Pharmacists

When we were at university and Chamber of Pharmacists president Mary Anne Sant Fournier used to lecture us, we were always led to believe that the chamber was the union we should look to if we ever needed to defend our rights.

For a number of years I have worked hard in primary health care pharmacies and we are now starting to believe what someone recently told us: "Don't trust them..."

Only recently on The Times of February 15, it was reported that the chamber president, who always stressed that we are not businessmen, entered an alliance with a business-oriented organisation, the GRTU. This is very cheeky indeed, because if the chamber really cared for us, they would join forces with the UHM in order to find solutions on how to attract more pharmacists and pharmacy technicians to work in government pharmacies.

Ms Sant Fournier even criticised us in public as if we were the ones to blame for the situation we are in. She said that as things stood, with numerous patients going to government pharmacies to pick up their medicines, pharmacists did not have the time for one-to-one contact with patients. "Proper supervision by pharmacists could reduce medical misuse as well and cut wastage," she added. Could Ms Sant Fournier give us hard, reliable evidence in order to justify her injurious allegations or else withdraw her statements immediately?

Could the government instead of forking out the money that will be charged per patient, as is being demanded, invest it for our needs so that we could improve our services to the patients?

How can we believe that we will not become redundant? Is the UHM being consulted? Or are decisions being taken on our behalf?

The Pharmacist of Your Choice Scheme is not the right way to cut patients' queues. Alternatives do exist but the government has in the first place to listen to us as well. After all, we all remained loyal to the government who is our employer.