Council to make final decision on new Charter at September meeting
The final decision on the wording of the proposed new Charter for the Royal Pharmaceutical Society will not be made until a meeting of the Society's Council in September.
That assurance was given by the President at the special
Council meeting on 30 June in response to concerns that the version approved that day
was set in stone.
This timetable will allow the new Charter to be taken forward in parallel
with the Government’s Section 60 Order under the Health Act 1999
(replacing current legislation), which is expected to be issued for consultation
in the autumn.
When the Council considered a document setting out the Charter wording
agreed during the Council’s strategy days, Douglas Simpson suggested
that the Council should not give its final approval to the document that
day. He feared that if it did, it might not achieve the required unanimity.
It had made substantial and excellent progress and that should be communicated
to the members as a matter of urgency. The members should have a chance
to see what the Council had come up with, so they were not taken by surprise.
The Council should then reconsider the matter in August when it had formed
a definitive view. After that, it could go to a ballot. He thought the
Council would then get a unanimous vote.
The President said that he could allay Mr Simpson’s fears. As a
result of its earlier discussions, the Council was in a position to put
the document to the membership as its preferred draft. The result of
the ballot would be reported to the Council in September, when there
would be a final opportunity for approval.
The Secretary and Registrar stated that at the strategy meeting the Council
had approved the revised document as its preferred draft. If that was
what it now agreed in formal business, then it would ballot the members
and would recommend the revised version to them as a unanimous decision
of the Council — or whatever the decision of the Council was.
John Jolley thought it was foolhardy to try to present such a complex
document for a yes/no answer. He feared for the future if the document
did not go out for consultation to get opinions.
The President repeated that, although the document was the Council’s
preferred, agreed and recommended version of what it thought should be
the case, the final decision would not be taken until September. In the
meantime, there was an opportunity to ballot the membership on the Council’s
preferred solution. There may, indeed, be comments and clarification.
A commentary would be sent with the proposed draft, and he hoped that
that would allay a large number of fears.
Linda Stone said she did not want anybody to go out under any misapprehension.
The ballot would say either yes or no. If the membership said no, that
was the end of it. If the membership said yes, then that version would
go. It would not return to Council to be unpicked again.
Maurice Hickey said he believed the strategy meeting had agreed that
the membership would decide whether or not the document was acceptable.
It should be minuted as such and it would be binding on the Council as
the membership’s representatives.
Graham Phillips asked what would be
the process by which the Council would consider any substantive concerns
raised by the membership.
The President was sure the Council would be happy to say in the documents
it sent out that if people had comments and questions he would suggest
they bring them up.
The Secretary and Registrar said that key comments would be brought back
to the Council in September. But the Council needed to be aware that,
as had been clearly been said in the strategy meeting, if the concerns
raised amounted to more than minor change it would mean having to start
the whole process again.
Answering a question, the President said that there would be a ballot
rather than a consultation, but that there may well be some useful comments
made.
Christine Glover suggested that, if there were too many comments, the
Council might end up with the situation of having to run the ballot again.
The Secretary and Registrar thought that the ballot would ask whether
members accepted the revised draft or otherwise. The ballot would take
place as soon as it could conveniently be organised in July. The result
of the ballot would be brought back to the Council in September, and
the Council would consider any comments that came back.
The President agreed. September would be when the Council considered
the document for the last time before signing it off.
|
The
Pharmaceutical Journal