Pharmacists facing sharp increase in Society fees
Increases in past five years
Society retention fees have increased steadily in the past five
years with the exception of one sharp rise in 2002.
From 1999 to 2000, the fee was raised by 3 per cent and the increase
was similar in 2001. This was followed by a major increase of 31
per cent from £142 in 2001 to £186 in 2002. Subsequent
increases were 4.8 per cent in 2003 and 5 per cent in 2004. Reasons
given for the 2002 hike in fees were to fund both constitutional
change and new areas of professional and regulatory activity in
order to meet the modernisation agenda (PJ, 11 August 2001, p209). |
Pharmacists are facing a 25 per cent increase in next year’s annual retention fee for membership of the Royal Pharmaceutical Society.
The Society announced this week that, subject to Privy Council approval,
it plans a retention fee increase of £51 next year. This will increase
the levy from £205 this year to £256. The reasons for this
are covered in the Society section (see p233). To summarise, it is because
in recent years the level of the retention fee has not matched the growth
in both regulatory and membership activities. As a
result, the Society has had to depend on
income from its publishing activities and the Society’s Council
has agreed that this is not prudent because of risks in the marketplace.
The Society has also decided to simplify the fee structure so that there
will only be two levels of fee compared with the current five. Pharmacists
will either pay a practising rate or a non-practising rate, which it
is
envisaged will be one-third of the practising fee. The Society says that
the current fees for those aged over 60 years and those retired due to
ill health neither cover the cost of the administration involved in collecting
the fee and maintaining the register, nor the cost of providing The
Journal.
It adds that having only two levels will also bring all practising pharmacists
into one category, which will make regulation more transparent.
The fees compare favourably with those paid by doctors and dentists,
but less well with fees paid by nurses. Most health professions pay separate
fees: one for regulation and one for professional representation. Doctors,
for example, have to be registered with the General
Medical Council (the
regulatory body) and have the option of being a member of the British
Medical Association. Almost 80 per cent of UK doctors are BMA members.
The annual GMC registration fee is £290 this year, and has been
at this level since 2002. A decision on next year’s fee has yet
to be made. On top of this, full membership of the BMA costs £335
this year, and the proposed rate for next year is £360.
Nurses are regulated by the Nursing
and Midwifery Council to which they
pay a three-yearly retention fee of £129. Annual membership of
the Royal College of Nursing, which is the representative body, is £158.
The General Dental Council is the regulatory body for dentists. Its annual
retention fee this year is £388. The fee was sharply
increased — by 160 per cent — from £135 in 2002 to £350
in 2003 (PJ, 20 April 2002, p521). Next year’s increase is proposed
at just 2 per cent, subject to Privy Council approval. The GDC says that
the 2003 fee hike was largely due to its modernisation programme, including
work around the registration of dental technicians, and also to process
an increasing number of complaints. Membership of the British
Dental Association, the dentists’ representative body, costs £396
this year. Next year’s fee is not yet known.
However, the BDA is currently facing financial crisis. This week, it
confirmed that its overspend for 2002/03 was £760,000 with a projected
deficit of £1.5m in 2003/04. Its
finance director has resigned. A recovery plan has been put in place
and it hopes to return to financial surplus by October. |
The
Pharmaceutical Journal
Acrobat
Reader