The Pharmaceutical Journal
Vol 279 No 7461 p72
21 July 2007

This article
Reprint   Photocopy

PDF 40K, Acrobat Reader

• White Paper
• Pfizer
• Recruitment
• Dispensing
• Labelling
• Retention fees

Letters to the Editor

Retention fees

Two copies of the PJ and an inspector in 2003

From Mr K. J. Baxter, MRPharmS

Qualifying as a pharmacist in 1992, I paid my first Royal Pharmaceutical Society retention fee for a full year in 1993 and it was £112. This December I will be paying the fee for the 15th year and I query why, these days, I am expected to pay two and a half times the amount I paid in 1992. I realise that some increase is explained by inflation but have prices really gone up by this amount in only 15 years? I am sure that someone at the Society’s headquarters in London will be able to justify everything but I would like to make the following points from my personal viewpoint.

All the Society seems to effectively do for me is to send my household two copies of The Pharmaceutical Journal each Friday and to send people to police me.

Regarding The Journal, I am told that the Society uses The Journal as its communication tool to all members. Since my wife is also a pharmacist (something I think is not uncommon in the profession) the Society must make the postman carry two of these to my house every week.

Surprisingly one is never opened and immediately binned. Yes, a waste of money and not environmentally friendly. Surely people in this situation can agree to share, or how about an electronic weekly format for those who want it? The savings could perhaps be passed to members in terms of a reduced annual fee.

In 1992, I probably saw an inspector every six months or so. The last time I met one was in 2003. Lucky for me, four years off for good behaviour. But it would be helpful to meet one occasionally just to bounce ideas off and check my understanding of the latest legalities. I suppose they might be like buses and three will turn up next week. At least the primary care trust and police drug inspector keeps me in check more often — and I do not directly pay for them.
 
Keith Baxter
Worcester

Send your letter to The Editor

Previous Topic (Labelling)