Council approves plans for consultation on national board proposals
The Council has approved plans for a consultation on the proposals put forward by its devolution review group, including the proposed establishment of national boards for England, Scotland and Wales (PJ, 12 February,
pp184–5). A forward plan for the consultation means that national
boards could be established by June 2006.
It was agreed at the April
Council meeting that the consultation would
be a paper exercise that would begin shortly and be supported by public
meetings throughout Britain. The responses to the consultation would
be summarised and reported to the Council at its August meeting. At that
meeting the Council would make a decision on whether to establish national
boards and, if it resolved to do so, would agree the drawing up of concordats
and regulations and determine the transitional arrangements.
The draft concordats and regulations would be presented to the Council
for approval at its October meeting, after which the proposed regulations
would be published for comment. The draft regulations, and any comments
received, would be submitted to the Privy Council for approval. If the
Privy Council confirmed the regulations by February 2006, elections and
appointments to the national boards would take place in May 2006 and
the boards would take office in June 2006.
The Council also gave consideration to the text of a draft of the consultation
document. The text was based on the review group report and informed
by discussion at a Council strategy day in March.
During discussion, Linda Stone pointed out that the previous devolution
debate had involved only those members who live in Scotland and Wales.
In the new consultation, there was a need to engage pharmacists in England
and ensure that they understood the arguments.
Answering a question from the Treasurer, the President said that the
budgetary implications of maintaining the three boards would be identified
at a later stage.
The Vice-President asked whether the consultation would involve people
outside the profession. The Secretary and Registrar replied that the
earlier consultation in Scotland and Wales had been both internal and
external. That had been beneficial, producing some good ideas, and it
would be useful to consult externally in England too.
Clive Jackson said that an essential danger in the consultation was that
it could be seen as an issue affecting predominantly Wales and Scotland
and therefore more pertinent for people in Wales and Scotland to comment
on. It was crucial to make clear the importance of comments from members
in England.
In addition, it was important to make it clear that the Council did not
necessarily agree with everything in the consultation document and that
it was not presented as a preferred approach from the Council.
There were clearly issues that needed further work.
The Council then approved the document, subject to its modification to
take account of concerns raised by Council members, and the forward plan.
|
The
Pharmaceutical Journal