The Pharmaceutical Journal
Vol 276 No 7406 p738
24 June 2006

This article
Reprint   Photocopy

PDF 20K, Acrobat Reader

Unpopular, but necessary more
Pharmacy in the political spotlight again more

Unpopular, but necessary

Advance notice of what the new Rules governing payment of retention fees to the Royal Pharmaceutical Society are likely to say is given in an article published in this week's Journal (p767). These Rules may not be popular and will, for many members, appear draconian — starting with the realisation that payment may have to be made before Christmas from 2007 (for 2008) and that there may no longer be any period of grace if payment is not made on time. No reminders will be sent and pharmacists and pharmacy technicians will be automatically removed from the Registers.

There are other proposed changes, which make the process seem similar to renewing car tax: members may have to produce evidence of insurance as well as undertake mandatory continuing professional development as a forerunner to revalidation. As The Journal has previously commented, the public demands tougher regulation and this is the price health professionals may have to pay (PJ, 10 June, p668).

The Journal is confident that members will respond vigorously to these proposals when the consultation opens in 10 days’ time, and we are steeling ourselves for the barrage of letters we are bound to receive on the topic.

Back to Top

Pharmacy in the political spotlight again

Pharmacy is once again in the political spotlight with the announcement that the All-Party Pharmacy Group is launching an inquiry into the future of pharmacy. The group’s chairman, Howard Stoate, has said the motivation for the inquiry is that, although there are signs that pharmacists are making progress in contributing to improved health care, the effort is too patchy. Much more needs to be done to make sure pharmacists’ expertise and resources can be used to maximum effect (p739).

The APPG inquiry will question people inside and outside the profession, including policy makers at the Department of Health and the NHS, and patients. Its terms of reference are broad and, although the inquiry is to embrace secondary care, the focus is likely to be on the community sector.

When it comes to identifying barriers to progress in the community sector, the APPG may find it has a great deal to learn from hospital pharmacy. At its best, hospital pharmacy seems to be distinguished by one main feature: multidisciplinary team working.

In hospital practice, pharmacists’ expertise is recognised by doctors and nurses and their contribution is valued as highly as that of any of the other health professionals. This is often not the case in the community and if the APPG can make a difference it will be to help bring political influence to bear on primary care organisations and the mass ranks of GPs.

Back to Top