The Pharmaceutical Journal
Vol 268 No 7199 p717-719
25 May 2002

This page
Reprint
Photocopy

PDF* 65K

  Dispensing
  Checking technicians
  Childhood vaccination
  NHS Direct
  Concordance
  Herbal remedies
  Disease mongering
  Honorary auditors
  Modernisation
  The Society

Letters to the Editor

The Society

Society should retain regulatory role

From Dr J. W. Poston, MRPharmS

The issue before the Society with respect to options for the future remit and functions is clearly critical for the future of the profession. As the executive director of the Canadian Pharmacists Association (CphA), I would like to share my perspective on the issue.

In Canada, we have considerable experience of pharmacy associations having a mix of both regulatory and advocacy functions on behalf of the profession. In recent years, those provinces that had associations with mixed functions have moved to create separate organisations — one regulatory and one focused on advocacy issues, primarily centred on negotiation for reimbursement.

The CPhA is a national voluntary organisation, unlike the Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain. We have a large publishing function, providing information and tools to support practice and fulfilling a professional role. In many ways, however, we are similar to the Royal Pharmaceutical Society but without a regulatory function. A major challenge for us is recruitment and retention of members. To be credible as an advocacy organisation, it is critical to have a strong membership base. In recent provincial organisations, where the regulatory and advocacy functions have been split, administrative strategies have been put in place to try and retain mandatory membership in the voluntary organisation.

Based on my experience, I believe that it is critical that the Society retains its regulatory role. It is hard to imagine a new organisation being created that would be able to perform this function so competently. The professional support role is a function that could also be maintained since this activity is critical to promoting and maintaining standards of practice and competency to practise. In the options presented by the Society, option 2 would retain some important advantages. Self-regulation in the public interest needs professional support. However picking option 2 would open the door to consideration of the issue of who represents pharmacists. In an increasingly corporate world, and in a world where pharmacists may be paid on an individual basis for their professional services, this will become a critical question that will need to be addressed.

Jeff Poston
Executive Director,
Canadian Pharmacists Association

Previous Topic (Modernisation)
Send your letter to The Editor