This site is intended for health professionals only

At the heart of general practice since 1960

Read the latest issue online

CAMHS won't see you now

Four candidates to stand for RCGP chair

Exclusive Dr Helen Stokes-Lampard, the current treasurer of the RCGP, is one of four candidates to take over as chair of the college this year.

The other three candidates are Dr Tim Ballard, vice chair of external affairs at the RCGP, Dr Sunil Gupta, a GP in Essex and GP trainer, and Professor Martin Marshall, a GP and professor of healthcare improvement at University College London, Pulse understands.

The RCGP declined to reveal the names of the candidates before it made an official announcement at an unspecified date.

But a spokesperson for the college said that the election results to replace the current chair, Professor Maureen Baker, may be announced by July.

Dr Stokes-Lampard is a partner in Lichfield, Staffordshire, and a senior lecturer at Birmingham Medical School.

She has been featured in Pulse’s ‘Power 50’ for the past two years, with judges praising her for the ‘efficiency with which she juggles her clinical, political and academic roles’.

Dr Ballard is principal in a small rural dispensing practice in Wiltshire, and has been an examiner for the MRCGP exam.

Dr Guptil is an MRCGP examiner, sits on the governing body of NHS Castle Point and Rochford CCG, and is a GP advisor for CQC inspections.

Professor Marshall was chair of RCGP’s ethics committee chair for six years until 2014, and was one of the architects of the QOF

Readers' comments (21)

  • I would only rejoin the RCGP if someone actually stood up for the profession.
    Currently total waste of money. Being a member is irrelevant nowadays.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I do not recall ever hearing from any of those 4 that they renounce Maureen's ridiculous and deluded pronouncements, therefore one must assume that they agree with her that there has never been a better time than this to be a GP, etc etc etc.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I regret it took me 5 years to stop paying for membership.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Ditch the Royal and I might have considered joining, but for 25 years it doesnt seem to have made any difference to my work or my patients.
    RCGP is a complete irrelevance

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • The RCGP has given the Sultan of Brunei an award and named an auditorium after him.

    This is the Sultan of Brunei who has introduced Sharia law; punishments will include death by stoning and punishable crimes will include infidelity and homosexuality.

    Any members of the RCGP who are at all concerned about International Human Rights should be asking themselves serious questions about whether they wish to fund this organisation.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Met Helen Stokes Lampard once, was very impressed. Hopefully can carry the same mentality into the post. God knows we need someone with a slightly more realistic approach than Maureen has provided.
    In response to a previous question - she is still a practising GP.
    And no I have no conflict of interest and no I'm not in the RCGP or on a CCG etc...

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • They are a joke
    I've saved 24 x £500 = £12K by declining to pay subs

    That buys about 600 cardigans to distribute among the great and good of our Royal Uselessness, including one Extra Large

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Never heard of any of them although "Being an Architect of QOF" isn't something I would want to add to my CV

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • In calling me an architect of QOF I think you might be confusing me with my good friend Martin Roland. He's short, bearded and wears glasses. I'm tall, clean-shaven and only wear glasses when I read Pulse. It would be more accurate to call me a critic of QOF. Have a read of my recent article calling for a new way of defining quality that represents what matters to patients and to the NHS: Redefining quality: valuing the role of the GP in managing uncertainty

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • What proportion of GPs actually pay to support this self-perpetuating, irrelevant, anti-GP, oligarchy? Why?
    The only reason I can think of in recent years is the bizarre requirement to have proof of membership if wanting to work in Australia, and perhaps some other countries. Would be interesting to know if that truly was a requirement and if so, is it at the request of the RCGP?
    If almost nobody paid them, their inappropriately wielded power and perverted influence would greatly diminish. They might have to sell up and move to some portacabins in an industrial estate off the M6. If their flawed membership exam were to continue, new potential GPs might have to pay over £10K to sit it, nicely finishing off General Practice in the UK!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

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

Have your say