---

Polyclinics

I am grateful for that intervention, as it gives me the opportunity to make my final point, which is about what happens if we cut through some of the nonsense and look at what is being proposed. As I mentioned in my intervention earlier, I had a very interesting document from the BMA, which was sent out to all GPs and local medical committees in May—just last month. The document is called ““New NHS Primary Care procurements””, and it is described as a ““factual guide””. It is an example of the BMA talking sensibly to its own people, rather than getting all excited about a public campaign against things that some people do not like. The factual guide includes a very nice table that sets out what it calls the ““key differences”” between health centres and polyclinics. Hon. Members can read it. It then goes on to describe the background to the policy, which is exactly the point that has been made. It talks about the Darzi review, and says that a central tenet of it"““has been the importance of determining primary healthcare services locally.””" It goes on to state that the review sets"““out a rigorous process requiring any change to be transparent, clinically evidenced, locally led and for the benefit of patients.””" When the BMA is talking for grown-ups, it tells the truth about what is on offer, but when it is putting petitions around surgeries and telling people that all their local surgeries will close, it talks dishonestly. The fact is that we have a proposal—it might not have been necessary if primary care services had reformed themselves in the way that they should have done over the years, but they have not—that will extend the range of services available to patients. That is a very good thing and it is dishonest to pretend otherwise.