In May 2008 it was made clear that the Government intended to proceed apace with the regulation of the psychotherapies, including psychoanalysis. The regulator would be the Health Professions Council, theUKCPís attempts to take on the regulatory process via its short-lived private offshoot, the Independent Complaints Organisation, being unacceptable to the Department for Health.

Before regulation can occur, a number of steps have to be worked through:

Firstly, the definition of what psychotherapy/ psychoanalysis is.

In order to establish this, Skills for Health, a Public Authority separate but intimately connected to the HPC and government aims on regulation, was established. This was supposedly going to set up working groups with representation from various modalities which would arrive

at generally acceptable National Occupational Standards for the psychodynamic psychotherapies and psychoanalysis. The College of Psychoanalysts and the Psychoanalytic Consortium both tried to be part of this process. The Consortium was not given the courtesy of a reply, the process simply began without them; the College was promised two places, but these never materialised. Thus, those who were from the outset voicing their discontent with the nature of the process, were excluded from contributing anything to that process, including being able to explain to those participating in it in good faith that it was from the outset a biased process. It was clear at this point that careful vetting of the political stance of members was more important than a fair distribution of places.

Secondly, the production of National Occupational Standards

The working group for psychodynamic psychotherapies and psychoanalysis has now met a couple of times and produced a set of National Occupational Standards, which will probably become part of a manual to which we may all be expected to adhere, despite being excluded from the process. The NOS produced are based upon a very particular view of what constitutes psychodynamic work and psychoanalysis. This is a view which many feel does not bear more than a passing resemblance to the way they have been trained and experienced in working. Thus, at a stroke, different orientations, the training analysis, current trainings, are at risk of being turned into something outside the remit of what will be defined by this brutal process.

Thirdly, wider consultation within the psychotherapy/ psychoanalysis organisations for comments on the NOS.