Agenda item

6.1

The Committee received a report which provided information on proposed national changes to Community Pharmacy Contracts in 2016/17, the funding settlement and the potential impact of the funding reduction.  The report was presented by Alison Knowles (Locality Director, NHS England).

6.2

In presenting the report, Alison Knowles emphasised that NHS England recognised the importance of community pharmacies and that the proposals, which were published in October 2016, would have little or no impact on patient health.  It was not possible at the present time to say how many practices in Sheffield would be affected, but work was being undertaken with existing pharmacies in this regard.

6.3

In response to a question from the Chair (Councillor Pat Midgley), Alison Knowles explained that there was a scheme to protect pharmacies, but to qualify for this protection the pharmacy had to be more than a mile away from its nearest pharmacy, have been on the pharmaceutical list as at 1^st September 2016, and dispense less than 9,000 prescriptions per month.

6.4

The Committee then received a further report which provided a response on behalf of the Local Pharmacy Committee to national changes to Community Pharmacy Contracts in 2016/17.  This report was presented by Tom Bissett (Community Pharmacy Sheffield).

6.5

In presenting the report, Tom Bissett indicated that the two year funding package being imposed on Community Pharmacy meant that there would be a £113m reduction in funding in 2016/17 and that this would be followed by a further reduction of £95m in 2017/18.  He added that there were 128 community pharmacies in Sheffield and that between 70 and 80 were dispensing less than 9,000 prescriptions per month.  The pharmacies benefitted from a mix of income but a majority were getting 90% of their income from the NHS. 

6.6

Members made various comments and asked a number of questions, to which responses were provided as follows:-

·                There was an establishment payment to cover advice given by pharmacists, but this was to be replaced by a single activity fee.

·                Reports that one in four community pharmacies would close could not be substantiated at the present time and there was still a need to undertake local impact assessments.  In terms of the national impact, it was felt that by reinvesting the savings this would result in more health gain, but it was acknowledged that a reduction in access needed to be looked at.

·                The proposed funding reductions were in line with other NHS reductions, but there was a need to work on the local picture.

·                It was acknowledged that there were some pharmacies in Sheffield which were in close proximity to each other with low dispensing volumes.

·                These proposals had come about as a result of a national consultation with the industry and there had been a delay in implementation due to the extension of this consultation.

·                The multiple chain pharmacies provided value and there was a good range of services being provided by both these and the independent pharmacies.

·                The role of the NHS was to push up quality and an example of this was the advice scheme supported through the NHS 111 initiative.

·                The effect on pharmacies in the ten most deprived areas of Sheffield was being looked at.

·                The process would take time and the NHS would work with the Sheffield Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) and the Director of Public Health in understanding and mitigating the impacts.

·                The national consultation was imposed on the industry.

·                There should be no distinction between independent and chain pharmacies, as they were all pharmacies.

·                In deprived areas, pharmacies may not have the same mix of business, e.g. they may not sell such items as perfume. 

·                Extra journey time may be an important impact, together with the free services available, e.g. delivery, which might have to be charged for.  It was difficult to imagine though that a pharmacist would not give free advice.

·                It was possible that some pharmacies may close if there were two in an area which were run by the same company.

·                It was hoped that there might be a move back to independent pharmacies.

·                This was not the first line of services which had been subject to budget reductions and ways to protect the service were being looked at in relation to advice giving and emergency dispensing.  Most patients did not go to the pharmacy as a first line of advice and it was important to ensure that the right primary care services were available in each area.  These changes had been introduced on a national level and there had been little discussion on them.  Ideally, measures should be introduced to ensure that community pharmacies were the entry point for health services.

·                The Prime Minister’s Challenge Fund, which funded pharmacies in GP practices, played an important role in diverting patients to pharmacies. 

6.7

RESOLVED: That the Committee:-

(a)       thanks Alison Knowles and Tom Bissett for their contribution to the meeting;

(b)       notes the contents of the reports and the responses to questions;

(c)        requests that it be kept informed of the impacts in Sheffield of the proposed national changes to Community Pharmacy Contracts, particularly in terms of the effect in deprived areas; and

(d)       notes that Alison Knowles will write to the Committee at the beginning of April 2017, with an assessment of local progress on the Community Pharmacy Contract changes.