Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • RESOURCES
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • BJGP Life
    • eLetters
    • Librarian information
    • Alerts
    • Resilience
    • Video
    • Audio
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers
    • RCGP e-Portfolio

User menu

  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
British Journal of General Practice
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers
    • RCGP e-Portfolio
  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in
  • Follow bjgp on Twitter
  • Visit bjgp on Facebook
  • Blog
  • Listen to BJGP podcast
Advertisement
British Journal of General Practice

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • RESOURCES
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • BJGP Life
    • eLetters
    • Librarian information
    • Alerts
    • Resilience
    • Video
    • Audio
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
THE REVIEW

Second thoughts about the NHS reforms

Mike Fitzpatrick
British Journal of General Practice 2011; 61 (586): 349. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp11X572508
Mike Fitzpatrick
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Embedded Image

Having discovered the breadth of opposition to its proposed reforms of the NHS, the coalition government is apparently having second thoughts about some aspects of its plans to hand over financial control of the system to GP consortia.1 Given the dubious records and political commitments of some of the individuals and organisations now opposing the government's plans, I find myself — as someone who regarded the reforms as irrational, ill-considered, and illegitimate from the outset — obliged to reconsider my own position.

I have generally found it a useful rule of thumb in medical politics to assume that, if the British Medical Association opposes something (like the NHS in its first decade), then there must be something good about it. If, on the other hand, the BMA has decided to campaign for something (like coercive measures against smokers and drinkers), then it is unlikely to be worth supporting. Now that the BMA has come out against the reforms, I have to look again to see if I have overlooked some progressive content.

Furthermore, I find two former health ministers, Stephen Dorrell and Alan Milburn, also leading the charge demanding substantial changes in the Health and Social Care Bill currently before parliament.2,3 A loyal Thatcherite, Dorrell presided over the mad cow panic in the late 1990s, and Milburn, a prominent Blairite moderniser, pioneered the extension of the private sector into elective care, intermediate care, and critical care through the NHS plan of 2000. Such a powerful consensus among such unprincipled politicians raises even stronger suspicions that Andrew Lansley must be doing something right.

Indeed, there are some positive features to be found in the coalition plans. The trouble is that for every tentative step these reformers take forward, they can be relied on to take two backwards. There is much to be said for abolishing the primary care trusts (PCTs): when central government officials asked these servile local bodies to jump — whether to put out local surgeries to private tender or to implement ludicrous pandemic flu contingency plans — they simply asked ‘how high?’. But replacing PCTs with GP consortia, or local commissioning boards incorporating wider professional and public representation (as favoured by influential critics), amounts merely to a disruptive and expensive bureaucratic reshuffle.

Removing public health from the prominent and intrusive role it has played in primary health care under the PCTs would be beneficial to doctors and, even more, to patients. But simply moving the crusaders against obesity, smoking, drinking, and sex to new ‘health and wellbeing boards’ in association with local councils ensures the continuation of these moralistic campaigns and the pernicious role they play in the NHS.

Another welcome initiative taken by the coalition in the sphere of health policy was its announcement of a ‘bonfire of the quangos’.4 Yet, scarcely had the celebrations begun before the government reprieved organisations such as NHS Direct, which continue to promote health-related anxieties, and social engineering projects such as the Teenage Pregnancy Unit.

Too much discussion of the NHS reforms has focused on the structure and organisation of health services rather than questioning the quality of health care that doctors and others working in the NHS are appealing to the public to defend.

  • © British Journal of General Practice, May 2011

REFERENCES

  1. ↵
    1. Watt N,
    2. Boseley S,
    3. Curtis P
    Andrew Lansley scrambles to save coalition's NHS reforms. Guardian 2011; 5 Apr: http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/apr/05/andrew-lansley-scrambles-to-save-nhs-reforms (accessed 7 Apr 2011).
  2. ↵
    1. Commons Select Committee
    MPs propose changes to Government's NHS reforms. Parliament UK 2011; 5 Apr: http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/health-committee/news/report—commissioning-further-issues/ (accessed 7 Apr 2011).
  3. ↵
    1. Bad Medicine
    , Progressonline 2011; 29 Mar: http://www.progressonline.org.uk/articles/article.asp?a=7865 (accessed 7 Apr 2011).
  4. ↵
    1. Curtis P
    MPs condemn coalition's bonfire of the quangos as botched. Guardian 2011; 7 Jan: http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/jan/07/mps-committee-bonfire-quangos-botched (accessed 7 Apr 2011).
Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

In this issue

British Journal of General Practice: 61 (586)
British Journal of General Practice
Vol. 61, Issue 586
May 2011
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Or,
sign in or create an account with your email address
Email Article

Thank you for recommending British Journal of General Practice.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person to whom you are recommending the page knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Second thoughts about the NHS reforms
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from British Journal of General Practice
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from British Journal of General Practice.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Second thoughts about the NHS reforms
Mike Fitzpatrick
British Journal of General Practice 2011; 61 (586): 349. DOI: 10.3399/bjgp11X572508

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
Second thoughts about the NHS reforms
Mike Fitzpatrick
British Journal of General Practice 2011; 61 (586): 349. DOI: 10.3399/bjgp11X572508
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley

Jump to section

  • Top
  • Article
    • REFERENCES
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF

More in this TOC Section

THE REVIEW

  • Tick. Tick. Tick ....
  • Made to measure?
  • The poetry of general practice
Show more THE REVIEW

Essay

  • Tick. Tick. Tick ....
  • Made to measure?
  • The poetry of general practice
Show more Essay

Related Articles

Cited By...

Advertisement

BJGP Life

BJGP Open

 

@BJGPjournal's Likes on Twitter

 
 

British Journal of General Practice

NAVIGATE

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • All Issues
  • Online First
  • Authors & reviewers

RCGP

  • BJGP for RCGP members
  • BJGP Open
  • RCGP eLearning
  • InnovAiT Journal
  • Jobs and careers
  • RCGP e-Portfolio

MY ACCOUNT

  • RCGP members' login
  • Subscriber login
  • Activate subscription
  • Terms and conditions

NEWS AND UPDATES

  • About BJGP
  • Alerts
  • RSS feeds
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

AUTHORS & REVIEWERS

  • Submit an article
  • Writing for BJGP: research
  • Writing for BJGP: other sections
  • BJGP editorial process & policies
  • BJGP ethical guidelines
  • Peer review for BJGP

CUSTOMER SERVICES

  • Advertising
  • Contact subscription agent
  • Copyright
  • Librarian information

CONTRIBUTE

  • BJGP Life
  • eLetters
  • Feedback

CONTACT US

BJGP Journal Office
RCGP
30 Euston Square
London NW1 2FB
Tel: +44 (0)20 3188 7679
Email: journal@rcgp.org.uk

British Journal of General Practice is an editorially-independent publication of the Royal College of General Practitioners
© 2021 British Journal of General Practice

Print ISSN: 0960-1643
Online ISSN: 1478-5242