For those who haven't followed the link, this is what's required of every Durham SGC/FAC applicant for the Initial Grant, and on every Renewal .......
1. Copy of front page of Application (Form 101) has to be sent by the FAC/SGC applicant direct to his/her GP who will check and/or correct what's been written in the medical declaration section.
2. Accompanied by a separate (non-statutory) Permission Form sent to the practice authorising the GP to release all 'relevant' personal medical information & history to the FLD .
3. An ongoing requirement on the GP to notify any changes or new medical information which occurs on every FAC/SGC Holder, whose medical record will be earmarked.
4. The release of CRO intelligence by the police direct to the GP.
5. A full additional medical report to be requested from the GP by the FLD in 'doubtful' cases - for which the Applicant must pay the fee.
The Applicant won't be informed of what the GP is told by the police, and is therefore unable to correct any errors of fact.
The only information the Applicant is entitled to see is what's on the additional medical report (5.) he has paid for, and must formally request to see (incidentally).
My daughter is a GP, and isn't allowed under GMC Rules to release confidential data of any kind without express permission of the patient who can, of course, quite rightly withold consent. Presented with a 'blanket' consent of the like of this - which in has effectively been strongarmed from FAC/SGC applicants by the police - she would be obliged to release any and possibly all the medical records (which includes all sorts of background or 'social' circumstances) held on her patient.
I think that's a fair summary of the implications of the new 'pilot' licensing requirements BASC are opposing.
Do correct this if I've missed something, or perhaps been unfair.