How many NHS consultants currently do no private practice at all, by specialty and region?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
There is no up-to-date, authoritative breakdown in the provided reporting that states how many NHS consultants “currently do no private practice at all” by specialty and region; the sources here are fragmented, historic and describe patterns of private income rather than enumerating zero-hours private practitioners by specialty/region [1] [2]. Older snapshots show substantial variation by specialty and region, and policy debates have long focused on whether and how consultants should be permitted private work, but the precise current headcounts requested are not available in these sources [3] [4] [5].
1. What the available data actually tell — a historical snapshot, not a current census
A tax-derived analysis of consultants in England for 2003/4 provides the most detailed quantitative picture in the supplied material: that study covered a near-complete sample of consultants and reported mean private and NHS incomes, finding that the mean private income in 2003/4 was £34,144 and that specialty mattered more for private earnings than region [1] [2]. That research also records the underlying consultant population at that time (around 28,750 consultants employed in England in 2003) and explains how incomes varied by contract type, specialty and region — but it does not produce a simple, current table of how many consultants do zero private practice by each specialty and region [1].
2. Older headline counts often cited, and their limits
Parliamentary and professional commentary from the early 2000s stated that of roughly 23,000 consultants then, about 16,000 undertook some private practice — implying roughly 7,000 who did none — but those figures are two decades old and derive from broad surveys and committee reports rather than a contemporaneous specialty-by-region census [3] [4]. The same reports emphasise that many consultants do only a small amount of private work, and a minority undertake substantial private practice, which complicates any binary “does/does not” private-practice classification [5].
3. How “private practice” is framed in the sources and why that matters
Guidance and commentary underline that private work ranges from occasional small-scale fee-for-service work to full-time private practice and that contractual terms (including limits on earnings for whole-time contracts) and codes of conduct shape behaviour, meaning a headcount of “zero private practice” depends on definitions and reporting methods used [6] [1] [7]. Croner-i and other sector briefings note that most consultants who do private work earn modest sums or spend limited hours on it, and that only a relatively small group (estimated historically at about 2,000) undertake ten or more private hours a week — again an intensity measure rather than a pure yes/no count by specialty/region [5].
4. Competing perspectives and policy drivers
MPs and professional bodies have long taken different positions: parliamentary committees and some MPs have pushed for limiting or eliminating private practice for consultants on equity grounds, while the BMA and college guidance recognise private practice as an existing right and set out conduct and contractual frameworks to manage potential conflicts [3] [4] [6]. These institutional positions create incentives for reporting and reform but do not substitute for a contemporary, disaggregated dataset [3] [6].
5. What is missing and where to look for the precise numbers requested
The supplied material does not include a current breakdown of the number of consultants who do no private practice, broken down by specialty and region; for that exact table one would need recent NHS workforce census data, up-to-date HMRC or NHS Digital linking of private earnings to consultant posts, or a modern, permissioned dataset comparable to the 2003/4 tax-derived analysis cited here [1]. The provided sources themselves explicitly call for further work to explore private income and practice patterns, which reinforces that the definitive, contemporary counts the question seeks are not present in this reporting [2] [1].