DENTAL PRACTITIONERS WHOSE REGISTRATION IS SUSPENDED—ENGLAND AND WALES (Hansard, 11 May 1983)

§ Mr. Kenneth Clarke
I beg to move amendment No. 4, in page 21, line 5, leave out 'under Part III (health cases) of the Dentists Act 1983' and insert—

'(a) by an order under Part II of the Dentists Act 1983 (interim suspension); or

(b) by a direction or order under Part III of that Act (health cases),'.

Mr. Deputy Speaker
With this it will be convenient to take Government amendments Nos. 5, 6 and 7.

§ Mr. Clarke
The purpose of the amendment is to extend the protection provided in clauses 15 and 16 for dentists suspended from the dentists' register on grounds of ill health to dentists subject to the new power of interim suspension which was contained in an amendment moved, with all-party support, by my hon. Friend the Member for Lichfield and Tamworth (Mr. Heddle) in Committee on the Dentists Bill.
In the Dentists Act 1983 the Government have provided a new power for the interim suspension of a dentist from the dentists register before his case has been heard by the 878 general dental committee's professional conduct committee. That power of interim suspension will be used by the GDC only where it is necessary to protect the public, A dentist will be able to continue in business by using a locum, but he will not be able to practise himself until there has been a full hearing before the disciplinary committee. While he is suspended on that interim basis, there will have been no adverse finding against him; I presume that there will be some presumption of innocence. It would be quite wrong for his contract to be broken and his livelihood totally taken away while he is waiting for a hearing.
We expect that dentists will be able to cover themselves against that risk by personal insurance, but it could be difficult or impracticable for dentists to arrange such cover. The amendment ensures that there will be a contingency provision so that not only the dentist's contract but his income will be protected until the hearing of the disciplinary committee. The provision is paralleled by the contingency provision already in the Bill, which would enable dentists compulsorily suspended on health grounds to have payments made to them under regulations that would have to be made.
This is a desirable step. It protects the position of dentists who face disciplinary hearings and ensures that they do not suffer disastrous financial loss before any adverse finding is made by the committee. There is also protection for the public, because the provision will make the GDC readier to use its powers to suspend. It will know that, if there is doubt about the protection of the public or about the professional competence or conduct of the dentist, it can suspend that man without immediately ruining or damaging him. A proper hearing can he held and the man reinstated in practice, suspended or struck off as appropriate. Thereafter—once a dentist is suspended or struck off—there will of course be no protection at all for his livelihood. I am sure that the House will regard this interim measure as worthwhile and reasonable.