Abolishing unnecessary bureaucracy in general practiceBMJ 2016; 352 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i1330 (Published 08 March 2016) Cite this as: BMJ 2016;352:i1330
I generally agree with the recommendations made by Roland and Everington in their editorial on the crisis in general practice,1 but I take issue with the suggestion that new funding should be ploughed into employing more staff to deal with increasing bureaucracy. Surely the better policy is simply to abolish unnecessary bureaucracy. The danger otherwise is that Parkinson’s law comes into effect. What is the evidence that appraisal and revalidation are of meaningful value? Why the profusion of care plans? Why the pressure to attend evening meetings on service redesign? Why, as the authors point out, the profligate and unselective application of Care Quality Commission inspections? Let’s tackle the causes of increased workload, not look at ways of accommodating it.
Competing interests: None declared.