On Sun, 5 Apr 1998, Paul Attwood <[log in to unmask]> writing
on gp-uk accused me of being contradictory....

I had said...
>> I won't "carry the can for inadequate funding" 

Paul replied...
>'scuse me? I have snipped to juxtapose these two paragraphs. The above
>clearly states that the PCG won't carry the can for rationing (aka
>inadequate funding) and the one below clearly states the PCG will be at the
>forefront of rationing!

I had said...
>>Someone has to decide on priorities for the limited resources in each of
>>your areas.  PCGs are giving you an opportunity to shape those
>>decisions.  

I tend to agree that prioritisation is a politician way of describing
rationing.  My central premise is that there is a need for
prioritisation, making best use of limited resources, and GPs I contend
are well placed to provide intelligent and well grounded advice to those
that decide.

I doff my cap to those that make those difficult decisions, and it may
be that if we move from levels 1-2 in the steps available to PCGs, those
decisions will in time be be made by PCGs, but that is some way off yet.
Wisely, the government is wanting evidence of effectiveness before
allowing groups to take those steps.

PS Sorry about the long sig... although these views are my own, I do
feel it important to be clear about my potential conflicts of interest.

PPS Apologies to Ahmad for my brief lapse in politeness.  No offence
intended!
-- 
Jon Rogers                                 Tel: 44 117 950 7100
Southmead Health Centre                    Fax: 44 117 944 5498
Bristol BS10 6DF   UK                   e-mail: [log in to unmask]

GP and Member, NW Bristol Locality Commissioning Group; Treasurer, PHCSG; 
Chairman, GP SWG Read Codes; Medical Advisor, AAH Meditel; 
Vice Chairman, Avon LMC; Member, RCGP Informatics Group; 
Member, Avon Health Strategic Advisory Group; Member NACGP


%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%