I would have thought that somebody would have worked out a formula by now whereby the well funded practices are given a handicap so as to create a level playing field. The CQC would never consider this - so might Pulse rise to the challenge?
It was ever thus. I regularly used to get 'doesn’t meet the referral criteria' letters. I got the impression that this was the standard reply irrespective of the merits of the case - the sole objective being to keep referrals down to a manageable level. I suppose I should have invariably written back to say: "Please explain exactly why this doesn’t meet the referral criteria."
A nurse practitioner who had a reputation for being very adept at dealing with teenage girls with mental health problems once confessed to having fleetingly thought in a moment of desperation: "If only she'd self harmed" ... because that was the key to getting these patients seen quickly.
The other perpetual gripe was something that was called 'The Crisis Team' - which we used to call 'The 3 days After the Crisis is Over Team' as they were often very slow to respond - so we had to do our best to cope in the interim. To misquote Longfellow, "When they were good they were very, very good - but when they were bad they were horrid."
Whatever the ins and outs of it, GPs are left feeling unloved and unsupported - which adds immeasurably to their stress levels.
As you say, it's the old story of the clinicians having been held to account for the faults of the system. It's well known that the well funded practices by and large get better ratings than the poorly funded ones.
It's hardly surprising that this situation has arisen given that GPs have been so badly treated over the years by those running the show. At one time, though, the practices that were really struggling were very much in a minority. These days even well funded practices are going to the wall. How sad - and what an unparalleled feat of mismanagement!