Society registers four main Section 60 concerns
Hemant Patel: registration and Society membership should remain
linked |
Four main concerns about the draft Section 60 Order that sets out the future regulatory framework for pharmacists in England, Scotland and Wales and for pharmacy technicians in England and Wales have been reported to the Department of Health by the Royal Pharmaceutical Society.
Publishing the Society’s response (PDF 130K) to the draft Order
this week, Society President Hemant Patel said: “The Society has
long been aware of the inadequacies regarding its powers and procedures
stemming
from current legislation. We have sought opportunities to update these
and have worked hard to influence the shape of this historic Order.
“During the consultation, the Society has heard the views of pharmacists
and other pharmacy bodies that have been essential to informing our response.
While overall we welcome the draft Order, we have several concerns which
we have highlighted to the Department of Health and urged them to take
on board.”
In addition to the four main concerns (see Panel) the Society has also
said that the proposed definition of practising pharmacists and pharmacy
technicians should be wider than only those working in direct contact
with patients. It wants those who give advice on the practice of pharmacy
to be included as practising pharmacists.
Society’s four main
concerns
· The main purpose of the Society given in
the draft Order does not closely reflect the Society’s
Royal Charter
· The draft Order does not empower the Society to regulate pharmacy
technicians in Scotland
· Statutory registration as a pharmacist and membership of the
Society should remain linked
· Chairmanship of the Society’s Disciplinary Committee should
be a Privy Council appointment, as it is for the current Statutory
Committee |
Overall, the Society has taken
the view that the draft Order reflects its own proposals to the DoH.
So its response concentrates on areas where
it believes the draft Order can be improved.
For example, the Society says that members of the Society who both live
and work overseas and who are professionally regulated locally should
be allowed to be on the UK non-practising register. It says that if this
is not allowed, then these pharmacists might give up their Society membership.
This would mean that they were no longer subject to the Society’s
Code of Ethics and that this would reduce the protection of the public.
In addition, however, the response makes plain the Society’s support
for explicit legislative reference to consideration as to whether applicants
for registration have an appropriate attitude and history of behaviour.
A report of the June meeting of the Society’s council begins on
p727 |
The
Pharmaceutical Journal
Acrobat
Reader