WEC calls for immediate ban on high-risk cosmetic surgery

CIEH welcomes the WEC recommendations, calling for a clear timetable and stressing that proper training, insurance and safe premises are essential

A new report published by the Women and Equalities Committee (WEC) has recommended that ‘high harm’ procedures such as the liquid Brazilian butt lift (BBL) should be banned immediately without further consultation. 

MPs said the government is ‘not moving quickly enough’ in introducing a licensing system for non-surgical cosmetic procedures and ‘should accelerate regulatory action’, cautioning that ‘this lack of timely action is fostering complacency in self-regulation’ within the industry.

The report warned of a ‘wild west’ in which procedures have reportedly taken place in Airbnbs, hotel rooms, garden sheds and public toilets. Individuals without any formal training can carry out potentially harmful interventions, placing the public at risk, MPs concluded.

The report recommended that liquid BBLs and liquid breast augmentations - procedures deemed high risk and which have already been shown to pose a serious threat to patient safety - should be restricted to appropriately qualified medical professionals immediately.

WEC recommended that a licensing system for 'green' and 'amber' lower risk non-surgical cosmetic procedures, in which only those suitably qualified can perform them, should be introduced within this Parliament. 

Currently, there is no regulation as to who can perform procedures that do not require incisions, and these are commonly used to refer to injectables such as Botox or dermal fillers, laser therapy or chemical peels. The report claims that any existing rules, such as around the prescription of Botox, are being circumvented, are under enforced and under policed.

CIEH welcomed the recommendation that a licensing system for non-surgical cosmetic procedures should be introduced within this Parliament. Mark Elliott, President, CIEH, said, “We believe the government should accept this recommendation and provide a timeline now for consultation on and implementation of the proposed licensing scheme.

“The implementation of this scheme would be a crucial step towards ensuring that people who undergo non-surgical cosmetic procedures receive treatment from practitioners who are properly trained and qualified, have the necessary insurance cover and operate from premises that are safe and hygienic.”

“Currently, individuals without any formal training can carry out potentially very harmful interventions and often do so in unsafe environments.”

MP Sarah Owen, Chair of the Women and Equalities Committee and Labour MP said, “The government is not moving quickly enough in introducing a licensing scheme for non-surgical cosmetic procedures and should accelerate regulatory action. Currently, individuals without any formal training can carry out potentially very harmful interventions and often do so in unsafe environments. This ‘wild west’ of procedures is placing the public at risk.” 

She added that regulation has not kept pace with the sector’s expansion, referencing the “concerning rise in cosmetic tourism” and adding that there is a “strong case for the NHS to systematically record data on complications arising from such procedures performed abroad. Publishing this data annually would enable a comprehensive assessment of the financial strain on the NHS and help raise awareness about the risks.”

Sam Silver, Head of Policy and Public Affairs, National Hair and Beauty Federation (NHBF) said the organisation supports the direction of travel but also urged government to be honest about the operating reality for legitimate businesses. “Many salons, clinics and independent practitioners are already under heavy cost pressure.”  

He added that the next phase is crucial. “A licensing system can’t be a box-ticking exercise that adds cost without raising standards and it can’t be so complex that it unintentionally squeezes out good operators while the worst simply go underground.  

“If government wants higher standards, it must also back the routes that make higher standards possible: recognised qualifications, apprenticeships, and funding that works for small employers, alongside enforcement that targets unsafe and illegal practice.”