The BMA have passed a resolution opposing changes to doctors’ pensions. The BMA is to ballot for industrial action if necessary. It has been calculated that doctors would be better off using a private pension scheme than the proposed changes.

A few recent news articles concerning the UK’s Conservative and Liberal-Democrat coalition government – the ConDem’s – brutal attack on the National Health Service.

BMA Calls For Talks With Government As Doctors Attack Myth Of “Gold-Plated” Pensions, UK

The BMA today repeated its call for talks with the government on pensions, as new figures show that many junior doctors could be better off investing in a private pension than joining the reformed NHS scheme. The call for dialogue comes as doctors and medical students attending the BMA’s annual conference in Cardiff passed a motion calling for a possible ballot of BMA membership on industrial action.*

Initial figures from illustrative modelling commissioned by the BMA* show that the potential pension a doctor embarking on a career as a GP could expect to build up in the NHS scheme – assuming it undergoes key reforms proposed by the government – could be lower than the pension built up by investing in a personal scheme (in which there are no employer contributions.)

…
*Notes

The new figures are illustrative examples only, based on initial information from the government on possible future changes to pensions benefits. Any doctor considering decisions on their pensions is advised to contact the BMA Pensions Department or an independent financial adviser.

The wording of the motion debated at the BMA Annual Representative Meeting today was as follows:

That this Meeting:-

i) believes that increasing the normal pension age for NHS staff will not be in the interest of the NHS; carried

ii) believes a final salary pension scheme for hospital doctors should be the favoured affordable option for the NHS as it provides a major incentive for recruitment and retention of high calibre NHS hospital doctors; carried

iii) believes that a CARE NHS pension system will give hospital doctors a significantly worse pension on retirement due to their pay structure increasing right to the end of their careers; carried

iv) believes that a revised CARE scheme for GPs will be unacceptable and may result in up to a third of GPs retiring prematurely; carried as a reference

v) believes that tiered pension contributions are unacceptable in a CARE scheme for doctors; carried as reference

vi) calls on the BMA, in the event that there is a government plan to halt the final salary pension scheme and replace it with an unfavourable career average (CARE) scheme for doctors, to ballot the BMA membership regarding all forms of industrial action; carried

Source:
British Medical Association

Shadow Health Secretary John Healey criticises the Destroy the NHS Bill as introducing … “more bureaucracy, more complex decision making and more wasted cost.”

Crapita complains about not getting enough business from intended and proposed NHS privatisation.

ConDems release plans to replace NHS trust management with private managers. There is an obvious danger here – that NHS trusts will be deemed to be failing so that they can be replaced by private managers. It’s the “failed states” scenario of international politics played out in the NHS.

The Hospital Consultants and Specialists Association warns of a perfect storm in the NHS.

A few recent news articles concerning the UK’s Conservative and Liberal-Democrat coalition government – the ConDem’s – brutal attack on the National Health Service.

Government ‘learned little’ from Health Bill pause, says Labour | GPonline.com

Shadow health secretary John Healey said the changes to the Health Bill had been a ‘political fix’ designed to ‘buy off’ the widespread opposition to the NHS reform plans.

He said the closer people look at the amended Health Bill ‘the less they will like the changes’ and ‘the more concerned they will become’.

But he warned that the government is ‘railroading’ the Bill through parliament, allowing little time for scrutiny of the changes. He also raised concerns that only 64 of the 299 clauses are being sent back to the House of Commons for further debate by MPs.

‘The government has only allowed 10 scrutiny sessions… which means there will be around seven minutes for each amendment for scrutiny,’ he said.

Mr Healey meanwhile said that the cost of reorganisation is likely to rise as a result of the changes to the Health Bill.

He said: ‘The government is introducing more bureaucracy, more complex decision making and more wasted cost.

‘Commissioning, which is currently being done by PCT, will soon be split with at least five bodies.’

He also warned that the government is unlikely to carry out a new impact assessment of the updated Bill, meaning the NHS is being asked to implement a ‘far reaching set of changes’ without knowing the costs or the wider implications.

He said ‘Far from removing confusion and uncertainty in the NHS about the plans for the future, the government with its announcements and amendments is making that confusion and uncertainty greater.’

HealthInvestor – Article: NHS not making use of outsourcing partnerships, says Crapita’s Bryant

Delays to the government’s Health Bill and short-sighted policies in NHS trusts are holding back Crapita’s outsourcing operations in the sector, the company’s managing director for health has said.

Beverley Bryant, who joined Crapita last year after a stint at the Department of Health, said that despite the need to make huge efficiency savings under the government’s QIPP agenda, trusts were generally failing to reorganise their back office functions accordingly.

“Trusts are still working on their budgets on a year-by-year basis, when in reality if they want to make savings next year and the year after they are going to have to come out to market this year,” she told HealthInvestor.

“We’re trying to get the message across that if you centralise and streamline back office services across a number of NHS trusts, you can make big savings. But at the moment there aren’t many big projects doing that.”

Bryant also suggested that NHS bodies might not be “as used to the partnership approach to outsourcing as local authorities are”. But she added: “We’re confident that once a few start to do it, more will follow.”
…

Outrage over plan to use private managers in the NHS | Public Finance — official CIPFA magazine

Unions have reacted with fury to government plans to bring in private sector firms to run failing NHS trusts, while health service professionals have accused the Department of Health of recycling old failed policies.

In a June 4 document, Developing the NHS performance regime, health minister Ben Bradshaw set out plans for minimum standards of quality, safety and financial management.

Trusts failing to meet the standards – part of a performance management framework that will be distinct from the Healthcare Commission’s inspection regime – will be deemed to be ‘challenged’ and given a set timescale to improve.

Those that fail to lift their performance will have their management team replaced in one of three ways: by a fresh team of NHS managers; takeover by a foundation trust; or by the introduction of a private sector management team under contract.

Dr Jonathan Fielden, chair of the British Medical Association’s consultants committee, speaking at the BMA consultants’ conference, asked: ‘How much do they want to offend their backbenchers? How much do they want to demoralise the talent in the NHS that can do so much if not always played down and insulted by ministers? How little do they know of the complexities of the NHS? You can’t just fly in management.’

Unison senior national officer Mike Jackson agreed that it was ‘unlikely that private sector managers would have the necessary experience of delivering acute and emergency services to bring long-term benefits’.

He added: ‘There is a strong public service ethos in the NHS which would be severely damaged by bringing in private management.’
…

Climate is ripe for a perfect storm in the NHS » Hospital Dr

The Hospital Consultants and Specialists Association (HCSA) is a trade union that represents the interests of senior hospital and medical staff

…

Many trusts are openly saying that they can’t pay the bills and are resorting to draconian measures to balance the books. At the same time NHS staff remain under a pay freeze, redundancies are becoming the norm and staff are being asked to accept higher pension contributions in return for a lower pension income. Morale is low; and goodwill rapidly destroyed as the NHS is forced to manage a financial crisis not of the staff’s making.

Where does patient care stand in this mess? Many treatments are being put on hold or restricted. Care of the elderly is regularly reported as being sub-standard. Waiting times are lengthening; tensions within the NHS increasing.

Reform can only be built upon a solid platform and I fear that the sinking sands will inevitably lead to structural collapse. Raiding surplus pension funds to bail out the business is Maxwellian, dangerous and ill-conceived. How often are we told: “Staff are the greatest NHS asset?” Well now is the time for politicians to put their support for the NHS to the test.

The perfect storm is not a cheap sound bite. Until or unless NHS staff are valued, respected and treated fairly, the storm clouds will loom large.

More to follow.

The British Medical Association (BMA) renews its opposition to the Destroy the NHS Bill and calls for it to be abandoned in its entirety.

Steve Field who lead the government’s ‘Listening Exercise’ on NHS ‘reforms’ says that the report is possibly wanting on addressing [edit: neglected] the cap on private patients.

A few recent news articles concerning the UK’s Conservative and Liberal-Democrat coalition government – the ConDem’s – brutal attack on the National Health Service.

BBC News – Doctors reject revised NHS plans

Doctors have rejected the government’s revised NHS plans, urging their union to take a tougher stance.

Delegates at the annual British Medical Association conference voted in favour of calling for the Health and Social Care Bill to be withdrawn by 59%.

The union initially welcomed concessions by ministers this month on competition and patient choice.

But doctors at the Cardiff meeting said it was time to keep pushing the government “further and harder”.

The plans involve opening up the health service to greater competition and giving GPs a lead role in spending the NHS budget.

Amid mounting criticisms the government put the changes on hold in April. Two weeks ago ministers attempted to appease opponents by watering down certain aspects of the plans.

But delegates at the BMA said they were still not satisfied – despite pleas by BMA leader Dr Hamish Meldrum not to vote in favour of a series of critical motions.

One of those was calling for the bill underpinning the changes to be withdrawn.

Dr Meldrum said he would continue to ask for more.

But he added: “If you push too far you may lose some of the ground you have taken.”

But delegates were not convinced with 59% voting in favour of the motion.

Dr Jacqueline Applebee, a GP from London, said the overhaul would result in one of the “biggest ever social injustices” as it would lead to charges for services and backdoor privatisation.
…

38 Degrees | Blog | NHS Poll results – what should we do next?

Over the past few weeks, tens of thousands of us have been helping decide what we should do next with the NHS campaign by taking part in a survey on the 38 Degrees website.

Thanks to the huge outcry against their original plans, the government was forced to make some changes. They’ve changed parts of the wording and made a few real improvements – but some of the most dangerous problems remain.

We’ve not won yet – but we definitely have made progress. According to Andrew Lansley’s original timetable, the NHS changes would be law by now. Together, we’ve helped stop that happen.
…

NHS forum GP admits private patient doubts | Society | The Guardian

The government is facing renewed pressure over its health bill after the GP who led its “listening exercise” admitted he should have done more to flag up concerns about private patients in NHS hospitals, and grassroots doctors meeting in Cardiff demanded further changes.

Labour warned that the health secretary, Andrew Lansley, was still planning to create a “full-scale market” after Steve Field acknowledged that the government would leave hospitals vulnerable to European Union competition law due to the presence of private patients in NHS hospitals. Concerns about a backdoor privatisation of the NHS prompted David Cameron and Nick Clegg to appoint Field to lead the Future Forum review.

As Field was addressing MPs, who are considering the bill again at committee stage, doctors in the British Medical Association defied their leadership to pass a motion at their annual conference criticising the “respray” of the health and social care bill.

Field said a majority of NHS staff who attended his meetings had raised concerns about government plans to lift a cap on the number of private patients using NHS hospitals.

Labour said lifting the cap, which was introduced in 2006, would help foster a free market approach in the NHS.

Field said: “If you wanted a gut feeling from what was happening in the listening exercise – the feeling was actually the private cap should stay because people felt that would provide the protection. But it should be reviewed and put at a reasonable level.”

He admitted he had second thoughts about failing to mention the cap in his report. “To be honest, we didn’t put as much in our report as perhaps we could have done. In fact, it was one area, when we reread the paper at the end, we might have been stronger on.”
…