News


Outrage at decision to uphold ARF hike


Dentists attack GDC after being ordered to pay the new £890 annual fee or face having registration withdrawn


A


judge’s deci- sion to allow the GDC to imple- ment the bitterly opposed ARF


increase despite ruling that the regulator had acted unlaw- fully in its consultation process, has been met with widespread anger and frustration across the dental profession. In an unprecedented step,


the BDA had sought judicial review of the GDC’s decision to increase payments by 55 per cent to £890 per annum, claiming the huge hike in fees to be unlawful and unjustifiable. In response, Mr Justice


Cranston found that there had been a procedural error in the ARF consultation process and


“We regret


that it came to this, but there was so much more at stake


than just fees” Mick Armstrong, BDA


highlighted a number of other significant failings by the GDC. However, he declared that the fee increase should stand. Within minutes of the


ruling being announced, the GDC welcomed the decision and moved swiftly to remind dentists that the new fee had to


THE REACTION


The GDC has demonstrated the same level of arrogance it has done all the way through this process.


Having gone through a judicial review, I feel we have been justified and vindicated. But with it finding in our favour, we all feel very frustrated and let down that there is no change to the fee. I hoped that the court would find that they had not been transparent and that they hadn’t followed the appropriate processes, and


6 Scottish Dental magazine


be paid by 3ı December, adding: “Failure to pay by this date will result in registration being withdrawn.” News of the decision and


the statements issued by the GDC provoked an immediate and furious reaction from the BDA and dentists across


Scotland, who launched scathing attacks on the under- pressure regulator. Mick Armstrong, chair of


the BDA’s Principal Executive Committee, said: “We regret that it came to this, but there was so much more at stake than just fees. We’ve seen patients and practitioners left in limbo for over ı8 months when complaints are raised, and hearings with an average price tag of £78,000. We had to take action because health professionals should not have to subsidise failure at their regulator. “Today a judge singled out


a ‘gaping hole’ in the GDC’s arguments. The regulator demonstrated it wasn’t clear


Scottish Dental spoke to dentists across Scotland and found universal anger against the GDC and the fee increase. Agreeing to be quoted, practitioners asked not to be named


that certainly seems to have been proven.


I’m not hopeful there will be an appeal, certainly not in time to prevent us having to pay the fee. I was one of those that cancelled my Direct Debit to the GDC in the hope that there would be a change to it.


However, I will pay in time. I can’t afford not to. I wish there was another avenue of protest, but there isn’t.


Practice owner Borders


If the consultation was unlawful, when do we


see our refund?


“If ever there was a case for the GDC to be disbanded, this is it. It’s been clear from the very start, it ignored the profession all through the consultation. It’s shocking.


“I think the BDA has also been weak in this – we need to see a Scottish Dental Association and a Scottish Dental Council.


“At the moment we have two countries, one system.


It’s not working for us in Scotland, it’s like Hong Kong and China.


“Our system in Scotland is entirely different and the BDA is unable to act. We need to have a completely separate regulatory body here that is separately funded and separately staffed.


“That is the only thing that will stop something like this from happening again.”


Practice owner Edinburgh


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84