Proposals agreed for lay and technician involvement in work of national
boards
Following its approval of proposed Regulations to establish national pharmacy boards for England, Scotland and Wales (PJ, 10 June, p689 and p703), the Society's Council has also now approved proposals for effective lay and pharmacy technician involvement in the work of each board.
Considering the matter at the June
Council meeting, the Council noted
first that, under the proposed Regulations, the Scottish Pharmacy Board’s
membership would include a lay member of Council resident in Scotland
attending ex officio, with an additional lay member co-opted if the need
for specific expertise arises. There would be no technician member.
The Society’s Scottish Executive had suggested a statement reconfirming
its commitment to involve pharmacy technicians and lay people in the
work of the Scottish Pharmacy Board. The exclusion of pharmacy technicians
in Scotland from the draft Pharmacists and Pharmacy Technicians Order
had reinforced the need to engage with technician representatives. A
meeting held with representatives of the Association of Pharmacy Technicians
UK had provided “a sound platform for further development”.
In relation to involving lay people, the executive said that it already
had well developed links with some patient representative groups in Scotland
and had identified other groups that could usefully be involved. It would
develop proposals for establishing and sustaining effective relationships.
It was expected that this work would be assisted by the Society’s
patient and public involvement strategy.
For Wales, the Council had agreed that the board would include one elected
pharmacy technician member. A lay member of Council resident in Wales
(or a nominee of the Council, if there is not one) would attend ex
officio.
The Welsh Executive had suggested a statement as follows: “The
Welsh Executive will ensure appropriate involvement in the Welsh Pharmacy
Board through a number of means. For pharmacy technicians involvement
is through an elected position on the board. For lay input the lay Council
member from Wales will sit formally in an ex officio capacity but this
input will be supported
by other lay involvement through the implementation of the PPI strategy.”
In England, the Council had agreed that the English Pharmacy Board would
include one lay member of Council resident in England, appointed by the
Council. There would be no technician member.
Privy Council advisers had recently queried the fact that there would
be no pharmacy technician board member in England. The Society’s
reply had pointed out that technicians were not members of the Society
and that the boards would have no regulatory function. Nevertheless,
it might be appropriate to have a statement including specific reference
to pharmacy technicians and to the Society’s PPI strategy.
The Council was asked if it would approve a statement that: “The
English Pharmacy Board will aim to involve pharmacy technicians in the
work of the board through a range of means, including consulting APTUK
where appropriate and/or invitations to pharmacy technicians to attend
meetings where there are relevant items. It is expected that the Society
strategy for patient and public involvement, once developed, will inform
the work of the English Pharmacy Board.”
Lesley Morgan said that, as a pharmacy technician, she had been concerned
that there was no technician involvement In England, but she thought
that the proposed statement was appropriate, particularly as reassurance
had been given that the configuration of the boards would be reviewed
in due course.
The Council gave its approval to all three statements.
|
The
Pharmaceutical Journal