The Pharmaceutical Journal
Vol 272 No 7286 p186
14 February 2004

This article
Reprint
Photocopy

PDF* 100K

  Which? report
  Dispensing
  Community pharmacy
  Cannabis
  Locum pay
  Mental health
  Nomenclature
  Minor ailments service
  The Society
  SOS action
  CPD
  The Charter

Letters to the Editor

The Charter

The Society must retain its original purpose

From Ms S. A. Haynes, MRPharmS

I read Peter Curphey’s letter (PJ, 7 February, p154) with increasing frustration — a familiar feeling to anyone who has involved themselves with the discussions (or lack thereof) over the Charter. I must make one point clear. I do not fear a “modern regulator”. I do not want the Royal Pharmaceutical Society to feel it has a responsibility to represent me personally in a dispute. There are unions for that. What I do want is the Society to maintain its original purpose: to represent the profession.

Sally Haynes
Birmingham

IPMI's position on Society's new Charter clarified

From Professor H. McNulty, FRPharmS

The council of the Institute of Pharmacy Management International at its meeting on 8 February noted the reference to the institute in the letter from Graham Phillips (PJ, 31 January, p121) and wishes to clarify its position accordingly.

The institute’s council responded to the consultation process on the first draft of the Charter in a letter to the Royal Pharmaceutical Society in April 2003, expressing concerns about a number of the points at that time. These were made public in our July 2003 newsletter. Although not all of our original concerns have been resolved, we have not made any further response. Members of the institute may hold personal views on this important matter and are entitled to make these known as they so wish. However, neither the institute as a body nor its council has supported (or, for that matter, opposed) the actions of any other organisation or group.

Howard McNulty
General Secretary
Insititute of Pharmacy Management International

The ball is in the Council's court

From Mr J. R. Martin MRPharmS

Why is Peter Curphey (PJ, 7 February, p154) so worried by the concept of the high court reviewing the actions of the Royal Pharmaceutical Society’s Council? Since the Council has already petitioned the Privy Council for a new Charter, it is too late to reach an agreement within the Society on its contents. The only way is to write his final paragraph in a useful fashion: “Let us see an end now to the macho politics and a return to reason. Withdraw the petition [my words] as a sign of goodwill before irreversible damage is done. It is not yet too late: agreement must be possible if everyone's motives are transparent, honest and in good faith.”

So, in my view, the ball is firmly in the Council’s court. Can it accept this new suggestion?

Jonathan Martin
Wallingford, Oxfordshire

Send your letter to The Editor

Previous Topic (CPD)