BMA gives Government 48 hours to avoid dispute over GP access changes
The BMA has given the health secretary 48 hours to avoid dispute with GPs over contractual changes coming into effect this week.
From Wednesday (1 October) GPs will need to keep online systems open for patient requests between 8am and 6.30pm for routine enquiries but the BMA’s GP committee is arguing that because the systems cannot tell the difference between routine and urgent, serious problems could be missed if safeguards are not in place.
The GPC voted in favour of re-entering dispute with the Government over the changes and has also demanded a deferral until the changes can be implemented safely, but this has not come to pass.
Now GPC chair Dr Katie Bramall said that the Government ‘has 48 hours to change course’ and ‘avoid this dispute’.
She has reiterated that in February the Department of Health and Social Care and NHS England confirmed that ‘necessary safeguards’ would be in place before 1 October 2025 to ‘avoid urgent clinical requests being erroneously submitted online’ – but that these are currently not in place, and the Government has decided to press-on with the changes regardless.
She said: ‘We agreed to these changes on the condition that “necessary safeguards” would be put in place before Wednesday 1 October.
‘This was agreed – in writing – with Government, DHSC, and NHSE in February this year. Now almost eight months later, it is deeply disappointing to see promises broken. We have worked incredibly hard to rebuild the trust between our exhausted profession and the Government, but now what are England’s GPs and practice teams supposed to think?’
The BMA has previously warned that the policy will force GPs to implement waiting lists for routine care.
Dr Bramall added: ‘The secretary of state knows that when these changes come into effect it will likely lead to the creation of hospital-style waiting lists in general practice, reduce face-to-face GP appointments – as we’ll be triaging a barrage of online requests, consequently putting patients at risk of harm as we try to find the urgent cases among the huge pile of unmet patient need that’s out there.
‘Mr Streeting needs to listen to us and understand how we believe GPs can deliver his ambitions safely.
‘General practice is the leader in NHS tech innovation, we do everything online from systems to prescriptions, referrals and appointments.
‘We’re not resistant to change, but we will be when the safety of patients and practice staff is at risk. The Government has 48 hours to change course, avoid this dispute, and keep to their promises.’
In a letter to health minister Stephen Kinnock on 17 September, seen by Pulse, Dr Bramall listed some of the safeguards that would need to be put in place, including:
- removing any free text box to prevent patients submitting ‘urgent clinical requests erroneously’
- allowing patients to only select specific non-urgent requests or queries via tick-boxes
- directing patients to call the practice if their request or query is urgent
She said that without these safeguards the changes ‘become very problematic’ for practices in terms of ‘heightening’ the risk to patient and practice staff ‘due to overwhelm’.
The solution, she added, would be for NHS England to agree to a buffer period until April next year for practices to implement the changes with support from ICBs.
NHS England has confirmed to Pulse that there is no such buffer period and the changes are coming in 1 October as planned.
Related Articles
READERS' COMMENTS [3]
Please note, only GPs are permitted to add comments to articles


so what does the BMA plant to do ? Strike ? no one will notice, get on to the job
GP Partner unlimited liability needs a rethink
as things are going to get risky
Maybe GPs should set a limit to the number of safe f2f contacts in the day
and the number of accurixes that can be safely managed in a day
The Gov has to accept that years of under funding means staffing is limited
and limited staff can only do so much
Meanwhile, a completely ineffective and hopeless RCGP continues to fleece its members in my opinion – Why is the member rate for the 2 day conference at £744 then £105 more than the fellowship rate – does the bestowing of this questionable title in my view mean fellows eat a lot less perhaps for their lunches and breaks to the tune of £105 , or they pay less attention and learn £105 less from the talks or is this needed to help fund more RCGP Lord, Sir, Dame , Baroness etc titles?? Are all the members £105 richer as a group than the fellows?