Skip to main content

BMA and RCN call on government to take urgent action on competition regulations for NHS services.

As the NHS in England faces the biggest shake-up for a generation, and with only days to go until new commissioning arrangements for NHS services come into force, doctors’ and nurses’ leaders are today (28 March 2013) calling on the Government to amend controversial regulations to make it absolutely clear how competition will be managed amidst continued confusion and anxiety about the changes. There are increasing concerns from doctors and nurses that competition will be enforced. The BMA and RCN say clarity in the legal framework is crucial, placing beyond doubt the limits of competition.

Regulations laid before Parliament last month provided greater details about how aspects of patient choice and competition would operate under the Health and Social Care Act, which takes effect on 1 April. They were intended to ensure good procurement practice, but prompted widespread concern and uncertainty about the apparent requirement for competitive tendering for most health services.

Although the regulations have since been revised to acknowledge some of these concerns, there remains a lack of clarity around when commissioners will be required to tender all services. The BMA and RCN are concerned that competition risks fragmentation of services, creates unnecessary transaction costs and increases scope for legal challenge, making it harder for the NHS to deliver high-quality, cost-effective and integrated care to patients.

During the passage of the Act, the Government stated on a number of occasions that commissioners would have the freedom to decide which services they would tender. Monitor has the task of producing guidance for commissioners on procurement and competition which is expected to provide clarity on what will be expected of commissioners and how Monitor will discharge its functions in this area. However this guidance has still not been published, causing further uncertainty for commissioners.

The BMA and RCN are asking the Government for:
Immediate and definitive assurances on whether commissioners could legitimately seek to limit competition in all circumstances where it is in patients’ best overall interests
Assurances to be clearly reflected in the legal framework
A firm commitment that commissioners could prioritise patient services over competition and choice, thereby avoiding fragmentation.

Dr Mark Porter, Chair of BMA Council, said: “Although the revised regulations improved the original wording, we stressed the need for this to be supported by clear guidance to provide the assurance and clarity that is needed to ensure that competition does not undermine integration, innovation, or clinical autonomy.

“With major NHS changes coming into force on 1 April, that guidance has still not been published. This has created great uncertainty and anxiety for clinicians and patients, and left commissioners in a potentially vulnerable state. We have not received satisfactory assurances from the Government that would alleviate the considerable fear that commissioners are facing.

“Until we see how the regulations work in practice we cannot be sure that commissioners will have the freedom to act in the best interests of patients. The stakes are too high to take such risks in what is untested territory.

“We urge the Government to give immediate and absolute assurances about the limits of competition, changing the wording of the regulations if this is what it takes, to ensure that its prior commitments match the reality on the ground. Commissioners need to be completely clear about the rules governing commissioning and to know that they will be allowed to make the best decisions for their patients.”

Dr Peter Carter, Chief Executive & General Secretary of the RCN, said: “Even with the recent revisions to the regulations there is still a worrying lack of clarity over how much freedom commissioners will have to provide the best possible care for patients. There is a very urgent need for Monitor and NHS England to publish the promised guidance for commissioners.

“We remain concerned that despite Government assurances commissioners may not be able to put the quality of patient care and integration above the need to provide competition without facing potentially costly challenges.

“The priority for the health service right now should be encouraging integration between services to cope with increasing demand and driving up the quality of patient care. Without Government assurances being reflected in the Regulations, we are concerned that clinicians will not be able to focus on these priorities and commission the services that their patients need.”

Postscript

Here are the links to the LBC broadcast of the Royal Society of Arts debate on the future of the NHS referred to by Jon Danzig in his comment below:


Comments

  1. This week there was a debate at the Royal Society of Arts, broadcast live by LBC Radio, called, “Is this the end of the NHS as we know it?’ I was first in the audience to ask a question, about the founding principles of our cherished National Health Service.

    http://goo.gl/Opnmi (1 minute 20 seconds; edited extract)

    The full debate (52 minutes)

    http://goo.gl/M5Pml

    ReplyDelete
  2. Dear Jon, Thank you for your links. I have added them as a postscript to the feature.

    ReplyDelete

Post a comment

Popular posts from this blog

Ian Duncan-Smith says he wants to make those on benefits 'better people'!

By any account, the government's austerity strategy is utilitarian. It justifies its approach by the presumed potential ends. It's objective is to cut the deficit, but it has also adopted another objective which is specifically targeted. It seeks to drive people off benefits and 'back to work'.  The two together are toxic to the poorest in society. Those least able to cope are the most affected by the cuts in benefits and the loss of services.

It is the coupling of these two strategic aims that make their policies ethically questionable. For, by combining the two, slashing the value of benefits to make budget savings while also changing the benefits system, the highest burden falls on a specific group, those dependent on benefits. For the greater good of the majority, a minority group, those on benefits, are being sacrificed; sacrificed on the altar of austerity. And they are being sacrificed in part so that others may be spared.

Utilitarian ethics considers the balan…

Keir Starmer has a lot to offer

The Labour Party is in the process of making a decision that will decide whether it can recover from the defeat in 2019 General Election.  All the candidates have much to offer and are making their case well.

No doubt for some the decision will be difficult.  Others may well have made up their minds on the simple binary of Left-wing-Right-wing.

The choice should be whoever is best placed to pull the party together.  Someone who can form a front bench of all talents and across the spectrum in the party.

That is what Harold Wilson did in the 1960s.  His government included Roy Jenkins on the right and Barbar Castle on the left; it included Crossman and Crossland, and Tony Benn with Jim Callaghan.  It presented a formidable team.

Keir Starmer brings to the top table a formidable career outside politics, having been a human rights lawyer and then Director of Public Prosecutions.   He is a man of integrity and commitment who believes in a fairer society where opportunities are more widel…

No evidence for vaccine link with autism

Public health bodies are worried that an alarming drop in childhood vaccinations is leading to a resurgence of diseases in childhood that we had all but eradicated.  Misinformation and scare stories about the harmful effects of vaccines abound on the internet and in social media.  Where they are based on 'science', it is highly selective, and often reliance is placed on falsehoods. 
Conspiracy theories also abound - cover-ups, deception, lies. As a result, too many parents are shunning vaccinations for their children.  So, what does the published, peer-reviewed literature tell us about vaccincations? Are they safe and effective, or are there long term harmful effects? 
A new report now provides some of the answers.

New evidence published in the Cochrane Library today finds MMR, MMRV, and MMR+V vaccines are effective and that they are not associated with increased risk of autism.

Measles, mumps, rubella, and varicella (also known as chickenpox) are infectious diseases caused by …