Community hospital campaigners are continuing to fight a controversial decision by councillors not to "call in" plans to close beds.

They say key concerns initially raised by councillors have still not been addressed, and that the original vote - to refer the decision to Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt - should therefore stand.

It follows a meeting of the Cumbria Health Scrutiny Committee on March 22, which saw votes taken by councillors earlier in the day later overturned with no clear explanation.

An investigation was launched after it emerged four of the 11-strong committee left before the final vote, with three later claiming they were confused and would otherwise have stayed.

Protesters demanded it be re-run, but Katherine Fairclough, chief executive of Cumbria County Council, has since concluded that there are no grounds to hold the vote or meeting again.

Groups are now calling on her to allow the votes taken earlier in the day, when all councillors were present, to stand.

Alston hospital campaigner, Alix Martin, has again written to Ms Fairclough after her initial letter did not get a response.

She said: "I want to make some further points, which I request you address as a matter of considerable urgency.

"As far as can be ascertained from the brief notes of the in camera meeting and what was reported in the minutes of the main meeting, not to mention statements made by some of the councillors who were present at the end of the meeting, none of the eight points identified as reasons for referral were considered or answered.

"The statements concerning the support for the alternative plans for the community hospitals are empty as far as we on Alston Moor are concerned. Our alternative plan includes medical beds as a flexible option within our proposed integrated care facility. Thus words of support for the alternative plan are entirely meaningless."

The scrutiny meeting was held to determine whether highly-unpopular NHS plans for health services should be "called in".

The scrutiny committee, made up of county and district councillors, has the power to refer decisions to the Secretary of State if it does not believe they are in the best interests of local people.

However, in the end only plans for maternity were referred - not paediatrics or community hospital beds.

Ms Martin went on to add: "It seems clear that the ill-informed vote of the remaining councillors at the end of the meeting should not be permitted to overturn the earlier, properly-considered, vote.

"We demand that the later vote is cancelled, and the original vote, with all the voting councillors present, should stand and be acted on."

The We Need West Cumberland Hospital campaign group has written a similar letter to Ms Fairclough regarding children's services.

Annette Robson, from the Whitehaven group, said: "The vote taken at the end of the meeting was contrary to the evidence provided at the meeting and the views and votes of the full complement of committee members were not taken into account. While 'due process' may have been followed, the process was flawed.

"Furthermore, that the preparation and chairing of the meeting allowed four out of the 11 members to misunderstand or leave can only be blamed on the process. We are asking you to recognise the importance of your role, to admit that the process was flawed and to remedy the situation in the only way that makes sense."