UK Parliament / Open data

Health Bill

Proceeding contribution from Earl Howe (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Monday, 22 May 2006. It occurred during Debate on bills and Committee proceeding on Health Bill.
moved Amendment No. 78:"Page 25, line 28, after ““procedures”” insert ““(including explicit lines of accountability)””" The noble Earl said: The amendment picks up a concern widely shared in the pharmacy profession—the need for appropriate checks and balances in the procedures designed to secure the safe and effective running of a pharmacy business. We return to the concept of ““proper control”” of a pharmacy. A pharmacist can remain responsible for a pharmacy, even when absent from it, as we have been discussing. But to maintain control, he needs to make sure that any delegations he may decide to grant to dispensing technicians are safe. In order to be safe, those delegations need to be explicit and absolutely clear. Some may be applicable when the pharmacist is present on the premises as well as when he is absent. In either event, there must be clear lines of accountability so that there is no doubt in anyone’s mind about who is responsible for what activity, in what circumstances, and where an individual’s delegated authority begins and ends. I hope that the Minister will be sympathetic to the amendment, at least to the principle. Clear lines of accountability are part of what we should understand by the concept of the responsible pharmacist. However, because the Bill leaves open what constitutes professional control—to my mind, still a key concept—explicit lines of accountability are too important an idea to be taken as read, so perhaps we need to refer to them. I beg to move. Lord Warner: It would be difficult to disagree with the noble Earl about the importance of clear lines of accountability. I am grateful to him for tabling this amendment, because it gives me an opportunity to explain that that is what we have provided for and that the amendment is not necessary. Clause 27 carries forward a provision in Section 71 of the Medicines Act for the responsible pharmacist to be subject to the directions of the superintendent pharmacist, where the pharmacy business is carried on by a body corporate. Clauses 26, 27 and 28 provide that the responsible pharmacist is to display conspicuously a notice stating that he is in charge of the pharmacy at that time. New Section 72A(1) makes it clear that the responsible pharmacist—that is, the pharmacist in charge of the pharmacy—is to be accountable for the safe and effective running of the pharmacy. New Section 72A(3) provides that he is to establish, maintain and review procedures to assure safe working in the pharmacy as these relate to the preparation, assembly, sale and supply of medicines to the public.  New Section 72A(4) states that a record must be kept of the responsible pharmacist for the pharmacy on any day and at any time. These provisions relating to lines of accountability are already in the Bill. In addition, the pharmacist is subject to professional accountability in discharging his responsibilities as a registered healthcare professional. It is our intention to set out in regulations the form of the procedures to be established by the responsible pharmacist and the matters they must cover. The matters likely to be included will concern operating procedures that support safe working. For example, the procedures may set out those pharmacy tasks that may be undertaken by trained and competent pharmacy staff, including where these activities may be undertaken only by designated staff. Pharmacy staff will carry out activities under the authority of the responsible pharmacist as set out in the pharmacy procedures. These must assure public safety. At the same time, they must reflect the ability of a responsible pharmacist to use his professional training and judgment in ensuring that those procedures meet the specific needs of that pharmacy, taking into account the availability and skills of the pharmacy staff there. We outlined matters relating to the exercise of the responsible pharmacist’s duties under Section 72A in the information paper that we published in January 2006, which all noble Lords may have had an opportunity to see—if not, I understand that copies are available in the Committee Room. We intend to work with all the interested parties in developing regulations relating to pharmacy procedures and to provide sufficient flexibility to reflect existing and future developments in the provision of pharmaceutical services. These must continue to protect public safety and ensure the proper exercise of the responsible pharmacist’s duty to secure the safe and effective running of the pharmacy. As required under the Medicines Act, there will be formal consultation in due course. I hope that that gives the noble Earl reassurance that we take the accountability issue very seriously, that we have provided for it in the Bill and that we will reinforce it through the regulations that will be provided under this part of the Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
682 c112-3GC 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Legislation
Health Bill 2005-06
Back to top