The conversations must have been lively at the Pharmacy Australia Congress in Sydney over the weekend. Health reform advocate John Menadue really socked it to the audience, judging by his 3,500-word speech.
For the sake of time-pressed Croakey readers, I’ve compressed the speech into several dot points. But it is worth reading in full, and you can do so here.
Here is a summary:
• There is quite a contrast between the community’s need for pharmacists to do more in their professional capacity and the unwillingness of the profession to change.
• The field of prevention beckons pharmacists. But it does not seem that pharmacists are fully responsive to needs and opportunities.
• Do pharmacists really want to collaborate with other health professionals or remain individual business entrepreneurs? Some are dissatisfied that their professional skills are not fully utilised and extended. It is not surprising that many find dispensing medications and running what sometimes seem like gift shops, to be mind-numbing.
• Unfortunately, the Pharmacy Guild of Australia opposes pharmacists working as consultant pharmacists within the GP super clinics. It insists instead that the only pharmacy participation must be via the establishment of a community pharmacy within the clinic.
• The evidence is compelling that the highly protected pharmacy business model which is comfortable and financially rewarding for owners up to this point is going to come under challenge. The history of protection in Australia is that protected sectors are very vulnerable and risk not fully appreciating their vulnerability until it is too late. Why is it that so much effort goes into political lobbying in Canberra and comparatively little effort into utilising more effectively the enormous professional talents within pharmacy?
• Discussion of business prospects and protection is relevant to extending the role of pharmacists in healthcare. An extended role of pharmacists will be essential, as future business prospects of pharmacists will be significantly influenced by contracting margins and increased competition.
• Features of pharmacies today which will come under challenge include the geographical restrictions, impending pressures on pharmacists’ margins, and the barring of pharmacies from supermarkets. Australians don’t have great love for the Coles/Woolworths oligopoly but they would love to see more competition. This lack of competition may explain why paracetamol can vary in price from $10.95 for 100 Panadol to $3.95 for almost the same produce sold under the Chemmart brand.
• It seems inevitable that the highly protected pharmacy sector is going to face major changes. The lesson of protection in Australia is that if you want to have a seat at the table when protection is being reduced, you must accept the need to change.
• Perhaps pharmacists might consider two categories of registered pharmacists. One would compose many of the long-established pharmacists who are reluctant to move away from the distribution model. The second category could be younger and differently trained pharmacists who will respond to a new model of professional practice which substantially extends their role into disease prevention and enhanced therapies. It would seem a possible way to overcome the environment which new and highly motivated pharmacy graduates apparently find so discouraging and dampening.
• It is quite remarkable that the PGA has consistently opposed direct relationships developing between GPs and accredited pharmacists. It insists that the relationship must be with the patient’s nominated community pharmacy. This is quite contrary to normal health referral practices.
• How can the disconnect between how pharmacists are trained and how most of them work, be remedied?
Menadue concluded: “Despite the rhetoric about prevention, are governments, their bureaucracies and the professions ready to implement prevention policies? The answer to me seems to be ‘not yet’. Some hard thinking is required all round.”
• You can read more about John Menadue’s arguments for reform of both the demand and supply of health services here.

One Comment
One feels both sorry for pharmacists and a bit angry at the as well.
They cry out to be taken seriously as health professionals yet as others have said they run gift shops filled with high priced cosmetics and shonky “alternative” / “complementary” medicine products. They promote slimming potions and many that do offer advice will wobble around the outskirts of the worst of CAM cons.
The lack of competition results in huge rip offs for consumers – I’m lucky in an area where I can drive to the cheapest and get a difference between $13 a pack and $28 for the same pack of pretty commonly prescribed medication.
Their business practices are a bit of a worry to – most pharmacists seem prefer to spend more time handing over stuff to serving wenches than it would take to talk to the customer themselves and zip the credit card through.
Lets not talk about the 10 minute wait for the customer to get something that is already packed, sealed counted and ready to grab of the shelf.
Where is the Guild (is it the Guild?) warning pharmacists that scientists (like chemists) can’t take homeopathy seriously and that “slimming” potions don’t work?
Where is the Guild helping pharmacists set up to do Home Medicine Reviews, or training technicians to do the HMRs?
How come all there is in a pharmacy is the highly trained pharmacist and then the serving wenches? Surely there are some skills in between that could be useful.
Where are they helping the few struggling professional pharmacists who do Methadone
Clinics to better design how and where methadone dispensing is done?
Where are the pharmacists helping encourage people to pick up FOBT kits for Bowel Cancer screening.
I’ve been hearing pharmacists want to take on the consultant role to GPs and specialists for over 20 years – why won’t the Guild let it happen for everyones sakes.
Consultant pharmacists could be the main conduit for drug/medication advice to GPs and specialists instead of Big Pharma reps as it is at the moment. A big win for us all.
Just as, paradoxically,the Parallel Import Restrictions on Australian Books, has contributed to the decline in Australian book shops, because people go online to buy books cheaper, faster and higher quality, from overseas, so will the PGA end up strangling Australian professional pharmacists.
One Trackback