Letter: Fundholding: bureaucratic and expensive
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: In the wake of the Audit Commission's Report on GP fundholding, how can the Health Secretary justify the continued expenditure of in excess of pounds 100m per annum on the administrative costs alone of this unproven scheme? By comparison the closure of a teaching hospital like St Bartholomew's will save the Government a meagre pounds 6m per annum.
It is indefensible that he refuses to resource statutorily or support the development of GP commissioning which has the potential to match, if not exceed, the purported benefits of fundholding at a fraction of the management costs. The Government has a duty to use the public purse for maximum direct patient care, rather than divert scant resources to administer bureaucratic political ideology.
Dr CHAAND NAGPAUL
Honeypot Medical Centre
Stanmore, Middlesex
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments