Under health reform plans announced in December, a national body is being set up to oversee medical education and training in England. However, the BMA has voiced concern that measures intended to bring about necessary change could threaten national standards and the quality of training, especially if pushed through too quickly.
Launching the government’s white paper, “Developing the Healthcare Workforce”, health secretary Andrew Lansley said the new HEE (Health Education England) body would address national workforce issues that could not be delivered by local providers such as GP-led consortia. These would include commissioning education and training in specialist skills that can only be done at a national level. HEE will be established in shadow form in 2011 and is expected to “go live” as a special health authority in April 2012, taking over the role of Medical Education England. The changes would also see local providers having to fund continuing professional development to local providers. At the moment, an element of the MPET (multi-professional education and training) levy is used. Under the plans the MPET, which also funds pre-registration training, and a component of junior doctors’ salaries, could be replaced in future with a levy on providers. BMA junior doctors committee co-chair, Tom Dolphin, has said that the consultation had the potential to simplify and improve the process of how funding for education training was distributed. However, he believes that “Ensuring that the UK has enough well-trained staff to provide high quality healthcare in difficult economic times will be a major challenge for the NHS, yet the proposals to move away from a coordinated UK-wide approach – to a more local system of organising training and education – could threaten national standards and erode the quality of training.” He also expressed concerns about the proposed pace of change, saying it was “difficult to see how there will be enough time to pilot and evaluate changes to the provision of training and education. High quality care in the future depends on getting the workforce numbers and the training right now, and it is critical that whatever new structures are put in place, we involve trainees and the rest of the profession in their development.”
