This site is intended for health professionals only
Wednesday 23 May 2012
Facebook Twiter Linkedin

Lansley backs away from complete abolition of practice boundaries

By Andrew McNicoll | 24 Oct 2011

The Government does not plan to entirely abolish practice boundaries and may restrict patients to registering only with GPs covered by their local commissioning group, health secretary Andrew Lansley has said.

In his keynote speech to the RCGP Annual Conference this weekend, Mr Lansley said he wanted to extend patient choice when practice boundaries are relaxed from next April - but pledged that clinical commissioning groups would ‘preserve responsibility' for the health of their population.

His speech - which ‘softened his stance completely' on practice boundaries, according to GP leaders - backs suggestions from NHS Future Forum chair Professor Steve Field revealed in Pulse earlier this month that practice boundaries will not normally be extended beyond the borders of a commissioning group to ensure GPs retain responsibility for a geographical area.

In a bid to win GP backing for his reforms, Mr Lansley told delegates that although the issue of practice boundaries was ‘very controversial', he was looking at ways to work around the issues without abolishing them entirely.

He said: ‘I'm clear that whatever we do, general practice must always remain rooted in local communities. We need to think carefully about how to manage home visiting, about how patients who don't live locally to their practice can receive urgent care, and about how information is shared.'

‘We will make sure it is done in a way that will preserve the responsibility for CCGs for the health of their local population.'

When pushed to clarify his position, Mr Lansley said:‘I am not abolishing, or about abolishing, practice boundaries. I am intending to extend patient choice.'

In the speech, he defended the NHS reforms, but also said the Government would ‘happily' amend the health bill to allay fears over the secretary of state's accountability for the NHS and slow the introduction of any qualified provider and said he was ‘very sympathetic' to the need for enhanced GP training.

GP leaders welcomed Mr Lansley's comments.

Dr Clare Gerada, RCGP chair and a GP in Kennington, south London, said: ‘We heard four concessions today.'

‘Mr Lansley didn't make an enormous song and dance about it but I think they were concessions and he softened his stance on practice boundaries completely. He has changed the line to one of "patient choice" rather than removing practice boundaries.'

‘But there are still grave concerns about the bill. What amazed me is that I did not hear enough acknowledgement from Mr Lansley of the need to address our concerns. There are so many people in the medical profession saying the same things and we are not all lemmings. I would quite like some acknowledgement that there are issues.'

Two years ago Mr Lansley, then shadow health secretary, labelled practice boundaries ‘a solid wall of defence' against patient choice, and proposals to open up GP lists remain a key plank of the Government' vision of NHS modernisation.

The health secretary's defence of his NHS reforms failed to win over all GPs. In a heated Q&A session, just one GP spoke in support of Mr Lansley, as delegates told him he was ‘patronising' the profession by claiming GPs ‘misunderstood' key elements of his reforms, and attacked claims that doctors back the bill, which they said was ‘plainly not the case'.

Dr Pete Deveson, a GP in Surrey, told Mr Lansley:‘You've repeatedly claimed you're not privatising the NHS, but surely that depends on how you define privatisation?'

‘Your intention to maximise the number of private providers will inevitably bankrupt the single payer, necessitating the introduction of fixed funding, of co-payments, of insurance, which surely is a privatised system.'

Dr Stuart Sutton, a GP trainee in London, said:‘A lot of us have tried to read the bill Mr Lansley and it's a little bit patronising to say we don't understand it.'

‘I think there is a complete problem in the fact that all the staff in PCTs, SHAs, are all sleepwalking to oblivion as well. We're trying to save £19bn as well as delivering the best care as we possibly can to our patients, but all we see is complete chaos.'

In a fiery exchange on privatisation, Mr Lansley rejected claims that he wanted to drive the NHS towards a US-style insurance based health system. Pushed on the topic, the health secretary said he defined privatisation as patients having to pay at the point of use, and said the NHS reforms did not allow this to happen.

Delegates, including RCGP chair Dr Clare Gerada, questioned the scope of Mr Lansley's definition of privatisation and said many GPs had wider concerns over the bill extending private sector influence in the provision and commissioning of care.

READERS' COMMENTS

Anonymous, PCT,
24 Oct 2011
Its the best smoke and mirrors ever seen. Private providers throughout the land, taking profit from flawed contracts, aborted payments when contracts fail, extras for non contracted costs, we will need an army of monitors up and down the land. Oh and we remove the system that could have adjusted to manage the same.
None of our lessons learned are being thought through, just overlooked. Wasting billions which this will do is criminal. There isnt the market, or the resources to manage and procure it.

This is a procurement exercise the scale of which we have never seen before, and none of the new chiefs understand SFI's let alone multi million ££ tenders.
GP's struggle with patinet groups so how theyll manage large acutes, and then when we wheel in the private firms.
It will be like letting a pack of wolves loose on the lambs.
I hope the cost of all this is amalysed just before the next election.
Average (6Votes)
Top
Julian Hall, GP Partner,
24 Oct 2011
What about practices whose boundries cover different PCT/CCG's. Our practice is located on the edge of the Dudley PCT and we are a member of the Dudley CCG, but we have many patients from neighbouring Birmingham and Worcestershire PCT's. Our practice boundry reflects our geographical position rather than some arbitrary PCT/CCG border. Lansley's suggestion to restrict patients registering only within their own CCG will restrict practices like mine from keeping or taking on patients that live in close neighbouring health authorities. We will lose 30% of our patient population if we are not allowed to keep our Birmingham/Worcestershire patients. This is another example of how Lansley has no idea how the system works at a grassroots level. Words alone fail me when trying to express how fundamentally flawed Mr Lansley and his health bill are, and just how deluded and misguided he is! He simply does not have the knowledge, competance or experience to usher in this "top down" reorganisation of the NHS-something which his party's manifesto pledged it would not undertake. This proves he nothing but a bare faced liar, so no wonder I do not trust a single word that comes out of his mouth when he suggests he is not trying to privatise the NHS. The BMA need to consider playing the same public smear campaigns that political party's use during elections. Only this way will the profession show the public what an untrustworthy liar Mr Lansley actually is!
Average (9Votes)
Top
Simon Ruffle, GP Partner,
24 Oct 2011
Bravo Dr Hall.
I get the feeling that this government superimpose their values onto ours; that we are not interested in improving the service but are protecting our income and 'power.'
If only they'd superimpose ours to theirs; then they'd govern with the 'patient' at the heart of all decisions.
The only thing both 'sides' can agree on is that there isn't enough money in the system to give the public what they need let alone want.
Time to cut reformations that are costly and just leave the service to run. If Lansley could promise us a meddle-free few years I'd suspect the service would not only improve it'd remain cheap-to-run.
Average (4Votes)
Top
Rosemary MacRae, GP Partner,
24 Oct 2011
We are in a similar position to Dr. Hall with a practice population centred on the surgery location but including patients from adjacent PCTs. Does Mr. Lansley not talk anything through with practicing doctors before coming out with stuff like this? Like Choose and Book, a prospective change supposedly in the interest of increasing patient choice which will have the opposite effect.
Average (2Votes)
Top
Anonymous, PCT,
24 Oct 2011
As far as I am aware the majority of patients in America do not pay at point of use, but rather through their insurance premiums - surely therefore a similar model here will not meet the Lansley criteria for privatisation and so will be perfectly acceptable to him!
Average (4Votes)
Top
Vinci Ho, GP Partner,
24 Oct 2011
All the government (mainly Tories) was extremely worried that this Bill would be dead in water while passing through the two Houses because they knew it was against the constituition and they knew it was up against the whole profession . Now it is more or less through , the politicians are playing ' nanny understands very well ' . I think even Lansley himself has got serious doubts whether it will work . Hence he is pulling everything to win some hearts .
There is Chinese saying ,'Feed you spoonful of sugar after spoonful of sh*t '
So much you can believe what politicians said......
Average (0Votes)
Top
Anonymous, Practice Manager,
24 Oct 2011
Once again Lansley is talking like a wingbat, showing he has no understanding of how GPs operate - if he does not understand how the basics of general practice works, then it proves a point that the GPs have been set up to fail and what more they will be the ones left being hated by patients for "ruining the nhs" - When will GPs stand together. Sadly they can't even do it to protect their pensions but one would have hoped they would do it to save the NHS for their patients and the longevity of General Pracitce
Average (4Votes)
Top
Andrew Mimnagh, GP Partner,
24 Oct 2011
I think we should regard this as a step in the right direction. It is career suicide for a politician to do a U turn but we have an assurance practice boundaries will not be abolished, which is as good as a U turn.
Whilst this proposal is not without issues, it could be made workable if Mr Lansley continues to follow wise council.
Average (0Votes)
Top
Justin Roper, Work for a health/commissioning consultancy company,
24 Oct 2011
This was inevitable as there are huge issues regarding funding, home visiting (which if borough based may well remain), public health (with unwell people travelling) and clinical responsibility (should a dual registration system be introduced).

If practices need to be co-terminus with CCG boundaries then those on the boundary may suffer along with patients whose choice could be restricted. Equally with a borough based system some of the patient drivers behind the boundary changes are missing such as patients being able to see a GP near their workplace.

I think this issue needs some extra time for thinking through to ensure implementation drives up standards and choice and really benefits patients and practices alike.
Average (1Vote)
Top
Anonymous, Other healthcare professional,
25 Oct 2011
Now the bill is through he can back away completely and let Gps take the blame!

It's up to these ultra enthusiastic pathfinders to make it work!
Average (0Votes)
Top
Peter Bennett, GP Partner,
25 Oct 2011
Yet again back of fag packet planning... we will abolish boundaries in April but we havent decided what this will look like.!!!! Not sure any other bausiness would go forward like this... when will they learn?
Average (2Votes)
Top
Hugo Minney, Practice Manager,
25 Oct 2011
Abolish boundaries, that is the obvious solution. Then we can choose which health secretary and which set of health sector reforms we want to work under!
Average (0Votes)
Top
Torquil DuncanBrown, GP Partner,
25 Oct 2011
I was there, and I heard reassurance that he would listen and not introduce any boundary changes without considering all the practicalities of doing so. So in fact I heard that boundaries may well go, but there was concession in wanting to do so carefully (although I hear you Vinci Ho!). And Pete.... agree...!
Average (0Votes)
Top
Torquil DuncanBrown, GP Partner,
25 Oct 2011
PS, anyone remember that bill-board poster in the 80's..... "What do you call a man who won't take medical advice?" with a photo of the then Minister of State for health Ken Clarke.

These things are cyclical and no doubt in another 20yrs there'll be another top-down reshuffle! In the mean time, time for another poster campaign....?!
Average (0Votes)
Top

ADD YOUR COMMENTS

Please note You must be a registered user of PulseToday and logged in to add comments. Opinions expressed below are those of the writers and do not necessarily reflect those of PulseToday. Comments are considered in the public domain and may be used in future Pulse coverage. We accept no responsibility, legal or otherwise, for the accuracy or the content of member comments.

Comment*

You must be logged in to add a comment.Clickhere to login.

SIGN UP FOR EMAIL NEWSLETTERS

Keep up-to-date with the latest changes to the NHS, CPD and clinical guidelines. Sign up below or find out more.

POLL

Is self-care the answer to the NHS efficiency drive? Read the full story here