The big threat from the change to GP commissioning of NHS services is the loss of the lobbying power of the mental health movement outside medicine

The study I've posted below is the sort of thing a GP with a basic
grounding in evidence could use to dismiss the potential of
psychological therapies.

The only stuff by the major UK mental health charities which a GP might
read are the information publications (either paper or online) to check
they're suitable before they give them to a patient.

GPs are likely to stick with evidence based medicine practice in mental
healthcare because they've come to know its effectiveness in physical
healthcare. EBM means a paper like this could damage commissioning of
psychological therapies across the nation.

The mental health lobby have protected the large Improved Access to
Psychological Therapies scheme through the cuts. They've helped increase
the span of provision to children and the elderly. They've stopped the
exclusion of people with severe mental illnesses (who experience the
comorbid common mental disorders which IAPT is aimed at but were
initially excluded when it was commissioned). They also got more funding
for it too.

I'm not sure that would be as easy with GP consortias. Older GPs favour
the older style of treatment: medication. Their early learning will mean
many are entrenched in this way of thinking about solutions in mental
healthcare. They also have very little knowledge and training in
psychiatry and social care.