Communication from UKCP

UKCP have asked us to amend two of our statements.

UKCP argue that they have never said that they are seeking to replace the existing MoU and that TACTT is misrepresenting this. Our statement was based on the following comments by Jen Ayling, vice chair of UKCP, in the meeting on Monday 17th June:

“I think it’s not about thinking that there’s anything in the current MoU that’s harmful. It’s about the fact that it doesn’t go far enough”

“As a board we’ve long been sitting not just us as a board but previous incarnations of the board with concerns about the brevity of the MoU as a document and its lack of nuance […] and we think this call for a better regulatory guidance and best practice guidance is most urgently needed”.

If we have misunderstood these statements, we apologise, but we would also request clarification of them as a matter of urgency – do UKCP seek to develop “better regulatory guidance and best practice guidance” in place of the MoU, or do these words have another meaning?

UKCP would also like us to communicate that NCPS “has not distanced themselves from the project, as your piece implies”. For full transparency, we share the information that NCPS has given us:

“As was stated in April, we [NCPS] have been in discussions with UKCP and other talking therapy membership bodies regarding potential practice guidelines. However, nothing has been agreed regarding ‘regulatory guidelines’ or indeed the establishment of a working group; there have simply been some discussions. I have raised this with UKCP and asked them to refrain for sending out these statements”.

We hope this clarifies the matter.