Statutory Regulation

[Guest guest]

Dear Drew and Colleagues,

Thank you for your thoughtful points about the regulation issue. I feel there

are some points which need further consideration.

As regards the statutory licensing option mentioned in the Consultation Document

(CD), despite its description as " light touch " , it is likely to be anything but

- giving us the worst of all worlds in terms of regulation. Statutory licensing

will relegate us to a lesser regulatory category using a system modelled on

Security Industry Authority (SIA) that licenses bodyguards, bouncers and wheel

clampers. I do not think this is at all the appropriate way to regulate herbal

practitioners and it would set us apart from other healthcare professionals that

are statutorily regulated making it impossible for them to make referrals to us

because we would be outside the statutory regulation system. Statutory licensing

would do nothing to ensure the development of our profession. It would not

provide for accreditation of training programmes or CPD and the development of

best practice. Most important of all, it would not enable us to be considered

" authorised health professionals " under Article 5.1 of the main European

Medicines Directive (2001/83/EC) so that we would not be able to have herbal

medicines made up for us by third parties for our individual patients. Many

herbal suppliers depend on such third party sales to herbalists and their

continued existence and may well go out of business.

You will also be aware that the CD also mentions the possibility that we might

be subject to control through the local authorities such as trading standard

officers and local government legislation. This could be a major problem because

we would not be governed by a professional body like the Health Professions

Council whose standards are informed by us. This is a very important point.

Instead we would be subject to governance by bureaucratic and petty minded

officialdom. For example, in Scotland local government legislation has required

acupuncturists to wear gloves before treating a patient with any cuts (this in

itself may not seem unreasonable, but the point is that it comes from the local

council and not from the standards of the profession).

As you know section 12(2) will no longer exist after the full implementation of

the Traditional Herbal Medicinal Products Directive in April 2011. This leaves

section 12(1) as a legal anomaly, allowing exemption from licensing for herbs

without any controls. That might have been OK for 1968, but in now is unlikely

to be acceptable in the long term. I don't know how many herbalists are aware

but there is a vociferous group of academics and scientists, e.g. Colquhoun and

the so called quack busters and other enemies, who have been for quite a while

crying out against our exemption. Further, it is very worrying that for the

first time the CD actually considers the possibility of repealing 12(1)

altogether. Many of us believe that 12(1) can only survive if its use is pegged

to a statutorily regulated profession.

It's not that I don't understand the concerns of those who say no to statutory

regulation but this is the 21st century when regulation is the accepted norm. In

my opinion statutory regulation offers the only way for the profession to

develop and preserve its right to access a full range of herbal medicines via

12(1) and Article 5.1 which I mentioned previously.

For these reasons, it is really important that colleagues and their patients,

friends, relatives willing do respond to the Consultation Document before Nov.

2nd and say that SR is their preferred option. It would also be good to write to

their own MP to say the same thing so that the Government will get the message

loud and clear.

Historically I understand that previous generations of herbalists recognised the

need to have their position established in medicine's law and fought hard for

this. We now have the opportunity to finally get this put in place to secure our

future. I am sure we should not lose this opportunity as it won't come easily

again.

Warm regards,

Vicki Pitman,