It may appear to many practitioners that regulation is a necessary evil, which does very little for the profession or the individual practitioner. However, one should not lose sight of the importance of regulation, especially that associated with health and social care. I suspect many would agree, retrospectively, that tighter and more stringent regulation of financial services would have been welcomed in the mid–1990s to avoid such repercussions we currently face in the financial market. Yet, one often hears somewhat negative opinions when we talk of the Health Professions Council (HPC) and its role in the regulatory function of paramedics.
As a UK wide multi-professional regulator, currently regulating fifteen professions (including paramedics), the HPC prides itself on its ability to be independent and mutual in respect of professional autonomy. The primary role of the HPC is to set standards of education and training (SETS) for the various education programmes it validates. In addition, the HPC produce Standards of Proficiency for practitioners who successfully complete a recognized programme of study and thus enter onto the register. The HPC also carry out regulatory functions in protecting the public and those who may use the services of the regulated professions—this is conducted within a legislative framework.
So, what is new in the world of multi-professional regulation and how will it affect the HPC? Since the establishment of the new coalition government, regulation has featured in many debates and public announcements, especially that which may influence health and social care. In July 2010, the coalition government published its white paper, Liberating the NHS: Report of the Arms-length Bodies Review— this review reflected the government's intention to transfer the General Social Care Councils (GSCC) regulatory functions, that of regulation of social workers, to the HPC, enacting a name change to reflect this shift in regulation (DH, 2010: 22).
Since the initial government report, a subsequent report, entitled Enabling Excellence, Autonomy and Accountability for Healthcare Workers, Social Workers and Social Care Workers (DH, 2011: 21), refers to the 2010 report, Liberating the NHS. This report implies the name of the HPC will be changed to that of ‘Health and Care Professions Council', thus supporting and reflecting the wider remit of the organization, as it works towards transfer of regulation of social workers in England by 2012.
Clearly, the government's wider portfolio of regulation has major implication for both the GSCC and HPC, however, as a multi-professional regulator, I suspect little impact will be evident amongst the professions regulated by the HPC. It is clear that regulation and the protection of public and service users are paramount, in any sphere of life and arguably essential when dealing directly or indirectly with vulnerable groups.
As the paramedic profession continues to strive for professional recognition and accountability, it is disappointing to hear colleagues make negative reference to the HPC's role and function. Clearly, there are occasions when fitness to practice (FTP) committees have to place sanctions on individual practitioners—however, I am sure many would agree that, as a regulator, the protection of patients and public is something we, as practitioners, fully support and encourage.
I suggest that membership of the professional body, the College of Paramedics (COP), in parallel with regulation, further endorses our desire to be acknowledged as ‘professionals’, within this relatively new emerging profession of paramedic practice.