2000 “a year of modernisation”
Presenting the annual review of the Council for 2000,
the President, Christine Glover, told the annual general meeting that
if there was a theme for the year it was “modernisation”. The plans to
modernise the National Health Service formed a blueprint for the next
10 years of the delivery of health care. As part of that process, the
roles of pharmacists were set to develop delivery of new approaches to
the management of medicines that truly met the needs of patients.
Different solutions to health needs might well emerge
in England, Scotland and Wales, but the health strategies for pharmacy
published in all three countries positively reflected the themes been
identified in the Society's strategy, “Building the future”. This strategy
had provided the basis for dialogue with government, with health care
professions, with politicians and with a whole gamut of opinion formers.
In England, pharmacy had been the first profession
to have its own plan, with the launch of “Pharmacy in the future” in September,
2000. That plan's match with the Society's own strategy was stunning,
but that was no coincidence because Council, staff and members had worked
to achieve it.
In the three home countries, different approaches
would share the common aim of modernising and improving pharmacy services.
“Pharmacy in the future” had set out a wide-ranging programme to develop
the NHS roles of the 30,000 pharmacists in England. The publication in
December, 2000, of the Scottish Health Minister's plan for the NHS in
Scotland had been a milestone pointing to better use of Scotland's 4,000
pharmacists. The launch in January, 2001, of the National Assembly for
Wales health improvement strategy provided opportunities for Wales's 2,200
pharmacists to contribute to patient-focused health care.
The Society's modernisation process was designed
to prepare pharmacists for future roles. The Society continued to address
regulatory reform for the profession in the light of the powers found
in the Health Act 1999 that enabled sweeping changes to be made to its
existing regulatory structure.
Broad range of activities
The President went on to summarise the broad range
of Society activities during 2000, as described in the annual review.
Among other things, she referred to the Council's decision in the autumn
of 2000 to suspend publication of the Industrial Pharmacist, the
Agricultural and Veterinary Pharmacist, the Pharmacy Assistant
and The Journal's British Pharmaceutical Conference pharmacy practice
research supplement, because none was expected to secure enough advertising
in 2001 to cover production costs. She added: “We have now found ways
of continuing their publication at little or no cost to the Society.”
Concluding, the President said that the annual review
was a celebration of success — but success came at a price. Raising the
profession's profile and ensuring the Society had input in the places
where it needed to have a voice, as well as working for the profession,
was bound to put pressure on financial resources. To meet the challenges
of the future, the Society had had to make some hard choices about priorities.
Membership fees met the cost of the regulatory functions and went some
way to fund the Society's role in professional leadership, but the Society
had come to rely increasingly on the success of its publications business
to help it to continue to do the things it needed to do to deliver change.
In the forthcoming year, those priorities had to
be focused on the Society's role in implementing of the NHS plans in England,
Scotland and Wales and on the underpinning proposals for reform of our
disciplinary machinery. There was much to do if the Society was to maintain
the momentum and the position it had established. That would require the
active participation and support of the membership.
The President then said that the annual review for
2000 was open for questions and comments.
Asked to elaborate on her comments about the suspension
of various publications, the President said that the things she had listed
were all specialist magazines for particular interest groups. “When we
were going through the budget to see where we could trim and what we ought
to get rid off because it was costing us money, those happened to be all
things that were costing us money instead of making us money, although
I would have to say that when they were first proposed they were put to
Council on the understanding that they would break even or indeed make
us money but the reality is when this decision was made they were all
losing us money, but they are only specialist magazines. The 50 per cent
of our income comes from the great bulk of our publications — the BNF,
Martindale, the specialist books, The Pharmaceutical Journal. What
we would have to say is that the special interest groups were, not surprisingly,
very put out at having their specialist magazines lost on the way so we
scouted about, they have scouted about, and we have managed to get support
so that they are no longer a loss on the sheet.”
Dr ANGELA ALEXANDER (Maidenhead) pointed out that
the practice research supplement was not a specialist publication. She
asked whether it would continue to be circulated to all pharmacists.
The SECRETARY AND REGISTRAR (Ann Lewis) said that
it would be available on the website rather than circulated. There would
be a review of the practice research in The Journal and the abstracts
would be published as a supplement to the International Journal of
Pharmacy Practice.
Dr ALEXANDER pointed out that it would therefore
not go to all pharmacists.
The PRESIDENT said that it was about cost containment,
but Dr Alexander had made the point well. “I think we have to put it
on the website and see how it pans out. If it doesn't work we'll have
to review it.”
The PRESIDENT then moved the adoption of the report,
which was agreed.
Later, drawing the meeting to a close, the President
said that it had been a great privilege to have been President for the
past two years. She could not have done it without the support of the
staff here at Lambeth, at Cardiff and in Edinburgh. They had been absolutely
tremendous and she expressed her personal thanks to them all.
Retirement of Bill Darling
She also could not close without saying a proper
thank you to Bill Darling, who was retiring from the Council. She had
said in a special Council meeting that afternoon that Mr Darling's contribution
to the profession has been exceptional and his honours and awards reflected
the high regard in he was held, in and out of the profession. He had been
made OBE and then CBE, he was a fellow and gold medallist of the Society,
he was an honorary fellow of Sunderland University and he was now a deputy
lieutenant for the County of Tyne and Wear. He had held a wide range of
offices, was currently chairman of Gateshead and South Tyneside Health
Authority, and still listed 12 other posts to his name.
Without doubt his breadth of knowledge of health
matters had made a huge impact on the Council's thinking and decision-making
and his wise counsel would be sorely missed. A particular personal contribution
had been the development of three codes of ethics and the final one adopted
by this AGM would be a lasting tribute.
The President added that she could not imagine Lambeth
without Bill Darling. He had been a personal friend and a great support
to her and she was sure that the meeting would want to wish him and his
wife Ann very good health and a very successful life ahead without Lambeth.
Back to Top
|
