Should Medical Council be dissolved?

St Philip's Hospital CEO Frank Portelli is urging the government to dissolve the Medical Council because it failed to conclude an inquiry involving him within the legally required two-year timeframe.

He maintains that according to the Healthcare Professions Act the President of Malta, acting on the advice of the minister, may order an inquiry into the operation of the Medical Council and, based on its outcome, dissolve it and set up a three-member council until another council is appointed. Meanwhile, Dr Portelli is appealing against the Medical Council's judgment in the First Hall of the Civil Court (The Sunday Times, July 26).

Dr Portelli castigates the Medical Council for having as its president a political appointee and for not having more members representing patients.

I am in no doubt that to earn public trust the Medical Council requires greater lay representation. An independent commission, created by the government, would be the best body to appoint and increase the lay membership of the Medical Council according to specific criteria. Political appointments are odious and divisive and always smack of favouritism.

This is not the first time that the Medical Council has come under fire. The leader of The Times (September 6, 2004) entitled 'Medical Council: change or die' commented thus on the unfair way a pensioner had been treated: "The Medical Council in its current state cannot command public confidence and may as well be disbanded. Alternatively, the government should revisit the law which gives life to the body and impose more rigorous procedures to govern its operation. In short, the council must be turned into a fair and transparent organisation and seen to be one".

Over the years I have written articles and letters lamenting the pathetic state of the Medical Council. It has a poor record of reform. It is not very visible to the public. The signs are that one of its 'strategies' is to keep the public at arm's length. There are few publications designed to impart information of its existence and functions. It runs no website of its own. Its building is unfit for visits by the elderly and people with disabilities. It has no press office that can liaise closely with the media and the public.

Although the Medical Council has reportedly been working for years on an updated ethical code of conduct in terms of modern regulation, this vital instrument calls for immediate action. The Medical Council has no business plan model setting targets and listing tools to measure success. Revalidation is a mere concept awaiting fruition. An audited financial statement has never been published.

Dr Portelli rightly insists that the Medical Council's aim is to protect patients. And yet, members of the public who have more than a fair knowledge of its existence, structure and functions are put off by its bureaucracy, its dysfunctional quasi-judicial system, its backlog of cases awaiting a hearing, its lack of openness and of creative approach to engaging with patients and the public. My reading of the Medical Council report published annually leads me to believe that its processes have been too tolerant of sub-standard practice from a minority of medical practitioners.

Social Policy Minister John Dalli should integrate the Medical Council within his reform of the National Health Service. The onus is on the Prime Minister and Mr Dalli to advise the President on the feasibility of ordering an inquiry into the operation of the Medical Council.

Frankly, I do not envisage such a move. However, I know that the higher echelons at Castille did consider at one stage the establishment of an independent Office of the Health Professions Adjudicator.