Barbara wrote on Jul 15
th, 2011 at 4:03pm:
The thing is, if he is so much in "error" how should patients feel about his medical abilities?? Would you trust him with your health??
This of course raises a very interesting point.
Like his professional colleagues, Dr Taylor may well be an excellent clinician. We do not expect our physicians to be experts in matters of business, nor do we expect accountants to be experts in matters of medicine. (We expect more of GP practice managers than they commonly deliver - but that is another point.)
The government's decision to place responsibility for secondary care commissioning (i.e. hospital and other health treatment) in the hands of GP-led Clinical Commissioning Groups (formerly known as GP consortia) implies an assumption that clinicians have the necessary business acumen to manage very large budgets and engage in effective negotiation with providers (particular those from the private sector). The need for clinical input to commissioning decisions so that optimum clinical outcomes can be properly considered when allocating scarce financial resources is obvious and vital. One cannot however dismiss the need for proper balanced decision making considering all factors. Clinicians are trained to take the narrow view, considering the patient in front of them at the time and focussing on whatever speciality they may have chosen to pursue. They also are inclined to leave others to worry about financial and commercial issues so as not to distort their clinical judgement.
To leave the allocation of large sums of money to clinicians at a time when its most efficient use is recognised to be of the greatest priority seems somewhat ill-judged. The motivation of those who step forward to accept this responsibility with enthusiasm has to be questioned.
I am not actually that worried that Dr Taylor does not understand telephony and charges. I am concerned that he chooses, or is required, to get into issues outside the area of his competence. It is for pretending authority when speaking nonsense that he is fully worthy of criticism. I am delighted that he has withdrawn from the argument, and hope that he is now considering the situation properly.
On a simple point of fact. It is cleared proved that the geographic number is able to accommodate multiple calls and hold them in a queue - Dr Taylor was quite wrong to imply that this could not be done. The non-geographic number may however be equipped to "stack" an unlimited number of calls if the capacity of the geographic number is exceeded.
"Surgery Line" addresses the problem of inadequate queuing capability by a solution that employs features that are rarely required and thereby not cost effective. It deals with the cost issue by taking advantage of the fact that as well as these features always being available on non-geographic numbers, so is revenue sharing! Misrepresentation of the cost of calling 084 numbers has enabled this solution to be widely adopted.
If one accepts that call queuing can exist at two levels, with the secondary level being referred to as "stacking", then we have a serious misrepresentation from Dr Taylor, but one that may contain an insignificant element of truth. Just because there are many misrepresentations and inaccuracies and there is no question that this practice is in breach of its NHS contract, it does not necessarily follow that the availability of network queueing on non-geographic numbers must be a fallacy.
As campaigners, we have all we need to win this war without having to try to prove that network queueing does not exist. If our case were seen to hinge on such an argument then we may find ourselves losing a battle that undermines the campaign.
I do hope that the surgery will not come back at some point to admit that the geographic number can handle a small queue, but not enough to cope with the Monday morning rush. If it does then this will not make the slightest difference to its breach of the terms of its contract to provide NHS services.
With my notes of caution recorded,
I applaud the efforts of SayNoTo0870 in further exposing this case of a breach of the terms of the GP NHS contract. Let us hope that the media coverage leads, as it must, to the withdrawal of the 0844 number.