Divided, we stand
Although there is still disquiet in some quarters that the Royal Pharmaceutical Society has allowed the regulation of pharmacy to swamp other activities, there are signs that the professional side of the Society is moving up the agenda fast. At last week’s Council meeting, members were given the first taste of what Lord Fraser of Carmyllie has been discussing with the Devolution
Review Group that was set up last year (PJ, 14 February 2004, p197). Their preliminary proposals make stimulating reading (see p167, p181 and pp184–5).
In future, the group suggests, in addition to the Scottish and Welsh
executives, there should be an English equivalent. (The group also makes
the sensible point that none of them should be called “executive” because
of the confusion with the name of the government in Scotland — the
Scottish Executive.)
These three “boards”, for sake of argument, would be responsible
for making policy for their respective countries and responding to the
needs of the national governments. Although the respective health services
seem to be developing along roughly the same lines at the moment, there
are signs that things can move along much faster in Scotland and Wales
than they do in England. If the Society wishes to keep up and make sure
its voice is heard it has got to be more nimble-footed than it is currently.
For example, there could be issues that originate in Scotland or Wales,
but the consultation deadlines could be missed if policy development
has to wait until after a full debate by the Council. To overcome this
problem, the Devolution Review Group recommends that, when a speedy response
is required in a particular country, the relevant board would devise
policy that would be adopted by the Society at large until it could be
considered by the other boards and the Council, and any refinements made.
Not all Society matters will be devolved; regulation, for example, will
continue to rest in Lambeth although there might be circumstances in
which the Statutory Committee would need to hear cases in Edinburgh or
Cardiff.
Will such a system be good for the Society? The Journal believes it will.
However, there are dangers ahead. The devolved boards might see this
as an opportunity for empire building, while Lambeth might not wish to
lose control of policy-making.
For the Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain as a whole to benefit
from a devolved board structure, transparency and communication will
need to be the watchwords. There will also have to be wholehearted acceptance
by the Society that its Scottish and Welsh boards will have just as important
a role to play on the GB stage as the proposed English board.
Back to Top
|
The
Pharmaceutical Journal