The Pharmaceutical Journal
Vol 270 No 7232 p82
18 January 2003

This page
Reprint
Photocopy

PDF* 80K

  Period-of-treatment fee
  Community pharmacy
  Locum pharmacy
  Hospital pharmacy
  PILs
  ReQuip
  The Profession
  Women's health
  CPD
  Scottish Executive
  The Society
  Registration exam
  Supervision
  The Register
  Christmas miscellany

Letters to the Editor

Scottish Executive

Draconian restrictions on canvassing in elections

From Mr M. R. Hickey, MRPharmS

I noted Roger Mills's letter (PJ, 11 January, p50) regarding canvassing restrictions with interest. I presume that any changes in the situation regarding canvassing for election to Council will also apply to the Society's Scottish Executive.

In the latter case restrictions on canvassing are even more draconian. Council candidates are allowed to make a policy statement, but candidates for the Scottish Executive are allowed to state nothing other than limited personal details. Although this may be adequate for candidates who belong to branches with around a 1,000 members, it is wholly inadequate for a candidate like myself who belongs to a branch with around 80 members.

It means I am asking the other 4,000 Scottish pharmacists to elect me on the basis that they most probably have no knowledge of me, of my abilities, my talents and, most important, my policies for pharmacy. I may have no ability, no talent and no policies, but no one is ever any the wiser.

As things stand, there is nothing in the Bye-laws or Charter to say that someone cannot canvass, it is a procedural precedent. It is also against the will of the membership at large — motions requesting that Council should reconsider the restrictions on canvassing by electoral candidates have been passed at several recent Branch Representatives' Meetings.

More importantly the restriction on canvassing is also contrary to the European Convention on Human Right, Article 10, Freedom of Expression, which states: "Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers." This was incorporated into United Kingdom law by the Human Rights Act 1998.

Consequently should I decide to accuse the Society of breaching my human rights, by disallowing me from disseminating my views and policies as a candidate for Council or the Scottish Executive, then the Society will have to demonstrate relevant and sufficient reason for such interference. In the case of the Scottish Executive, where even a candidate's policy statement is not allowed, I believe the Society would experience difficulty.

The Society could be held to account as a public authority. The Society's statutory activities and public significance mean that it can be regarded as such. Public authorities should act in a way that positively reinforces the principles of the Human Rights Act.

I believe the Scottish Executive should examine this issue as a matter of urgency, or face the possibility of a court case they would surely lose.

Maurice Hickey
Forres, Morayshire

Send your letter to The Editor

Previous Topic (CPD)
Next Topic (The Society)