| · NHS
· Paracetamol
· BPC
· Homoeopathy
· The Society
· Retention fee
Letters to the Editor
|
The Society
Future of the regions
From Mr M. Bland, FRPharmS
At the June meeting of the Royal Pharmaceutical Society’s Wessex
region, one of our designated Council members, Jonathan Buisson (member
for England, Isle of Man and the Channel Islands), while giving Council
meeting feedback, clarified progress on the formation of the English
National Board (ENB). Following questions on the structure and the electoral
process, he declared that he was agnostic as to whether the current regional
structure should continue. This would introduce four tiers of organisation
(Council, board, region and branch) into the hierarchy of Lambeth instead
of the existing three tiers. We were given to understand that, although
no decision on the future of the regions had been made, it was for the
regions to work to justify their continued existence.
Since that time, I have waited for some indication that any form of consultation
might take place on the subject. At the 2005 regional secretaries’ meeting,
some discussion took place on the subject and we were led to believe
that those regions that wished to have an active existence would
be supported while those of
a different opinion had the
freedom to make alternative arrangements.
The Wessex committee has often and regularly expressed the wish to continue
its activity and members believe that they are a useful sounding board
and conduit of communication between the branches and Lambeth. They believe
that it gives Council members the opportunity to explain policy more
easily and receive feedback from the branches and members. In addition,
the regions are the only organisations that regularly arrange local conferences
which, in Wessex, are valued and would be a loss to members.
The committee believes that the ENB might be scheduled to replace the
regions but at what cost? In 2007, fee increases have been announced
(practising members 6 per cent, premises 9.3 per cent) with the costs
partially attributed to the formation of the boards (PJ, 17 August 2005,
p199) and it was indicated that there would be five elected pharmacist
places from specific areas of practice. It has been confirmed that the
12 members of the board will be able to claim full attendance allowances
at existing Council member rates.
It appears from the report of the August Council meeting that there might
be diminishing enthusiasm for the structure of the ENB from some members
and we are being provided with an additional administrative tier to bring
us in line with our colleagues in Scotland and Wales. Ordinary Society
members who have
never been enthusiastic about
the introduction of the ENB
will be even less convinced once they appreciate that it could become
an additional resource pressure leading to greater than inflation fee
increases over future years.
So what is the future of the regions? We have a proven local organisation
of regions, the members of which are drawn from their constituent branches
where they are active, and are aware of local issues and concerns. The
feedback that we have received indicates that these may be allowed to
wither on the vine and either be replaced by a more bureaucratic ENB
less receptive to local opinion or the ENB will become an extra administrative
tier performing some of the existing duties of Council but at an additional
cost. In no way will the board replace the regions and one would question
whether it was ever intended that it should.
It may be that some branch members might agree that the regions need
to disappear or change. I would support a re-examination both of their
function and for their boundaries to be redrawn more in line with health
service organisations. However, to expect the board to replace them without
a full and open discussion would appear to be a step into the unknown.
Mike Bland
Wessex Regional Secretary
Royal Pharmaceutical Society |
The
Pharmaceutical Journal