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

Kingsland: Practices should hold commissioning budgets

CCGs should be devolving responsibility for their budgets to the level of individual GP practices, in order to enable the NHS to tackle the challenges ahead, a leading commissioning GP has claimed.

Dr James Kingsland, who is president of the National Association of Primary Care and a GP in Merseyside, said GPs should be ‘personally responsible’ for managing commissioning budgets so that they are devolved to the level where decisions were being made.

He told Pulse the Government’s original plans for ‘commissioning at scale’ were supposed to lead to GP practices holding the budgets and being personally responsible for commissioning services.

He claimed that CCGs’ work has been patchy, with some real innovation from some CCGs but with others replicating PCTs.

He said: ‘What really changes the behaviour of a cohort of general practices across the country is making them personally responsible for the budget. If patients with a low complex condition in GP opening hours goes to the A&E, there is no real incentive for the practice other than the CCG saying “did you realise this is happening?” for them to make a change to ensure it never happens again.

‘My understanding of commissioning at scale was to get CCGs devolving budgetary responsibility to where the decision was made. That decision was always at the interface with the patient, or the patient’s decision, so they will end up with an urgent care centre… CCGs don’t necessarily commission. They manage contracts, procure services but they don’t make the referral themselves.’

GPs are already doing this, he said, but there is no accountability for their decisions.

He added: ‘GPs are doing this anyway. There are thousands of GPs sitting in surgeries making commissioning decisions. They’re assessing the need of the individual and making a decision to secure the services needed. At the moment, the individual making that decision has no accountability to the budget that goes with it.’

This would help GPs remain independent contractors and repel any move to general practice become a salaried profession, he added.

‘Being an independent contractor and self-employed goes together. There is a reason for it and the efficiency of managing a population and being self-employed is all part of why the NHS is free at the point of access… General practice does 80% of the work for 8% of the funding – it is very efficient. We want to put that efficiency into the wider NHS.’

The current system is not true commissioning, he said. ‘That is what I thought was GP commissioning – anyone who thought GP commissioning was the creation of new organisations that have a few clinicians on the board, we should have just had GPs on a PCT board, that would have saved a lot of pain.’

Readers' comments (8)

  • This comment has been deleted by the moderator.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • So he wants even more pressure on individual GPs.

    Change requires investment and more resources i.e. more GPs.

    This would demoralise us further. We do not have the resources to prevent patients going to A+E. We have no sanctions on irresponsible patients going there with trivial complaints that we do not need to see . We do not have the capacity anyway.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • What a load of tosh .

    If GP's are doing 80% if work for 8 % of the budget
    The problems lay else where.
    There should be no conflict of interest at clinical
    decision level.
    There is merit in saying the ccg have decided
    Something is no longer funded rather than
    Compromising your relationship with the patient in
    the consultation .

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Yet another reason to relinquish my partnership. I'm almost beyond caring now. Sad but true.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I disagree. Funding decisions have no place in the consultation room. Small practices with high year on year variation would be disadvantaged through additional pressure and the resulting stress. Furthermore, it is both professionally insulting and untrue to state that there is no incentive to address unnecessary use of A&E unless there would be an immediate impact on one's other patients

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • This would be the final straw if it goes ahead. Some patients will always choose A+E - however inappropriately - even if you offer to see them at the practice immediately. We cannot police patients actions - just advise and point out inappropriateness where applicable. My degree isn't in economics or business studies. Funding has to be at a CCG level rather than individual practice level. I am too busy doing the job I trained for to take on anything else.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Ridiculous - practices tend to have very limited scope for their own practice lists and doing the best for THEIR patients - this is just more responsibility abdication from central government with their teflon shoulders and will result in post code lottery of healthcare provision!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I know, lets call it "fundholding" !!!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say