§ Mr. Austin-WalkerTo ask the Secretary of State for Health in what circumstances under which a general practitioner found guilty of serious professional misconduct by the General Medical Council can be allowed to continue to practise; and what assessment she has made of whether patients are sufficiently protected.
§ Dr. MawhinneyIt is a matter for the professional conduct committee of the General Medical Council to decide whether a doctor is fit to continue practising after he has been found guilty of serious professional misconduct. Where a finding of serious professional misconduct is made by the professional conduct committee, it may order that the name of the practitioner concerned is erased from the register; that his registration be suspended, or that his continuing registration be dependent upon his compliance with such conditions of practice as the committee may think fit. The professional conduct committee would need to consider each case on its merits having regard to its primary concerns to protect the public and uphold the reputation of the profession.
The Government's aim is to ensure that proper controls exist to protect patients against the risk of deficient conduct and professional regulatory bodies like the GMC have an important role to play in safeguarding standards of medical care. Under the terms of the Medical Act 1983, the disciplinary remit of the GMC covers only those offences amounting to serious professional misconduct.
A family health service authority has a duty to remove from its medical list the name of any general practitioner whose name has been erased from the medical register, or whose registration has been suspended, following disciplinary proceedings by the GMC.
The GMC is proposing to introduce performance procedures which would apply where a doctor's pattern of professional performance was seriously deficient but did not amount to serious professional misconduct. We support the GMC in its aims and will continue to contribute to the discussions about the detail of the proposals.
§ Mr. Austin-WalkerTo ask the Secretary of State for Health in what circumstances it is possible for a general practitioner to continue to provide NHS services after a direction has been made by the General Medical Council that his or her name be erased from the register; and if she will make a statement.
§ Dr. MawhinneyA doctor who is the subject of a decision by the General Medical Council's professional conduct committee to erase his or her name from the register has 28 days in which to appeal against the direction to the judicial committee of the Privy Council. During that period and if there is an appeal, until the appeal is withdrawn or disposed of, the doctor's registration is not affected and he or she is able to continue practising. The professional conduct committee may direct that a doctor's770W registration should be immediately suspended where it is satisfied that such action is necessary for the protection of members of the public or would be in the best interests of the doctor.
A family health services authority has a duty to remove from its medical list the name of any general practitioner whose name has been erased from the medical register, or whose registration has been suspended, following disciplinary proceedings by the GMC.
§ Mr. Austin-WalkerTo ask the Secretary of State for Health what assessment she has made of the speed in dealing with cases of charges of serious professional misconduct at the NHS tribunal and on appeal; and if she will make a statement in relation to a recent case raised with her by the hon. Member for Woolwich.
§ Dr. MawhinneyMy right hon. Friend the Secretary of State looks to the chairman of the National Health Service Tribunal to deal with references made to the tribunal as speedily as possible within the regulations governing its procedure. The outcome of a hearing of the NHS Tribunal may be that a practitioner is no longer included in a family health service authority list or all such lists. That is a serious matter and the parties must have reasonable time to prepare themselves for the hearing. The tribunal chairman is responsible for ensuring that the proceedings of the tribunal are conducted fairly.
The case drawn to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State's attention by the hon. Member was originally scheduled for hearing in September. Unfortunately the hearing was delayed because of the resignation of the previous tribunal chairman. The case has been relisted for 15 November when it will be heard by the tribunal under its new chairman, Mr. Adrian Whitfield QC.