Responses to two consultations concerning other health regulators

The General Chiropractic Council has recently responded to two consultations concerning other health regulators: 

• Regulating anaesthesia associates and physician associates: consultation on our proposed rules, standards and guidance from the GMC

• The Government’s consultation on provisional registration for overseas-qualified dentists

Nick Jones, The Chief Executive and Registrar of the GCC said: 

We fully endorse an approach of parliament agreeing broad principles in primary legislation, and leaving the technical details of registration and regulation to be established through rules that are developed by the regulator.
While the urgent need for the provisional registration of overseas dentists by the General Dental Council (GDC) required enabling action by government, we are heartened that the proposals are consistent with this approach. 
The proposals by the General Medical Council (GMC) demonstrates how a regulator can, when given time and appropriate powers, develop thorough and thoughtful rules that will protect patients and benefit professionals. 
We look forward to the same approach enabling the GCC to deliver more effective regulation when our time comes.

Regulating anaesthesia associates and physician associates: consultation on proposed rules, standards and guidance from the GMC

The Anaesthesia Associates and Physician Associates Order 2024 came into force on 13 March 2024. This is a move broadly welcomed by the GCC as it will likely form the framework to modernise professional regulation across healthcare professions. 

The order set the legal framework for regulation through rules, and we congratulate the GMC for being in a position to consult on those rules by 26 March. 

While it was not appropriate for the GCC to comment on many of the details of the rules (as there are others with a better understanding of the practise of PAs and AAs, and how they should be regulated), our assessment was that they were thorough and thoughtful.  

We recognise, through experience, that the weight of responsibility placed on regulators is a heavy one and we welcome the care and diligence the GMC has shown in developing the rules. 

Of particular note were: 

• The flexibility afforded by approving programmes of education rather than entire institutions. In our experience this allows an agile and more targeted approach to influencing education programmes – particularly the opportunity to “course correct” minor issues before they become major problems. 

• Greater flexibility over the information that appears on the public register – deftly balancing the public nature of a professional role with the right of a professional to a private life. 

• Greater clarity and transparency on entering, re-entering and removal from the register – particularly where an individual has been found guilty of a serious criminal offence and the public rightly expect their removal. 

• Greater clarity over the progress of Fitness to Practise cases. We anticipate the rules will balance the need for justice with the right to a fair investigation; with the simpler streamlined process reducing needless stress for the professional under investigation and setting realistic expectations for the complainant. 

• The details of a flexible fee system – recognising that a single payment for the year is not adequately reflective of the complexities of modern life. 

The GCC has consistently said that the current healthcare legislation (including our own) hampers the ability of regulators to deal with complaints in the most effective and timely way, and to deliver the agile and flexible regulatory regime that modern healthcare requires. 

While the GCC anticipates that the reform of its powers may be some time away, we recognise the importance of engaging with the development of the rules by our colleagues at the GMC (and likely the NMC and HCPC next) as their approach will influence our own proposals on rules in time.

The Government’s consultation on provisional registration for overseas-qualified dentists 

The GCC has also responded to the government’s consultation on provisional registration for overseas-qualified dentists, to give the General Dental Council (GDC) the necessary powers and duties to provisionally register dentists who have qualified overseas and have not yet satisfied the GDC’s requirements for full registration. 

The legislation would allow an overseas-qualified dentist to practise in any dental setting, including high street dental practices, under the supervision of a dentist who has full registration on GDC’s dentists register.  

Our response emphasised that the draft legislation on provisional registration of dentists should not constrain how provisional registration will work in practice. Working through the detail will require careful engagement and consultation with the dental sector and patients and the public, something we know the GDC is committed to doing. We underline the commitment by the GDC to ensure that patients can be confident in their treatment, provisional registrants are supported to practise safely, and the GDC’s standards are maintained.