Latest News
This new page is to keep you informed of events as they happen in the fight to retain our dispensing surgeries. We will update it as events occur. SODS welcome comment and information which can be sent to us at our email address, patientsods@btinternet.com
Latest News as at 1 February, 2012
The recent announcement by the GPs of Pitcairn Practice, Balmullo, NE Fife, that they intend to submit an Application to provide the full range of NHS pharmaceutical services is to be much welcomed.
SODS give their full support to this application and hope that the Board of NHS Fife will at last recognise that such an Application is exactly what is wanted by and needed for this community. There can be no doubting the wish of local folks to see such a venture succeed following on from the impending forced ending of GP dispensing from Balmullo in May, 2012.
We urge all members of the public and in particular patients of the practice to provide positive comments and support for this Application. They can do this by writing to the practice at:-
PITCAIRN PRACTICE
1 PITCAIRN DRIVE, BALMULLO, KY16 0DZ
Or Email:- Fife-UHB.F21204Leuchars@nhs.net
The public consultation period will end on 29th Feb, 2012 so please act now. A good response will make all the difference to what may be your last chance to keep a one stop surgery service
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Latest News as at 28th December, 2011
SODS learned today that Sir Menzies Campbell, MP, has written to Nicola Sturgeon, MSP, Cabinet Secretary for Health and Wellbeing concerning NHS Fife’s decision to end GP dispensing at Balmullo in May, 2012.
Sir Menzies seeks clarification regarding the government’s position in light of the recent meeting between SODS representatives and the Scottish Minister for Health, Michael Mathieson, which took place in November, 2011. At that meeting the Minister made it clear that there was no legal reason why dispensing had to end just because a local pharmacy opened.
We have already asked NHS Fife to explain why this option was not considered at the NHS Fife Special Committtee meeting and subsequently at the NHS Fife Board meeting which ratified the decision to end Balmullo dispensing. To date we have not had a satisfactory response to explain NHS Fife’s reason for not considering the option.
We will be looking at the legal advice provided to NHS Fife prior to the Balmullo decision as we believe it may not accord with the Minister for Health’s statements to SODS. The local MSP, Roderick Campbell is also seeking a further meeting with the Chair of NHS Fife on this matter.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Latest news as at 22nd November 2011
The letter below has sent to NHS Fife:-
Professor J McGoldrick
Chairman, NHS Fife Board,
Hayfield House , Hayfield Road,
Kirkcaldy,
Fife KY2 5AH
Dear Professor McGoldrick,
SODS Meeting with Scottish Health Minister.
On 9th November, 2011, I and other colleagues from Carstairs and Millport had a meeting at the Holyrood Parliament with Michael Mathieson, MSP, the Scottish Minister for Health. We were accompanied by Kenneth Gibson, MSP. Prior to meeting with the Minister I had a meeting with Roderick Campbell, MSP, and gave him a copy of a briefing note which was later handed to the Minister.
We briefed the Minister on the circumstances behind the recent decisions regarding pharmacy applications affecting GP dispensing in Balmullo , Carstairs and Millport and left the him with detailed notes concerning the Area Health Boards’ decision processes in the case of Millport and Balmullo.
In the course of the discussion the minister made the statement that there was absolutely no legal reason whatsoever why GPs should not continue dispensing when a pharmacy opened in the practice neighbourhood. He went further by saying that GP dispensing could continue alongside a community pharmacy and that he saw no difference between England and Scotland in the level of protection which should be applied in making such a decision.
This Ministerial statement on what should be happening is contrary to the position taken by NHS Fife regarding its decision process which will bring about the ending of dispensing at Balmullo from 31st May 2012. It is therefore incumbent upon the Board to review the decision made on Balmullo in order to accord with the position the minister has outlined.
One particular factor makes it necessary for the Board to revoke the decision made by its Special Committee and revisit the matter of GP dispensing.
It is clear from a statement given by NHS Fife to the Dispensing Doctor’s Association on or about 8th June, 2011 that NHS Fife did not accept that continuance of GP dispensing was possible according to its interpretation of the regulations. This is made evident by the Media Briefing note prepared by Communications, NHS Fife and dated 27th May, 2011. Yet we now know from the Minister that all Area Health Boards were advised of the fact they could continue GP dispensing in a 50 page document sent to them in March, 2011.
The PMSC‘s decision in December 2010 to permit Balmullo to continue dispensing was in fact valid as there was no legal requirement for NHS Fife to take any action whatsoever to end it. The PMSC probably understood the local conditions affecting patients far better than the ad hoc Special Committee and common sense dictated that GP dispensing should continue.
It is self evident that the Special Committee’s remit was flawed since it was obviously not made aware that continuance of GP dispensing was an option and that there was no legal reason why it should end.
As well as the omission of considering this option to continue the Special Committee also failed to understand and properly address the implications of ending Balmullo dispensing. Balmullo Community Council made Dr Montgomery very aware of that fact when he attended their public meeting in October, 2011.
In the absence of a commercial pharmacy within the practice, previously refused by NHS Fife, Balmullo patients will not be satisfied with anything less than the retention of the GP dispensing service until a local pharmacy opens in Balmullo, preferably within the existing surgery.
In view of the Minister’s pronouncement that GP dispensing can continue when a local pharmacy opens I now ask that the Board reconsider the Special Committee decision it previously ratified concerning Balmullo. I also ask that due weight be given in reconsidering the decision to the adverse effects on patient services which will result from a failure to reverse the closure notice.
Yours faithfully
Alan Kennedy
On behalf of SODS Forum Group
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Latest News as at 12th November 2011 Firstly a huge congratulation is due to the SODS, Millport, supporters who took their protest to the Scottish Parliament on 9th November. A report on that taken from the Millport Website very neatly sums up the result of that visit.
The Millport SODS and supporters who took the pharmacy protest to Holyrood this week, were meeting MSPs at the Scottish Parliament. Campaigners from Millport and beyond joined the protest.
June Allison, of Millport SODS, said: "What a great day and what a turn out! The Scottish Minister for Health was very, very definite that THERE IS NO REGULATION THAT STATES THAT ANY DOCTOR’S DISPENSARY MUST CLOSE JUST BECAUSE A PHARMACIST HAS SET UP SHOP IN THE SAME VILLAGE!!
When we mentioned the Regulations in England that protect Dispensing Practices, he told us that Scotland was the same as England and that there was no reason why a Doctors Dispensary and a commercial pharmacy cannot co-exist in the same place.
We (Millport SODS representatives) met the Minister along with Ken Gibson, MSP, Mr. Alan Kennedy from Leuchars SODS and Dr. S. Goudie from Carstairs.
Millport's delegation consisted of a coach and three mini buses. Carstairs also turned up in strength with about 50 supporters. Several MSPs came out to speak to the protesters and were all very interested to hear of what has been occurring in rural practices.
One said that "the Health Boards no longer had a fig leaf to hide behind" which is a wonderfully apt description.. Our emphasis will now move to the Health Boards and we still have funds enough to take the whole protest to Ayr along with all of our gallant supporters.
We would like to reiterate that it is not the supporters that wish to keep the status quo who are insisting on a monopoly. We have no objections to half a dozen pharmacies opening up in Millport SO LONG AS THE DISPENSARY CAN STAY OPEN TOO. It is the pharmacist who wants and insists upon a monopoly, which says more about him than it does about the SODS!”
As well as the many protesters there in person, campaigners handed the Minister sheets containing the signatures of 310 supporters who due to other commitments could not be present but wished their views to be counted in the protest"
The meeting with the minister reinforced the original statement by Dr Jonathon Pryce of NHS Scotland in 2009 that dispensing GPs can continue alongside local pharmacies. SODS will now take action to again raise this with local Health Boards. It is self evident that the decision to end GP dispensing at Balmullo and Carstairs did not take account of this ruling and that the NHS Fife Primary Medical Services Committee in fact made a correct decision in allowing Balmullo dispensing to continue before this was wrongly, in our opinion,overturned by the Board’s Special Committee.
It is clear from the discussions with the minister that this ruling, already promulgated to Area Health Boards in March 2011, has not been sufficiently understood and steps will again be taken to make this clear to Health Boards.
One final point has been brought to our attention. Was that really a certain pharmacist who we know as ‘PWJ’, who arrived on the island to view the new Millport pharmacy on, of all days the 9th of November? Was it just co-incidental that most Islanders who could were away protesting against the pharmacy in Edinburgh on that day. We hope PWJ liked the new NHS signage above the pharmacy!!!! Obviously only the best will do!
We are posting below up some pictures to show the great job Millport and other SODs supporters did on 9th November by making the effort to take their protest to the Scottish Parliament
On the Millport ferry on the way to the Scottish Parliament
At the Scottish Parliament
What the folks in Millport really want.
At Holyrood
The crowd grows with Carstairs and Leuchars/ Balmullo patients
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Latest news as at 4th November 2011
For the information of SODS supporters all over Scotland we repeat the Millport SODS latest webpiece. We already know there will be a good turnout from affected areas but the more the merrier for this worthwhile cause.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SODS PROTEST 9TH NOVEMBER 2011
This is to remind all SODS and Supporters that we take our Protest to Holyrood on Wednesday the 9th November 2011, leaving the island on the 10.am ferry. A bus from Millport Motors will pick up everyone along the town to connect with the 10.am Ferry.
A Parks Luxury Coach will collect us from the Ferry and we will leave Largs heading for Edinburgh with just a short stop along the way for a comfort break, (although we understand that there will be toilet facilities on the Coach).
We intend to arrive at Holyrood at 1.pm and the Coach will drop us off directly outside the Parliament Building.
SODS and Supporters from all over Scotland will be joining us.
A deputation of us will meet with the Minister at 1.30.pm along with our MSP Kenneth Gibson.
The schedule is quite tight so could we please ask anyone who wants to provide themselves with refreshments - i.e. drink and a sandwich to keep them going until we get back to Millport.
Last night one of our Supporters met with the Scottish Secretary of State and handed him documents explaining how rural Dispensaries are being picked off all over Scotland by pharmacists looking to make money out of our prescriptions.
PLEASE ANYONE WHO WISHES TO JOIN US - COME ALONG YOU WILL BE VERY WELCOME!
Latest News as at 29th October , 2011
Millport SODS have now arranged a meeting with The Scottish Health Minister, Michael Mathieson, at 1.30 on Wednesday 9th November. A large number of Millport residents are making the journey to make their feelings felt at the impending loss of their existing GP dispensing services as well as their present GPs
This meeting will coincide with a protest by SODS members from across Scotland who will congregate outside the Holyrood Parliament Building from 1 PM onwards
SODS supporters from across Scotland are invited to attend the protest and it is expected that patients from the Balmullo/Leuchars SODS Forum Group and the Carstairs area will be among these attending.
What is happening to rural communities where patients see their preferred GP dispensing arrangements overturned to satisfy commercial gain by predatory pharmacy applications is something that cannot be allowed to continue. Patients will always welcome a one stop service for their prescription needs and where this is threatened, by Area Health Boards totally failing to take patient preferences into account, such inaction by these Health Boards will be seen as an flagrant abuse of the democratic process that was supposed to be inbuilt – and which patients have a right to expect - as part of the NHS Reform ( Scotland ) Act, 2004.
Latest News as at 11 October,2011
Balmullo continues to oppose closure of GP Dispensing Service
A well attended meeting of Balmullo Community Council on Monday 10th October heard the Chair of the Community Council re-affirm their continuing opposition to the NHS Fife decision to end Pitcairn Practice surgery dispensing from May 2011.
The meeting heard the Director for Medical Services,NHS Fife outlining the reasons for the decision by the Board to ratify the closure as recommended by a Special Committee of the Board.
It would be fair to say that his explanation that NHS Fife had simply followed regulations was greeted with considerable anger and disbelief by the vast majority of those present. He was left in no doubt that patients served by the Balmullo practice felt thoroughly let down by NHS Fife. In particular a number of speakers questioned the seeming undue influence of commercial pharmacy operators in the deliberations of the Board. It was widely felt that the effect of the decision to close local dispensing had been taken without sufficient recognition of the serious disadvantages for the elderly and infirm. Time and again The Fife Board representative was asked to justify such action and his responses clearly failed to satisfy those present. The well worn argument that “the Board was simply following legal advice” was of little comfort to those who felt that patient choice was simply being ignored.
There was keen support for the possibility of Balmullo having its own community pharmacy, possibly in partnership with Pitcairn Surgery. However the recent past experience where just such an application, supported by local patients had been thwarted at local Fife Pharmacy Practices Committee and National Appeal Panel levels by a local pharmacist’s objections had undoubtedly made potential applicants wary of applying again. Many of those attending the meeting felt that the Fife Health Board had seriously let down their patients by failing to properly support such a community service. They also clearly thought that this was absolutely wrong in both ethical and good service terms.
The battle by patients to retain what they see as a superior service to that which will apply from May 2012 was self evident. Recognising this the Community Council has written to NHS Fife asking that the Pitcairn Practice dispensing service be retained on an annual review basis until such time as a community pharmacy can be encouraged to set up in the Balmullo area. This seems an eminently sensible course of action for the Board to accede to. We all await their response.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Latest news as at 3 October, 2011
See below details of the Agenda for the next Balmullo Community Council meeting to be held in the Balmullo School on 10th October,2011
Agenda Monday 10th October 2011 at 7.30pm
Dr Montgomery of NHS Fife will speak
on the proposed closure of our Dispensary.
1. Apologies for absence
2. Minutes of last meeting
3. Matters arising
4. Councillor’s Report
5. Treasurer’s Report
6. Any other business
Update by YPRs
Update by Young MSPs
7. Incoming correspondence
8. Date of next meeting
9. 200 Club draw
------------------------------------------------
All patients of the Balmullo practice are encouraged to attend when it is hoped that an opportunity will be given to question Dr Montgomery on the pretty disastrous outcome for local patients resulting from the NHS Fife decision.
------------------------------------------------
Latest News as at 15th September, 2011
The ‘You and Yours’ programme on BBC Radio 4 broadcast yesterday can be seen via the following link:-
You and Yours
The news that James Semple of TLC Pharmacy Group has no plans to make any further applications is welcomed but SODS will watch carefully to see if he does in any way get involved in any further such cases. Much damage has already been done to our patient services as a direct result of these pharmacy applications and much still remains to be done to repair that damage and try to ensure it never happens again. The public has to realise that unless it speaks out and challenges the flawed policy which civil servants and ministers are forcing down our throats, regardless of our protests, further misery in rural areas with dispensing GPs may well occur.
SODS, through the Freedom of Information Act, now have access to the total payments for each of the 1300 or so community pharmacies in Scotland for drugs and fees for the 2010/11 financial year, including essential small pharmacy allowances. We know that at April, 2011 there were 5,518,718 patients in Scotland registered with Scottish medical practices of which158,104 were dispensing patients.
The sums involved are enormous. One pharmacy outlet in Glasgow received over £21 million and of course these figures do not include other profitable sales such as the myriad of non prescription sales ranging from sunglasses to herbal remedies.
Whilst we need to do a more detailed analysis of these statistics we now have received advice from three independent sources that indicates that on average a community pharmacy gross profit from NHS income is around 30 to 35%. Larger chains would expect to see profits nearer the 40% mark or more. With even relatively small high street chemists’ NHS income figures often ranging from upwards of £700,000 to over a £1M it is not surprising that such businesses attract large premiums when sold.
We now have to ask the question why are we paying so much NHS funding into community pharmacies? We have good evidence of the investment by dispensing GPs into surgery improvements. Witness the examples under threat in Fife and Cumbrae. Is it right that so much money is going into community pharmacies? Especially when the new ones seen recently are located in small premises designed to ensure maximum profit with minimum outlay? We learn today that NHS Fife has found a £1 million hole in its budget. Small wonder when we see where NHS funds go!
We need a whole new approach to the community pharmacy situation as it now stands in Scotland. Commercial pharmacies co-located within GP Surgeries are to be welcomed. They can provide the best one stop service that patients want. When these proposals, usually welcomed by communities, are opposed by certain operating pharmacies who seek to retain all the income from NHS funds, no matter what the public want, something definitely needs to be done. It is high time the Scottish Government woke up to the fact that the public are being short-changed by the funding we all pay for our NHS service. Millions of pounds are at stake here and it is high time government policy was altered to reflect this. In the meantime patients still have the ultimate response. Voting with our feet on which outlet we personally choose to provide our dispensing service is still the one thing that cannot be taken away
Lastly, here is a picture of the modernised and internally purpose designed Millport dispensing medical practice. It is a perfect example of just what is at stake under the impending opening of a commercial pharmacy in a small shop in the town.
Garrison House home to Millport Medical Practice
If this doesn’t make you question the force that drives SODS to keep campaigning against such commercial pharmacies who force closure of the dispensing services within such excellent premises nothing will.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Latest News as at 9 September 2011
It now seems likely that the Pharmacy piece will be on BBC Radio 4 on Wednesday 14th September commencing 1210. It will be available on BBC i Player for a week afterwards in case you miss it.
Thanks to the Freedom of Information Act we now have had access to the annual net income for 2010/2011 received by each retail community pharmacy in Scotland. At first count there are around 1300.
It makes interesting reading! We are now looking further into this as some of the sums listed are eye-wateringly large. It is now understandable why pharmacies can change hands for hundreds of thousands of pounds.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Latest News as at 6 September, 2011
The Chairman of NHS Fife has yet again refused to act to satisfactorily withdraw the false allegations made against SODS. In a letter dated 1st September, 2011 he demonstrates yet again that he fails to see the damage that may have ensued as a result of these false allegations. We copy below SODS’ latest attempt, sent today, to try and get a satisfactory response to our submissions
------
6th September, 2011
Professor J McGoldrick
Hayfield House, Kirkcaldy
KY2 5AH
Dear Professor McGoldrick
Thank you for your letter of 31st August, 2011.
I am sorry to see that you still do not yet appear to recognise that it is the ‘fallout’ from the false allegations made that is the real crux of the matter. I know as well as you do from my long experience in senior management in both the private and public sector those minutes cannot be altered. However I equally know that it is perfectly possible to revisit the minute at a subsequent meeting under ‘Matters Arising’. This is but one of the actions that now need to be taken to address the very unsatisfactory situation that has now arisen concerning these unfounded allegations against SODS. I have already made you aware of additional actions required by SODS.
I and my fellow SODS Forum members are quite certain that the vote at the recent Board Meeting may very well have been unfairly influenced by these allegations against SODS. The Board may protest to the contrary but the fact remains that you cannot prove otherwise. The public will see the Board’s refusal to take action in this matter as yet another instance of failure to recognise their concerns
It is for that reason that action we are about to take is in our mind both considered and necessary. I understand that the Board will meet in October and you have already been asked by Balmullo CC to reconsider the Balmullo decision. I and patients throughout this area would like to see some evidence that their protests are being given some real honest consideration free from the political dogma that surrounds this matter. I think they were really angered by the fact that they are to be forced to use buses and cars from next year to obtain prescriptions that they collected on a visit to the GP before. So much for NHS progress with a change they never wanted and have so strongly opposed.
Perhaps the very imminent BBC investigative programme due to come out next week, re the local dispensing situation in Balmullo in particular and Scotland in general will help to show a wider audience how things have gone so wrong.
This subject is not going to diminish in the attention it gets. SODS have just renewed their website licence for a further two years. Patients need to be protected from the disastrous effects of decisions which make no sense in terms of a caring health service for all.
Yours sincerely
Alan Kennedy
---- . ---
We will post up details re the BBC programme once these are finalised, hopefully later today.
---------------------------------------------------------
Latest News as at 29th August, 2011
For the last two months SODS has been busy working with others in an attempt to bring about a sensible and patient choice based decision on the Balmullo Surgery dispensing issue. Despite the efforts of our local and national politicians, Community Council , SODS members and many patients in the Balmullo surgery area NHS Fife have decided that dispensing at Balmullo must end on 30th May, 2012.
Many will be angry and feel let down by our NHS Board who have ignored the wishes of local communities over the past three years. Attempts to bring about a commercial pharmacy within the Balmullo practice failed due to the Leuchars pharmacy objecting to this. Yet such a possibility was highly popular with local people and deserved a better outcome.
The vote by the Board of NHS Fife to ratify the Special Committee decision to close Balmullo dispensing was carried by a narrow majority of 7 to 5. Some19 Board members did not vote.
Evidence has now come to light which casts serious doubts on the validity of the Board vote. SODS believe it may well have been influenced by an allegation made and recorded in the minutes of a meeting of a NHS Fife Primary Medical Services Committee in March 2011. At SODS behest this serious allegation against SODS Forum was reportedly investigated by NHS Fife but the Chairman has now said the allegations could not be substantiated!
SODS have attempted to seek satisfactory redress for this false allegation but without success.
We are therefore publishing below the history of the correspondence in this matter in order that the public may see for themselves just how unfairly they have been treated in the NHS Fife actions concerning Balmullo. SODS will also be taking further action to clear their name and will do everything possible to highlight the appalling mismanagement of matters concerning the decision processes behind the impending cessation of Balmullo dispensing.
We state again that the NHS Reform (Scotland ) Act 2004 states categorically that the public's views must be part of any democratic process involving such decisions
SODS are now in active and ongoing discussions with a major media organisation with a view to raising the profile of the whole matter of the threat to rural dispensing in Scotland and in particular the Leuchars, Balmullo and Millport cases where we believe failure to take sufficient note of public opinion and local conditions lies at the root of the current situation.
SODS welcome any attempts to provide improved pharmacy services to patients in rural areas but these must be based on patient choice and where patients decide to support the status quo with a dispensing GP these wishes should be respected. The Scottish Government’s policy of allowing and seemingly encouraging pharmacy applications which are based purely on a perceived high profit level rather than patient wishes must be reconsidered. Competition is good and if the Scottish Government really believe they have the right policy let dispensing GPs and dispensing commercial pharmacies operate together. Let the patients choose.
Letters Relating to an Accusation against SODS
Letter 1
2/7/2011 Mr Alan Kennedy
3, Smithy Lane, Balmullo,
St Andrews, Fife ,KY160FG.
Tel 01334 870378
Email alan365@btinternet.com
Ref: - SODS 1295/2011
Professor J McGoldrick, Chair, NHS Fife, Hayfield House, Hayfield Road, KIRKCALDY, Fife. KY2 5AH
Minutes of PMSC meeting of 15th March ,2011.
Dear Professor McGoldrick,
My attention was drawn recently to the Minutes of the above meeting.
In item 04/11 Ms Harper advised the committee concerning a breach of confidentiality. This breach alleges that a SODS member had telephoned the Board before 5pm on the day of the committee meeting, ie, 14th December, 2010. She further alleges that the caller was aware of the decision to be made by the Board and that the SODS website published this decision that same day.
I can tell you that:-
1. No such phone call was made by any known member of SODS. We are a close group and I know my fellow members well enough to know this sort of thing was simply not credible. Indeed all SODS members are prepared to testify they made no phone call in this respect.
2. No SODS member had any knowledge of the PMSC decision until after the Balmullo practice was informed and the Balmullo practice then informed me.
3. The PMSC decision was not published on the SODS website until 19th December.
A cursory look at the SODS website would have confirmed that it did not publish the PMSC decision until 19th December. The previous entry was on 13th December and made no reference to the PMSC. I control the website and no other SODS person has access to it.
A call to me or indeed any SODS member would have confirmed that no call was made to the Board by a genuine SODS member. It therefore follows that, if such a call was received, it was from some seemingly unnamed person professing to be a SODS member but who was not a member of our group. It is difficult to understand why any SODS member would wish to call the Board even if they knew who to call, which is in itself most unlikely. At best the call, if received as alleged, was from someone outwith SODS with an interest in the outcome or at worst it was a person seeking to discredit the SODS forum. Presumably call logging on your telephone system will have a record of the call.
In either case the Board appears to have accepted the allegation without any rudimentary checks on the source and background to the matter. The Board then instigated an investigation. SODS would very much like to know the outcome of that investigation.
We have serious concerns, following the announcement at the PMSC meeting of 15th March, 2011 that SODS were involved in a leak of information, that this news would have quickly travelled around NHS Fife. Not only were members of the Fife Board present but also others outwith the core organisation.
We believe it is quite inconceivable that this false accusation would not be known to a wide range of senior management in NHS Fife especially as the Board’s Chairman authorised an investigation. Furthermore, following the meeting on the 15th March we believe it is highly likely that those members of the Special Committee, which convened and decided that dispensing in Balmullo must cease, would also in that timescale been aware of the allegations against SODS. This same applies to the recent NHS Board meeting on the 28th June . It is therefore quite reasonable to expect that most if not all involved may have been influenced by the accusation with regard to SODS’s submission to the Board for their meeting of the 28th June, 2011. We believe that legal advice would confirm that our view is correct
Since the allegation has been made public by virtue of the minutes appearing on the NHS website I am asking that NHS Fife either publicly retract the allegation or provide proof that it was a SODS member who made the call and that evidence of the alleged SODS website posting is also provided.
I can also confirm that Balmullo Community Council have given their full backing to SODS in our attempt to find out who was responsible for the allegation leading to the Board’s investigation.
I look forward to an early response to this matter which has caused me and my fellow SODS forum members considerable anger as well as a concern that this allegation will, unless corrected, seriously damage our public image. We demand that NHS Fife state publicly and inform all Board members that the allegation that SODS Forum members were involved, as the Board alleges, is without foundation. I would also expect a retraction in the minutes of the next PMSC meeting as well as a revisiting of the Board’s deliberations and vote on Balmullo dispensing. Failure to revisit this decision would indicate that the Board does not appreciate that the Balmullo decision is now untenable. I await your response.
Yours faithfully
Alan Kennedy, on behalf of SODS Forum group
Cc; Chair , Balmullo Community Council
Letter 2
Letter 3
Chairman, NHS Fife Board
Dear Professor McGoldrick,
Your letter , Reference JMcG/NW/VM/letters0711kennedy of 11th July , 2011 refers
Whilst I am grateful for your response I am most certainly not satisfied that the allegation referred to has been properly dealt with. It is clear that the person who made the allegation, Ms Harper, has apparently not been asked to substantiate her allegation which still remains as part of the PMSC Minutes of 15th March’. I suspect she is unable to provide any evidence whatsoever that can back up her statement
It is disingenuous to say the least that a simple check could not have been made either to SODS or by a visit the SODS website to ascertain the true position.
You state that the alleged phone call cannot be traced and no record is held regarding the caller. As that is the case I and my fellow SODS would like to know why the call remains part of the PMSC minutes.
I am now formally requesting that you inform all concerned with this allegation that the allegation was false and that the PMSC minutes will be amended to reflect this.. Also that SODS will be informed through me that this has been done.
I very much hope that action is taken by the Board to close out this matter as a result of this request to you. If this is not done SODS will have to look at alternative action to put these matters right. Yours sincerely
Alan Kennedy
Letter 4
( see next page)
Letter 4
Letter 5
Dear Professor McGoldrick,
Thank you for your letter of 18th August concerning the 15th March PMSC minutes.
My SODS forum members have told me of their serious dissatisfaction at the response given. There is not a shred of evidence that the allegation made against SODS at the meeting of 15th March has any substance. As you yourself have now said NHS Fife is unable to substantiate the claims
Adding a note to the file version of the minutes, which will probably never be read again, does little to redress the damage that has been done by the allegation.
I am sure that we both have more urgent matters to attend to but it is precisely this sort of failure to properly address public concern in all aspects of the Balmullo dispensing decision that drives our supporters on. Until the public have confidence that NHS Fife are acting in the best interests of patients and in particular patient choice this subject will detract from the overall performance of your organisation.
We therefore regret that we are unable to accept that the matter shall rest and accordingly must now take action to bring about a proper recognition of the harm that has been done, both to SODS' reputation and we believe to the decision process on Balmullo.
yours sincerely
Alan Kennedy on behalf of SODS Forum Group
3, Smithy Lane, Balmullo,
St Andrews, Fife, KY16 0FG
Tel 01334 870378
29th August, 2011
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Latest News as at 5th August 2011
SODS Forum Group in Balmullo and Leuchars are pleased to post up the following notice from Millport SODS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MILLPORT S.O.D.S.
WE WISH TO ANNOUNCE THAT WE HAVE A REPLY FROM OUR Q.C.AND WOULD LIKE TO HOLD A MEETING IN THE NEAR FUTURE WITH ALL OF THE GENEROUS SUPPORTERS WHO CONTRIBUTED TO THE FIGHTING FUND IN ORDER TO BRING THEM UP TO DATE, AND TO GIVE THEM DETAILS OF OUR NEXT ACTION.
IN THIS RESPECT, AND IN ORDER TO MAKE OUR CAMPAIGN THAT MUCH MORE EFFECTIVE.
WE HAVE BEEN IN CONTACT WITH THOSE SIMILARLY AFFECTED IN LEUCHARS, CARSTAIRS, TARVES, METHLICK, & PITMEDDEN AND HAVE ALL AGREED TO WORK TOGETHER IN FUTURE.
WE HEAR THAT MR. SEMPLE HAS INDICATED THAT HE MAY BE IN A POSITION TO OPEN HIS LITTLE SHOP IN MILLPORT IN THE NEAR FUTURE, SO WE WILL KEEP AN EYE ON THE SITUATION AND KEEP YOU ALL INFORMED.
AS SOON AS THE SODS COMMITTEE HAS MET, WE WILL POST A DATE AND TIME OF THE PROPOSED MEETING OF SUPPORTERS.
THANK YOU
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We have also been engaged in briefing Sir Menzies Campbell, our MP and have now received legal advice from him concerning the NHS Fife Board decision to close Balmullo surgery dispensing from next year. Something which he is strongly opposed to. We are now also working closely with other affected rural communities to plan the next moves against these appalling decisions which directly affect our local health care services.
Latest News as at 28th June
The following letter was submitted to CEO, NHS Fife in advance of the Board meeting on 28th June . This meeting will decide whether the decsion to end Balmullo dispensing is to be ratified by the Board
21/6/2011
Ref:- SODS 1293/2011
Dear Mr Brechin,
Balmullo Dispensing Decision
Introduction
On 28th April, 2011 the Fife NHS Board formally notified Pitcairn Practice, Balmullo, by letter that a Special Committee, arranged after advice from the Central Legal Office of NHS Scotland, had convened on 26th April, 2011, to consider dispensing from Balmullo Surgery. This meeting took place following legal advice that the remit of the Primary Medical Services Committee’s decision did not allow it to rule on this issue when it met on 14th December, 2010, when it decided that the Balmullo GP practice could continue dispensing following the opening of a commercial pharmacy in Leuchars.
This reversal of the December 2010 decision to allow dispensing to continue has caused great anger amongst local patients and staff of the Balmullo practice. They have already made it abundantly and overwhelmingly clear in public meetings that they do not wish to see any changes made to their local GP dispensing services. The decision also raises important issues which deserve to be considered before the Board takes action to ratify their ‘Special Committee’ decision of 26th April 2010. Despite the somewhat lame apology by NHS Fife’s Medical Director for the ‘confusion and inconvenience caused to the practice’ by the Board the public are surely entitled to contest this decision for which the board claims ‘there is no right of appeal’. Failure to allow an appeal brings into question NHS Fife’s acceptance of the implications resulting from the introduction from 1st June 2010 of amended Control of Entry legislation for pharmaceutical applications. This clearly states that Area Health Boards must take all reasonable steps to ascertain and consider input from the public with regard to such applications. The Leuchars pharmacist, who we understand was alone in raising an appeal against the December decision, despite the Board stating that this also was not subject to appeal, appears to have been given a most unfair advantage in the circumstances. The public were neither informed nor consulted concerning the remit of the NHS Fife Special Committee which determined a decision affecting hundreds of NHS patients.
For the above reason in general and the queries set out in detail below I am formally requesting that the Fife NHS Board place on hold any ratification of the decision of the Special Committee meeting of 24th April. I am also asking that the notice to the practice to cease dispensing from 30 April, 2012 is suspended pending further review of the Special Committee’s decision.
Public Involvement The NHS Reform Act, (Scotland) 2004 states that “It is the duty of every body to whom this (Act) applies to take action, with a view to securing, as respects to public health services for which it is responsible, that persons to whom these services are being provided or may be provided are involved in and consulted on –
(a) The planning and development of services and
(b) decisions to be made by the body significantly affecting the operation of those services.”
The above stipulations in the Act apply to all Scottish Area Health Boards and I am unaware that NHS Fife Board has received any dispensation to ignore them.
I am also aware of the content your letter GJB/NW/VM/ letters/0614smart of 14th June 2011. However this letter fails to adequately address the questions listed below.
Detailed Questions in Relation to the Special Committee Decision
- What was the nature of the complaint that prompted the Board to reconsider the PMSC decision of December 2010 and how did this come to the attention of the Board? The Board may wish to note that in approving the appeal against the Leuchars Pharmacy application in August 2009 the National Appeals Panel committee minutes record that the Leuchars applicant stated “he could see no reason why the neighbourhood should be anything other than the village of Leuchars”. He further stated that “Balmullo was a different neighbourhood and currently served by a different dispensing surgery. NAP minutes clearly show that that the Leuchars pharmacy application was approved on the basis that it would cover the village of Leuchars and the Comerton area. Balmullo was not affected and was not part of the ‘neighbourhood’ under the meaning of the ‘Control of Entry’ pharmacy legislation.
- With reference to 1 above why did the Special Committee see fit to include Balmullo in the same neighbourhood area as Leuchars when it clearly is not according to the NAP minutes?
- What were the exact terms of the Board’s remit to the Special Committee and who prepared this remit?
- Did the Board take any steps to advise the public in Balmullo and surrounding neighbourhoods that the Special Committee were to reconsider the December 2010 decision and if not why not?
- Did the Board invite either Pitcairn Practice or the public’s input for consideration by the Special Committee and if not why not? (it is accepted that certain submissions to the December PMSC meeting were available to the board but more recent input with regard to a review of that decision does not appear to have been sought).
- How did the Special Committee take due cognisance of the provisions of NHS (GMS Contract) Scotland Regulations 2004 and in particular para 44.1 which deals with inadequacy of means of communication and distance. In relation specifically to this paragraph how did the board reconcile the fact that Balmullo patients disabled and elderly alike will, from May 2012, be required to travel either by car or by an infrequent local bus service to fulfil prescriptions? The experiences of travel difficulty incurred over the winter period 2010/2011 cannot be ignored and it should be noted that over 250 patients registered with the practice are over 60 years old. The Board will no doubt have learned that many patients in Balmullo and Leuchars do not wish to use the Leuchars pharmacy since it has been the catalyst for the unwanted and unwelcome changes that have been, and continue to be made, to their NHS services.
- How does the Board reconcile its publicly declared aim in its stated ‘Targets for Implementation of Healthcare Quality Strategy’, regarding patient feedback, with this failure to seek public input on a front line service change? (NHS FIFE Annual Review, August 2010)
- How does the Board reconcile its ‘Patient Experience’ aims of “ensuring strong public voices within the governance arrangements” as declared in the 2010 Assessment when it has ignored the public in this decision which will materially affect everyday health care for Balmullo Surgery patients from May 2012.
- Since the PMSC committee presumably took the decision to close Leuchars GP Dispensing will that decision also now be reviewed in the light of the legal advice received?
Summary
NHS Fife has decided to reverse a previous welcome decision to retain GP dispensing and introduce one that will have such a serious and adverse impact on the NHS services for a Fife community. It is quite inexcusable that the same community has no input and is not even informed that the matter is being considered. Such action goes against every tenet of the democratic process laid down in the NHS Reform Act. The general mismanagement and lack of regard for patient consultation that has accompanied the whole NHS process with regard to pharmacy applications in the Leuchars and Balmullo areas presents a horrendous example of how not to manage such front line services and how not to treat the public. Patients as well as practice staff have a right to both expect and receive better treatment.
Patients welcome pharmacies within their community, the more the merrier. However they have made it perfectly clear they do not want GP dispensing to stop because of this. Patients have noted the considerable investment by local GPs in practice facilities. All that investment in the day to day service by the GPs has been adversely affected by these pharmacy decisions which are simply profit motivated.
I therefore request that:-
1 The Board announce that the Special Committee’s decision will be subject to Appeal and that the Board sets a timescale for input regarding this.
2 That the Board suspends any ratification process of the Balmullo dispensing decision until such time as a full review of the points made in this letter has been carried out by NHS Fife and the public affected by the Special Committee’s decision have been given a chance to provide input under an appeal process.
I am,
Yours faithfully,
Alan Kennedy
On behalf of SODS ( Save Our Dispensing Surgeries) Forum Group
CC Nicola Sturgeon, Deputy First Minister, The Scottish Parliament
Chairman NHS Fife,
Medical Director, NHS Fife,
Councillor Tim Brett
Chair,Balmullo Community Council
Chair, Leuchars Community Council
Sir Menzies Campbell, MP
Roderick Campbell MSP
Pitcairn Practice
Latest News as at 15th June 2011
Following discussions between SODS and Balmullo County Council it was agreed that we would work together to overturn the decision made to impose a cessation of GP dispensing at Balmullo from May 2012. Both parties are unanimous that the fight to save Balmullo dispensing will be given a high priority. A strategy and timetable for action in the near future have been agreed and if the decision is not overturned we will continue to jointly endeavour to fight this thoroughly unjust and totally irresponsible decision by all means available to us
Latest News as at 4th June , 2011
Balmullo Dispensing Decision
The shameful decision by NHS FIFE to reverse an earlier announcement to allow surgery dispensing to continue in Balmullo will have angered and dismayed many local patients.
This decision arose from a complaint from the Leuchars pharmacy. The same pharmacy whose original applicant declared that he had ‘no interest in Balmullo’ when making the Leuchars application. For NHS Fife to state there is no right to appeal after previously saying the same about the decision to allow dispensing to continue shows the Board to be at the very least incompetent as well as callous. Further insult is added when the Medical Director of Fife NHS refers to the matter as an ‘inconvenience’ for the local Balmullo surgery. It will be more than ‘inconvenient’ for the many elderly and other patients who will need to go elsewhere for their prescriptions to be met.
One of our local councillors has stated ‘nothing can be done’. That is incorrect and much can be done to try and overturn this appalling situation provided the Balmullo community is prepared to get behind efforts to overturn this NHS madness.
There is absolutely no legal reason why dispensing at the Balmullo surgery cannot be allowed to continue. SODS (Save Our Dispensing Surgeries) have this in writing from the Scottish Executive and it has also been publicly stated by Scottish parliamentary ministers on a number of occasions. The power to do so is delegated to the Area Health Boards. One wonders why they are so reluctant to use it.
SODS are actively engaged with other communities throughout Scotland who face the same problems. Millport is an excellent example where virtually the whole community is behind the local SODS group fighting Ayrshire and Arran Health Board on this issue. They are not alone, Methven, and Carstairs are other examples of communities prepared to challenge these destructive pharmacy applications at both application and approval stages. Their MSP’s, regardless of political party, are backing them. It does not matter how many pharmacies are opened locally. This is about patient choice which is in turn about democracy in our health service.
SODS have a number of options and actions they are now considering but it will be a long hard fight to get a sensible solution which protects, as in England, the local dispensing services we wish to retain. SODS across Scotland will continue to seek to achieve this no matter how long this takes.
It is understood that the dispensing decision will be on the agenda at the next Balmullo Community Council meeting to be held on Monday 13th June, commencing at 7pm in Balmullo School on Hayston Park Road. If you are a Balmullo resident and interested in contributing to the discussion on dispensing you may wish to attend.
Latest news as at 22 May, 2011
We have been given permission by Millport SODS to place the following notice on our website. We thank them for it and will continue to keep in close touch on all matters of mutual interest.
MILLPORT S.O.D.S.
SAVE OUR DISPENSARY SERVICE.
We would like to thank all of those who contributed so generously to our Appeal for a Fighting Fund for the Town’s struggle to keep our Doctors’ Dispensary open.
In this respect, we have approached an eminent Q.C. who has agreed to take on this work for the Town.
Combined with this, representatives of the Elderly Forum and others have a meeting on Wednesday 25th with both the Chairman of the Ayrshire & Arran Health Board, Professor Bill Steveley and Wai-Yin Hatton, the Board’s Chief Executive.
Approaches have been made to the new Health Secretary, Michael Matheson and we continue to receive assistance from our own MSP, Kenneth Gibson. Alongside this, we have received encouraging correspondence from the First Minister and he has asked to be kept up to date with the situation.
Contact is also kept up with our fellow campaigners in Leuchars who face their own fight, but continue to vote with their feet regarding the unwanted pharmacy that has been forced upon them.
This situation also prevails in Carstairs, Balmullo, Tarves, Methven, and Arran etc. etc. – so we are not alone.
Thank you all once again and as soon as we have further news, we will bring it to you.
Millport S.O.D.S. Committee.
22nd May 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SODS Press Release 21st May, 2011-05-17
The decision by Fife NHS to close dispensing services from Balmullo’s GP surgery from May 2012 will come as a horrendous blow to patients of the practice as well as the GPs and their staff. More especially since the Area Health Board first decided dispensing could remain. It is understood a single complaint was lodged by the current Leuchars pharmacist and through this action the decision to allow GP dispensing at Balmullo has been reversed. Dr Brian Montgomery, Medical Director for NHS FIFE ‘apologises for the inconvenience’ caused to the practice. No concern about patients’ views then! What planet are these officials on? No right of appeal either, just to rub it in.
Yet again the voice of patients has been ignored in the decision processes taken by a Health Board which continues to demonstrate it is more interested in political dogma than patient services. Leuchars and Balmullo folks have long realised that they can no longer trust a health board which continues to ignore public opinion. Patients do not want to lose their GP dispensing service. Millport, Methven and Carstairs patients are no doubt of the same opinion. Millport is currently seeking legal advice from a QC to fight their case. These unwanted pharmacy applications are not going to go away so long as income and profits rather than patient choice are the driving factors.
There is absolutely no legal reason why dispensing cannot continue regardless of how many pharmacies are opened. The Scottish Government have confirmed this is the case. Yet again, as currently in Millport, NHS boards, who have the power to allow dispensing to continue in parallel with a new pharmacy, have run scared of making this decision. Well, patients have one thing the health board cannot take away. The right to decide which pharmacist they will use. SODS are sure they will, when they make that decision, choose a pharmacist who they feel has not imperilled their local GP services.
SODS have been concerned over the last month that this matter was being reconsidered by the health board. Now that this decision has been made SODS will continue to fight for a right to retain our Dispensing GP services We look for further volunteers to help us promote our cause and you can make your views known and offer your support at www.patientsods.co.uk
Latest news as at 29th February 2011
Those of you who have been following this long running saga to save our dispensing surgeries, in the face of unwanted pharmacy applications, which will bring one stop surgery dispensing to an end in some rural areas - as well as impacting adversely on other surgery services - will know that Millport is facing a serious threat from such a pharmacy approval. The very angry citizens of Millport have now decided to take further action and have posted up the following message on their website at
http://www.s1millport.com/news/millport-dispensary--its-time-to-call-in-the-lawyers.html
We have repeated this message on this website as the many site visitors and supporters we have from all over Scotland and further afield need to be aware that this is an issue which will not go away. Some of you may well wish to contribute to Millport’s fighting fund. We commend Millport for the action they are taking. With a Scottish Election looming SNP leader Alex Salmond has already been specifically and directly briefed as to how seriously affected rural communities are fighting the challenge to their long established and much appreciated rural health services. Nicola Sturgeon may still try to claim that a Community Pharmacy is an NHS priority for rural patients. She seems unable to comprehend the simple message that many communities have clearly and overwhelmingly said they don’t want a pharmacy imposed upon them at the expense of the GP dispensing services they currently enjoy. As Scotland’s patients start to vote with their feet to avoid using unwanted and irrationally imposed pharmacy services the message might at last get through that patients demand a say in the choice of service they want. If the Scottish Government really believes this is not the case we suggest the two services run together in affected areas. Patient choice will then determine the outcome and may the best service survive.
_________________________________________________________________
Millport Dispensary- it's time to call in the lawyers
Well the fight for the pharmacy has been going on for over a year now and Millport SODS (Save Our Dispensary Service) has decided that it's time to call in the lawyers.
SODS want to stop controversial plans to transfer the island's dispensary service from the GPs to a private pharmacy.
The current dispensary is in the doctor's surgery- which is the heart of the community.
But now SODS need legal expertise to help win the long battle.
They want to set up a "Fighting Fund" to give them cash to hire a lawyer.
June Allison of SODS says: "To all off-island SODS. Today we began a mail drop to everyone on the island as we are now about to form a Fighting Fund to take the Campaign to the next level - i.e. the employment of a Q.C. for his advice and opinion."
As well as hiring a lawyer the SODS will also hold an organised demonstration to alert people to the cause.
Can you contribute to the Fighting Fund? It doesn't matter how much you can donate- big or small, it will all be appreciated.
Please send cheques made out to
Robert F Duff and Co
19 Guildford Street, Millport, Isle of Cumbrae,
KA28 0AE
You should also state that it is for Millport SODS
If you wish for a receipt from the SODS Committee please enclose a s.a.e. You can also donate by Paypal. The address for this is sodsmillport@btinternet.com.
To donate using Paypal visit www.paypal.com. If you are a Paypal registered user then simply login and select the option to send money. The email address to send the money to is sodsmillport@btinternet.com. You can still send money via Paypal even if you are not a registered user. See paypal.com for further details
If you have any questions call Millport SODS on 01475 530253.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Latest news as at 14 March, 2011
The link below has some useful information about what is happening at Millport regarding the islanders' fight to save their dispensing GP services
http://www.dispensingdoctor.org/content.php?id=1583ir
It can also be revealed that consideration is now being given to raising a new Petition to the Scottish Parliament to address the major problems still inherent in the new Control of Entry legislation. In particular it will seek to change the regulations to automatically allow dispensing GP pharmacy services to co-exist with any new pharmacies approved for areas served by the GP service.
This will allow the public to make an informed choice of how they wish their dispensing and other NHS services to be provided. It is already quite clear that the public are fully prepared to exercise their right to do so in Leuchars and if necessary in Millport and other areas. It is fundamentally undemocratic that Area Health Boards are even considering that they should not have this choice.
SODS Latest News as at 9th March 2011 The extract below from today’s Scottish Parliamentary business shows that the question of protecting rural dispensing GPs from the attentions of pharmacists, seeking to cash in on such dispensing services, is far from being answered.
Murdo Fraser, Deputy Leader of the Conservative Party and Shadow Cabinet Secretary for Health & Wellbeing, has asked the following questions in the Scottish Parliament.
1. To ask the Scottish Executive how it supports rural GP practices that raise income from dispensing services to continue to deliver services to communities when a community pharmacy opens in the area.
2. How it ensures that an increase in community pharmacies will not have a negative impact on the capacity of rural GP practices that raise income from dispensing services to deliver services to communities.
3. Whether the funding arrangements for GPs that raise income from dispensing services will be amended to ensure that rural practices can continue to deliver services to patients.
4. How it will ensure that patients' views are taken into account when community pharmacy applications are being considered.
5. How it ensures that rural GPs who have lost income previously raised from dispensing can continue to deliver services to local communities.
Despite the recent review of Control of Entry legislation, which brings some minor changes in on 1st April, 2011, there are still many serious problems which the Scottish Government has failed to address. SODS are seeing pharmacy applications ongoing at Carstairs and Methven that simply take advantage of the glaring gaps in the current legislation that allow them to proceed despite growing patient and general public opposition. The revised legislation, taken overall, will do nothing to provide fairness and democratic decision making when it is applied..
Yet Area Health Boards have the solution available now. There is nothing to prevent a dispensing GP service continuing if a commercial pharmacy opens in its neighbourhood. That ruling has been authorised in writing by the Scottish Government yet Area Health Boards seem far too weak and timid to allow it to happen. Why not give the patients a choice? That is what many patients see as the fair and democratic answer.
Meanwhile Millport is awaiting a decision from the Ayrshire and Arran Health Board regarding the existing GP dispensing service and how long it may continue now a commercial pharmacy has been approved. The islanders are not standing idly by whilst this is considered and are looking at a number of options to protect the existing excellent GP services they presently enjoy.
As we have said many times before the only practical option right now for patients, whose views on what they want are continually ignored by both the NHS Executive and Area Health Boards, is to ‘Vote with your Feet’. Discontent will grow and grow as more and more rural dispensing GP services are affected. Thus it is now likely that this issue will be raised again and again in the Scottish Parliament, using every method available, including a further petition, unless steps are taken to address the question of the public’s choice in such matters.
It is high time that Government Ministers responsible for our NHS services started understanding what is felt by rural communities when faced with such aggressive applications which are virtually unanimously opposed by those they affect. This is no way to run NHS policy. Ministers need to think again before it is too late.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Latest news as at 18th Feb 2011
The closure of PE1220 at the last meeting of the Scottish Parliament’s Petitions Committee was not unexpected. Especially as the Scottish government chose the morning that the Committee sat to issue the new Control of Entry legislation which will shortly come into effect. The Government is nearing the end of its term in office and new Scottish elections in May will bring about new Petitions Committee members.
Whilst PE 1220 was a useful tool in achieving an overhaul of the regulations the resulting legislation on Control of Entry falls far short of a democratic and fair process. Dispensing GPs affected by a pharmacy application will still have no direct input to a process that can often adversely affect the level of care they currently offer and even make their practices no longer viable. We are now seeing such effects manifest themselves in the Leuchars area and Millport, Carstairs and Methven all now face the same problem. In each of these areas the public have made it clear that new pharmacies which impact upon GP services are unwelcome and unwanted. Adding to the concern is the fact that some pharmacists involved refuse to meet the public to discuss the implications of such applications. That has caused a lot of anger and rightly so.
Even more seriously the public’s input still plays no part in the processes at PPC and NAP levels where the final decisions on applications are made. Whilst the Government has said it seeks to improve matters in this respect the legislation just issued shows that their comments pay lip service only to the matter.
In addition the Scottish Government is still putting its head in the sand by refusing to understand and accept that dispensing GPs plough back more than 50% of their dispensing fee income to supplement the cost of additional services they offer. We have yet to see any evidence that pharmacists who take over dispensing in rural areas are prepared to do the same-and we suspect we are not likely to either.
So what can now be done? SODS have long ago come to the conclusion that patients now facing a loss of GP dispensing in rural areas because a pharmacy has been allowed to open really only have one viable choice. If they consider that the new pharmacy is not wanted and is the cause of the reduction in GP services they will make their displeasure known loud and clear by choosing carefully which pharmaceutical supplier they wish to use. Voting with their feet is a right that nobody can take away or override. That is what is going to happen in all the areas affected so far. So sad that Area Health Boards, who could quite legitimately allow competition by permitting rural GPs to carry on dispensing, should take the easy way out and bring their services to an end. But then healthy competition has never been a strong point in this Scottish Government’s Orwellian vision of the Scottish health service
New petitions for the Scottish parliament are not yet being accepted but it may be that the furore aroused by the current spate of applications in rural areas can only be dealt with by revisiting the subject matter in the next parliamentary session, something now under consideration by those affected.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Latest news as at 19th January , 2011
A belated Happy New Year to all our supporters.
Today Millport may learn its fate as the NAP meets to consider the Appeal against the island pharmacy approval. We know it is attracting a lot of interest and concern and we join with many others who do not live on the island as well as those that do in wishing the Millport patients all the best for a successful Appeal albeit the current legislation is certainly not helpful to their cause. The repercussions if the pharmacy does get the final go ahead are certainly going to cause a stir.
Meanwhile Leuchars Community Council awaits a response from the Scottish Ombudsman concerning aspects of the decision process to allow a pharmacy there. All we know at the moment is that it is under investigation.
On Tuesday 25th, January and not the 26th as previously reported, the Scottish Parliamentary Petitions Committee will meet to again discuss the latest position on PE1220. They will certainly want to look at the unacceptable resistance by the Scottish government to allowing public input to be part of the actual decision process at PPC and NAP levels. It may be necessary to raise a further new Petition to force the issue if the current one brings no satisfaction in this particular matter.
Carstairs Medical Practice has also been allowed an Appeal against the approval of a pharmacy in its dispensing area. This threatens the whole viability of the GP practice but that does not seem to concern those who submit such applications. However patients in that area have already taken on board the ‘vote with your feet’ message which seems the only protest option left to citizens who have unwelcome pharmacies imposed upon them at the expense of their GP dispensing service.
Finally we publish below, with the full permission of the DDA,a copy of their Article on Leuchars which was published on the DDA website on 17th January,2011. It is an excellent article which simply reinforces the view held by so many patients now that these unwelcome and unwanted pharmacies are wrecking years of local GP investment in patient services. Now we are seeing the real picture despite the contention from certain pharmacists that local services would not be affected. We repeat our message to patients. You have the final say and you have the choice to who dispenses your prescription. You can vote with your feet!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“Leuchars GP to leave
Services being run down, less doctors
By Ailsa Colquhoun
17th of January 2011
Patients at the Leuchars and Balmullo surgeries in Scotland are to lose their GP after 21 years. Dr Bryan Johnston is to leave the surgeries at the end of March, two months before the Leuchars practice loses its dispensing rights to the new village pharmacy.
Services at the Leuchars practice such as physiotherapy and practice nurse clinics have already started to wind down. According to Dr Johnston, it is likely that the Leuchars practice will become a skeleton operation, offering very limited services, and staff numbers will be cut. The number of doctors in the practice has gone from 2.75 full time equivalents to 2 doctors.
During his 21 years at the practices, Dr Johnston and partners have built up the practice from little more than an "old shed" with a list of 960 patients to a thriving, modern practice with 3,500 patients. He says his decision to leave is entirely down to the impact of the new village pharmacy on the practice and its patients, some of whom will find it difficult to travel either to the Balmullo surgery or to the village pharmacy. He says: "I simply didn't have it in me to see the service I had worked so hard to build up picked apart." He added that the Area Health Board's disregard for patient choice had also influenced his decision to go. He leaves to take up a post in a practice in Melbourne, Australia, and will be replaced by Dr John Kennedy, from Inverness.
Paying tribute to the efforts of local patients, who have formed the Save Our Dispensing Surgeries lobby group, Dr Johnston said: "The SODS patients have been very vociferous and effective in getting changes to the regulations. They have been very supportive and deserve better."
SODS patients have fought hard against the arrival of the pharmacy in Leuchars and they have welcomed the decision by the Area Health Board to retain GP dispensing at the Balmullo Surgery.
Patients sent the chairman of the Area Health Board a letter just prior to the hearing on Balmullo, which stressed in some considerable detail the importance of continuing GP dispensing for Balmullo patients and those in other communities who also use this surgery. Writing on their website, SODS campaigners say that the decision will "relieve Balmullo surgery patients who faced having to travel for prescribed medication". They add that it goes some way to restoring a measure of confidence in the Board's willingness to accept public opinion as a vital and mandatory factor when decisions are made with regard to new pharmacy applications.
Patients of the surgeries at Leuchars and Balmullo attended various meetings in the run-up to the decision on the local pharmacy application. At these meetings patients made clear that they want to meet and discuss all such applications which can affect their everyday community life.
Despite the positive outcome at Balmullo, patients say that there is much still to be done to improve the process of pharmacy applications in rural areas. "The wholly undemocratic nature of current legislation has thwarted all attempts to bring some common sense and fair play into the process. Current thinking in the Scottish Executive with regard to new legislation due out very shortly is still out of line in addressing public concerns."
Commenting on the Scottish government's position on dispensing doctors, DDA Board member, Dr Hal Maxwell said: "Regrettably, government policy in Scotland is that all patients have access to pharmacy." Dr Johnston added: "There is no change in Government sympathies towards dispensing doctors. Its position is that doctors should provide GMS without using their dispensing income but the reality is that most dispensing practices use their dispensing income to provide and improve the services they offer patients."
We asked NHS Fife for comment but they declined.”
Says it all really.
----------------------------------------
Latest News as at 19th December 2010
SODS is sorry to learn that Dr Bryan Johnson, the longstanding GP for the Leuchars and Balmullo surgeries, is leaving for a new appointment in Australia. We all wish him well. As he has said recently he leaves with a heavy heart after 20 years of building up the two excellent Leuchars and Balmullo surgeries from a small shed operation.
There can be little doubt that his impending departure would not have come about had the unwelcome arrival of a commercial pharmacy in Leuchars, amid the concerns that this brought to local communities, not happened. From 1st June, 2011, Leuchars patients will have to find a pharmacist of their own choosing to dispense their prescriptions. Fortunately they have a good choice of pharmacists in Tayport, Cupar and St Andrews should they decide not to use the local facility which has brought about this situation. No doubt they will make up their own minds if the support expressed at the village meetings on the pharmacy proposal was any indication of their mood. These were meetings which Mr Semple failed to attend, just as he has done with his application in Millport where he has been invited repeatedly to face the public but again failed to respond. The public have made it clear that they want to meet and discuss all such applications which can affect their everyday community life. Something Mr Semple appears unable, or perhaps unwilling to comprehend which may account for his decision to sell on the Leuchars business.
However there is some good news.
SODS was delighted to hear that GP dispensing will be allowed to continue at Balmullo Surgery. The Chairman of the Area Health Board was sent a letter by SODS just prior to the hearing on Balmullo. This stressed in some considerable detail the importance of continuing GP dispensing for Balmullo patients and patients in other communities who also use this surgery. SODS congratulate the Area Health Board for taking this decision which will greatly relieve Balmullo surgery patients who faced having to travel for prescribed medication. It will also go some way to restoring a measure of confidence in the Board’s willingness to accept public opinion as a vital and mandatory factor when such decisions are made with regard to new pharmacy applications.
There is much still to be done to bring about a much fairer way of dealing with pharmacy applications in rural areas. Only the wholly undemocratic nature of current leigislation has thwarted all attempts to bring some common sense and fair play into the process. Current thinking in the Scottish Executive with regard to new legislation due out very shortly is still out of line in addressing public concerns. This is being looked at by the Petitions Committee regarding PE1220. However Fife Area Health Board , by virtue of the Balmullo dispensing ruling made by the by the Primary Medical Services Committee, who were able to look at the whole picture and the whole community and not just a vested interest, has shown a positive result is possible in such matters.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------[
Latest News as at 13th December, 2010
Karen Gillon, MSP, recently addressed the following written question reference no S3W-37911, to Shona Robison, the Scottish Minister for Health:-
Karen Gillon (Clydesdale) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive whether NHS boards have delegated powers that would enable them to allow dispensing GP practices to continue dispensing after a local pharmacy application is accepted.
Karen Gillon is the MSP for the Carstairs area where a long established dispensing GP practice is now under threat of losing its dispensing rights as a result of a recent pharmacy application being approved. The health minister replied as follows:-
Shona Robison: Yes. The regulations for general practice provide that a contractor or provider shall be entitled to receive reasonable notice from the health board if the supply of drugs, medicines and appliances is to be discontinued.
The Minister’s response, which fails to answer the question asked, indicates three possibilities.
- She did not read the question properly as she has clearly failed to answer it.
- She is not aware of the rulings already issued from her own department.
- She wishes at all costs to avoid answering the question.
The third is the most likely possibility. On 14th January, 2009, the Deputy Director of the Primary and Community Care Directorate, Dr Jonathon Pryce made the following written statement to the Scottish Parliamentary Petitions Committee with regard to the successful application for a pharmacy in an area served by a dispensing GP
““There is no requirement that an existing dispensing operation must cease, and therefor,depending upon full consideration by the NHS Board, a commercial pharmacy could be opened in addition to rather than necessarily replacing existing dispensing operations”
That declaration has never been rescinded. No doubt that the minister realises that if Area Health Boards were to be bold and honest enough to allow this to happen, which is what patients want, the end result would strike at the heart of her plans for NHS pharmacy services.
The Scottish Government has made it clear that their policy is that every community should have a pharmacy. Nothing wrong with that and indeed it is a welcome service if it can be planned and brought about as an integral part of the surgery service. Or alternatively operate as second dispensing option for the community
Where new community pharmacies are definitely not welcomed is when they adversely affect the rights of patients to choose if they wish to retain a one stop service from a dispensing GP and are eventually forced to go elsewhere.
Shona Robison no doubt knows full well from the sheer scale of the public protests mounted in Leuchars and Millport, prime examples of unwanted commercial pharmacy applications, that her policy is fatally flawed.She may be assured that further protest will continue as other rural dispensing GP practices in Scotland are threatened.
The simple answer would be to allow GP dispensing to continue alongside a new pharmacy dispensing outlet. No problem with that and patients in the end will exercise their preference by voting with their feet. Unfortunately this government, as well as our Area Health Boards, is ill disposed to listen to what NHS patients really want and continues to press ahead with allowing commercial pharmacies to operate at the expense of preferred GP dispensing services. In the end it maybe a painful process as the patient will choose to select the dispensing pharmacy of choice and that may well not be the unwanted local one foisted on them by an NHS service which fails to listen to its patients.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Latest news as at 2nd December, 2010
SODS are pleased to learn today that in Millport an Appeal is to be allowed regarding the decision to grant a pharmacy application by a Mr J Semple of the TLC Pharmacy Group. Hundreds of Millport patients of the local dispensing GP surgery opposed the original application. Mr Semple has failed to respond to invitations made to him to come and meet with local patients and answer questions concerning the proposed pharmacy.
We are sure Millport patients will again strongly oppose this unwanted and unwelcome commercial pharmacy. In the event the appeal is not successful Millport patients can vote with their feet and may well wish to seek alternative options to fulfil their prescription requirements.
Latest News as at 29th Nov 2010
SODS has learned that a GP dispensing practice in Carstairs is the latest to fall victim to an unwelcome commercial pharmacy application which has already received approval at the local Health Board PPC level. Over 130 local people voted unanimously at a March 2010 meeting for the status quo. The applicant, a Mr Khan, although invited did not come to the meeting. Nothing new there then!
SODS has been in recent contact with the GPs and updated them on matters which they may find useful regarding their next options. The proposed site is 450 yards from the GP surgery and there may well be patient concerns over access across a busy road.
The Carstairs case has raised an important point about the cost of allowing these pharmacies to open. The applicant, we understand, may well seek a Government ESP subsidy for a period to supplement pharmacy income
In the Carstairs case there are 4 other pharmacies within a 3 mile radius. At least patients will have the option to vote with their feet if the pharmacy is opened. This seems the only option left when the Government and local health boards choose to ignore public protests in such cases. We have little doubt it is an option many thoroughly fed up members of the public will choose.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Footnote as at 1 December, 2010. We live and learn. SODS have now been further briefed by a helpful GP concerning the ESP subsidy. Whilst it may well be controlled and administered by government it consists of funds made available by Scottish pharmacists. That explains why some pharmacists have been complaining that they can be required to subsidise pharmacies which are unwelcome and unlikely to be profitable in the areas where GPs currently dispense.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Latest News at 12th November,2010
Following the discussion of PE 1220 by the Scottish Parliament’s Petition Committee on Tuesday 9th November the full transcript of the questions to be asked of the Scottish Government has now been made available. The Scottish Government has until the 10th December, 2010, to provide answers to the questions below and to advise that they are taking action on the matter of mandatory recognition of public input to PPCs and NAPs regarding their decision processes.
PUBLIC PETITIONS COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION OF PE1220
QUESTIONS ARISING FROM COMMITTEE MEETINGS
(See ‘Written submissions’ for responses)
TUESDAY 9 NOVEMBER 2010
Scottish Government—
· In addition to your commitment to ensure the process is clearly understood by the public to enable them to make informed views, the Committee believe that if the public are being encouraged to make their views known then in order for them to feel it is worth while doing so it is important that these views are taken into account as a mandatory part of the process. The Committee would appreciate if you were to ensure that the process is amended to ensure that the views made by the public must be taken into account as part of the decision making process.
· You state that you expect NHS Boards to comply with relevant legal obligations when carrying out their functions. In light of the example by the petitioner of where an impact assessment wasn’t carried out can you confirm how you ensure that NHS Boards are meeting their legal obligations and what steps you would take if it is found that they are not.
· The Committee would also be interested in your views of the issues raised by the petitioner in his submissions of 18 October 2010.
TUESDAY 29 JUNE 2010
Scottish Government—
· How will you ensure that public opinion is incorporated into the decision making process by NHS boards in addition to their requirement to publicly consult?
· What assessment has been made in relation to the impact the changes will have in rural areas?
· Are NHS boards carrying out Impact Assessments under the Disability Discrimination Act 2005? What are your views on the points raised by the petitioner in this regard?
TUESDAY 20 APRIL 2010
Scottish Government -
· What are your views on the points raised by the petitioner in his letter of 24 March on the issue that the points for input in the consultation fall short of achieving a fair and democratic process which is the aim of the petition?
· What are your views on the request made by the petitioner that a hold is put on all current and new applications in dispensing doctor areas until the new regulations come into being?
· Will you please provide the Committee with information showing what actions and timescales you are expecting to follow once the consultation has closed on 11 June 2010.
· Will you take into account the points made in all the correspondence on this petition as part of your consultation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We now await the Government’s response. It is indeed difficult to see how, having canvassed public opinion, that same opinion can then be deliberately ignored in the decision process.
PE 1220 would never have been raised, presented and progressed so far had pharmacy applicants, Area Health Boards, PPC and NAP Panels as well as the Scottish Executive not totally ignored public opinion, patients’ preferences, local community leaders and politicians alike. It is now time for government to act to restore faith in a very tarnished and mistrusted legislative process.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Latest news as at 10th November ,2010
The Scottish Parliamentary Petitions Committee revisited PE1220 yesterday.
The Committee unanimously decided to ask further questions of the Government concerning the recent Control of Entry legislation proposals.
The Committee decided that:-
1 The Government should answer further questions relating to the position of dispensing GPs who are still not considered as interested parties in the proposed Control of Entry process.
2 The Government should provide further information regarding both public input to the decision processes,
Concern was also expressed concerning the application of legislation which may impact on pharmacy applications and whether such legislation was being applied by Area Health Boards.
This outcome is welcome and supports the line taken by the petitioner in his submissions made earlier in October. In due course the government will reply to the Committee and the petitioner will have the opportunity to respond to this reply.
PE1220 has now been running for almost two years. Much has happened in that time. We particularly welcome the comments received recently from by one Scottish pharmacist, who initially strongly opposed the petition, but now in a complete reversal says, in his own words,
“On behalf of the entire pharmacy profession can I take this opportunity to thank you (patient sods) for all your hard work? It has been of immeasurable benefit to pharmacists across Scotland”.
We will protect this pharmacist’s identity as we do not know if he is qualified to speak for all pharmacists but we appreciate the expression of support. Thank you, ‘PWJ’, as we will call you. No doubt when the Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain's Scottish Office hears about this we are sure they will wish to be associated with your enthusiastic support.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8th November 2010. A pharmacist the people appreciate.
We were sent the picture yesterday of a Nepalese pharmacist by a SODS supporter. Yes, we do have supporters all over the world now. The shot was taken recently on the Manaslu trekking route at about 13,000 feet This lady is well respected in her community and carries out nursing duties and midwifery as well as dispensing from the little pharmacy you see behind her.
We are delighted to hear about her work and we are sure she is well known by every one of the community she serves. Would that certain pharmacists in Scotland saw the benefit of meeting the community they purport to serve!
Latest news from SODS as at 4th November, 2010
Whilst things may appear quiet on the news front over the past few weeks this is not the case for ongoing action by SODS. There are a number of most interesting matters now being actively pursued and SODS expect to report on these actions, which could have a significant effect on the present situation, in the early part of December. We thank all those who have sent us their continuing support . We have no doubt that our aims and objectives will be running into 2011 and beyond.
Latest News as at Sunday 3rd October , 2010.
Readers of the ‘Largs and Millport Weekly News’ were doubtless surprised to see an article a week or so ago by Mr James Semple, the applicant who wishes to open a pharmacy on the island. A pharmacy which clearly the islanders don’t want. This article purported to allege that June Allison, a leading opponent of the pharmacy application, was likely to benefit from a financial interest if the TLC Group application was rejected and the Lomond Pharmacy application was approved. Clearly Mr Semple had failed to do even the most elementary homework regarding the situation.
We can do no better than to repeat below, with the Trust’s permission, the letter to the paper from the Chair of the Cumbrae Community Development Company in response to Mr Semple’s article regarding the allegation. This letter was published on 29th September.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CUMBRAE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMPANY
West Lodge, Garrison House, 2 Clifton Street, Millport, Isle of Cumbrae. KA28 0AZ
Company No: 234200 Scottish Charity No: SC 033383
24th September 2010.
Sir,
As Chair of CCDC I was concerned to read a letter in your paper last week from a James Semple.
I assume that this is the same James Semple who, in spite of enormous local opposition, is pushing ahead with the establishment of a private pharmacy in Millport.
In order to set the record straight let me confirm that CCDC did have outline discussion with Lomond Pharmacy about supporting a bid for a Community Pharmacy based in the Garrison.
The clear benefits of this would have been:-
Full access to all medicines etc. for every one of our residents, including those in wheelchairs and disabled scooters. There is no disabled access to Mr Semple’s proposed pharmacy.
Lomond Pharmacy were also willing to look at working with the GP Practice to ensure 24 hour, 365 days a year cover and access to drugs for islanders. As far as we are aware, Mr Semple proposes to open during office hours 5 or 6 days a week. This means no access to necessary medication out with office hours, potentially over weekends, public holidays and during inclement weather.
The rental paid by Lomond Pharmacy would be paid to CCDC and would then be used by CCDC for other good causes locally.
Mr Semple’s proposal does nothing to assist the work of CCDC nor will it provide assistance to other local projects.
The Board of CCDC resents the implication in Mr Semple’s letter that any of its Directors has any financial interest. None of our Directors receives any remuneration for the work that they do on behalf of the Community. There is only one individual standing to gain financially here and that is Mr Semple himself.
In short therefore the Board of CCDC believes that Mr Semple’s application represents a retrograde step for the island. There are some clear benefits from having a local pharmacy, but we believe these to be massively outweighed by the negative effect that this proposal will have not just on the local GP Practice but also on the local population.
We also believe that Mr Semple’s proposal represents a waste of public resource as it will undoubtedly be a costlier route for the NHS than retaining the status quo.
As a matter of interest to your readers I can also confirm that at no stage has Mr Semple or anyone representing him, made any approach to CCDC about renting space within Garrison House or working with the Community to provide an improved service to local residents.
Yours faithfully,
Frank Corcoran
Chair
Cumbrae Community Development Company
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------That really says it all. Small wonder the Millport patients do not want this unwelcome pharmacy application to succeed and are even now planning to use alternative suppliers should it be finally approved.
We also have permission to include here a copy of a letter sent to the local press by June Allison, who is one of many public figures leading the Millport protests against the pharmacy.
June Allison said:-
Regrettably Mr. Semple is not answering any of the questions regarding his application, preferring instead to use the tactic of throwing enough mud in the hope that some of it will stick. What puzzles me is that Mr. Semple has discussed the pharmacy application before his (Ms. McSorley’s) ad nauseam and now he is keen to discuss the one after his from Lomond Pharmacy.
The one pharmacy application that Mr. Semple seems unwilling to discuss is his OWN!
However, as he will not come to Millport and face the Community and answer their questions, we are left to draw our own conclusions.
Mr. Semple’s allegations about me personally are as ludicrous as they are inaccurate. Anyone who serves on a Board or Committee working for the Community voluntarily knows that they are usually out of pocket – not the other way around.
What they do illustrate is his complete ignorance of Millport. He obviously hadn’t realised that the clue was in the name - Cumbrae COMMUNITY Development Company. A company owned by the Community run on a voluntary basis by Directors who give of their time for no financial gain whatsoever. However, doing something for nothing could, perhaps, be a concept of which Mr. Semple has no personal experience.
There are many, many questions that this Community wishes to ask Mr. Semple so can we again invite him to come to Millport in order that he can answer them
Signed, June Allison
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now the invitation is up on this website it will be interesting to see if Mr Semple of TLC Pharmacy Group responds to a request for him to attend a public meeting. If he does it will be a ‘first’ as far as we are concerned as he failed to attend public meetings at Leuchars and Balmullo although invited to do so. We have no doubt that he will read it as he seems to be running a 24 hour watch on anything that opposes his plans.
Supporters of this website’s aims will no doubt continue to endorse the above letters and we will continue to seek to bring to an end pharmacy applications that are either not wanted or which do not add value to existing services by working in partnership with local doctors.
We are heartened by the many messages of support SODS and Leuchars CC have received from all walks of life, including patients, politicians, councillors, GPs and let it be said pharmacists. The support comes from across Scotland, too many messages to repeat here. The only messages which oppose our aims come from one particular pharmacy group - no prizes for guessing who!
SODS will shortly be assisting Alan Kennedy in the required follow up to Petition 1220 which will illustrate very clearly the problems which such purely commercial applications bring and how they are being pushed through in the face of bad legislation and overwhelming public opposition.
SODS will have more to report on this particular subject later this month as much backroom work is being done on these matters.
The fight to save our dispensing surgeries across Scotland is indeed far from over.
--------- * ---------
Latest News as at 9th September, 2010
SODS has permission from the author to publish the following letter recently sent to the Millport outlet of the Herald and Times newspaper group. It exactly epitomises the problems now being experienced by rural communities.
Sir,
It would seem that we are witnessing the Death of Democracy in Scotland.
We in Millport have just been asked for our opinion as to whether we wished for a pharmacy to be opened in Millport. We knew this would mean the end of our Doctors’ Dispensary, the loss of jobs for 5 Dispensary Ladies and one Doctor. We would also lose out of hours care from a doctor we all know along with loss of out of hours dispensing, including Christmas and New Year and bad weather, when the ferries do not run.
Over 320 of us said NO we did not!! 6 or 7 said yes – two of whom lived off of the island and one of whom wasn’t quite sure where the pharmacy in question would be – I think Troon was mentioned!
No contest one would think. This is a Democracy and the MAJORITY view will prevail. WRONG – as it was the wrong answer to the question, the Pharmacy Committee decided to ignore the majority view and go with the minority – which is a bit like counting the votes in the last General Election and then declaring that the BNP was the winner.
Why were we asked? As it seems that our answers are of no interest whatsoever to the Pharmacy Committee, why did they go through the process of bothering to ask us?
Surely this whole process is inherently flawed when a community can be subjected to ad hoc decisions such as this. However, we are not the only community to be suffering from these farcical laws – Leuchars is the same (although that licence to dispense has been already sold on as not one patient has left the doctor’s dispensary to use the new pharmacy) and Tarves is suffering too – all from the same applicant.
The applicant is counting on the fact that we all have short memories. That we will regale each other of stories about the lovely pharmacist who is so helpful and forget the service we now enjoy.
People Power can only make an impact if we “vote with our feet” and indulge one of the few rights we have left – i.e. to shop where we wish. Our views don’t count – but our money will. We are being bullied, as an Island Community we have to stick together and make a stand.
I regret the necessity to write this letter as we all recognise the important part that pharmacists play on the mainland in urban areas, but this is a rural island community where we neither need, nor want, this forced alteration to our way of life and bitterly resent being forced into something we neither need, nor want.
I remain,
Yours etc., June Allison, Spokesperson Millport SODS
Following on from the news we announced about the Millport decision SODS received yet another inaccurate, abusive and particularly foul mouthed outburst from Mr James Semple of TLC Group. We do not propose to publish this or respond to it. However we are making the appropriate bodies, UK wide, aware of the correspondence. Those in positions of power regarding NHS services should be made aware of the sort of person they are now dealing with in regard to such pharmacy applications.
-----------------------
Latest news as at 6th September, 2010
Sods learned today that Millport is the latest casualty in the fight to retain our rural dispensing GPs. We had hoped that Ayrshire PPC might show a lead to the rest of the country in retaining a well respected GP service instead of getting a commercial pharmacy that the vast majority of the islanders do not want.
We have said it before and we say it again. Patients have the choice to vote with their feet to demonstrate their anger and dismay at the way current undemocratic pharmacy regulations are being used to allow such decisions to be taken. An Appeal may follow but whatever happens Millport may in the end be forced to do what Leuchars patients are now doing in response to their unwanted pharmacy. Find an alternative pharmacist. That is the only way to win until the rules are changed in favour of patients’ wishes and not commercial gain.
Nicola Sturgeon could introduce a Statutory Instrument tomorrow making Public Consultation part of the process. After all she did this in 2009 to make Area Health Boards consult the public—only she and her advisers did not think to make AHBs take any note of such consultation which totally negated this move. And that is what has happened in Millport. We are now learning much more about the civil servants behind the scenes who with ministerial backing, are pushing through policies which pay scant regard to patient wishes. Yet another story to be unfolded.
More on Millport as it evolves but meanwhile we wish to express our sympathy to all those in the local Millport GP services who may be adversely affected by this quite outrageous decision. We are sure many others will wish to say the same . SODS will fight on.
Latest News as at 1 September , 2010
SODS are receiving information that patients in Tarves are now considering following Leuchars and Millport in preparing to find alternative pharmacy supply sources as and when the Tarves pharmacy opens.
Voting with your feet is the choice open to every patient who is unhappy with a pharmacy which replaces an existing rural dispensing surgery service. Patients in Leuchars continue to steadfastly use their dispensing service in the local surgery which will continue until May 31st, 2011. After that it is now highly probable that most, if not all patients, will seek to get their prescriptions handled by a pharmacist outwith Leuchars. This course of action is every patient’s right. Until current pharmacy regulations are amended and seen to be fair and democratic patients will retain their anger at the manner in which their NHS services have been altered without their involvement and despite their protests.
Millport are already geared up to follow Leuchars should they have the same problem. Despite what may be said to the contrary these actions are not taken as a vendetta against individual pharmacists or their companies. It is a matter of principle and affected patients appear to have a clear understanding of the rights and wrongs of the situation they now find themselves in. Accordingly when they find that Area Health Boards and the Scottish Government simply will not listen, or are too weak to exercise concern for their protests, they will act on their own. That is what is happening now and SODS predict this action will continue to grow across Scotland as other communities find that this may be the only way to make their voice heard and their feelings known.
Those who seek to apply to open pharmacies in rural GP dispensing areas will now have to very seriously consider whether the considerable profits they seek to gain are in fact achievable in the face of patient protest and this factor alone will dictate the future course of events in such applications.
Latest News as at 24th August 2010
SODS and Leuchars Community Council recently sent a letter to the Dundee Courier which challenged the Semple Brothers recent statement that they were surrendering their interests in the Leuchars Pharmacy ‘because of a “small group of people who seem determined to see the pharmacy fail”. The Courier decided to turn the letter into an article published on 24th August and reported our comment that the Semple statement was utter nonsense. In order that visitors to this website can see the whole of the letter sent to the paper we repeat it below:-
To The Editor, Dundee Courier.
Sir,
Leuchars Pharmacy Twist
As correctly reported in the Courier on August 21st the sell-out by the Semple brothers of their interests in the unwanted Leuchars Pharmacy comes as no surprise to those who always were sure that their involvement was purely profit motivated.
Mr Semple and his colleagues still, after nearly two years of hearing it, fail to understand the message that the communities in Leuchars and the surrounding area have made crystal clear from the start. The local campaigns seek to retain the current in-house Leuchars GP dispensing service now being forced to end in May, 2011. The pharmacy has brought about that wholly unsatisfactory position. Mr Semple complains of a vendetta. Utter nonsense.
If he thinks five community councils and hundreds of patients who protested against his money making venture are a “small group” he obviously has a serious counting problem. No doubt the TLC Pharmacy group will bring the same concerns to Millport if it is successful with its application there. There is also little doubt that, from evidence received from the Millport SODS forum, any unwanted pharmacy venture there will also backfire.
In the face of a Scottish Government which refuses to act in suspending new applications under the flawed pharmacy regulations until fairer ones are introduced there is one option every citizen has, that is to choose how and from whom they wish to obtain their medical prescriptions. In a time-honoured tradition they are voting with their feet in Leuchars. If the Leuchars pharmacy fails to prosper it will be because people choose to go elsewhere as a result of its affect on GP one-stop services they prefer to retain. It has nothing to do with a vendetta against anyone.
Yours sincerely,
Alan Kennedy, On behalf of SODS (Save Our Dispensing Surgeries) Forum Group
Carroll Finnie, Chair of Leuchars Community Council
We also publish here a letter sent to the Dundee Courier from our Millport SODS friends. It is so well put together and so perfectly describes their position that it is well worth a read
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 11:35 AM
Subject: Leuchars Pharmacy
Sir,
I read with interest your article re James Semple and the Leuchars Pharmacy. What it didn't mention is the fact that Mr. Semple is no stranger to controversy and is apt to cry "foul" when his schemes do not work.
We in Millport on the Isle of Cumbrae are under the same pressure from one of Mr. Semple's applications but he doesn't claim a "vendetta" here. Here he has contacted journalists of our local paper and the Sunday Herald, claiming that pharmacy applications have been the subject of "death threats".
Should Mr. Semple's application succeed here, he will take over a small shop some distance from the Surgery which has no Disabled Access and we in Millport will lose one doctor and 5 dispensing lady's jobs, with the knock-on effect that all of this implies.
The present surgery is situated in custom built accommodation with full disabled access in the centre of the town. We walk from the Surgery Consulting Room down the corridor to collect our medicines at the desk. We also have a full and comprehensive service for minor ailments, cessation of smoking assistance, blood tests, blood pressure, yearly medical checks, baby clinics etc. etc. This building also houses the local council office, library, museum and cafe. A perfect arrangement.
Our medical service is second to none but that isn't good enough for Mr. Semple! Oh no, ever since he found out through the FOI Act just how much dispensing doctors' practices are worth, he would like to shower us in these areas with the benefits of a pharmacy. He has said himself that he doesn't wish "for his global sum to be diluted" and obviously opposition to him, does just that.
What Mr. Semple fails to understand is that those opposing him are doing it for good reasons. He does not appear when invited to any meetings to explain his intentions and so we have to make up our minds what to think.
He claims an "organised vendetta" in Leuchars, but even IF this were true - has he ever wondered why? People will vote with their feet and when they are more than happy with the services that they have, they do not want these to be put under threat by outside applications that are based on profit.
We are fighting here in Millport for our frontline services. Living on an island, we cannot have any service such as this in private hands. What happens if we lose our dispensary, a doctor and jobs in this fragile economic area, only to find Mr. Semple cannot make enough profit from his proposed pharmacy - and like Leuchars - pulls out?
We will continue to fight here - not against Mr. Semple personally - but against anything that will threaten the way of life on the island and the security we have with our present medical services.
Yours faithfully
June Allison - spokesperson for Millport SODS..
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Latest news as at 20th August, 2010
The Dundee Courier have today rung SODS to ask if we knew that Mr Semple was selling up his interests in the Leuchars Pharmacy. He claims there has been a personal vendetta against him. Not so, SODS, the Leuchars community and the other four community councils,in the area, Dairsie, Guardbridge, Tayport and Balmullo, have absolutely no problem with pharmacists who will attend public meetings, take questions and discuss their proposals openly with local people. Mr Semple failed on all these counts and cannot be surprised at the reaction he has aroused. Or was it all about money?
The Millport hearing is on the 25th August. If eventually Mr Semple’s pharmacy application is successful, and it may be under the current unsatisfactory and undemocratic legislation, we confidently anticipate that he may sell on his interests there as well. Possibly also in Tarves. Opposition to the TLC Group’s Millport pharmacy proposal is just as strong , if not stronger than in other areas and they have good contingency plans in place to react to it. Perhaps, at last, people are beginning to realise they have the power to exercise their choice and vote with their feet. SODS could of course titled themselves as ABS, ‘Anyone but Semple’ but that was never our intention.
The current Leuchars pharmacist has recently described SODS as an ‘anti pharmacy political pressure group who no longer have any objectives in Leuchars’ Utterly wrong on both counts. SODS have no political affinities and never will have. SODS, like any other protest group, will use all sources in media and politics to get their message across And we believe we are now doing so. The fact is we ARE in favour of pharmacy applications where the public have a chance to meet and discuss with applicants all aspects of their proposals . Balmullo was an excellent example but now that has been turned down. For the moment that is.
As for having no interest now in Leuchars two SODS members attended the Fife Area Health Board Annual review on Tuesday 17th August in Kirkcaldy. The following question was addressed to the Fife AHB
Following the recent approval to allow a commercial pharmacy to open in Leuchars Post Office, where there are serious concerns over the access for disabled persons, can the Board please explain why no Impact Assessment was carried out, in direct contravention of the Disability Equality Legislation, 2004? Many patients now believe the present unwanted pharmacy could not have been approved had such action been taken.
The Board admitted that no Impact Assessment had been carried out to evaluate the effect of the proposed pharmacy location on disabled access for patients. It has taken the AHB 3 months to finally admit to this after many attempts by SODS and Leuchars Community |Council. The reason given was that the AHB legal team were still trying to ascertain if the Board was required to do so This answer will be of great interest to the Equality Commission responsible for the legislation who have already indicated that NHS contracts fall within their remit.
However just to hammer home the point:- 2006 Disability Equality Duty, Appendix A, schedule 1, Part 1, lists Area Health Boards ( in Scotland) as subject to the legislation.
Paras 3.36 and 3.37 within the legislation clearly state that ‘ if there is a clear indication that an action is likely to have an major impact on disabled people authorities are likely to need to conduct a full Impact Assessment.
There can be few more obvious cases for such action as the Leuchars Pharmacy yet no action was taken. SODS and Leuchars Community Council are now preparing an approach to the Ombudsman now that the final evidence is available to them regarding the failure to carry out the Assessment. Yes, I think we can claim to still have an interest in Leuchars.
In addition at the same meeting the following question was put directly to Nicola Sturgeon, Cabinet Secretary for Health and Welfare,:-
I am Alan Kennedy the Petitioner for Petition 1220 to the Scottish Parliament which seeks to bring fairness into the very flawed Pharmacy Regulations that are now allowing commercial pharmacists to destroy years of excellent and much appreciated GP dispensing services in rural areas
Throughout Scotland some 70 dispensing GP rural practices have now been targeted for applications for commercial pharmacies. These applications are made for commercial gain and are resisted by every community they impact on. I am fully aware of and involved in the painfully slow consultation process on the Control of Entry legislation which might, if properly addressed, bring a more democratic outcome to such applications
You have been repeatedly asked by patients, politicians of all parties and the media to put a hold on current applications until new legislation is introduced. You do have the authority to do so., Will you now please act?
Once again Nicola Sturgeon reiterated she was unable to act. In government but not in power is a phrase that springs to mind. If you are Cabinet Secretary and cannot act what is the point of being Cabinet Secretary?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Latest News as at 15th August , 2010
A meeting between a Millport SODS Forum member and some of the SODS running this website was held last week. It was interesting to hear of the contingency plans now being prepared to enable Millport patients, who may choose not to use any particular commercial island pharmacy, to have their prescriptions delivered from a mainland pharmacy. We have no doubt that, if required, the action will be most effective as the islanders are both determined and resilient. This sort of action has already been working well re getting petrol supplies to the island.
Whilst it is hoped that this will not prove necessary and that Millport patients will be able to continue collecting their prescriptions directly from their GP’s dispensary, this will depend on the outcome of the PPC meeting on 25th August , which in turn may be subject to appeal. . SODS have provided Millport protestors with a copy of the written assurance from the Scottish Executive that any decision to stop GP dispensing is one that lies solely with Area Health Boards.
Similar options to offer such an alternative may be offered to Leuchars patients once their GP dispensing ends on 31st May 2011 and volunteers to run such a service have already come forward. It may be sad but true that currently the only way to protest against unwanted pharmacies is to use an alternative service from another established pharmacist. After all we are told in our NHS service it is all about choice and the patient has the right to use whichever pharmacist he or she chooses.
Latest news as at 10th August, 2010
SODS have learned that the National Appeal Panel have turned down the move by Lomond Pharmacy to establish a pharmacy within the Balmullo surgery premises. This is a sad blow for local patients who, in company with 4 local community councils and SODS, supported the application. As yet we have no details surrounding this decision which again illustrates how present legislation is totally unfit for purpose. A fresh application could be attempted once details of the refusal are known.
Scottish government ministers responsible for health matters are still sitting on their hands and failing the public by refusing to act to suspend all such applications until the legislation, currently under review, brings these quite harmful and wholly undemocratic decisions to an end.
Millport will be the next rural community to undergo this process as they face a pharmacy application which will come before their Area Health Board PPC on 25th August. It will be interesting to see how their area PPC view this bid as previously they have failed to support such commercially driven action. One thing is already clear. The patients of Millport feel just as aggrieved as the patients in Leuchars, Balmullo , Tarves and elsewhere at the manner in which their NHS services are being undermined.
It has been interesting to read the submissions made to the Scottish Government on the Control of Entry consultation process which hopefully will bring much fairer and more democratic regulations to such applications. Almost without exception the submissions support mandatory public, ie patient, input into the decision process. Yet some bodies still see little wrong with the way things are being carried out. Unsurprisingly those who want no or little change are closely involved with the pharmaceutical profession who clearly, in some cases, see profit rather than patient care as the driving factor.
SODS will continue to press for change and an end to the rapacious nature of some recent applications which are clearly not wanted by rural communities. The latter have been totally ignored to date by those who purport to serve them. Meanwhile Leuchars Community Council awaits a response from Fife Area Health Board on an official complaint that no Impact Assessment was carried out on Leuchars prior to the approval of a pharmacy in the local Post Office. We know one was not done. What we want to know is why? That is a question that the Scottish Ombudsman may wish to ask in due course. Meanwhile the patients in Leuchars appear to be voting with their feet regarding the new pharmacy. This may be the only way for communities to protest until the rules are changed
Latest News as at 30th July 2010
Leuchars Community Council, working with SODS Forum Group, have now started on the process of taking the Leuchars Pharmacy decision to the Scottish Ombudsman. Following advice given by the Disability Equality Commission and the Ombudsman office a formal complaint has been submitted to Fife Area Health Board. This concerns the failure of the Fife NHS authorities to carry out an Impact Assessment on the Leuchars Pharmacy site in accordance with current legislation and asks why this was not done. Had this action been taken it is difficult to see how the premises could have been approved for such purposes. All parties involved know for sure now that no Assessment was done but we have to go through these steps in order to comply with the Ombudsman process.
Meanwhile in Millport on Isle of Cumbrae Island, another dispensing practice at danger from an application by Mr Semple to open a community pharmacy,there has been outrage at comments made by him in a local paper. You can read all about it at this here.
http://www.dispensingdoctor.org/content.php?id=1393
It now appears Mr Semple blames a ‘conspiracy’ by GPs to make him drop his application. He also claims, quite unjustifiably that local patients are too scared to speak out. Naturally he himself is nowhere to be found when public debate virtually unanimously condemns both his actions and his wild and inaccurate statements. He appears to have upset many in the community and especially elderly patients
However those who may wish to see Mr Semple, for the first time, have an opportunity to do so on BBC Scotland News to be broadcast on
BBC 1 TV, Scottish News Monday 2nd August at 6.30 pm.
Eleanor Bradford, BBC Health Correspondent, has been looking into the Millport situation and her report will no doubt be interesting and informative. Leuchars and Balmullo patients may care to watch as, apart from them seeing for the first time the man who has so disrupted the local communities, the reporter has expressed an interest to SODS in understanding more about the decisions affecting rural NHS services across Scotland. We will keep her in touch with developments on this site
June Allison, of Millport SODS, has posted a response by letter to the Sunday Herald regarding Mr Semple’s comments in the article published on 24th July. It perfectly reflects the feelings of Millport patients and should serve as a timely and informative reminder to patients in threatened rural dispensing practices across Scotland that commercial profits are often the biggest motivator of all and service to patients is not necessarily the real reason behind such applications.
Mrs Allison’s article is so well put together and forms such a perfect riposte to the newspaper comments made by Mr Semple that we are delighted that she has agreed to it being posted on this website. In fact we intend giving it a much wider circulation via our SODS contacts list.
June wrote on 27th July:-
To the Editor, Sunday Herald,
Dear Sir,
I have spoken to Ms. McArdle regarding her article in the Sunday Herald and.she admits that she was contacted by Mr. Semple and the article was slanted from what he told her.
However, I wonder if she also looked at the email sent from him referrring to his "global sum" and it being diluted, or the ones to the Leuchars SODS "crowing" about his activities.
Mr. Semple only began to wish to bestow the "benefits" of pharmacies on rural populations when under the F.O.I. act he was able to find out the turnover of Dispensing Doctors!
We are an island with the access problems all of that involves, we have a predominately elderly population who will find difficulty in accessing a shop some way from the surgery, we have much higher than the average number of people in wheelchairs and mobility scooters, none of whom will be able to gain access to the proposed pharmacy.
You must also remember that we have a "ferry bus" not any public transport as such and there is no fuel for sale on the island, all of which hinders easy movement from the West Bay and the housing scheme.
On the island we have a purpose built Surgery and Dispensary in a public building which has just got £5. million to be totally refurbished so that our Health Services could all be in one place, so what can possibly be improved by moving the dispensing service away to a smaller dingier shop without disabled access?
We are a fragile economy and placed in the overall ranking of multiple deprivation and the loss of the 5 jobs and one doctor will be fairly catastrophic to us.
Also 49% of our population is over 55.
At our public meeting we had some 300 people. Considering the number of children on the island and those involved in their care, the housebound, those away on Age Concern trips that day and those already booked into our travelling cinema which comes once a month, that is an enormous amount and there was 99% support for the island to retain the Status Quo, i.e. our Dispensary Service.
As for the reports of bullying. These are ridiculous. We are the Millport SODS, not the "mafia" and all we have done is have our say and put forward our opinions. We are a democracy and all are allowed their opinions but no one has been "bullied" which is a ludicrous claim to make about a committee run by o.a.ps and whose spokesperson is a 66 year old 5'2" woman.
As for Ms. McSorley's claims and allegations, Millport SODS did not exist at the time of her application.
To say that there is some Machiavellian plot going on here is as farfetched as it is ludicrous and could only have been made by someone desperate to win at all costs.
I regret the necessity of having to write this letter but the way the article was written made it appear that the atmosphere on the island was different to that which is the reality.
That is obviously borne out by the feeling of the Public Meeting, the number of letters sent to the Minister Shona Robison regarding the odd way that Mr. Semple's application, (though altered several times in the way of dates and the pharmacist) was numbered 108, but managed to jump the queue over Lomond Pharmacy's which was numbered 107 and put out to Public Consultation first.
There have also been many, many letters sent regarding Mr. Semple's application to the Health Board stating that they are totally against his pharmacy.
Anyone who wished to support him was able to do so via letter or email both privately and confidentially and I cannot imagine how they could have been "bullied" into doing otherwise!
Perhaps, if those opposing Mr. Semple's application here on the island had been spoken to before the the article was printed on Sunday, and it had been somewhat more evenly balanced, it would (not) have caused so much outrage.
Can I please end by saying that the organisation Millport SODS acts totally independently of the GPs here who do not attend our meetings, nor see any of our statements before they are circulated. To say otherwise is both untrue and derogatory to both parties.
Thank you for your attention
June Allison
Visitors to this website, ( and numbers are increasing daily) should be aware that there is much still going on behind the scenes in this long running saga to protect rural dispensing practices. We will keep the public informed as much as we can, as and when we can. We have drawn the attention of the Scottish Cabinet Secretary for Finance, John Swinney, MSP , to the fact that, if looking for savings in the NHS budget is as important as we are told, one of the first actions should be to act to preserve rural dispensing practices. Latest statistics show that GP dispensing practices are now more cost effective in NHS dispensing terms than any pharmacy displacing them—AND patients want them retained! What could be simpler? Pleasing patients and taxpayers and saving NHS funds!
_________
Latest News as at 17th July, 2010
SODS and Leuchars Community Council have jointly released today the following Statement to MSPs, MPs, Scottish Government ministers with responsibility for health. Fife Area Health Board, press, TV and radio media contacts and Institutions and Commissions across Scotland who are concerned with the provision and application of NHS health regulations and patient welfare.
Leuchars Community Council Fife, and SODS ‘Save Our Dispensing Surgeries’ Forum Group Forum Group wish to draw your attention to the ongoing threat to rural dispensing surgeries across Scotland by commercial pharmacy applications .This subject is well documented and has been the subject of considerable media and political protest. Leuchars Community Council is now experiencing the disruptive effect of an unwanted commercial pharmacy application. SODS Forum group was formed in Fife in September 2008, initially to fight an application in Leuchars, Fife but now with a broader interest across rural areas so affected. These two bodies, LCC and SODS have united to draw both political and public attention to a most serious threat that rural communities currently served by dispensing surgeries are facing right all over Scotland. Some 70 of the 128 dispensing surgeries serving rural areas are now at risk
As a result of Scottish Parliamentary Petition 1220 a review of the thoroughly flawed and wholly undemocratic legislation covering such applications, which are heavily weighted in favour of pharmacists and give little or no attention to patient wishes, has begun. This consultation process will take time to be formatted into a new fair and democratic process. Meanwhile, despite considerable concern by the public, MSPs and MPs of all parties, the unsatisfactory legislation is still being used to determine such applications. So far the Scottish Government has, quite unreasonably and irrationally, resisted all requests to instruct a suspension of pharmacy applications in rural areas until new legislation is brought in. It claims it cannot do so. One wonders what governments are for if they fail to govern in clear cases of disadvantage to the public.
SODS and LCC , ‘Save Our Dispensing Surgeries’ , has recently received further evidence of the threat to rural dispensing doctor services across Scotland. The attached email shows just how far one member of the pharmaceutical profession and Vice Chair of Community Pharmacy Scotland is prepared to go to put an end to many of the much cherished ‘one stop’ dispensing doctor practices in rural areas. This email clearly indicates that the motivation for certain pharmacists appears to be financial gain rather improved NHS service to rural communities
SODS is calling for action now by the Scottish Government to suspend all pharmacy applications in areas currently served by a dispensing medical practice. No such applications should be continued before new fairer and more democratic Pharmacy (Scotland ) Regulations are in place
In addition LCC and SODS and will now work jointly to place the case history of the Leuchars Pharmacy before the Scottish Ombudsman with a view to seeking redress for the way in which this matter has been handled by both Fife Area Health Board and the Scottish Government. It will incorporate reference to the failure of Fife Area Health Board to instruct an Impact Assessment which would have revealed the unsuitability of the approved pharmacy location and will seek the Ombudsman’s assistance to further investigate the circumstances surrounding the Leuchars case as well as matters general regarding pharmacy applications in rural dispensing doctor areas
Carroll Finnie, on behalf of Leuchars Community Council http://www.leuchars.org.uk/
Alan Kennedy On behalf of SODS forum group, patientsods@btinternet.com
Email sent by Mr Semple to the Dispensing Doctors Association in March , 2010.
To: <Allan.Tennant@dispensingdoctor.org>
Cc: "Brendan Semple"
Sent: Friday, March 05, 2010 1:49 AM
Subject: Leuchars / Balmullo
Hi Allan
We were slightly concerned to see the following link:
http://www.dispensingdoctor.org/content.php?id=1294
suddenly disappear.
Is this a boring technical issue, or is it because the DDA has decided to dissociate itself from Mr Allan Kennedy and his ridiculous campaign?
You won't be alone - the local GP was most keen to wash his hands of him at the recent PPC hearing on an application to open a PHARMACY at his premises in Balmullo.
(Personally, I thought it was a bit cruel - but then they maybe know Mr Kennedy better than I do...)
As a supporter of GP dispensing in Scotland, I was (ironically) concerned to hear the arguments of the pharmacist applicant: "pharmaceutical services to the village of Balmullo (population 1200) are inadequate, as there is only GP dispensing and that doesn't count. The size of the community is irrelevant." (That was paraphrased - not a direct quote, but as good as...)
The thing is, for complex historical reasons, we in Scotland have never had 'Dispensing Doctors' in the same way as you guys south of the border. We only have doctor dispensing in communities where a pharmacy isn't viable. Like, for example, Balmullo - but usually more isolated.
I have a list of about 70 dispensing doctor practices in areas where - ordinarily - a pharmacy would not be viable. Well - not viable if they didn't receive an Essential Small Pharmacy allowance. (ESP).
I support doctor dispensing in these communities. If some idiot gets a pharmacy contract granted and subsequent ESP allowance, he'll suck a disproportionate amount from my global sum - and none of us want that to happen. My Global Sum gets diluted, your dispensing doctor loses some income. We all lose.
You guys were absolutely right to support your dispensing colleagues in Leuchars/Balmullo when I applied to open in Leuchars. As far as *Scottish* government policy is concerned, your support was futile - but worth a go. Nothing ventured, nothing gained.
However, I would caution you against your continued support for a PHARMACY in village with a population of 1200, currently served by a dispensing doctor practice.
If such an application were to be granted - with the blessing of the local AMC *and* the DDA - then I'm going on a spending spree.
Can you see what I'm getting at here?
Support a pharmacy in Balmullo, and your 90% 'safe' dispensing practices are no longer safe.
It's a bugger, ain't it?
Regards
James
------------------------------------------------------
James B Semple MRPharmS
Director & Superintendent Pharmacist
TLC Pharmacy Group
It would seem that Mr Semple is showing his true colours very clearly and financial gain rather than supposed improved service to patients seems to be the driving force.
DDA Online has spoken to people in Leuchars and they do understand the regulations. Their concerns are that the regulations regarding pharmacy applications do not take into account patient views or the effect of the application on local medical services. Unsurprisingly the local GP who attended the PPC hearing does not have the same recollection as Mr Semple regarding Mr Kennedy!
Following DDA Online's articles DDA recently received three emails from Mr Semple during the wee small hours. Amongst them was this quote, “Fortunately I never send emails I'm not happy to be made public, even when not intended as such.”
Click here to see Dundee Courier article
Questions that need to be addressed re the Leuchars pharmacy case and other current application
- What changed the mind of the PPC and NAP committees when they decided to approve the second Leuchars Application, virtually identical to the first which had been rejected for valid reasons?
- Why did Fife Area Health Board not carry out an Impact Assessment at the proposed Leuchars Pharmacy site before commencing the PPC process as required by current Equality Commission legislation which clearly applies to the NHS Fife Area Health Board?
- Why did the National Appeal Panel (NAP) take the decision to exclude the protest letters from 5 community councils and hundreds of local patients when deciding the Leuchars application despite Fife Area Health Board confirming they were properly submitted as evidence for the NAP Appeal.
- Why was there no record of the votes ‘for and against’ at the NAP Appeal on Leuchars?
- Why does the Scottish Government refuse to suspend all current pharmacy applications in rural GP dispensing areas applications in view of the clearly acknowledged major faults in current legislation.?
- Why did the Royal Pharmaceutical Society, Scotland take a cheque for £600 to register a section of the Leuchars Post Office as a pharmacy site without any check on the suitability of the premises regarding disabled access, patient confidentiality and other important aspects?
- Why has Fife Area Health Board failed to apply the standards laid down and accepted by them as contained in Scottish Health Planning Note 36 Part 3 which determine planning standards for pharmacies?
- Is the Royal Pharmaceutical Society , Scotland, content with the methods now being used by some pharmacists to open pharmacies in rural GP dispensing areas under current Control of Entry Regulations?
These questions remain unanswered by the Scottish Executive, The Fife Area Health Board and others involved in the Leuchars case. It is high time that these bodies began to appreciate that patients’ views and their very real concerns must not only be ascertained but also actively considered in the case of rural dispensing surgeries.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Latest News as at 5th July , 2010
We are sad to hear that Tarves Medical Practice has lost its battle to keep its dispensing surgery. The National Appeal Panel ruled that an application to open a commercial pharmacy by Mr Semple is approved. The name of this applicant is well known to all the communities opposing such activities. He will continue to claim, no doubt, that he is benefiting local NHS services and his actions will have no effect on GP services. Tell that to the communities who have to deal with the impact of his unwelcome applications. Small wonder that they so strongly oppose his actions. Profit as opposed to patient welfare appears to the key motive as no doubt he will gain financially by transferring the Tarves commercial pharmacy to a third party. SODS believe that he has also applied for a pharmacy licence for the Pitmedden area. The public may care to know that Mr Semple has said that he is using the Freedom of Information Act to target dispensing practices to access their income from dispensing. His statements on this are in the public domain. This serves to illustrate that such applications are being made for commercial gain and it would appear that any concern for the service to patients is not the motivator.
Such commercial applications will continue and may succeed until the Pharmaceutical (Scotland) Regulations are changed to bring about a fairer and more democratic process in the Control of Entry legislation. Despite being asked to intervene by a number of bodies, both political and community based, Scottish Executive ministers with responsibility for our NHS services Shona Robson, MSP and Nicola Sturgeon, MSP are not willing to suspend these applications until the review of the regulations is complete. Much harm is being done to rural community services by this failure to act to protect patient services.
Other matters concerning the Leuchars pharmacy case are now under consideration. Some two months ago SODS asked Fife Area Health authorities if they had carried out an Impact Assessment to assess the effect on disabled patients before the approval was given—and if not why not.. We have received no answers on these questions. We then put the same question on 17th May to Fife NHS in the form of a Freedom Of Information enquiry. This resulted in a further delay beyond the normal response time as the FIO representatives appeared to encounter considerable problems in finding the information we sought.Despite FIO representatives’ best efforts Fife NHS have failed to give an answer. The question is very simple. Did they or didn’t they and if not why not? . If ever a location required a Impact Assessment it must be the Leuchars Pharmacy location. A quick glance at our website pictures and linked information makes this patently obvious.
We are now 100% certain that Fife Area Health Board did NOT carry out an Impact Assessment. The Fife NHS Freedom of Information department has now confirmed to SODS that they are unable to trace any record of an Assessment being made or even considered. We therefore asked the Equality Commission to examine this matter which we believe is a serious breach of current mandatory legislation under the Equality Legislation 2006 Act. The Commission have informed SODS that the case, now registered with them, will go before their Assessment Panel to determine what further action may be taken. We have also received advice from the Equality Commission concerning other action we should now take and we anticipate this will commence jointly with Leuchars Community Council. Details will be published in due course.
On the 29th of June Petition 1220 received another hearing at the Scottish Parliaments’ Petitions Committee. As a result of the petitioner’s input further questions are to be asked of the Scottish Executive with regard to the current ‘Control Of Entry’ consultation process which covers regulations for commercial pharmacy applications.. In our previous news pages we made reference to significant omissions from the public consultation process. These have now been addressed by a series of questions from the Petition Committee to the Scottish Executive. See below:-
TUESDAY 29 JUNE 2010—
Scottish Government—
· How will you ensure that public opinion is incorporated into the decision making process by NHS boards in addition to their requirement to publicly consult?
· What assessment has been made in relation to the impact the changes will have in rural areas?
· Are NHS boards carrying out Impact Assessments under the Disability Discrimination Act 2005? What are your views on the points raised by the petitioner in this regard?
These are important questions and in their own way highlight the considerable disconnect between what the Scottish Government and the pharmaceutical profession wants to impose and the service that patients served by dispensing surgeries threatened by unwanted commercial pharmacies seek to retain. This battle and it is a battle, is about our NHS service and how it is being shaped and adversely altered in rural areas by commercially driven enterprises.. Common sense, fair play and patient wishes get trodden upon in the rush for commercial gain. That is why SODS are so resolute in their defence of what the public want. SODS have no financial stake in the outcome, SODS are not linked to any political agenda or party. SODS are determined that, despite all the present setbacks like Tarves and Leuchars, this is something worth fighting for. We congratulate Millport SODS on the campaign they are now running to save their dispensing service.
Savings in every government department is now the name of the game. Figures just published for Scotland show that dispensing doctor drug costs are considerably lower than pharmacy prescription costs by a significant margin.
One wonders what is going on in NHS Scotland and why they are not trying to protect GP dispensing and other services as in England? They are cheaper to run, are wanted by patients who receive the service and help unite rural communities rather than tear them apart. Another case of a government department being totally out of step with public opinion and financial common sense.
Latest News as at 13th June 2010
This has been a busy time for SODS. The deadline for submissions on the ‘Control Of Entry’ consultation for pharmacy applications was 11th June. It is to be hoped that patients and all those involved in NHS services at the front line will have done their best to provide their views. The SODS submission is shown below. A summary of all non-confidential responses is expected to be posted on the following website by 6th July, 2010. http://www.scotland.gov.uk/consultations
At a time when dispensing surgeries all over Scotland are now under threat it was sad to see that Leuchars surgery is making the necessary provisions to run down and eventually close in one year’s time. The closure has been brought about solely by the opening of the Leuchars pharmacy on 1st June . A pharmacy that might never have been approved if Fife NHS had taken into account public opinion and all the relevant factors pertaining to the premises. Now Millport on Cumbrae, as well as Tarves in Aberdeenshire, face a similar threat to their dispensing surgery services. At a recent and packed public meeting the Millport public voted overwhelmingly against the pharmacy application. It remains to be seen whether their views will be considered when decisions are made or whether they will be ignored as per the Leuchars case.
PE 1220 to the Scottish Parliament is still actively progressing. Recently the Committee raised their concerns about the consultation process and in particular its limited nature regarding the wider issues affecting applications. The Executive have responded to this by stating that they believed they had addressed all the issues. They also stated that they would not suspend current applications, claiming they had no authority to do so. What is the point of having a Health Executive if it totally fails to use common sense and find ways to minimise actions which are harming its services? Alan Kennedy, as the initiator of Petition 1220, has now submitted an update to the committee for its next meeting at the end of June which records that many vital factors have not been addressed in the consultation process. In particular the fact that there is still no mandatory obligation on Area Health Boards and National Appeal Panels to make public opinion a key component of the decision process. Until this is done the public will have no trust in the end result.
All is far from over in the Leuchars case and SODS is currently researching a new factor which could call into question the legality of the PPC and NAP decision. Leuchars Community Council are also working on the case and there is no doubt that Leuchars patients are still strongly opposed to what has happened . Balmullo patients await the NAP appeal at the end of July to learn whether they will retain dispensing services at their surgery.
Meanwhile the British Medical Association,Scotland, has recently reiterated its call for government support for rural dispensing practices. The matter was debated at the annual GP conference in London last week. Dr Dean Marshall, Chairman of BMA Scotland, stated “that patient satisfaction surveys clearly indicate the value that dispensing surgeries. provide”. It is even more frustrating when one learns that recent costings indicate that pharmacy dispensing costs to the NHS are greater than those from dispensing practices.
England and Wales have taken steps to protect rural dispensing services having realised their true value. Yet despite pressure from many sources the madness of Scottish Government dogma on this subject continues to fly in the face of common sense and respect for patient opinion.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following submission was made by SODS to the Primary and Community Care Division of the Scottish Executive on 6th June and was acknowledged under reference number CofE/059. Which indicates at least 58 other responses.
1
SODS Forum Group Input to the Control of Entry Consultation Document
(All comments below refer to the paragraph numbers in Annex A of the Scottish Executive Consultation Document.)
Para 37 Yes. With proviso that all decisions and the reasons for the decisions are recorded and are readily available for public access. As with the PPC and NAP procedures there must be a right to appeal against such an NHS Board decision provided there are reasonable and justifiable reasons for such an appeal.
Para 38 Yes.
Para 39 Would prefer 24 months to avoid placing unwanted stress on local communities and their existing NHS services. It is assumed that this will cover all applicants and will apply unless there are demonstrably significant changes in the neighbourhood structure.
Para 40 Yes. With proviso that more clarity is required in respect of the proposals in Para 19. Boards must take much more care in assessing local patient preferences rather than following a standard ‘one size fits all’ approach.
Para 43 Yes. Provided relocated premises comply with all relevant requirements regarding internal and external planning in accordance with both local and NHS planning and building control legislation. Particular attention must be given to providing disabled access.
Para 45 Yes. Provided relocated premises comply as in our Para 43 above.
Para 47 Yes. We most strongly support proposals a) and b). We regard the right to respond of those GPs directly involved as vital in the process. GPs, must be informed directly and not through a third party.
2
Para 49 We endorse the Scottish Government’s intention to expect NHS boards to engage with the public but rather than ‘expect’ we wish to see such engagement ‘directed’ as a mandatory part of the process. Representation by or on behalf of any person directly affected is vital in the decision making process at Area Board, PPC and NAP levels. Much more clarity is required on how this consultation is to be achieved by Area Boards and is recorded for consideration as part of the PPC and NAP processes. We further believe it is essential that public input and especially input from the affected neighbourhood’s vulnerable and disabled persons is admissible. Input must be actively sought from those unable to easily access public meetings, internet or telephone facilities. This input needs to be a mandatory part of Board, PPC and NAP decision processes. At present such input is not part of the decision process at any level. This must be changed. Nothing less will be acceptable to the public following recent cases.
Para 53 Yes. In principle we agree but care must be taken to ensure that nominations are vetted to ensure impartiality and no conflict of interest would arise should they be selected to serve on a PPC
Para 54 It would be helpful to have nominations from other health professionals provided there is impartiality and no conflict of interest on specific PPC or NAP cases. It is also worth considering whether local community representation might be allowed. We need to see much more ‘balancing’ of the committee composition in both PPCs and NAPs. Pharmacists are only one cog in the wheel of health provision and must not continue to dominate the outcome of PPCs and NAPs as is the case under existing legislation.
Para 56 Guidelines on what is ‘Essential’ and what is ‘Desirable’ need to be quantified and much more clearly laid out in the ‘Statutory Test’ It is a fact that many of the concerns we now see resulting from applications are due
3
to the arbitrary and quite haphazard nature of PPC and NAP deliberations. The public has lost trust in the present situation. Decisions taken are often incomprehensible and contrary to the reality of the situation. This should not happen if all important factors were allowed be recorded and to be taken into account.
A standard format for recording proceedings at both PPC and NAP levels is essential to demonstrate accountability and fairness in the overall process.
Training of members should include basic awareness of local transportation issues, disability access, demographic data and local regulations pertinent to both NHS and local planning and building regulations. In particular basic knowledge of the Statutory Code of Practice on Disability Rights as it affects NHS Scotland is essential. Some understanding of the provisions of Scottish Health Planning Note 36, Part 3, on Community Pharmacy Premises would also greatly assist Boards, PPC and NAP members to establish what is desirable and what is essential in such applications. Such awareness would help PPCs and NAPs to avoid the errors of past decisions which have caused much anger, concern and bewilderment amongst the public and local NHS staff.
Para 59 YES. With proviso that PPCs must deal much more robustly with applications than at present. Since 50% of current applications go to appeal something is clearly wrong.
Para 62 Emphatically NO. To forbid such appeals would deny the natural democratic right of those opposed to the decision to submit evidence to support their appeal on the grounds that the decision reached was unreasonable or illegal.
Para 65 YES. With proviso that NAP are made fully aware of all the proceedings from the PPC decision process.
4
Para 68 The proposal is broadly welcomed as the present representative set up has inflicted a grave disservice upon local communities. A much broader representation is required amongst fewer members on the NAP.
Additional Comment
In the statement outlining the consultation process we note that the Executive are seeking to ‘indicate the need for policy development or review’ and ‘to inform the development of a particular policy’. SODS wish to make the following points in this regard:-
The review cannot be considered complete without considering the following factors.
1 It appears that no attempt within the consultation document has been made to strengthen the application of the Pharmacy (Scotland) Regulations by either incorporating or requiring adherence to the necessary standards required to ensure a new pharmacy operates in accordance with best practice in terms of internal layout and external access.
Current planning laws do not adequately cover this and the Royal Pharmaceutical Society’s licensing system fails completely to ensure the same. It is suggested that Scottish Health Planning Note 36, which is a comprehensive document covering such circumstances, be made an integral requirement of the approval process and failure to comply with essential standards should result in rejection of an application for all new pharmacy outlets. Only by doing so can Scotland ensure that best NHS standards possible in both new community and commercial pharmacy premises will be achieved.
2 In view of the requirements of Disability Equality Duty 2006 legislation it would be appropriate that meeting the conditions imposed by such
5
legislation in respect of carrying out an Impact Assessment be an integral part of the process in each PPC and NAP decision.
3 Consideration needs to be given to speeding up the current timescale surrounding applications from start to finish . The strain on both local communities, GPs and their current support staff have often reached quite unacceptable levels. Patients want their doctors to spend the majority of their working time and expertise on patient care, not fighting off repeated lengthy and often unreasonable applications affecting them, their staff and their patients.
4 Sir Menzies Campbell, MP, raised a most important point when he stated with regard to the Leuchars pharmacy approval “that the decision might be susceptible to judicial review on the grounds that no reasonable tribunal could have reached it”. This goes to the heart of the problem as far as the public are concerned. In reviewing the Control of Entry regulations attention needs to be concentrated on the absolutely vital necessity to avoid ever again reaching this sort of outcome at NHS Area Board, PPC and NAP levels.
Signed.
Alan Kennedy: ---On behalf of SODS (Save Our Dispensing Surgeries) Forum Group.
3, Smithy Lane
Balmullo, St Andrews, Fife
KY16 0FG
Tel 01334 870378
6th June 2010
IMPORTANT - Latest News as at 19th May 2010
SODS has learned that a very unhelpful and totally false rumour has been started regarding the Guardbridge Shop. Guardbridge is the nearest village to Leuchars. The rumour is that the owner of the shop has sold the premises to the Leuchars postmaster. The latter , by leasing part of the Post Office premises, brought about the unwelcome application for a commercial pharmacy which is now the subject of great concern locally.
The rumour that the shop has been sold is totally untrue and only serves to muddy the waters around the Leuchars pharmacy case. SODS hope that this note will be the last word on the matter.
SODS are delighted to welcome newly formed ‘Millport SODS’ to the fight against unwanted pharmacy applications. The forum group has just been formed by concerned Millport patients following the application for a commercial pharmacy by a Mr Semple, a name now well known to all involved with such cases.
Millport SODS will hold their first public meeting on 8th June in the Town Hall, It will be attended by the local MSP plus local councillors and the practice doctors will explain how the application for a commercial pharmacy may seriously impact on local community NHS services. Information on the Millport challenge can be found on www.s1Millport.com
SODS concerned about the Leuchars pharmacy approval have now formally used the Freedom of Information legislation to ask FIFE NHS whether an Impact Assessment on the Leuchars pharmacy application was carried out prior to the PPC approval. SODS understand this is required under the Disability Equality Duty 2006 legislation. Failure to do so can result in the Equality and Human Rights Commission taking court action to commence a judicial review. Whilst pharmaceutical premises are not covered by the legislation NHS dispensing services are. So far FIFE NHS have failed to answer a question to them by SODS on whether such action was taken and now have until 11th June to make a response under the NHS FOI procedures.
The Scottish Parliamentary Petitions Committee will meet to consider the latest position on PE1220 on 29th June. It is understood that at least two MSPs will be submitting papers illustrating the damage to rural NHS services now being caused by commercial pharmacy applications. Nowhere is this more evident than Leuchars where the surgery serving Leuchars has already taking steps to run down its services locally. It is anticipated that the Leuchars surgery will close down completely within the next year with all medical services being concentrated on Balmullo. NO decision has yet been made by FIFE NHS on how long the Balmullo dispensary can continue. So much for our faith in the NHS to look after patients’ interests. It is up to the public to protest against these closures and SODS urge all interested patients to make their views known by submitting their concerns via the public consultation process now ongoing to revise Scottish pharmacy regulations. Only in Scotland has the value of such services not been properly recognised and the services themselves protected. It would appear that some totally misguided political dogma is preventing the responsible Scottish ministers and the NHS Primary and Community Care Directorate from protecting patient services. What we are facing now would simply not be allowed in England or Wales
Details of how individuals can make their views known in the consultation process to amend current regulations may be found at:-
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2010/03/22110058/0
The latest date for submissions is 11th June 2010
SODS are already engaged in drawing up their submission on this consultation process. We hope many more will be prepared to do so before further damage is done to NHS services in rural areas
Latest news as at 7th May 2010
It is understood that work has now started to install a pharmacy into the Leuchars Post Office premises. SODS also understands this pharmacy will be operational by 1st June, 2010. It will be 'interesting' to see how disabled access is enabled.
Whilst this may be a setback in terms of the Leuchars population’s overwhelming wish to retain the present surgery dispensing services it should be remembered that the Leuchars surgery will be allowed to continue to dispense to patients up to 31st May, 2011.
A great deal is still happening regarding both the PPC and NAP decisions to allow this pharmacy . Much of it cannot yet be published on this website as we are awaiting decisions and information on matters which require some considerable research by a number of parties
However SODS and no doubt Leuchars Community Council will continue to work for the best outcome for all patients in what has become a very important case as far as current Scottish pharmacy regulations are concerned. The story has not yet ended.
Latest news as at 5th May 2010
SODS wish to draw your attention to the following comments which are taken from a recent article compiled by the UK’s Dispensing Doctors Association
The extracts below are published with the permission of the DDA.
“Now is a scary time to be a dispensing doctor in Scotland.
Over the last few years we have highlighted pharmacy applications in Aberfoyle, Balmullo & Leuchars, Tarves and most recently Millport.
The DDA is now very concerned about events in Scotland.
Last month David Prince, Committee Executive, Scottish General Practitioners Committee wrote to all LMCs "We have become aware that a company has submitted pharmacy applications in every area of Scotland where there is dispensing doctor provision. It is our understanding that these applications are not particularly robust especially in relation to premises requirements."
In March 2010 four applications (plus the Millport application) were received by NHS Ayrshire and Arran but all were returned to the applicant as incomplete - the company in question is called Unicare, a Lancashire-based pharmacy company. The applications failed to name the proposed premises of the pharmacy, this is required for applications in Scotland.
Unfortunately for residents of Newcastleton in the Scottish borders, Unicare have made an application within premises that are already occupied by a cafe.”
Freedom of information requests
“Somebody is asking freedom of information questions on General Medical Services (GMS) payments made to each GP practice in Ayrshire & Arran, The Borders, Tayside, Shetland, Orkney and the Highlands, Fife and Dumfries & Galloway. These questions have been asked between October 2009 and January 2010. The information provided includes dispensing income.
Undoubtedly pharmacies opening up all over rural Scotland can only have one consequence, the decimation of medical services to rural patients. The pharmacies may be marginal but so are the practices without the cross subsidy of dispensing.
Dr David Baker said, "The tone of the consultation on Control of Entry in Scotland is very dismissive of dispensing doctors and appears to have no appreciation of the devastating effect that loss of dispensing will have on patient care and provision of medical services generally - a situation entirely analogous to the Pharmacy White Paper in England."
The DDA feel it is reasonable that pharmacists are involved in the appeal process of new pharmacy applications, when other pharmacists would be affected by any decision. However, it appears wrong and very unfair that in rural areas where doctors dispense, rural patients and doctors have no voice The fact that the control of entry consultation is not addressing this issue is wrong.”
The Consultation on Control of entry actually mentions the problem in relation to the Appeals Panel in Para 69:
: There will always remain a need to involve pharmacists in the decision making process given their expertise. However, rather than seeking such nominations from individual organisations, an alternative might be to identify a pool of pharmacists using Health Board nominations. Clearly there will be a need to ensure that appropriate safe-guards are in place to avoid a situation where a pharmacist on a Board is asked to take part in an appeal in relation to their own or neighbouring board.
SODS are currently preparing their own submission to the Scottish Executive’s Control of Entry consultation process. SODS will be drawing the attention of the Executive to the fact that the questions posed for consideration so far fall far short of a thoroughly democratic review. Much more needs to be considered and reviewed within current regulations if they are to meet with all the regular pronouncements that the NHS service must be open and subject to public scrutiny.
What do you need to do?
· Regularly visit this website for future updates
· Inform us of any applications in your area
· Consider making your own response to the Consultation on Control of Entry. There is absolutely nothing to prevent you doing so—after all it is YOUR NHS service You have until 11th June to submit your response and every entry will help shape the future for dispensing services in your area . Use ‘Control plus click’ on the link below to take you straight to the document where you will find full details on it and instructions on how to complete it
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/307011/0096527.pdf
Latest News as at 24th April 2010
- Iain Smith, MSP, has written to Nicola Sturgeon, Cabinet Secretary for Health and Wellbeing in the Scottish Government expressing his concerns about the National Appeals Panel hearing that finally approved the Leuchars Pharmacy application. In particular he draws attention to the potential for a conflict of interest between members of the Appeal Panel as well as the serious breach of natural justice which saw hundreds of letters of objection ruled inadmissible by the Chair. Mr Smith has asked the Cabinet Secretary to intervene and instruct a fresh hearing. We still await a response to this letter submitted on 2nd April
- The question has also arisen as to whether an Impact Assessment was conducted on the Leuchars pharmacy application in accordance with Disability Equality Duty, 2006, legislation which requires this to be done when any change is made to a service affecting disabled people. Fife Area NHS have been asked by SODS whether this was carried out and if not why not since the legislation specifically covers NHS prescription services. A response is awaited.
- On April 20th the Scottish Parliamentary Petitions Committee discussed progress concerning Petition 1220 . This petition seeks to bring about changes in Pharmacy (Scotland) Regulations to introduce fairer and more democratic procedures in dealing with pharmacy applications affecting dispensing doctors. It has already produced one change in that the public must now be formally consulted as part of the process . ( Vital to note that these public consultations are still not included as a mandatory part of the decision process!) The committee had before them a response by the petitioner, Alan Kennedy, to the recent announcement concerning the Regulations consultation process now issued by the Scottish Executive. Mr Kennedy expressed his concern about the limited nature of the items for consultation input and also about the failure to address some of the recent issues, in particular suitability of premises, arising from the Leuchars and other pharmacy applications. The Committee agreed to seek further information regarding these concerns from the Executive. The Executive have been asked to respond by 11th May.
- Leuchars Community Council have also written to the Royal Pharmaceutical Society to ask if any inspection was carried out on the proposed Leuchars Pharmacy area within the Post Office. It will be interesting to see their response as we suspect the premises were registered as soon as the cheque for registration was handed over.
Overall the pressure is mounting on the Scottish Executive to take note and act upon the various concerns now being expressed in a variety of quarters over the whole issue of pharmacy applications which affect Dispensing Doctors, With further applications, such as in Millport, again we understand from a certain Mr Semple, it is likely that this pressure will grow. This matter has a long way to run yet.
If your local dispensing surgery is threatened make sure you involve all levels of local and national government to express your concerns.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Latest News as at 2 April 2010
SODS are pleased to repeat the following message from Leuchars Community Council. This message corrects the information given in today's Fife Herald.
DISPENSING NEWS
The Leuchars surgery has been given approval BY NHS Fife Health Board to continue dispensing for one year following the opening of any Leuchars Pharmacy.
This is important news and all patients are being advised that they can continue to get their repeat prescriptions from the Leuchars Surgery. Dispensing will continue there until the very last day permitted.
There is one important piece of information that all Leuchars patients on repeat prescriptions must understand.
Under current regulations if they should decide to get repeat prescriptions from any Pharmacy they will no longer be able to make use of the Leuchars G.P. Dispensing Services for existing or future prescriptions.
The NHS Fife Health Board have also made it clear that they will not make any ruling on Balmullo surgery dispensing until such times the results of any appeal is known.
Carroll Finnie
Leuchars Community Council
Latest News as at 31st March, 2010
The Leuchars surgery has been given approval by NHS Fife Health Board to continue dispensing for one year following the opening of any Leuchars pharmacy. This is important news and all patients are being advised to continue getting repeat prescriptions from Leuchars surgery. Dispensing will continue from there until the very last day permitted.
However there is one important piece of information that all Leuchars patients on repeat prescriptions must understand. Under current regulations if they should decide to get repeat prescriptions from any pharmacy, say in St Andrews or elsewhere, they will no longer be able to make use of the Leuchars GP dispensing services for existing or future prescriptions. This looks like another matter to raise in the process of consultation on the new regulations.
The NHS Fife Health Board also have made it clear they will not make any ruling on Balmullo surgery dispensing until such time as the results of any Appeal is known.
The reprieve, albeit temporary for Leuchars, is welcome. It is foreseen that the vast majority of patients at Leuchars will continue to use the GP surgery dispensing service. Especially so after the recent events which have caused so much anger and protest. It is therefore difficult to see how any new pharmacy could successfully operate at a profit , at least in the first year. Indeed many patients, with long memories, may wish to find an alternative to a Post Office pharmacy after the first year from its opening and who can blame them. If the NHS wish to bring closer working between pharmacists and GPs the Leuchars case is an excellent example of how not to go about it.
26th March 2010
The Primary and Community Care Directorate of the Scottish Government have now issued, at last, their long awaited consultation paper on the Control of Entry Arrangements relating to NHS Pharmaceutical Services.
SODS will need time to study the proposals and comments must be submitted to the Directorate by 11th June 2010. Our first thoughts are mainly of concern that it fails to adequately address the matter of patient input to the application process with regard to applications affecting dispensing doctors in rural areas. Whilst Scottish Parliamentary Petition 1220 has brought about a requirement for Area Health Boards to consult the public this consultation document does not make such input a component part of the decision process. Thus Area Health Boards really have no obligation to recognise the serious concerns that many patients have regarding such applications and take note of these in the decision process. If democracy is to have any part in NHS policy this particular matter must be addressed both at PPC level and also within the National Appeal Panel. Secondly current regulations coupled with local planning laws can allow a pharmacy to open in an existing commercial shop or post office without the application meeting the standards for new pharmacies laid down in Scottish health planning note 36, part 3 which is now being applied throughout Health Board Areas. This is a serious omission and must be put right yet the consultation document totally ignores this major point.
These are just two of the factors that SODS will be raising in their input to the consultation process. They are certainly not the only ones as we have learned much that concerns us during the past 18 months we have been in being.
19th March, 2010. SODS understands that Lomond Pharmacy have submitted an application seeking an Appeal on the FIFE PPC decision not to grant the application for a Balmullo Pharmacy. A decision on whether this appeal will be allowed is now awaited.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
SODS 's position regarding the Leuchars Pharmacy as at 12th March 2010
Leuchars and Balmullo Pharmacy Applications
SODS wishes to express its very deep regret and serious concern at the recent decision week by NHS Fife PPC to turn down the Balmullo Pharmacy Application in spite of the overwhelming support for it from local residents. That, and the extraordinary outcome of the Leuchars Pharmacy application when again, contrary to the wishes of the local community, approval was given for a new Pharmacy within Leuchars Post Office, is a situation which SODS believes demands further scrutiny.
In ideal circumstances we would have sought a judicial review as we believe this action would have considerable merit but the costs associated with this are likely to be prohibitive. However SODS will offer support in any way they can to Leuchars Community Council if and when they decide to prepare prepare a case for submission to the Scottish Ombudsman for investigation.
At this stage it would be inappropriate to comment further on the Balmullo application until after a decision on a possible appeal. SODS will, however, continue to carefully monitor the Balmullo application as it progresses to a conclusion and may later decide whether it needs to be given further attention
SODS will continue to support Mr Alan Kennedy’s Scottish parliamentary petition 1220. This has brought about government legislation to involve the public in cases like Balmullo and Leuchars and has resulted in the Scottish Government announcing a consultation process on the current unsatisfactory Scottish Pharmacy Regulations. SODS has been invited by the Scottish government to contribute to this now long overdue review as soon as it is launched.
News as at 19th February
SODS learned today that the application by Lomond Pharmacy to open a pharmacy within the Balmullo surgery has not been approved by the Fife Pharmacy Practices Comittee despite the overwhelming communities' support for the application. Until the minutes of the PPC are made available the grounds for the refusal are not known and the possibility of an Appeal to the National Appeal Panel can not be decided.
The SODS forum are angry and dissappointed that yet again community input seems to count for nothing in the applications process and the conduct of the relevant committees and panels. SODS expect to make a further statement in due course on the next actions in our campaign to bring both common sense and respect for patient welfare into the pharmacy approvals process. We will not end our campaign until this has been achieved regardless of local setbacks from time to time
Position as at 25th January 2010
In spite of the united and sustained ‘campaign’ by Sods, patients and all five local community councils the appeal against the application by Mr Semple of Fraser McPherson and Partners to open a commercial pharmacy in Leuchars Post office failed.
The National Appeals Panel granted the application but it did not take into consideration the views of the local community. The Chair of NAP deemed the hundreds of letters of protest from patients and community councils, which were sent to NHS Fife (as instructed by Fife Council) ‘inadmissible’ - apparently because they had not been sent directly to the appellant! It would appear that the NAP acting ‘as it sees fit’ as per current regulations regarding submissions, and (NHS Fife?) pays little or no regard to the ‘public consultation’ inherent in the NHS (Scotland) Reform Act 2004.
This lack of public consultation and the delay in the Pharmacy Regulations Review was brought to the attention of Nicola Sturgeon, Scottish Cabinet Secretary for Health and Well-being at the Annual Review meeting of Fife NHS Board on 18th January 2010 --- we are awaiting a response!
In the meantime an application has been submitted to Fife PPC by local Pharmacist of the Year, Mr Ray Kelly of Lomond Pharmacy, in Falkland, to open a commercial pharmacy within Balmullo Surgery. He would lease appropriate space from the practice and, in turn, the income derived from this would help, at least in part, to defray the possible contraction of GP services resulting from the loss of dispensing services.
Public meetings were set up in both Leuchars and Balmullo on the 18th and 21st January 2010, at which both Dr Johnston, for the practice and Mr Kelly for the pharmacy gave details of how they believed they could work together to provide a one stop NHS service for all neighbourhood patients. Both meetings were very well attended and questions from the public were answered as openly and freely as possible given that the PPC process has begun and that Fife NHS has made no decision yet on the future of surgery dispensing in Leuchars. Both meetings wholeheartedly endorsed the Balmullo pharmacy application.
There are many good reasons for local patients to support the Balmullo pharmacy application when they write or email to register their support. Here are some:-
- The new application would cover Balmullo, Dairsie and Guardbridge.
- The newly approved Leuchars pharmacy has said it will only provide services to the immediate area of Leuchars and not beyond.
- Balmullo pharmacy would offer additional services such as a minor ailments service, repeat prescriptions and a range of health promotion activities.
- The poor public transport links between Balmullo and Leuchars makes it difficult for people without personal means of transport.
- There are clear benefits to patients to have a pharmacy working so closely with Balmullo practice.
- It is an additional commercial outlet for Balmullo.
- It offers patients greater choice as the where they may obtain their pharmacy prescriptions.