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

Indemnity provider calls for clarity over state-backed scheme

The Government needs to clarify who and what will be covered in the new state-backed indemnity scheme for GPs in England, the Medical Protection Society (MPS) has said.

The indemnity provider argued that, as it stands, it is unclear 'what is and is not covered in the new scheme, particularly concerning non-NHS work', causing distress among its members.

It said it was also unclear who will and will not be covered, adding that the scheme 'should reflect and support new ways of delivering primary care and be as simple as possible for practices'.

Speaking at the Westminster Health Forum conference on the future of general practice, MPS medical director Dr Rob Hendry said that the Department of Health has to address a number of key issues to ensure GPs are protected against claims.

He called on the DH to involve 'clinical negligence experts, and those with a detailed understanding of primary care and the needs of GPs' throughout the development of the scheme.

He also said the DH has to ensure GPs have a 'smoth transition' from their existing indemnity defence schemes to the state-run version.

Dr Hendry said: ‘These are the issues our members would like greater certainty on at this time, so they can make informed decisions that meet their needs both now and in the future.

‘We will continue to push the Government to ensure swift progress is made and that GPs get that much needed certainty.’

The news comes after the Medical Defence Union saw a backlash after overhauling their policy in light of DH's indemnity announcement two months ago.

The DH warned GPs who took out the cut-price indemnity policy would not be covered for the period up until the state-backed scheme is launched.

But the MDU wrote to GPs to ask them to help it push for the DH scheme to include 'all historic liabilities for the benefit of all GPs'.

The DH has since said that reductions in GP indemnity costs 'will depend on negotiations' and cannot yet be guaranteed.

Readers' comments (3)

  • David Banner

    Well I'm glad we've cleared that all up..........

    What a dog's breakfast.
    Is the half price MDU water tight? Definitely maybe.
    Are MPS cutting their prices? Nope.
    Does anyone know the details of the state backed scheme? Errrrm...

    Just at the time that sinking GPs need certainty on the nuclear issue of exponential ruinous rises in indemnity we are presented with obfuscation and vagaries. Hunt booted this into the long grass to stop all the moaning, now it's time for BMA/RCGP to skewer him for clarity.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • This maybe something at last we can all rally around to support industrial action. We don't have to worry about harming patients if we strike, as after all we can't practice safely if none of us have or can't afford indemnity.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Oh yes, they do need clarity to ensure their lucrative business doesn't suffer. A couple of billions in reserves is not enough.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say