Agenda item

Health Primary Care Funding

It was moved by Councillor Jillian Creasy, seconded by Councillor Robert Murphy, that this Council:-

(a)      recognises that Sheffield suffers from health inequalities across the city and that good health care can help to mitigate and treat illness;

(b)      is therefore disturbed to hear that four General Practices in Sheffield are affected by the withdrawal of a fund, the Minimum Practice Income Guarantee (MPIG), designed by the last Government to support practices serving particularly needy populations which were adversely affected by the 2004 GP contract;

(c)       notes that whilst similar practices in London have been given a two year reprieve, cuts to practices outside London have already begun and MPIG will be phased out over seven years;

(d)      notes that MPIG was always seen as a stop-gap until a fairer funding formula could be found but is now being withdrawn without any replacement;

(e)      fears that practices serving some of the most needy people in the city, including Devonshire Green in the city centre, which has a high proportion of people suffering homelessness, mental health and addiction problems, face closure;

(f)       agrees that closure of such practices would directly affect the health of their patients and have knock on effects for surrounding practices as well as emergency and hospital services;

(g)      thanks the Clinical Commissioning Group, the local area team of NHS England and the colleagues in public health for their support, but notes that the funding comes from NHS England at national level;

(h)      therefore resolves to write to David Geddes, head of primary care commissioning at NHS England, to ask him to reverse this decision; and

(i)        requests that a copy of this motion be sent to all Sheffield MPs and to the Secretary of State for Health, The Rt. Hon. Jeremy Hunt MP.

Whereupon, it was moved by Councillor Mary Lea, seconded by Councillor Mike Drabble, as an amendment, that the Motion now submitted be amended by the addition of new paragraphs (h) and (i) as follows, and the relettering of original paragraphs (h) and (i) as new paragraphs (j) and (k):-

(h)      believes that this news makes a complete fallacy of the Government’s claim that they are not cutting the NHS;

(i)        reiterates its objection, raised at previous meetings, of Government redistribution of NHS funding from areas with higher levels of deprivation and health inequalities to some of the healthiest and wealthiest areas of the country;

On being put to the vote, the amendment was carried.

It was then moved by Councillor Richard Shaw, seconded by Councillor Martin Smith, as an amendment, that the Motion now submitted be amended by:-

1.        the deletion of paragraph (b) and the addition of a new paragraph (b) as follows:-

(b)       recognises the difficulty some practices are placed in by the withdrawal of MPIG, but recognises that MPIG is not a needs-based payment, but merely a negotiated compensation for practices that lost out when the current needs-based formula was introduced;

2.        the deletion of paragraph (d) and the addition of a new paragraph (d) as follows:-

(d)       believes that a system of needs-based formula plus MPIG is not preferable to a pure needs-based formula, which recognises all the demands of age, deprivation, mental health, homelessness and addiction

3.        the deletion of paragraph (h) and the addition of a new paragraph (h) as follows:-

(h)      therefore resolves to write to David Geddes, head of primary care commissioning at NHS England, to ask him to back reform of the GP funding formula to take better account of the demands on GPs of deprivation, mental health, homelessness and addiction.

On being put to the vote, the amendment was negatived.

The original Motion, as amended, was then put as a Substantive Motion in the following form and carried:-