News

Items on this page

Correspondence with Barry Tanner, GRCCT
Meeting with Professional Association Representatives, 18 July 2008

Correspondence with Barry Tanner, GRCCT

Following our meeting with representatives of professional associations on
18 July, CNHC were contacted by Barry Tanner of GRCCT, expressing concern
about the potential for confusion about differing regulatory organisations
in the complementary therapy sector. CNHC's reply is reproduced here. If you
have any views on this issue, we would be pleased to hear from you. Email CNHC Admin at peter.mitchell@cnhc.org.uk

28 July 2008

Dear Barry

Thank you for your recent email inviting CNHC to attend a meeting which you are organising apparently to discuss regulatory issues in complementary health care.

Having discussed your invitation with my colleagues, I set out our position below.

As you know CNHC emanated from the work undertaken by the Federal Working Group established by the Foundation for Integrated Health, during 2007. This group, as you are aware, had representation from the Department of Health, who have subsequently provided certain ‘start-up’ monies for CNHC as a measure of good faith in our activities. This support was also evidenced by the presence of the Health Minister at the launch of CNHC in March of this year, who wished us well in our work.

We are therefore clear that our Council is the one mandated to establish a credible voluntary regulatory body for all those complementary healthcare professions who do not seek statutory regulation. All our activity is focused on this objective.

We are aware of a number of other initiatives in this field and would agree with you that this makes things actually and potentially confusing for the public. We therefore welcome approaches from other bodies, including GRCCT, who wish to discuss with us, how their regulatory work can feed into our activity, in order to reduce public uncertainty and potential confusion. Indeed, we are already in such discussions with a number of groups.

In the interests of transparency, it might be helpful for you to know that we will be putting this letter on to our web site, in order that practitioners can fully understand our position.

Yours sincerely

Maggy

Maggy Wallace
CoChair CNHC

Meeting with Professional Association Representatives, 18 July 2008

CNHC CoChairs, Maggie Dunn and Maggy Wallace were delighted to host a meeting at the King’s Fund on Friday 18 July, designed to welcome representatives from the professional associations with an interest in the work of CNHC and provide an update on CNHC activity to date. Over 60 people were present , representing all 12 professions who have been working with the Foundation for Integrated Health on their standards for regulation. We were also pleased to welcome a variety of other interested participants.

A presentation on the key achievements and key challenges for CNHC was made, followed by a question and answer session. Emphasis was placed on the key roles of the professional associations in supporting practitioners and determining professional standards, as a complement to CNHC’s work as the voluntary regulator.

A lively debate covered a range of topics, including public protection, the cost of regulation, the advantages of having one regulator that the public can go to, public relations and publicity.

Susan Elizabeth, CNHC’s new part time Chief Executive and Registrar closed the session with a resume of the key issues discussed, as follows:

‘The discussion has touched several times on the future roles and responsibilities of the professional associations and CNHC as the regulator. Whilst we would be taking on very different roles, it was clear from the debate that there is great mutual interdependence and mutual benefit to be realised. CNHC will wish to encourage practitioners who are not already a member of a professional association to join one. This is where they will find support for their continuing professional development and - in the worst case scenario - where they would find support in the event of a complaint against them. The professional associations, in turn, will wish to encourage their members to register with CHNC, thereby giving reassurance to the general public about their standards of practice. It was noted from the floor that CNHC has a powerful role to play in educating the public about the CNHC "brand" and thereby contributing to the standing of complementary therapies.

2. It was also noted that the blueprint for the regulatory body given to CNHC by the Federal Working Group has some shortcomings. In particular, CNHC is keen to look at how it can increase professional involvement in its work in a way that is consistent with the spirit of the FWG report and with wider regulatory best practice.

3. There were a range of views about the likely cost of registration. Some felt it to be reasonable and good value, others felt it was too high. CNHC noted those concerns and re-stated its commitment to achieving a sustainable, credible voluntary regulatory body as cost-effectively as possible. There is nothing to be gained by establishing an organisation that cannot deliver effectively.

4. Finally, it was encouraging to hear how widespread was the willingness to work with CNHC in meeting its challenging agenda and we felt incredibly heartened by the positive responses people had given us.’

Feedback both after the event and subsequently has been very positive. Any further comments would be welcome, send to the CNHC Administrator, peter.mitchell@cnhc.org.uk

Download a copy of the CNHC Powerpoint Presentation from the 18 July 2008 PA meeting, here.