Agenda item

Sukh Singh, Director of Primary and Community (Out of Hospital) Care, NHS Kent and Medway and Dr Ash Peshen, Deputy Chief Medical Officer, NHS Kent and Medway were in attendance for this item.

Mr Meade declared that he would be asking a question in his capacity as a Borough councillor.

1.    Following an introduction by Mr Singh, Dr Peshan gave a presentation about how the Modern General Practice Model enabled his practices (Northdown and Dashwood in Thanet) to develop, measure and accelerate the delivery of improvements. Measures included a digital hub/ front door and a dedicated GP service for local care home residents.

2.    Mr Meade (Local Member for Gravesend East) asked about the application by the Highparks Medical Practice to close their surgery in Hermitage Road, Higham in order to save running costs. The rural population of around 4,000 would be significantly affected by their GP practice and he condemned the application. He asked who carried out the independent assessments cited in their decision to close, and how planning applications were taken into account (such as the proposal to build 800 new homes in Wainscott). In light of the reason to close the site, and the risk of more practices following suit, he felt the Committee needed to be better informed about the financial challenges GP practices were facing, such as a register of surgeries at risk of closure.

3.    Mr Sukh responded that Highparks were running public engagement and no application to the ICB had yet been submitted. The ICB would make a decision based on the needs of the population, what mitigations were in place to respond to resident feedback, what provision was available locally as well as what growth was expected. Financial challenges were a national issue, with national discussion about the GMS contract that funds practices, and more locally the enhanced services contracts in place. The ICB’s role was to mitigate against risk of any GP closures. Peer ambassadors were employed to share best practice between surgeries, as well as resilience offers for practices requiring additional support.

4.    The Committee made comments and asked questions around rolling out the work Dr Peshan presented on; Local Plans and housing; the use of AI and the digital front door. Dr Peshan and Mr Singh responded:

a.    The digital hub (Anima) was an enhancement, not a solution. AI presented opportunities to create capacity in the system but the correct governance had to be in place.

b.    The Modern General Practice Model was a national model that had been adopted, but it had to be tailored to the local population. Thanet had many care homes and that is why they introduced the dedicated care home GPs. A single model would not suit all localities.

c.    To attract GPs to Thanet, Dr Peshan offered enhanced personal development such as visiting care homes and attending out of hospital visits.

d.    Practices needed the capacity and resource to consider and implement change – this is where the ICB could help. The ICB also had a role in improving recruitment, for example through the GP attraction package).

e.    Demand for services had increased over time but the GP workforce had stayed fairly static.

f.     A diversified workforce allowed patients to see the most appropriate clinician which was not always a GP.

5.    The Committee asked what was being done to close the gap in the provision of Mental Health Practitioners (MHPs) from practices. Dr Peshan noted in Margate the MHPs worked for the Primary Care Network and covered all local practices. They also wanted to understand more about the variation in GP access across Kent and Medway.

RESOLVED that the Committee considered and noted the report.