Recommendation BRIS-72: Prioritise establishing statutory Council for Regulation of Healthcare Professionals with broad membership
From Bristol Heart Inquiry — Final Report, published 18 July 2001.
Recommendation
The Council for the Regulation of Healthcare Professionals should be established as a matter of priority. It should have a statutory basis. It should report to Parliament. It should have a broadly-based membership, consisting of representatives of the bodies which regulate the various groups of healthcare professionals, of the NHS, and of the general public.
Government response
No government response to this recommendation is on the record yet.
Delivery
DHSC and NHS England say completed (27 February 2026)
Please see Recommendation 46, 69, 70 (Professional standards); 71 (Professional Standards Authority).
Site note: DHSC and NHS England's own account of progress, supplied to the Thirlwall Inquiry in September 2024 and printed in the Inquiry legal team's Review of Implementation of Recommendations from Previous Inquiries into Healthcare Issues (version dated April 2025, published 27 February 2026). It is not a finding of the Inquiry. Their reviewed extent of implementation reads “Implemented – Closed”. Table row: section 6.2 No. 72, PDF page 104.
What other bodies have found
In their own words. These do not change the delivery statement above.
Thirlwall Inquiry legal team (15 May 2024)
The Government agreed with this recommendation.
In its January 2002 response, the Department of Health proposed that the Council should be accountable to Parliament, have 17 members drawn for the current regulatory bodies, patient & public representatives and NHS interests.
The Health Professionals Council was set up in 2003, under the National Health Service Reform and Health Care Professions Act 2002.
Site note: The Thirlwall Inquiry legal team's own notes on implementation, from its Review of Implementation of Recommendations from Previous Inquiries into Healthcare Issues (version of 15 May 2024). The review does not colour its Extent of Implementation cell for this recommendation green; it leaves the cell uncoloured where a recommendation was rejected, where evidence of implementation was insufficient, or where steps had been taken but implementation was not yet complete. Table row: section 6.2 No. 72, PDF page 95-96.
Who has spoken
- DHSC and NHS England
Delivery statement - Thirlwall Inquiry legal team
Finding