|
Dispensing
EpiPens
Pharmacy practice
Oxygen cylinders
Overseas registration
Statutory Committee
The branches
The Council
The Charter
Letters to the Editor
|
The Council
What is the role of the Privy Council nominee members?
From Mr G. S. Phillips, MRPharmS
Three Privy Council nominees currently sit on the Council of the Royal
Pharmaceutical Society. From the members’ perspective, little is
known about these individuals or their role, but I have always understood
them to want to see “fair play” — in short they are
the voice of reason and democracy who would call “foul” should,
for example, a renegade president and an unrepresentative Council attempt
to ride roughshod over the views and interests of the members of an honourable
profession.
In this context, the constitution of a professional body — like
that of a country — is arrived at after much blood, sweat and tears.
Constitutions are put in place for the long term and are deliberately
fashioned to be difficult to change, in fundamental ways at least. Major
constitutional changes invariably require the overwhelming sanction of
those affected.
During the Council debate on the revised draft Charter (PJ, 11 October,
pp522–3), various members of Council expressed their concern at
the degree to which the membership were being air-brushed out of the
democratic process and sought to restore the greater controls placed
upon the Society’s Council by the current Royal Charter. Against
this background it is surprising, therefore, that one of the Privy Council
nominees, Professor Michael Schofield, argued that, far from being constrained
by the democratic process, the Council should be empowered to the extraordinary
degree that the revised Charter allows.
Also in this context, the Secretary and Registrar, Ann
Lewis, writes
(PJ, 8 November, p642): “Although appointment to the Privy
Council is normally for life, only Ministers of the government of the
day participate
in its operational work. Hence, it is government ministers who take Privy
Council decisions.”
Of equal relevance is Royal Charter guidance on the Privy Council’s
website, which states that those applying for a Royal Charter should
have “taken soundings among other bodies who may have an interest,
in order to minimise the risk of a counter-petition” and that “any
proposal which is rendered controversial by a counter-petition is unlikely
to succeed”.
That the Council patently does not have the membership behind it is crystal
clear from the results of the last Council elections, the special general
meeting, the annual general meeting, the branch representatives’ meeting
and the continued disquiet about “modernisation” evident
in all the pharmacy journals.
My question then is this: How do the Privy Council nominees themselves
see their role? As the independent voice of democracy? As apologists
for the government-of-the-day? Or as something else again? At this time
when their contribution is key to the future of the profession and, as
a result, is under intense scrutiny, it would be useful to hear their
views.
Graham Phillips
St Albans, Hertfordshire
| |
MICHAEL SCHOFIELD, Privy Council nominee member of the Royal
Pharmaceutical Society’s Council, replies:
The three Privy Council appointees
on the Society’s Council have a duty to act in what they perceive
to be the public interest. They bring experience of public life in
other fields and try to act with common sense, having no vested interest
in the Society, either as pharmacists or seeking any honorary position
in the hierarchy.
At the present time, I think we perceive our duty as being to ensure
that the best features of the Society, which are many, are taken
into the future while
also recognising the need for some changes to meet the requirements of today’s
Government and today’s public. |
|
* PDF files on PJ Online require Acrobat
Reader 4 or later.