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

Don't fill out NHS England's workforce audit, GPC tells practices as it holds urgent talks

Exclusive GPs have been told to hold off on completing a mandatory survey of practice staff, described as ‘intrusive’ and ‘time consuming’ by GP leaders, until the GPC has concluded urgent meetings with the Department of Health.

Pulse revealed in January that GPs had been told by NHS England that they should complete a census of 75 different categories by May, including a report of staff absences, ethnicity and the reasons for staff members leaving, for the NHS workforce Minimum Data Set (wMDS).

The BMA legal department reviewed whether practices can opt-out of the census over data protection concerns, but advised that data sharing powers introduced in the Health and Social Care Act overruled their objections.

As a result, the GPC had said that practices were obliged to complete these forms.

However, the GPC has now advised practices not to begin preparing for the scheme, as has been in talks with the DH over mitigating the ‘significant’ workload burden at a time when GPs are already over stretched.

In a note sent to LMCs, the GPC said that practices should hold off on completing the forms while it holds talks and reviews practices’ legal obligations again.

LMCs have begun disseminating the information, which states: ‘GPC would advise practices to await further guidance before proceeding with the preparation of the data, and GPC will issue further information as soon as possible.’

The GPC had an initial meeting with the DH last Thursday at which the DH agreed to work with the GPC to minimise the burden the wMDS puts on practices and another meeting will take place soon.

The BMA legal department had found that NHS England and the Health and Social Care Information Centre can demand the information under powers granted bysection 259 of the Health and Social Care Act – the same section which blocks GPs from preventing the extraction of their patients’ records under care.data, NHS England’s GP record-sharing scheme.

GPC deputy chair, Dr Richard Vautrey told Pulse that the GPC had concerns over the ‘huge workload’ for practices, and that practices should continue to hold off completing the forms.

He said: ‘Practices have been raising real concerns about this for a number of reasons; the huge workload involved for individual practices, at a time when they’re already struggling; and concerns about what data is being requested, particularly concerns around requests for national insurance numbers for individuals, which many people have been anxious about.

‘So we’ve met with [the DH and HSCIC], and I think they’re very alert to the problems that this is creating and want to work with us to try and find a better way of doing this. So I think it’s early days, and we’ll see whether we can get to a better place.’

‘I think we’re focussed on issues about workload, the practicality, and the collaboration – rather than a threatening approach. That’s the way to solve this particular problem.’

‘We’re hoping to issue something as soon as possible, but it depends really on the outcome of further discussions with the various parties involved.’

A DH spokesperson told Pulse: ‘All parties agree it is vital we get accurate and detailed information from GPs about their workforce because it allows us to plan for future training and recruitment requirements, and also reassures the public.’

‘However, we understand GPs are under pressure, so we will consider the issues raised by the BMA. We are working together to reduce the burden on GPs of submitting this data, and are hopeful we will reach agreement soon.’

Readers' comments (16)

  • Vinci Ho

    Interesting.
    So if there are disputes with two sides of the story ,why don't the two parties see each other in court?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • 11.06 Agreed this looks like preparation for TUPE and nothing to do with workforce planning which shouldn't be a problem because we already know quite a lot about the demographic of our patient population and therefore the resources required to serve them. There seems to be consensus that 8000 GPs are required which is a good enough starting point for now.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • BMJ2015;350:h474
    Inbox
    x
    Dr.Mustafa Rahim

    AttachmentsJan 31 (5 days ago)

    to editor
    My dear editor,

    With reference to the above article in the BMj,there certainly has been a failure in regulation.

    The GMC MPTS has not been regulated in their unholy alliance with NHS ,accepting their allegations not considering public health in the process.

    Though it was pointed as per evidence from Prof Toni Barnet out to GMC MPTS that Sulphonyureas were dangerous to the public lowering blood sugar as strongly as Insulin in their first three years ,as per attachment.GMC MPTS failed to take account of the dangers to the public in not taking action on on NHS,instead persecuting the doctor who blew the whistle.


    Attachments area
    Preview attachment viewer.png

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • sorry Chaand, dont you have other things to do?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • This comment has been moderated.

  • As one practice manager has already pointed out we work for the GP Partners not the NHS and I am not about to divulge any information to any other body. My letter to ICO is on its way. Other way is to fudge all the data given should put a spanner in the work !! I can give some really strange NINOs for them to use!!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I have spoken with my staff and "asked" them for their consent to disclose this "personal information" and have received a resounding no.

    I shall get all my staff to sign a "no consent" form, place it on file and send to whoever requests this information in future.

    I cannot disclose personal information if I do not have the consent of the individual................ can I??

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

View results 10 results per page20 results per page

Have your say