The President’s answer to what he calls the interesting question from Christine Heading [both on 3 April] is itself interesting. He seems to be supporting the view of Dr Rees, myself and others that the title ‘pharmacist’ should be retained as the professional qualification used by those who have the academic qualification of a pharmacy degree and are members of the professional body. Exactly what we are arguing!
Why then does he, elsewhere, support the draft Pharmacy Order S 27(2) that would make it a criminal offence to do just that, unless the person concerned is also registered by the GPhC?
The additional title ‘registered pharmacist’ is a government registration given only to pharmacists who meet the further requirements (the GPhC’s CPD for example) that will be introduced to protect the public, relevant we argue only when the pharmacist concerned has dealings directly with the public.
John Turner.
Head of GPhC
Could someone point me in the direction of the advert for this post in the Society's official organ?
I have seen it advertised in the Guardian Jobs section so can we expect the post to be filled by a non Pharmacist....closing date 25th May