully costed and assessed; whether clinicians were involved in the appraisal and scoring process; and the reasons why alternative options were discounted.

Your response confirms that an options appraisal was presented on 19 March 2026 and a business case considered on 25 March 2026, yet pathology staff were informed of a preferred option on 20 March 2026. Please explain what opportunity remained for staff and clinicians to influence the decision after the preferred option had been identified.

I would also be grateful if you could clarify the statement that there are "no further Board-approved proposals" beyond cellular pathology. While I appreciate the distinction you draw between strategy and formal proposals, you also state that work continues through the Peninsula Pathology Network to explore a more resilient and sustainable regional pathology model. Please therefore confirm what services are included within that work, what scenarios are being considered, and whether any modelling has been undertaken regarding future consolidation of pathology services beyond cellular pathology.

Finally, to assist understanding of the decision-making process, please advise whether the following documents can be provided: the March 2026 options appraisal; the March 2026 business case; relevant risk assessments and risk registers; clinical feedback summaries; Equality and Quality Impact Assessments; and minutes or reports recording consultant and clinical leader feedback.

I look forward to your response.

Kindest regards

Susie Colley
Chair of the Torquay Chamber of Commerce and the Heart Campaign
(Declined) Governor of Torbay Hospital

From: Catherine Lissett, Chief Medical Officer, Torbay and South Devon NHS Foundation Trust (catherine.lissett@nhs.net)
To: Susie Colley (chair@tqcc.co.uk)
Subject: FW: Request for Clarification Regarding Gadeon House and Peninsula Pathology Network

Dear Mrs Colley

Further to your email of 19 May 2026 requesting clarification, I will answer the specific questions you asked in the order you set them out. For completeness, I have included at the end of this email the published extract from the papers for the Board meeting held in public on 07 May 2026.

1) The "time-limited opportunity": what it was and why decisions were taken at pace. The issue we were addressing was a defined estates safety risk affecting our cellular pathology (histopathology) accommodation at Torbay Hospital, including ventilation and formalin exposure risks that cannot be safely mitigated over the longer term. In January 2026, we were advised that ring-fenced NHS England Estates Safety Funding capital was available to address this, but only if an affordable, deliverable solution could be implemented within the financial year and all expenditure was completed by 31 March 2026.

Were consultants formally consulted prior to these decisions being made? Our engagement focused on the clinical leaders and colleagues directly involved in, or impacted by, cellular pathology. Pathology colleagues were briefed on the options and had the opportunity to provide feedback. Clinical service leads (including consultant specialty leads for relevant areas) were briefed, and the pathology clinical service lead was engaged throughout.

Were any concerns raised by clinicians? Our staff have raised many questions. The issues you raise are central to the work and are being addressed through the design of the model and ongoing risk management. Maintaining service quality, turnaround times and clinical support for patients remains a core requirement. Work is now starting with cellular pathology colleagues to co-design the service model for the new laboratory.

Were any formal option appraisals undertaken? Yes. An options appraisal was presented to the Executive Committee on 19 March 2026, and a detailed business case was considered on 25 March 2026. As outlined in the Chief Executive's report to the Board in May 2026, an earlier plan to address this through a new on-site asset linked to enabling works for the New Hospitals Programme did not progress in 2024, leaving an urgent requirement to secure a safe and sustainable solution.

At what point were the Board, clinicians, and staff informed? The preferred option was considered through the Executive Committee in March 2026 (19 March options appraisal; 25 March business case). The Board were briefed regularly by the Chief Executive. Clinical service leads were verbally briefed through their regular fortnightly meetings, as were the Medical Staffing Committee. Pathology colleagues received a personal email from Joe Teape, Chief Executive, on 20 March 2026, setting out the options appraisal and preferred option. Regular fortnightly meetings take place between cellular pathology colleagues, the Chief Executive, Chief Medical Officer and other leads. Confirmation to all staff was shared on 05 May 2026, ahead of the Board meeting in public on 07 May 2026.

"No proposals at this time": clarifying what is (and is not) agreed. Those steps relate to a specific, agreed programme to address an estates safety risk in cellular pathology. The agreed programme comprises an initial relocation of cytology services to release capacity on the Torbay site, and a planned move of routine cellular pathology into fit-for-purpose laboratory accommodation at Gadeon House within an estimated 12-18 months. Urgent and time-critical pathology services will continue to be delivered safely from Torbay Hospital through an on-site Acute Service Laboratory while routine elements transition.

Royal Devon University Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust is separately progressing its own lease arrangements with Torbay Council (the freeholder) for other floors in Gadeon House for the relocation of some of its pathology services.

In parallel with the specific cellular pathology programme, we continue to work with partners through the Peninsula Pathology Network to explore options for a more resilient and sustainable regional pathology model, while maintaining appropriate local service delivery. However, beyond the cellular pathology programme, there are no further Board-approved proposals for other service moves from Torbay Hospital at this time.

I understand your concern about the language of proposals. Strategy describes direction and priorities; it is not, in itself, a set of agreed proposals. A proposal is only created when an option is developed to the point it can be formally decided through governance. In this case, the agreed model is primarily an estates safety and workforce resilience intervention within a clinical support service, and it explicitly maintains urgent and time-critical provision locally from Torbay Hospital.

Should you have any further questions, please submit these through our Freedom of Information process: tsdft.foirequests@nhs.net

Yours sincerely,

Kate Lissett

The text below is taken from the published papers for the Board meeting held in public on 07 May 2026.

Development of Gadeon House for the long-term provision of Cellular Pathology Services. Cellular Pathology involves the examination of tissue and cell samples to support diagnosis and treatment, including the diagnosis of cancer and other serious diseases. These services are safety-critical and rely on specialist laboratory facilities and workforce.

Over several years, we have sought national support to address significant estates safety risks associated with the life-expired temporary building at Torbay Hospital. These risks include ventilation and formalin exposure and cannot be safely mitigated over the longer term. Earlier plans to address this through the creation of a new on-site asset as part of enabling works linked to the New Hospitals Programme did not progress in 2024.

In January 2026, we were advised that capital funding from NHS England was available, subject to a requirement that an affordable and deliverable solution could be implemented within the financial year, with all expenditure completed by 31 March 2026.

An options appraisal was presented to Executive Committee on 19 March 2026, which identified a preferred option to establish a consolidated Cellular Pathology laboratory at Gadeon House, Exeter. This includes an initial relocation of Cytology services to Royal Devon University Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust to release capacity on the Torbay site, followed by a planned move into the fully fitted laboratory at Gadeon House within an estimated 12-18 months.

A detailed business case was brought to Executive Committee on 25 March 2026. Given the time-critical nature of the funding opportunity, the Chief Executive and Chair approved the proposal under our urgent decision-making arrangements on 26 March 2026.

Approval was given for £4.6m of national NHS England capital funding, secured through a time-limited estates safety funding programme. This funding is ring-fenced capital and cannot be used for day-to-day operational or staffing costs. The investment covers lease costs, design development and professional fees, and the fit-out of the laboratory space. We have entered into a 15-year lease with Torbay Council, who are the freeholder of the building, with a Trust break option at 10 years.

Throughout the transition, maintaining service quality, turnaround times and clinical support for patients remains a core requirement. Urgent and time-critical pathology services will continue to be delivered safely from Torbay Hospital through an Acute Service Laboratory, while routine elements transition in a phased and managed way.

Best wishes

Kate Lissett
Chief Medical Officer
Torbay and South Devon NHS Foundation Trust

To: Joe Teape, Catherine Lissett
Date: 19 May 2026, 15:12

Good afternoon

Thank you for your detailed response. I appreciate the clarification provided, however a number of important concerns remain unresolved.

Please can you clarify precisely what consultation took place with consultant pathologists, laboratory clinicians, service leads, and wider clinical teams before decisions were taken to pursue the national capital funding opportunity, enter into lease arrangements for Gadeon House, and progress plans for relocation of services. Specifically: were consultants formally consulted prior to these decisions; were any concerns raised by clinicians regarding safety, workforce impact, transport, turnaround times, recruitment, resilience, or future service implications; were any formal option appraisals undertaken comparing refurbishment at Torbay against relocation to Exeter; and at what point were the Board, clinicians, and staff informed that relocation to Gadeon House had become the preferred option?

Secondly, I remain concerned about the repeated use of phrases such as "There are no proposals at this time" while simultaneously confirming lease agreements, secured capital funding, governance approvals, workforce planning, operational planning, and active scoping work around microbiology and blood sciences consolidation. To many readers, these activities appear to constitute active strategic development rather than merely exploratory discussion.

I would therefore welcome clarification as to whether the Trust has developed any medium or long-term strategic modelling regarding consolidation of pathology or diagnostic services beyond cellular pathology; whether any proposals, draft business cases, strategic outlines, or planning assumptions exist concerning further transfer, merger, or network consolidation over the next 5-10 years; and how this position aligns with the wider One Devon strategy documents.

Given the degree of public interest and concern, transparency on these points is extremely important.

Kindest regards

Susie Colley
Chair of the Torquay Chamber of Commerce and the Heart Campaign
(Declined) Governor of Torbay Hospital

From: Catherine Lissett, Chief Medical Officer (catherine.lissett@nhs.net)
To: Susie Colley (chair@tqcc.co.uk)
CC: Joe Teape, Chief Executive (joe.teape@nhs.net)
Signed jointly by: "Joe and Kate"
Subject: RE: Request for Clarification Regarding Gadeon House and Peninsula Pathology Network

Dear Ms Colley

Thank you for your email of 09 May 2026. We are very aware of the strength of local interest in these matters and welcome the opportunity to clarify our position.

First, we would like to address the comment you reference from the Board meeting held in public on 07 May. The discussion around Gadeon House and histopathology services took place as part of the Chief Executive's report. The remark that there were "no proposals to move any services" was made by Dr Lissett during discussion of our organisational strategy, which was a later agenda item. Our new organisational strategy sets out our overall direction and priorities; it does not contain specific proposals for service change. We can understand how, taken out of context, that comment may have caused confusion.

Is the Trust formally participating in the Peninsula Pathology Network arrangements connected to Gadeon House? Yes, we are a partner in the Peninsula Pathology Network, working alongside other NHS organisations in Devon and the wider southwest peninsula. Gadeon House is a building on the outskirts of Exeter which is owned by Torbay Council.

Are any services planned to be transferred, consolidated, relocated, or shared through Gadeon House? As set out in the Chief Executive's report, there is a specific programme of work relating to cellular pathology (histopathology). A time-limited opportunity arose earlier this year to secure national capital funding to address longstanding estates risks. As a result, a decision was taken to develop a new cellular pathology laboratory at Gadeon House in Exeter. We have entered into a lease agreement with Torbay Council. Separately, Royal Devon University Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust are also entering a lease agreement with Torbay Council for space on other floors. Our programme involves an initial relocation of cytology services to create capacity on the Torbay site, and a planned move of routine cellular pathology work into the new laboratory once completed. Urgent and time-critical pathology services will continue to be delivered safely from Torbay Hospital through an on-site acute service laboratory.

If no service moves are currently proposed, does this apply only to immediate operational changes, or also to future strategic plans? There are no proposals at this time to move other services beyond what is described above. We continue to work with partners through the Peninsula Pathology Network to consider how services can be made as safe, resilient and sustainable as possible over the long term.

Has the Trust entered into any agreements, governance arrangements, financial commitments, workforce planning, or service development discussions relating to Gadeon House? As part of the Gadeon House development for cellular pathology, we have entered into a lease arrangement (with Torbay Council as the freeholder), secured £4.6m of ringfenced national capital funding, and progressed this through our formal governance processes, including executive and Chair approval. Clinical, workforce and operational planning regarding which other pathology services (notably microbiology and blood sciences) is being scoped with the clinical teams, however this is at a very early stage.

We recognise that these are important issues for local people and we remain committed to being open and transparent as our plans develop.

Joe and Kate

Kate Lissett
Chief Medical Officer
Torbay and South Devon NHS Foundation Trust

To: Catherine Lissett
Date: 12 May 2026, 17:22

Good afternoon, Ms Lissett

Thank you for your reply and for taking the time to review the matters we have raised. We appreciate your willingness to look carefully at both the comments made during the Board meeting on 7 May and the wider programme position before responding substantively.

We would very much welcome the opportunity to meet with you in person at an appropriate stage, as we feel a face-to-face discussion may help provide clarity and avoid any unintended misunderstandings that can sometimes arise through correspondence alone.

Kindest regards

Susie Colley
Chair of the Torquay Chamber of Commerce and the Heart Campaign
(Declined) Governor of Torbay Hospital

From: Catherine Lissett, Chief Medical Officer (catherine.lissett@nhs.net)
To: Susie Colley (chair@tqcc.co.uk)
Subject: RE: Request for Clarification Regarding Gadeon House and Peninsula Pathology Network

Dear Mrs Colley

Thank you for your email. I am reviewing the points you raise, including the comments made at the Board meeting in public on 7 May. I will respond fully once I have had the opportunity to confirm the precise context and accuracy of the Board discussion and the current programme position. I will come back to you with a substantive response.

Best wishes
Kate Lissett
Chief Medical Officer
Torbay and South Devon NHS Foundation Trust

To: Catherine Lissett
Date: 9 May 2026, 15:57

Good afternoon Ms Lissett,

I am writing to seek clarification regarding the relationship between Torbay and South Devon NHS Foundation Trust and the pathology consolidation programme associated with Gadeon House in Exeter.

From publicly available information, it appears that Gadeon House is being developed as part of the Royal Devon-led NHS pathology consolidation facility for the wider Peninsula Pathology Network, and that Torbay and South Devon NHS Foundation Trust may be a participating member. However, during the Board Meeting held in public on 7 May 2026, it is my understanding that you stated there were "no proposals to move any services."

In light of this, I would be grateful if you could clarify the following:

1. Is Torbay and South Devon NHS Foundation Trust formally participating in the Peninsula Pathology Network arrangements connected to Gadeon House?
2. Are any pathology, laboratory, diagnostic, administrative, or support services currently planned to be transferred, consolidated, relocated, or shared through the Gadeon House facility, either fully or partially?
3. If no service moves are currently proposed, does this statement apply only to immediate operational changes, or also to future strategic plans under the Peninsula Pathology Network programme?
4. Has the Trust entered into any agreements, governance arrangements, financial commitments, workforce planning, or service development discussions relating to Gadeon House?

Given the level of public interest and the comments made at the Board Meeting, I believe clarification would help avoid misunderstanding. Perhaps it would be helpful if you had time to meet with us so we could help allay the fears of the public?

Kindest regards

Susie Colley
Chair of the Torquay Chamber of Commerce and the Heart Campaign
(Declined) Governor of Torbay Hospital