The quiet and somewhat restrained mood of the IMO conference is likely to change today when a national GP meeting is held to discuss growing dissatisfaction with the General Medical Services (GMS) scheme.
Later in the day the Minister for Health, Mr Martin, is due to contribute to a scientific session on the new health strategy. This, too, promises a lively debate on the many competing priorities for the future of the health service.
So far the atmosphere has been sombre, reflecting declining morale in the medical profession. For the first time the issue of early retirement or alternative careers is a recurring theme on the fringes of the conference.
General practitioners - in particular those in their late 40s and early 50s - are adamant that they will leave their practices if significant improvements to their professional lot is not forthcoming.
The strong fear of litigation is one of the main reasons for such high levels of dissatisfaction. The destructive effects of escalating claims against doctors is more than just a financial one; many were visibly relieved to hear the psychological aspects highlighted during the opening scientific session on medical indemnity.
And it is not just doctors who are suffering. The very core of healthcare, the trusting relationship between a doctor and his patient, is under serious threat from the spiralling medical negligence crisis.
A recent IMO benchmark survey found that 30 per cent of the profession had experienced a loss of personal esteem and patient respect. With 77 per cent of doctors fearing the threat of litigation, it is clear that morale is at an all-time low.
There is a link between the fear of litigation and another source of dissatisfaction, the long and punishing hours worked by doctors in all specialities. The longer he or she works and the more patients that are "squeezed" into the day, the more tired the doctor and the greater the likelihood of a mistake.
Conference participants clearly feel a thorough overhaul of the system is the only solution. General practitioners are almost unanimous in the view that the GMS scheme, as currently constructed, has no future.
Plans by the Government to add the over-70s and children to those presently covered by medical cards will be fiercely resisted, judging by the tone of some of today's motions.
In fairness to family doctors, there is an element of social conscience in their resistance. They would much rather see the scheme extended on a meanstested, income-eligibility basis so that those in real need of free healthcare would benefit.
There is a sense here that a complete overhaul of primary care will be welcomed by doctors as a means of achieving equitable access for patients to preventive healthcare. Any attempt to "tinker" with the present system will be firmly rejected, however.
The threat of industrial action by non-consultant hospital doctors and the Minister's firm rebuttal of this tactic could also help to ignite proceedings. So far, though, it is a low-key, calm and restrained meeting, unlike other professional gatherings which have made the headlines this week.