| A
CHANGE NEEDED
The NSW government
is legislating to lift the limit on the number of pharmacies a
pharmacist may own. The Pharmacy Board of NSW will be the key
organisation in any change and no doubt will lose an activity
that has been keeping the Board (and other Pharmacy Board's) alive
- monitoring the ownership makeup of pharmacy businesses.
At the time of writing the Pharmacy Board had not been brought
in to the matter which is surprising seeing the Pharmacy Board
had, and still is, monitoring the business structure of pharmacies.
Maybe there is one Government in Australia that sees the business
structure as being a matter for a Department of "small business"
and not something that a professional licensing authority should
concern itself with.
Makes one wonder what comes next - does it really matter who the
owner is seeing the ethical standards of health professionals
are so much under scrutiny and always upgrading the education
opportunities open to those same professionals.
The bringers of gloom and doom for the Australian public as a
consequence of relaxing the ownership laws of pharmacies and the
subsequent risks they will be exposed to are thinking more of
their own business risks.
The sooner Pharmacy Board can overcome the obsession they have
with pharmacy ownership the sooner pharmacists can get back to
being a pure health professional employed by a organisation they
do not own as are nearly every other health professional.
DOES
GRAEME SAMUEL READ i2P NEWSLETTER?
In the special Woolworths edition of October 2003 we said:
There is almost always a pharmacy business in close proximity
to a supermarket.
This is because the supermarket creates customer traffic.
There seems little difference between the business outside the
supermarket and independently owned and inside or right next to
the supermarket like the "Bakers Delight" or "Macs
Liquor store".
On Thursday 18th March ABC News reported:
Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) chairman
Graeme Samuel says he sees no problem with supermarkets operating
pharmacies.
"They (pharmacists) have no objection to the pharmacy sitting
right next door to the supermarket to get that passing trade.
So the question I have to ask as a competition regulator is why
would there be an objection to the pharmacy actually sitting inside
the store, in the Woolworths or the Coles store, and offering
the same product with the same supervision."
Well done Mr. Samuels and keep reading Computachem I2P.
STUDENTS NEED TO BE LISTENED TO
On the Auspharmlist a student appealed for the Pharmaceutical
Society of Australia to stand up for professional development
in the lead up to the Fourth Community Pharmacy Agreement.
This was because the Pharmacy Guild, according to the correspondent…
"… prioritises the interests of its own members over
that of the profession - as it should."
The trouble is the PSA National Council, and through it to state
level, is also dominated by Guild members.
At the time of the controversy surrounding the draft report of
the NCP review into pharmacy ownership it was hard to tell the
difference between the rhetoric of the Guild officials and that
of the PSA.
That report recommended a 51% ownership to pharmacists and 49%
to an external party.
Pharmacy and consumers would be better served by an advisory council
that comprised representatives of other health professionals and,
legal and consumer representation. It could be said the Australian
Pharmaceutical Advisory Council is that body but unfortunately
it is going the path of so many organisations with the Canberra
"clique" of National Secretariats being so much living
together that the agendas are worked through before the meeting
so no ones boat is rocked and plans unsettled.
The days of the Guild National President going to Canberra every
month to thump the table and lay down the needs for change are
gone and have been replaced by an incestuous web of National Secretariats
each so much a part of the club that nothing happens.
So long as an industry advisory body is made up of only the profession
itself there will be accusations of nepotism.
THE ASPIRATIONS CHANGE
A student enters pharmacy to lead the life of a health professional.
It it does not take long, thanks to the urging of the official
pharmacy organisations, for them to become part of the critical
mass of people still at the crossroads.
It is getting very crowded there and the lights are changing slowly.
The students are at the back and if they want to come forward
they have to join the club of pharmacists wondering which way
to go.
By the time thay get to the front it is too late - the lights
have gone back to red and they will have to wait to get across
into the land of hope and opportunity that is professional satisfaction.
Wouldn't it be good if NAPSA (the student's organisation) could
gather its forces and challenge the guilds and societies with
a model of pharmacy practice that can reshape the future and move
away from the "shopkeeper" image the profession has
today.
One answer lies in the question of ownership.
Why does the pharmacist have to own the practice?
Surely there would be more benefit gained from the four years
of study for the professional pharmacists as being employed by
an owner that was unable to influence the conduct of the pharmacist.
This was recommended in the National Competition Policy review
of pharmacy in February 2000.
The Pharmacy Boards were urged to get on with the professional
practice of pharmacy and get out of attending to business matters
that could otherwise be done through another department.
The areas in Recommendation 6 of that report can be read at:
http://www.health.gov.au/haf/pharmrev/finaloverview.pdf
My quote of the month:
"The
greatest pleasure in life is doing what people say you cannot
do."
Walter Bagehot
Keep dreaming
- it's never too late.
Have fun
Comments and suggestion for topics to this column may be sent
to rollom@bigpond.net.au
|