|
• Retention fees
• Concessionary fees
• Pack sizes (5)
• Prescribing
• Controlled drugs
• Hospital infections
• Wholesalers
• Locum pharmacy
• BPC
Letters to the Editor
|
Retention fees
Preparing for the future
From Mr A. C. Gush, MRPharmS
Gladly, the Royal Pharmaceutical Society’s Council has now lessened
the impact of the fee increase following changes to the financial circumstances
and revised planning forecast for 2008. This has also enabled feedback
from members to be acted upon as much as possible.
The proposed practising retention fee for pharmacists was £425
for 2008. This has been reduced to £395. In addition, the impact
on certain membership groups such as preregistration trainees and non-practising
members has been lessened to reflect their more vulnerable circumstances.
When the Resource Management Committee recommended the original increase
to the Council at the beginning of July 2007, the decision was based
upon the best information available at that time.
In the months that
have
followed, I have worked closely with the senior staff at the Society
to undertake a major review of the planning assumptions, the external
factors and the expenditure forecast.
I can now report that we were able to make efficiency savings of £500,000
and also to revise the forecast pension provision costs. This created
a window to allow the Council not only to reduce the overall pharmacists’ retention
fee, but also to consider carefully feedback from the consultation process
which argued for special treatment for groups such as preregistration
trainees.
It was made clear through the consultation that staged payments were
a major issue for our members. Therefore it must be a huge priority for
the Society and, although a timetable for the introduction of this is
dependent upon legislation, we are determined to take make this happen
for 2009.
This has certainly been a challenging year to be the Society’s
Treasurer. It has been of great importance to treat fellow members with
respect and honesty and I have committed to sharing information and responding
to members’ concerns, particularly through letters to the PJ.
As
I have said in the past, the formal consultation process and online
petition did not make for comfortable reading, but I appreciate the strength
of
feeling among the members and it is only right and proper that the
Council has acted positively and constructively on the feedback.
I hope that members are now better aware of the financial situation
that is in part inherited, and in part thrust upon the Society. Understandably
members voiced their dissatisfaction with the situation and we have
responded
by making the biggest reductions we can, while still safeguarding our
ability to invest in areas that matter most, such as education, communications
and pharmacy practice.
I will continue to investigate ways of helping members financially
at crucial times in their careers and also, free of the future shackling
costs of regulation, develop a fees structure for the new professional
body with recognisably low costs so that fees will not be a barrier
to
membership. We want all members to join.
As Treasurer, I am now satisfied that we have a solid base for the
Society to move forward and to lead the profession creating tangible
benefits
for the public, for pharmacists and for our contribution to health
care. Andrew Gush
Treasurer
Royal Pharmaceutical Society
|
The
Pharmaceutical Journal