Denplan share concerns on GDC
- Details
- Published: Monday, 25 January 2016 07:53
- Written by News Editor
- Hits: 3701
In a press release, Denplan is ensuring UK dental practitioners are aware of concerns raised in both Houses of Parliament this week about the performance of the General Dental Council. Denplan shares these concerns, and others raised in Parliament. It believes that wholesale reform of healthcare regulation, as recommended to Government by the Law Commission in 2014, is long overdue in the interests of patients and the public.
Debating the introduction of new powers for the Council to introduce Case Examiners, who would be able to review complaints cases at an earlier stage than currently, members of the Lords and Commons from the two main political parties, expressed concern about the independence of Examiners (who will be Council employees), as well as the Council’s past performance and culture.
Denplan shares the concerns as expressed by many of its member dentists and repeated in the debates, particularly the significant increase in complaints to the Council, the significant delays in processing those complaints, and the consequent significant rise in dentists’ registration fees which pay the Council’s costs.
During the course of the parliamentary debate the Council was described as being, according to dentists and its own overseer the Professional Standards Authority (PSA), ‘the most expensive, least efficient and most troubled’ healthcare regulator. In response to this, further comments were made that the PSA report on the GDC published in December was extremely worrying and that there were concerns about the Council’s performance.
Roger Matthews, Chief Dental Officer at Denplan added: “The introduction of case examiners may help progress credible complaints more quickly, and introduce some welcome and long-overdue proportionality to the Council’s processes. However there remain serious underlying concerns about their independence, about the Council’s ‘culture of complacency’ which was referenced during the parliamentary debate and the risk that an “extra layer” of review may add to rather than reduce the Council’s costs in the future.”
You need to be logged in to leave comments.
Report