Proceeding contribution from Lord Lansley (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 23 April 2008. It occurred during Opposition day on Family Doctor Services.
Family Doctor Services
That is interesting. I understand exactly what my hon. Friend has said. If there were a rationale behind the measure, the many GPs whom I have met in many places across the country would be supporting it. If it was going to provide better services for their patients, they would understand that. In some places, better services are being provided. Macclesfield is an example. My hon. Friend the Member for Macclesfield (Sir Nicholas Winterton) is not here, but if he were, he would ask us to consider what happened in his constituency. General practices there wanted to come together and create a single premises for the whole town. They have done that, and the services are there. What is happening now? The Government say that there must be a polyclinic in every primary care trust, so the GPs in Macclesfield are threatened by the fact that the PCT wants to create another polyclinic in the PCT area. That would undermine those GPs' situation. Frankly, that is not acceptable. The Government made a complete mess of the GP contract. To give a simple measure of that, they paid £1.76 billion more than they were planning to. The National Audit Office reported that the Government said that under the new contract they were expecting a productivity gain in primary care of 1.5 per cent. a year. In fact, there was a drop in productivity of 2.5 per cent. in each of the first two years. The Government got the precise opposite of what they were hoping for—and we know the whole story of what happened to out-of-hours services across the country. Interestingly, local primary care trusts that cared about open access and extended opening hours for patients—they now claim that they do—had opportunities in the contract to provide them. Local enhanced services could have commissioned Saturday morning surgeries or extended opening hours on weekdays. I find it utterly astonishing that back in February, in the midst of a conflict with the British Medical Association, I could ask the Secretary of State whether he knew whether primary care trusts had commissioned local enhanced services for extended opening hours and get the answer that he did not even know. Having not used the contract for the purpose for which it was intended, the Government now blame GPs for the costs and consequences of a contract that they negotiated and pressed GPs to accept.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 474 c1319-20
- Session
- 2007-08
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Contracts Finance General practitioners NHS Patients Primary care Public participation Standards Health centres Treatment centres
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2025-02-27 10:21:41 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_465688
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_465688
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_465688