anon2016 suggests that not much will happen: and I agree with him -- it won't happen actively. But without a doubt it will happen (passively), because there will come a point in every professional's life when he/she simply won't be able to cope any more and will then resign.... leaving his/her patients in the abyss.
I have said for decades that we won't save the NHS if we refuse to go on strike. No-one will listen until it's too late and by then General Practice will have collapsed permanently. What we always needed to do was to stand up to the the NHS political bullies and give them a very firm ultimatum... and then walk away from the NHS if nothing happens.
Sadly, it's almost certainly too late now.
What is the alternative to the Bedfordshire LMC's motion? That if practices fail, their doctors then leave primary care entirely? Who will that help? On the other hand, if these doctors stay in general practice (but offer themselves privately) at least some patients will get some primary care).
The motion is simply calling on GPC to provide guidance and support to help them do this more effectively, should they choose.
The alternative? - probably no GPs of any sort, in the entire country, in a very short time. That won't help anyone.
Probably the most unpleasant effect of CQC is what it does to morale generally. Prof Field says that perhaps they ought to rate more practices as outstanding. Too right they should! What message does it give off to everyone else if you can bust a gut over your practice and not be acknowledged for it? Bearing in mind just how hard GPs work, in the most tiring and stressful of circumstances, being told repeatedly that you 'could do better' is simply a kick in the teeth. If it wanted to demoralise primary care, CQC probably couldn't devise a better way to do it.
Do you want to know a really good way to reduce referrals? Use the e-Referrals Advice and Guidance feature. Research suggests you'll probably be able to reduce your referrals hugely as a result.
Hunt's original promise was for 5,000 more GPs, not HCAs, nurses, pharmacists, staff. He needs to be reminded of this, bluntly and called out for his spinning of the situation.
Isn't it amazing how, given a problem within the NHS, the authorities take every possible action except the one actually necessary to deal with the situation?
'Secretary of State to be made personally responsible at law for any failures within the NHS' might do a little more good, don't you think?
The Emperor Nero comes graphically to mind...
With a bit of luck they will delay this for so long that the money will only be released the day after the last practice has folded... thus saving all that money which would otherwise have been wasted.
To me, 'removing medication errors' starts with having a decent system, with minimal copying (=minimal transcription errors).
We need a national medication database for each patient, from which everyone works, whether in hospital, primary care, private medicine, community, OPD, wards... so there is an immediate understanding of what the patient is taking. (A single database doesn't mean a single software program to run it, BTW).
Then we need a total absence of silly rules ('you can't put CDs on repeat dispensing' -- which I suspect was why Repeat dispensing never took off that well at the beginning).
Then we need prescriptions which are written to cover clinical needs, not financial ones. All that faffing around to repeat prescriptions every month for longterm medication such as levothyroxine is simple wasting time and increasing the possibility of transcription and transmission errors (electronic and physical).
Finally, we need time to make the decisions: and it's got to be unhurried and not pressurised. Tired, overwhelmed staff will make mistakes: it's not their fault as much as the system which creates that tiredness and that sense of being overwhelmed.
... and ONLY at that point should anyone start to investigate the competencies of the prescribers themselves (though will all the above in place, I suspect that the level of mistakes would already have dropped precipitously.)
Great... provided the rules are changed so that as a GP I can fast-track into being a brain surgeon. No? I need fuller training to be a brain surgeon? Really?
Then why cut down the time needed to learn to be a GP -- probably the hardest job in medicine to do well?
You really couldn't make it up, could you?
Many congratulations to the coroner for expressing such a sensitive, forthright and brave response.
Seems to me that it's a case of 'if the NHS provides the money it unblocks the log-jam.'
Fine. Just what GPs have been saying for years. Now do it nationwide.
Very important to ensure indemnity for locums and especially for those with portfolio careers.
The totally disproportionate size of the penalty and the fact that it is also a criminal matter speaks volumes about the utter incompetence, cluelessness and insensitivity of certain of those 'managers' (sic) who run the NHS.
May I also remind people of the fact that if you are given a criminal record it will affect your GMC registration; your ability to work abroad; even your ability to emigrate, etc.
The whole plan is total overkill, made worse because (1)the object of the exercise isn't really what general practice is directly about (2) those 'managers' in the NHS 'organising' (sic) this need to put their own house in order first.
This will only work if the risk is taken by the NHS, not by individuals or individual practices.
Why don't we formally instigate an NHS policy of 'cutting money for anyone who actually does things' -- thus leaving more for all the talking shops, committees, new layers of management, new investigatory powers, new consultation processes...
You mean it's cock-up, not conspiracy?