THE BMA GPs conference yesterday voted unanimously, but for a couple of abstentions, for Motion 153: ‘The Market and Any Willing Provider’.
The motion from the Agenda Committee stated: ‘That Conference reaffirms its opposition to the privatisation of the NHS and:
i) ‘insists that the government enshrines in the Act the requirement that the NHS shall remain as a public, not-for-profit service, free to all at the point of use
ii) ‘insists that the Health and Social Care Bill would lead to the inevitable privatisation of the NHS
iii) ‘believes the insistence of enforced competition (any willing provider [AWP]/any qualified provider [AQP]) will undermine local clinical cooperation, increase fragmentation of patient care pathways, inflate the cost of contracting and compromise the quality of healthcare.
iv) ‘believes the introduction of AWP/AQP for less complex interventions could lead to the destabilisation of traditional providers
v) ‘instructs GPC to campaign against the implementation of an AWP as it will allow “cherry-picking’’ of profitable services and result in the disintegration of NHS-provided services.’
Mover Dr Andrew Taylor, of Liverpool, said: ‘The Health and Social Care Bill is the greatest threat to our NHS and its principles since its inception.’ He said the government ‘was not elected nor mandated’ to break these principles of care for all, free at the point of use.
He said: ‘Few GPs support the Bill as it stands. Most GPs are being coerced into consortia. That doesn’t mean they agree with them.’
He added: ‘GP commissioning is already being given out to private companies who can commission from private providers. Bingo – privatisation. My patients want the NHS committed to its principles.’
He continued to warn: ‘Current, traditional providers have already gone to the wall because of cherry-picking by private providers.’ He concluded that ‘all this is looked over by Monitor, who encourages competition.’
First-time speaker Samuel Maseef said: ‘It is a decisive day today. We should send a message to the government: any willing provider – is it a market or the NHS? We should continue to do what we do. We should reject all the Bill, full stop.’
Dr M Ainsworth, of Avon, urged delegates: ‘Don’t be seduced by private sector blandishments.’ She added: ‘Rather than focusing on savings, the government should focus on patient care.’ She insisted: ‘The corrupting influence of profit must not influence the NHS.’
Dr Ainsworth cautioned that private sector cherry-picking will leave the most difficult operations to the state. She called on delegates to vote for all five clauses.
Delegates went on to vote unanimously for Motion 185 from the Agenda Committee, stating: ‘That Conference believes that the proposed role of Monitor needs to change away from promoting competition to promoting co-operation with commissioners in seeking more cost and clinically effective services.’
Mover Dr B. Schmidt, of Liverpool, warned that Monitor is an unregulated regulator to ensure competition. She warned: ‘It will make sure private companies have a share of the NHS.’
She added: ‘Competitors don’t talk to each other. Competition will take place to the benefit of private companies. You will be expected to put the money first.’
Supporting the motion, Mark Darling of Sheffield warned: ‘Monitor’s extended and enhanced role will have extensive consequences.’ He stressed: ‘There is no evidence that market forces benefit patients. We need collaboration, not competition.’
In a right of reply, Dr Schmidt said: ‘Monitor is a front for the privatisation of the NHS.’
