It pleases me greatly that my posts have stood the test of time, Dixon and Coats have moved on from the GCC, there is not a lot more I have to say about the GCC, as long as they keep out of my way, I will leave them alone. Below is a post I wrote in April 2008 exactly five years ago and I thought I would give it another airing in light of the announcement in the latest GCC newsletter to remind people.
Readers who did not believe all the things I published about Peter Dixon when he was chairman of the GCC and my prediction that his “leadership” would bring the chiropractic regulator to its knees may find this little note in the Newsletter revealing.
“For many years the GCC has been in a difficult financial position, operating a large mortgage on its premises. To provide a solid financial future, we have sold the freehold of the building at 44 Wicklow Street, London for a very advantageous price. The premises have been acquired by a healthcare trust and will be run as a clinic and advice centre. This will
clear our debts and enable us to maintain the recent reduction in the registration fee. However, the GCC office will remain in the building. We are relocating to the top floor.” ( Very different from the explanation when the clowns purchased Wicklow street in the first place, do not remember anybody saying, unfortunately the purchase of Wicklow Street will mean we will have to have the highest registration fee of any health regulators. )
So having pissed off the Danes causing them to leave the ECU after his four years as President forced the GCC to sell the family silver to fund his excesses after six years as chairman. Peter Dixon now turns his attention to improving the academic credibility of chiropractic in the UK as the new President of the College of Chiropractors. You could not make it up? Wicklow Street was to be Margaret Coats legacy, perhaps someone should chech she is not the new landlord! I thought I would re publish the following post from 2008, and to remind chiropractors how foolish they are to allow Peter Dixon any political influence what so ever.
FROM APRIL 2008 I wrote; I am not calling GCC chairman Peter Dixon a Liar, but if he told me it was dark at midnight, I would look out the window before passing the information to someone else. Somehow Peter Dixon has managed to retain the position of Chairman of the new “reformed” General Chiropractic Council. I suspect he will want to draw a line under the old regime and try to rehabilitate himself and the GCC with the chiropractic profession by giving GCC chief executive Margaret Coats her P45 in the near future.
If this Peter Dixon’s strategy he should not be allowed get away with it. Coats and Dixon are inextricably linked and to her credit she has been loyal to all previous GCC chairs, while a politician like Dixon would be more than happy to point a finger at Coats if he thought it could get him off the hook with the chiropractic profession.
A great example of how these two work in tandem was illustrated in January 2008, (Peter Dixon was on the back foot over the way he had managed Coats desire for retribution after my election onto GCC council. I had complied with the GCCs September request to remove articles I had published about her before the election. Then at the November Council meeting, Dixon allowed Coats to highjack the agenda of a meeting demanding an apology from me. Hoping to bring an end to the matter, I reluctantly obliged after offering my resignation. By January Dixon and Coats were demanding a larger separate apology and I had decided to did my heels in as we were approaching the February meeting and I was confident their days in charge were numbered) To pile pressure on Dixon and increase the possibility of a confidence vote, on January 31st, I e-mailed Margaret Coats asking “Can you tell me if you were questioned by police in 2007 about allegations that were made against Greg Price”
Coats responded immediately by stating “I would be grateful if you will explain the purpose of your question.”
I stated that “I have been informed that police were told among other things that Greg Price solicited money from respondents to make complaints go away. Other council members have no knowledge of a police investigation involving GCC members of staff and in the light of current events I think council members should know if you were questioned by police about Greg Price and council business”.
Coats responded by stating; Dear Richard, As you can see I am copying this to the Chairman (Dixon), so that he can respond to you.
Dixon responded by “snail” post on the same date; “Margaret has brought this enquiry to my attention and I can assure you that no member of staff at the GCC has been interviewed by the police relating to this matter. I hope this clarifies this issue.”
My suspicion and that of other council members with whom I was conferring with, was that this was another example of Coats not keeping council members informed regarding matters of importance to the GCC, and we were outraged that she was not even keeping the chairman informed.
During the first break of the council meeting on 6th February, I showed Peter the police report by DS Mark Chard from September 2007, explaining their reasons for not pursuing a criminal action against Mr Price. DS Chard stated “The GCC themselves state that Mr Price role was not much more than admin. He was a support for Solicitors, employed by the GCC. It was solicitors who carried out the investigations. He was not involved in the decision making process”.
After reading DS Chard’s statement Peter told me that he had no knowledge of any police investigation into Price and specifically said Margaret had not informed him of any investigation. Later I spoke Judith Worthington the GCC deputy chairman on the matter and she said there was no purpose in raising the issue of Price as the police had decided there was no case to answer. I assumed she had inferred that from what I had said about the police investigation.
During the council meeting, Coats position as GCC Chief Executive was discussed and Peter Dixon defended her, I asked how he could support someone who would not keep him informed about a police investigation to which he shrugged and remarked. Coats had not been “questioned” and tried to make a distinction between being “questioned” and being read her rights and questioned which had never been suggested. I was furious, however Dixon had managed to divert council members by setting up a committee with Christina Cunliffe and Judith Worthington, for what GCC council members understood to involve reeling in Coats powers.
I saw it as more of the same incompetent GCC, but giving the impression of change by involving Christiana Cunliffe who was seen as an advocate of change of the GCC, rather than someone who would look to feather her own nest. This was my “fuck it” moment, the point I realised my election to council would mean nothing. I was wasting my time and my election was just to give the professions the feeling they had influence on the regulatory process, which has been removed anyway by the regulatory reforms.
So was Peter Dixon lying when he stated? “That no member of staff at the GCC had been interviewed by the police”? Peter Dixon was informed of the police investigation by Margaret Coats four months before he wrote the letter to me. Peter Dixon and Judith Worthington were informed by Margaret Coats in an e-mail on 17 of September 2007 that she had a “lengthy conversation” with DS Chard in which she gave details on what the investigation was about. Worthington and Dixon are the senior councillors on the new reformed General Chiropractic Council
My experience GCC lawyers after my removal from the GCC thought me defamation lawyers do not see lies and liars as simply matters of right or wrong. Coats e-mail to Peter may have been picked up in a spam filter, I would have to prove that he had seen the e-mail understood its content and was not under the influence of say alcohol
when he wrote to me, there are all sorts of reasons which prevent me calling Peter Dixon a liar. When he could simply use the Humpty Dumpty defence for what he means when he uses a word.
I was removed from council on March 3 2008 by 13 votes to four. I was not allowed to vote Dorthy Grace Aelder and Rita Lewis did not attend the hearing. My statement to Council lasted 55 minutes
- The CHRE does not have the authority or the will to investigate the General Chiropractic Council
- Investigating complaints
- Peter Dixon’s plan for my removal
- The complaint against Peter Dixon was not sent to the PCC and he was able to remain as chair of the General Chiropractic Council
- How Peter Dixon soinned my removal to the profession
- If Peter Dixon cares about the chiropractic profession as he claims, he should go now and take Coats with him or risk Self Regulation for chiropractors.
- Business as usual; declares General Chiropractic Council chairman Peter Dixon as he rearranges the deckchairs.
- Peter Dixon tries to cover the mess
- Peter Dixon will not be held accountable to former members of council
- Can chiropractors learn from FIFA