Cookie policy notice

By continuing to use this site you agree to our cookies policy below:
Since 26 May 2011, the law now states that cookies on websites can ony be used with your specific consent. Cookies allow us to ensure that you enjoy the best browsing experience.

This site is intended for health professionals only

At the heart of general practice since 1960

'Professor Field has lost the confidence of the profession'

Full statement from GPC chair Dr Chaand Nagpaul and RCGP chair Dr Maureen Baker

Dr Chaand Nagpaul, GPC chair

This motion demonstrates the dismay and anger felt by dedicated hardworking GPs across England following the recent unjustified comments made by the chief inspector of general practice at the CQC. When the vast majority of practices are managing to maintain high quality care against all odds in the face of falling resources, staff shortages and rising patient demand, the Chief Inspector should be vocally supporting GP services and not undermining them.

It is clear that the CQC inspection regime is not fit for purpose. The current process is disproportionate, expensive and bureaucratic, and takes GPs and their staff away from spending time looking after their patients. It includes endless amounts of pointless paperwork, such as box ticking exercises aimed at scrutinising the details of internal practice meetings. The CQC has already had to perform a U-turn this year over its widely discredited risk banding programme which formed judgements before inspectors had even arrived at a practice.

If a GP practice is found to be struggling, immediate action needs to be taken to ensure that it is supported to improve the quality of care that practice delivers. It does not need to be attacked, especially as in many cases problems that do occur are due to resource or infrastructure constraints.

The CQC inspection process needs wholesale reform urgently in order to restore the confidence of the profession and stop GPs wasting their time on pointless processes and paperwork when they should be treating patients.”

 

Dr Maureen Baker, RCGP chair

GPs are supportive in general of regulation, however the way Steve has gone about making misleading, unfounded and denigrating comments about the level of care that hard-working GPs provide to their patients is rapidly undermining the concept of regulation.

He repeatedly makes sensationalist and non-evidenced claims about how bad the level of patient care is – which must inevitably scare patients. 

As the Chief Inspector of General Practice, Steve needs to be seen as being fair and impartial, but given the scaremongering comments he has made this is no longer the case. To be quite frank, he has now clearly lost the confidence of the profession.

For someone in such a position of authority to disparage unfairly the work of our hard-working family doctors is inexcusable.

It is difficult [to see] how Steve can turn his reputation around with the nation’s GPs, but he could make a start by issuing an immediate apology. 

As an organisation, we support the principle of the CQC having a regulatory role to ensure that practices do not fall below an acceptable standard of patient care. But we need the inspection regime to be headed up by a Chief Inspector who is seen as fair and impartial, and has the confidence of family doctors.

 

Readers' comments (4)

  • This comment has been removed by the moderator.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I really struggled to choose the Villain of the Year in your poll recently but can't help thinking that both Jeremy Hunt and Prof Field's antics have achieved more unity in the medical profession than any of our own representatives could have mustered. So congratulations to both of you!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Hasn't lost it - never had it as far as I'm concerned

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Essential person specification for chief inspector of CQC is critical analytical skills.
    Does Steve Field have that ability?
    I don't think so.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

IMPORTANT: On Wednesday 7 December 2016, we implemented a new log in system, and if you have not updated your details you may experience difficulties logging in. Update your details here. Only GMC-registered doctors are able to comment on this site.