Doctors have called for the resignation of the GMC’s leadership, variously describing the institution as ‘bloated’, ‘failed’ and ‘rotten’.
BMA members at the annual representative meeting in Liverpool also called for the association to set out a vision for a reformed GMC, or a new, alternative regulator and to lobby for this.
The vote came after the previous day’s call for doctors to sign a new ‘BMA register’ in support of a new regulator only for doctors, as well as previous votes of no confidence in the GMC at the ARM.
Presenting his motion, public health specialty registrar Deiniol Jones said that the medical profession had no confidence in the GMC, calling for the resignation of the GMC's chief executive Charlie Massey, and a performance review of the regulator’s current senior management team.
‘How did it come to this? Well, as the saying goes, the fish rots from the head and my word is the GMC rotten. Enough is enough.
‘Who here would honestly have the gall to continue leading a regulator that has so clearly lost the confidence of those it regulates? [Charlie Massey] needs to go.’
In outlining his calls for a review of the GMC’s appointments and appraisal processes and of the council’s senior management team, Dr Jones (who contributed virtually and is pictured above from last year’s ARM) said the regulator had to change or the medical profession would seek regulation from a new source.
‘We need this rotten GMC to change, or else we need to change regulator and leave the GMC. We cannot continue as we are. It is a risk to our patients, and it is a risk to our profession.’
Dr Jones’ call to action was wholeheartedly backed by East Yorkshire resident doctor Rebecca Lavelle, who strongly criticised the GMC for straying from its original purpose, and called on doctors to fight back.
She said: ‘For too long we've allowed the GMC to run roughshod over its founding principles. Now it is a failed regulator. It’s bloated, it’s expensive, it’s racist, and frankly it’s not acceptable.
‘[The GMC] has strayed from its original purpose, which is to protect the public from those who fail to uphold the high standards of training and behaviour that is expected of doctors.
The GMC’s approach to fitness-to-practise (FTP) investigations of doctors has long been criticised by the BMA both for the often protracted and detrimental impact the process has on individuals, and for the disproportionate numbers of ethnic minority doctors targeted by FTP proceedings.
‘When did fitness to practise have to be a rod with which to beat doctors, rather than a measure of the standard of care and expertise that we bring to healthcare?,’ asked Dr Lavelle.
‘It’s time the BMA actually takes action, the GMC needs to know that change will happen. We will make it happen.’
The GMC has also faced recent legal challenges over its refusal to properly regulate physician and anaesthetist associates (PAs and AAs), and for choosing to refer to doctors and associate staff as ‘medical professionals’ within its Good Medical Practice guidance.
Peterborough resident doctor Schnell D’Sa told the ARM that these decisions alone should have led to the resignation of the GMC’s leadership.
She said: ‘Anaesthetists United are in High Court proceedings because the GMC refuses to set safe standards for PAs and AAs compromising patient safety. Any other public body would change its leadership after failures like these.’
Read more about the BMA’s call for a new medical register.