This site is intended for health professionals only

At the heart of general practice since 1960

pulse june2020 80x101px
Read the latest issue online

The waiting game

Health secretary given right to suspend GPs' pensions before conviction

Pension benefits for GPs could be suspended if they are accused of a crime - without necessarily being convicted - under reforms brought in by the Government. 

Under existing law, the health secretary has the power to suspend all or part of any rights to NHS Pension Scheme benefits where a member is convicted of an offence.

But it has been decided to extend the powers of the health secretary to be allowed to suspend these rights when a charge has been brought, and before any conviction.

The BMA strongly opposed the measure, warning it would subject 'innocent members to hardship', but the Government decided to continue with the proposal despite their protestations.

Last year, the Department of Health proposed to amend the forfeiture of pension benefits as part of a consultation on proposals to change NHS pension scheme regulations.

As it stands, members of the NHS Pension Scheme are liable to have their rights to a pension removed if convicted of a crime that took place before any benefit or other amount became payable.

The Government decided to extend the 'forfeiture' rules so that the secretary of state 'may suspend pension benefits if a member or other beneficiary is charged or convicted with an offence that may lead to all or part of those benefits being forfeited'.

The BMA warned that suspending a person’s pension benefits before they have been proved guilty of a crime would be unfair as it would subject 'innocent members to hardship'.

The BMA said: 'We oppose the proposal to give the secretary of state the power to suspend a person’s pension benefits before they have been proved guilty of committing a crime. This risks unfairly subjecting innocent members to hardship.

'We believe that the proposed new power is neither necessary nor proportionate and should be abandoned. Alternatively, such a power should be limited either by reference to the length of time of the suspension (having regard to the potential length of criminal proceedings) or by reference to the amount of benefits that may be suspended (having regard to the risk of hardship).'

But the Government argued that existing processes are lengthy as the secretary of state first needs to 'seek representations from the member or beneficiary' before they can use their forfeiture powers.

'This takes time and means that a member may claim benefits before the outcome of court proceedings is known or before the secretary of state directs forfeiture,' the Government said.

'As a consequence, a member or beneficiary may receive substantial pension and lump sum payments from the public purse, notwithstanding the fact that the member has been charged with, or convicted of, serious relevant offences.'

Dr Naureen Bhatti, an East London GP and appraiser, called the move disgraceful.

She said: 'I think this would be gross injustice to be able to do this, it’s disgraceful. To do this before someone has even been proven guilty is an absolute disgrace so I would agree with the BMA. I am really shocked to hear this. 

'It’s too open to harming and I think it will harm more people than in the very rare occasions where someone is such a bad criminal that we don’t want them to get their pension out of the public purse. 

She added: 'These things take years to settle and by then people might have lost their home or might not be able to pay their mortgage so it doesn’t strike me as fair.

'If you think about what happened to Dr Bawa Garba, that’s the sort of person who would have lost their benefits if she were in that stage of her career and yet it was a gross miscarriage of justice as the majority of doctors have confirmed and which has now been shown.'

A Department of Heath and Social Care spokesperson told Pulse that the duration of suspension is at the secretary of state's discretion and will be decided on a case-by-case basis. If the person were to be found innocent, the pension would be reinstated, they added.

The Government said: 'The Department acknowledges the concerns raised by respondents and emphasises the discretionary nature of the proposed suspension power.

'The secretary of state is required to act in accordance with obligations under the Human Rights Act 1998, and also to consider equality implications under the Public-Sector Equality Duty and the impact on families under the "Family Test".

'In addition, general public law principles require the secretary of state to maintain an open mind when deciding whether or not to suspend the right to, or payment of, benefits pending a forfeiture decision and to reach a reasonable and rational decision following consideration of all relevant facts. All representations, including those relating to financial hardship, will be considered by the secretary of state.'

It added: 'In circumstances where the secretary of state applies a suspension but does not subsequently direct forfeiture, or directs forfeiture of an amount less than the amount suspended, then the amount suspended or the difference will be paid to the member together with interest.

'In conclusion, having considered the responses, the Department confirms it will proceed to implement the proposed amendments.'

Related images

  • thinkstock photos 564595088
  • Law-Legal-Hammer-Court 3x2
gp heroes nominations2020 180x250px

Readers' comments (36)

  • I don’t see why you lose something you have paid for even if you did commit a crime. In these circumstances are you allowed to claim back all the contributions that have been made to the exchequer. I also thought punishment was the responsibility of the court not the employer. Is this for serious crimes or does it include parking offences....

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Where's Optimus?

    Looks like not enough people dying to allow the ponzi scheme nhs pension to work
    great tax it to death
    and deny as many as you can aswell
    is it worth having the nhs pension anymore ???
    no final salary schemes like the baby boomers

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Where's Optimus?

    Thank God its not Jeremy Hunt

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • The death grip of NHSE, GMC, CQC etc. now extends beyond the world of employment. So my money I earn and pay in can be withheld if I do summat or nuffink? Seems unlikely to fill wannabe recruits with confidence - joining a flogged and faltering profession with a pension subject to the capricious and untrustworthy govt. types. (other secretaries of state are also available)

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Guilty til proved innocent, bunch of c@@&s

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • What happens to politicians &other public sector workers pensions if they have been accused of any crime? Does their pension gets suspended ? If yes then fair enough but if theirs is not suspended and they think they can do it do GP because they are spineless then its shame on BMA & GPC to accept this.
    Bloody crooks & thieves, everybody wants to s**** GPs because we are easy targets and don't hit back

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Cobblers

    Dr Bhatti is against the proposal and then goes on to state "where someone is such a bad criminal that we don’t want them to get their pension out of the public purse".

    Public purse? This is the "criminal's" money, deferred income if you will. It is tantamount to double punishment, one by the courts and one by the SoS for health.

    From what I see even if you are retired and no longer a GP they can stop your pension. Is this really true?

    God these gobshite politicians are truly the dregs of the scum of this earth.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • And yet an MP can still go to prison and claim her MP salary. Says a lot about the clowns running this country. Absolute disgrace all of them.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Nothing particularly new.
    There was a king of Scotland and England, known on the mainland as ‘the wisest fool in Christendom’. They also said of him that ‘he would find you guilty before you were tried and hang you before you were found guilty’.
    History repeats itself?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • National Hopeless Service

    The NHS is in the poop generally so why would anyone spend time thinking this up? Politicians must hate GPs.....nothing new there.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

View results 10 results per page20 results per page50 results per page

Have your say