This site is intended for health professionals only

At the heart of general practice since 1960

pul jul aug2020 cover 80x101px
Read the latest issue online

Independents' Day

Mark Hazell

  • 'Indemnity fees are killing our profession' - sign this letter to Jeremy Hunt

    Mark Hazell's comment 01 Sep 2017 12:52pm

    Mark Hazell

  • Professor Mayur Lakhani elected RCGP president

    Mark Hazell's comment 01 Jun 2017 9:01pm

    I think we need to remember that we are self-employed. When changes that require large amounts of extra work for no reward are made to the contract we should just refuse to accept them.
    I don't know of any other profession that accepts a contract that changes yearly and is so untransparent on how it is funded (does anyone fully understand the Carr-Hill formula?)
    If the government was serious about preventing the collapse of general practice they would not be adding frailty reviews etc to our core contract. When something gets stopped and the 'funding gets put back into the global sum' you have no idea if it really has or not. It also means that surgeries that worked hard to maximise incomes from revenue streams would lose out as the funds would then be evenly distributed amongst all - this is my main concern should Qof be scrapped.
    Indemnity would be a great way of improving take home pay without causing too much retribution in the press. Total reimbursement or crown indemnity.
    Also any new auxiliary staff should be funded by the NHS via a reimbursement scheme.
    NHS underwriting of risks of last man standing would be much appreciated too as well as providing completely free premises fit for purpose.
    Politicians must be truthful about what can be expected from the NHS so that we don't have to waste time dealing with complaints about waits, lack of local services etc.
    Changes of the hospital contract to ensure that they must provide a well staffed system to deal with patient queries re: appointments and results.
    RCGP should be more vocal in the press about the increased cost when there is private involvement in healthcare - APMS contract costs vs GMS would be a good starting point to analyse and compare.
    The other larger private subcontractors have the right idea - they charge much more and even have the ability to hide behind 'commercial sensitivity' rules to avoid releasing information on medical complications, uncovered shifts etc.
    My wish list is long and unrealistic but I would settle for us recognising the fact that we are in a position of power when it comes to declining enforced changes in contract. The feeling that we have no say regarding our workload is stressful and embittering. Use our independent contractor status to our advantage.

  • Close to four in 10 GP practices set for CQC reinspection within a year

    Mark Hazell's comment 11 Apr 2017 8:10pm

    I'd keep quiet about that Simon. They might have forgotten you - result!