Is this true? (NHS)

[Mellowfruitfulness]

Does anyone know if this is true:

I have heard (on Radio 4) that GPs, (when they are all commissioning the services for their patients) could be personally rewarded for any savings they can make in their budgets. So if they decide, say, that Person A doesn't need an operation, the money they save could be added on to their pay! (File on Four, I think.)

Then tonight, Channel Four News said (I think) that there is nothing to stop GPs buying shares in the very companies they are commissioning to provide the services to their patients. So they won't be choosing the service-provider that is most suitable but the one they partly own?

Surely not???

Does anyone know?

You might like to have a peek at this thread.

Also, I'm worried about the confidentiality of our medical records if they're swimming round the system being shared by all the various service providers.

These changes all sound a bit mad, imo.

Thanks, Meditrina. I looked for a thread on this, but missed that one.

Oh dear, it does look grim.

I hadn't thought about the integrity of medical records. But as the NHS spine is an IT disaster waiting to happen anyhow, it might not make it any worse.

I think that not referring a patient who should be referred is unlikely. But the prospect of a gradual decline in quality (and price) of the onwards services seems more likely and just as worrying.

The other thing that bothers me is that there doesn't seem to be any guarantee that the unprofitable services will continue to be provided.

I don't think the private companies will have access to the same expertise, the employees won't have such good training, and there won't be the same democratic accountablility as there is when the buck stops with the government.

On top of all that, I don't know anyone who thinks the NHS even needs changing! We're all more than happy with it and I am hugely grateful to the NHS for looking after us all so well all our lives. It's so sad to see it pulled apart like this.

I'd be happy to pay much more tax if that would protect it - but it's too late now, isn't it.

Yes, it's true.

Andrew Lansley on this morning's 'Today' programme flatly denied that money saved would line the pockets of doctors. It's probably on the BBC I-Player or listen again facilities.

In the same piece, the body representing doctors also stated that they believed the NHS needed changing.... their concerns are more about the methods & timing rather than the objective itself. Unprofitable aspects will be protected by national tariffs. Training credentials remain very high and the democratic accountability is right at the GP/patient interface. If enough patients think a service is poor and complain to their GP, the GP will stop using it.

No organisation can afford to stand still or think it's perfect and the NHS isn't perfect by a long chalk. My family is less than happy with it and the families reported recently, who have seen their elderly relatives mistreated in NHS hospitals, are rightly furious. Private companies seem to have 'bogeyman' standing with some but, as long as the service is high quality and free at the point of need, most of us won't actually notice when/if the changes happen.

The NHS does need changing - it's quite wasteful and depending where you live choices are very limited. Local service provision can be so dire and yet they have the monopoly on provision as there is no competition.

I don't claim to know or fully understand the proposals, and certainly don't understand the funding and economics of it, but if it means patients and service users get better local provision and choice, nearer to their homes, with high quality care, then that can only be a good thing.

Doctors' views, as expressed by the BMA are here. They do not seem to support the tariff structure as currently proposed, and highlight a number of other areas of potential difficulty.

Just because reform idle needed, it doesn't follow that these are the right reforms being brought in on the right timelines.

Doctors' views, as expressed by the BMA are here. They do not seem to support the tariff structure as currently proposed, and highlight a number of other areas of potential difficulty.

Just because reform is needed, it doesn't follow that these are the right reforms being brought in on the right timelines.

(Apologies, don't know how that double posted whilst I was trying to correct a typo).

Useful link, Meditrina. Thanks again.