It is “unacceptable” for the Royal Pharmaceutical Society (RPS) to suggest changes to the contract, the Pharmaceutical Services Negotiating Committee (PSNC) has said.

The RPS published a consultation in August which proposed aligning the community pharmacy and GP contracts, and PSNC chief executive Sue Sharpe used a speech last week (November 4) to accuse the society of “trampling into the territory” of funding negotiations.

The proposals attracted criticism from the National Pharmacy Association in September, and Ms Sharpe suggested that the RPS “maybe hadn’t thought through the risks and – frankly – the stupidity of what they’re proposing”.

Negotiations are “the domain of contractors who’ve got business investment in the sector”, Ms Sharpe said at the local pharmaceutical committee (LPC) conference in Birmingham.

“It's really important that we don't have people who don't represent business owners making decisions on behalf of those who do. I think what [the RPS] did was absolutely wrong,” she stressed.

The RPS's joint consultation with the National Association of Primary Care (NAPC) in August was designed to "test the appetite" for connecting the GP and pharmacy contracts so they could be focused on the health of local populations.

The RPS and the NAPC may have "ignored" PSNC when drafting their "radical proposal" due to fears that "we might put them off", Ms Sharpe speculated.  

“No inkling of her strong views”

The RPS told C+D that Ms Sharpe had attended its board meeting last month, and it had “no inkling of her strong views” on its consultation.

“We are more interested in making the case for better use of community pharmacy, rather than criticising other bodies,” RPS English Pharmacy Board chair Sandra Gidley said the day after Ms Sharpe’s speech.

RPS board member and University of Birmingham deputy head of pharmacy Anthony Cox agreed that Ms Sharpe’s comments were “not the message the board got when she came to visit last month”. Ms Sharpe had not used any “strong language” at the time, and had talked about “working together” with the RPS, he told C+D.

Do you think the RPS should be able to suggest changes to the contract?

We want to hear your views, but please express them in the spirit of a constructive, professional debate. For more information about what this means, please click here to see our community principles and information