The—as yet unconfirmed, but almost certainly correct—rumour of the closure of the current GP practice operation at Priors Field in Sutton with effect from 31 March has come as a huge shock to the local community, including me as a patient as well as a local councillor.

Residents are clearly concerned, and have a number of questions, not all of which can be answered at this moment.

Cllr Mark Inskip and I have launched a petition to NHS England, and to Sutton’s MP (who also happens to be the Secretary of State for Health), calling on them to save GP services at Priors Field, which you can sign here. Please sign and share widely.

To be absolutely clear, neither Cllr Mark Inskip nor I had any prior notification of the closure, confidentially or otherwise. I learned the rumour from Facebook on Tuesday evening like most local residents. And at this stage, some of what follows can be based only on speculation. It is however the best information I have to date, and I have been in contact with the local Director of Public Health about the situation, asking her to clarify the processes involved.

The decision to cease a GP practice does not rest with the council, or with the Government, or even with the NHS. Under the legislation which created the NHS in 1948, GP practices are effectively small businesses contracting with the NHS, and are under no more responsibility to tell councillors about their plans than the local hairdresser or garage would be. Decisions about the business rest with the GP partners, and are theirs alone.

The decision of a GP practice to cease to operate from a premises does not automatically mean that there will no longer be GP provision from that premises. Firstly, the ownership of the building is a matter for the GP partners.

Secondly, the local Integrated Care Board is responsible for planning and delivering health and care services in Cambridgeshire, and I would expect them to be involved in helping to ensure ongoing health provision for local residents. Through the Chair and Vice Chair of the Adults & Health Committee of the County Council, I’m making contact with the Integrated Care Board to understand their input.

Thirdly, funding of primary care provision rests with NHS England, which is why the petition is addressed to them.

Questions have also been asked about the planning consent for expansion of the premises which was given by the council some while ago. The planning consent follows with the building, so whoever owns the building will be able to carry out the consented works so long as the planning permission has not run out. They can also seek to renew the consent if it runs out of time, or submit a fresh application for different works.

Other concerns have centred round the financial commitments sought from developers (Community Infrastructure Levy or CIL funding) towards health care in the village. As Cllr Mark Inskip has said on Facebook, East Cambs District Council maintains a list of infrastructure projects that will potentially benefit from this funding. One of the projects is the extension of Sutton surgery. If the development goes ahead, the contribution has to be made. The GP practice, whoever was running it, would need to apply to the district council to release those funds.

As a patient and a councillor, I am aware of the huge interest in this matter, and will provide updates as and when I receive them.