No doubt Gordon will be along later and correct me if I'm wrong, but I *thought* that Scotland has NHS Boards and England has PCTs (Primary Care Trusts).
I know nothing about Scotland's NHS Boards, but then I live a looong way from Scotland (that's my excuse anyway ;D).
As for PCTs: Here is what the NHS England web site has to say about them:
"PCTs are now at the centre of the NHS and will get 75% of the NHS budget. Your PCT must make sure there are enough services for people within their area and that these services are accessible. They must also make sure that all other health services are provided, including hospitals, dentists, opticians, mental health services, NHS Walk-In Centres, NHS Direct, patient transport (including Accident & Emergency), population screening, pharmacies and opticians. They are also responsible for getting health and social care systems working together to the benefit of patients."
PCTs are autnonomous from each other. That is to say, whilst all PCTs have to cover the above services, they don't all do it in exactly the same way.
As for the NHS dental lists: In theory, a dentist can apply to go on PCT "A" list and get refused (say they find his references unsatisfactory). He then applies to PCT "B" and gets accepted.
(For dentists being removed, there is removal from the "local" PCTs list, but there is also an option for "National Disqualification". Since it's the FHSAA who decides on "National Disqualifications" there ought to be a list, at least in theory. You could always apply to the FHSAA to see it under the "Freedom of Information Act" and see what happens.
Tempting.
I don't see how there could be a compiled list of dentists who've been removed/refused just from a "local" list. As I said above, PCTs are autonomous; so I don't see anyone collating decisions to refuse/remove someone just from "local" lists.)
Anyone who wants to practice as a dentist, whether private or NHS, must be registered with the GDC.
But a PCT can refuse to put a dentist on *their* list (for example, if they find his references unsatisfactory) or take him off their lists but that doesn't mean the dentist would also be removed from the GDC register. The two lists aren't connected.
To get removed from the GDC register, someone needs to complain to the GDC. They can only deal with complaints that fit into *their* definition of "serious professional misconduct".
So, you are correct: a dentist may have been taken off the NHS list, but as long as he remains on the GDC register he can continue to see private patients.
(There are quite a few issues that I might consider serious professional misconduct, but the GDC would not ... Even in the rare cases where the GDC do erase a dentist from the register, the dentist can apply to be re-instated after 10 months. Channel Five did a programme not along ago on the topic "Can you trust your dentist?" One of the cases I remember was about a dentist who'd spent some time as a guest of Her Majesty and on release had to go on the Sex Offenders' Register. He'd been erased from the GDC register when he went to prison. But on his release he applied to be reinstated as a dentist and was succesful!
The programme makers interviewed the GDC president and asked him how a person who was on the Sex Offenders' Register, had to meet his Probation Officer regularly and was under supervision of the police's Public Protection Unit could be regarded by the GDC as "fit to practice". The GDC president gave a response along the lines of that he didn't see that as a problem.
The programme makers then telephoned the GDC's enquiry line and said they were thinking of registering as a patient with Mr X and was there anything, such as prior complaints against him, that they should know about. The GDC telephone person said that there were no complaints on his record. His record just gave where and when he qualified.- In other words, when a dentist gets re-instated to the list he gets a "clean" record, and members of the public have no way of finding out the previous history.
Sorry for rambling on. The GDC have as their slogan "protecting patients, regulating the dental team". My two cents on this is that they have a very strange way of going about this.
G.
- thanks!! I take the GDC could still prosecute individual dentists within body corporates, if complaints had been lodged against them?
)
- in fact, I came across some cases where I really couldn't blame the dentists involved, and in some cases even thought they acted quite honorably. But the public should be allowed to make up their own minds based on the facts and summaries of cases available. If these are within the realm of the Freedom of Information Act, then they should be available over the internet. 
!