GP waiting times in Wales 'will get worse' due to NI increase
Unlike other NHS services, GP practices operate as private businesses and are funded by government contracts, which means they are not exempt from the NI increases, which came into effect last month. GP partners now have to pay NI at 15% on salaries above £5,000 instead of 13.8% on salaries above £9,100.
Monmouthshire-based Dr Christmas said funding cuts, inflation and the rise in the cost of living had made it difficult for GPs to keep going."It's hard to be so pessimistic, but this is such a catastrophic situation we suddenly find ourselves in out of nowhere," she said.She added the new tax rate would cost her practice £20,000 a year, with larger practices facing additional costs of up to £90,000.
In January the BMA's Welsh GP committee voted to accept an updated pay offer, which includes a one-off £23m payment aimed at stabilising practices.Dr Christmas said the new agreement was "a very welcome relief" but warned it would not solve the long-term challenges and called for GP practices to be exempt from the NI rise."If we can't turn that into recurrent funding, we're back to square one or even worse off. It's a temporary breather," she added."We all know what's best for patients. But if we're constantly trying to pick up the pieces, we can't do that quality job that we need to that will save the NHS in the long run."
Dr Meleri Evans, an Anglesey GP, said her practice expected to pay between £30,000 and £50,000 more a year.She said: "This means we're going to have to change the way that we do business and the reality is that the only way that a GP partner can do that is to look at reducing the services they currently provide."For the majority of people that comes down to reducing staffing costs. So there are certainly going to be very difficult decisions, including possible redundancies."In response to the Budget and growing worries within the profession, the British Medical Association's Welsh GP committee entered into negotiations with the Welsh government earlier this year to revise the General Medical Services contract for 2024-25.
The UK government said health was a devolved matter and was an issue for the Welsh government, but added that ministers in Cardiff Bay had received additional funding on top of £21bn for changes in NI for employers. The Welsh government said: "Our initial estimate is devolved public sector employers in Wales face a £253m extra cost. The approach the UK government is taking leaves us with a significant shortfall."It added increases should be be fully funded by Westminster and it was pressing the Treasury on this issue.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Powys County Times
2 hours ago
- Powys County Times
My Dentist closure 'another nail in coffin' for town
THE impending closure of a dental surgery in Knighton has been described as 'another nail in the coffin' for the town. The My Dentist facility, in Wylcwm Place, will close on September 30, with patients receiving the news via letter from the practice. The practice has provided both NHS and private treatments since opening, but will cease to offer either service from the end of September. Knighton mayor Tom Taylor described it as 'bad news', with town councillor Sally Vaughan calling it a 'terrible outcome' for local residents. 'My Dentist have given/ended their NHS contract, so that will no longer leave an NHS dentist in the town,' Councillor Vaughan said in a letter to her fellow councillors. 'They say that there is (an) inability to recruit dentists into this area so, unfortunately, at this present time, My Dentist will close permanently on September 30. 'They said that obviously if things alter then they will reassess. 'This is a terrible outcome after being closed for some time and (after being) given hope that it would re-open. 'I think as a town council we need to write to our Assembly Members and the health board and see what they are going to do about the closure. 'We have to try something as the townspeople look to the council for help and guidance and we just cannot just sit back and do nothing. 'I am not sure if we can do a lot once their minds have been made up and, obviously with the lack of clinicians available to work here, it does not bode well. 'But we must ask the question for the town. It is important as there are very few if no NHS dentists in this area available to take on patients. 'I am sure there are plenty that would take on private patients but we need NHS dentistry here in Knighton.' Cllr Vaughan said she intends to contact Brecon and Radnorshire MS James Evans and report back to the council. The news of the closure was reported on the Knighton (Powys) Open Forum last week and greeted with sadness. 'This is a shame and a nightmare,' said one person. 'It's another nail in the coffin for Knighton,' added another, who said he has been driving to Ludlow for private treatment for a long time. 'No opticians no dentist, the little Co-op with no stock. It's shameful,' said one user. And another said: 'No dental practice whatsoever in Knighton now. 'We travel to Church Stretton for our dental treatment, have done since Orchard Corner closed and we didn't find out until someone told us three months later that they were closed, no letter or phone call. 'Knighton and Mid Wales is being totally left out of everything and anybody who dares to speak up for us gets immediately shot down in flames.'
Spectator
7 hours ago
- Spectator
Kill the single state pension age
When William Beveridge designed the welfare state in the 1940s, the state pension age was 65 for men and 60 for women. Life expectancy for a man was around 66, and around 71 for a woman. The pension was not designed to fund decades of leisure: it was a modest provision for the last couple of years of life, one that not everyone would receive. Today, life expectancy for a man aged 66 (the current state pension age) is around 85, and a woman aged 66 can expect to live until she is 88. The average person now spends close to a fifth of their life in retirement. What was once a short post-script has become a major chapter – and an increasingly expensive one. This is the backdrop for the latest statutory review of the state pension age (SPA), led this year by Dr Suzy Morrissey. Her terms of reference are technical: consider sustainability, intergenerational fairness, life expectancy, international practice. Behind the dry language sits a political question no one rushes to answer: when should people stop working, and who pays for the years they do not? You know the script here. Britain is ageing. The ratio of workers to pensioners is shrinking. Every review concludes that the SPA must rise. Every opposition grumbles about the cruelty of doing so. Every government, when in office, quietly nudges the age upwards. Nothing fundamental changes. What almost never gets challenged is the model itself: a single age at which everyone, regardless of class, health or occupation, is deemed equally ready for retirement. This is tidy for Whitehall. It is also daft. The Office for National Statistics reports that male life expectancy for a retirement age man in Surrey is 86 years; in Blackpool, it is 81. Healthy life expectancy – the years lived without major illness – shows still sharper divides. Yet we persist in pretending that the 66-year-old accountant in Guildford and the 66-year-old ex-dockworker in Hull should both cross the same finish line. That is unjust, and unsustainable. It loads the cost of longer-lived, healthier retirees onto taxpayers who may not live long enough to see much retirement at all. Here I can almost hear some readers reaching for outrage about contributions. Shouldn't a person's pension entitlement reflect their national insurance contributions? So a Surrey stockbroker who pays more NI than a Sunderland scaffolder has earned the right to draw the state pension for longer? This takes me to the biggest and most persistent misunderstanding in British politics: the state pension isn't really a pension. It's a benefit. And it's funded not from some pot of money patiently built up from each recipient's contributions, but from the taxes of today's workers. National Insurance is just a tax, and one that long ago lost any hypothecated link to the pension system. That means pension policy cannot be treated as a personal contract between citizen and state. It is a collective transfer between generations. Pretending otherwise, with talk of 'I've paid in, I deserve it back', hides the real choices – about fairness between regions, between classes, and between young and old. Other countries are at least edging away from the one-size-fits-all fiction. Denmark and the Netherlands now link their pension ages directly to life expectancy. Countries including Norway and Portugal offer some scope to offer earlier pensions to those who have done physically demanding work. None has yet built a fully 'variable' pension age, but the recognition is spreading: a uniform pension age does not match demographic reality. Britain should be bolder. One approach is to tie entitlement not to age but to years of contributions, recognising that someone who started work at 18 has done their share by 65, while the graduate entering at 25 has not. Another is to give more flexibility to those in arduous jobs: that Sunderland scaffolder is likely to be physically knackered in a way that his stockbroking compatriot is not. More radical still is to abandon the cliff-edge retirement model altogether. Instead of full-time one day and nothing the next, policy should support tapering – part-time, flexible work in the sixties and seventies, subsidised and encouraged so people can scale down, not drop out. This would help individuals, who gain income and purpose. It helps employers, who retain skills and experience. It helps the state, which saves on pensions and collects more tax. Above all, it acknowledges reality: ageing is a spectrum, not a binary switch from 'young' to 'old'. This is politically difficult, to put it mildly. I am recommending electoral hemlock, because it entails higher pension ages for some (who will be angry) and different treatment for some (ditto). No sane politician attempts major change to the state pension. The fury of the Waspi women still haunts ministers. Even tinkering with winter fuel allowances causes uproar. You'd be mad to do it, minister. But it must still be done. The fiscal maths is brutal. By 2075, pensioners will make up more than a quarter of the adult population. The cost of the state pension is projected to rise from around 5 per cent of GDP today to nearly 8 per cent. Absent reform, the money has to come from somewhere: higher taxes on a shrinking workforce, or cuts to other services. Intergenerational politics are already sour. Younger voters see themselves funding entitlements for older cohorts who enjoyed cheaper houses and more generous occupational pensions. A rigid single SPA deepens that resentment. That is the real political danger: not the fury of today's pensioners, but the alienation of tomorrow's workers who simply refuse to pay for the pensions of others. Dr Morrissey's review is framed as technical, but it is inescapably political. She has licence to say what ministers will not: that one pension age for all is outdated, unfair and unaffordable. A braver politics would seize that truth, and act on it. None of this is easy. None of it is popular. But it is necessary. The single state pension age should end.
The National
8 hours ago
- The National
Risk of cancer death drops by 11.1 per cent to record low
Statistics published by Public Health Scotland (PHS) have shown an 11.1% reduction in mortality rates since 2013, from 333.7 per 100,000 diagnoses to 296.8 per 100,000 in 2022. The data, published on Tuesday, showed the death rates from the illness are the lowest on record since 1998. READ MORE: Chemical company fined £100k after worker suffers 'serious burns' Health Secretary Neil Gray said: 'It is encouraging to see the risk of dying from cancer in Scotland is at a record low. This is down to the hard work of NHS staff, improved treatment options, and people reporting their symptoms at an earlier stage. 'We are determined to further improve cancer survival, reduce waiting times and provide excellent, equitably accessible care right across Scotland.' Due to Scotland's ageing population, 69% of all cancer-related deaths recorded in 2022 were individuals aged 70 or older. 'We are taking action to improve the awareness and earlier diagnosis of cancers, including expanding our Rapid Cancer Diagnostic Services and our investment of more than £14 million towards cancer waiting times this year', Gray continued. 'Reducing health inequalities is a clear ambition for this government. Cutting smoking rates is key to tackling lung cancer incidence in areas of deprivation – our world-leading tobacco control measures are helping us in our goal of a Tobacco-Free Scotland by 2034.' MSP for Rutherglen Clare Haughey welcomed the figures, praising the work of NHS staff and action taken by the Scottish Government to improve both treatment options and early detection initiatives. 'One death from cancer is one too many but these figures are welcome and show the real progress we are making to improve cancer survival under the SNP Government', Haughey said. READ MORE: Ayrshire trust in race to raise £200k for community ownership of B-listed church 'The fact that the likelihood of dying from cancer is at its lowest level on record is testament to the incredible work that staff in our NHS do throughout Scotland every day. 'The SNP is determined to go even further to improve cancer survival across Scotland by taking action to improve awareness and earlier diagnosis of cancers. This includes expanding our Rapid Cancer Diagnostic Services and investing more than £14 million to reduce cancer waiting times this year. 'Whilst other parties continually talk down our NHS, the SNP is getting on with the job of improving and extending lives by investing to tackle health inequalities and improve health outcomes for people right across Scotland.'
