GP partners have been urged to write to their MP demanding a U-turn from the Government on its decision not to refund practices for increased National Insurance contributions (NICs).
The BMA has asked GPs to urgently write to their practice’s MP outlining the impact this will have on practices, following the announcement of an increase to the rate of employer NICs by 1.2 percentage points – to 15% – from 6 April next year.
Since the chancellor’s announcement during the Budget on Wednesday, the Treasury confirmed that funding has been set aside to protect the spending power of the public sector, including the NHS, from the direct impacts of these changes.
But GPs have been excluded from this, as the funding to offset the increased NICs costs does not include support for the private sector, including ‘private sector firms contracted out’ – with GPs generally operating as independent businesses for this purpose according to the Treasury.
This caused concern and uncertainty among the profession last week, with GP leaders demanding the Government reimburse practices for the increased contributions, following statements by a Treasury minister that seem to have created greater confusion around the issue.
In a message to GPs on Friday, the BMA said that the Budget ‘failed to protect GP practices’ from the NICs increase, while GPs are ‘already under severe financial strain’ due to ‘years of neglect’, and invited practices to communicate this to their MP.
It said: ‘This additional cost is one they simply cannot afford. The Government must treat GPs like other parts of the NHS and urgently reverse this decision.
‘We need all GP partners to write to their MP, outlining the risk this will have on practices in their constituencies and ask them to immediately raise this issue with the Treasury and Department for Health and Social Care.
‘MPs will be debating the details of Budget next week, so it’s vital the Government is hearing our voice beforehand.
‘The Government has promised to repair and invest in the NHS. But this decision could see an adverse impact on patient care and the potential for more practices to close their doors for good.
‘Please email the MP of your practice using our tool today. It only takes a few minutes but it could make all the difference.’
The Dispensing Doctors Association has also urged dispensing practices to write to their MPs pointing out that ‘there is no justification’ for excluding practices from the compensation arrangements announced in the Budget for other NHS bodies.
‘General practice is the front door to the NHS – the increases in employers’ NICS and Living Wage could close many of those doors for good,’ said DDA Chairman Dr Richard West in a letter to health secretary Wes Streeting.
Speaking to Sky News yesterday, Rachel Reeves said the NHS should fund any compensation to GPs via the extra £22.6bn announced in the budget.
‘What the tax increases on Wednesday paid for in part was a £22.6bn investment into the National Health Service and the National Health Service will now make the allocations to GPs, for example,’ she said.
Pressed on whether the NHS would be expected to cover the tax rise, she added: ‘These are matters for the NHS to make the allocation of money to, for example, hospices as well as GP surgeries, but there’s enough money now in the NHS budget to fund those priorities.’
The DHSC confirmed to Pulse that further detail on NICs for GPs will be confirmed in due course, and that it is working with the Treasury to ensure appropriate compensation for the public sector.
Alongside tax hikes, the chancellor also announced public spending increases with an additional £22.6bn going towards day-to-day health spending, and £100m ‘earmarked’ for GP estates upgrades.
The Health Service provided by GPs will be more insecure; also, other sectors in this country will be less secure, due to this budget; even farmers and some politicians say this will effect the food security of Britain which is important. Why do some working people including GPs, feel they are not treated fairly, compared to some unemployed people on certain benefits which allow large payments that are not taxed? The public know some people on benefits are very deserving: but for some who get benefits, there is not much incentive to get back into work because they get so much (untaxed) benefit payments, already: so the public may well ask: why don’t this government tax the employed and the unemployed receiving benefits fairly? (especially as the social budget is so enormous), and this potentially would encourage more people back into work (and work can be good for you) and help more workers, including GPs, using the savings made. Perhaps, this will happen in the next Rachel Reeves budget, if General Practice is still alive in Britain by then, you could say. Tax more benefits (to be fair and to give a level playing field to everyone).