Here are two more letters sent yesterday:
CHARITY COMMISSION:
COMPLAINTS DEPARTMENT
Charity Commission Direct
PO Box 1227
Liverpool
L69 3UG
12 July 2010
Dear Sirs,
GENERAL MEDICAL COUNCIL – REGISTRATION NUMBER 1089278
I am writing to complain about what I perceive as a lack of proper financial controls over expenditure within the General Medical Council (GMC). In addition, responses received from the GMC about this accounting issue indicate that the GMC, through its actions, may be damaging its reputation, the reputation of charities generally and indeed reducing public trust and confidence in the Charities Commission as an effective regulator.
I have been corresponding with the GMC regarding Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests for details of costs associated with certain Interim Order Panels (IOP) and Fitness to Practise Hearings. These, as you may know, are Disciplinary Hearings for doctors who are being investigated for suspected wrong-doing.
In particular, I have been inquiring regarding an IOP Hearing with respect to Dr Sarah Myhill. I attach my FOIA request letter herewith. You will note that I refer to a previous FOIA request with respect to Dr Myhill in the attached letter. That previous request resulted in the GMC disclosing to me the external costs (mainly solicitors' fees) of a previous investigation against Dr Myhill but also stating that they (the GMC) could not disclose the internal costs of that previous investigation because such accounting information was not maintained. However, in that previous correspondence, the GMC did state that they were in the process of instigating a system which would allow the disclosure of such internal cost information in the future.
Therefore, when I applied for similar information in my most recent FOIA request I was confident of receiving a full account of the GMC's costs with respect to this most recent Hearing regarding Dr Myhill.
After a lengthy delay, one which broke the terms of the FOIA and one which therefore I am complaining about to the Information Commissioners' Office, the GMC responded with details of external costs, details of hours spent by their internal legal team on this case and then a note stating that further internal cost information could not be disclosed because such information, in particular the costs of the Investigation team, was not recorded. I attach also the email from the GMC containing this disclosure.
My complaint, therefore, is as follows:
-In general terms I do not see how the trustees of the GMC can exercise control over the costs associated with individual investigation cases if they do not even record those costs! Remember that the ‘products’ of the GMC are the investigations it carries out. This is its core function as detailed in its Memorandum and Articles. This would be akin to the Ford Motor Company not recording the costs associated with the production of a Mondeo. I believe, in this context, that the trustees of the GMC are not following the guidance contained within CC8 - Internal Financial Controls For Charities. In addition, the requirement to maintain proper accounting records as detailed in PART VI CHARITY ACCOUNTS, REPORTS AND RETURNS section 41 of the Charities Act 1993 also introduces a legal requirement in this context.
-I am concerned that the GMC informed me that they were going to correct this lack of internal financial control and then did not do so. I believe this indicates a lack of understanding within the GMC regarding the implications to public trust and the damage to its reputation of promising a course of action and then not taking it. I believe this breach of trust is serious enough to warrant investigation.
-The fact that the GMC breached the FOIA in its tardiness of reply indicates a disregard for the importance it should attach to complying with information disclosure legislation. I have numerous other examples of the GMC breaking both FOIA and Data Protection Act notice periods. Once again I think this flagrant disregard for legal requirements brings damage to the reputation of the GMC and potentially other charities in general and possibly upon the Commission itself.
As a result of these areas of concern, my complaint regarding the GMC is made on the following two points, as taken from your website:
----serious non-compliance in a charity that damages or has the potential to damage its reputation and/or the reputation of charities generally; and
----serious non-compliance in a charity which, left unchecked, could damage public trust and confidence in the Charity Commission as an effective regulator.
In addition, as already noted, and as a Chartered Accountant, I am concerned by the lack of financial control over costs and would ask you to investigate this too.
If you require further documentary evidence to proceed with your investigation then please feel free to contact me.
Yours faithfully,
JOHN BERCOW MP SPEAKER OF HOUSE OF COMMONS
Rt Hon John Bercow MP
Speaker,
Speaker’s House,
London
SW1A OAA
12 July 2010
Dear Mr Bercow,
DR SARAH MYHILL GMC IOP HEARING 29 APRIL 2010
Thank you for your letter dated 4 June 2010 concerning the above.
With your letter you attached a response from Mr Paul Philip, Deputy Chief Executive of the GMC. I am concerned by two particular comments within that letter:
1- In his letter Mr Paul Philip states that the GMC has received ‘a number of letters in relation to Dr Myhill, all of which are of a similar nature..’. The general tone of this paragraph is rather dismissive, almost as though because so many letters have been received that this in some way diminishes their worth. I can confirm that an organised campaign was conducted in defence of Dr Myhill. As a seasoned politician you will be aware that such campaigns only succeed with significant public support. In the space of weeks, a petition in support of Dr Myhill with over 4000 names attached was put together, over 700 emails or letters of support were sent direct to the GMC and a facebook group of over 2000 supporters was formed. How many other doctors do you think could muster such support in such a short time period? I would be indebted if you could write again to Mr Paul Philip and ask for his confirmation that
a- the GMC is not dismissive of, and recognises, the high level of public support given to Dr Myhill
and
b- the GMC took this support into account when arriving at its decision.
2- Mr Paul Philip also states that ‘Dr Myhill….could have raised any unfairness at that hearing’. I believe this statement to be untrue. I would be grateful if you could pursue this statement a little further on my behalf. I am suggesting that the best course of action would be for you to speak or correspond, directly with Dr Myhill. She is in full possession of the facts – I was unable to attend the hearing due to poor health. I attach her contact details at the tail of this letter.
3-Finally I would like to make clear that most of the people who supported Dr Myhill in this way are extremely ill and this makes their level of support even more impressive and worthy. Moreover, one of the conditions imposed upon Dr Myhill was that she was no longer permitted to prescribe ‘prescription only’ medication. I have received a number of emails from patients who, having been unable to obtain such medication on the NHS, have suffered relapses or other deteriorations in their condition. When asked about the arrangements for helping patients with problems over obtaining prescription medication, the GMC replied in an email of 12 May 2010 as follows:
‘The GMC would not become involved in the arrangements made by Dr Myhill for the on-going care of her patients’.
There is a deep irony here – the restrictions imposed by the GMC upon Dr Myhill do adversely affect the on -going care of Dr Myhill’s patients and yet having caused the problem the GMC offers no solution to it!
I wonder if you could possibly raise this issue with Mr Paul Philip also and enquire as to what the GMC thinks these patients should do in order to preserve their health.
I thank you in advance for your attention to this matter.
Yours sincerely,
Dr Sarah Myhill
Tel: 01547 550 331
Email:
office@doctormyhill.co.uk;
Address:
Dr Sarah Myhill
Upper Weston
Llangunllo
Knighton
Powys, LD7 1SL
Wales
END
