Internal review of earlier request IR1-4688802183
Dear General Medical Council,
In response to my email dated 22 November, Edd Mustill clarified that the source of the funds to be used to fight legal cases brought by the British Medical Association (BMA), Anaesthetists United and the parents of Emily Chesteton challenging GMC's regulation of PAs and AAs is GMC's unrestricted funds. He kindly provided a link to your Annual Report which leaves no doubt that he was saying that it is the doctors' fees that cover the legal costs of the doctors' own challenge.
However, I believe this to be a lie. I am not accusing Mr Mustill of lying, but whoever told him this appears to have lied.
On 6 December 2024, DHSC provided the following information:
A longstanding principle underpinning the introduction of statutory regulation for new
professions is that all the cost related to that, including legal challenges to that work,
should be funded by the Government, to avoid other professions cross-subsidising the
work involved. In this case, DHSC is therefore funding the General Medical Council (GMC)
to undertake the work required to introduce regulation for Anaesthesia Associates (AAs)
and Physician Associates (PAs), to avoid doctors paying for this through their registrant
fees. Once regulation of AAs and PAs becomes self-funding, DHSC will cease funding the
GMC.
The same response was also given to a Parliamentary question. I therefore trust it is correct.
1. I should therefore be grateful if you would tell me on what authority you provided the erroneous statement that your legal costs would be met from unrestricted funds.
My original email was to Mr Gallagher, your Director of Strategy and Policy, asking how his position enabled him to instruct the DHSC, a government department, on its approach to the press with regard to this legal challenge or any other matter. That part of my query remains unanswered.
2. I should therefore be grateful if you would tell me by what authority your Director of Strategy and Policy instructs the DHSC.
Please regard both of these queries as requests for internal review.
Yours faithfully,
Susan Sollazzi
Thank you for getting in touch. Please note this is an automated email.
Your receipt of this means that we have safely received your email.
We are currently receiving a high volume of requests and there will be a
delay in getting back to you with a further acknowledgement. We will do so
as soon as we can.
Since 6 December 2023, the GMC has been subject to the Welsh Language
Standards. You are welcome to contact us in Welsh and we will respond in
Welsh, without this causing additional delay.
In the meantime, if you want any further information about the GMC, please
visit our website: [1]Home - GMC (gmc-uk.org)
General Medical Council
We work with doctors, physician associates (PAs), anaesthesia associates
(AAs), those they care for and other stakeholders to support good, safe
patient care across the UK. We set the standards doctors, PAs, AAs and
their educators need to meet, and help them achieve them. If there are
concerns these standards may not be met or that public confidence in
doctors, PAs or AAs may be at risk, we can investigate, and take action if
needed.
This email may contain privileged or confidential information which should
only be used for the purpose for which it has been sent.
If you are not the addressee or have received this email in error, please
do not read, print, re-transmit, store or act in reliance on it or any
attachments. Please email the sender and then immediately delete it.
The General Medical Council is a charity registered in England and Wales
(1089278) and in Scotland (SC037750)
You are welcome to contact us in Welsh. We will respond in Welsh, without
this causing additional delay.
_________________________________________________________________
Y Cyngor Meddygol Cyffredinol
Rydym yn gweithio gyda meddygon, cymdeithion meddygol (PA), cymdeithion
anesthesia (AA), y rhai y maent yn gofalu amdanynt a rhanddeiliaid eraill
i gefnogi gofal da a diogel i gleifion ledled y DU. Rydym yn gosod y
safonau y mae angen i feddygon, cymdeithion meddygol, cymdeithion
anesthesia a’u haddysgwyr eu bodloni, ac yn eu helpu i’w cyrraedd. Os oes
pryderon na fydd y safonau hyn yn cael eu bodloni o bosibl, neu y gallai
hyder y cyhoedd mewn meddygon, cymdeithion meddygol neu gymdeithion
anesthesia fod mewn perygl, gallwn ymchwilio, a chymryd camau os oes
angen.
Efallai fod y neges e-bost hon yn cynnwys gwybodaeth freiniol neu
gyfrinachol, y dylid ei defnyddio at y diben cafodd ei hanfon ar ei gyfer
yn unig.
Os nad chi sydd i fod i'w dderbyn, neu os ydych chi wedi cael yr e-bost
hwn mewn camgymeriad, peidiwch â’i ddarllen, ei argraffu, ei
ail-drosglwyddo, ei storio na gweithredu gan ddibynnu ar y neges nac
unrhyw atodiadau. Anfonwch yr e-bost at yr anfonwr ac yna ei ddileu ar
unwaith.
Mae’r Cyngor Meddygol Cyffredinol yn elusen gofrestredig yng Nghymru a
Lloegr (1089278) ac yn yr Alban (SC037750)
Mae croeso i chi gysylltu â ni yn Gymraeg. Byddwn ni’n ymateb yn Gymraeg,
heb i hyn achosi oedi ychwanegol.
References
Visible links
1. https://www.gmc-uk.org/
Dear Susan Sollazzi,
IR: IR1-4721252822
Thank you for your email below dated 22^nd December 2024.
We will be considering your email as a Freedom of Information Act 2000
(FOIA) appeal. We have a target response time of 20 working days. We will
endeavour to respond to you within this timeframe.
Alex Mason
Information Access Assistant
General Medical Council
3 Hardman Street
Manchester M3 3AW
Email: [1][email address]
From: Susan Sollazzi <[FOI #1218722 email]>
Sent: Sunday, December 22, 2024 6:16 PM
To: FOI <[email address]>
Subject: Freedom of Information request - Internal review of earlier
request IR1-4688802183
Dear General Medical Council, In response to my email dated 22 November,
Edd Mustill clarified that the source of the funds to be used to fight
legal cases brought by the British Medical Association (BMA),
Anaesthetists United and the parents
Dear General Medical Council,
In response to my email dated 22 November, Edd Mustill clarified that the source of the funds to be used to fight legal cases brought by the British Medical Association (BMA), Anaesthetists United and the parents of Emily Chesteton challenging GMC's regulation of PAs and AAs is GMC's unrestricted funds. He kindly provided a link to your Annual Report which leaves no doubt that he was saying that it is the doctors' fees that cover the legal costs of the doctors' own challenge.
However, I believe this to be a lie. I am not accusing Mr Mustill of lying, but whoever told him this appears to have lied.
On 6 December 2024, DHSC provided the following information:
A longstanding principle underpinning the introduction of statutory regulation for new
professions is that all the cost related to that, including legal challenges to that work,
should be funded by the Government, to avoid other professions cross-subsidising the
work involved. In this case, DHSC is therefore funding the General Medical Council (GMC)
to undertake the work required to introduce regulation for Anaesthesia Associates (AAs)
and Physician Associates (PAs), to avoid doctors paying for this through their registrant
fees. Once regulation of AAs and PAs becomes self-funding, DHSC will cease funding the
GMC.
The same response was also given to a Parliamentary question. I therefore trust it is correct.
1. I should therefore be grateful if you would tell me on what authority you provided the erroneous statement that your legal costs would be met from unrestricted funds.
My original email was to Mr Gallagher, your Director of Strategy and Policy, asking how his position enabled him to instruct the DHSC, a government department, on its approach to the press with regard to this legal challenge or any other matter. That part of my query remains unanswered.
2. I should therefore be grateful if you would tell me by what authority your Director of Strategy and Policy instructs the DHSC.
Please regard both of these queries as requests for internal review.
Yours faithfully,
Susan Sollazzi
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[2][FOI #1218722 email]
Is [3][GMC request email] the wrong address for Freedom of Information requests to General Medical Council? If so, please contact us using this form:
[4]https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www....
Disclaimer: This message and any reply that you make will be published on the internet. Our privacy and copyright policies:
[5]https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www....
For more detailed guidance on safely disclosing information, read the latest advice from the ICO:
[6]https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www....
[7]https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www....
Please note that in some cases publication of requests and responses will be delayed.
If you find this service useful as an FOI officer, please ask your web manager to link to us from your organisation's FOI page.
Dear Ms Sollazzi
I write further to previous correspondance. I’ve considered this as an
appeal of our initial response.
In respect of your first point, we understand that the Department of
Health and Social Care (DHSC) stated in its response to you on 6 December
2024, and in response to a parliamentary question tabled on 2 December
2024, that ‘A longstanding principle underpinning the introduction of
statutory regulation for new professions is that all related costs,
including legal challenges to that work, should be funded by the
Government.’
However, at the point in time that you submitted your request for
information to us on 22 November 2024, no specific agreement had been
reached between the GMC and the DHSC regarding the covering of costs
related to the legal challenge in question. Therefore, the information
provided to you in our response of 22 December 2024 was accurate from a
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) perspective. I do recognise, however,
that our not providing this additional context within our response at the
time might have led to confusion, for which I apologise.
Turning to your second point, while we do not hold any information within
the scope of your request from an FOIA perspective, I thought it would
still be helpful to clarify that we do not believe the email in question
amounted to an attempt to instruct the DHSC.
Your right to appeal
You can appeal to the [1]Information Commissioner, the regulator of the
FOIA. We will of course cooperate with them if they accept any complaint
made to them.
---
Kind Regards
Matt
Matthew McCoig-Lees
Information Access Manager
Information Access Team
General Medical Council
3 Hardman Street
Manchester
M3 3AW
Email: [2][email address]
Website: [3]www.gmc-uk.org
Tel: 0161 923 6579
I sometimes work flexibly and therefore this email may reach you outside
of core working hours. I don’t expect you to respond outside of your own
working hours.
From: FOI
Sent: Monday, December 23, 2024 12:01 PM
To: Susan Sollazzi <[FOI #1218722 email]>
Subject: RE: Freedom of Information request - Internal review of earlier
request IR1-4688802183
Dear Susan Sollazzi,
IR: IR1-4721252822
Thank you for your email below dated 22^nd December 2024.
We will be considering your email as a Freedom of Information Act 2000
(FOIA) appeal. We have a target response time of 20 working days. We will
endeavour to respond to you within this timeframe.
Alex Mason
Information Access Assistant
General Medical Council
3 Hardman Street
Manchester M3 3AW
Email: [4][email address]
From: Susan Sollazzi <[5][FOI #1218722 email]>
Sent: Sunday, December 22, 2024 6:16 PM
To: FOI <[6][email address]>
Subject: Freedom of Information request - Internal review of earlier
request IR1-4688802183
Dear General Medical Council, In response to my email dated 22 November,
Edd Mustill clarified that the source of the funds to be used to fight
legal cases brought by the British Medical Association (BMA),
Anaesthetists United and the parents
Dear General Medical Council,
In response to my email dated 22 November, Edd Mustill clarified that the source of the funds to be used to fight legal cases brought by the British Medical Association (BMA), Anaesthetists United and the parents of Emily Chesteton challenging GMC's regulation of PAs and AAs is GMC's unrestricted funds. He kindly provided a link to your Annual Report which leaves no doubt that he was saying that it is the doctors' fees that cover the legal costs of the doctors' own challenge.
However, I believe this to be a lie. I am not accusing Mr Mustill of lying, but whoever told him this appears to have lied.
On 6 December 2024, DHSC provided the following information:
A longstanding principle underpinning the introduction of statutory regulation for new
professions is that all the cost related to that, including legal challenges to that work,
should be funded by the Government, to avoid other professions cross-subsidising the
work involved. In this case, DHSC is therefore funding the General Medical Council (GMC)
to undertake the work required to introduce regulation for Anaesthesia Associates (AAs)
and Physician Associates (PAs), to avoid doctors paying for this through their registrant
fees. Once regulation of AAs and PAs becomes self-funding, DHSC will cease funding the
GMC.
The same response was also given to a Parliamentary question. I therefore trust it is correct.
1. I should therefore be grateful if you would tell me on what authority you provided the erroneous statement that your legal costs would be met from unrestricted funds.
My original email was to Mr Gallagher, your Director of Strategy and Policy, asking how his position enabled him to instruct the DHSC, a government department, on its approach to the press with regard to this legal challenge or any other matter. That part of my query remains unanswered.
2. I should therefore be grateful if you would tell me by what authority your Director of Strategy and Policy instructs the DHSC.
Please regard both of these queries as requests for internal review.
Yours faithfully,
Susan Sollazzi
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[7][FOI #1218722 email]
Is [8][GMC request email] the wrong address for Freedom of Information requests to General Medical Council? If so, please contact us using this form:
[9]https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www....
Disclaimer: This message and any reply that you make will be published on the internet. Our privacy and copyright policies:
[10]https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www....
For more detailed guidance on safely disclosing information, read the latest advice from the ICO:
[11]https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www....
[12]https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www....
Please note that in some cases publication of requests and responses will be delayed.
If you find this service useful as an FOI officer, please ask your web manager to link to us from your organisation's FOI page.
We work to defend the right to FOI for everyone
Help us protect your right to hold public authorities to account. Donate and support our work.
Donate Now