Please see below message from Roger Scott, GPDF Chair,
I wanted to offer a little context to the proposed increase in the voluntary levy which funds GPDF and, by extension, GP representation, LMC conferences, LMC Support Network and the Rebuild GP campaign. The last 2 were voted for and approved by LMCs at our EGM this year. We also have a UK conference mandate to spend “unprecedented amounts” in the defence of General Practice.
The levy has been held at 3p since 2020, having been 6p from 2014-2018. Our current budgeted expenditure is around the 6.7p mark, though we do have income from investments which offsets some of this deficit.
The deficit for the year 2024/5 is £616,030, including the income from investments.
We have worked hard as an organisation to bring our costs down since Dr Zoe Norris was Chair.
Total director remuneration was £126k for the last financial year. This pays for 6 directors, one of whom is chair, currently me. Directors get £875 gross per month for all GPDF activity including a monthly directors meeting plus ad hoc email queries, responding to funding requests etc. As chair I am engaged for a nominal 3 sessions per week, and get £4875 gross per month.
Secretarial support from Attend was £159k for the last financial year. Total administrative costs including accounting, legal, audit, meetings etc was a total of £329k
This represents a near £200k decrease from the previous regime, in 2022 these costs were £519k.
We are always looking for ways to be more efficient. The majority of our board meetings are remote with 3-4 per year in person. We will be retendering our book keeping service in the next 12 months.
At some point we have to balance the books. We cannot continue in a deficit indefinitely. The proposed move to a 5p levy will not balance the books, but will move us towards it. It may be that with investment income it will balance for a time, but we have large expenditures looming with the negotiation of a substantive new contract in England, and similar moves in Scotland and Wales as well. We have earmarked an initial £1.25million pounds defence fund to facilitate this. As we spend down our reserves, the income from investments also reduces, limiting the amount we can offset from any deficit.
For a fairly average practice like my own in Liverpool with 9000 patients, the levy increase means a change from £270 per year at 3p/patient to £450 per year. When the levy is as low as it has been, any increase is going to represent a large proportionate percentage, but is still very cheap in my opinion.
If the levy increase is not voted through then we will continue to run a deficit for another year. It is likely that we would need to ask again next year for a levy increase because we cannot run a deficit indefinitely. The balance point, excluding investment income, is likely to end up being 7p/patient with our current commitments. I would prefer to ease the levy upwards, while we continue to rationally spend down the excess reserves to minimise the shock to practices and LMCs. If, as I have heard some people suggest, we move to a more contractual arrangement with the BMA then VAT at 20% may come in to play which could push our costs even higher. We will of course keep things under review.
I hope this clarifies the reason behind the proposed uplift. I am always happy to answer questions and give context where requested. We remain committed to diligently stewarding the resources entrusted to us and want to ensure that we are funding excellent representation that represents value for money to jobbing GPs, myself included.
I look forward to seeing some of you at the AGM next week.
Best Wishes.
Roger Scott
Chair GPDF