Sir, the committee of the Hounslow & Twickenham Section of the BDA would like to express its concern at the BDA attitude to the forthcoming CQC registration. We are all dentists committed enough to the BDA to spend time and effort running an active Section. We have all been members of the profession for more years than we care to admit!

You were kind enough to attend our Section meeting in January 2009 as our guest speaker. On that occasion I had the honour as our Section Chairman to sit beside you at dinner and enjoyed our conversations on numerous matters, both dental, and non-dental. At the time the shadow of forthcoming HTM 01-05 compliance was beginning to darken the atmosphere. I clearly remember when we spoke I raised my concerns that the policy seemed to be based on a theoretical model that had no evidence to back it up, and that furthermore no additional benefit was apparent to patients if the 'best practice' recommendations were implemented in full.

I was amused by your answer when you stated that 'We dentists are generally too polite to make a fuss and just quietly get on with it.' My amusement was because I know this to be true! However, recent events have caused my sense of humour to start failing.

On top of the unproven and totally excessive regulations of the HTM 01-05 document, we are now about to have the CQC thrust upon us. I have yet to hear one member of our profession who feels this is a worthwhile idea. Again, no apparent benefit to patients can be seen, and again those of us who are trying to run ethical dental practices on behalf of our patients are going to have to pay for it.

I know this particular tune is not a new one. I have read acres of correspondence in other dental publications recently, and they all agree with what I state. Some of them have been quite sad with experienced and respected practitioners who had intended to keep working now throwing in the towel, or younger clinicians now contemplating emigration to Australia where they will re-gain their freedom. Rather ironic don't you think considering the founding history of that particular colony!

My reason for writing to you at the BDJ is that I have now reached the point after 26 years of membership, of resigning from the BDA. I have served as Chairman of my local section on three occasions and am also one of the earliest members of the BDA Good Practice Scheme.

As I am now paying over £500 a year for membership, plus payments for the CQC, I am seriously wondering just what representation we are getting? It appears that despite statements that the BDA are consulting with the DoH on the forthcoming CQC registration, no real resistance is being offered to a totally unnecessary quango. We are effectively being told, not asked, to pay the salaries of the individuals who are less qualified than those they are inspecting and then telling to comply with their regulations.

I already have to pay for my GDC annual renewal. This I agree is necessary regulation and is enough! I can choose whether or not to renew my BDA membership next year. With all of the recent increases in practice expenditure how many members of the BDA will decide that the money that they pay for BDA subscriptions should go towards CQC registration instead?

I cannot speak for the entire profession (but I guess I am for most of them), but I can speak for the managing committee of our BDA Section. This is a plea, through the pages of your esteemed and respected journal to the BDA to stand up and fight for your members. It is also a plea for fellow readers to join in and get some critical mass together. We do live in a democracy after all!

Peter Ward, Chief Executive BDA, responds:

Thank you for the opportunity to respond to Dr Painter's letter.

Colleagues in Hounslow and Twickenham are certainly not alone in their anxieties about Care Quality Commission (CQC) registration. I know from talking to practitioners across the country that the frustrations Dr Painter articulates about the registration of dental practices with CQC are felt by the vast majority of the profession. The BDA has been working hard to have dentists' concerns heard and addressed. John Milne, Chair of the General Dental Practice Committee, and Susie Sanderson, Chair of Executive Board, have personally made the case to the new Government for the situation to be looked at again. At the time of writing, their appeals appear to have gone unheeded.

The fight continues. It is important that the profession across England now demonstrates the strength and extent of feeling on this issue. That is why the BDA has launched a campaign to help practitioners do just that. In last weekend's edition of bdanews members will have received a postcard that calls for a simplification of the CQC's functions, a reasonable fee and a delay while problems are addressed. I urge every dentist in England to fill in that postcard and send it to their Member of Parliament. We need the mass participation Dr Painter describes if we are to influence what happens next.

The BDA recognises the strength of feeling on this issue coming not just from Hounslow and Twickenham, but from sections and branches everywhere. That feeling now needs to be articulated in a consistent, coherent way. The postcard campaign we have launched provides the vehicle to achieve that and I urge everyone reading in England to join this campaign.