I have started this new thread as, following the consultation and the petition, the campaign against GPs using revenue sharing numbers has entered a new phase (at least in England).

After doubt and delay, the Department of Health has now issued the contract revisions (for existing contractors) and the revised standard contract. This is covered on this page with links to the various documents.

Individual variation notices will be sent out by PCTs for acknowledgement by the GP.

Further briefings will be issued to the media and to every PCT referring to unofficial guidance on how to understand what numbers are subject to charges greater than that for "calls to a geographic number". These briefings will also confirm that long term contracts for the provision of telephone service allow migration from 084 to 034 numbers. Copies will be posted to my blogs.

There is nothing in what I am doing that should make any difference whatsoever to action that others may wish to take on a local basis with GPs, PCTs parliamentary candidates and local media. Likewise on a national level there is no formal campaign group that is briefing the media.

I will also be briefing the governments and media in Wales and Scotland. Those based there may wish to draw attention to the fact that on this issue relating to the principles of the NHS, it is England that is taking the lead.

This is also the time to remind NHS bodies using these "expensive" numbers that they only have until December to change their arrangements. Furthermore, any failure to announce their intention to change is likely to impede the process of getting GPs to do so.

---

P.S. If anyone wishes to use this thread to point out how easy it may be for GPs to avoid complying with the ban, or perhaps to encourage the media to put out stories indicating that GPs do not have to change, then that is their right. There is no question that the terms of the contract revisions could have been clearer or stronger. I believe however that they can be made to work and it is my intention to do all I can to see that they do.

idb wrote on May 4^th, 2010 at 1:25am:

I hope that fellow campaigners will join in the efforts to "remind" all NHS bodies and contractors of the fact that formal Directions and contract revisions are now in force.

The point about Talk Talk and 0344 is simply to clarify the fact that there is no need to wait until the end of any existing contract. A move away from a revenue sharing number is always possible.

(The full text of the quoted media release is published in the relevant blog.)

kasg wrote on May 6^th, 2010 at 3:12pm:
We all have our areas of expertise. GPs cannot be expected to know that 03 numbers cost the same as ordinary numbers when called from mobiles and that migration from 084 to a 034 number is a quite normal practice within the term of a contract for supply of telephone service on a non-geographic number.

We have until next April for the message to be put across, taken on board and followed-up. It could have been quicker, but there are strong vested interests protecting their position.

sherbert wrote on May 6^th, 2010 at 4:08pm:

I personally think that this is an over-generous view of the extent of public understanding of telephone charges. Until quite recently the BBC was repeatedly declaring that 03 numbers cost more from mobiles, but not from landlines, in its standard message about its own 03 numbers. I understand that it was not bombarded with complaints about this misinformation.

We are also aware of organisations who deliberately promote misunderstanding about these difficult issues. I am reluctant to accept that nobody gets taken in by these efforts.

I strongly believe that there is much to be gained by simply informing people of the truth of the situation regarding 084 and 03 numbers. If all perpetrators and all victims of the misuse of revenue sharing numbers are fully aware of what is going on, then there is little that we can do to help to fully rectify the situation. I do not believe that this is the case; I hope that the information in the published article was helpful to some and I am inclined to accept that the question asked was a genuine expression of doubt.

It is now confirmed that the revised GP contracts, with a variation prohibiting use of "expensive" numbers, are now being issued to NHS GPs.

A briefing sent to PCTs and a media release have been published.

---

The new Minister of State (Health Services), replacing Mike O'Brien, is Simon Burns MP. His constituency includes a GP practice that adopted a 0844 number in October 2009.

Mr Burns has confirmed his support for a taxation funded NHS and has campaigned against excessive car parking charges (although not the 0844 telephone number) at the local hospital.

An interesting article in the Leicester Mercury - Higher-rate calls to GPs set to stay - Friday, 25 June 2010.

I see that some apposite comments, including promotion for saynoto0870, have been added to the article.

---

I am happy to contribute to and promote discussion in this forum. I do however provide a series of feeds of all items I find (including the above) and my own commentaries on this topic and other topics on which I campaign.

These feeds are available for (free) subscription by rss or by email, at this link.

It would perhaps be better for members of the forum who are interested in this material to subscribe to the appropriate feed, so that they can bring items which they individually think worthy of comment into the discussion forum. I do not believe that it is for me to set the agenda for this forum.

N.B. I have no personal commercial interest in subscriptions to my feeds, nor in the viewing of my blogs or websites.

29th July 2010

Bradford Primary Care Trust still deny any knowledge of receiving any documents later than December 2009/ January 2010 regarding the use of 0844. Therefore they are doing nothing to end the use of that type telephone number in the Bradford area. So much for the end of the use of 0844 by Gps.

Hello and sorry for resurecting this post,

I contacted my local MP regarding the use of 0844 Numbers in my area by local GP's including my own.  Here is my original e-mail:

"Dear Sir/Madam

I am e-mailing you in relation to a Local and in some ways National issue.  I obliviously understand you are only able to comment and deal with the local aspect of this issue.

The issue is as follows:

My local Dr's Surgery at Little Common at some point changed its contact number to an 0844 number, which I have to pay extra to call to.  To give you an idea of the cost I am with BT on an Unlimited Anytime Call plan, which offers me calls of up to 60 minutes to ANY 01/02/03 number anywhere in the UK for no additional cost.

However IF I call an 0844 number the cost is 5p per minute PLUS an initial cost of 9.9p (let's call that 10p), so my 1st minute costs me 15p and then 5p for every additional minute. Hopefully I haven't lost you so far.

My issue with this is very simple, I already pay for access to NHS services, including access to my local Dr, via my National Insurance Stamp. Why am I therefore expected to pay additional costs to call somewhere which is in the SAME dialling code?

This is NOT a business it's a service from the NHS!

Other local Dr’s Surgeries are using the same number, in fact out of nine local Dr’s only 3 use an 01424 number the remaining 6 use an 0844 number, the list is here: http://www.nhs.uk/Scorecard/Pages/Results.aspx?OrgType=1&Coords=1067%2c5716&Trea...

As you may or may not be aware this is becoming not only a local issue but one of National focus.  As a constituent in the area you cover, and a registered voter I am very very interested in your views on this, and what plans you have to voice my and others opinions to abolish the use of these numbers for access to NHS services.

Once again I appreciate you are only able to deal with local issues, but I hope you can take on board the general consensus and anger towards what is effectively your constituents being ripped off!

I look forward to your response and thank you for your time in reading this e-mail."

-------- response follows in next post ----------------