Dreams about the RPSGB
I had a dream about a letter I wrote to the RPSGB asking why fees were so high. In addition, I stated that although it was reasonable for pharmacists to pay a nominal registration fee under self-regulation, if the government wanted to end self-regulation then the fees payable to the GPhC should be set to zero. I also asked why the RPSGB registration fees were so high and why RPSGB employees are contracted to work such short hours with over generous salaries; have a subsidised canteen (is it because they could not afford to buy their own food); have generous employee contributory pensions; are entitled to sick pay and maternity pay at levels greater than the government minimum, all paid my members who do not generally get such benefits. I suggested a new professional body should be run on a wafer thin budget with a flat structure and salaries aligned to locum rates with minimal benefits.
In my dream, the response from the RPSGB was as follows.
"Your letter is unreasonable because you have not seen the bigger picture. The GPhC will definitely cost more than the professional body for any other profession. The PDA claim that as a percentage pharmacists are subject to more misconduct investigations than other medical professions such as doctors, dentists and nurses. This would imply that the regulatory bodies for the other professions are not doing their job or that persons attracted to the pharmaceutical profession lack moral fibre and therefore need to be monitored much more stringently resulting in correspondingly higher fees.
The noble members of the council have always said that there is no fat to be cut from the Pharmaceutical Society's expenses. The treasurer has only managed to trim the registration fee by about 10% despite the massive protest against the fee increase. Reading between the lines that would imply that if the thousands of miscreants on the register are to be controlled and stopped from harming the public the imposed fees are certainly fair.
Compulsory membership of the professional body is the only solution to keep the Pharmaceutical Society going. Pharmacists cannot be trusted to maintain and improve standards without the interference of the Pharmaceutical Society. Voluntary membership would not work, as it would be like asking turkeys to vote for Christmas.
The fees for the professional body should be commensurate with the difficult task of keeping a bunch of penny-pinching shopkeepers in line. The wages would have to be high to attract the best people, hopefully most will not be pharmacists but from other professions where the members are more professional and can be trusted to work with less regulation.
You must appreciate a quango functions to provide its staff the best remuneration and working conditions possible. To help you understand reality you must think of pharmacists as animals on a farm and the RPSGB and Council members as the farmer. The farmer lives a better life than the livestock he manages because without him the animals would not be able to survive. Read Animal Farm and you will realise why your attack on the staff at the Lambeth Palace is so unfair."
I wonder if I was really dreaming!
Reply With Quote
