Forums » Off duty » News & media » GP "fatcats" and the white paper
|
GP "fatcats" and the white paper
posted at 21/7/2010 11:32 AM BST
|
|
*Moderator*
Posts: 665
First: 13/3/2009 Last: 10/4/2012 |
The white paper will doubtless mean a re-negotiation of the 2004 GP contract. Health secretary Andrew Lansley refused to rule out a pay rise yesterday. But if any increase results in headlines saying: "GPs paid up to £200 000," as happened last time, what effect will this have on the profession's standing? The public perception last time round was that family doctors got paid an awul lot for working less hours. I loved the BMA response to Andrew Lansley: "Clearly if these new arrangements are to work well then the necessary resources will need to be in place to support them." Mr Lansley apparently declined to comment on the suggestion that the BMA will be "running rings" around the government on pay. |
|
|
Re: GP "fatcats" and the white paper
posted at 21/7/2010 4:35 PM BST
on bmj.com
|
Posts: 124
First: 11/6/2010 Last: 1/4/2011 |
I feel that many people castigate GPs for getting paid well. I think SOME GPs are overpaid, however this has ultimately come about due to our previous government’s negligence. If you were offered more money for the same work would you say no? The 2003 reform springs to mind where doctors where promised 12% pay rise, better pensions and the chance to opt out of providing out-of-hours care. I think this much debated reform will have to include financial incentives for GPs. Undoubtedly these financial incentives will be consumed readily by doctors at a great cost to the NHS. In the name of sensationalist writing, £200,000 is an understatement, “Super-GPs earn up to £500,000 a year.”
|
Forums » Off duty » News & media » GP "fatcats" and the white paper
