Planning a response to the review of health profession regulation
The Vice-President of the Royal Pharmaceutical Society, Gerald
Alexander, who chaired this week's Council meeting in the absence of the President, explains how the Society intends to respond to the recommendations of the two recent reports on the regulation of health care professions
Gerald Alexander: Society has led the field in health profession
regulation |
At its August meeting, the Council had its first opportunity to discuss
the key messages arising from the two recent reports on the future of
health professional regulation. Further opportunities will follow at
a strategic review day in September and at the October meeting of the
Council. By then, we hope to have framed the Council’s responses
to both sets of recommendations, which have far-reaching implications
for the public, all health professions and their regulatory bodies and
for the Society in particular.
We shall, of course, consider all the issues and implications and, by
our responses, demonstrate professional leadership. As leaders of the
profession, it is our duty to explain that we have the ideas and solutions
that will satisfy the Government’s requirements and ensure that
pharmacy has the robust and effective frameworks needed to take it into
the future.
The Society was an active member of the group advising the review of
non-medical professional regulation chaired by Andrew Foster. We shared
the work that we had done to modernise the Society in its role as a regulatory
body in line with best practice. We have been proactive in identifying
gaps in public protection that require new powers and are pleased that
the long-awaited Pharmacy and Pharmacy Technicians Order [under Section
60 of the Health Act 1999] will go forward. Our contribution to both
reviews helped stimulate and clarify thinking on the principles of modern
regulation.
The Society has led the field in ensuring the highest standard of regulation.
Good regulation is integral to any health profession as it is to the
public. It is the bedrock on which the public’s trust is based.
For the vast majority of health professionals who are competent, caring
and delivering a high standard of service, sound regulation is empowering.
The Society’s integrated roles are established through its 2004
Royal Charter, which provides the authority for the Society to fulfil
all its current roles within one organisation. The granting of this Charter
was effectively an acknowledgement by the Government that the Society’s
roles were indeed compatible and acceptable. The Foster review agrees
that these roles combine to the good of the public but raises questions
about perceptions of tension between them.
We have always believed that our integrated roles enable us to support
the progress of the profession in ways that meet the real needs of patients
and fulfil the aspirations of our profession. Our functions — which
span education, registration, research, policy and practice development,
ethics and fitness to practise, maintaining membership networks, publishing,
supporting science, and informing and involving the public and patients — are
strengths that keep the profession patient-focused, dynamic, informed
and forward-looking.
We shall endeavour to ensure that there will be absolute clarity how
our integrated roles work and strengthen, not detract from, the public
interest by being vested in the Society. We intend to scrutinise how
we deliver these roles and ensure that we remove any possibility of misconstruction
of our purpose and direction of travel.
The outcomes from these two reports will be far reaching and significant
and, I am sure, challenging. The profession can rest assured that the
Council’s energy will be focused on arriving at clear analysis
and sense of purpose, bringing forward workable solutions for the future
of the profession, the Society and the public.
|
The
Pharmaceutical Journal