This site is intended for health professionals only

At the heart of general practice since 1960

Read the latest issue online

GPs buried under trusts' workload dump

NHS to receive £3.8bn funding boost from next year

The NHS in England will receive an above inflation funding boost of £3.8bn annually from next year, which NHS England has promised will partly go towards stabilising GP services.

But the additional funding from the Treasury  - which is the first step to meeting the pledge to increase the NHS budget by £8bn by 2020 - comes as certain services, including public health and medical education budgets, have been removed from the protected budget ring-fence.

GP leaders have said that the decision to frontload the funding is ‘significant’, but said that the funding should not be geared towards providing seven-day services that patients ‘don’t want’.

However, the Government will expect the NHS to provide full seven-day services in return for the additional investment, and NHS England has already pledged to make £22bn in efficiency savings in return,

Prime Minister David Cameron has pledged to ring-fence NHS funding, but this only covers NHS England’s budget, which critics, including Dr Mark Porter of the BMA, have called short sighted.

Cuts to public health services like smoking cessation and sexual health clinics have already begun to bite and could be more costly for the NHS in future.

NHS England chief executive Simon Stevens has said: ‘This settlement is a clear and highly welcome acceptance of our argument for frontloaded NHS investment. It will help stabilise current pressures on hospitals, GPs, and mental health services, and kick start the NHS Five Year Forward View’s fundamental redesign of care. In the context of constraints on overall public spending, our case for the NHS has been heard and actively supported.’

Dr Richard Vautrey, deputy chair of the GPC, said: ’The key is how much comes to general practice and what strings are attached to it. But we need to be absolutely clear that there are big calls on funding already, just in terms of national insurance rises, indemnity rises, CQC fee rises, let alone funding to shore up the current workload pressures that are in general practice.

’We also need to see any new funding prioritised on the current core service which is under significant strain, and not wasting precious NHS funding paying for routine weekend appointments that increasingly patients report they don’t want.’

Dr Maureen Baker, chair of the RCGP, said: ’We welcome the Government’s decision to meet the call made by NHS chief executive Simon Stevens for major new investment in our health service.

’It is particularly significant that ministers have decided to front load the new investment, as was urgently requested by Mr Stevens – and we hope the injection of new resources will mean that NHS England’s ground-breaking vision for a sustainable NHS, the Five Year Forward View, can quickly now become a reality.’

The remaining investment will see smaller increases in 2017/18 (£1.5bn), 2018/19 (£0.5bn) and 2019/20 (£0.9bn), according to HSJ.

Early reports indicate the remaining £1.7bn increase will be made in the final year to meet any remaining costs from fully implementing seven-day services, which Jeremy Hunt has said ‘all practices must ensure they offer by 2020’.

 

Readers' comments (28)

  • well done.There is investment in NHS.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • A drop in the ocean that is. The tories used a well known technique of starvation followed by crumbs=satisfaction and compliance. Not this time.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • "Dr Maureen Baker, chair of the RCGP, said: ’We welcome the Government’s decision"

    Hahahaaaaaahahahahaha

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Sticking plaster - How much will the population increase by in the next 5 years?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • With this year's overspend expected to hit £2.2bn, and about £1bn to go on the NIC changes, that leaves £0.4bn - not exactly a feast. In fact, that's roughly what they will have pulled out of public health, so it will cost more than that to fix the damage they do to prevention.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • And conditional on routine 7 day services - factor in the increased work plus the damage done by using an already stretched 5 day routine service to cover 7 days and then do the sums. Dr Baker, please do something about this unnecesary and destructive political demand.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • ...and how much will be taken from GPs via another rearrangem,ent of the QOF points....new money my eye!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • The NHS continues to experience year on year real time reductions. We need to avoid sleep walking into collusion with the government spin on this. Net result is on-going unrealistic expectation on NHS staff to deliver, greater pressure, stress and additional loss of productivity as a result

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • He must be kidding. Takes 22 billion out and puts in 3.8 and expects everybody to hail him as our great saviour.
    Single handers won't get a penny because it will go to the big boys who have agreed all along with govt plans and towed the establishment line contributing partially to the collapse of NHS.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • if this is the GOOD news I hate to think what the BAD one is

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Thieves continue to raid. This NHS is doomed.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Intersting when the puppet masters have bad news they front it up with a side kick but when they have something to give, they plaster themselves all over it.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Front loading is a a misnomer. It is actually making up for prior years of reduced spending.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Is Jeremy Hunt still being invisible?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • too little too late
    4bn to keep the lights on annually
    UNLESS ... ditch the market-captateed busdgest for health economies and probabaly vertical integration or watch the Superpracticesd Fedearions Vanguards and Devo-Macn for future models of care

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Well I am now officially clairvoyant, I can see the future. I predicted that Maureen would say "we welcome", and I was right!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Complete waste More petrol in an old, nearly dead car.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • The secondary care sector is grossly in debt. So how much of this money, if any, will come to general practice?

    This is the problem with general practice. Our workload has risen enormously in the past three or four years. Workload has also risen in secondary care, but because they are paid on a different basis they are resourced for the extra workload and we are not.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • 40 % more work with 4 % more budget . Shome mishtake shurely?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • 'We welcome'

    Can't believe you have said this yet again

    You are like a STUCK RECORD!

    Please speak to your media advisers for some new material

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Vinci Ho

    Same tactics as raising so called minimum living wage and cutting deep into tax credits.
    Playing with the figures in billions. Don't forget with devolution of power , a new 'power house' city government will have to live an integrated budget of health and social care. The result is like using nine lids to cover the cups.....
    The fallacy of efficiency saving lives on.....

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • And what are the £22 billion of efficiency savings going to be. Simon Stevens has not spell this out in detail.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I used to be totally non-political, I now HATE the tories with a passion. They are beyond belief evil. What they give with one hand they take with the other, tenfold.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Because the NHS does not contribute towards GDP, it will always be underfunded. If truth be told, the Treasury of any government in power would not want to give more money for health care. The only reason they do is to maintain votes. All governments are petrified given the rapid increase in the numbers of elderly people that will have to be cared for. This is not unique to this country, but all over the world. That is why we will continually be whipped to become more productive

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • The governemt have just announced that 178 billion are to be spent ... wait for it...on the military to fight against ISIL. So the 3.8 billion that they are giving to the NHS is approximately a mere 2% of the budget they are giving to the military.
    Put's this sum into perspective.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • The NHS does contribute to GDP, what about all those private compaines creaming off the profits for PFI.If the NHS was not present who do you think would be paying for health packages for their employees private companies would this would come off their top line and hence profits.A private health system would not run as lean as the NHS without rationing.Let the Nash collapse begin.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • better than nothing but nowhere near enough as much will be pissed into the wind to weekend routine service whilst much higher nhs priorities are ignored by these maniacally deluded ideologues.
    does not even make up for the worst starving of the mhs eber in the past five years..percent of gdp spent has barely risen..considering three million extra people in that period spend per capita has declined,let alone no allowance for medical inflation.
    gross underfunding explains record deficits of even the best run trusts .
    the nhs now has gone backwards in recent years..waiting times for aed for opd,staffing levels..hence waste on locum costs,unprecedented brain drain of all staff.
    meantime this insanely incompetent misgovernment continues with criminal waste of ten probably twenty billion a year on pfi ,the internal market,unaccountable 'trusts'with their grossly overpaid bureaucratic bullying bum polishers,mad privatisations often followed by expensive failures before causing chaos and poor service eg the ongoing disastrous farce of 111.
    now this partial paying back of the much larger sum which the nhs has been starved of is also in the context of much larger 'efficiency'cuts..described by an expert as 'absolutely barmy'

    unfortunately many will be taken in supported by our lamentably unbalanced self interested media.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • This comment has been moderated.

  • Absolutely correct deductions above with the current deficit and the strings attached, hence the rather weird/unrounded sum of £3.8 bn.

    I am sure they are laughing at the pigeons who came to the Cat's den expecting a good outcome!

    "They have counted your guns..." and now it is their turn...to call in the lawyers to fiddle around with the 'small print'!

    Merry Christmas (Crisis) everyone!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say