General Dental practitioners are already regulated by the GDC and further regulation by the CQC will bring no benefits to the public or the profession. It will simply mean that valuable time and effort is wasted on proving compliance which means less time for patients. At a time when morale among NHS dental professionals especially is very low, due to the unpopularity of the new contract, the CQC registration is seen as onerous and a complete waste of time. Inspections by PCTs are already rigorous and timeconsuming. Private practices are often accredited by Denplan, BDA good practice or BUPA. Ultimately the GDC regulates all GDPs.
As we are in a recession this would seem to be an unnecessary expense and a waste of practice manpower at this time. It is doubtful if patients would experience any benefit for the expenditure. The CQC was supposed to be a watchdog for large health and social care organisations such as NHS trusts and private hospitals. The cost of introducing a department to police dentists will be huge- is this giving the taxpayer value for money.
Why is this idea important?
General Dental practitioners are already regulated by the GDC and further regulation by the CQC will bring no benefits to the public or the profession. It will simply mean that valuable time and effort is wasted on proving compliance which means less time for patients. At a time when morale among NHS dental professionals especially is very low, due to the unpopularity of the new contract, the CQC registration is seen as onerous and a complete waste of time. Inspections by PCTs are already rigorous and timeconsuming. Private practices are often accredited by Denplan, BDA good practice or BUPA. Ultimately the GDC regulates all GDPs.
As we are in a recession this would seem to be an unnecessary expense and a waste of practice manpower at this time. It is doubtful if patients would experience any benefit for the expenditure. The CQC was supposed to be a watchdog for large health and social care organisations such as NHS trusts and private hospitals. The cost of introducing a department to police dentists will be huge- is this giving the taxpayer value for money.
INTRODUCTION
Sex education should be about NOT having babies. Why do teenage pregnancies occur? Nobody tells those clean brains (they are nearly new computers and softwares) properly, and we all experiment. Young people need help, as here, not lecturing.
The Chinese had the right idea, to limit their population, but did they explain masturbation to their population? I wish they had, for all our sakes, because we might then have adopted the idea too.
The following several pages are written by an Engineer, a very senior engineer who is now 67 years old. The body is an engineering structure – it has bones and flesh and nerves and a brain, and also fluids, just like engines use oil. The brain is a digital computer, and it learns as it grows older, but the learning is just like a computer software programme – complex sure, but neverthless a computer and its software. The hardware is what we build as we grow up, enlarging our brains by adding more hardware (brain cells) as we go, and the software is what we learn from parents and school and by simply living and enjoying life as we grow older. We learn all of the time throughout life, and this White Paper is all about our bodies and how sexual they are. It is not emotional, but factual.
It is therefore quite basic, and is meant to teach the young person particularly, what sex is all about, for they expolore themselves too easily. There are no pictures, because that is not the point. It is Information, or as that intelligent robot Johnny 5 would say “INPUT INPUT INPUT”!! Engineering Input.
SOME EXPLANATIONS
Sex is not all it is cracked up to be.
For the man it feels OK, until the explosion of sperm called ejaculation, and then the penis aches for perhaps hours afterwards, because of the high blood pressure inside it which makes it rise called an erection. The blood valve opens after ejaculation and the penis relaxes, but the strain on the internal flesh of the penis and especially its head, is what makes it ache. For the woman, the vagina is almost not exciting at all, and in fact the body of the man banging against her pelvis is not pleasant, but she loves you, so ….. Oh well. All of her feeling is in her clitoris, and so gentle stroking is by far the best for her.
And then if they have a baby at all, the result is screams throughout the night and day for years until the child has learnt to look after itself. These screams change from real screams, to over-exuberance, to a determined “I want …..” as they grow older, and thus they exist right up until they are 18 years old!! My children are now over 40 years old, and I love them to bits, but …… My daughter struggles against a hierarchy at work which seems to want her to work 24 hours a day, and my son has just lost his job because the Company he worked for decided to put his job in China – having got him to go to China to tell them how to do it!!! I am concerned for them, and how it affects my sons young family.
My daughter is not married, for she found that men seemed to want to dominate her life – no way! My Mothers Sister similarly – she married only as she approached retirement! And my Mum is now 90 years old, and quite determined that the doctor is not going to run her life with his tablets, thankyou!
So, kids are with you for ever, and you should therefore consider whether you actually do want them at a young age. Maturity helps, for then you will have explored the world as much as you can or want to, and will then have decided what you really want in life, instead of letting an emotional drive to have sex AT THIS INSTANT, take over your life for years and years and years afterwards.
THE MORNING AFTER PILL
The morning after pill basically rejects implantation of the egg in the womb – nature does this every month of course. Fertilisation takes time – the sperm are not an express train, so the morning after pill rejects unfertilised eggs, and it is recommended that it is taken quickly. Have some in your pocket first, because on a bank holiday weekend you may not be able to get any within 24 hours. You may feel a bit sick after taking it, but only about 1 woman in every 60 actually throws up, when you should then take another pill. Pharmacists should help you, but there are some silly religious ones who want to stop you – find another pharmacist, there are good ones about too.
And maybe you might imagine this couple talking to each other? – “Do you want sex tonight? Why? Because it is nice, and I like it, don’t you? Well, I do not want a child. I agree, but condoms are painful. OK, so maybe no penetration, just play with the outside? Yes, that would be OK.”
Certainly, with careful use of fingers on sensitive nerves alone, both sexes can enjoy each other. Just do not be prejudiced because you have been told masturbation is wrong – it is GOOD and not at all wrong.
WHY IS THERE A SEXUAL DEMAND?
The male of our species passes urine down his prostate-penis tube, which triggers the need for sex after a week or two – women do not have the same demand at all, for their sensitive parts do not lie in the urinary tract. And the same when the male needs to go to the loo – the pressure inside the bladder-prostate valve may cause an erection if he has had to wait a long time, and some may misinterpret this as a need for sex – NOT SO.
SOME PRACTICALITIES
The UK Government or Family Planning Association documents never talk about using tissue to catch a male deposit. Nor about how difficult it is for a man to stop, once started. Nor about anything else useful in August 2010.
How does a woman clean that male deposit out of her vagina after intercourse? It cannot just collect at the top of the tube!! Does the slightly smelly deposit dribble leak onto her pants during the whole of the next working day? Of course it does.
When she has intercourse, do her internal organs get moved to one side – a little for the vagina is a collapsed tube the rest of the time. The old side saddle mania, was because MEN thought the vagina was wide open all day!
MASTURBATION IS GOOD – NO PREGNANCY, AND FUN
Many religions have said that masturbation is wrong. It makes you blind some say – absolutely ridiculous!! Rubbish religious propaganda. Tell them that rubbing by hand or finger is no different from rubbing any other way! Religious philosophy has been power mad for too many centuries, demanding we have more and more children – and it is the parents who are religious not the child. Who dictates to children what to believe? Who are virgin young and happy until the evil dominating propaganda starts?
Masturbation is nice and you like it too? Good, but the circumcised male especially finds this difficult, and needs help to avoid the vagina – lubrication and softness essentially necessary. KY Jelly should be enough, but clearly it is not just for use by a woman – the packaging message is missing some advice, and so Johnson & Johnson have been asked to add some extra info.
Even normal males would benefit from using it, for the lubricated head of the penis is then more comfortably stimulated – the penis will still ache afterwards, but this route is so much better for both sexes, that its use should be more widely promoted.
CIRCUMCISION IS WRONG, FOR BOTH SEXES
It is recommended that circumcision is not generally practiced – evolution over millions of years has decided that we are OK as we are (no chimpanzee or orangutan is circumcised), and those males who are cut find it painful for ever afterwards.
For women it is a huge disaster caused by religion again. The whole of their bottom end skin (labia, clitoris all most painfully removed) is destroyed by an uneducated comic “surjeon”, who has no feelings of any sort other than sadism – just imagine the screams in the backyard room, where this awful procedure is carried out. IT HAS TO BE STOPPED, for it is MEN who are DOING IT TO WOMEN. STONING TOO, for it is the MAN who BLAMES the woman for HIS evil!! Male penis castration obviously necessary, to really stop such male arrogance.
Back to the circumcised male (whose surgeons do that? Not the National Health Service Surgeons I hope): It is painful when older to have an erection because the skin is often cut too short at birth, and it will not stretch far enough when the male becomes a teenager and has an erection, and maybe not after then either – because the skin has to be made to stretch and that is difficult, though masturbation may help.
So it is misery for life, and not at all helpful, for the natural urine flow cleans the inside of the skin out time after time anyway – as I say the orangutan has had his skin for tens of millions of years now, and it is only humans who are destroying their own penis, and maybe some human circumcised males want suicide for erection can be quite painful. The only other relief for a circumcised male is to use the lubricated vagina, and so they are tied to a vagina for life (thank goodness KY jelly came along) – thus circumcision is yet another disgusting and old religious philosophy to promote having many children in our already over-crowded world.
You should remember that once circumcised the highly sensitive nerves of the male rub inside his pants every minute of the day.
No wonder he never forgets – it must be murder for some, if not all. The foreskin protects and reduces the demand for sex thereby – just as nature intended!
RELIGIONS THE WORLD OVER
Religious Dogma is why we have pregnancies – they merely want to populate the planet dead, and as individuals we mostly do not want them, for we would like to enjoy life first, and wait.
Why is this idea important?
INTRODUCTION
Sex education should be about NOT having babies. Why do teenage pregnancies occur? Nobody tells those clean brains (they are nearly new computers and softwares) properly, and we all experiment. Young people need help, as here, not lecturing.
The Chinese had the right idea, to limit their population, but did they explain masturbation to their population? I wish they had, for all our sakes, because we might then have adopted the idea too.
The following several pages are written by an Engineer, a very senior engineer who is now 67 years old. The body is an engineering structure – it has bones and flesh and nerves and a brain, and also fluids, just like engines use oil. The brain is a digital computer, and it learns as it grows older, but the learning is just like a computer software programme – complex sure, but neverthless a computer and its software. The hardware is what we build as we grow up, enlarging our brains by adding more hardware (brain cells) as we go, and the software is what we learn from parents and school and by simply living and enjoying life as we grow older. We learn all of the time throughout life, and this White Paper is all about our bodies and how sexual they are. It is not emotional, but factual.
It is therefore quite basic, and is meant to teach the young person particularly, what sex is all about, for they expolore themselves too easily. There are no pictures, because that is not the point. It is Information, or as that intelligent robot Johnny 5 would say “INPUT INPUT INPUT”!! Engineering Input.
SOME EXPLANATIONS
Sex is not all it is cracked up to be.
For the man it feels OK, until the explosion of sperm called ejaculation, and then the penis aches for perhaps hours afterwards, because of the high blood pressure inside it which makes it rise called an erection. The blood valve opens after ejaculation and the penis relaxes, but the strain on the internal flesh of the penis and especially its head, is what makes it ache. For the woman, the vagina is almost not exciting at all, and in fact the body of the man banging against her pelvis is not pleasant, but she loves you, so ….. Oh well. All of her feeling is in her clitoris, and so gentle stroking is by far the best for her.
And then if they have a baby at all, the result is screams throughout the night and day for years until the child has learnt to look after itself. These screams change from real screams, to over-exuberance, to a determined “I want …..” as they grow older, and thus they exist right up until they are 18 years old!! My children are now over 40 years old, and I love them to bits, but …… My daughter struggles against a hierarchy at work which seems to want her to work 24 hours a day, and my son has just lost his job because the Company he worked for decided to put his job in China – having got him to go to China to tell them how to do it!!! I am concerned for them, and how it affects my sons young family.
My daughter is not married, for she found that men seemed to want to dominate her life – no way! My Mothers Sister similarly – she married only as she approached retirement! And my Mum is now 90 years old, and quite determined that the doctor is not going to run her life with his tablets, thankyou!
So, kids are with you for ever, and you should therefore consider whether you actually do want them at a young age. Maturity helps, for then you will have explored the world as much as you can or want to, and will then have decided what you really want in life, instead of letting an emotional drive to have sex AT THIS INSTANT, take over your life for years and years and years afterwards.
THE MORNING AFTER PILL
The morning after pill basically rejects implantation of the egg in the womb – nature does this every month of course. Fertilisation takes time – the sperm are not an express train, so the morning after pill rejects unfertilised eggs, and it is recommended that it is taken quickly. Have some in your pocket first, because on a bank holiday weekend you may not be able to get any within 24 hours. You may feel a bit sick after taking it, but only about 1 woman in every 60 actually throws up, when you should then take another pill. Pharmacists should help you, but there are some silly religious ones who want to stop you – find another pharmacist, there are good ones about too.
And maybe you might imagine this couple talking to each other? – “Do you want sex tonight? Why? Because it is nice, and I like it, don’t you? Well, I do not want a child. I agree, but condoms are painful. OK, so maybe no penetration, just play with the outside? Yes, that would be OK.”
Certainly, with careful use of fingers on sensitive nerves alone, both sexes can enjoy each other. Just do not be prejudiced because you have been told masturbation is wrong – it is GOOD and not at all wrong.
WHY IS THERE A SEXUAL DEMAND?
The male of our species passes urine down his prostate-penis tube, which triggers the need for sex after a week or two – women do not have the same demand at all, for their sensitive parts do not lie in the urinary tract. And the same when the male needs to go to the loo – the pressure inside the bladder-prostate valve may cause an erection if he has had to wait a long time, and some may misinterpret this as a need for sex – NOT SO.
SOME PRACTICALITIES
The UK Government or Family Planning Association documents never talk about using tissue to catch a male deposit. Nor about how difficult it is for a man to stop, once started. Nor about anything else useful in August 2010.
How does a woman clean that male deposit out of her vagina after intercourse? It cannot just collect at the top of the tube!! Does the slightly smelly deposit dribble leak onto her pants during the whole of the next working day? Of course it does.
When she has intercourse, do her internal organs get moved to one side – a little for the vagina is a collapsed tube the rest of the time. The old side saddle mania, was because MEN thought the vagina was wide open all day!
MASTURBATION IS GOOD – NO PREGNANCY, AND FUN
Many religions have said that masturbation is wrong. It makes you blind some say – absolutely ridiculous!! Rubbish religious propaganda. Tell them that rubbing by hand or finger is no different from rubbing any other way! Religious philosophy has been power mad for too many centuries, demanding we have more and more children – and it is the parents who are religious not the child. Who dictates to children what to believe? Who are virgin young and happy until the evil dominating propaganda starts?
Masturbation is nice and you like it too? Good, but the circumcised male especially finds this difficult, and needs help to avoid the vagina – lubrication and softness essentially necessary. KY Jelly should be enough, but clearly it is not just for use by a woman – the packaging message is missing some advice, and so Johnson & Johnson have been asked to add some extra info.
Even normal males would benefit from using it, for the lubricated head of the penis is then more comfortably stimulated – the penis will still ache afterwards, but this route is so much better for both sexes, that its use should be more widely promoted.
CIRCUMCISION IS WRONG, FOR BOTH SEXES
It is recommended that circumcision is not generally practiced – evolution over millions of years has decided that we are OK as we are (no chimpanzee or orangutan is circumcised), and those males who are cut find it painful for ever afterwards.
For women it is a huge disaster caused by religion again. The whole of their bottom end skin (labia, clitoris all most painfully removed) is destroyed by an uneducated comic “surjeon”, who has no feelings of any sort other than sadism – just imagine the screams in the backyard room, where this awful procedure is carried out. IT HAS TO BE STOPPED, for it is MEN who are DOING IT TO WOMEN. STONING TOO, for it is the MAN who BLAMES the woman for HIS evil!! Male penis castration obviously necessary, to really stop such male arrogance.
Back to the circumcised male (whose surgeons do that? Not the National Health Service Surgeons I hope): It is painful when older to have an erection because the skin is often cut too short at birth, and it will not stretch far enough when the male becomes a teenager and has an erection, and maybe not after then either – because the skin has to be made to stretch and that is difficult, though masturbation may help.
So it is misery for life, and not at all helpful, for the natural urine flow cleans the inside of the skin out time after time anyway – as I say the orangutan has had his skin for tens of millions of years now, and it is only humans who are destroying their own penis, and maybe some human circumcised males want suicide for erection can be quite painful. The only other relief for a circumcised male is to use the lubricated vagina, and so they are tied to a vagina for life (thank goodness KY jelly came along) – thus circumcision is yet another disgusting and old religious philosophy to promote having many children in our already over-crowded world.
You should remember that once circumcised the highly sensitive nerves of the male rub inside his pants every minute of the day.
No wonder he never forgets – it must be murder for some, if not all. The foreskin protects and reduces the demand for sex thereby – just as nature intended!
RELIGIONS THE WORLD OVER
Religious Dogma is why we have pregnancies – they merely want to populate the planet dead, and as individuals we mostly do not want them, for we would like to enjoy life first, and wait.
Yesterday the BBC News gave the number of hospital admissions due to alcohol. Read it and weep for the state of our so called democratic society:
In 2008/09, 606,799 people were admitted to hospital with drink-related problems. Some were treated more than once, leading to 945,469 total admissions, the Local Alcohol Profiles for England show.
More than 1,500 men and women are admitted to hospital every day because of alcohol, a report reveals.
The figure is 65 per cent higher than only five years ago, while drinking is to blame for around 15,000 deaths a year.
More than 400,000 brawls, burglaries, sexual assaults and other crimes are also fuelled by alcohol each year, the study shows.
Why is this idea important?
Yesterday the BBC News gave the number of hospital admissions due to alcohol. Read it and weep for the state of our so called democratic society:
In 2008/09, 606,799 people were admitted to hospital with drink-related problems. Some were treated more than once, leading to 945,469 total admissions, the Local Alcohol Profiles for England show.
More than 1,500 men and women are admitted to hospital every day because of alcohol, a report reveals.
The figure is 65 per cent higher than only five years ago, while drinking is to blame for around 15,000 deaths a year.
More than 400,000 brawls, burglaries, sexual assaults and other crimes are also fuelled by alcohol each year, the study shows.
Tonight, I saw a new anti-smoking advert of the TV. In this advert, a mum is seen smoking on her doorstep. In the house are a couple of children ((I am not absolutely sure of the facts because I only saw it once). A voice-over then says that tobacco smoke is invisible and gets everywhere. It then says "TAKE SEVEN STEPS".
There is an obvious implication in this advert that there is some danger to the children inside the house from the mum smoking on the doorstep. In reality, there is no such danger. None at all.
It is beyond my comprehension that the Health Dept can issue such garbage.
Why is this idea important?
Tonight, I saw a new anti-smoking advert of the TV. In this advert, a mum is seen smoking on her doorstep. In the house are a couple of children ((I am not absolutely sure of the facts because I only saw it once). A voice-over then says that tobacco smoke is invisible and gets everywhere. It then says "TAKE SEVEN STEPS".
There is an obvious implication in this advert that there is some danger to the children inside the house from the mum smoking on the doorstep. In reality, there is no such danger. None at all.
It is beyond my comprehension that the Health Dept can issue such garbage.
The requirement for CQC registration for the dental profession should be scrapped because there are already qulitiy assurance systems in place that are being regularly checked by the local PCTs. Moreover, the GDC has tough guidelines on standards of care etc. As it is the dental profession is one of the most heavily regulated professions in the world. This means that dental practitioners have to dedicate much more time in dealing with excessive and unnecessary regulations and guidelines that are not all evidence based resulting in less time focusing their energy on patient care. Is it not patient experience and outcomes that are more important than the raft of new regulations beseeching dentist in this ever changing world of health service provision where the goal post seems to shifting on a monthly basis! If the concern is about totally private practices then surely the remit of the PCTs can be extended to cover this sector?
Why is this idea important?
The requirement for CQC registration for the dental profession should be scrapped because there are already qulitiy assurance systems in place that are being regularly checked by the local PCTs. Moreover, the GDC has tough guidelines on standards of care etc. As it is the dental profession is one of the most heavily regulated professions in the world. This means that dental practitioners have to dedicate much more time in dealing with excessive and unnecessary regulations and guidelines that are not all evidence based resulting in less time focusing their energy on patient care. Is it not patient experience and outcomes that are more important than the raft of new regulations beseeching dentist in this ever changing world of health service provision where the goal post seems to shifting on a monthly basis! If the concern is about totally private practices then surely the remit of the PCTs can be extended to cover this sector?
The largest response is to amend the smoking ban. Nick Clegg say they will not repeal the ban and he won't amend it either – yet it is what the majority of the people want. He was not elected to act against the people's wishes.
Why is this idea important?
The largest response is to amend the smoking ban. Nick Clegg say they will not repeal the ban and he won't amend it either – yet it is what the majority of the people want. He was not elected to act against the people's wishes.
Make it illegal for manufacturers to list their ingredients and instructions in ultra small print that even people with optimum vision cannot read.
Print on packaging has become smaller and smaller over the years so that now it is quite often little more than an unintelligible fuzz.
For people who have to avoid certain ingredients and additives due to personal choice, dietary requirements etc it is becoming increasingly difficult to see the important information they need when the print is far too small.
I feel that is every citizen's right to know what they are purchasing, and think this is an issue of civil liberty because we all need to have the freedom of choice to find out what is in the item we are buying and we need to know how to safely follow the instructions on a product and be able to see those instructions clearly, but it is often impossible to even see the relevant information one needs.
Please introduce a minimum standard size on how small the small print can be.
Why is this idea important?
Make it illegal for manufacturers to list their ingredients and instructions in ultra small print that even people with optimum vision cannot read.
Print on packaging has become smaller and smaller over the years so that now it is quite often little more than an unintelligible fuzz.
For people who have to avoid certain ingredients and additives due to personal choice, dietary requirements etc it is becoming increasingly difficult to see the important information they need when the print is far too small.
I feel that is every citizen's right to know what they are purchasing, and think this is an issue of civil liberty because we all need to have the freedom of choice to find out what is in the item we are buying and we need to know how to safely follow the instructions on a product and be able to see those instructions clearly, but it is often impossible to even see the relevant information one needs.
Please introduce a minimum standard size on how small the small print can be.
My understanding was the GCC was supposed to protect patients rights. Currently there are people within the profession who would limit chiropractic to musculoskeletal pain syndromes which I believe it failing patients to protect numerous patients who will lose life saving and quality of life care if these people are sucessful.
Why is this idea important?
My understanding was the GCC was supposed to protect patients rights. Currently there are people within the profession who would limit chiropractic to musculoskeletal pain syndromes which I believe it failing patients to protect numerous patients who will lose life saving and quality of life care if these people are sucessful.
I'm not sure if this is a business issue but it can certainly be made one.
Yesterday there was a report that human flesh had been found on surgical implements in a hospital. Having been treated in this particular hospital – albeit more years ago than I care to remember – I was horrified.
Though the contaminated batch was spotted at the hospital, I cannot think there must be better, more efficient, and possibly cheaper ways of running operating theatres.
These instruments are sterilised by private companies. This is a job that could surely be better done in-house but it would be much better if scalpels and other such implements were only ever used once.
These instruments are all made from high quality steel. There is no reason most of them could not be manufactured from plastic, mostly it is only the blades that need to be metal. Scalpels made of plastic apart from the blades would be cheaper, lighter and easily disposed of and recycled. Ditto other such implements.
Disposable instruments bought in bulk would almost certainly be no more expensive than regular ones, and the possibility of contamination would be eliminated.
Why is this idea important?
I'm not sure if this is a business issue but it can certainly be made one.
Yesterday there was a report that human flesh had been found on surgical implements in a hospital. Having been treated in this particular hospital – albeit more years ago than I care to remember – I was horrified.
Though the contaminated batch was spotted at the hospital, I cannot think there must be better, more efficient, and possibly cheaper ways of running operating theatres.
These instruments are sterilised by private companies. This is a job that could surely be better done in-house but it would be much better if scalpels and other such implements were only ever used once.
These instruments are all made from high quality steel. There is no reason most of them could not be manufactured from plastic, mostly it is only the blades that need to be metal. Scalpels made of plastic apart from the blades would be cheaper, lighter and easily disposed of and recycled. Ditto other such implements.
Disposable instruments bought in bulk would almost certainly be no more expensive than regular ones, and the possibility of contamination would be eliminated.
There are many contributions on this subject now. Please all ready the very first (at the bottom) contribution " Abolish the HPC" which has now over 100 comments and makes frightening reading. All health professionals registered with the HPC please read the comments and add your opinions/stories.
Why is this idea important?
There are many contributions on this subject now. Please all ready the very first (at the bottom) contribution " Abolish the HPC" which has now over 100 comments and makes frightening reading. All health professionals registered with the HPC please read the comments and add your opinions/stories.
I have been selected this year (in April) to submit my CPD profile (2.5% are being selected) together with my re-registration. I have followed the example of my own professional body which is published on the hpc website. I have followed the written guidelines (and now available on the hpc website as video under continuous professional development), but still keep having it thrown back at me as not meeting their standards, despite having added a further 5 CPD activities. Below I am just quoting the official hpc guidelines and quotes from the letters received by the hpc.
"The registrant has explained how her EXPERIENCE has improved the quality of her work and how this experience has benefited the service user. The standards could be met if the registrant can show links as to how her CPD activities within the registration period have improved her work and benefited the service user."
In the hpc guidelines they list, amongst many, the following to be CPD activities:
"Learning by Doing." , "Reflective Practice", "Gaining and learning from EXPERIENCE".
Can anyone make sense of the assessors' above comments ?
Next, I am being told that " Standard 1 states that a registrant must PROVIDE a continuous and up-to-date record (in my view up-to-date does not mean dated) of their CPD activities. In this case the assessors are looking for a continuous list covering the registration period May 2008 to April 2010. Please provide a full dated list of your CPD activities for the entire registration period."
I have always followed their printed guidelines and chosen to keep my CPD records in 2 Lever Arch Files. Their guidelines state:….."or you might keep a folder in which you store any documents relating to your CPD. This means that you can keep your personal record in a format that suits you. This also means that you can plan and undertake CPD which is relevant to you and your job and which fits with how you prefer to learn. Standard 1 states that a registrant must MAINTAIN (note not provide) a continuous up-to-date (Note not dated) accurate record of your CPD activities. You might keep a folder in which you store any documents relating to your CPD. This means that you can keep your personal record in a format that suits you. We never ask to see your complete CPD record folders."
AND to finally add insult to injury I have also been told that "However we do not consider a registrants day to day work activities to be CPD activities." The official hpc guidelines state:"…you should be able to show that your CPD activities are part of your work , contribute to your work and are not separate from it."
I have consistently been trying to explain to the hpc in lengthy written statements that experience and reflective practice is the main contributor to improve knowledge and skill because one learns from mistakes and experience. I have also submitted one of my more complicated case studies. But now they consider day to day work activities not to be CPD activity, despite the fact what they state and they also list "Learning by Doing" as a recognised CPD activity.
I would love to hear from anybody whether they can make sense of this all, continuously being rejected, despite having complied with their CPD requirements and being threatened to be removed from the register if the standards are not being met.. How can one meet the standards if the goal posts are continuously being moved ?
Please also read the 140 contributions below "Abolish the HPC". It gives a clear picture of the frightening powers and behaviour of the hpc.
Why is this idea important?
I have been selected this year (in April) to submit my CPD profile (2.5% are being selected) together with my re-registration. I have followed the example of my own professional body which is published on the hpc website. I have followed the written guidelines (and now available on the hpc website as video under continuous professional development), but still keep having it thrown back at me as not meeting their standards, despite having added a further 5 CPD activities. Below I am just quoting the official hpc guidelines and quotes from the letters received by the hpc.
"The registrant has explained how her EXPERIENCE has improved the quality of her work and how this experience has benefited the service user. The standards could be met if the registrant can show links as to how her CPD activities within the registration period have improved her work and benefited the service user."
In the hpc guidelines they list, amongst many, the following to be CPD activities:
"Learning by Doing." , "Reflective Practice", "Gaining and learning from EXPERIENCE".
Can anyone make sense of the assessors' above comments ?
Next, I am being told that " Standard 1 states that a registrant must PROVIDE a continuous and up-to-date record (in my view up-to-date does not mean dated) of their CPD activities. In this case the assessors are looking for a continuous list covering the registration period May 2008 to April 2010. Please provide a full dated list of your CPD activities for the entire registration period."
I have always followed their printed guidelines and chosen to keep my CPD records in 2 Lever Arch Files. Their guidelines state:….."or you might keep a folder in which you store any documents relating to your CPD. This means that you can keep your personal record in a format that suits you. This also means that you can plan and undertake CPD which is relevant to you and your job and which fits with how you prefer to learn. Standard 1 states that a registrant must MAINTAIN (note not provide) a continuous up-to-date (Note not dated) accurate record of your CPD activities. You might keep a folder in which you store any documents relating to your CPD. This means that you can keep your personal record in a format that suits you. We never ask to see your complete CPD record folders."
AND to finally add insult to injury I have also been told that "However we do not consider a registrants day to day work activities to be CPD activities." The official hpc guidelines state:"…you should be able to show that your CPD activities are part of your work , contribute to your work and are not separate from it."
I have consistently been trying to explain to the hpc in lengthy written statements that experience and reflective practice is the main contributor to improve knowledge and skill because one learns from mistakes and experience. I have also submitted one of my more complicated case studies. But now they consider day to day work activities not to be CPD activity, despite the fact what they state and they also list "Learning by Doing" as a recognised CPD activity.
I would love to hear from anybody whether they can make sense of this all, continuously being rejected, despite having complied with their CPD requirements and being threatened to be removed from the register if the standards are not being met.. How can one meet the standards if the goal posts are continuously being moved ?
Please also read the 140 contributions below "Abolish the HPC". It gives a clear picture of the frightening powers and behaviour of the hpc.
The Clinical Governance Framework requires all pharmacy contractors to have in place arrangements which comply with the requirements of the Local Authority Social Services and National Health Service Complaints (England) Regulations 2009, for the handling and consideration of any complaints made on or after 1st April 2009. The regulations introduced a number of changes to the way that Health and Social Care services are handled, in order to provide complaints procedures that are consistent across all providers and NHS bodies, and deal with complaints efficiently and effectively.There are some differences between these requirements and those that existed in pharmacy before they came into force.
The new regulations introduce several major changes one of which is that, an ‘annual report’ about complaints must be published, made available to anyone who requests it, and be sent to the PCT.
Why is this idea important?
The Clinical Governance Framework requires all pharmacy contractors to have in place arrangements which comply with the requirements of the Local Authority Social Services and National Health Service Complaints (England) Regulations 2009, for the handling and consideration of any complaints made on or after 1st April 2009. The regulations introduced a number of changes to the way that Health and Social Care services are handled, in order to provide complaints procedures that are consistent across all providers and NHS bodies, and deal with complaints efficiently and effectively.There are some differences between these requirements and those that existed in pharmacy before they came into force.
The new regulations introduce several major changes one of which is that, an ‘annual report’ about complaints must be published, made available to anyone who requests it, and be sent to the PCT.
Smoking in public places shoudl be illegal. Isn't it already banned you say? Yes, but, absurdly, only on some private property, where people have a choice to be.
Out on the street, where one often has to be at some point, it is allowed (including outside offices and pubs where ironically it is banned).
(No, you don't "have a right to go into a pub and not passively smoke" as I have heard it argued – you are permitted entry by the landlord/manager at their discretion.)
I would reverse the ban on smoking on private property – i.e. the rules on smoking int he workplace, leaving employers to decide on their own policies – no-one has been forced to work anywhere since the abolition of slavery!
Instead the ban should apply to publicly owned space.
(I am not a smoker!)
Why is this idea important?
Smoking in public places shoudl be illegal. Isn't it already banned you say? Yes, but, absurdly, only on some private property, where people have a choice to be.
Out on the street, where one often has to be at some point, it is allowed (including outside offices and pubs where ironically it is banned).
(No, you don't "have a right to go into a pub and not passively smoke" as I have heard it argued – you are permitted entry by the landlord/manager at their discretion.)
I would reverse the ban on smoking on private property – i.e. the rules on smoking int he workplace, leaving employers to decide on their own policies – no-one has been forced to work anywhere since the abolition of slavery!
Instead the ban should apply to publicly owned space.
(I am not a smoker!)
Surgeries have a limit of 10 minutes per appointment which may be OK for certain cases but for other critical cases it is insufficient and may have to be extended.
This 10 minute appointment limit with GP should be ended and replaced with the GP's recommendation of length for appointment according to the case.
Why is this idea important?
Surgeries have a limit of 10 minutes per appointment which may be OK for certain cases but for other critical cases it is insufficient and may have to be extended.
This 10 minute appointment limit with GP should be ended and replaced with the GP's recommendation of length for appointment according to the case.
It is non productive. . We are already over governed and regulated as it is.
It is an unnecessary tier of ticking boxes which takes up valuable time.
Why is this idea important?
It is non productive. . We are already over governed and regulated as it is.
It is an unnecessary tier of ticking boxes which takes up valuable time.
If I want to put in or alter gas instalations at home or on my boat I am preveted from doing so either by direct prohibition or by prohibition on retailers supplying the equipment. If I want to instal or alter a mains electrical circuit in my kitchen or bathroom I must get my local authority or a professional electrician to check it at my expence.
These are both safety issues and I do not want to underplay the importance of safety. However in drawing up the recent regulations there was consultation with trade and safety organisations but no balancing representation of DIY interests because they do not exist. To a great extent, therefore, these regulations represent a restrictive practice.
Why is this idea important?
If I want to put in or alter gas instalations at home or on my boat I am preveted from doing so either by direct prohibition or by prohibition on retailers supplying the equipment. If I want to instal or alter a mains electrical circuit in my kitchen or bathroom I must get my local authority or a professional electrician to check it at my expence.
These are both safety issues and I do not want to underplay the importance of safety. However in drawing up the recent regulations there was consultation with trade and safety organisations but no balancing representation of DIY interests because they do not exist. To a great extent, therefore, these regulations represent a restrictive practice.
I am a smoker and do appreciate the improvements in general that have been acheived in the UK by this law.
I am also aware of the absurdity that exists where in some cases pubs now have a external smoking zone on public footpaths creating a congested area of drinking, smoking rowdies and a 'fog' of smoke which other members of the public have to pass through or avoid by crossing to the other side of the street.
It also creates late night noise and disturbance outside pubs and clubs where neither the 'landlord' nor the authorities are able/willing to address unless it escalates to another level and finally creates litter in the form of cigarette butts, empty beer glassess, broken glass and other litter spread around the vicinity.
I have noted that in some cases, airports for example, smoking areas have sensibly been re- introduced inside the terminal building, albeit that they are not actually 'in the building' and are distinctly basic, to avoid smokers taking to the toilets for a final fix before their flights.
The law is virtually unenforceable with regard to lorry drivers who smoke in their 'company' cabs.
The law must also have deterred a proportion of the public from 'dining out' although this probably has encouraged non smokers to enjoy themselves more.
I also have visited restuarants, bars and other places abroad where smokers are allowed but segregated from non smokers; where there are 'smoking allowed' and 'non smoking' establishments and thsi approach seems sensible.
The 'one size fits all' is fine for the nanny state where it is practical and can be made to work without creating other problems, but why can't the Smoking Ban be revised to allow some degree of choice with proper controls (e.g. extraction/filtering of air) and where smoking is licensed inside buildings.
I do not advocate a repeal as I think the principle is good but I would like to see some revisions to address the balance and provide flexibility and practicality.
Why is this idea important?
I am a smoker and do appreciate the improvements in general that have been acheived in the UK by this law.
I am also aware of the absurdity that exists where in some cases pubs now have a external smoking zone on public footpaths creating a congested area of drinking, smoking rowdies and a 'fog' of smoke which other members of the public have to pass through or avoid by crossing to the other side of the street.
It also creates late night noise and disturbance outside pubs and clubs where neither the 'landlord' nor the authorities are able/willing to address unless it escalates to another level and finally creates litter in the form of cigarette butts, empty beer glassess, broken glass and other litter spread around the vicinity.
I have noted that in some cases, airports for example, smoking areas have sensibly been re- introduced inside the terminal building, albeit that they are not actually 'in the building' and are distinctly basic, to avoid smokers taking to the toilets for a final fix before their flights.
The law is virtually unenforceable with regard to lorry drivers who smoke in their 'company' cabs.
The law must also have deterred a proportion of the public from 'dining out' although this probably has encouraged non smokers to enjoy themselves more.
I also have visited restuarants, bars and other places abroad where smokers are allowed but segregated from non smokers; where there are 'smoking allowed' and 'non smoking' establishments and thsi approach seems sensible.
The 'one size fits all' is fine for the nanny state where it is practical and can be made to work without creating other problems, but why can't the Smoking Ban be revised to allow some degree of choice with proper controls (e.g. extraction/filtering of air) and where smoking is licensed inside buildings.
I do not advocate a repeal as I think the principle is good but I would like to see some revisions to address the balance and provide flexibility and practicality.
If the State tries too hard to protect us from minor incidents we will be unprepared for major incidents when they occur.This applies particularly to children;
Quite simply the health and safety authorities should be forbidden to interfere with any activity unless a there is reasonable expectation that there is a risk of death or serious injury likely to occur.
Children will then be free to play "conkers" and take part in"egg and spoon races" and adult functions will be able to take place without restrictions from hordes of officials.
Why is this idea important?
If the State tries too hard to protect us from minor incidents we will be unprepared for major incidents when they occur.This applies particularly to children;
Quite simply the health and safety authorities should be forbidden to interfere with any activity unless a there is reasonable expectation that there is a risk of death or serious injury likely to occur.
Children will then be free to play "conkers" and take part in"egg and spoon races" and adult functions will be able to take place without restrictions from hordes of officials.
Many nursing homes and care homes have space to offer 2 or 3 day respite care but do not do so because they are not licensed for a specific age range or category of disorder. A modest relaxation of the licensing requirements in order to allow short periods of respite care would improve the carer's lot and reduce pressure on acute hospital beds.
Why is this idea important?
Many nursing homes and care homes have space to offer 2 or 3 day respite care but do not do so because they are not licensed for a specific age range or category of disorder. A modest relaxation of the licensing requirements in order to allow short periods of respite care would improve the carer's lot and reduce pressure on acute hospital beds.
so that's it finally we got the answer and here it is
Drugalysers to be issued over the next two years to detect drugs such as cocaine and cannabis
Testing kits designed to catch motorists driving while under the influence of drugs such as cannabis, cocaine, and ecstasy are to be issued to police over the next two years, the government announced today.
Ministers are due to give details of research funding to develop "drugalysers" which will be initially used in police stations, but later for roadside testing.
The plan follows a review by Sir Peter North, who in June called for tougher drug driving laws and the development of a roadside saliva test for those suspected of driving after taking drugs.
He called for screening devices to be available in police stations within two years to test for drugs including amphetamines, methadone, ecstasy, cocaine, cannabis and heroin.
The testing kits will mean that police officers no longer have to wait for permission from a doctor before a blood test can be taken to be used as evidence in court.
The road safety minister, Mike Penning, said: "This equipment will make it easier for the police to prosecute the irresponsible minority who put the lives of the law-abiding majority at risk.
"We are taking urgent steps to make drug screening technology available as soon as possible."
The Home Office expects to issue manufacturers with a final draft specification by the end of September.
Along with the Department for Transport and the Technology Strategy Board, it also announced a £300,000 investment for further research into drug-testing technology.
The aim is to develop equipment that can test for a wider range of drugs and is suitable for roadside testing.
A Home Office spokesman said: "Motorists who drive while under the influence of drugs are a menace to the roads and we have already given the police powers to test drivers for signs of impairment.
"We also want them to be able to test drivers for drugs in their system. By the end of September we aim to have issued a final draft specification for a testing device, setting out the drugs we want to detect. As soon as manufacturers have produced devices that satisfy our specification, we will approve them for police to use."
Research shows that 10% of drivers aged between 18 and 29 have admitted driving after taking illegal drugs.
So far, no device that meets the Home Office and Department for Transport's requirements has been identified.
source http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/aug/06/police-testing-kits-drivers-drugs
Why is this idea important?
so that's it finally we got the answer and here it is
Drugalysers to be issued over the next two years to detect drugs such as cocaine and cannabis
Testing kits designed to catch motorists driving while under the influence of drugs such as cannabis, cocaine, and ecstasy are to be issued to police over the next two years, the government announced today.
Ministers are due to give details of research funding to develop "drugalysers" which will be initially used in police stations, but later for roadside testing.
The plan follows a review by Sir Peter North, who in June called for tougher drug driving laws and the development of a roadside saliva test for those suspected of driving after taking drugs.
He called for screening devices to be available in police stations within two years to test for drugs including amphetamines, methadone, ecstasy, cocaine, cannabis and heroin.
The testing kits will mean that police officers no longer have to wait for permission from a doctor before a blood test can be taken to be used as evidence in court.
The road safety minister, Mike Penning, said: "This equipment will make it easier for the police to prosecute the irresponsible minority who put the lives of the law-abiding majority at risk.
"We are taking urgent steps to make drug screening technology available as soon as possible."
The Home Office expects to issue manufacturers with a final draft specification by the end of September.
Along with the Department for Transport and the Technology Strategy Board, it also announced a £300,000 investment for further research into drug-testing technology.
The aim is to develop equipment that can test for a wider range of drugs and is suitable for roadside testing.
A Home Office spokesman said: "Motorists who drive while under the influence of drugs are a menace to the roads and we have already given the police powers to test drivers for signs of impairment.
"We also want them to be able to test drivers for drugs in their system. By the end of September we aim to have issued a final draft specification for a testing device, setting out the drugs we want to detect. As soon as manufacturers have produced devices that satisfy our specification, we will approve them for police to use."
Research shows that 10% of drivers aged between 18 and 29 have admitted driving after taking illegal drugs.
So far, no device that meets the Home Office and Department for Transport's requirements has been identified.
source http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/aug/06/police-testing-kits-drivers-drugs
The cycle to work scheme is currently a hugely popular way of enabling employers to offer their employee's the chance of obtaining a tax free bike with most people saving in the region of 40% off the cost of a bicycle and accesories. In return the employee has to enter into a hire agreement with their employees over a set period and repay the cost of the bike (Minus VAT and with tax benefits) in equal monthly payments.
However, HMRC are threatening the very existence of the scheme.
HMRC's rules mean that an employer cannot state to the employee that they will either agree to enter into discussions to transfer the legal ownership of the bike before they sign up to the scheme, thus putting people off the scheme (who is going to want to pay up to a £1,000 for a bike without the guarentee of at least being made an offer to ownership in the future)
Secondly, HMRC state that the employee needs to pay what is known as a ‘fair market value' for the bike and accessories, otherwise further tax implications will apply for the individual concerned. The only problem is that they offer no guidance on how to do this other than that you cannot apply a rate of transfer on bikes across the board.
What instead they propose is that the bike is individually assessed, what this means in practice is that this increases the administrative burden associated with the scheme increasing costs and wasting resources by over complicating the process. They give no guarentee that this complies with their vague ruling thus reducing confidence in the scheme.
By also making the process more complicated and daunting than it needs to be it also makes the scheme less attractive to individuals wanting to sign up which will simply result in less people cycling and only contributing to this country’s huge carbon footprint.
It would be much simpler if a set of nationally agreed guidelines are drafted stating that a bicycle packages’ value after a defined time period is a % figure of the bicycle packages original retail value. This would make the scheme much easier to administer and it would save a enormous amount of time and effort from for organisations administering the scheme. As I say it is not just private sector businesses that run this scheme but public sector organisations too. This is one way government could actually bring about increased efficiency in the public sector.
Why is this idea important?
The cycle to work scheme is currently a hugely popular way of enabling employers to offer their employee's the chance of obtaining a tax free bike with most people saving in the region of 40% off the cost of a bicycle and accesories. In return the employee has to enter into a hire agreement with their employees over a set period and repay the cost of the bike (Minus VAT and with tax benefits) in equal monthly payments.
However, HMRC are threatening the very existence of the scheme.
HMRC's rules mean that an employer cannot state to the employee that they will either agree to enter into discussions to transfer the legal ownership of the bike before they sign up to the scheme, thus putting people off the scheme (who is going to want to pay up to a £1,000 for a bike without the guarentee of at least being made an offer to ownership in the future)
Secondly, HMRC state that the employee needs to pay what is known as a ‘fair market value' for the bike and accessories, otherwise further tax implications will apply for the individual concerned. The only problem is that they offer no guidance on how to do this other than that you cannot apply a rate of transfer on bikes across the board.
What instead they propose is that the bike is individually assessed, what this means in practice is that this increases the administrative burden associated with the scheme increasing costs and wasting resources by over complicating the process. They give no guarentee that this complies with their vague ruling thus reducing confidence in the scheme.
By also making the process more complicated and daunting than it needs to be it also makes the scheme less attractive to individuals wanting to sign up which will simply result in less people cycling and only contributing to this country’s huge carbon footprint.
It would be much simpler if a set of nationally agreed guidelines are drafted stating that a bicycle packages’ value after a defined time period is a % figure of the bicycle packages original retail value. This would make the scheme much easier to administer and it would save a enormous amount of time and effort from for organisations administering the scheme. As I say it is not just private sector businesses that run this scheme but public sector organisations too. This is one way government could actually bring about increased efficiency in the public sector.
The drug laws have failed. Use of drugs has soared under a regime of prohibition. Crimes of acquisition go up as a result. People feel less safe in their communities. Gangsters get rich. Disaster! We need to tell people the truth. Prohibition has failed. The 'war on drugs' is just a useless slogan. Another truth: 99% of people take drugs recreationally WITHOUT immediately falling dead or becoming ill or commtting other crimes. Another truth: Drugs are not equally harmful. Some illegal drugs are safer then alcohol or tobacco. Another truth: Most people on the very dangerous drugs of heroin and crack want to stop. A few don't. We need to be able to help those who want to stop and lock up those who don't. People are not interested in another lurid Daily Mail headline. They just want to feel safe in their homes and neighbourhoods – that's what really matters.
The solution? Small quantities of all drugs for personal use should be decriminalised IF there is no other offence being committed. If there is another offence then drug possession should act as an aggravating factor for that offence. By decriminilasing small quantiites for personal use we allow agencies and support groups to go to work to help those what want help. It has worked for Portugal so it will work for Britain if only we are brave enough to tell the public the truth.
Why is this idea important?
The drug laws have failed. Use of drugs has soared under a regime of prohibition. Crimes of acquisition go up as a result. People feel less safe in their communities. Gangsters get rich. Disaster! We need to tell people the truth. Prohibition has failed. The 'war on drugs' is just a useless slogan. Another truth: 99% of people take drugs recreationally WITHOUT immediately falling dead or becoming ill or commtting other crimes. Another truth: Drugs are not equally harmful. Some illegal drugs are safer then alcohol or tobacco. Another truth: Most people on the very dangerous drugs of heroin and crack want to stop. A few don't. We need to be able to help those who want to stop and lock up those who don't. People are not interested in another lurid Daily Mail headline. They just want to feel safe in their homes and neighbourhoods – that's what really matters.
The solution? Small quantities of all drugs for personal use should be decriminalised IF there is no other offence being committed. If there is another offence then drug possession should act as an aggravating factor for that offence. By decriminilasing small quantiites for personal use we allow agencies and support groups to go to work to help those what want help. It has worked for Portugal so it will work for Britain if only we are brave enough to tell the public the truth.
Repeal tjhe Misuse of Drugs Act 1971. Introduced under American pressure, it is the most disastrous legislation of modern times and has created a huge, uncontrolled and constantly expanding criminal market in all forms of harmful drugs.
Make the Department of Health the lead department on drug policy. We might then get some hope of a realistic harm-reduction policy rather than the ever-more-futile and ever-more-expensive attempts at interdiction.
Why is this idea important?
Repeal tjhe Misuse of Drugs Act 1971. Introduced under American pressure, it is the most disastrous legislation of modern times and has created a huge, uncontrolled and constantly expanding criminal market in all forms of harmful drugs.
Make the Department of Health the lead department on drug policy. We might then get some hope of a realistic harm-reduction policy rather than the ever-more-futile and ever-more-expensive attempts at interdiction.
Uploads of patients records is proceeding apace, even though many people are unaware that their records are being uploaded, and have not had the chance to make an informed choice as to whether they want this: I understand this database contains many errors, and once you are on it your medical details are accessible to hundreds of thousands of people working for the NHS.
Why is this idea important?
Uploads of patients records is proceeding apace, even though many people are unaware that their records are being uploaded, and have not had the chance to make an informed choice as to whether they want this: I understand this database contains many errors, and once you are on it your medical details are accessible to hundreds of thousands of people working for the NHS.
As a health professional that is regulated by the Health Professions Council (HPC), having first hand experience of the dictatorial approach of the HPC, I urge the government not to move the social workers under the control of the HPC.They have a hard enough job without being tyranisd by the HPC imposing their Continuous Professional Development Standards (CPD Standards) on them.
The HPC imposes CPD Standards on their registrants which are not linked to professional competence . They can set arbitrary standards and use bullying tactics. The HPC is not regulated by anybody and they can do what they like. They can impose standards which are not linked to professional competence. Can you imagine that they can dictate how Social Workers should work without being accountable to any government body. The Department of Health has no power over them. The CHRE has no statutory powers over the HPC – only advisory. A really frightening scenario.
Why is this idea important?
As a health professional that is regulated by the Health Professions Council (HPC), having first hand experience of the dictatorial approach of the HPC, I urge the government not to move the social workers under the control of the HPC.They have a hard enough job without being tyranisd by the HPC imposing their Continuous Professional Development Standards (CPD Standards) on them.
The HPC imposes CPD Standards on their registrants which are not linked to professional competence . They can set arbitrary standards and use bullying tactics. The HPC is not regulated by anybody and they can do what they like. They can impose standards which are not linked to professional competence. Can you imagine that they can dictate how Social Workers should work without being accountable to any government body. The Department of Health has no power over them. The CHRE has no statutory powers over the HPC – only advisory. A really frightening scenario.