ourNHS

BMA calls for withdrawal of Coalition's privatisation regulations

Controversial competition regulations should be withdrawn and replaced, says BMA ahead of crucial House of Lords debate

OurNHS
18 April 2013

Doctors leaders have today (Thursday, 18 April) called for controversial competition rules to be withdrawn and replaced ahead of a crucial House of Lords debate next week[1].

In a new briefing paper sent to peers ahead of the debate, the BMA calls for the withdrawal of the regulations[2] that detail how aspects of patient choice and competition operate under the Health and Social Care Act in England.  

They should be replaced with new regulations that unambiguously reflect previous Government assurances that commissioners will not be forced to use competition when making their commissioning decisions. The BMA is pressing for this principle to be explicitly stated in the regulations.

The BMA has long argued that mandatory competition for all services risks fragmentation of services and creates unnecessary transaction costs, making it harder for the NHS in England to deliver high quality, cost-effective and integrated care to patients.

Regulations, which were first laid before Parliament in February 2013, set out how competition and patient choice would work under the Health and Social Care Act. They were intended to ensure good procurement practice, but have continued to prompt widespread concern and uncertainty about the apparent requirement for competitive tendering for most health services.  

Dr Mark Porter, Chair of BMA Council, said:

“The absence of expected guidance on how the competition regulations would operate in practice, and the lack of satisfactory guarantees in these regulations, has created great uncertainty and anxiety for clinicians and patients.

“Only explicit wording in the regulations would allow patients, doctors and commissioners to be absolutely certain that clinicians will have the freedom to act in the way they consider to be in the best interests of patients.”

Dr Laurence Buckman Chair of the BMA’s GP Committee said:

“GP commissioners now have responsibility for making critical decisions about how best to provide services to patients in their locality.  

“Commissioners could be put in the position of facing costly tendering processes and possible legal challenges from unsuccessful bidders because of ambiguous rules. That is why GPs want the regulations withdrawn.”

Notes

1.   On Wednesday 24 April 2013, the House of Lords will debate the following ‘fatal’ motion secured by Lord Hunt of King’s Heath: ‘National Health Service (Procurement, Patient Choice and Competition) (No. 2) Regulations 2013 – Motion to Annul’

2.  Details of the regulations are available here:

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/500/contents/made

The BMA’s briefing paper is available here.

http://bma.org.uk/working-for-change/shaping-healthcare/competition-and-choice/choice-and-competition/section-75-briefing

 

Stop the secrecy: Publish the NHS COVID data deals


To: Matt Hancock, Secretary of State for Health and Social Care

We’re calling on you to immediately release details of the secret NHS data deals struck with private companies, to deliver the NHS COVID-19 datastore.

We, the public, deserve to know exactly how our personal information has been traded in this ‘unprecedented’ deal with US tech giants like Google, and firms linked to Donald Trump (Palantir) and Vote Leave (Faculty AI).

The COVID-19 datastore will hold private, personal information about every single one of us who relies on the NHS. We don’t want our personal data falling into the wrong hands.

And we don’t want private companies – many with poor reputations for protecting privacy – using it for their own commercial purposes, or to undermine the NHS.

The datastore could be an important tool in tackling the pandemic. But for it to be a success, the public has to be able to trust it.

Today, we urgently call on you to publish all the data-sharing agreements, data-impact assessments, and details of how the private companies stand to profit from their involvement.

The NHS is a precious public institution. Any involvement from private companies should be open to public scrutiny and debate. We need more transparency during this pandemic – not less.


By adding my name to this campaign, I authorise openDemocracy and Foxglove to keep me updated about their important work.

Had enough of ‘alternative facts’? openDemocracy is different Join the conversation: get our weekly email

Comments

We encourage anyone to comment, please consult the oD commenting guidelines if you have any questions.
Audio available Bookmark Check Language Close Comments Download Facebook Link Email Newsletter Newsletter Play Print Share Twitter Youtube Search Instagram WhatsApp yourData