| • Clarke Inquiry (2)
• New professional body
• The Society (2)
• Community pharmacy (2)
• Pharmacy practice
• Technicians
• The industry
• WCPPE
• Drug addiction
• Research
Letters to the Editor
|
New professional body
Scotland must manage its own affairs
From Mr I. M. Mullen, MRPharmS
I was fascinated by Clare Bellingham’s excellent investigation
of the rumours
of Scotland’s desire for independence (PJ,
19 January 2008, p43).
People in England, perhaps understandably, have taken some time to appreciate
the change that has taken place at all levels in Scotland as a result
of the devolutionary process. In the early days of the Scottish Parliament,
many UK-wide organisations with head offices in the south-east appeared
to regard devolution as something of a little local difficulty that would
have few implications for the manner in which they intended to continue
to go about their business.
With a bit of pushing some, such as the Royal Pharmaceutical Society,
reviewed their ways of working, changed some of the names and transferred
a little more power to the natives. I am afraid that approach is no longer
acceptable.
Scotland has a separate government and a separate NHS Act. Increasingly,
the NHS in Scotland is developing differently from that in England or
Wales. In principle, we still have a UK-wide health service, but all
of the key decisions relating to the organisation, management, finance
and delivery of the NHS in Scotland are now taken in Scotland.
Similarly, the Scottish pharmacy contract is markedly different from
that in England, and the pace and range of development within community
pharmacy in Scotland mean that the divergence apparent in the two NHS
systems is clearly replicated within pharmacy.
Obviously, a future professional body must represent all pharmacists
in Scotland, not only those involved in community pharmacy, but pharmacists
working within the hospital service are also governed by the differing
approach and ethos adopted by NHS Scotland. I suspect that industrial
pharmacists based in Scotland might similarly feel the need to identify
with the principles of devolution in making choices about their professional
body.
What is required of a future professional body, I believe, is a clearer
understanding of the differentiation between the application of management
and the provision of governance. In my view, the current arrangement
between the Royal Pharmaceutical Society and the Scottish Pharmacy Board
allows the Society in Lambeth to manage the operation of the profession
in Scotland, when what Scotland actually requires from Lambeth is effective
governance as part of a UK-wide professional representative organisation.
If a future professional body is to have genuine appeal for pharmacists
in Scotland, I firmly believe that it must allow the Scottish organisation
to manage its own affairs and come together with some form of UK-wide
body to provide an appropriate level of governance.
Ian Mullen
Auchterarder,
Perthshire
|
The
Pharmaceutical Journal