Home > PJ (current issue) > Letters | Search

PJ Online homeThe Pharmaceutical Journal
Vol 272 No 7296 p506-507
24 April 2004

This article
Reprint   Photocopy

PDF 75K, Acrobat Reader

Letters

· Community pharmacy
· CSM
· Canvassing
· Registration exam
· Law and ethics


Letters to the Editor

Canvassing

SOS may not have done themselves any favours

Will not engender support

SOS may not have done themselves any favours

From Mr S. R. Axon, FRPharmS

I have always favoured the freedom to canvass and welcomed the hustings arranged by Young Pharmacists Group. In my view the Save Our Society group has taken this new found freedom too far.

Pharmacists, being intelligent people, are perfectly able to read election manifestos. For my part, I looked in all the manifestos for a considered view on the important issue of representation. I was disappointed that, rather than use their own words, seven candidates wasted part of their allocation by repeating wording clearly agreed with others. However, to receive a postcard reminding me of the seven candidates who are standing on this “one issue ticket” is implying that I have not read the manifestos before voting and is little short of insulting.

Despite the proven electoral advantages in the past of hitching oneself to a ginger-group bandwagon, if other voters have the same reaction as I have to this latest tactic then SOS candidates may not have done themselves any favours.

Stephen Axon
Amersham, Buckinghamshire


Will not engender support

From Mr J. M. Allan, MRPharmS

I have received a circular which canvasses support for seven candidates in the forthcoming Council election.

Despite the fact that it begins, “I cannot believe ...”, the circular does not disclose the identity of the writer, nor does it indicate on whose authority it is published by an undeclared source.

One has to assume that the writer has chosen to ignore the election procedure published in The Journal and that he or she regards the information supplied by all candidates, and printed in both the PJ and as a separate policy document, as inadequate.

I find it difficult to accept that such an approach will do much to engender support for the argument which these candidates espouse, indeed I suspect that it may well be counter productive.

Malcolm Allan
Glasgow 

Send your letter to The Editor

Previous Topic (CSM)
Next Topic (Registration exam)

Back to Top


©The Pharmaceutical Journal