§ Ms DrownTo ask the Secretary of State for Health with reference to the NHS (General Medical Services) Amendment (No. 4) Regulations (SI No. 3742) and the NHS (General Medical Services Supplementary List) Regulations 2001 (SI No. 3740), whether it is his policy that there should be a requirement on health authorities to provide information to general practitioners to support the allegations being made against them. [23821]
§ Mr. Hutton[holding answer 19 December 2001]Before a health authority decides to remove a doctor from either the medical or supplementary list under discretionary powers the regulations require it to
- (i) give the doctor notice in writing of any allegation against him;
- (ii) give the doctor notice of what action the health authority is considering and on what grounds;
- (iii) give him the opportunity to make written representations to the health authority;
- (iv) give him the opportunity to put his case at an oral hearing before the health authority.
These matters are addressed more fully in advice, prepared in consultation with key stakeholders, including the British Medical Association. This advice was made available to health authorities on 30 November 2001 and explains that the doctor should be sent full details, including any written evidence, of the case against him no less than 14 calendar days prior to the date set for the panel.
This advice is available on the Department's website.
§ Ms DrownTo ask the Secretary of State for Health with reference to Regulation 6(2)(a) of the NHS (General Medical Services Supplementary List) Regulations 2001 (SI No. 3740), whether it is his policy to require a general practitioner, in order to gain access to a health authority's supplementary list, to provide evidence that he or she has performed general medical services for three out of the last six months; and what assessment he has made of whether this would disadvantage doctors who have not worked for three out of six months previously owing to(a) ill health, (b) maternity or paternity leave and (c) other valid reasons. [23823]
§ Mr. Hutton[holding answer 19 December 2001]The regulations are intended to ensure that general practitioners who work as non-principals (for example, locums, assistants and salaried general practitioners) are picked up by a supplementary list based in the area in which they intend to work. They get onto that list, in part, by either demonstrating that they have worked in the area or by showing that they intend to work in that area. These arrangements are therefore not discriminatory.
These matters are addressed more fully in advice to the national health service, prepared in consultation with key stakeholders, including the British Medical Association. This advice was made available to health authorities on 30 November 2001 and explains that satisfactory evidence of an intention to work in a particular area could include membership of the local medical committee or a written commitment from the practitioner that he or she intends to work locally coupled with any other matter which links them with the area such as a home within the health authority's area.
This advice is available on the Department's website.
652W
§ Tim LoughtonTo ask the Secretary of State for Health how many GPs he estimates will be 60 or above in each of the next five years. [24429]
§ Mr. HuttonThe information requested is shown in the table.
Headcount Number All Practitioners1 31,369 of which aged: 54 822 55 716 56 764 57 606 58 532 59 449 Total aged 54 to 59 3,889 Total aged 60 and over 1,938 All UPEs2 27,704 of which aged: 54 802 55 696 56 741 57 585 58 514 59 435 Total aged 54 to 59 3,773 Total aged 60 and over 1,764 1Practitioners include UPEs, Restricted Principals, Assistants, GP Registrars, Salaried Doctors (Para 52 SFA), PMS Other and GP Retainers. 2Unrestricted Principals and Equivalents (UPEs) includes GMS Unrestricted Principals, PMS Contracted GPs and PMS Salaried GPs. Source:
Department of Health General and Personal Medical Services Statistics
§ Tim LoughtonTo ask the Secretary of State for Health when the hon. Member for East Worthing and Shoreham will receive a reply to his letter of 15 November, to the Parliamentary Under-Secretary, the hon. Member for Salford (Ms Blears), regarding the exclusion of Worthing from his scheme to incentivise general practitioner recruitment. [24678]
§ Mr. HuttonA reply was sent to the hon. Member on 19 December 2001.