The BMA should abandon its policy of ‘critical engagement’ with the government over NHS reform and canvas its membership on the way forward.
This is the message from Dr Clive Peedell, co-chair of the NHS Consultants’ Association and consultant oncologist, who has written a letter on bmj.com saying the union is critical to ’saving the NHS’ but is unlikely to do so with its current approach.
He also criticises BMA council for failing to support the organisation of a specialist representative meeting to debate the proposals.
The letter was co-signed by 118 doctors, including 20 professors, the Lib Dem Science spokesman Dr Evan Harris, and former Independent MP and Health Select Committee member, Dr Richard Taylor.
It is also critical of the BMA’s leadership for suggesting the white paper is a done deal and that members should start working towards its delivery. The letter says: ‘The white paper is still awaiting publication as the Health Bill, which will then need to be subjected to the legislative process before being enacted by parliament. We are therefore very concerned that the BMA and more specifically the BMA general practitioners committee is treating proposed policy (that is, a white paper) as if it is policy.’
Peedell warns that the white paper has become even more pro-market, with price competition having been introduced within the new operational framework. It enables hospitals to charge rates lower than the national tariff.
The letter says: ‘We believe that the BMA has no mandate from the BMA membership to continue with the “critical engagement” policy. Mr Lansley’s reform agenda has been widely criticised across the health policy and political spectrum as moving too fast, yet the current approach from the BMA could actually hasten the pace of reform because the association has effectively sent a message to the profession that the white paper is a done deal.’
It concludes: ‘We have serious concerns that the proposed reforms will fundamentally undermine the founding principles of the NHS by creating a much more expensive and inequitable market based system. However, we also believe that the BMA could play a crucial role in saving the NHS from this fate.’
Dr Hamish Meldrum, chair of BMA council, said the BMA would continue to forcefully represent members’ concerns as the government’s proposals move to the next stage.
Read the full letter.
Tags: Health policy, Privatisation
I left the BMA during my SHO years, more than 10 years ago. They have never ever represented the hospital doctors. In fact, I don’t know what teh BMA does except to award gold and platinum awards to the ‘yes’ doctors. There wasn’t much of a voice during the MTAs and MMC debacle. Just mild opposition but finally a ‘yes’.
I agree. In fact, I know of GPs who can’t wait to take this on. They are already saying they want to do everything in their own surgeries with the hope that we will sort out the mess.
Hurray! Someone has said what we have all been thinking for a long time. The BMA should be renamed the BGPA (British General Practitioners Association). It has far too many vested interests in General Practice to represent Hospital doctors with any conviction. The NHS as we know it is about to be dismantled but the BMA does not seem at all bothered. It has always been and will remain dedicated to ensuring that GP’s get the best possible deal in the never-ending redisorganisation that is the NHS.
as much as i empathise with a lot of the nostalgia many feel for the old nhs - the changing demogprahics and the ever increasing demands from the public mean that the concept of “free at the point of delivery” will lead to its collapse. study the last decade of the soviet union if you do not believe this!
exactly right my dear gp. medical registrars are wasting their time with training. with nursey deemed fit to do endoscopy lists, things can not get any worse. gp endoscopy? go for it! maybe the specialty doctors will some day hold their respective royal colleges to account for having given up their very own turf, but i doubt it. they are suckers who will never stand up for themselves.
The BMA has always tried to be “all things to all men” - and, sometimes, ladies! There are 3 main groups of doctors - GPs, Consultants, and ‘juniors’; they all have different needs and aspirations, so it is difficult, if not impossible, for one organisation to ‘represent’ them all properly. Hence the emergence, many years ago, of the HCSA (for consultants and specialists) - now flourishing; and the JHDA (for Juniors) - now, defunct.
There is no question that the NHS needs RADICAL refrom (as opposed to tinkering ‘reorganisation’) if it is to meet the needs of the 21st century. In ‘the old days’, it did a wonderful job of meeting the needs of the population in the 40’s, 50’s and 60’s; but the population has changed and, with it, medicine. There are now so many treatments that are possible (but not always available under the NHS); many of them are ‘expensive’ in terms of manpower and ‘expendables’. The people want it ‘free’; but they dont want to pay increased taxes!
I totally agree with Malcolm, hence the BMA should change its name to the BGPA (British GP Association). It has a vested interest and does not represent hospital doctors. It is not surprising that it is agreeing with the white paper albeit not wholeheartedly.
PS It is a sad day but the BMA was not always like this.