Keeping our distance

We are proposing to set up a new tribunal service to increase the separation between the investigation of cases and management at hearings and to enhance confidence in the independence of decisions made at hearings.

'Panels already make their own decisions and they do not always accept what the GMC proposes,' said Niall Dickson, Chief Executive of the GMC.

'But we believe we can enhance this autonomy and make it absolutely clear that the appointment and management of those who sit in judgement and the monitoring of their decisions are all under independent control. Only a very small proportion of doctors come before a hearing, but for those who do it can be traumatic and have very significant consequences. It is vital we get this right.'

Why do we need to make changes?

We want to demonstrate clearly the separation between the investigation and adjudication of fitness to practise cases.

The number and complexity of complaints we receive has increased in recent years. In the last few years we have had to hold more hearings than ever before and those hearings are lasting longer. This means more stress and anxiety for those involved and higher costs which have to be met through the annual fees paid to the GMC by all doctors.

We want to reduce the stress and anxiety, speed up the process and, where we can, reduce the length of hearings and make them more cost effective.

What changes are we proposing?

We are proposing to set up the Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service (MPTS) which would run panel hearings and be responsible for panel decisions about doctors whose fitness to practise has been questioned. It would be led by an independent chair with significant judicial experience.

This would enhance separation between the investigation part of our process from the adjudication of cases.

As part of this we are suggesting that we can manage cases more effectively by modernising and streamlining the process of preparing cases for hearings and by more use of written evidence.

The consultation follows the Government’s decision not to proceed with the establishment of the Office of the Health Professions Adjudicator (OHPA). Many of the reforms proposed were developed in partnership with OHPA before this decision was made and we believe our proposals would offer the same benefits.

How can I respond?

If you would like to comment on our proposals, you can read and respond to the consultation document here. If you would like a hard copy, please email publications@gmc-uk.org.

The consultation closes on 13 June 2011.

We are also carrying out a separate consultation on changes to the way cases are dealt with at the end of an investigation. You can read and respond to that consultation document here.

Together, these proposals represent a radical set of reforms that should make the entire fitness to process simpler and swifter for all involved.