The Pharmaceutical Journal
Vol 270 No 7238 p304
1 March 2003

This page
Reprint
Photocopy

PDF* 90K

  OFT report
  Corporate pharmacy
  Supermarket pharmacy
  CPD
  Chloroform water
  Antipsychotics
  Advertising
  Pharmacist prescribing
  Dentistry
  APPG
  The Register
  Dispensing
  The Profession
  Leadership
  The Council
  The Society

Letters to the Editor

Leadership

Where are we headed?

From Mr I. D. Khan, MRPharmS, and others

Life is a rollercoaster better than any that Disney could provide. Here we were, holding a weekend conference for North East London Local Pharmaceutical Committee members and invited guests (including key primary care trust decision-makers and key pharmacy contractors). For good measure we managed to get some national strategic policy-makers to address us about the options for a viable future for pharmacy. Things were going well. We spoke about some of our proposed projects and the speakers gave us some pointers to help us focus on better procedures and more fruitful outcomes. We felt exhilarated.

Then someone dared to ask the director of primary care, NHS England, why, given that he had devoted a Sunday to us (a measure of our worth to the NHS?) we had not been included in the Government's national primary care strategy to date. Disney cannot compete with the G-forces produced by his reply — "that the national leadership was not knocking at their door". Wow! The press was present and duly recognised this for the bombshell that it was and set it to print (PJ, 15 February, p213).

Now we approach the top of the loop where you get flung into an abyss. The leadership reacts. The Scots and Welsh show concern at this perceived shortcoming. The Royal Pharmaceutical Society said nothing. The Pharmaceutical Services Negotiating Committee gives an indifferent knee-jerk about varied opinion being an advantage. What is the advantage in winking in the dark where no one can see you?

Who needs to influence whom? If the strategists do not know of our aspirations then where is continued running on the spot going to take us? If varied opinion is really an advantage then surely it should, via active and informed dialogue, result in a meaningful, fruit-bearing solution. Are the national bodies out of touch or is the Department of Health? Can you really afford to think it is the holder of the purse strings? Does the PSNC know something that is not visible to the DoH or the membership at large? If we are going to negotiate at local level (Mike King and NEL-LPC are indeed currently active) then do we really need to fund another negotiator or should we subject the committee to a bout of clinical governance and ask for justification and an account of its activities? The NEL-LPC questioned the PSNC about its views on public health. It was unable to point us in any meaningful direction; conversely, it is not prepared to adopt any initiative presented to it.

Our quality of speakers was to show the audience (PCT decision-makers) of our commitment. Our objectives were accomplished but a side effect arose, namely, the national leadership exposé.

We sincerely urge our leadership to engage actively and diligently their grey cells and come up with a practical and viable solution to tackle this new and unwelcome dilemma.

Imran Khan
Ilford, Essex

Jignesh Patel
Plaistow, Essex

Surinder Singh Kalsi
Barking, Essex

Send your letter to The Editor

Previous Topic (The Profession)
Next Topic (The Council)