|
The Pharmaceutical Journal |
||
|
PDF* 55K |
|
Concordance
|
The CouncilOut of touchFrom Mr P. Robinson, MRPharmS Despite assurances that we would all be able to cast a vote in the recent Council election (PJ, 13 April, p486), almost 80 per cent of the membership of the Royal Pharmaceutical Society did not vote. Apart from a few trivial differences, all of the candidates broadly supported the same fundamental policy and thus provided no opportunity for members to vote for a significant change. The election embodied policy matters that are the cornerstone of the present administration. The fact that few people want to vote for these policies should, as always, be a cause of great concern to the Council. The profession suffers from a constitution that is legally correct and enforceable but a representation that is abysmally flawed and hugely biased. This is a situation that a trade union, even if it existed, would be powerless to change. It is an alarming fact that if any one of this year's candidates were to become the next President, they would, at the most, have received the votes of only 2.5 per cent of the electorate. As a result of this, some 35,500 people would suffer the imposition of rules and regulations they might not want and, without their own representation, would have no recourse to object. For a Council that has always dismissed opposing "minority" views as insignificant, it is strange that it should think that its own position is so strong. In view of such an appalling outcome in these elections, it is time for each Council member to decide why so few people voted for him or her and do something about it. The Council is completely out of touch with the views of the wider membership and is vigorously pursuing policies for which only a small minority of the electorate has voted. Peter Robinson |
|
|
Send your letter to The Editor |
Previous Topic (Council elections) |
Home | Journals | News | Notice-board | Search | Jobs Classifieds | Site
Map | Contact us
©The Pharmaceutical Journal