The GPhC is developing a policy on its use of disqualification powers and taking steps to progress its open cases.
The GPhC has powers to disqualify pharmacy owners under the Medicines Act 1968. These powers were extended in March 2018. Since then, the GPhC has opened a small number of disqualification cases.
Although we have not yet developed an overarching policy on our use of disqualification powers, we have recognised the need to develop a policy to support our teams investigating these cases and decision-makers dealing with these cases.
Our disqualification powers allow our Fitness to Practise Committee to:
- Disqualify pharmacy owners from being pharmacy owners in future
- Remove premises attached to those owners from our register
As part of our decision to develop a disqualification policy, we have reviewed all of our open disqualification cases. We have identified a limited number of cases where, since the disqualification cases were opened, the pharmacy owners have removed all of their associated premises from the register.
The lack of registered premises attached to an owner does not prevent us from continuing to take action against the pharmacy owners. However, we have taken the view that it would not be in the public interest to progress these cases to a full disqualification hearing for the following reasons.
The reasons why we consider it would not be in the public interest to progress these cases to a full disqualification hearing are:
- The lack of registered premises attached to these pharmacy owners means there is no current risk to the public
- A disqualification finding against these owners would not lead to any premises being removed from our register, as there aren’t any
- We would have to expend significant resource to hold these disqualification hearings even though one of the main purposes – removal of premises from the register – would not be available. We do not consider this would be a proportionate use of resources.
- The information we hold on the pharmacy owners, including the involvement of individual directors, can be taken account of in our registration decisions and can support a refusal to allow these entities to register as pharmacy owners.
We believe that by taking this approach, we can still achieve our over-arching objective of protecting the public without holding full disqualification hearings. We also believe this approach meets the principles of “Right-touch regulation” promoted by the Professional Standards Authority.
We intend to invite our Fitness to Practise Committee to close these cases on the basis they are no longer in the public interest. We will take steps to bring these cases to a resolution while we develop a full disqualification policy.