Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I agree, I believe the test is whether the service would cause any other chmist to close due to loss of business. Since Chemists are highly regulated it is felt they cannot be left to the free market. It WOULD be great to have a chemist open in the evening!

Glad we got all the legal points cleared up.


Never mind the nursery, the after school club, the community centre and the residential street for a moment.


'an ill considered site' because all the consideration has been done by Mediquick. What do you think their motivation might be? Of course they want it on site. Remember that this proposed service is not fulfilling a need which has been identified. It's just a business proposition.

Which is why anyone with a vested interest should make their views known to the PCT. Which they are doing, but who knows what the final decision will be.

I'm babysitting my granddaughter so haven't been able to read it properly, but I think dispensing chemists who offer advanced services are exempt from 'control of entry' test. see para 24


I am not sure about the predujicial effect test tho. Might have to look at the new regs rather than this consultation document.

Never mind ...!


You mean never mind the fact that every street is a residential street; What makes yours so special ?


The people who live on the roads near kings hospital are residents too are they not? Have you got some pecking order that we should know about?


Maybe when these things were moved into local pharmacies the idea from policy makers was to break up the numbers so no one particular area was the sole focus, what is unfair about that ?

macroban Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>> Given the choice I would prefer to stay on-site

> and collect my prescription rather than walk the

> streets of East Dulwich to find a dispensing

> chemist that is open after 6pm.



Macey's on Northcross Rd is open until 7.30pm during weekdays, so its still open after DMC closes. Its only 3 mins walk from DMC. But something open until later and/or Sundays could be good.


The existing chemists did offer to extend their hours further. Also if the doctors extended their hours, the chemists said they would extend their hours in line - so that people could pick up their perscriptions after a late appointment. I would like to see some evening surgeries at DMC.

the-e-dealer Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Except that some of the Services are already

> provided. Ashwin Tanna Objected to Sainsburys a

> while back and they couldnt open a dispensary.


Hes hardly being inmpartial is he or thinking about the community when he argues on any chemist related matter !

Its Snorkys mantra, but these chemists want your MONEY. Its how they make a living - of course they are going to oppose anything that nibbles away at their margins


you are being used here by the various factions of established and wannabe dispensing chemists in the area


they are all bothered about money at the end of the day - you BARA supporters have been royally mugged by a bit of inflammatiory wording and fear of the unknown.


SMASH THE CHEMIST FASCIST EXPLOITERS AND THE DUPED FORELOCK TUGGING BARA LACKEYS


RECLAIM THE DISPENSARIES FOR THE PEOPLE


MEDICINES NOT PROFIT


etc

snorky Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> the-e-dealer Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Except that some of the Services are already

> > provided. Ashwin Tanna Objected to Sainsburys a

> > while back and they couldnt open a dispensary.

>

> Hes hardly being inmpartial is he or thinking

> about the community when he argues on any chemist

> related matter !



Your summary on Sainsburys is not quite correct. If you had gone along to the Bara meeting, you could have found out the position on this. Its pretty complex. As everyone keeps saying, there's far more information available than can be posted on this forum.

>>Your summary on Sainsburys is not quite correct.<<


I think it was. This was referring to the occasion several years ago when Boots opened a branch inside the DKH Sainsburys. Mr Tanna and other local chemists raised objections to this being a dispensing chemist and won the day, and good for them! There is now of course a dispensing chemist in the middle of the new Supersize DKH Sainsburys, but I;d never think of using it myself. (I have regular repeat prescriptions - some of the stuff quite expensive and you really do need the local/personal touch in this situation)


Mr Tanna is now retired and sold up to the Lewis chain so I'd not have thought he still retained the same level of vested interest. I think its fair to say though that local chemists offer so much more than any Sainsburys-type system.


I am not terribly objective about Mr Tanna as he was "my" chemist" before retirement and offered me an excellent level of service above and beyond the call, as it were.


That said, dispensaries inside GP surgeries are generally a fine idea!

Sorry I don't know if we are all talking about the same application as there was also another Sainsburys application which seemed to get turned down but it wasn't quite like that and then the dispensing pharmacy did not open. Sorry if I've confused things!

snorky Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> you are being used here by the various factions of

> established and wannabe dispensing chemists in the

> area

>

> they are all bothered about money at the end of

> the day - you BARA supporters have been royally

> mugged by a bit of inflammatiory wording and fear

> of the unknown.

>

> SMASH THE CHEMIST FASCIST EXPLOITERS AND THE DUPED

> FORELOCK TUGGING BARA LACKEYS



Snorky, I'm able to read the information for myself. I can look up the facts for myself, I know how to read a statute, assess whether its a good piece of legislation and assess how well things are being handled under the principles of adminsitrative law and under the heading of 'common sense'. Have you read all the info to make up your mind? Its easily accessible. If you haven't, then you should. If you have, then great.:))

This just in (my mail slot): "News from Tessa Jowel - update on Proposed new pharmacy at the Dulwich Medical Centre Crystal Palace Road"


It's seems that all of the rambling and whining that's been going on in this post for the past few weeks has been a FARCE! According to Tessa and the PCT - there is no plan for a needle exchange at the new DMC and there never was. She does quote that the reason for the confusion in the first place is because of the lack of a decent consultation period in the first place, however - if it really is true that this post was just created out of Chinese Whispers - then I think this is just a great laugh!


It really is true that you can't believe everything you read. BARA you might have to have a chat to your sources!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Per Cllr McAsh, as quoted above: “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution. " Is anyone au fait with the Clean Air Act 1993, and  particularly with the state of 'Smoke Control' law and practice generally?  I've just been looking  through some of it for the first time and, afaics, the civil penalties mentioned  were introduced into the Clean Air Act, at Schedule 1A, in May 2022.  So it seems that, in this particular,  it's a matter of the enforcement policy trailing well behind the legislation.  I'm not criticising that at all, but am curious.  
    • Here's the part of march46's linked-to Southwark News article pertaining to Southwark Council. "Southwark Council were also contacted for a response. "Councillor James McAsh, Cabinet Member for Clean Air, Streets & Waste said: “One of Southwark’s key priorities is to create a healthy environment for our residents. “To achieve this we closely monitor legislation and measures that influence air pollution – our entire borough apart from inland waterways is designated as a Smoke Control Area, and we also offer substantial provision for electric vehicles to promote alternative fuel travel options and our Streets for People strategy. “We as a council support the work of Mums for Lungs and recognise the health and environmental impacts of domestic solid fuel burning, particularly from wood-burning appliances. “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution.  “This work is being undertaken in collaboration with other London boroughs as part of the pan-London Wood Burning Project, which aims to harmonise enforcement approaches and share best practice across the capital.” ETA: And here's a post I made a few years ago, with tangential relevance.  https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/278140-early-morning-drone-flying/?do=findComment&comment=1493274  
    • The solicitor is also the Executor. Big mistake, but my Aunt was very old, and this was the Covid years and shortly after so impossible to intervene and get a couple of close relatives to do this.  She had no children so this is the nephews and nieces. He is a single practitioner, and most at his age would have long since retired - there is a question over his competence Two letters have already gone essentially complaining - batted off and 'amusingly' one put the blame on us. There are five on our side, all speaking to each other, and ideally would work as a single point of contact.  But he has said that this is not allowed - we've all given approval to act on each others behalf. There are five on her late husband's side, who have not engaged with us despite the suggestion to work as a team, There is one other, who get's the lion's share, the typicical 'friend', but we are long since challenging the will. I would like to put another complaint together that he has not used modern collective communication (I expect that he is incapable) which had seriously delayed the execution of the will.   I know many in their 80s very adept with smart phones so that is not an ageist comment. The house has deteriorated very badly, with cold, damp and a serious leak.  PM me if you want to see the dreadful condition that it is now in. I would also question why if the five of us are happy to work together why all of us need to confirm in writing.             The house was lived in until Feb 23, and has been allowed to get like this.
    • Isn’t a five yearly electricity safety certificate one of the things the landlord must give for a legal tenancy?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...