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

Professor Simon Gregory: ‘I want GPs to feel valued – that’s not universal yet’

Health Education England is exceeding its targets for GP trainee numbers. Anviksha Patel speaks to its head of primary care about plans to alleviate the workforce crisis more widely

prof simon gregory paul stuart 50 525x30px


General practice continues to face a staffing crisis. There have been a number of failed attempts to bolster the size of the workforce – through international recruitment and retention of older GPs, among other initiatives.

But recently there has been reason for hope: last year, for the first time, Health Education England (HEE) met – and exceeded – its GP trainee recruitment target of 3,250. And it looks as though that will be bettered this year.

HEE’s deputy director of primary care, Professor Simon Gregory, believes this success can be sustained. Here, he tells Pulse about the changes to training that enabled the goal to be met and how HEE plans to tackle the workforce challenges still to be solved.

Pulse: HEE has met its target of recruiting 3,250 GP trainees in a year, after several failed attempts. How did you get there?

Professor Gregory: Initially, the challenge was trying to encourage people to join a specialty, a profession, when all they were hearing were negative stories. We needed to be honest about the problems there were – and still are – in general practice and encourage these incredibly bright doctors to realise they could be part of the solution.

The RCGP recently said 5,000 GPs needed to be trained a year to deal with workforce shortages. How achievable would it be to train more?

We’ve been working on increasing GP numbers for years. I’m not really fixated on a number – I want there to be more, but I don’t know if it will be 5,000 or more than that. We are working with ideas to reform GP training, to expand it.

Is it enough to just train larger numbers of GPs, or should there be greater efforts to retain those already in the profession?

It’s got to be a whole-system solution. My team and I have ensured that trainees see this as the career to go for, but there’s so much more to be done.

First, the GP trainees we’re recruiting need to be welcomed. They need to be encouraged to stay in general practice at the end of their training.

Second, the established GP workforce needs sorting. There needs to be a lot more done in all avenues. Work intensity is a key thing. When I started as a GP, one in three consultations involved a patient with more than one problem, and it was complex. But gradually more and more of my work is being passed on to other healthcare professionals.

Pensions, as well, must be sorted out. I’ve got friends I trained with who have already retired. When you get your pension quote, or you get your tax bill, that’s the point when you think, why do I carry on doing this? 

So, just putting more trainees in is not the only answer.

I wanted flexibility - I just didn’t have the sense to believe it was on offer

Do you think portfolio careers encourage people to work in general practice?

Many doctors want portfolio careers, and rather than seeing the loss of full-time GPs as a threat, we should see the opportunity.

We really value frontline GPs doing frontline general practice, and what general practice needs is the expert generalist. If we do other things in portfolio careers, we’re still GPs. What’s more likely to happen is that it makes the career sustainable.

We’re working on one of the themes set out in the People Plan [the NHS workforce strategy], called ‘Making the NHS the best place to work’. General practice has got to benefit from that. It’s about making our working conditions better. I want GPs and their staff to feel cared for and valued, and I’m not sure that’s universal yet.

How do you respond to concerns that trainees do not see themselves becoming partners, or working in full-time frontline care?

The first thing to consider is the number of them who say their career intention is to be a GP. Some actually want to be partners from the start. Some may have relationships that mean they’re not necessarily able to stay in one area at first. I also think people are wisely saying, ‘I’ll do what fits my choice’.

When I look at what millennials want, it’s not that different from what I wanted. What’s changed is opportunity. I wanted flexibility, I just didn’t have the sense to believe it was on offer, or the courage to accept it would be okay. I was thinking of my mortgage, supporting my kids. I look down the list of what millennials want and think, ‘Good on you, I agree’.

I get that they want different things, but what I don’t want is them labelled as though they are offering something less than other generations did. They’re not – they’re just as committed.

Don’t sit your exams too early. Don’t sit them until you’re ready

HEE is working on a five-year GP training pilot in east London. Will it be expanded elsewhere?

Our plan is to have 13 or 14 pilots. Ideally, I’d like one in every deanery area. I’m having discussions on those at the moment. I’ve said before, why do we train people for 18 months in hospital? Often they’re not even learning much about general practice; they’re providing a service in the hospital, but that’s the way it’s currently funded.

Looking at that pilot in Tower Hamlets, there are going to be seven people starting next year in FY2. They’re going to do a year of FY2 in the community. They’ll do three years of GP training, and then the fellowships automatically at the end of it.

What has been the effect of HEE changing the rules for trainees who fail their MRCGP exams?

We got the rules changed so that if people fail the exams they can have up to a year’s extension to their training programme – it used to be only six months. That’s been one of our biggest changes in helping people, because we had the shortest training programme, with the shortest opportunity for extension. We’re saying to people, ‘don’t sit your exams too early. Don’t sit them until you’re ready’.

People take the AKT at the start of ST2. They take the CSA as soon as they can in ST3, often before they’re ready. If they fail, it’s costly and distressing. The exam is run at no profit by the college, but it’s expensive due to the costs of examiners and actors.

I don’t want people to keep resitting it, so I’m trying to encourage them to delay until their trainer thinks they have a good chance. If that means they don’t take it before they’re ready, that’s better.

We’ve piloted this – we’ve said in the targeted training programme [introduced by HEE to give trainees who fail one of their exams another attempt] that people shouldn’t sit it until they have got the agreement of their trainer; if they fail it they should have the agreement of both their trainer and their training programme director before a resit.

What plans are there to train extra healthcare professional staff joining primary care networks?

HEE has now had its one-year spending review, and in that we were allocated a 3.4% funding increase. This gives us a real opportunity to plan for the integration of other healthcare staff into PCNs.

For example, we’re working with ambulance trust chief executives who are worried about who is going to be on the ambulances if they lose their paramedics to general practice.

We’ve put forward a programme based on rotating paramedics, where people might spend some time on a vehicle, some time in an emergency department and some time in general practice.

Do you expect to include the digital GP model and new tech in GP trainee curriculums?

It most certainly needs to be a part of the future curriculum, although if you go back to the RCGP curriculum and look at the bit about being a GP and about the consultation, none of that says it has to be in a consulting room.

Rather than focusing on any particular provider, what I would say is, this is a disruptive innovation. My worry would be that if people go straight into online consulting, they may not have the full grounding in being a GP. I would hope we would include it more and more – through it being one of the modalities we offer patients. But we also have to ensure this is a model that supports everybody; one thing I want to be careful of is that this doesn’t exacerbate the inverse care law [whereby those most in need of care have least access to it].

Have any lessons been learned from the 2015 GP recruitment drive that featured a GP ticking a consent form for a patient skydive?

There was a huge backlash from established GPs – [but] it was really popular among the people we were trying to recruit. Every single advertisement or video we now use is tested against all age groups. That particular advert was tested to make sure it would appeal to the people we needed to recruit – but what we didn’t do was test it to see if it would upset anybody else.


Age 53


1990 Graduated with MBBS from the University of London


2019-present  Deputy medical director for primary and integrated care, Health Education England

2019-present  Board member, Maggie’s Cancer Centre, Northampton

2018-present  Trustee, RCGP

2016-present  Board trustee, Astrea Academy Trust

2014-present  Ethics chair, RCGP

1995-present  GP, King Edward Road Surgery, Northampton

Other interests

Rugby, woodturning

Rate this article  (1.22 average user rating)

Click to rate

  • 1 star out of 5
  • 2 stars out of 5
  • 3 stars out of 5
  • 4 stars out of 5
  • 5 stars out of 5

0 out of 5 stars

Readers' comments (15)

  • More shuffling of deckchairs!
    What about the destructive appraisal process and the pension crisis?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Beyond shuffling the deckchairs well and truly sunk.

    Actually red the all the above and have no idea why or have any take home "nugget to add to my PDP

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • No apparent insight or interest in why people are leaving. Thinks increased recruitment will solve the problem, no interest in retention of experienced GPs, no interest or ambition to make full-time GP "sustainable".
    Another waste of space.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • What a load oif crap Patel, wear your NHS badge high you had a cushy ride I presume.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • After 25 years in GP, every working day I still draw on experience that I gained in hospital jobs: especially womens health and paediatrics, but also management of acutely poorly old folks and the odd life-threatening emergency.
    Some registrars dont seem to have the breadth of basic skills that they need: can't inject a joint, can't chop out a seb cyst, dont seem to be able to sign repeat prescriptions, can't take blood. But more importantly don't seem to know about claiming a fee for items of service, minor injuries, locally commissioned services, or capturing disgnoses and QOF codes in the records.
    They are heading for salaried jobs, so the bottom line of the practice is of no interest to them. HEE is not teaching them or testing them on the right stuff. They aren't being taught how to be partners in a small business, because HMG has no intention of there being any in the near future, just PCNs ripe for selling off to Trump's cronies with all the usual sweeteners from the tax-payer

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • @copernicus : if GP trainees are not learning about IOS and fees, that is the fault of their GP TrainERS! and VTS course Organisers. Ours learn about them!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • GP used to be a job that people would do full time for decades, and GPs often had to be persuaded to stop. Now people do as little as possible and stop as soon as possible. Something has changed, and for a supposedly intelligent individual the Prof shows surprising little interest in what that might be.
    Part-timers rarely have the same commitment to a Practice as full-timers, why should they? And part-timers will struggle to acquire the same depth of knowledge and experience. Patients prefer to see "their doctor", and knowing your patients and getting good at the job makes life better for the Doctors. Part-timers have a role and make a useful contribution, but anyone who thinks you can run a good service without a central role for full time Partners is delusional. Equally delusional is the belief that GP manpower problems can be resolved without addressing why people no longer want to do the job.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • National Hopeless Service

    You can have as many trainees as you want but if they remain as salaried GPs and especially locums the whole system is going to collapse when there are no partners left to own or lease premises. Locuming has become the norm which has resulted in an increasing broken system. I think there should be disinsentives (tax or otherwise) to being a locum (head above parapet).

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • A GP turned government employee will not provide the answers to the UK’s nhs/GP problems. It’s an issue between that of self interest and the pretence of trying to do good with other people’s money. The two don’t really go hand in hand

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Training more trainees wont automatically equate to more GPs doing the job.... what is it, 3 trainees to be trained to get one full time equivalent? They can train more so they get more young professionals ready to man Canada's and new Zealands Health care systems (Australia has already benefitted). Trainees do need more time in hospital, not less, I agree with other comments that time in hospital is invaluable to help you recognise the conditions and also for practical procedures.... its a simple brief.... you need to make the day to day job better if you want more people to do it... training more people to enter a job they wont stick with is a waste of time and resources is it not? Why is it the professor thinks recruiting more people to start training will stop the haemorrhage at the other end????? Perhaps if he'd spent time in hospital in a surgical dept he'd have learnt that it is much more important to stop the bleeding than just keeping more blood into the sick patient? I see nothing of substance in his article that would naive me back.... 3.4% rise- er does he really think that will make any significant impact?????? Would 3.4% pay rise entice more graduates into general practice? er dont think so.... all academia and no common least the quality of NHS management remains constant....

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

View results 10 results per page20 results per page

Have your say