UK Parliament / Open data

Pharmacists and Pharmacy Technicians Order 2007

I will write to the noble Lord with clarification, but in any case when a complaint was so serious that it was being investigated by a committee there would be some potential danger to the public involved. Therefore, I imagine that for wider interested persons to be informed there would be some danger to the public, but I shall clarify that point in writing to the noble Lord. I shall respond to the other questions. With regard to the costs of registration and indemnity, there are no hidden figures in these pages. However, increases in registration charges can be made only after consultation with the registrant, so I would not have thought there would be any great hikes in charges. I am sure the registrants themselves would oppose such a measure. We are taking time to explore the whole issue of indemnity insurance, but many pharmacists already pay for indemnity costs, so I imagine there would be no huge change there. On the use of English, we are glad to see that it is important in relation to attitudes and behaviours in misconduct cases. It is good and proper that the use of English is considered in all those cases. With regard to the change in the size and composition of the council, it should not be read as the Privy Council. The noble Lord, Lord McColl, asked if the Privy Council could vary the composition of the society of the council without a request. I understand that, yes, that would be possible, but there are no plans to do so. It is simply potentially possible. I do not know if I have left any questions unanswered. Members may wish to remind me now; if not, I will gladly respond in writing.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
688 c421-2GC 
Session
2006-07
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Back to top