Extra cash for GPs

SIR – I read with interest your report (October 14) on the plan to devote £250 million of taxpayers’ money to encouraging GPs to offer more face-to-face consultations.

Thus, long-suffering patients are being obliged to pay more for a service that GPs are already being paid for not providing. It defies logic.

Dr Frederick Langley

Hessle, East Yorkshire

SIR – While it is important that those who wish to see their GP in person can do so, many people prefer telephone appointments when appropriate. They save time and travel, and avoid the risk of spreading germs at the surgery.

I hope that surgeries are not penalised purely on the basis of the proportion of patients seen in person, but that, if the patient’s preference is for a phone appointment, this is treated as a plus.

This would, however, lead to more bureaucracy, as it would be necessary to record and submit what type of appointment each patient preferred and what they got.

Richard Harrington

Ivinghoe Aston, Buckinghamshire

SIR – The BMA is complaining that part of the reason why GPs are “on their knees” is that they are carrying out extra duties (for a fee) as vaccinators.

Why are GPs still being used as vaccinators? The relatively simple procedure of giving an intramuscular injection can be carried out by many other healthcare providers.

Dr J R Drummond

Cellardyke, Fife

SIR – It’s all very well the Government telling GPs to get back to face-to-face appointments, but when will it tell the civil service to get back to work? Alison Thomas

Leatherhead, Surrey