Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.


Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

External auditors have reviewed NMC fee rise


The Nursing and Midwifery Council has bought in external auditors to examine the business case for its proposed fee rise, Nursing Times has learnt.

Council members will consider the audit report from KPMG at their next meeting this week, before voting on whether to press ahead with the planned 58% hike in the registration fee.

They will also decide at the meeting whether to accept the government’s offer of a one-off £20m grant, which was announced by ministers last week. But even if the council accepts the grant, some level of fee increase would still be needed to balance the NMC’s books.

The regulator had previously insisted the business case for the fee rise was sound and refused to bring in external auditors, despite two written requests to do so from former health secretary Andrew Lansley and repeated calls from unions.

An NMC spokeswoman insisted the decision to bring in the auditors after all was not a “U-turn”. She said: “KPMG have reviewed our assumptions on which the business case for fees was made.

“The independent reviews should give assurance to council as to the robustness and appropriateness of the activity and financial projections upon which they are being asked to make a decision.”

The NMC claims the fee rise is needed to cope with a 47% increase in fitness to practise referrals since 2009-10, and a predicted further spike in referrals when the public inquiry into care failings at Mid Staffordshire Foundation Trust reports next year.

Royal College of Nursing head of policy Howard Catton welcomed the decision to carry out the audit. He said: “This is something we have been calling for. Registrants need to be reassured and have confidence that if there is a fee rise, it’s based on expert advice.”

The regulator’s original refusal to carry out the audit was seen as an attempt to assert its independence from government.

In July the council expressed “grave concern” when the government intervened in the recruitment of a new NMC chair. Ministers advised the Privy Council to appoint experienced civil servant Mark Addison, rather than allow the regulator to continue its own recruitment process.

KPMG also carried out audit at the NMC in March, which focused on its financial position. The audit report, obtained by Nursing Times under the Freedom of Information Act, questioned a number of assumptions about the cost and length of hearings on which the 2012-13 budget was based.

It found an assumption that it would be cheaper to bring investigations back in house was not based on a “substantive cost-benefit analysis” and discovered the NMC had budgeted for only 310 investigations between April and June this year, when it would in fact need to carry out 650.

Appearing before the Commons health select committee last week, Mr Addison told MPs that he did not expect it the results of the new review to contradict the NMC’s fitness to practise assumptions.

Asked whether the NMC would accept the government’s grant, he said it was decision for the council.

He added the regulator would “want a clear set of time limited outcomes to be judged against in return for the £20m”, so that the government’s involvement had a clear end point.

“We do not want to find ourselves in hock to the government,” he said.

Visit on Thursday for breaking news from the NMC’s council meeting.


Readers' comments (18)

  • why can't all costs involved in further referrals following the mid staff public enquiry be paid for by the trust. They employed and trained the staff, they were responsible for ensuring standards were monitored, not us.

    in 'no case to answer' referrals who pays the costs? - are the referrers charged money for inappropriate referrals?

    where there has been a clear systematic failing, breakdown in communication, staffing issues, skill-mix issues, lack of training etc. which results in a nurse error who is held responsible and do they pay for any referral costs?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Stop being fools! Just refuse to pay it!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • How much has the NMC had to pay KPMG to do this external audit?

    A vote of no confidence in the NMC by the profession should stop them in their tracks!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Anonymous | 23-Oct-2012 12:11 pm


    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I agree that a vote of no confidence in the NMC should be put forward by the unions on our behalf.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I agree with those calling for a vote of 'no confidence' in the NMC. It is about time a halt was called to their unaccountable and unwarranted 'ivory tower' mindset. Let's have an elected body with some real accountability to lead us. I know of no-one in the profession who regards the NMC with anything other than bewilderment and contempt. Time to call a halt.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Its all very well saying don't pay it but then when registration lapses you cannot work!

    Its sad to say but we are in a no win situation unless the government steps in and orders the NMC to freeze/reduce the rise.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Perhaps there's a case for mass refusals to pay an ineffective organisation?

    They couldn't remove us all from the register en masse. Imagine the effect on employers!

    I think unions and professional bodies could do a decent job by organising a large scale refusals and ensuring that there was a legal framework in place to support such a campaign of civil disobedience.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I agree. A vote of no confidence in the NMC should be put forward. This opinion should be pretty well apparent from the recent comments from nurses displayed on these pages and in the press.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I Feel a vote of no confidence is the only way forward. I do, however, worry that there will be a large percentage of nurses who will be apathetic to this.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

View results 10 per page20 per page

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions. Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.