Liz McManus (Wicklow, Labour)

I move amendment No. 4:

In page 6, line 34, after "section," to insert the following:

"and subject to such requirements as may be prescribed by the Minister making consequential provision for any one or more of the following:

(I) the certification or licensing of premises on which services are provided by a person referred to in subparagraphs (i) or (ii);

(II) inspection, quality assurance and enforcement issues in respect of such persons;

(III) co-operation between statutory bodies having functions in respect of such persons;

(IV) regulation of professional training and development of such persons;

(V) development of effective medicines management;

(VI) any other matter that appears to the Minister to be incidental or conducive to the proper functioning of the prescribing régime;".

I reintroduce this amendment on Report Stage arising out of my great concern about the lack of regulation of the pharmacy sector. It is an issue that has been raised by pharmacists and, in particular, by the society that has the duty to regulate, as far as it can, despite the total absence of proper statutory controls in terms of fitness to operate and fitness to practice. The Minister of State would have specialist knowledge in this area but it is extraordinary that animals are better protected under veterinary law against pharmacy malpractice than are humans. It seems negligent if the Minister of State does not accept this amendment which he refused to accept on Committee Stage but which I reintroduced to offer him the opportunity to deal with this issue. There have been long delays in regard to legislation that has been promised. The medical practitioners Bill has been promised for 13 years. We may have to wait as long for a pharmacy Bill, as two pharmacy Bills have been promised. There is a logjam when it comes to the production of legislation.

Meanwhile there is a real concern and risk that a scandal will hit the headlines because of rogue pharmacists. Pharmacists are no different from anybody else. There are good and bad pharmacists. To protect the public good there must be a proper regulatory framework. When we were petitioned, as Members of this House, by pharmacists who are extremely concerned about the current position we were told that two or three pharmacists per year should be struck off and that there may be up to 30 pharmacists who should not be practising. A pharmacy owner has been brought to court because he has been operating a pharmacy for three weeks without a pharmacist and medications were given out.

An interesting court case is proceeding in regard to a journalist who went out to see exactly how thorough are standards when it comes to giving out medication. This is a matter that cannot be put on the long finger. We have enough scandals in the health service without permitting further delay, which will lead to issues of pharmacy malpractice. Everybody who knows anything about this area agrees there is a real risk that needs immediate attention.

The chief pharmacist position in the Department is vacant. When I raised this matter on Committee Stage it took a long time for the Minister of State to tell me who is filling that post on a temporary basis. Certainly much greater attention should be given to the pharmacy area. There is no doubt that the pharmacist is a key player, particularly in primary care, in the delivery of health services at local and community level, quite apart from the role the pharmacist plays at hospital level or even in our prisons. It is unconscionable to continue with a situation where there are no protections and safeguards that people require and expect because we have a Government that is incapable of producing legislation.

We are still waiting for legislation on nursing home repayments. How many people will have died before that money is provided? In the meantime I suggest to the Minister of State that he accepts this amendment. I have no doubt he will have all sorts of cogent reasons that we should wait for the pharmacy Bill to be published, but frankly that is not good enough. I suggest to the Minister of State, who has specialist knowledge and has concerns in this area, that he has an opportunity to provide some safeguards, even by way of regulations under this Bill, by accepting the amendment.

If the Minister of State answers in the negative he needs to explain to the public how he can sustain the idea that we persist with the absence of a proper regulatory framework where people can and should be struck off as registered pharmacists. The authority that registers pharmacists does not have that power. One cannot be struck off the register. Do we simply wait for matters to become so acute that a criminal law must apply or do we ensure there are professional standards? This is no disrespect to the pharmacy profession generally, which is of the highest standard in the main. When one looks at the Shipman case in Britain where a pharmacist was examined and found wanting in terms of practice, one should learn from the experience, not just here but abroad. We are dealing with people's health and people's lives, and there is this extraordinary unacceptable anomaly where animals are protected and humans are not.

See this speech in context