This is intended to be a monthly report, although it may slip to bi-monthly at times. It is designed to give members an insight into some of the activity undertaken and views expressed on their behalf by GHP Council and to provide an additional informal link through which they can comment.
It is intended to be an open, personal commentary of the issues addressed each month and can only indirectly illustrate the work of the whole Council.
The month started with finalising the GHP response to the GPHC Standards, which you can read in full at the ghp website or as interpreted in the PJ here
Our view on these initial standards was that they were overly complex and difficult to interpret. They could in practice promote a process-driven rather than professional risk-based practice through their stifling of professional judgement. We felt this was not in the best interests of patients, the NHS service or the professionals themselves. In fact the current code of ethics drawn up by the Royal Pharmaceutical Society five years ago appears more in keeping with other modern healthcare regulators!!
The informal discussions between the DoH, RPSGB, Employers and staff bodies led by the past President on Responsible Pharmacist continues. We feel that for hospitals, it is not a major issue apart from the issues on what is wholesaling under the de minimus principle and the inequitable handling of EU Pharmacists requiring 3 year GB registration of the premises. However, what it has done is highlight again the inadequacies of the Medicines Act for the practice of Hospital Pharmacy in the 21st Century. We have repeatedly expressed concerns that over-rigorous interpretation of this Act which is under review may lead to larger hospitals ceasing to support the supply of medicines other NHS and charitable institutions such as hospices (outside the body corporate) and we (for the moment) continue to recommend to Chief Pharmacists that they seek registration as a pharmacy to maintain this activity. Richard has also been discussing with the RPSGB Inspectorate how best this legislation should be interpreted in the hospital environment. The original guidance largely aimed at senior pharmacist members still remains on the RPSGB website and we are part of a group working on further guidance for all pharmacists particularly around the responsible pharmacists, registerable activities and absences, although your job description should have already been updated and local policies discussed.
Personally - in week 2 of January - I attended my final English Board Meeting of the “old” RPSGB. Having spent 3 years on the Board and been their nominee for the Transitional Committee, it will be nice to be able to focus solely on the day job; GHP and my home life! On a more serious note, the new Boards have been elected in the three countries, but we recognise the poor electoral turnout is a recognition of failure by all organisations that want a new confident, forward looking and inspirational PLB. The process, at least in electoral terms has failed to engage the wider membership.
We are still working closely with the RPSGB and recently Jeremy Holmes and I contacted hospital pharmacists listed as PLB pioneers asking their views on how they saw the future relationship, functions and roles of the two separate organisations in freeing and supporting NHS pharmacists to deliver a common agenda of innovative change to raise standards of practice. As always the full response to the RPSGB elections is on the GHP website. I have started to contact the primary care and hospital members on each Board, offering them our help and support as we all work together to achieve the professional body we aspire for the future.
The Past President Richard Cattell, the GHP Education Lead Roisin O’Hare and myself attended a DoH stakeholder day to discuss the options for undergraduate and pre-registration training. We can all recognise the weaknesses of the current system like the late exposure to pharmacy practice and the lack of context for theoretical learning with too much focus on the community sector. Hence the two models proposed included more training and assessment in practice, involvement with patients and other healthcare professionals. Whilst many of the delegates had concerns on implementing what are described as significant changes. I felt the options were too safe and did not really change the existing courses that much? Of course the elephant sitting in the room that was never addressed is how the changes would be funded and by whom?
When there is no Council meeting in the month we tend to have an executive teleconference to keep the “wheels in motion”. The one in January focused on GHP Council Elections; the Professional Secretary role; Reports, Consultations, and Communication (including this document). We also discussed the Responsible Pharmacist situation and the current state of play with regard to Terms & Conditions (oh what an exciting life we lead, but all necessary stuff).
The Terms & Condition agenda is still discussing On-call and a survey is planned in 63 Trusts in April/May for April 2011 implementation. We welcome the fact that the PRB has reiterated its recommendation of a premia for Band 6 and 7 Pharmacists, but the Minister has once again rejected this request from the independent body. The Unite Head of Health, Karen Reay has requested a meeting with Andy Burnham to discuss this personally.
An item that is increasingly being raised in our discussions is the creeping privatisation of Outpatient Services. We are clear with the current recruitment issues that some Pharmacy Managers will explore this option to prioritise their services but ultimately as it is largely based on a VAT loophole it is the UK taxpayer who is the loser subsiding major pharmacy chains.
By telephone and email we had discussions on the Annual Report for 2009 from the previous Council. At this time of year there are also teleconferences and numerous e-mails on the Annual Joint Conference with the UKCPA - it seems so seamless when you are attending the actual conference, but it takes hours of work by the GHP and UKCPA organisers.
I hope this year’s is up to the standard of previous years and you can find details here.
Finally, one thing that occupied the last President, the regular flu pandemic planning meetings, whereby we provided a service input into the process, appears to be winding down, but to stay on message, that does not mean we can forget it; stop preparing for it or that it may not come back – so, that is at least a good start to 2010!
David Miller – GHP President
If you wish to raise any issues or have comments on this report then you can raise them through contacting me using the link