| • Sponsored inserts (3)
• Dose administration aids
• White Paper
• Prescribing
• 100-hour pharmacies
• Retention fees
• The Society (2)
Letters to the Editor
|
The Society
How can this spending be justified?
From Mrs A. R. Shaw, MRPharmS
I recently complained about the profligate use of our membership fees
(PJ, 25 August, p205). I also expressed my concern about the possible
and probable misuse of our money on things not readily noticeable to
us.
I have since been made aware of one such matter, the proposed expenditure
of a minimum of £98,000 in the employment of three employees, namely
head of public affairs, (a new post), communications manager, (to head
a team of four) and a senior communications officer.
I would appreciate
confirmation or denial of this intention, for in view of our uncertain
future, how can this be justified? Ruth Shaw
Bolton
| |
GRAHAM PHILLIPS, member of the Royal Pharmaceutical
Society’s
Council and chairman of its Public Affairs Planning Group, responds:
As
Andrew Gush, the Society’s Treasurer, has made clear,
we welcome suggestions from members as to how the Society
can be most cost effective. I have given a number of branch
talks in recent weeks: members tell me that they want a much
better and more supportive relationship with their Society and
we are working on exactly that through Opinion Leader research
and the review led independently by Nigel Clarke.
Other consistent
feedback is a desire for the Society to achieve greater recognition
by Government of our crucial role in the health and wellbeing of
the public.
Clearly, one of the areas where the Society needs to invest more
is in its communications effort. With devolution and the impact
of the EU, the public affairs health agenda
is increasingly complex and it is vital that this is managed effectively. Although
the head of public affairs is a new role, it was covered before at a more junior
level and only on a part-time basis, so not all the costs are new.
The communications effort must increase to respond to the planned separation
and the need to ensure the national pharmacy boards are truly effective in promoting
the benefits of pharmacy.
A check on the Society website and the British
Pharmaceutical Conference website will show the level of
activity. BPC 2007 received coverage across almost all national daily print media
and national, regional and local
broadcasters. The team also responds to the daily news agenda and manage proactive
campaigns.
In recent weeks pharmacy has been mentioned favourably by the new Prime Minister,
the Secretary of State for Health, the shadow Liberal Democrat and the shadow
Conservative health secretaries and again, this week, in Derek Wanless’s
King’s Fund report on the future of health care. In short, the profession’s
efforts are bearing fruit.
We are eager for greater success and still more results. Members say they want
the Society to speak with a stronger voice to represent their interests to government
and the media. That is why we are prepared to invest. |
How are such administration fees justified?
From Mr A. Rahman, MRPharmS
I recently asked for data from the Royal Pharmaceutical Society, pertaining
to my ethnic diversity study and, for the sake of some easily obtained
numbers, I was quoted £50 for an administration fee, 65p per label
for label costs and £75 per hour, (a minimum of £100) for
technical support.
In view of the proposed increase in fees, how are such administration
fees justified? These costs have stopped my study until I can source
funding. Surely such data should be accessible by members online or through
CD-ROM within our fee structure. The proposed fee increase should be
opposed by all members since the existing fee is poor value for money
as it stands.
Abdul Rahman
Dudley, West Midlands
| |
SUE AMBLER, head of research and development at
the Royal Pharmaceutical Society, responds:
The process used to approve
the use of data for research
purposes involves a detailed assessment and sign-off procedure by
staff at the Society. Indeed final sign-off is given at director level
in
order to ensure that members’ personal details are protected and
that our data are used in line with the Society’s data protection
registration.
When requests for datasets require stratification of the register(s)
by, for example, sectors of practice or geographical location this
requires additional
technical support in our IT department.
In order to obtain data for research members should e-mail requests to practiceresearch@rpsgb.org
Members
should be aware that they will be asked to complete a formal request that
asks for details of the methodology and ethics committee approval
among other things. |
|
The
Pharmaceutical Journal