Home > PJ (current issue) > News / News Centre | Search

PJ Online homeThe Pharmaceutical Journal
Vol 280 No 7495 p353
29 March 2008

This article
Reprint   Photocopy

  Acrobat Reader


News summary


Scotland’s community pharmacy representatives oppose plans to register and regulate technicians

Royal Pharmaceutical Society

Society regulation of technicians in Scotland opposed

Community Pharmacy Scotland, the body that negotiates on behalf of community pharmacy contractors in Scotland, is opposing plans for the Royal Pharmaceutical Society to take on the regulation and registration of pharmacy technicians.

The CPS also questions the need for technicians working in the community to face statutory regulation at all.

The comments come in its response (PDF, 60K) to a Department of Health consultation on the Healthcare and Associated Professions (Miscellaneous Amendments) No 2 Order — part of the Government’s plans to reform professional regulation.

The CPS argues that while technicians in hospital may operate more independently, community technicians always work supervised by a pharmacist or according to set procedures. “We are not convinced at this moment that demonstrable need for the regulation of technicians working within the community has been shown,” the CPS says.

And since only 526 technicians in Scotland have put their names on the Society’s voluntary register, the CPS questions whether technicians themselves are committed to registration. Opposition to registration from technicians could, the CPS warns, affect recruitment in community pharmacy and damage patient safety.

“ Our view is that we need to consider more carefully the distinction between registration and regulation,” the CPS says. “We are not opposed to moves towards the creation of a register or list of technicians working within the community, but at this time we would question the need for statutory powers to regulate and whether it is in fact what technicians want.”

The organisation also doubts the appropriateness of a GB-wide body like the Society taking on the regulatory and registration duties because of the differences to practice brought about by devolution.

It also points out that the Society will lose ts regulatory powers in 2011.

The comments have disappointed the Association of Pharmacy Technicians UK.

Its president, Sarah Wilcox, said technician regulation and registration was in the best interests, of patient safety and that a separate system for registration and regulation would prevent the free movement of technicians across the UK. She said: “If the Society has agreed to regulate technicians then it should be UK-wide. ”

Back to Top


©The Pharmaceutical Journal