Skip to main content

GP contract changes will undermine delivery of patient services, warns BMA


The government’s failure to listen to the concerns of thousands of family doctors about changes to the GP contract in England will undermine how patient services are delivered, the BMA warned today (Monday, 18 March 2013).

The warning came as the Department of Health confirmed a raft of changes to the GP contract in England that will come into force on 1 April 2013. The government’s proposals will see general practice facing a range of new targets and additional workload responsibilities, as well as reductions in the central funding that many practices receive.

These changes are being implemented despite thousands of GPs expressing concerns about the proposals in a BMA survey that was submitted, along with other evidence, to the government’s consultation on the changes1.

Dr Laurence Buckman, Chair of the BMA’s GP committee said:

“GPs are committed to working with patients and the government to deliver the highest quality of care to the public.

“However, ministers have completely failed to take on board the concerns of thousands of GPs about the cumulative impact of these proposals on general practice. Practices will face numerous new targets that will divert valuable clinical time and resources towards box ticking and administrative work.

“The decision to make changes to the Quality and Outcomes Framework (QoF) from 2014/15 and other funding areas will make it more difficult for practices to maintain services. This comes at a time when many practices are already struggling to cope under the pressure of rising workload and shrinking resources.

“A BMA survey that drew nearly 8,000 responses demonstrated that the impact of these changes would result in GPs considering reducing patient access and staffing hours.

“Last year, the BMA and NHS Employers came close to agreeing a tough, but fair package of changes that would have resulted in real improvements for patients. These talks were ended when the government decided to pull the plug and threaten to impose their own proposals. This has been followed by a total failure to listen to grassroots GPs during the recent consultation.

“It is unacceptable that the government has ignored this weight of opinion and ploughed ahead with so many ill thought out proposals that run the risk of destabilising patient care.”

Comments

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 ba

The lion and the wildebeest

Birds flock, fish school, bees swarm, but social being is more than simply sticking together.  Social groups enable specialisation and a sharing of abilities, and enhances ability, learning and creating new tricks. The more a group works together, the more effective they become as a team.  Chimpanzees learn from each other how to use stones to crack nuts, or sticks to get termites.  All around us we see cooperation and learning in nature.  Nature is inherently creative.  Pulling together becomes a rallying cry during a crisis.  We have heard it throughout the coronavirus pandemic.  "We are all in this together", a mantra that encourages people to adopt a common strategy. In an era of 'self-interest' and 'survival of the fittest,'  and 'selfish gene', we lose sight of the obvious conclusion from the evidence all around us.   Sticking together is more often the better approach.  This is valid for the lion as it is also for the wildebeest.   We don't

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 cau