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.

Join

Subscribe or Register

Existing user? Login

PJ Online | PJ Letters: Council election

Home > PJ  > Letters | Search

Return to PJ Online Home Page

The Pharmaceutical Journal
Vol 268 No 7182 p93-96
26 January 2002

This page
Reprint
Photocopy

Letters

Letters are available in a single PDF* file (70K)


  Community pharmacy
  Locums
  Education conference
  Primary care pharmacy
  Careers
  The Council
  Council election
  The Society
  Statutory Committee
  The Journal
  Christmas miscellany


Letters to the Editor

  * PDF files on PJ Online require Acrobat Reader 4 or later.

Council election (2 letters)

Can we have regional members?

From Mrs S. Carter, MRPharmS

At a recent branch meeting we discussed the lack of enthusiasm in voting for the Royal Pharmaceutical Society's Council. I find it difficult to vote because I know few, if any, of the candidates each year. I struggle to base my decision on the written information provided. I believe we would be better served by voting for a candidate for a specific area of the country. The candidate would have to be resident in the area thus increasing our chance of knowing them. Equally, they could attend branch meetings before elections to put forward their views and enter into discussion and debate.

If candidates were elected by areas, the system would lend itself to much better feedback from the grass roots. This is not a new suggestion but it made a lot of sense to me when I first heard it. Perhaps it will to others, too.

Susan Carter
Southampton

Improve our awareness of candidates

From Mr P. Jenkins, FRPharmS

As we move towards Council elections there will be the usual and valid complaints that for the majority of voters many of the candidates are unknown. To offset this there will probably be the usual attempt at hustings but these are of limited use because of geography and the limitations on free time to attend.

We should devise more ways in which the maximum number of candidates are introduced, if only through their written thoughts, to the maximum number of voters. Requesting, but not pressurising, anyone interested in standing to declare their intentions one year in advance and so placing themselves on a register of potential candidates, could be a good start. This is a variation of the process used by the national political parties but in that case just showing an interest is not sufficient and there are formal selection procedures to get on the candidates' list.

I do not suggest any such formality and there should be no obligation to stand even if the intention has been signaled, if over the year a person's circumstances have changed. There should also be no block on someone standing who had not signaled his or her intentions. However it would concentrate the minds of those interested and mean that from any letter, article or anything else over their name we, the electorate, will be able to judge their quality or lack of suitability as Council members. We may get a flood of publications but that could be counterproductive to the potential candidate by exposing their limitations (better to find that out before they are elected than afterwards) and we could judge what sudden flurries of activity are all about. Blatant electioneering should not be allowed and the editorial experience of the major weeklies should keep the worst excesses at bay.

The present sensible restrictions should be kept in place for the immediate run up to the election. The existing Council members and especially those in office will still have the advantage of a higher profile but this simple registration will go some way to redress that balance and perhaps even reduce the excuses of those members who use lack of knowledge of candidates as an excuse not to vote at all.

Peter Jenkins
Abercynon, South Wales

Back to Top

Previous Topic (The Council)
Next Topic (The Society)
Send your letter to The Editor


Home | Journals | News | Notice-board | Search | Jobs  Classifieds | Site Map | Contact us

©The Pharmaceutical Journal

Citation: The Pharmaceutical Journal URI: 20005875

Rate this article 

Click to rate

  • 1 star out of 5
  • 2 stars out of 5
  • 3 stars out of 5
  • 4 stars out of 5
  • 5 stars out of 5

0 out of 5 stars

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

  • Pharmacy Registration Assessment Questions

    Pharmacy Registration Assessment Questions

    Pharmacy Registration Assessment Questions features over 400 closed book and calculation questions. With the registration exam having gone through a complete transformation in 2016, this volume has been developed around the new General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) guidelines.

    £33.00Buy now

Search an extensive range of the world’s most trusted resources

Powered by MedicinesComplete
  • Print
  • Share
  • Comment
  • Rate
  • Save
  • Print Friendly Version of this pagePrint Get a PDF version of this webpagePDF

Jobs you might like

Newsletter Sign-up

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