Letter: Labour plan for GPs would hit patients
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: Three times recently Labour Party health spokespersons have stated they would abolish the GP fundholding scheme within 12 months of coming to power. I believe that this is a cost-cutting exercise, with little regard for the quality of care our patients receive.
The Audit Commission report on fundholding stated that fundholding GPs have developed better relationships with consultants. It also said that fundholders contract for quality of care and not finance or numbers and, most importantly for our patients, that fundholders provide a patient- sensitive health service which health authorities do not.
The long waiting lists of the 1980s seem to have been forgotten and improvements to local services ignored. The fact that 51 per cent of GPs have voluntarily become fundholders and that 97 per cent of them believe that fundholding has benefited their patients is dismissed.
The commission's report was selectively and inaccurately leaked to create the impression that fundholding has been a failure. It did not reach that conclusion. All fundholding GPs had, the report said, produced benefits for patients with some making considerable improvements in the services provided.
The opposition of the Labour Party to the NHS reforms is puzzling to those in closest contact with patients. I believe this to be a cruel cost- cutting exercise which they will justify on grounds of equality but which will harm patient care, reduce flexibility, innovation and the pressure for higher standards. If quality is not to be decreased in the name of equality in education (Mr Blair), surely it is even more important that this be true for our health.
Dr RHIDIAN MORRIS
Chairman
National Association of
Fundholding Practices
London W1
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments