GDC Respond to FTP Failing With “nothing to see here” Article
- Details
- Published: Tuesday, 02 January 2024 10:50
- Written by Peter Ingle
- Hits: 1518
The GDC have now offered their response to the Professional Standards Authority (PSA) review which was recently published. Once again the regulators regulator marked the GDC as failing on two of the expected standards for the Fitness to Practice process.
With practiced spin, the brief posting in the news section of the GDC website led with the fact that they had met the other 16 PSA standards.
When it came to their consistent failure to meet FTP standards the GDC had little of substance to say. Tucked away between some self-congratulation about engagement and excuses for the problems with registration, they did manage to write: “The PSA found that Standards 11 and 15 were not met, specifically the parts of those standards relating to the respective timely resolution of registration and fitness to practise cases.”
After this the author returned to the issues around overseas graduate registration. It was only after this that the reputation management exercise returned to FTP. “There has been a long-term issue that fitness to practise cases often take too long to resolve,” they wrote. “We have increased the size of the casework team, streamlined processes, improved guidance to reduce delays and, with support from stakeholders, we are undertaking a pilot to enable single clinical issues to be resolved more quickly.”
The GDC then asserted that: “These reforms reflect our determination to make improvements to the fitness to practise process where we can, ahead of any potential regulatory reform.” This laudable ambition has to be considered alongside their miserable record of not once passing all of the FTP standards over the last decade, and the PSA’s own withering observation: “The GDC has outlined actions to improve performance in this area, but there is so far limited evidence of the impact of these measures.”
Perhaps someone at the GDC has already seen some of the responses to their recent polling on registrant’s opinions of the Council, since they added: “It is also hoped that improved timeliness and proportionality will reduce the impact of fitness to practise investigations on the health and wellbeing of those involved.”
The GDC often cite outdated legislation as the reason for many of their failings, and complain that they can do little to improve matters without changes. Given this, their handling of registrations for overseas applicants will raise concerns. The continuing delays, which have yet to be resolved, are proving an obstacle to getting willing dental professionals onto the register. This is at a time of great workforce shortages. And yet the GDC blame these problems upon a change in legislation: “The changes to legislation to register dental professionals who qualify overseas prompted a surge of applications and we recruited a large team of additional people and external associates to process and assess applications, and the backlog is now starting to reduce.” This is GDC speak, to try and explain that they were not prepared for the changes, were caught out, but have now scrambled to recruit personnel to try and cope with the increased demand. It hardly inspires confidence in how the GDC will manage if and when there are the major legislative changes which they say they need.
Unsurprisingly the GDC make no comment on the Williams case, or subsequent investigations. The case was specifically referred to in the PSA publication, as was the GDC’s promised review into cases where registrants were erased for ‘topping up’. When completed, that review may prove a greater challenge for the GDCs communications team than their well-practiced response to another “could do better” PSA report.
You need to be logged in to leave comments.
Report