Bill, Mark,
With the indulgence of the disinterested:
I reply here because of comments by others who seem to be prepared to
allow this discussion. We keep having this reference to a General
Podiatry Council. You can form what membership organisation you like it
is not the same as a statutory regulator. Your suggestion is just the
same as saying I drive a car and do not wish to join the system operated
by the DVLA in Swansea so I have created a general driving council and
will get the govt to recognise it.
You and I have not joined the HPC we are regulated by it due to an Act
of Parliament. We certainly do not like it, I suspect that the telephone
and electricity companies do not like regulators either but they do not
waste their efforts with a separate Council.
Talk to MPs, use your local MP surgery, withdraw your vote, vote Liberal
Democrat or SNP to change the Law but do not expect the govt to be
persuaded by us unless we can show that the public protection has been
lost and the HPC is a failed organisation.
As for the House of Delegates it is a proposition which would make the
SCP much more controlled and influenced by the membership. The
management Board would be answerable to the delegates and the delegates
would create policy based on propositions. It would not be connected
with the HPC which is a govt regulator and not a professional body.
What we consulted the membership about was the proposed rules of the HPC
not whether we would join since the was not an option.
You are right Bill in that you can leave the HPC, you would lose only 2
things, your job in the NHS and your access to LA.
Kind Regards
Ralph Graham
Consultant Podiatrist
Witham, Essex, U.K.
-----Original Message-----
From: A group for the academic discussion of current issues in podiatry
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Wm J Liggins
Sent: 05 September 2004 13:38
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: The Reason of Things (Ralph Graham)
Interesting comments but still Machiavellian Ralph! However, nice to
see you replying on this site despite your claim only 6 days ago that
you would only deal with academic subjects here. Obviously, another
Ralph Graham 'confusion pirouette' (you taught me that one, and cited
it as an excellent way of avoiding difficult questions)! You really must
not misquote or quote out of context. I did not state that resignation
from the HPC would be supported by the entire professional body. What I
did state, and did so in writing in your journal, was that we should
never have entertained the idea of entry in the first place. The
opportunity for creating a General Podiatric Council was missed, and
despite your claims to the contrary, The Society at the time supported
the idea of HPC registration to the extent of holding a plebiscite with
highly loaded questions and then claiming that the result supported the
Society policy of the profession entering the HPC. Despite the appeals
of myself and others, no alternative was seriously considered. I have
consistently stated that a General Podiatry Council could be set up and
stand outwith the HPC, and that this is the only way of gaining the
consensus of ALL the Chiropody/Podiatry bodies. Once that is running,
then consideration could be given to other issues, such as testing the
feelings of the registrants with regard to withdrawal from the HPC.
This of course, would require political support and might not be
possible until a change of government took place, since the profession
would effectively - and properly - be self governing. However, this
seems to be to be a more logical and realistic way forward than the
unworkable concept that the Society of Chiropodists and Podiatrists
should be the only professional body and should be all things to all men
(and women). Perhaps you could enlighten us with the details of your
'House of Representative's concept? Is this my HPC by any other name, or
is it another Society only theocracy?
All the best
Bill Liggins
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ralph Graham" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Sunday, September 05, 2004 11:01 AM
Subject: Re: The Reason of Things (Ralph Graham)
> Dear Mark,
>
> I have replied to another thread on this issue which you will have
> seen. Those who wish to argue that the law is wrong and fails to
> protect the public may wish to continue I prefer to try and be more
> productive. Mike Batt who views this mailbase would confirm that both
> CPSM reg and unreg tried to persuade govt that the HPC bill was a
> mistake. I have sat across from Ministers and officials who told us
> bluntly that they would not countenance a Podiatry council. They would
> oppose a Private Members bill which was drafted and had support and
> that the HPC and joint regulation was their intent. After three years
> of fighting we now have it. The judgement I, and all of us, have to
> make is do we stand at the side while they make regulations or do we
> participate. I believe we have an opportunity to unite a regulated
> profession and to deal with those who wish to escape such regulation.
> If the govt fails in its stated aims to regulate all then we will have
> fight again and consider the resignation from the HPC issue. I have my
> doubts that such a plan would be supported by the majority who would
> be worried for their income, however it is a constant claim by Bill,
> Akbal and others that this option exists. If we can unite the
> profession we can raise standards again. Please do not misrepresent my
> comments here to suggest that I am happy about this, nor do I have a
> warped view because I practice surgery. I have a general private
> practice and my daughter who graduated 7 years ago works there also. I
> am well aware of the views of the younger profession and my aim is to
> prevent them having to deal with this again in 40 years. My experience
> of the grandparented group is that they want to improve their
> knowledge base and feel limited by what is on offer rather than by a
> choice not to learn. In the end I have to convince my colleagues in
> the SCP who may choose to resign if they do not get their way or to
> propose alternative motions at the AGM. I and Council are bound by the
> membership and the first House of Delegates, which I am glad you
> support, will have ample time to do this as well as the full AGM.
> I have just returned from the World congress of Podiatry and the FIP
> consensus conference. It is clear that wherever we exist we are under
> threat, nurse practitioners, more assistants, medicine, managers,
> insurers. The stories alter a little but the thread remains. Some
> successes (prescribing in certain Australian states, the Scottish
> co-operation for surgery) and some losses. From Japan to Mexico and
> Denmark to South Africa 3 countries are seen as the goal for a
> profession, the UK, USA and Australia.
> Here in the UK we know that we have a lot to do to achieve our aim of
a
> well respected, well rewarded, viable profession. Active in the NHS
and
> privately. I do not think we will achieve this in my career but we
must
> keep moving forward. I see a professional body that represents all
those
> individuals in foot healthcare as a central plank of that initiative,
> others do not and that is the debate that must be had.
>
> Ralph Graham
>
>
> Kind Regards
>
> Ralph Graham
> Consultant Podiatrist
> Witham, Essex, U.K.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: A group for the academic discussion of current issues in
> podiatry [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Mark Russell
> Sent: 04 September 2004 09:17
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: The Reason of Things (Ralph Graham)
>
>
> Dear Ralph,
>
> You will have noted what I have to say in respect of the nature of my
> enquiry in the post to Ray this morning. I do hope that clears up any
> apprehensions you may have. It may well be that you would have
> preferred me to write in a private capacity - as we have done on some
> occasions in the past. But I do feel that the decision to open the
> doors to the unregistered practitioner an important one, for everyone
> in the profession. And in that respect I think it better if these
> communications were in the public domain.
>
> It is not my intent to cause any embarrassment or distress - as I'm
> sure you understand - merely to seek clarification on the process by
> which your decision was reached.
>
> I know from previous correspondence that one of your passions is to
> create a House of Delegates for the profession in the UK and I commend
> that idea wholeheartedly. Such a body would prove invaluable and it
> would strengthen the community immeasurably. Practitioners throughout
> the country would feel less distanced than now and it could go a long
> way to breaking the apathy and disenfranchisement that many suffer
> from today. But if it is to work then communication would have to be
> paramount. With that in mind I do hope that you will reconsider your
> decision to 'shut up shop' on these issues for I think you will find
> that it is not just me that is searching for guidance and answers.
>
> Lisfrancs is a lovely topic but it only has relevance if there is a
> profession there to treat it. Don't close the door on us just yet.
>
> With best wishes, as always.
>
> Mark Russell
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> This message was distributed by the Podiatry JISCmail list server
>
> All opinions and assertions contained in this message are those of the
> original author. The listowner(s) and the JISCmail service take no
> responsibility for the content.
>
> to leave the Podiatry email list send a message containing the text
> leave podiatry to [log in to unmask]
>
> Please visit http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk for any further information
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> This message was distributed by the Podiatry JISCmail list server
>
> All opinions and assertions contained in this message are those of the
> original author. The listowner(s) and the JISCmail service take no
> responsibility for the content.
>
> to leave the Podiatry email list send a message containing the text
> leave podiatry to [log in to unmask]
>
> Please visit http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk for any further information
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was distributed by the Podiatry JISCmail list server
All opinions and assertions contained in this message are those of the
original author. The listowner(s) and the JISCmail service take no
responsibility for the content.
to leave the Podiatry email list send a message containing the text
leave podiatry to [log in to unmask]
Please visit http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk for any further information
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was distributed by the Podiatry JISCmail list server
All opinions and assertions contained in this message are those of
the original author. The listowner(s) and the JISCmail service take
no responsibility for the content.
to leave the Podiatry email list send a message containing the text
leave podiatry
to [log in to unmask]
Please visit http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk for any further information
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
