Proposed Charter changes expected to be acceptable to Privy Council
The Council's proposed changes to the draft new Charter (see panel
below) should be acceptable to the Privy Council. That is the view of
an expert in the law relating to chartered bodies, Robert Bulling, of
Allen & Overy.
The Council’s main proposed revisions
to the draft new Charter
The following are the Council’s main
proposed revisions to the draft new Charter:
· The reordering of Object 3 to place it as
the second object and its revision to read: “to safeguard, maintain the honour,
and promote the interests of pharmacists in their exercise of the
profession of pharmacy”
· A revision of the former Object 2 (now Object
3) to read “to promote and protect the health
and well-being of the public through the regulation and professional
leadership and development of the pharmacy profession and the regulation
of other persons engaged in related activities”
· A requirement that any new category of membership should be subject
to the members’ approval
· A requirement that any proposal from the Society to change the
Council’s composition should be subject to the members’ approval
· A provision allowing the Council to ballot the members for approval
of constitutional changes
· An acknowledgement of the potential for developments in devolution
in measures relating to the winding-up of the Society |
Mr
Bulling (who is a member of the Society’s modernisation steering
group) gave his opinion during the special
Council meeting on 30 June
in response to concerns expressed by Council member Hassan Argomandkhah,
who said there was a need to sort out the language used in relation to
the proposed changes. People talked of “minor changes” and “substantive
changes”. It was important because the Privy Council would not
accept what it saw as major changes.
Mr Bulling agreed that there was an issue with regard to whether some
things were major or minor changes. That was to do with whether or not
they could proceed on the basis of the existing petition and put back
to the Privy Council a modified draft. His view was that the changes
the Council had agreed to make were within the contemplation of that
exercise. So from this point, they need not talk about minor or major.
There was another question as to whether or not any issues that arose
during or after the ballot could be taken on board. He thought that that
would probably depend on whether they were just a technicality or some
minor typographical error to be sorted out. Basically, the Council was
now going to ask the members to say yes or no to the draft. The ground
was laid to go back to the Privy Council for amendment under the existing
petition.
|
The
Pharmaceutical Journal