Cookie policy: This site uses cookies (small files stored on your computer) to simplify and improve your experience of this website. Cookies are small text files stored on the device you are using to access this website. For more information please take a look at our terms and conditions. Some parts of the site may not work properly if you choose not to accept cookies.


Subscribe or Register

Existing user? Login


Low level engagement from members in RPS election needs to be addressed

Once again we have a low voter turnout in the Royal Pharmaceutical Society’s (RPS) English Pharmacy Board election. Being a board member is undoubtedly no easy task and we should all be pleased that there are members willing to undertake this role. Accordingly we should surely give consideration to their various statements, letters and posts and cast our votes for those who seem to best meet the needs of members and of the board and the RPS.

All candidates deserve to receive this consideration and, whether successful or not, should be aware of the level of support they have across a sizeable proportion of the electorate. Although there will be members who, for entirely understandable reasons, choose not to vote — preferring to leave others to decide the composition of the board — surely we should be expecting at least a 30% or even 40% voter turnout in the election?

The level of engagement from members in the election is an issue that needs to be discussed within each local practice forum (LPF). Such discussions should serve to increase future member engagement in board elections. Further discussion in the LPFs to identify the reasons members may have for not voting would also be helpful. These reasons could then be forwarded to the board and the RPS for their consideration in respect of any changes to the electoral process that would lead to greater engagement of members in board elections.

Douglas Hancox


New Zealand


Citation: The Pharmaceutical Journal DOI: 10.1211/PJ.2015.20068690

Readers' comments (1)

  • Could it be that an elected Board as a model of Governenance is the thing that members are not interested in. Does it serve the membership as well as other models?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

For commenting, please login or register as a user and agree to our Community Guidelines. You will be re-directed back to this page where you will have the ability to comment.

Recommended from Pharmaceutical Press

  • FASTtrack: Pharmacology

    FASTtrack: Pharmacology

    FASTtrack: Pharmacology is a study guide providing an account of drug action, as well as dealing with molecular pharmacology at a more advanced level.

    £28.00Buy now
  • Print
  • Share
  • Comment
  • Save
  • Print Friendly Version of this pagePrint Get a PDF version of this webpagePDF

Newsletter Sign-up

Want to keep up with the latest news, comment and CPD articles in pharmacy and science? Subscribe to our free alerts.