Who is this dreamer that gets through a slab of cartridges shooting at wildfowl in a weekend?
POLL - Are you happy to pay for a medical certificate?
- Thread starter FrenchieBoy
- Start date
Who is this dreamer that gets through a slab of cartridges shooting at wildfowl in a weekend?
Fursty Ferret
Well-Known Member
No, no, and another fecking no! Make a stand people!
Happy for my medical records to be checked.....hell, I'd expect it, but I'm certainly not paying any extra for it!!
Happy for my medical records to be checked.....hell, I'd expect it, but I'm certainly not paying any extra for it!!
Who did you ask ?
timbrayford
Well-Known Member
Parliament determines the FAC/SGC grant and renewal fees which are set out in the Firearms Act, these are statutory and varied only by the appropriate Statutory Instrument. Neither the BMA, GPs or Police have the powers to increase these as they see fit.
The GPs feel that the new procedures place an extra burden on them for which they receive no extra funding from their NHS contracts.
The correct course of action from GPs is to seek remittance either from a new NHS contract or from the Home Office, what they should not be doing is bullying their shooting patients into paying a fee when no such fee is lawfully due from them.
The GPs feel that the new procedures place an extra burden on them for which they receive no extra funding from their NHS contracts.
The correct course of action from GPs is to seek remittance either from a new NHS contract or from the Home Office, what they should not be doing is bullying their shooting patients into paying a fee when no such fee is lawfully due from them.
JabaliHunter
Well-Known Member
There is no reason for compensation for this task not to be paid through general taxation, just like any other GP’s task.
DeerDucksFishin
Well-Known Member
No Im not happy to pay, but hey for the sake of a fiver a year for a five year firearms cert is it really worth contesting id rather have my cert back no issues than argue the toss over home office guidence and paying a 25 quid fee which is what my local doctor charges and at the moment the NHS is over stretched and under funded dont think letters to the cops is high on their agenda, why dont you moan about the price off ammunition that goes up each week it seems or the forth coming potential sporting tax being put forward by the SNP these may impact you more than a couple of quid to the doctor
Exactly the outlook that will eventually finish firearms in the public domain.
the thin end of the wedge
phrase of wedge
- 1.
informal
an action or procedure of little importance that is likely to lead to more serious developments.
"a charge for nursery classes would be the thin end of the wedge and lead to charges for ordinary schooling"
Last edited by a moderator:
The change to the fee could be brought about by a Legislative Reform Order, this does not require massive parliamentary scrutiny. A joint approach by BMA BASC etc might work. (except there's a little bit on nonsense going on in parliament at present).
Agreed
FrenchieBoy
Well-Known Member
It seems like BASC are saying two different things then. Let's have a look at what Dr. Colin Sheddon (BASC Scotland) had to say about it and the fact that Alex Stoddard (SACS Director) nearly lost his job when he said that his members should not pay (This is taken from Post number 47 on https://www.thestalkingdirectory.co.uk/showthread.php/145368-Countryfile-and-Firearm-Licensing/page5:-
Well unfortunately they did - they had a petition last year ... and the 'majority' said it was OK to pay (not me to be clear), in fact the SACS Director (Alex Stoddart) nearly got himself sacked as he insisted that his members should NOT pay the GP's and his membership disagreed, so strongly that he almost lost his job and was forced to do a U turn.
In his words "I made a mistake in assuming our members would not pay a fee. I had some dreadful verbal abuse over that. So our position is that fees are currently a matter between a patient and a GP, but that this is largely unfair and the Home Office should sort this fees situation out. "
Dr Colin Shedden (BASC Scotland) who ran the petition told me that he was not pursuing Police Scotland as his membere were "happy to pay", BASC adopted this stance nationwide and have done nothing about it at all, quite rightly as like SACS, BASC has a mandate to obey the wishes of the membership.
Yes there are grumbles, yes (in my opinion) it is wrong and tantamount to coercion and blackmail but the reality is that most people (over 80% I beleive) are "happy to pay" .... BASC, SACS and the CA are doing a lot for the shooting community but unfortunately they are not trying to reverse this situation as their members have said they don't want them to. (Perhaps BASC David you would care to comment on this ?)
EDIT: Please note that the red highlighting and the underlining is mine!
However from the way that I am reading this both the BASC and SACS are saying that the majority of their membership (Over 80%) are willing to pay so let's sort this out - Are BASC and SACS saying that the majority of their members are willing to pay or are they now saying that the majority of their members are not willing to pay. (Maybe it's time for David BASC to step in here and offer an honest reply)
I for one will not pay to renew any membership fees till I know exactly which side of the fence either of these (Major) shooting organisations are standing!
In his words "I made a mistake in assuming our members would not pay a fee. I had some dreadful verbal abuse over that. So our position is that fees are currently a matter between a patient and a GP, but that this is largely unfair and the Home Office should sort this fees situation out. "
Dr Colin Shedden (BASC Scotland) who ran the petition told me that he was not pursuing Police Scotland as his membere were "happy to pay", BASC adopted this stance nationwide and have done nothing about it at all, quite rightly as like SACS, BASC has a mandate to obey the wishes of the membership.
Yes there are grumbles, yes (in my opinion) it is wrong and tantamount to coercion and blackmail but the reality is that most people (over 80% I beleive) are "happy to pay" .... BASC, SACS and the CA are doing a lot for the shooting community but unfortunately they are not trying to reverse this situation as their members have said they don't want them to. (Perhaps BASC David you would care to comment on this ?)
EDIT: Please note that the red highlighting and the underlining is mine!
However from the way that I am reading this both the BASC and SACS are saying that the majority of their membership (Over 80%) are willing to pay so let's sort this out - Are BASC and SACS saying that the majority of their members are willing to pay or are they now saying that the majority of their members are not willing to pay. (Maybe it's time for David BASC to step in here and offer an honest reply)
I for one will not pay to renew any membership fees till I know exactly which side of the fence either of these (Major) shooting organisations are standing!
Last edited:
Perhaps, the real issue is not so much the paying, but rather, the amount, and the obvious disparity of payment level, from one doctor to another?
Added to that, it is not the patient that is requesting the information, it is the police, so they should pay - they insist that they are the guardians of public safety, and also insist that this information is required, in order to protect the public.
If I were to put in a Freedom of Information request, asking for information on the number and types of sickness suffered by the police, I would have to pay, I wouldn't expect the police, or the police doctor, or the data clerk to pay for it - so why are the police not paying for information that THEY have requested?
Why do they presume that I should or would be happy to pay extra, to a third party, for something that they insist is in their domain?
Added to that, it is not the patient that is requesting the information, it is the police, so they should pay - they insist that they are the guardians of public safety, and also insist that this information is required, in order to protect the public.
If I were to put in a Freedom of Information request, asking for information on the number and types of sickness suffered by the police, I would have to pay, I wouldn't expect the police, or the police doctor, or the data clerk to pay for it - so why are the police not paying for information that THEY have requested?
Why do they presume that I should or would be happy to pay extra, to a third party, for something that they insist is in their domain?
ferretmanabu
Well-Known Member
Wrong. They are not public servants. The GP practice is an independent small business which provides a contracted service to the NHS. For any work that falls outside of this contract, a fee can be charged. If the customer (patient) feels the fee is excessive/inappropriate/unacceptable, they are free to find another provider who will do it at an acceptable rate to them.
FrenchieBoy
Well-Known Member
I totally agree with you! It is not the shooter that is asking for this information it is the police so if they want it then they should pay for it!
Add to that the fact that IF (and I emphasise the word IF and hope that it will never come to it) we do end up having to pay then there should be one standard set fee nationwide!
Here's another slant on things - If these plans do get appealed and overturned in England, Wales and Northern Ireland (And Scotland?)would those who have already been forced to pay be able to claim a refund???
FrenchieBoy
Well-Known Member
Yes, but it is not the patient who is requesting this service, it is the police. Surely the responsibility of payment falls squarely on the shoulders of those who are requesting the service to be carried out!
I am sure that we would all agree that a doctor needs to be paid for his services but how come there is so much variation in charges being seen between different doctors, surely they all have exactly the same workload when they have to write one of these reports (But I could be wrong there) - If it does come to it then surely the biggest majority would have to agree that the fee should be set and fixed nationwide!
ferretmanabu
Well-Known Member
Frenchie, variation in price is there for the same reason you have variation in price in any other sector. Builders will charge different rates for the same job. It all comes down to how much the professional doing the job values his time at. Looks in the Stalking Opportunities section and you will see a big variation in how much the professional stalkers charge. Why don't we just set a national fee for them too?
timbrayford
Well-Known Member
Exactly, but given the amount of controversy that this has caused perhaps it would be better to remove GPs from the process altogether!
ferretmanabu
Well-Known Member
This is the best route. There is no evidence to suggest that adding in this extra layer of bureaucracy adds anything to gun safety.
I suppose then, that it would be fair to ask your doctor "If the police ask for a report, regarding my medical fitness to hold SGC/FAC, how much will you charge, and, will you charge the police requesting the service, or the person who is being asked about?"
Imagine if it were to get out that the doctor would charge the person being asked about - mass migration to a doctor that would charge less, or that would bill the entity asking for the service, as is normal practice in ANY OTHER INDUSTRY OR TRADE.
You now have a doctor losing patients, and therefore income, and another gaining, as well as the police having to do as any other service does, and pay their own bills.
Sorry, although this may sound like police bashing, it is not intended as such!
Imagine if it were to get out that the doctor would charge the person being asked about - mass migration to a doctor that would charge less, or that would bill the entity asking for the service, as is normal practice in ANY OTHER INDUSTRY OR TRADE.
You now have a doctor losing patients, and therefore income, and another gaining, as well as the police having to do as any other service does, and pay their own bills.
Sorry, although this may sound like police bashing, it is not intended as such!
This is all about the Police passing the buck. They have been found wanting over the Dunblane type incidents and are expecting doctors to be able to take the blame if something similar happens again. Doctors should have insurance to cover their mistakes, so perhaps that is the sound of ambulance chasing lawyers that I can hear in the distance.
Similar threads
