PATIENTS are to be given the right to see doctors’ disciplinary and performance records on the internet under a sweeping review of medical accountability to be announced today.

The move is also likely to spell the end of the General Medical Council’s historic right to judge doctors after a series of failures culminating in the Harold Shipman case.

On the day of Dame Janet Smith’s final report into deaths in Shipman’s early career, the GMC stands to lose to a new independent tribunal its power to strike off doctors, The Times understands.

The review by Sir Liam Donaldson, the Chief Medical Officer, will alarm doctors who face having the details of allegations about their behaviour made public for the first time.

Sir Liam will also consider whether “spent convictions” should remain on a doctor’s public record after they have retrained or served a period of suspension.

One senior source said last night: “Knowledge is power and the knowledge is going to go to patients. They are demanding to know more about their own health and more about the doctors who treat them.”

John Reid, the Health Secretary, will reveal the terms of Sir Liam’s review before the release of Dame Janet’s report into 137 deaths at Pontefract General Infirmary, West Yorkshire, where Shipman was a junior doctor between 1970 and 1974.

Shipman, who hanged himself in prison last year, is already known to have murdered at least 215 patients while he was a GP in Hyde, Greater Manchester.

Mr Reid will tell Sir Liam to put patients’ interests at the heart of a new system of openness about doctors. The move will effectively punish the GMC for years of resistance to radical reform.

While the GMC will continue to maintain the register of doctors, it stands to lose its powers to pass judgment on them.

The dual system was criticised by Dame Janet in her earlier report. She also suggested that much more information should be placed on the doctors’ register, including patients’ complaints made against them.

Ministers have already suspended plans for five-yearly “doctors’ MOTs”, drawn up by the GMC and due to start in April, because they were not tough enough.

The appraisal system for GPs was thought to be particularly weak, especially plans to track and assess locum doctors who work in different parts of the country. Hospital doctors, who have a more obvious line management system, are thought to be easier to assess.

Sir Liam will be expected to report by the end of the year but doctors are already living in fear of being “named and shamed”. They could fight Sir Liam’s proposals under the Human Rights Act to keep details secret.

A spokesman for the British Medical Association said: “There are potentially human rights issues in this. We want the public to be as fully informed as possible. But we have to be fair to doctors as well and not put them in a category that is totally different to anyone else in society. We would have grave concerns about any unfounded or unproven allegations being made available.”

Sir Liam’s review is expected to cover three areas: the role of the GMC; the revalidation “MOT” process for doctors; and standards of patient safety. Sir Liam has been told to interpret his remit widely, The Times understands.

To emphasise the importance of patients rather than doctors’ vested interests, Sir Liam will have an advisory group which includes the National Consumer Council.

One of his hardest tasks will be to decide which information can be made public under the Freedom of Information Act, modified by the Human Rights Act and the Data Protection Act.

But the GMC case for retaining both the power to prosecute doctors and pass judgment on them is already considered to be open to legal challenge under the human right to a fair trial.

Should patients have access to GPs' records?
Join the debate

Explore UK News

• Crime News

• Education News

• Health News

• Scotland News

Times Recommends

• Iran arrests relatives of opposition leaders
• Banksy rival has final word in art feud
• Electrician travels 175 miles to change bulb