Friday, June 20, 2014
GPC report 19 June 2014
Wednesday, April 23, 2014
GPC Report 17 April 2014
Friday, March 21, 2014
GPC report 20 March 2014
Friday, February 28, 2014
GPC report 20 Feb 2014
Friday, December 20, 2013
GPC report 19 Dec 2013
Thursday, October 24, 2013
CSD and GPC reports from 17 October 2013
Wednesday, September 25, 2013
GPC report 19 September 2013
Monday, July 22, 2013
GPC Report 18 July 2013
Monday, June 24, 2013
GPC report 20 June 2013
Friday, May 24, 2013
LMC Conference 2013 - Day 2
Here is a brief summary of my version of events. As yesterday, its intended audience is my constituent GPs in Sussex and it is not intended to be a detailed account of proceedings.
An hour of networking again to start with resulted in a read-through of the Hunt speech - which says not very much at all. Even the announcement of a Chief Inspector fails to be specific. This could be an opportunity for us to seize the initiative and put forward our vision of General Practice. There is a work stream going on at GPC but it would be most useful to hear from constituents if you have a wish list. I have one, but you may modify it! I hope to have news of sorts after June's GPC meeting.
Conference deplores the destabilising effect of MPIG changes, though the situation is complex. This is something that GPC is already keeping an eye on. Hopefully outliers who are heavily dependent on MPIG will be looked at by NHS England, which as far as I know does not include many or possibly any practices in the Confederation do SSLMCs. I understand the office is in the process of finding that info out.
A fairer funding formula is coming, Conference feels its introduction should be accelerated but made the point that any resources redirected from practices must stay within the envelope of GP funding. The cost effective nature of General Practice was emphasised, a Motion very popular with Conference. The Governments persistent failure to walk the walk and fund General Practice such that we can deliver everything they wish us to, which we could (though not "us" but we could organise it), is persistently and consistently disappointing.
A UK-wide contract is the only way to ensure equity of health provision, a reiteration of past statements but now it is also Conference policy. This will be helpful in the future during negotiations, though it is already emphasised by our negotiators. However, given we essentially have four Departments of Health, each with slightly individual plans, is this sustainable? We will see, I hope it is.
A disappointing 10 minutes was allocated to the vexing issue of Premises and the transfer of leases etc to PropCo (more properly NHS Property Services Ltd). There was brief discussion about the effect on practices and Conference agreed that there is still much to be concerned about. Personally, I was disappointed there were no motions on General Practice premises INVESTMENT.
A proposal to tightly define core services was popular though ultimately lost and in my view core services are already adequately defined in our contracts. Defining specific things we do risks allowing more salami slicing and farming off of work to others. Have a look at your contract under Essential or Additional services, which will tell you what you must do. Anything else should be adequately resourced. On the other hand, the ability to place sanctions (fines in other words) on persistent DNAers was less popular and also lost (thank goodness). The are other ways to deal with this problem. Occupational health issues are of concern and Conference decided to push for more consistency.
A half hour session for Q&A for the negotiating team from the floor covered a wide range of issues. As I alluded to yesterday, there will be an election for the neg team in July. Whether this will result in a change of nuance remains to be seen.
On day 2 there is a half hour "Soapbox" session, where speakers can speak for 1 minute on any matter they like. The topics are always many and varied.
Motions about GPC are always fiery. Despite criticism of communications, which have and are improving, the only demand that was made was that GPC should have its own website. Much was made of the frankly bizarre situation of lack of female representation on GPC. It is difficult to know how this could change given that, arguably, the electoral processes are already on a merit basis. However the motion called for an examination of ways to change matters and was passed. Unfortunately, this work is already ongoing but is being led, inevitably, by the BMA and so is likely to result in changes around the time I am currently planning on retiring in 2030. I just wish more women would actually stand. Finally a motion was passed to set up a training program for younger doctors to facilitate the development of future medical politicians.
After lunch, we discovered one of our colleagues from K&R, Richard van Mallaerts, had been elected as a newbie to GPC from Conference. Having spoken to him at length in the last two days, he will be an asset to the whole profession, at least for the next 12 months...
IM&T issues which were raised included concerns abut the risks of online accessible medical records, data extraction from records and data sharing.
The is a bit of a gap in my awareness of proceedings in the period after IM&T as I was busy trying to figure out the best way to respond to the major debate items. This involved discussion with several colleagues from a variety of LMCs as well as some GPC colleagues. A strategy was agreed upon....
The Major Debate covering mainly the return of OOH was noisy but the message was clear: that our constituents do not want it back. The motion suggesting we take back responsibility fell, so existing policy stands: that we do not take it back. Another motion expressing no confidence in Jeremy Hunt, which in my view is pointless posturing that actually might make it difficult for our negotiating team to engage with the other side, was lost. The other motion in the major debate agreed that GPs are working so hard on guff that it is all getting in the way of "the patient's agenda", which passed.
The end of the second day is always slow, especially after an exciting major debate. I missed most of the last half hour as I was grabbed by Pulse regarding the survey I had sent out to constituents on the OOH issue.
Next year's conference is to be held in York I understand. Next GPC is on 20 June, so more from me then.
Thursday, May 23, 2013
LMC Conference 2013 - Day 1
Arriving slightly late because of problems on the underground, I discovered a lack of both wifi and phone signal. A quick petition to the Agenda committee got them to at least look in to it! Apparently the bandwidth available was inadequate. This will be considered in future years. I was not alone in being unhappy with this, especially given the other meeting going on in the afternoon at the King's Fund which we could not rapidly respond to as a result.
A less rousing than expected speech from Laurence Buckman, his last as GPC Chairman, met with a long standing ovation, to his obvious embarrassment. As a State of the Nation address, we are in a very difficult position. His speech this evening will probably be less politically correct and more humorous.
That so many GPs were speaking so critically of the direction of travel speaks volumes about the professions' feelings on what is happening to our NHS and General Practice. Motion after motion on the enormous problems with resources (reducing) and pressures (increasing) has been passed, many unanimously.
NHS111 needs an enquiry, independent and external, incorporating an examination of the use of the most inexperienced people for triage, contrary to all the evidence about effective triage. Revalidation and appraisal need consistency and a national approach. None of this is news but now it is Conference Policy.
The Primary Care Workforce issues were discussed at length, with so many wishing to speak that timing had to be restricted. The ongoing theme of lack of goodwill, feeling worn down and that enough is enough continued. My own perception is that calling on the Government to take measures is a bit like asking King Canute to put his wellies on. We need to be more proactive and come up with solutions rather than react to the latest mad idea. The problem is to get them to listen. Communication with members also needs to improve, a matter raised by more than one speaker. Recruitment is a major problem all over the country with low numbers of applicants.
That GPC and its negotiators have lost the faith of the profession is a matter which generated enormously strong feelings on both sides of the debate, though debate was short. A stern, indeed ill-tempered, rebuttal from Laurence Buckman swung the day, the Motion being lost comprehensively.
I spent some time after lunch networking with GPC and LMC colleagues before returning to the auditorium. It is both useful and pleasant to put faces to names and meet people who otherwise I may only interact with electronically. Sharing ideas is a useful way to influence opinion, or indeed be influenced.
GP education and training caused much interest, covering extending training, international medical graduates' difficulties attaining similar grades to UK-trained graduates. CQC is not an organisation we have much confidence in and OFSTED style ratings will be unhelpful.
The day was characterised by irritation, anger, frustration. There is an obvious feeling of dissatisfaction in how matters have been progressed or not, in what achievements have been made or not. It will be interesting to see what happens in July, when a new Chair of GPC and negotiating team are elected by GPC.
More tomorrow....
Thursday, April 25, 2013
Strain on A&E...
Just
heard Hunt on Today program, trying very hard to back-pedal and say
that it isn't actually GPs' fault that A&E can't cope with the extra
4 million visits per year but the previous governement for allowing us
to opt out. And to put that 4 million extra consultations into context,
UK GP see 300 million consulations per year. Yes, 2 whole orders of
magnitude more...
Well, for one thing, my "part-time" week
(read the comments on the Telegraph website) is already 47.5 hours, and
that's without the extra I put in. For another, the reason I am tapping
away on the computer is two-fold: most important is I'm keeping records
so I can remember what happened to you years ago; but the way GP is
resourced (NOT how I get paid but how the services in YOUR surgery are
funded) means that if I don't tick an increasing number of boxes (many
of which will do nothing to improve either your health or well-being),
the resources don't come in to pay for the nurses, reception staff,
equipment etc.
So rather than blame ME for poor OOH provision,
fund the bloody service properly in the first place, rather than engage
in a race to the bottom with cheapest wins the tender, set proper
standards that must be adhered to. How about a national strategy, given
it's the National Health Service? Rather than arms-length "oh that's
the fault of local commissioners", who you haven't given the resources
to in the first place. And make sure that A&E departments are
empowered to tell people to go to the appropriate place rather than have
to see and sort them (inadequately, which is not incidentally their
fault).
It isn't bloody rocket science.
Friday, April 19, 2013
GPC report 18 April 2013
GPC Report
For East and West Sussex LMCs
Dr Russell Brown
18 April 2013
The GPC held its meeting on 18 March.
This months report will be brief as, for a change, much of the discussion was confidential.
Equitable funding, locum superannuation and PMS practices news
Discussions are ongoing. A letter to the profession has been sent by Laurence Buckman on 17 April and its contents are about all I can divulge on how the plans for equitable funding are likely to impact on PMS practices. Discussions about the new obligation on practices to pay locum superannuation are still ongoing but are no further forward at this time.
Additionally, there have been discussions about arrangements for collaborative fees and occupational health services for practice staff. But no news.
Communications
There will be an announcement shortly on a policy that is to be implemented very soon. You will have to wait for the announcement but expect some of previously aired concerns by LMC members to be addressed. It should also be noted that it will be an ongoing and developing piece of work, with involvement from the profession and patients being encouraged.
Premises
Work is continuing on nailing down the details for leases and the like. Legal advice is being taken by both sides in an effort to get an agreed and sensible model. However, it will still be necessary for practices to instruct their own advisors to ensure they will be well served by any lease arrangements.
NHS111
I was asked to give an interview to BBC South East Today about NHS111 during this months meeting. Fortunately, I managed to get back to the meeting without missing much about NHS111. In brief, it is still a mess, the tendering process has demonstrably failed, response times are still unacceptable. What we need is a reintegration on the triage service with the face-to-face service. Will it happen? As we already know, there is a political imperative on this. I just hope no one gets hurt.
Commissioning update
There was an update on the recently published conflicts of interest guidance from NHS England, the Monitor document on fair playing fields and an oral update on engagement with the process the Labour Party is going through to try and determine its health policies.
A motion was proposed and passed in all parts. I reproduce it below:
That GPC believes that compulsory practice membership of CCGs with statutory duties as defined by the Health and Social Care Act:
1. risks placing GP partners in a position of untenable conflict between their professional obligations to their patients and the statutory obligations of their practices as CCG members;
2. fundamentally changes the role and nature of general practices, and, in view of recent regulatory changes, risks forcing them to be integral agents of state rationing, cost control and privatisation, seriously threatening the trust between GPs and their patients and therefore posing a risk to the very integrity of NHS general practice;
3. places significant obstacles in the way of GPs and practices acting in accordance with the recommendations of the Francis report as they will be under inevitable pressure to comply with their CCGs' statutory obligations to stay within budgets and to achieve financially and managerially-driven targets which conflict with the needs of their patients;
4. adds to competing pressures on general practice, particularly following the recent contract imposition, and GPC recognises that practices must and will prioritise providing safe essential services to their patients and are therefore very likely to consider limiting their engagement with their CCG and its activities to their contractual obligations;
5. leads it to call upon the BMA , local medical committees to robustly support doctors who are placing the interests of their patients as their first concern and who may be unable to comply with obligations placed upon them by the constitution of their CCG where there is evidence that patient safety may be compromised by the requirements of CCG policy.
Words mean what words say and I will not embellish them by attempting to interpret the beyond repeating them.
I understand there are similar motions going to the Conference of LMCs next month. The next GPC meeting is in June because of this. There will be a report from there as well though.
I hope you have found this helpful. As ever, feedback on my report is encouraged.
Dr Russell Brown
PS It is interesting to see how much more detail is contained in this month's GPC News, which will be on the BMA website soon at tinyurl.com/cuea2rg, as I was under the impression much of the conversation was confidential. Perhaps I should be less discrete...
Wednesday, April 03, 2013
Text of my GPC report 21 March 2013
For East and West Sussex LMCs
Dr Russell Brown
21 March 2013
The GPC held its meeting on 21 March. Much of the agenda and discussions were confidential,
unfortunately. We are now in the new world of CCGs and post-Francis, not that I expect either of
those to make any difference to the direction of travel.
Contract and QOF
Though I cannot report on discussions which took place, details of the imposition and DES
specifications are gradually becoming clearer. It is not pretty and I suspect that at least some
practices will consider carefully whether the new work is affordable. I suppose it may be that
some of the less attractive bits may be possible to do in collaboration with other practices.
Whether that is desirable is for practices to consider. There has already been much comment and
guidance on this so I will not add to it except by pointing to some of it: http://bma.org.uk/practical-support-at-work/contracts/gp-contract-survival-guideThis is a work in progress and will be added
to over time.
The Francis Report
This said nothing terribly unexpected. The BMA welcomed it in the main. I have some concerns
about how it may affect GPs. However, with the rollout of 111 steaming ahead in many places
despite concerns being expressed by many, it appears that HMG and DH are still considering how
to implement some of the suggestions made in the report.
The future of General Practice
Not a GPC piece of work, but a response to a request from the Labour Party to consider how
they should develop their policies on this matter in the future. I can see arguments about being
inside a tent, but I am uncomfortable with this. I am generally cynical about the motives of
politicians.
Commissioning matters
An oral report from the negotiating team generated much discussion and, unusually, a motion
which was passed: "that GPC opposes and calls for the withdrawal of Statutory Instrument
2013/500." This referred to the competition concerns expressed elsewhere. Despite governmental
assurances, I suspect that CCGs will in effect have no choice but to tender services. If we can help
them see how and where they might avoid doing so I am sure they might be inclined to maintain
dialogue.
Premises
Work on premises cost directions is almost complete and there will be a common single set of
documents. The regulations themselves have been signed in to force in the last week. For the first
time there will be a uniform set of guidance notes, available by the end of April. One outstanding
area is the issue of waste of various types but I understand this will be resolved soon. Leases are
coming but still a work in progress.
NHS111 & NHSCB (now NHS England) Single Operating Model
Unfortunately I had to leave the meeting early so Julius will update us on theses items.
The next meeting is on 18 April. As ever, feedback on my report is encouraged.
Dr Russell Brown
Thursday, January 17, 2013
GPC report 17 Jan 2013
For East and West Sussex LMCs
Dr Russell Brown
17 January 2013
The GPC held its meeting on 17 January. The day was in two parts, the morning being GPC-proper, the afternoon being devoted to a strategy session with thought-provoking (no, really) external speakers held under Chatham House rules. I expect to be able to share some of the issues raised in the afternoon with you in the months to come but as it is still a work in progress, now is not the time.
Contract negotiations update:
All of the details that can be shared can be found on the BMA website at
BMA.org.uk/working-for-change/negotiating-for-the-profession/general-practitioners-committee/contract-negotiations The BMA are running a survey until 13 February to gauge opinion from the profession. It can be found at http://www.demographix.com/surveys/6VQM-4EGE/72LVTJPV/
I urge you all to complete it before the deadline though it may be sensible to wait until you have attended the Negotiators Roadshow if you are unsure about the extent of the damage that is about to be inflicted on us. This is also true for our constituents and I would ask that you remind them about the survey repeatedly. The negotiators roadshow on Thursday, 31 January has been confirmed. This will be held in the Aurora hotel in Crawley though I am unsure which negotiator is attending. Julius maybe able to advise. This meeting technically covers Surrey and Sussex. As last month, I would encourage all of you to attend and I would ask that you encourage as many of our non-politically minded colleagues to attend as well. For those unable to attend, I understand that the intention is to webcast the Avon meeting which I believe is on 7 February. Either the LMC office or I will forward details of that when we have confirmation.
Public Sector Pensions update:
A useful presentation from Andy Blake, the head of the BMA Pensions department, updated the committee on where we are. The Bill is currently at the Lords Committee stage, about a month ahead of schedule. This implies a degree of "rush". The Government has conceded that the so-called "Henry VIII" clauses, allowing retrospective changes to Primary legislation using Secondary legislation, are inappropriate and has removed them from the Bill. This is good news though of course in a context of a dire inevitability.
GP workforce issues:
A paper was presented for discussion, to advise and inform strategy for dealing with and helping other bodies involved in issues such as workforce planning, a contradiction in terms as no one knows what the NHS will look like in five years, never mind fifteen to twenty. A learning point for me was that the UK has the lowest number of GPs per head of population of any European country. I already knew about the recent report showing we were also the most efficient in Europe. One can't help thinking those two facts must mean something significant.
The next GPC meeting is on Thursday, 21 February and I will be absent as I am on leave that day. Any feedback or questions are welcomed. I have also started publishing these reports at a blog I used to keep at www.thebrownstuff.blogspot.com so that people can get to it easily. I am not using the blog for anything else these days.
Dr Russell Brown.
GPC Rep East and West Sussex
Monday, December 24, 2012
GPC report 20 Dec 2012
For East and West Sussex LMCs
Dr Russell Brown
20 December 2012
The GPC held its meeting on 20 December. As is often the case there is much that I cannot share with you. However the image below should give you some idea of how I feel the meeting preceded at times.
Contract negotiations update:
You will all have seen the letters sent to the BMA as they have been circulated by Laurence Buckman. Analysis of the imposition documentation is taking place at the tools for modelling the effect on practices is being developed. This should be with us shortly. It is anticipated that there will be another letter in the next couple of weeks from GPC. After this there will be a survey of GPs to gather views on the proposals. This will not be a ballot. I will not repeat the details of the imposition. All of these details can be found on the BMA website at
BMA.org.uk/working-for-change/negotiating-for-the-profession/general-practitioners-committee/contract-negotiations
Given that we are technically in the midst of a consultation about these changes I would encourage all of you to respond to the consultation both individually and through the LMC office. This will enable the BMA to show how much strong feeling there is about this matter. There will be a negotiators roadshow on Thursday, 31 January. This will be held in the Aurora hotel in Crawley. I would encourage all of you to attend and I would ask that you encourage as many of our non-politically minded colleagues to attend as well.
Locum superannuation:
Separately to the contract negotiations the government is suggesting that superannuation payments for locums, which are currently paid by PCOs, will be moved into global sum. This has significant implications the both practices and locums. The BMA will be responding to this consultation in due course.
Data sharing agreement template for risk stratification:
A template has been developed by the BMA. This will hopefully help practices to ensure that local arrangements for datasharing between practices and third parties adhere to appropriate standards of confidentiality. This template will be sent out in due course.
Deprivation:
There was much discussion around the subject of deprivation and workload together with the impact of resource allocation formulae. A motion was passed to the effect that GPC will work with the Department of Health to introduce either a deprivation allowance or other recognition of increased workload in deprived areas. However it should be noted that much of the discussion was around the fact that many health problems may be dealt with by improving resources in other areas such as social services rather than directly in health.
CQC registration fees consultation:
The BMA has now responded to the CQCs recent consultation and the response can be found on the CQC section of the BMA website.
There was also a session of breakout groups to discuss how best to implement the separation of the positions of Chair and Lead Negotiator within GPC. This is a matter of LMC Conference policy. I started the afternoon thinking that the whole idea is madness. I'm delighted to report that by the end of it I was less convinced it was madness but I'm still unconvinced that it can be made to work. More news when I have it.
The next GPC meeting is on Thursday, 17 January.
May I wish you all a peaceful and restful Christmas and New Year.
Dr Russell Brown.
GPC Rep East and West Sussex
Tuesday, November 27, 2012
GPC report November 2012
I was hoping to have more info on the proposed imposition but have none as yet. It does not, however, look good.
NHS 111 is still a mess and looks to be likely to cost around £2.2million per year more than the current system.
The NHS Mandate/online access business will need to be worked on and Jeremy Hunt already seems to be willing to talk about what is possible and more importantly from our point of view, what is not.
And that's it really.
So there will be no written report this month.
Monday, October 22, 2012
GPC report October 2012
For East and West Sussex LMCs
Dr Russell Brown
18 October 2012
This month was a meeting in two parts. The morning was spent in various subcommittees. I am a member of the Commissioning and Services Development Committee, which has a very wide brief.
Discussion was mainly about the ethically rather dubious incentive schemes being published in a variety of places, Harrow being a particularly harrowing example. These schemes aim to directly financially reward GPs for reducing referrals. This has obvious (I hope) implications. The GMC, when asked for comment, were not terribly helpful. I suspect any GP signing up will be on their own if anything untoward happens as a result of schemes like this. The BMA is intending on making it clear what it considers ethically appropriate. It is conceivable this will exceed what the GMC suggests is acceptable. I must confess to some confusion as to why the GMC is not being more clear in its position.
The other main topic under discussion was performance management of primary care (for which read general practice). The relevant team from the DH have been meeting with a small group of LMC secretaries to discuss how this may work. It should be noted that these are not negotiations, more of a feeling the way forward. The LMC secretaries concerned are being robust in their feedback. Eventually, these meetings may pave the way for negotiations about how to might work in a useful way. In the mean time, I recommend that GPs get in the habit of practicing the following mantra, so it can be recited at appropriate junctures, making any appropriate deletions: "My professional registration is with the GMC. My GMS/PMS contract is with the PCT/LAT. I have a contractual obligation to be a member of a CCG. And that's it. Further queries should be discussed with the LMC." We seem to have very good liaison with local emerging CCGs, so hopefully you will never need to use it. I will let you know if anything changes on that front.
There was a brief discussion on the commissioning of Local Enhanced Services. To reaffirm, unless a single contract is going to exceed £100,000 there is no need to go to tender. There is also no requirement on CCGs to use either the AQP route or competitive tendering. In e context of a LES, the contract size depends on the size of the practice, not on the size of the budget. So a budget of £250,000 does not require tendering if all practices will be taking part in a LES, as the individual contract with each practice will be under the limit.
The afternoon session was the full GPC meeting.
The need for confidentiality was repeated, forcefully.
The GP IT Subcommittee reported that work is ongoing to try and make the transition of GP IT support services as painless as possible. Many of the problems arise from the fact that the amount of funding in many areas is uncertain, so many PCOs are unable to tell the NHSCB with any certainty how much money it needs to budget for these services.
I will now report on other matters, including the current state of negotiations for GMS/QOF for 2013/14, as far as I am able to:
I hope this report is useful. Please feed back any comments if you would like me to present it differently. Additionally, if you have any matters you wish to discuss or that you would like me to raise at GPC, please contact me by email at my email address, which I'm not posting on blogger :)
Dr Russell Brown
GPC and Chair East Sussex LMC
Friday, September 21, 2012
GPC report September 2012
For East and West Sussex LMCs
Dr Russell Brown
20 September 2012
This month's meeting took place in BMA House in London again, as the Olympic season is over. The day started with a rather uninteresting 10 minute GPDF AGM and I will not subject you to further information on that.
There was discussion around the recent Dispatches program which effectively blew the whistle on the way DWP assessments are being undertaken by ATOS. A letter will be sent to the DWP asking what they are going to do about. Additionally, a meeting between Laurence Buckman, Mark Porter and the Minister has been organised for October to discuss the matter.
The matter of NHS Pledge cards was discussed briefly. I understand this will be considered by BMA Council next week. The intention of the cards, as I understand it, is to enable GPs to reassure patients that they are supporting the NHS by only referring them to NHS hospitals. Personally I am uncertain that this is something that is sensible for the BMA to commit to given the huge local variations in service availability and quality. I would be reluctant to commit to a scheme of this nature if I knew a local private or AQP provider would be a better choice for the patient sat in front of me for example. GPC's position is that we are neutral on the matter until we have more details to consider.
Pension matters have been quiet over the summer. I understand however they are to be discussed at BMA Council next week. The Public Service Pensions Bill was published on 13 September and as you know it's purpose is to address the claimed unsustainability of Public Sector Pensions. The BMA strongly believes that the scope of these changes is unfair and will adversely impact staff in the NHS Pension Scheme for reasons we have discussed before. The BMA is working on several strands of work. Firstly, the BMA is involved with the Working Longer Review, looking at the impact on health workers; secondly work with the other health unions to look at the principles of the relative contributions; lastly using the publishing of the Bill as an opportunity to lobby Parliamentarians and make them aware of our concerns.
Reports from various of the subcommittees were received. There seems to be an issue in the Kent, Surrey and Sussex Deanery area where GP Trainees who require further training are only being offered part time positions, apparently so as to avoid the prospect of a waiting list (and no work). Funding seems to be the issue. Many of the individual doctors concerned are vulnerable for one reason or another and seem to be unrepresented by anyone but GPC so far. The GP Trainee subcommittee is watching the situation. Of interest to some practices in the federation will be the fact that CSC, the provider of iSoft Synergy and Premier GP IT systems will not be supporting them after October 2013, necessitating a change of system for those practices. This will be managed carefully to avoid problems with QOF data degradation.
In better news, there has been movement on Revalidation: GP remediation will be funded in certain circumstances by NHSCBA from central funds, namely where the training needs to take place away from the normal place of work. However, I heard nothing about locums and am concerned that most GPs in need of remedial training will have it in their practices and so am unclear how this will be funded. Criteria for deciding on eligibility for this will be discussed and decided with the BMA in due course, but I have no idea how long that will take or what will happen in the mean time. Some colleagues may have seen stories in the press about the BMA agreeing that Revalidation can go ahead. That isn't quite right but the BMA has agreed that its seven principles have been met sufficiently to allow the process to move forward, though there are still many outstanding issues which need to be addressed.
The authorisation process for CCGs moves on in unstoppable fashion. We are fortunate locally that there is LMC involvement in developing our Constitutions. In some areas there are reports of CCG Boards behaving quite irresponsibly which doesn't bode well for their longevity I would think.
Finally, the juggernaut of NHS 111 similarly moves on. There are still many problems which the project board seems to find difficult to comprehend. Many of these are manifestly patient safety issues. The dispositions need much work. Pilot areas are feeding information back to GPC. The ScHARR report into the performance of the pilot schemes is inexplicably still unpublished, having been in the hands of the Ministry for some time.
I hope this report is useful. Please feed back any comments if you would like me to present it differently.
Dr Russell Brown
GPC and Chair East Sussex LMC
