The Pharmaceutical Journal
Vol 279 No 7481 p634
8 December 2007

This article
Reprint   Photocopy

PDF 30K, Acrobat Reader

Everyone must have a view

Over the past few months The Journal has heard mutterings from various pharmacy quarters about why the Royal Pharmaceutical Society and other organisations and individuals interested in the development of a professional body have not pulled their collective finger out and devised a model or two of what the new body might look like.

In truth, a great deal has been happening behind the scenes and, although the critics might think otherwise, it takes a lot of time and effort to create a body that will still be around towards the end of the 22nd century.

It must appeal to as wide a cross-section of the profession as possible, and be able to carry forward what is worth preserving from 165-plus years of the Society’s existence as well as adopt good practices that other pharmacy organisations have in place. It will be no mean task to match these expectations.

The Clarke Inquiry — established by, but independent of, the Society — will have a pivotal role in what the new professional body will be like. Last month it started taking evidence at informal sessions and from invited groups.

Already there are common themes emerging (p635). One of the interesting ideas that has been put forward is that the way the professional body is structured might help to shape the future development of the profession: the existing demarcations between different sectors of pharmacy may not be as relevant in the future.

Instead, pharmacists might be defined by their level of training or their clinical interests rather than whether they work in the community, hospital sector or wherever.

But it is early days for these ideas to be anything more than that. This has been recognised by Nigel Clarke, the inquiry’s chairman, who told The Journal that he accepted that evidence given during the sessions on behalf of different organisations was not necessarily their final word on the topic. He understood that internal discussions were ongoing and ideas were still emerging.

He and his fellow inquiry team members would be happy to hear any further views as and when they arise. More than that, he would like to see an interactive debate develop on the inquiry website, where all written and oral evidence is to be posted.

Mr Clarke said that he is particularly keen to hear from community pharmacists and locums, whose opinions have so far been under-represented. The professional body will not just be there for specialists and clinical pharmacists; everyone who can sport MRPharmS must have a view.

Mr Clarke would also like to hear from pharmaceutical scientists and pharmacy technicians.

Back to Top