In November 2000, the House of Lords Select committee on Science and Technology reported on complementary and alternative medicine and considered the public health policy needs and NHS provision of these treatments.
The House of Lords found this unacceptable and that "in the best interests of their patients such therapies must each strive to unite under a single voluntary regulatory body".
These included having a register of members, educational standards, a code of ethics and practice, a public complaints mechanism, and the capacity to represent the whole profession.
[5] On behalf of the FIH, Professor Dame Joan Higgins was asked to be Chair of a Federal Working Group which was to look into setting up what was to become the Complementary and Natural Healthcare Council.
If you are involved in advertising or promoting any other product or service, you must make sure that you use your knowledge, healthcare skills, qualifications and experience in an accurate and professionally responsible way.
Any potential financial rewards to you should be made explicit and play no part at all in your advice or recommendations of products and services that you give to patients, clients and users.
At present anyone may legally practise in the UK without qualifications as a reflexologist, aromatherapist, homeopath, naturopath, nutritional therapist, acupuncturist, etc., and that voluntary registration by the CHNC will make no difference to this.
[9] In response to a Freedom of Information request, the Department of Health has confirmed that since the CNHC was set up the DH has provided funding as follows: £293,496 in 2007/8/9 (including start up costs), £409,300 in 2009/10 and £127,748 in 2010/11.
The CNHC do not publish details of the number of registrants it has attracted, but as the organisation has continued to exist and operate from 2007 to 2024, the income from fees must be sufficient to have been covering running costs from 2011 to 2024.
[15] However, in response to the point made by the petitioners and others, the CNHC has now amended its website, deleting its original statement that regulation by them gives a guarantee of the efficacy of the procedures carried out by their registrants.
In addition to the medical criticism, CNHC have also been censured by the British Standards Institute for use of their trademarked term "kitemark",[16] and have also been criticised for poor openness[17] and an inconsistent approach to data protection.