| • Community pharmacy (3)
• Pfizer proposals
• COPD
• Statins
• Complementary medicine
• NHS
• Physician-assisted suicide (3)
• Prescribing
• Northern Ireland
• Medicines recycling
• Retention fees
• Reciprocity
Letters to the Editor
|
Reciprocity
Recognition of British-registered pharmacists in the EU
From Mr J. Ferguson, FRPharmS
Andrew Husband makes important points in his Broad
spectrum article “A
solid foundation in science and practice is a must for the NHS’s
Future” (PJ, 27 January, p104). And, on the reasonable assumption
that those involved in pharmacy education wish the qualifications of those
who register as pharmacists in Britain to be recognised by the other 26
countries of the EU, they will have to ensure that courses continue to
comply with the requirements of EU legislation.
The new “Directive on recognition of professional qualifications” (2005/36/EC)
has to be incorporated into national legislation by 1 November 2007. If
qualifications are to benefit from automatic recognition by other member
states, they will have to meet the “harmonised minimum training conditions” included
in the directive. In practice, these carry forward the corresponding provisions
in the current “sectoral” directives for pharmacists.
Recital 25 in the new directive makes it clear that “holders of qualifications
as a pharmacist are specialists in the field of medicines” and Article
44 covers “training as a pharmacist”. Paragraph 3 of this Article
states that “training for pharmacists shall provide an assurance
that the person concerned has acquired the following knowledge and skills:
• Adequate knowledge of medicines and the substances used in the manufacture
of medicines
• Adequate knowledge of pharmaceutical technology and the physical, chemical
and biological and microbiological testing of medicinal products
• Adequate knowledge of the metabolism and the effects of medicinal products
and of the action of toxic substances,
and of the use of medicinal products
• Adequate knowledge to evaluate scientific data concerning medicines in
order to be able to supply appropriate information on the basis of this
knowledge
• Adequate knowledge of the legal and other requirements associated with
the pursuit of pharmacy
These provisions can only be changed by going through the complete EU legislative
process, involving the Commission, the Council of Ministers and the Parliament.
It is unlikely that time will be devoted to such a measure in the foreseeable
future. The new directive took more than three years from proposal to adoption.
The list of subjects to be included in the “course of training for
pharmacists” is set out in Annex V.6 of the new directive. Apart
from “legislation and, where appropriate, professional ethics” all
of the subjects listed can, I believe, properly be described as scientific.
There is no mention of pharmacy practice. The EU Advisory Committee on
Pharmacy Education and Training, on which I was privileged to serve and
to chair for some years but which has now been abolished, recognised that
the list needed to be updated to adapt to what the directive describes
as “scientific and technical progress” and presented appropriate
recommendations to the Commission.
Under the old directives, change could only be achieved by going through
the complete EU legislative process and the Commission had many other priorities.
In fairness, the Commission did inform the then member states of the recommendations
of the advisory committee for course development and they were implemented
voluntarily by most member states. Under the provisions of the new directive,
the list of subjects can be amended via a qualified majority in a committee
of representatives of member states (civil servants), after the Commission
has consulted “experts from the professional groups concerned” and
provided “a reasoned report on these consultations” to the
Committee. Thus, there is now the possibility of a faster track than previously.
However, unless circumstances have changed dramatically, and I have no
reason to believe that to be the case, anyone who proposes a weakening
of the science base of the course leading to qualification as a pharmacist
for automatic recognition throughout the EU will encounter stern resistance.
On the other hand, proposed developments to reflect “scientific and
technical progress” to meet the needs of modern pharmacy practice
are much more likely to be welcomed.
John Ferguson
Haywards Heath,
West Sussex |
The
Pharmaceutical Journal