Regulation of Health and Social Care Professionals Consultation

Council believes it is appropriate that the doctor’s registration is restricted or
removed and the doctor accepts this proposal. 54
8.65 The increased use of consensual forms of disposals has proved controversial.
For example, the Patients Association has argued the default position should be
“that public examination of the facts is required” so that patients have confidence
that when professional standards are not upheld “a thorough investigation is
carried out and the necessary steps taken to protect the public”. 55
Provisional view
8.66 The range of powers available at the investigation stage to dispose of cases
varies between the regulators. Our provisional view is that all the regulators
should have access to the same powers. This would not only assist legal clarity
and certainty, but help to ensure that cases can be dealt with efficiently and that
the public can be protected. We therefore propose that the regulators should
have statutory powers to issue or agree the following at the investigation stage:
(1) warnings;
(2) undertakings;
(3) voluntary erasure; and
(4) advice to any person with an interest in the case.
8.67 The regulators would also be given broad powers to make rules governing the
use of such powers. This would include rules governing who or which body can
issue them and the circumstances in which the powers can be agreed or
imposed. For example, the regulators could establish a public interest test for
consensual disposals similar to that established by the Health Professions
Council. Alternatively, regulators could require that only panels or committee
should have powers to make the final decision on sanctions.
8.68 As noted above, under our proposals there would be no requirement to establish
investigation committees. It would therefore be possible for such powers to be
issued by, for example, case examiners, Council officials or a single decisionmaker.
We welcome views on whether the statute should require that any
decision under these powers must be made or approved by a Fitness to Practise
Panel or an equivalent committee. Alternatively, the powers of the Council for
Healthcare Regulatory Excellence to refer decisions of Fitness to Practise Panels
to the High Court (see Part 10) could be extended to cover disposals at the
investigation stage.
8.69 We welcome further views on the use of consensual disposals (including removal
from the register) either at the investigation stage or at the adjudication stage.
Concerns have been raised that many such cases are not subject to public
54 As above, p 21.
55 Patients Association, Evidence to the Health Select Committee (GMC 08) (2010) para 11.
151