This site is intended for health professionals only

At the heart of general practice since 1960

Read the latest issue online

GPs buried under trusts' workload dump

Revalidation could be imposed without GPC support after GMC brushes aside concerns over remediation funding

The GPC's threat to withdraw support from revalidation unless agreement is reached on funding remediation will not be allowed to delay its rollout, the GMC has said.

Speaking after a meeting of GMC Council yesterday, chief executive Niall Dickson said the regulator would be writing to GPs later this month with more details on the implementation of revalidation, which he said was still ‘on track' to come into force by the end of 2012.

Mr Dickson said the timing of the rollout would not be affected by the GPC's warning last month that it would refuse to support the process unless problems around funding for remediation and support for sessional doctors were resolved. The belief that ‘revalidation is somehow dependent on remediation' was not correct, he said.

His comments raise the prospect of revalidation being imposed on GPs next year without support from the profession's leaders. GPC chair Dr Laurence Buckman said last month that without guarantees on remediation funding ‘the process cannot proceed'.

Mr Dickson said: ‘We will be mailing every doctor in the next couple of weeks with our initial wake-up call telling them ‘this is about to happen, it's real, it's coming' and suggesting some very early things they need to do.'

‘We will release the detail of how implementation is going to work in the first half of next year.'

‘We will be communicating with doctors regularly in 2012 so that people are in no doubt about what they need to do to get themselves prepared for this process.'

He added: ‘I don't think [remediation] is an argument for not doing revalidation'.

‘If the argument is, it might identify these patient safety issues but you haven't got a good enough thing in place to remediate the doctor, I would say: "Well not identifying a patient safety issue is not the way forward."'

Rate this article 

Click to rate

  • 1 star out of 5
  • 2 stars out of 5
  • 3 stars out of 5
  • 4 stars out of 5
  • 5 stars out of 5

0 out of 5 stars

Have your say