HPC Registered, but who runs your club?

Hi Emma

We thought that as well

As an associate or full member ??

It's a great pity more of your membership did not have your commendable enthusiasm and foresight and as someone who is also passionate for unity within and to move forward, equality must be included in the package.

When the professional bodies can sort themselves out then we may have a chance until then who knows

Cheers

Derek

 

Hi Emma

Many of us applaude your mindset and have been able to work with other former state pods with similar outlooks. Ironically when we work together at grass roots the obsticles are easily overcome.

In terms of joining the society, however, I suspect you need to become more aware of just what you are asking us to leave. My own experience of branch meetings, for example, reflect an enthusiastic (membership of 90+ with ususally 50 -60 attending) bunch of people, great comraderie, much mutual education, moves towards devloping further educational programmes etc.

I have no reason to leave what I currently have to join the society.

I would, however, be very interested in a body that came up from scratch with equal representation from each of the chiropody bodies and that all, including the society, bought into. Each of the groups losing its old power base and a new body starting. How say you and would this appeal to the society?

 

Thanks for the comments
I am aware of some of the state of play and of course commend group meetings and clinical updating wherever it occurs.
It is a unified front that we are lacking, you and your colleagues would still be free to meet and socialise etc but the numbers game and the representation would increase and therefore our professional power base would grow. Of course we need enthusiastic branches and clearly yours would continue to flourish and grow, why would it not?

Whilst I understand this desire to start from scratch, I personally feel that that is not necessary. We have a huge body of knowledge within the SCP. join it as full and associate members ( my personal belief is for full inclusion and I forsee that coming sooner rather than later) and then each of us do that interview, talk to groups and clubs here, there etc informing the general public of the role we have to play in looking after their feet! The SCP has the history of being the "Mother ship" (my words) and amalgamating former groups of individuals who had arguments. Now is the time!
Smae has been an enormous force but now is the time to step into the SCP and change it from within. we have a profession to build.

In America 70% of people with a foot problem seek the services of a podiatrist in the FIRST instance. Why? because the APMA (american podiatric medical association) has been there promoting the profession. that is what we need.

Sounds like we need you more than you need us but that is always the way is it not!


Thank you!
Emma Supple

 

Hi again

I think we all need each other probably more than we ALL realise.

Sooner or later the nettle must be grasped and we WILL ALL have to work alongside each other ,and as Ian said I have found it easy and pleasant at grass roots level , my opposite numbers have, so they tell me felt the same

The past has gone it is no good dwelling there we know that.

The professional bodies from all sections must sit down and unite in honesty and for the benefit of all.

Let's all hope it happens SOONER rather than later

Cheers

Derek

 

Hi Emma

"Sounds like we need you more than you need us but that is always the way is it not!"

Thank you for the comment. Perhaps we both recognise that to take things forward we both need each other equally. Regretably I know only to well that this is not always shared by various people from either of the original groupings, the other forums making some of the feelings obvious!

"Whilst I understand this desire to start from scratch, I personally feel that that is not necessary."

I understand your view on this and because of the history of the society taking in groups, it would seem natural to simply repeat this. However, the idea of having to come into an existing group, even simply as a number force to give power, is inadequate to the task ahead. I do not think it would address the natural, mutual suspicions that have had many years to develop nor do I think it would engender a positive mindset towards developing unity.

Hence my comments ealier about all organisations having to swallow pride and history and status and power in order to truly start from as level a playing field as possible. Even this would be extremely difficult! But it would be required of us all

To bring other groups into the society could well simply create a mongrel of a species where as starting from scratch may well allow us to create a more thoroughbred species.
My own experiences of taking disparate peoples into a cohesive unit prevents me being convinced of simple absorbtion and makes me focus on more thorough and costly (not meaning finances here) approaches. When we all feel we a paying a price it can engered a good spirit (wish it could the same for my spelling!!)

Cheers
Ian

 

The positive mindset has to be there before any move Ian. I have thought long and hard about your scenario over the last few years and I agree, it would be relatively easy to set-up a new body and hang your name-plate on the door - but think of the other practicalities for a moment. The Society has an experienced secretariat with superb facilities and infrastructure in place who are there to serve the needs of the membership, whatever their wishes or background. Why dismantle such an obvious asset when we need to focus on professional rather than corporate policy? Think of it as nothing more than a company merger and what would be best for the emerging organisation - look at the assets and facilities and shareholder portfolio, and remember also the thoughts and desires of the existing shareholders. What is needed is consideration on all sides but with a dispassionate view on what vehicle is best utilised for forward momentum.

Starting from scratch with a new body is not the best option. If it was I would have done it three years ago. But I do agree it would be best to do so under a new banner - hence the suggestion of the BPMA - as many of the existing SCP membership are disillusioned too. Consider the numbers coming together - create an executive body based on proportional representation, utilising the obvious talent on all sides - and move forward collectively with agreed aims and objectives. Apply the same reasoning we discussed the other evening - apropos dealing with problematic relationships and incidents, and move on – acknowledging, but not encumbered by past difficulties.

Don’t throw the baby out with the bath-water before we start!

Kind regards

Mark

 

Hi Mark

Can I ask is that based on a level playing field or based on proportional representation with the minority having NO VOTING POWERS ??

Mark I really do respect your opinions but please don't assume we are all that naive !!

Your liaisons outside the forums may feed your ego but there is no way individual opinion will outweigh the professional bodies collectively even if you do sit on one of the councils.

HONESTY is the buzz word not surreptitious phone calls it HAS to be in the open.

Sorry

Derek ( the plumber ,bathwater and all)

 

I don't assume anything, Derek and neither should you. I was making a suggestion based on what I think might be the best way forward. The assimilation of respective bodies would need to be looked at, discussed and agreed. Remember the Council proposed to open membership to all new registrants and I was one of the principal opponents. Listen to what I am saying.

I think that's a little uncalled for but in regard to the professional body, the position is as above. Let me throw the argument back at you. What do you see as the best way forward and detail how it can be achieved with common consensus in a realistic timeframe?

Regards

Mark

 

Hi Mark

I am essentially not a political player and so my niaevety can be very evident. However, I probably represent the majority in having this naievety (cant even spell the word tonight)

I do not think that the four of us in this recent set of posts are really very far apart.

I do accept that my view has marked limitations but it is a deliberately high target. But if you at least aim for it (and you will miss) you may well end up nearer it than if you shoot low to start with.

I am in agreement that when it comes to infrastructure why reinvent the wheel and why waste loads of money setting up new admin. That would be a move on the part of people like myself. I would be moving in a direction which, intially, would gain me very little.

As you know I am in favour of exploring the concept of unity under the new named body "BPMA"

However, I think Derek is right in highlighting the P Rep issue. Proportional representation for me would be one of those things that creates a mongrel. If you removed the proportional representation out of the equation then I feel a good step is made towards developing a trusted body under a new name. I honestly do not believe we can overcome years of mis information and mistrust without leveling the playing field as much as possible.

Hopefully this shows a mindset that is positive and a willingness to move on.

Ian

 

I would have thought PR would have suited you best. What are the other options? An electoral process? I'm open to suggestions!

Mark

 

Hi Mark

Yes Mark you were one of the principal opponents and obviously supported by others.

I do not want ASSOCIATE membership of the SCP with no voting powers.

What are you seriously suggesting all grandparented pods are welcomed with open arms at the start and once all in then treated as Muppet's with no say in their future GET REAL it ain't gonna happen.

Mark as I have said I DON'T KNOW !!

But it can only be done collectively with the professional bodies sitting down , putting the past behind them, uniting and MOVING FORWARD.

I agree with your ideals again for a united body to represent and advance the profession I really do, but individuals won't do it :-

a lot of individuals together will !!

So yes I hear what you say , but up front , honest and in the open it must be for lasting unity

Cheers

Derek

 

Amalgamation?

Hi Emma,

How can an associate member with no voting rights change anything from within?

Regards,

Colin.

PS. If all Chiropodists/Podiatrists unit now, we are still 40,000 short of a number high enough to have a sphere of influence in the place it matters, the HPC.

PPS. My experience of compulsory amalgamation is that the largest always swallows up the smallest!

 

I rather suspect the principals of your professional body are reading these comments with some interest, but still they are reluctant to respond and by implication, move forward. Let me invite them to do so now, openly and honestly, and they can speak on your collective behalf. You could also ask them to add to the debate, Derek. They are, after all, your appointed representatives.

Regards

Mark

 

Hi Mark

The ground swell for this has to come from branch level so here goes a thought process:

year one

1. Couple of meetings of branch chairs from all organisations to begin dispelling misinformation etc
2. feed back from branch chairs to the branches. Branch discussions etc
3. Heads of the various organisations meet to explore how to create a level playing field with equal representation across the board.

Year two

1.Initiation of a interim equal represented " council" (for want of a better name at the moment). Perhaps having limited responsibilities for this twelve months. Utilising society resources.
2.Initiating of admin for creating new membership, that is getting rid of the whole idea of grandparented being associate and moving towards equal status.
3. The new "council", has had 12 to 18months to prove something of itself in its limited role and to produce a code of practice etc. Also it should have explored how it is to be fully established and run when year three comes round.

Year three

1. Full, frank and open feed back to branches on the success of the new council approach, its areas of success and its failings and how it is now to be established.

2. Vote. This to take two approaches.
a. a vote on the success of the new council and how it should be established

b. a membership vote for embracing a new title for a united body under a new name. To make this a level playing field the vote is operated in both the society and in the other bodies, independent of each other. For the society people to give a yes they must get two thirds of their memebrship
For the BChPA to give a yes they must get two thirds of their membership (etc for other bodies). If both groups give a yes then it is a goer. If either group come up with a no then it fails.

Years 3 and 5
These are trial run years and in year five a vote is given as to whether to continue as we are or whether the thing is a dead duck.

Hey I'm not a political guy so this is incredibly niave but at least its something to kick against. It allows us to be up and running by three years and possibly united by 5 years.
As they say a battle plan is worthless after the first bullet has been fired.

Perhaps I should leave this stuff to the experienced.

Cheers
Ian

 

Mark

With all due respect to you ,IF any of the principals in my professional body ARE aware of this thread I am quite sure they will respond of their own volition they would not need me to tell them to do so as your other SCP council members are conspicuous by their absence would not.

I am not privy to the mindset of the hierarchy of either the BCPA or SMAE but I honestly do try to put my point of view( which Ian has stated is not too far away from yours) in the hope it might have some effect.

That is all I can do

Cheers

Derek

 

Hi Ian

Sorry , year 2 ??:-

If it's gonna happen it will only be with equal status and voting rights from day ONE !!

There is no substitute for that in my book, I will not be deemed a second class practitioner by ANY professional body.

Cheers

Derek

(sorry politics is fickle isn't it ??)

 

I'll have a think about this over the next three weeks when I'm on holiday, but I would agree there needs to be a ground-swell from grass roots of every sector to move the process forward. However, there also needs to be leadership and direction, and in that regard I offer the following thought;

Leadership is power governed by principle, directed towards raising people to the highest levels of personal motive and social morality; and tested by the achieving of results measured by original purpose. Power manipulates people as they are; leadership as they could be. Power impacts; leadership engages. Power tends to corrupt; leadership creates.

The answer to the original question "who runs your club?" is quite simple: Everyone who is in it!

Look forward to reading all the submissions on my return.

Kind regards

Mark

 

Have a good one Mark
Cheers

Derek .

PS I won't go down the road of Holidays what are they I'm self employed....

 

Hi Derek

As no membership of a new named body would exist at that point there is no issue here for me. When membership starts it has to be on the level playing field. so we agree I think?!!

 

Hi Ian

I was just making the point, so there is no misconception from any quarter. And yes I think we both agree on that one.

Cheers
Derek

 

Unity!

Hi Derek, Ian and Emma, plus All other interested parties Mark included,

Yes to UNITY described by you two above, (Derek and Ian), but only when the Society remove their newly erected barrier of no voting associates from their midst and their ranks!

Why, why, why do I feel so safely isolated for the next ten years, someone please prove me wrong???

Regards,

Colin.

 

Hi Colin

I will try ,

I believe there has been a LOT of movement towards unity from all sides and in some way in fact perhaps more than anywhere in the SCP ranks.

You only have to look at the posts on this site and compare them to when it started!!! People are TALKING their points of view rather than shouting and more to the point agreeing !!

And the best thing about it up to now is NO ONE has lost any body parts through actually talking and working together (I check regularly and ask my opposite numbers to do the same)

I always felt that the "them and us" was promoted in the main by "them and us" much of the "folklore "based on hearsay and rumour.and I think as more and more pods are coming into contact with "other side pods" it is very evident "a pleasant surprise" is recorded in most instances.

I recently had occasion to attend a multi practitioner seminar on biomechanics and gait analysis and during the lunch break listened very intently to the horror stories about SMAE trained Pods and what terrible people we all are from a SCP member.

This guy was a very nice chap and I got on really well with him and discussed may aspects and topics of podiatry ( I steered well clear of them and us). He assumed I was also an SCP member and gave me his card with an invitation to call in if I was ever in his area.

I'm ashamed to say I didn't have the heart to tell him I was SMAE trained as I think he would have been very embarrassed. ( if he is reading this sorry )

I think the quicker the "old guard" accept the situation we now have will determine how long the uniting of us all will take , and with the increasing pressure being brought to bear by growing numbers in the ranks it may no take as long as you think.

Alterations and concessions will have to be made by all for parity and lasting unity

And the first one should be in my opinion yes you've guessed, the associate membership has to go.

SOON please.

Cheers

Derek

 

Unity, PS.!

Hi Emma,

A second attempt at a PS. to Unity above! (I ended up at the Sunderland Echo with the last one, I hope it Does not cause a bomb scare there, things being what they are at this time!)?

Emma you say above, Quote: "The battle ....................... but please bring them inside off the street!" That is the problem I have here, is there a mind set or is it me?

I have never thought of myself being on the street? Possibly to comfortable where I am now outside of the main monopoly's environment! Am I too black and white here?

It is difficult to Jaw, jaw instead off War, war when outside of brick throwing distance, (Metaphysically speaking of course, never dream of doing it physically of course, I could get arrested!)?

Regards,

Colin.

PS. You see, I cannot even Lurk on your Forum Site. I cannot see what you are saying???

 

Hi Derek,

Will read your post carefully later, was that you wrecking my first PS. to Emma? Never mind the last one is much funnier than the first! Hope she has a sense of humour though?

Regards,

Colin.

 

Hi Colin

I don't think you NEED any help in wrecking your IT skills !!

I have never known anyone lose mails like you or for that matter get them to finish up on such obscure sites

Is it a " steam driven" PC or one you built yourself ?

Cheers

Derek

 

No it was not I! I am innocent? It was my son in law who built it, Windows was not happy either! Comment from one or two of their programs, "It looks like a custom built what is it?" It cannot spell either!

Regards,

Colin.

PS. Now Derek please be careful, Australia an obscure place if they remember, now that can be dangerous?

 

Colin

Would "abortion" be close ??

Cheers
Derek

 

Parity?

Hi Derek,

I agree with your thinking, the main deficiency in the UK. is the lack of understanding and trust brought about by decisions made for the rest of Podiatry behind closed doors!

The associate member without any voting rights is the prime target at the present time in neutralizing the new HPC-Registration. It also applies in the other direction towards FHP.'s so I'm given to understand? [This is not the Society I hasten to add, closer to home! (The Edit.)].

Although some of us would like to blame the HPC. They have clean hands at this moment for they have walked into a situation not of their own making! They may, however, resolve one side of this problem by putting the FHP's. on a firm footing. We will just have to wait and see what happens with this one?

At the other end we have the problem created by the associate member! This can only be resolved by those who have accepted it! The rest of us must decide where our future best lies with or without them, and act on it?

Open handedness has never been the way of a closed association of believers but this has to be obtained some how here? The free flow of information and facilities when it is required by all no matter who is supplying it. Mark this well, I'm not looking for free handouts and would expect to financially support such free flow of information and educational aids etc.

Decision taken and formed behind closed doors anywhere alway leads to suspicion and resentment! But unfortunately it has always been part of the human Psyche. Open Handedness may in fact be the key to UK Podiatry unity? If brought about by parity, (The state of being equal!), which is the thing to aim at first, then trust following from open handed access to knowledge, unity then should naturally follow and drop into place?

Regards,

Colin.

 

Abortion Derek, no, occasionally two hands around the Monitors throat seems to do the trick! One or two enemas, however, in certain places might just bring about a little of the parity that I am looking for me thinks! [Parity: Not the Society, my computer with the enemas, (Then again?)! Score to date Computer +3, Colin +1? (The Edit.!)].

Regards,

Colin.

 

Hi Colin and All

I make you spot on with that one!!

All of the foregoing which goes hand in hand with Trust and Mistrust.

Who trusts who ??

No one is the actual answer.

The SMAE don't trust the SCP or the Institute,The Institute don't trust the SMAE or the SCP , The SCP etc....

Why?? because of all the underhand things that have been done in the past and I would suggest by all sides at one time or another because of the closed door policy !!

I'm a great believer in democracy and to stand up and be counted. If a point has to be made however unpopular it should be aired to its fullest extent and then voted upon and the majority has the day.

That is why in the future EVERYTHING must be up front and in the open.

Power crazy empire building individuals must be brought to heel by the membership. Absolute power must be curtailed and replaced with moderation and a freedom for the profession to merge and expand in due process.

But most of all it is just the likes of you and me "the membership" that will alter the situation by getting out collective representative bodies to sit down together and TALK !!

Cheers
Derek

 

Hi Markus,
Some time ago I requested BUPA if I could become a registered provider and was told in no uncertain terms that unless I was a member of the Society and State registered they would not entertain any chiropodist with private training getting a provider number. When I took this up with my professional body, The Institute of Ch. & P.'s they intervened on my behalf with BUPA - to no avail, as they still insisted they would only recognise HPC registrants who were also members of the Society. The letter the Institute sent me said they were then taking the matter up with the Office of Fair Trading and would keep me informed of any response. That was in May 04.
As you so rightly state - so much for a level playing field.
Lylee Urwin , registered podiatrist and certified pedorthist.

 

Time for the Masked Avenger to Reveal Himself!

Hi Markus,

Very pleased to have been able to contribute to this Thread but at this point in time I have a problem?

This being an Open Forum questioning if that is the right word the activities of a closed secretive society!

Who are you Markus?

Regards,

Colin.

 

Professional Integration

Ian

I promised to revert to you regarding integration and unification of the professional bodies once I returned from holiday. I commend your considered approach, however on reflection, I feel that by staging this process over three years would not be the best timescale for the profession. Over the last few months, the government have announced a number of consultations which directly affect podiatry. These range from changes to the regulatory landscape with proposals to tighten the loopholes created by the Health Professions legislation, to fundamental changes in the way the NHS commissions and delivers its care. All proposals in these consultations have an early implementation date – some as early as 2006 – and the consequences for clinicians will be much greater than anything we’ve seen to date.

My feeling is that in order to take advantage of these proposals for the benefit of all members and their patients, the professional bodies must come together and agree a joint strategy at the outset. Like any time of great change there are dangers and opportunities ahead. If the profession remains fragmented we will not be able to maximise these opportunities for everyone, and there is a real danger that the divisions between the Society and the smaller bodies will remain for another generation; and that would be unfortunate for all as I’m sure you might agree.

Whilst I would prefer to see some movement between the organisations immediately, I have to be frank and say I don’t think that will occur. However, it may be that as the implications of these new proposals begin to permeate throughout the profession, we might see some movement between the various organs. The goalposts are changing again; the question is, do we field a new team?

Kind regards

Mark

 

Hi Mark

Hope you had a good break ??

Is there a realistic time scale to achieve that goal or are the changes available to accept not on associate levels in the biggest body ??

Which do you think has the more likely successful outcome ??

Just my thoughts

Cheers

Derek

 

Hi Mark,

Likewise with holidays!

With 'Associate membership' the Society and possibly two others who seem to have gone silent re. 'Associate' just at the present, have changed the goal posts already, PITY!

Even with my imagination I think it's already to late in the UK. to present a 'United Front'? I don't think there is enough time left do to it.

Is there the will with denationalization in the offering regarding PCT's. and newly manufactured Leaders with Patient-led possible anarchy duly designed to dilute the powerful influence of the GP.'s. now in the offering?

Podiatrists employed by GP'.'s or is it PCT's.? Lady Thatcher must be having hysteric's of loud laughed as her policies are implemented by this New(Tory) Labour Government!!!

Regards,

Colin.

PS. I would be happy for you to prove me wrong!

 

Hi Mark

Thanks for the consideration you've given. Hope the fishing went well.

Although you speak of the speed of the changes ahead and indicate the potential ramifications are more significant that we have yet experienced I still suggest that, however it is presented to the podiatry population, it needs to come through the various branch chairpersons.

On the whole these are trusted people by the branches and time spent with them (even a day) to outline things, I feel ,would be time ( especially as we are short of it) well invested. Let these people hear the agenda and disseminate it.

Could it be possible to produce a paper that could be worked through with these people on the day. Then that same information made available to branch members to work through with their chairs. At least we might have common information. I know, niave)

Clearly it needs to be less confusing than the HPC situation and agendas need to be clear rather than hidden.

Of course this assumes the changes will not be enforced from those politically above us!

Ian

 

Hi Ian

I believe unless we get our act together and unify that is a very strong possibility.

The ministers will not keep talking to differing waring factions about the same thing ,those days are passed.

They will be looking for one body one voice and we should never forget we are a very small cog in a very large wheel so our assumed importance carries only so much weight.

We should be getting OUR professional bodies to sit down with THEIR professional body and sort this out NOW before it is too late.

Just my opinion

Cheers

Derek

 

Ian

I often think that podiatry politics is like a game of poker and the dealer being the current government. Most of the time the players keep their cards close to their respective chests; rarely, if at all, do any players take a chance and gamble. More often than not the game ends in stalemate, but now and again the dealer gets fed-up and shuffles the pack and changes the rules. When he does, the players run around jostling for position before sinking back into their various (safe) positions.

Don't know about anyone else, but I'm getting tired at poker and rather think there's a lot of other fun games to be had out there, if only we were able to look beyond our familiar table. That means leaving our comfort zones behind and taking a step into the unknown - which, as you've probably realised by now, was what I was suggesting a few weeks ago. Nothing ventured, nothing gained, is as good a motto as any.

I agree that branch chairs are a good way to distribute information although I have to caution that many of the Society branches are inactive or poorly attended. However, I regards these forums as an online branch and I would suggest that any developments should be posted here and copied to the respective forums of the professional bodies for people to digest.

[Craig - we spoke of constructing a sub-set for the UK last month. Is it possible to do so in the near future?]

There is a great deal happening on the political front and I suspect we'll have a job trying to keep up with all the developments. Where I can I shall certainly keep you informed, but in the meantime I suggest we all think of ways of facilitating change in the way we approach a common goal.

The fishing was radge BTW - the Vosso River is second only to the upper Varzuga (in the Kola peninsula) for Atlantic Salmon. I've still got a sore wrist and it ain't the usual complaint!

Mark

 

Mark
Just my two pennies worth.

I agree with your caution about using Branch Chairs (Society) perhaps non members do not realise there are about 60 branches, I think compared with around 15 BChA, (do not know about Institute and Alliance.)

However if the HPC could get it's act together and issue it's guidelines for CPD the two issues, Unity and CPD, could possibly reignite the Branches.

It seems to me the major sticking point is mutual recognition of qualifications.

I'm a SCUBA diver and have watched the sport grow incredibly over 35 years. In the early days there were a number of waring training organisations, predominantly the British Sub Aqua Club (BSAC) and the Professional Association of Diving Instructors (PADI). BSAC were a laborious but very thorough training organisation, PADI got you in the water very quickly then sold you lots and lots of extra courses.
After 20 years of animosity, because of a large mixing of divers at coral sites (mainly the Red Sea) divers realised there were areas of mutuality. The Organisations then sat down and and agreed cross over courses. The result an increase in the number of diver 'grades' but a greater flexibility between Organisations. (See any similarities?).

I think it is a given that the basic Smae qualification, MSSCh is not the equivalent of DpodM or BSc, however the FSSCh could equate much closer to the degree training, (accepted no LA but that was not possible).

If Unity was to be under the SCP banner, could an agreed mutuality of qualifications be worked out with a possible new level of membership, with full voting rights, recognising the lesser training but accepting the right to work? At the same time the SCP would need to organise a definite training pathway, and organise the courses, to train to achieve the next level of membership. (Possibly still in conjunction with Smae, or Institute, both are pursuing thier atempts at degrees.?)

Bob

 

Cryptic Clues?

Hi Bob, and those it may concern???

Possibly an aside from what you were saying above Bob,

I know you are addressing Mark but put this as a possible PS., (Criptic Clue for someone else perhaps?),
Quote:_ "It seems to me the major sticking point is mutual recognition of qualifications."
Too true Bob, Admin. has just locked a Thread up on possibly just that very point! Slamming the door after the horse has bolted perhaps, (But not referring to you here Bob, or, Admin. after I re. read this last one!).?

HPC. = Degree, perhaps?

Unless possibly a red herring here as FHP is about to happen?

If:- Degree = HPC. Does HPC = FHP. registration, (Bearing in mind HPC's. mind to register carers in other fields!)? Despite Marks hint elsewhere that someone is about to move the goal posts again whilst applying the NZ Podiatry Act here amongst us?
Does?

Degree = HPC. ( I Think if they were asked in regard to our case it would be still YES!).

The HPC. who without being hurried are about to establish their next phase of development for all registered sectors of their Register. The CPD. structure is about to happen, (And I cannot see it not happening.)! You have the reason why I haven't aligned myself with Mark's enthusiasm!!!

1. Does enthusiasm = Realism?

2. Does anything else but Degree = Realism at this late final stage in HPC.'s reality concerning Chiropody?
Bearing in mind the other sticking point associate membership wherever it applies?

3. Openness even here in this Thread possibly not quiet right? Does for instance,
MM = MMR Perhaps?

Regards,

Colin.

PS. And a big big apology to you Bob, because I know you are one of those who is always for straightforwardness and speak as you find!!!