BMA calls for new doctor-only regulator amid growing concerns over GMC’s role

The British Medical Association (BMA) has issued a bold call for the creation of a new, independent regulator specifically for doctors, citing diminishing confidence in the General Medical Council’s ability to support the profession and protect patient safety.

Speaking at the BMA’s Annual Representative Meeting in Liverpool, Council Chair Professor Philip Banfield criticised the GMC’s regulation of physician associates (PAs), accusing the Council of contributing to “unsafe blurring of professional boundaries” within clinical practice.

The BMA has now launched a new register “solely for doctors” as part of a campaign to press for regulatory reform, inviting doctors to sign in support of a distinct regulatory body exclusively for medical practitioners.

“The GMC argued that any doctor supervising a PA should first check with their former employers what they can and can’t do,” Banfield said. “What world is the GMC living in?”

The push follows legal action by the BMA and Anaesthetists United against the GMC, challenging its terminology in Good Medical Practice and its refusal to define a clear scope of practice for PAs.

Survey findings presented at the meeting show that over 80% of doctors support the establishment of a new regulator, and almost 90% believe the GMC no longer properly distinguishes between doctors and unregulated roles.

The BMA has outlined its vision for a replacement regulator that would:

• Regulate doctors only, maintaining public clarity on professional titles

• Be bound by a clear statutory duty to protect the public

• Enforce tighter controls over the use of “medical practitioner” titles

In response, the GMC defended its work and reiterated its commitment to safe, effective, and compassionate regulation. It also pointed to government plans to modernise the broader regulatory framework it operates within.

This clash comes amid a wave of scrutiny over how newer roles, like PAs and anaesthesia associates, are integrated into the NHS workforce—a process some say has lacked transparency and proper safeguards.

Disclaimer: The accuracy and information of news stories published on this website is accurate on the date of publishing. We endeavour to update stories if information change. You can contact us with change and update requests. Where possible, we will link to sources. Content on this website is for guidance purposes only. We cannot accept any responsibility or liability whatsoever for any action taken, or not taken. You should seek the appropriate legal advice having regard to your own particular circumstances.