| · The Charter
· Charter ballot
· Volunteer agencies
· Voting
· Personal control
· Medicines and devices
· Simvastatin
· Ward technicians
· CAM
· Remuneration
· The Profession
· Education
· CRCS
· Retention fee
· Onlooker
Letters to the Editor
|
Charter ballot
Low percentage
voting should be a cause for concern
From Ms S. A. Haynes, MRPharmS
Your leading article “Light at the end of the tunnel” (PJ,
28 August, p276) has a patronising tone which incensed me. The special
general meeting was about far more than just the referendum, and the “tumultuous
year” achieved far more than just a chance for the members to have
their say over the new Charter.
The low percentage of members voting should be a cause for concern for
the Royal Pharmaceutical Society’s Council, not a chance to indulge
in rather childish one-upmanship.
Of course most members did not respond in the recent referendum. Maybe
they did not respond because they agree with Philip Sealy’s sentiments
in the letters column (ibid, p286): maybe they believe their individual
voices are not going to be heard, or noticed, or have any effect.
I agree that the “yes” vote is a light at the end of the tunnel.
However, what lies at the end must not be a return to a situation where
the Council thinks it does not need to consult with the membership. The
Council must recognise its responsibilities and ensure that no member
feels as Mr Sealy does, whether it is about the retention fees or any
other issue.
Sally Haynes
Birmingham
|
The
Pharmaceutical Journal