The
Professional Standards Authority (PSA) has today published its report on the GDC’s performance for the period
2019/20, which shows that we met 16 of the 18 Standards of Good
Regulation.
We
are pleased that the assessment recognises we are a fair and proportionate
regulator and that this reflects the good work our teams have done to ensure we
continuously improve.
There
were two areas in which the PSA concluded that we fell short of the
standard. These were Standard 15, which looks at the proportionality,
fairness and timeliness of fitness to practise processes; and Standard
17, which looks at the use of interim orders in the fitness to
practise process.
In
relation to Standard 17, we were aware that the information we provided to the
PSA during the assessment process showed an increase in the time
taken to make referrals to the Interim Orders
Committee (IOC), and that we had already taken steps
to address this. We are pleased to report that the steps we took resolved
the issue, and that, since early 2020, we have
once again been referring cases to the IOC in line
with our previous performance. We are therefore confident
that this standard will be restored at the next review.
In
relation to Standard 15, despite not having met the element of the standard
that relates to timeliness, we are nevertheless pleased that the assessment
reflected that our processes are fair and proportionate. We of course agree
with the PSA that timeliness is immensely important and improving those aspects
of timeliness that fall within our control has been a key focus for
us in recent years. Not every change we have made has
succeeded in improving timeliness, but we have made
improvements.
However, focusing
on those elements that are within our direct control has served to
underline that they comprise only a relatively small part
of the total time taken (significant time is often spent
awaiting responses and submissions from the parties, who need time
to provide their evidence, and there are cases that we
are unable to progress because we are awaiting the outcome of other
investigations or proceedings). We must therefore recognise
that, without legislative change to provide stronger powers of case
management, the impact of any action we take is likely to be
limited. Of course, the
impact of COVID-19, and the challenges that this has presented for all of
us, add further complexity.
Timeliness is
a problem which will take extended effort and legislative change to
solve completely. We nevertheless remain committed to
making improvements where possible, while ensuring that we maintain our focus
on the other important elements of proportionality and fairness.
