In Opinion

Follow this topic

Bookmark

Record learning outcomes

A reinvigorated pharmacy professional leadership body is an optical illusion. Take away its vaunted royal college status and you’re left with the old Royal Pharmaceutical Society, still suffocating in its own opaqueness. 

If you think that’s harsh given it transitioned into the Royal College of Pharmacy (RCPharm) only in April this year, then consider its decision to stop Teva UK sponsoring and exhibiting at its conference next month.

I won’t prevaricate. It was a ridiculous, irresponsible decision. Ridiculous, because a war thousands of miles away has nothing to do with UK pharmacy professional leadership.

Did the RCPharm think that picking on the British arm of an Israeli pharmaceutical company which supplies significant amounts of medicines would see it held up as a bastion of morality?

What’s more likely is people will question the timing of the RCPharm’s decision, as I’m doing. It could have made its announcement six months ago, a year ago, two years ago, which still wouldn't have made it right in my view, but it did so very soon after two things happened last month.

First, the Royal College of Nursing ended its partnership with Teva after pressure from a pro-Palestine group. Then, a few days later, the RCPharm received a letter from pro-Palestine activists, signed by healthcare workers including pharmacists, demanding the “immediate cancellation” of Teva’s sponsorship. 

The RCPharm caved in. Worse, it failed to provide a clear rationale, as good professional leadership bodies should do. Its decision, it said, “follows a further due diligence review” which brought to its attention “the possibility of certain Teva Pharmaceuticals activities which do not align” with its values.

The RCPharm provided no explanation of those “activities” and did not say if it will make the contents of that “due diligence review” public, which it should. Alas, we had rewound to October 2022 when an independent review concluded the RPS was "opaque at best" and needed to be “more open and transparent”.

But here’s what’s really worrying. In punishing Teva, the RCPharm is politicising its role and that’s irresponsible because it could, albeit unintentionally, persuade some pharmacists not to stock Teva products. I’d like to think that won’t happen but feelings are running high. 

Given the fragility of medicines supply, it would be disastrous. RCPharm’s members, non-members and particularly patients deserve a lot better.