This site is intended for health professionals only


BMA ‘highly sceptical’ of trusts delivering primary care services in neighbourhoods

BMA ‘highly sceptical’ of trusts delivering primary care services in neighbourhoods
Getty Images

The BMA has told the Government it is ‘highly sceptical’ of trusts’ ability to deliver primary care under new neighbourhood contracts.

The union suggested that GP practices are better placed financially than trusts to take on primary care services in neighbourhood contracts. 

It comes after the Government revealed last month that ICBs will be able to commission trusts to hold integrated health organisation (IHO) contracts, as first described in the NHS 10-year health plan.  

The BMA’s argument came in written evidence submitted for the parliamentary Health and Social Care Committee’s inquiry into the role of NHS estates in delivering neighbourhood health services. 

It said: ‘Facilitating NHS trusts to take on primary care services via neighbourhood contracts through the 10-Year Health Plan may severely undermine the value for money currently delivered within primary care and general practice.  

‘NHS trusts are not bound by the same financial constraints as primary care and general practice providers and many are routinely in deficit, while few, if any, have specific experience or insight into the operation of services at the proposed scale’, it argued.  

‘Because of this, the BMA remains highly sceptical of the intent to place NHS trusts in charge of the commissioning and provision of primary care under multi-neighbourhood provider contracts.’ 

The BMA also used the evidence to urge the Government not to build neighbourhood health centres (NHCs) using private finance – a model which will fund eight in 10 newly-built NHCs. 

The Government has confirmed 80% of the 70 newly built NHCs (and around four in 10 of the total) to open by 2030 would be funded through public-private partnerships (PPP) – a form of private finance. 

‘The BMA has significant concerns about the proposed use of private finance to fund the development of new or refitted sites to house Neighbourhood Health Centres (NHCs) due to historic poor value for money and service offered by these arrangements.’ 

‘Regarding the neighbourhood estate specifically, the BMA has also raised notable concerns about the proposed use of private finance to fund the development of new or refitted sites to house NHCs.’ 

Around 130 NHS schemes were funded by the Private Finance Initiative (PFI), another form of private finance, until 2018 and are expected to ultimately cost more than £80bn in repayments, with the model criticised for its inflexibility and perceived value for money.   

‘Instead of these costly and convoluted measures, the BMA strongly believes that direct investment by the Government is the most cost effective, democratic, and responsible means of injecting sorely needed capital funding into the NHS.’ 

The BMA suggested instead that GP practices should have easier access to levies on developers that finance local infrastructure, such as the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL). 

The BMA has previously criticised what it perceives as the Government placing secondary care in a position to lead on neighbourhood health services.  

NHSE recently announced a scheme which invites hospital trusts to bid for GP practice premises owned by the landlord NHS Property Services (NHSPS) but which excludes GP practices and local authorities.  

The RCGP has also responded to the health select committee enquiry, arguing for the protection of individual GP practices and continuity of care.

Its submission said: ‘Neighbourhood health expansion must be planned so it strengthens, rather than displaces, the role of individual practices, protecting GPs ability to provide continuous care for registered patients, manage risk and long-term complex conditions as specialist generalists, and train the future GP workforce while contributing to neighbourhood health where they add value.’

The RCGP also said that ‘while new centres and refurbishments are welcome, many GP premises are already located within the communities they serve and, with targeted capital investment, could be upgraded to function as NHCs more quickly and at lower cost’.


			

READERS' COMMENTS [4]

Please note, only GPs are permitted to add comments to articles

So the bird flew away 8 April, 2026 5:05 pm

Robber: “Hands up. Gimme your money and living.”
GPCman: “I’m highly sceptical of your approach.”

David Kynaston 9 April, 2026 9:31 am

Goodbye partnerships, hello corporate for profit healthcare. The direction of travel has been obvious for years. Maybe if I’m lucky enough to get a job in Neighbourhood Health Centre will I get a little badge with stars on it for good behaviour like in MacDonalds? I hope so!

Shaun Meehan 9 April, 2026 11:45 am

The problem BMA and RCGP have is they have put doctors interests ahead of patients and so are not trusted. If we invest billions in NHS we cannot argue that must mean just more doctors seeing every patient..we’ve been doing that for years and it has not worked!( doctor numbers are doubling every 20 years ) It must be teams in neighbourhood centres that address the reasons for ill health and doctors are less good at that than others ( family social outreach, alcohol support staff, mental health practitioners etc). Our leaders must take the blinkers off and re-read the Black report or invite Professor Marmot in for a chat. Start thinking what the public need first to regain any credibility then you can talk about where neighbourhood centres should be placed and staffed.GPs deliver great care and are less expensive than trusts and we should be shaping these centres but our leaders make that difficult.

Just a GP 9 April, 2026 12:54 pm

Shaun – nice idea but more prevention needs more money and will not reduce need for GP services.
More prevention (if it actually can be delivered in an effective and cost effective way) will mean more people living longer to need more healthcare. Who disproportionately uses GP services- old people. So- more GPs then?