Update: RPS secures 60 per cent of practising pharmacists
As of March 29, 29,895 pharmacists had renewed their membership with the RPS, of which 1,168 were retired and 2,455 lived overseas.
Using figures from the General Pharmaceutical Council, this means that 60 per cent of non-retired, UK-based pharmacists have remained members of the professional body.
RPS membership and marketing director Patrick Stubbs said that the Society had contacted pharmacists who had not yet renewed their membership and would continue to do so.
"We are still seeing about 60 members renewing each day. For that reason we are continuing to contact those who have not yet let us know if they want to be a member or not, to make sure they have received the information and to gather their views about the Society," he said.
Mr Stubbs added that about a third of those who had been contacted since March 17 had said they would be renewing their membership.
Members have joined from across pharmacy sectors, with community pharmacists the largest proportion at 58 per cent. Hospital pharmacists accounted for 16 per cent of renewals.
RPS president Martin Astbury said he was pleased to see "trust" had been placed in the RPS.
Pharmacists in England make up 78 per cent of the membership with those in Scotland and Wales accounting for nine and five per cent respectively.
The deadline for RPS renewals was March 1, but the membership figures announcement was delayed after IT problems plagued the process.
Letter from Graham Phillips, English Board member, RPS
I count myself one of the Royal Pharmaceutical Society's sternest critics and, in the same breath, one of its strongest advocates. After all, not too many members have taken the Society to the high court, lost, and then found themselves elected, by a landslide, to its Council. So why did I do it and why does it matter now anyway?
Well, I did it because I believed the Society had so lost touch with its members that it had become ‘anti-pharmacist' and that it had so lost touch with democracy that only by means of legal action could we protect the Society's assets for the benefit of us, you and me, pharmacists, its members……
I believed then, as I believe now, that we had been regulated almost to a standstill, to the point where ‘defensive practice' often takes priority over patient care and our clinical focus has been buried under the weight of bureaucracy amid a climate of fear. I believed then, and I believe it now more than ever, that we pharmacists need one strong, clear professional voice to speak for all of us and support our professional aspirations to do more for patients and the public.
Which segues nicely into the point of this letter: to those who have had bad, bad experiences at the hands of the ‘old' RPSGB I can only say, me too, but please give our shiny new one a chance…... and to those who are reluctant to join because, albeit improving, it's a long way from perfect, I would say, I agree. It's not perfect and it never will be. But that's not the point. Engage with it – it's your Society now – the only way to improve it is to support it, raise your issues and help hone it.
When I was on the Council of the old RPSGB, I used to ask how many members we thought we would get if membership became voluntary overnight. My best guess then was 20 per cent, and many pharmacists even recently have come up with the same sort of figure. Well now is the acid test and the good news is that we are already way beyond 20 per cent - well over 50 per cent in fact with more members joining every day in their hundreds and thousands. And members are joining from all sectors, all ages and all geographies.
Given the history that's a massive vote of confidence in our new body. We cannot afford to be complacent: to be fully effective and legitimate as the voice of pharmacists we need every single member with us. So the RPS must repay the faith shown by its members by delivering for them and in so-doing convince those of you who remain dubious.
A profession with no professional body? Unthinkable! Please join us and, in turn, we promise to make your voice heard in a way that was never possible before.
Please note You must be a registered user of Chemist+Druggist and logged in to add comments. Opinions expressed here are those of the writers and do not necessarily reflect those of Chemist+Druggist. Comments are considered in the public domain and may be used in future Chemist+Druggist coverage. We accept no responsibility, legal or otherwise, for the accuracy or the content of member comments.
