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

Report this comment to a moderator

Please fill in the form below if you think a comment is unsuitable. Please indicate which comment is of concern and why. Your comments will be sent to our moderator for review.

Report comment to moderator

MandatoryRequired fields.


Chief pharmaceutical officer of England ought to be congratulated


I would agree with Mr Pate's view that Keith Ridge should not engage in public professional spats, where it not that Mr Ridge had instigated this by his use of biased and inaccurate comments in a public arena. It is an old lawyers trick to ask a question which the judge deems inappropriate but the question - or, in this case, comment - has been made and cannot be "unsaid". As the manager of a pharmacy where our inspection rated us as "good", it is personally offensive that Mr Ridge should comment that "only 4 pharmacies rated excellent", as this places inappropriate emphasis on the top result while ignoring others who score above the, if I am honest, frustrating label of "satisfactory". I should be interested to hear what Mr Ridge has to say in response

Posted date

29 MAY 2017

Posted time



Newsletter Sign-up

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