§ 10. Tim Loughton (East Worthing and Shoreham)If he will publish whole-time equivalent target figures for additional GPs in service by 2004. [3773]
§ The Minister of State, Department of Health (Mr. John Hutton)The NHS plan commits us to providing at least 2,000 more general practitioners by 2004. The number of whole-time equivalent GPs resulting from that increase will clearly depend on a number of factors, but we expect that the overwhelming majority will be full-time.
§ Tim LoughtonUsing the phrase "will clearly depend" is not the same as saying that there will be 2,000 doctors. Is it not now patently clear that all the Secretary of State's and the Prime Minister's much trumpeted claims about new doctor and nurse recruitment do not bear close scrutiny? It later transpired that of the 2,000 extra GPs promised in the next four years more than half were in the pipeline already. Is it not the reality that, as the British Medical Association has made patently clear, whole-time equivalent GP numbers are static and that many experienced doctors are still leaving the NHS or are set to leave or retire early, when we can ill afford to lose them? If the Secretary of State or the Minister cannot guarantee that promising 2,000 extra doctors will actually mean that there will be 2,000 extra, how can we take their pledges on nurse recruitment or any of their other election promises seriously?
§ Mr. HuttonThere will be 2,000 extra GPs, and we have made that very clear. The hon. Gentleman's arguments lack both consistency and credibility. On consistency, it is worth pointing out to the Conservatives that they cut the number of GPs in training by 20 per cent. between 1991 and 1996. Had the number been maintained at its 1991 level, there would be nearly 700 more GPs in practice today and 1,000 more by 2004. It is not terribly flattering to the hon. Gentleman to pretend that he is committed to a policy when his record in Government shows that he took the opposite approach.
In addition, the hon. Gentleman criticises us for lack of ambition in recruiting GPs. The Tory manifesto for the last election contained no pledge to increase the number of GPs in the national health service: not a single GP was 1046 promised. We are determined to reverse the trend that we inherited and are increasing the number of GPs as well as the number of full-time equivalent GPs in the NHS.
§ Judy Mallaber (Amber Valley)I have been visiting GP practices in my constituency in recent weeks and have seen improved services such as counselling and smoking cessation. Will my right hon. Friend assess the impact of the new primary medical services system and the appointment of nurse practitioners and other clinicians in enabling practices and GPs to operate more efficiently and flexibly? Will he also reconsider the NHS information systems to ensure that there is proper and easy access to the information that is required by GPs and PCTs?
§ Mr. HuttonOverall, the introduction of PMS has had a hugely beneficial impact on the delivery of primary care services. We intend to continue those initiatives to ensure that GPs and their patients have the greatest access to choice. PMS has allowed us to make sure that we can provide primary care services in some of the most underprivileged and deprived parts of Britain. That is an important step forward.
My hon. Friend is also right about information services for GPs and primary care practice. It is important that we improve those for the benefit of not only GPs but their patients. That is why we are embarking on a major investment in information technology upgrading across the NHS, which will benefit many people.
§ Derek Conway (Old Bexley and Sidcup)Is the Minister aware that recruiting additional GPs will prove difficult in my constituency because the Bexley primary care trust is just under £8 million short of its capitation weighting? Will he address that problem? Although it may be comfortable for him to live in the past, he has been in office for a while and it is time that he took responsibility for the shortfall that is affecting our areas.
§ Mr. HuttonI am sure that the hon. Gentleman wants more money spent on the NHS. So do we, but we are providing the extra resources, unlike the Conservatives who clearly would not have been able to. He knows that we are reviewing the formula that determines how resources are distributed across the NHS. That has not been completed, but I hope that it will be shortly. I hope that he will be able to endorse and support one change—the emphasis that we are placing on the role of primary care trusts as the main conduits through which resources reach the front line of the NHS. It is better for the NHS for those to be as close to the front line as possible. I am sure that that will benefit his constituents and all patients in Bexley.