National Voices responds to the new GP contract 2026/27

The final GP contract proposals should make it easier for people to get a timely response from general practice, including for routine (non-urgent) care. They also put greater weight on patient experience and inequalities. 

Much of the publicity will focus on urgent care capacity. Yet for many people, particularly those living with long-term health conditions, routine appointments can still feel hard to secure. The contract now makes clear that practices must not ask patients to call back, or make contact, on another day. It also amends the “appropriate response” requirement for non-clinically urgent contacts. Practices will still need to confirm next steps by the end of the next working day, so people know how and when their issue will be managed. 

As a coalition of charities representing people who use health and care services, we have consistently made the case for changes that reduce unequal access. That means protecting people who face the greatest barriers, including through reasonable adjustments and parity between digital and non-digital routes. These reforms will work best when practices can handle non-urgent requests safely and patients receive clear information about what happens next. 

Continuity of care is now a core contractual requirement. It is supported by risk stratification, which means using available information to identify people most likely to benefit from seeing the same professional or team. For people with multiple long-term conditions and complex needs, relationship-based care supports safety, confidence and outcomes. The next step is to make sure this approach reflects non-clinical factors that shape access and outcomes, such as housing instability, caring responsibilities and social support. This will help continuity reach those facing the greatest barriers, in line with the Government’s 10 Year Health Plan commitments. 

The proposals also recognise the value of transparent, high-quality data to understand demand patterns, patient experience and inequalities. They make clear this is intended to support improvement rather than performance management. Monitoring of online and video consultations should be clear about purpose, support analysis that shows who is being missed, and stay proportionate. Where data is collected automatically from system suppliers, practices should have clear routes to understand, verify and challenge data quality. This will help reporting support improvement without creating avoidable burden. 

Implementation guidance must also protect people who are digitally excluded or need support to access care. DHSC/NHSE have indicated that protections for non-digital and assisted routes will be set out in guidance. Administrative changes that look “internal” can still shape real access if these routes are not protected in practice. 

Jacob Lant, Chief Executive of National Voices, said: 

“People want to know that when they reach out to their GP practice — whether their need is urgent or routine — they won’t be pushed into a frustrating loop of trying again another day. The final proposals take a positive step by requiring practices to give people clear next steps for non-urgent requests, while protecting same-day responses for clinically urgent needs. We also welcome continuity being treated as a core requirement for those who need it most, and a clearer commitment that data should be used to understand patient experience and inequalities — not just to count activity. The test now is implementation: ensuring reasonable adjustments, accessible routes, and meaningful patient-centred measures are built into guidance so these reforms genuinely reduce unequal access.”