§ Mr. Austin MitchellTo ask the Secretary of State for Health what estimate the Government have made of the effects of the proposed changes in the remuneration of general practitioners on the gross income of those who do not opt for their own budgets; and what is the intended effect of the new arrangements in terms of(a) the number of patients per doctor and (b) the number of staff employed by doctors, and their remuneration.
§ Mr. MellorI refer the hon. Member to the reply that I gave to my hon. Friends the Members for Ealing, North (Mr. Greenway), for Brigg and Cleethorpes (Mr. Brown), for Slough (Mr. Watts) and for Colne Valley (Mr. Riddick) today. Under the proposals for GP practice budgets set out in the White Paper, "Working for Patients", and Working Paper 3, practices which opt to become budget holders may invest any savings on their annual budget in improving the services that they offer to patients. The review body on doctors' and dentists' remuneration will continue as now to recommend the average net income and indirectly reimbursed expenses of all GPs, whether budget holders or not. Other expenses incurred by GPs are reimbursed directly.
We expect the number of staff employed by GPs to increase as a result of our intention to invest more in practice teams, and to remove the present restraints on their number and the range of qualifying duties. By enabling family practitioner committees to target funds on areas of greatest need, the deployment of practice team staff will become more cost-effective.