Richard Lanigan has passed me your e mail address. The profession > regards the GCC with contempt and despises the actions of the GCC. A > vote of no confidence was overwhelming at 77%. > > > This ill feeling does not extend to you personally; indeed it does > not extend to the majority of council, so how could a minority produce > such negative emotions? The problems currently being addressed of the > lack of any sense of proportion in the disciplinary process; and the > repeated attempts to close the McTimoney College were causing real ill > will towards the GCC. This was made so much worse by Greg Price; do > you really think that a majority of the profession does not know that > he had been posting on anti chiropractic web sites? > > Over thirty people reported Price to the police, why would they not > contact the GCC instead? Three cases of Mr Price dismissing cases > himself were alleged, one of the cases involved an indecent assault, > one alleged that a chiropractor acting as the employer of another > chiropractor contributed to his early death and the third involves a > false freedom of information reply to cover up for improper conduct. > Two cases of fabricating anonymous complaints to the police and very > many of obtaining a job by deception. > How did this man get sacked by the GCC, be reported to the police and > then get a job with another regulator? Were the truly bizarre events > of the Addleshaw Goddard passed on to his new employer? > > > That so many people would not trust the GCC with their complaint shows > how clearly the GCC has failed. The absolute lack of a near miss > system puts the public at risk, the lack of conciliation and a very > adversarial process is not the fault of registrants. The culture fails > to protect the public, and the failings are a direct result of a > belligerent adversarial style. If you deny that the public has been > failed, then I assume that you can assure me that the indecent assault > allegations were properly followed up? You would also be able to > assure me that Price did not lie in a freedom of information reply and > had not dismissed the case ? you can assure me that the GCC did > investigate the complaint into the death of Dr Savides ? > > > This leads me to the managerial style. > The leadership of the GCC is dismal; senior managers should be able > to have a near miss system, a complaints process in place and > proportionate cost effective procedures. For years there was no formal > structured complaint system, the warning signs were there for every > one to see, in his complaint Pat Flanagan the finance director of Back > to Health gave you clear warning, in my complaint written by Bankside > Law all the signs were there of a rogue employee, yet he carried on > causing misery. > > In your place I would trust to the good sense of the profession, tell > the truth, put right past mistakes and be open. This does not mean > that you would have to break the Data Protection act by naming Price; > you should however have been more open. This will not go away, the > lack of proportionate responses has meant that many chiropractors > suffered a rude adversarial approach; they told their friends and > colleagues what happened. The GCC is a grotesque parody of a > regulator, we know what went on with Price posting on anti > chiropractic web sites from work, had he not been such an oddity in > the Addleshaw Goddard case he would still be there. The cases which > were hidden will need to be investigated. I would be very interested > to know how the GCC could report Price to the police on the 21 march > 06 and then not support a prosecution for the same offence in > September 07?