Lord Hunt calls on GDC Council to resign
- Details
- Published: Wednesday, 20 January 2016 07:54
- Written by News Editor
- Hits: 7176
Lord Hunt of Kings Heath, speaking in the House of Lords, said he would have expected the entire Board of the GDC to have resigned following the adverse report that came out before Christmas. ‘I seriously would ask the Minister whether there can be any confidence that this organisation is fit for purpose’ he said. Replying the minister, Lorrt that came out before Christmas. on the GDC, d Prior said the PSA report was ‘extremely worrying’, there was a lack of confidence in the GDC among the profession and ‘that confidence must be rebuilt’.
The debate was on the Order that will set up case examiners for the GDC. It was an opportunity for both retired dentist, Lord Colwyn and Lord Hunt to comment on the order and express their misgivings over the Council.
In a press release BDA Chair Mick Armstrong said: “The BDA has repeatedly argued that the GDC is out of control and unaccountable. It is a huge relief to see our parliamentarians recognising that reality – I say thank you to Lord Hunt for drawing attention to this shambles of a regulator. It comes as no surprise to us that he has called into question the Council’s entire governance structure.
“We have a GDC Chair and Council that do not understand dentistry and the PSA’s report also demonstrates a complete lack of transparency. The report only reinforces our grave concerns and the profession’s massive loss of confidence in this hugely overpriced and underachieving regulator. We have already brought our concerns to the attention of government ministers, and we urge them now to listen to these words of Lord Hunt.”
Lord Colwyn said the order was a welcome and very long overdue step in the right direction toward speeding up the overall process of complaints handled by the GDC. He added that the case examiners must be properly independent from the GDC, as well as appropriately trained and supported in carrying out their new duties and it was also crucial that the clinical case examiner should always be a professional from the same profession as the individual whose case is being examined.
Lord Hunt of Kings Heath also raised issues about the order but said the real question before the House was whether the GDC is a fit and proper organisation, capable of implementing the changes. He referred to PSA reports on both the complaints of former chair, Alison Lockyer, the whistleblower, a member of the investigation committee. He said he read the latter report ‘with considerable disquiet’, he could not recall ever seeing a report ‘relating to a statutory regulator quite like it’.
He said it looked as though the GDC had simply not accepted the core conclusions of the various reports and that the PSA lacks confidence in the performance of the GDC. ‘Frankly, I would have expected the entire board of the GDC to resign in the light of that report just before Christmas. I understand that the chief executive has resigned but no one else on the board seems prepared to take responsibility for a culture that has clearly lasted over a good many years. That is not acceptable. Can there be any confidence that this organisation is fit for purpose?’ he concluded.
Responding the minister, Lord Prior of Brampton said that the GDC’s governance and performance were a profound worry and the report from the PSA was extremely worrying. He said his colleague Ben Gummer MP was the Minister with direct responsibility for the GDC and he had a meeting coming up in the very near future to discuss the GDC’s performance in the light of the PSA report. There is a lack of confidence in the GDC among the profession and ‘that confidence must be rebuilt’. He would organise for Lord Hunt to meet Ben Gummer MP to express his concerns directly to the minister.
Background
The House of Lords was considering the Order which will introduce case examiners to the General Dental Council. The debate was started by the junior health minister, Lord Prior of Brampton, formerly of the CQC. He explained that the GDC will be provided with a rule-making power that will allow it to delegate the decision-making functions currently exercised by its investigating committee to case examiners. By introducing case examiners, it was anticipated that there will be a swifter resolution of fitness-to-practise cases, as a full investigating committee will not need to be convened for every case and instead allegations will be considered by two case examiners.
The Minister said he realised that the fact that case examiners will be employees of the GDC may be a cause of anxiety for some, but it was important to remember that they will not be making findings of fact in respect of whether a registrant’s fitness to practise is impaired. They will make decisions based on documentary evidence which will be supplied to them in the same manner as is currently the case for the investigating committee. The case examiners will not be involved in evidence-gathering. There will also be one lay and one registrant case examiner, from the same part of the register as the individual whose case is being considered, considering an allegation, which will provide another safeguard in the process ensuring fairness.
He also said that provision would be made to allow both the case examiners and the investigating committee, in certain cases, to address concerns about a registrant’s practice by agreeing appropriate undertakings with that registrant. This will be instead of referring them to a practice committee. He added that making these amendments will create approximately £2.5 million of efficiency savings per annum over the next 10 years.
The debate can be found at http://tinyurl.com/gtpoon8
You need to be logged in to leave comments.
Report