In the October issue of Therapy Today Sarah Browne said that the letters page ‘is again bursting with your critiques and views about the current HPC consultation; I have yet to receive one letter in support of the process’. This is highly revealing; the furore over HPC regulation is threatening to provoke a crisis of trust. What is certain is that the possibility of regulation under the HPC will affect and help to shape the future of counselling and psychotherapy for many years to come – but not necessarily in any positive sense. Its implications are extraordinarily far reaching. There has been little evidence to date that the Professional Liaison Group’s (PLG) consultation process is much more than a bureaucratic necessity, in order to reach the desired outcome of regulation by any means and with as little fuss as possible. Unless we are careful though, this could mark the beginning of a profound disillusionment for many of our members. The draft consultation document produced by the PLG has demonstrated little in the way of imagination, substance or even a basic understanding of the complexities and subtleties of our work.

This does, however, provide the BACP with a real historic opportunity to use its authority to regain a position of strength if it can demonstrate courageous and principled leadership. In the process, it can enthuse and inspire its members and enhance its reputation considerably. It is not too late to find a new direction based on a clear mandate from the membership. There is now a window of opportunity available to strengthen the integrity of the organisation by providing a clear and decisive lead – a rejection of a regulatory body (HPC) that is clearly unpopular and is simply not fit for purpose.

Any decisions reached must be based now on true consultation, sound analysis and much clearer ethical thinking. This is the right time for BACP to do the right thing by its members and engage in a true consultation process, involving a referendum, by mobilising its resources as it did so impressively when arguing against the differentiation of titles proposed by the PLG draft. Only in this way, can the true meaning of democracy be re-asserted and the membership re-invigorated.

Paul McGahey
MBACP (Snr Accred)