Policy responses and statements
- Name of organisation:
- General Medical Council
- Name of policy document:
- Draft General Medical Council (Licence to Practise) Regulations 2009 and Supporting Guidance for
Doctors
- Deadline for response:
- 21 April 2009
Background: The General Medical Council launched this consultation on its draft Licence to Practise Regulations and supporting guidance for doctors. It plans to introduce the licence to practise in the autumn of this year. From then onwards, all doctors who wish to practise medicine in the UK will need to be both registered with the GMC and hold a licence to practise. The introduction of the licence to practise will affect doctors, employers and patients; and the regulations that the GMC has drafted explain how it proposes to grant, withdraw, restore and refuse licences to practise in the future.
Licensing represents a significant change in medical regulation, and this is the first tangible step towards the introduction of revalidation.
This consultation gave doctors, employers and others who will be affected by these regulations and guidance the opportunity to say whether they are clear, fair, straightforward and in the public interest.
COMMENTS ON
GENERAL MEDICAL COUNCIL
DRAFT GENERAL MEDICAL COUNCIL (LICENCE TO PRACTISE) REGULATIONS 2009 AND SUPPORTING GUIDANCE FOR DOCTORS
The Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh is pleased to respond to the GMC on its consultation on the Draft General Medical Council (Licence to Practise) Regulations 2009 and Supporting Guidance for Doctors.
Q1. Options for Licensing
The College agrees with the 3 options as listed (registration with licence to practice, registration only and relinquish registration voluntarily). It will be important for the GMC to produce clear information for the public on the difference between these options in addition to requiring doctors to take care not to misrepresent their regulatory status if they opt for registration.
Q2. Automatic Issue of Licences
The College agrees that the GMC should grant licences automatically to all registered doctors unless they have opted out. The phased introduction of revalidation soon thereafter will support public safety.
Q3. Registration options for new applicants after licences are introduced.
The College agrees that all new applicants must register and take a licence to practise. There is no significant benefit to be gained from allowing doctors new to the country to register with the GMC if they have no intention of practising as a medical doctor. Doctors currently registered can remain so even if they refuse an initial licence.
Q4. Fees
The College agrees that the fees should be proportionate and reflect the costs of regulating doctors with a licence, and creating a reduced fee for those who choose to remain registered only.
Q5. Draft Guidance
The College agrees that the draft guidance is (largely) comprehensive. However, there may be questions raised about para 29 in terms of the advice to check indemnity arrangements with defence unions if doctors are concerned about liability for Samaritan cover without a licence. Similarly, there may be uncertainty about the eligibility of registered (but not licensed) doctors to continue to participate in the work of medical advisory bodies and in medical teaching or assessment. This may prove a significant loss to many organisations including the GMC.
Para 32 e) implies that a benefit of maintaining registration without a licence is that it may be easier to apply for restoration. This is set in the context of a national medical emergency (eg pandemic), but would this not always be the case?
Q6. Impact on different groups
See Q5 – doctors not participating in direct clinical work, including retired doctors, may find themselves excluded from important activity requiring their medical experience through the lack of a licence.
Copies of this response are available from:
Lesley Lockhart,
Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh,
9 Queen Street,
Edinburgh,
EH2 1JQ.
Tel: 0131 225 7324 ext 608
Fax: 0131 220 3939
[17 April 2009]
|