Cookie policy notice

By continuing to use this site you agree to our cookies policy below:
Since 26 May 2011, the law now states that cookies on websites can ony be used with your specific consent. Cookies allow us to ensure that you enjoy the best browsing experience.

This site is intended for health professionals only

At the heart of general practice since 1960

GP leaders condemn 'transformation' plans as ‘an attempt to dismantle the NHS’

GP leaders have voted to oppose the 44 regional plans to overhaul the NHS across England because they are undemocratic and will lead to cuts.

Debating the so-called ‘sustainability and transformation plans’ (STPs) at the annual LMCs Conference in Edinburgh today, delegates passed a motion to ‘condemn’ them as 'an attempt to dismantle the NHS’.

GP leaders decided that the STPs do not represent the public or GPs, that they will increase the ‘postcode’ lottery of available services for patients, and that they will place a wedge between NHS providers.

Delegates further voted that ‘the only possible outcomes are cuts in services and/or increases in waiting times’.

Presenting the motion, Dr Ivan Camphor from Mid Mersey LMC recalled the pledges made when the Health and Social Care Act 2012 was rolled out.

He said: ‘Whatever happened to “no decision about me without me”, “no more top-down reorganisations”? Words, conference, are sadly cheap and plentiful and it appears that words do come easy.

‘Their plans are based on wilful self-delusion, that mobile phones alone will change outcomes on obesity, that Skyping will alone reduce consultation times, and that volunteers can take up places of well-trained NHS staff.’

He added: ‘Evidence that reconfiguration produces financial savings is almost entirely lacking.’

Pulse has previously reported that GPs were largely excluded when the STPs were drawn up in haste over the past year.

The motion in full:

Proposed by Mid Mersey LMC: That conference believes that the Sustainability and Transformation Plans are fundamentally flawed, and:

(i) believes that they are undemocratically appointed quangos that do not represent the public or profession;

(ii) condemns them as an attempt to dismantle the NHS;

(iii) asserts that they will only increase the postcode lottery;

(iv) believes that they will stimulate further division between organisations despite intending to promote integration

(v) the only possible outcomes are cuts in services and/or increases in waiting times.

Passed in all parts

Readers' comments (3)

  • Theoratical concept of avoiding duplication and standardizing services is not a bad thing.

    But if that is the true intention, why do we have 44 plans across the country? Why not just have one plan made by DoH? Why exclude clinicians and public from consultation? And why task local areas with X millions to save, rather then national saving?

    I think the above question leads to answer we all know.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • AlanAlmond

    The NHS is already being dismantled and we are all standing around watching muttering and condemning the process...and yet still continues and at some point in the not too distant future it will be gone...and folk will be talking about that too.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I for one am not condemning the dismantling of the NHS; it's way beyond its sell-by-date. It only survived this long by exploiting its own staff and mining 3rd-world countries for their medical staff.
    And I had enough and am in the process of emigrating.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say