The Pharmaceutical Journal
Vol 274 No 7342 p349
26 March 2005

This article
Reprint   Photocopy

  Acrobat Reader

News summary

Society not included on regulatory review committee

Nicholas Wood, President of the Royal Pharmaceutical Society, has written to health minister Lord Warner expressing dismay that the Society has not been included on the advisory committee set up to review the regulation of health professions.

The letter from Mr Wood was sent last Friday as soon as the Society learnt details of the membership of the committee. It followed the announcement earlier in the week by Health Secretary John Reid (PJ, 19 March, p323) of the review that will consider the regulation of pharmacists, nurses, midwives, opticians, osteopaths, chiropractors and the 13 other allied health care professions represented by the Health Professions Council.

A 17-strong advisory committee has been established but there is only one pharmacist member — the Department of Health’s chief pharmaceutical officer Jim Smith. Optometrists are not represented and dentists will have to rely on input from the chief dental officer. The Nursing and Midwifery Council and the Health Professions Council both have two representatives. The committee also fails to reflect all home countries of the UK.

In the letter the President said he was dismayed that the Society was not represented on the group because it has been working on the future of pharmacy regulation and reform. It has also been closely involved with the DoH looking at the implications of two of the Shipman Inquiry reports on issues around Controlled Drugs and professional regulation. A Society spokeswoman said: “The President has written to Lord Warner and asked that the decision not to involve the Society is reconsidered as a matter of urgency.” She added: “The President made the point that in order to engage the members in what comes out of the review the Society has to be part of the review.”

The Society also believes it has a valuable contribution to make to the review because pharmacy is the only health profession which has its own inspectorate. The Society is also responsible for regulating pharmacist superintendents which means, unlike other regulatory bodies, it has links with the corporate sector. “These are the kinds of issues that are relevant to the review,” the spokeswoman said.

The review will take place alongside another review, being carried out by the chief medical officer for England Sir Liam Donaldson, which is looking at the future make up of the General Medical Council and doctor regulation following the fifth Shipman Inquiry report published in December.

Mr Reid said: “[The] new review will complement the work being undertaken by the chief medical officer. It will help enable us to put in place comprehensive and consistent measures to ensure all professionals treating patients remain fit to practise.”

The review has been launched as the Society continues to wait for details of the Section 60 Order of the Health Act 1999 from the DoH that will outline the future regulation of the profession. The DoH confirmed that the recently announced review will not influence the Section 60 Order which will be published for consultation in the summer.

A DoH spokesman said that the Society was not invited to join the committee because numbers were limited. The Nursing and Midwifery Council represents 600,000 registrants while the Health Professions Council has 130,000 registrants compared with the Society, which has fewer than 50,000. “It was simply a case of drawing the line somewhere for practical reasons. We will of course want to discuss the work of the review closely with every regulator.”