MP Rejects Findings in Dental Practice Inspection Report

Published on: 22 Mar, 2022
Updated on: 24 Mar, 2022

By Martin Giles

Findings that the Beresford Dental Practice “was not well-led” and “was not providing safe care” have been rebutted by Sir Paul Beresford the MP for Mole Valley. The routine Care Quality Commission (CQC) inspection also found that the practice “was providing effective care”.

Sir Paul works part-time at the practice and has declared an income of £500 per month from his work in the Parliamentary register of interests. He said: “It is extremely difficult to keep up with the multitude of regulations.”

The report summary published by CQC.

Asked for comment on the report Sir Paul said: “This is the second CQC inspector visit. The first, some years ago. gave the practice an excellent report. The latest was critical of procedures relating to a number of regulations which the surgery is now required to meet.

Sir Paul Beresford

“There was and is absolutely no criticism of the standard or quality of dentistry.”

The CQC report was brought to the attention of The Guildford Dragon by an anonymous informant who labelled him or herself “Lordship Lane N22”. Pointing out that N22 suffix indicated he or she, “was not a Mole Valley or SW London resident”, Sir Paul continued by addressing four areas of criticism:

Failure to sterilise instruments effectively. “This is incorrect. The recording mechanism on the autoclave failed to record the sterilization data. When this was noted a new autoclave was installed.”
Failure to test and check x-ray equipment. “Also wrong. At the time of the CQC inspection a brand-new x-ray machine had just been installed, tested and checked. Following the CQC inspection, the required ongoing checking and notification regulations were organised.”
Unchecked and potentially unsafe electrical equipment. “A fully qualified electrician has undertaken the annual check. No equipment was found to be unsafe.”
No processes to deal with hazardous objects/waste. “Absolutely incorrect. A nationwide hazardous waste disposal firm is and has been employed since the practice opened for removal and legitimate safe disposal.”

In conclusion, he said: “This is a very small, very part-time dental practice with a staff of one dentist and one practice manager/DSA. It is extremely difficult to keep up with the multitude of regulations.

“A specialist regulations firm has now been employed to ensure we are able to comply. The CQC inspector has been invited back to help ensure complete compliance.”

Responses to MP Rejects Findings in Dental Practice Inspection Report

David Roberts Reply

March 23, 2022 at 5:50 pm

I wonder what a man in his late 70s hopes still to achieve by plodding on with two careers, neither of them with conspicuous success. An overdue retirement beckons to so many local Tories: eg Cllrs Spooner, Manning and Moseley.

Surrey used to be true blue but Conservative fortunes cannot even start to revive until there is a thorough clear-out of the discredited old guard.
- David Blaen Reply
  
  March 24, 2022 at 12:20 am
  
  As a retired dentist I am well aware of the recent increased onerous regulations. Nevertheless ignorance is never an excuse. Perhaps he should bring the difficulties to the attention of those who have imposed them – maybe write to his MP?
Peter Steadman Reply

March 24, 2022 at 6:19 pm

Although never a supporter, I always assumed my MP-dentist was a decent professional.

It is unreasonable to use one’s profile as an MP to attempt to wriggle out of responsibility for being an under-performing leader of a dental practice. How do other dentists get it right? He could pop into any of the practices in the constituency to chat about how to do the job properly.

If it’s all too much, it may be time to walk away. An MP-dentist must have loads of stories to tell on the after-dinner circuit. Probably make more money there too.