Well I must admit it has been a little hard motivating myself to start up a new year, but once having started, the issues began to clarify and flow freely.
Pharmacy concerns seem to be hardening around some issues of globalisation (it is quietly happening at a very rapid pace-most of us are not recognising this fact); the issue of Guild representation and how it is only representing a minority of the pharmacist population; the issue of corporatisation (or the lack of it) which inhibits pharmacy as a whole, leaving it unprotected and unable to realise its fullest business and professional potential.
How can we be ready to compete against global predators with inefficient business structures?
Lack of a corporate pharmacy structure must also be of concern to newly graduated pharmacists, for this is one practical method of securing a partial ownership of a pharmacy, on a progressive basis.
It is still denied to them.

The unexpected shock of UK pharmacists negotiating with one wing of government, suddenly finding the skids taken out from under them by another wing, must serve as a continuing warning to Australian pharmacists. While the system of ownership within Australia appears stronger than the UK, pharmacists must remain vigilant.
The Australian pharmacy model, despite all the criticisms from economic rationalists and the like, still continues to be one of the most efficient in the western world, particularly when compared with the American and the British models.
Some of our writers over time have worked in both systems, and Australia still comes up trumps!
So we need to build on our existing strengths and ensure we can become structurally and financially stronger.
This may mean borrowing some of the better global elements to reinforce our local offering, particularly at the pharmacy political level. The recent attacks by American global pharmaceutical interests on our PBS, through our bilateral trade agreements, is just one instance of a threat never before envisaged by Australian pharmacists.

Accreditation systems are also causing concern.
There are obvious benefits if a high standard is maintained, but it also comes at a cost.
It would appear that some flexibility needs to be built in to the system.

I would also point you to the press release on MediConnect (the new BMMS), because this is going to have a profound effect on your professional and business lives. Also, in the background are some rumblings about its high cost, unproven benefits and the fact that it has a 90 percent chance of failing (compared to other systems of similar size that have been attempted).

We have a new writer, John Skyllas, who is noted for his candid point of view, and our other writers have produced some articles of specific interest that provide excellent reading.

Neil Johnston
February, 2002

BACK TO MAIN PAGE

...