Regulatory bodies
Discussion
Baroque attacks said:
blueg33 said:
anonymoususer said:
Rollin said:
General Dental Council
Are you suggesting they have no teeth ?Their crown hasn’t slipped.
blueg33 said:
tamore said:
is there a single one actually doing what they were set up to do rather than being in the pockets of those they are regulating?
YupCharities Commission
Social Housing Regulator
CQC
I am on the board of a business that is regulated by those three. We have to jump through many hoops. For instance, get governance wrong = no social housing grant, get care wrong = fewer clients and more inspections.
It should be, but it isn’t. By providers at least.
CTO said:
blueg33 said:
tamore said:
is there a single one actually doing what they were set up to do rather than being in the pockets of those they are regulating?
YupCharities Commission
Social Housing Regulator
CQC
I am on the board of a business that is regulated by those three. We have to jump through many hoops. For instance, get governance wrong = no social housing grant, get care wrong = fewer clients and more inspections.
It should be, but it isn’t. By providers at least.
Imposes a regulatory burden that distracts from clinical care and in my estimation probably does more harm than if there were no regulator.
Basically provides undemanding feather bed employment for a class of clinicans who cannot hack it at the coal face.
tegwin said:
xx99xx said:
Civil Aviation Authority?
You’re joking right?Have you had dealings with them? Ask any pilot/operator and you will hear stories of pain and suffering. In the eyes of the CAA the safest flight is one that never leaves the ground…. They appear to work pretty hard to make that a reality… Makes running an aviation business or innovating technology exceptionally hard!
Can think of two significant global innovations the CAA worked with us to achieve, and one other we didn't need help with but got a lot of support for.
Then there was a situation with a competitor last year where our chap signed off on a very rapidly developed plan that not only earnt us a bunch of dosh, but also really helped out a large number of regular people who would have been impacted far more than resulted.
I've worked in regulation
Issues come down to this
- the amount of issues to deal with far exceed the resources we have (which were cut massively under the last Govt since 2010)
- it can take a lot of time and effort to investigate even a reasonably simple matter
- prioritisation is important and a way of justifying not doing stuff
- once something gets to court the nightmare really begins - slow ,expensive and unpredictable.
-a lot of people and organisations are just too weak - the central Government agencies just seem bound by red tape.
- many regulators are very concerned about their public imagine if things go wrong or if they are seen to be doing something that may be considered a waste of time/money - so everything is very 'safe'
- in some areas we did have sufficient tools/powers but in other areas it was massively lacking
- partnership working between the public sector could be better
Issues come down to this
- the amount of issues to deal with far exceed the resources we have (which were cut massively under the last Govt since 2010)
- it can take a lot of time and effort to investigate even a reasonably simple matter
- prioritisation is important and a way of justifying not doing stuff
- once something gets to court the nightmare really begins - slow ,expensive and unpredictable.
-a lot of people and organisations are just too weak - the central Government agencies just seem bound by red tape.
- many regulators are very concerned about their public imagine if things go wrong or if they are seen to be doing something that may be considered a waste of time/money - so everything is very 'safe'
- in some areas we did have sufficient tools/powers but in other areas it was massively lacking
- partnership working between the public sector could be better
oddman said:
CTO said:
blueg33 said:
tamore said:
is there a single one actually doing what they were set up to do rather than being in the pockets of those they are regulating?
YupCharities Commission
Social Housing Regulator
CQC
I am on the board of a business that is regulated by those three. We have to jump through many hoops. For instance, get governance wrong = no social housing grant, get care wrong = fewer clients and more inspections.
It should be, but it isn’t. By providers at least.
Imposes a regulatory burden that distracts from clinical care and in my estimation probably does more harm than if there were no regulator.
Basically provides undemanding feather bed employment for a class of clinicans who cannot hack it at the coal face.
CTO said:
I can’t speak for the other two, but the CQC is not regarded as an independent regulator of Health and Social Care.
It should be, but it isn’t. By providers at least.
Strangely that is first thing on their websiteIt should be, but it isn’t. By providers at least.
Our purpose and role
CQC is the independent regulator of health and adult social care in England.
We make sure health and social care services provide people with safe, effective, compassionate, high-quality care and we encourage care services to improve.
We monitor, inspect and regulate services and publish what we find
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff