Just noticed this in the Chancellor's pre-budget report, under the sub heading of Extra Support for GPs in the section "4.28 Increasing Employment Opportunity for All"-

"Government will also pilot improved arrangements on fitness for work advice, including
placing employment adviser support within GPs’ surgeries and encouraging closer links
with existing support to help people manage their condition."

Maybe they'll also help the GPs with requests for supporting evidence from those pesky advisers?

On a more serious note I see that the BMA opposed this (rightly), because it would mean that GPs would be seen as policing the benefits system.

It could also undermine and conflict with the many welfare rights services tied to GPs practices (CABS alone services in 751 GPs practices and there are probably at least as many primary health care services staffed by LA WROs). It shows why we must continue to argue for the uniqueness and importance of welfare rights services which are independent of the DWP and against the development of misguided and naive concepts such as joint teams with the Pensions Service.

Today joint teams with for oldler people. Tommorow "partnerships" between JC+ and GPs. And thereafter?

for how much longer do you think it will be permissible to say 'benefit system' and 'policing in the same sentence?

take a look at para 5 for starters.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200405/cmbills/008/2005008.pdf

you know how much fun we have with IS changes of circs? can you imagine the schedule of reportable facts in say, 10 years time?

jj