Dental Protection welcomes this opportunity to respond and give its support to the General Dental Councils (GDC) proposals to remove registrants' addresses from the online register.

Dental Protection has in recent years assisted thousands of members who have made requests for assistance with General Dental Council (GDC) investigations.

This consultation relates specifically to the proposed fee structure for all health care and adult social care providers that will be registered under the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

The document Principles of Good Complaint Handling sets out the Ombudsman's views on the key principles of good complaints handling. Although the information contained within the document is largely factual in nature, a number of issues arise from it.

Yes. In general, the arrangements outlined are reasonable and appropriate. However, the GDC should be aware that MDOs will be unable to be specific about the indemnity arrangements until registration has taken place and they are consequently able to be accepted as a member of that MDO.

Dental Protection broadly welcomes the proposals made in this consultation because we feel that a radical change of approach, and culture change, is needed within GDC fitness to practise (FtP) procedures. If in order to make the necessary culture changes, the proposed Section 60 Order is required, then we will support them. However, in order to ensure that these proposals have the intended impact the GDC must be committed to taking full advantage of these new powers.

On this occasion the GDC has justified the unprecedented scale of the increase in the ARF primarily on the basis of the increase in the number of complaints that it has to deal with. In calculating its likely operating costs, the GDC has also predicted that this volume of incoming ‘complaints’ will continue to rise for the foreseeable future, and appears to have assumed that the number of Fitness to Practise (FtP) investigations will need to rise at least in proportion to this.

When placing advertisements for services you provide as a registrant you must ensure that you adhere to the Councils ethical guidance Standards for Dental Professionals.

DPL has, since the 2005 Amendment to the Dentists Act 1984 was introduced, been concerned that IC has not been fit for purpose and has produced a steady stream of inconsistent decisions. It has appeared to us that the members of the IC have not understood their role and the standards that they are legally required to apply. Therefore we welcome this latest attempt by GDC to introduce guidance to IC. Specifically we welcome the learning from previous cases although we would commend the use of consistent thought processes in considering cases, rather than a recipe book approach to decision making.

We believe that we are uniquely placed to appreciate the role that CPD can play in the areas of professional performance, patient safety and the quality of patient care. Our unwavering commitment to CPD is evidenced by the fact that we, and the MPS group of which we are a part, invest substantial resources into providing risk management and educational resources for our members around the world. In 2012 alone this included over 600 educational presentations.