Jump to content

Recommended Posts

The Dulwich Medical Centre has made formal planning applications to open a temporary pharmacy in a portakabin and permanent changes to its building for a permanent pharmacy.

This would match the health authority to open a 100 hour pharmacy and from memory needle exchange.


The two applications are:


12-AP-3008 - http://planningonline.southwark.gov.uk/AcolNetCGI.exe?ACTION=UNWRAP&RIPNAME=Root.PgeResultDetail&TheSystemkey=9547882


12-AP-3010 - http://planningonline.southwark.gov.uk/AcolNetCGI.exe?ACTION=UNWRAP&RIPNAME=Root.PgeResultDetail&TheSystemkey=9547884


East Dulwich councillors will be applying for this decision to be made by planning committee and not be granted by council planning officials.


We think open a 100 hour retail pharmacy on such a residential street - taking deliveries, customers - isnt appropriate for such a residential street. If the surgery was on a commercial street it would make sense but not on Crystal Palace Street.


But whether you are for or against these planning permissions please tell council officials via:

[email protected] and copy me [email protected]

Hi Penguin68,

That's a good point. I would suggest you highlight this to the planning officers.


Hi david_carnell,

No. Having a needle exchange open 100 hours a week is a bit different to the pubs on CPR.

Equally te people living near the two pubs chose ot move there. No one living near thi proposed pharmacy chose to live near a need led change pharmacy.

Wouldn't the majority of people using the service be coming in from further afield rather than being local? And it is not exactly on a bus route (except the P13 I suppose)

I was told that the residents of Court Lane got the P4 route diverted because there was a significant increase in burglaries after it was introduced into Court Lane- is there any truth in that does any one know?

Hi Michael,

Social good?

The lead pharmacist for SE London area said needled exchanges should be in hospitals.

East Dulwich area has numerous pharmacies already.

Preserving residential areas peace and tranquility, considering the above, maximises the social good in these circumstances.

Does the lead pharmacist of S E London use a needle exchange? If not I would suggest his preference for where they are placed is irrelevant.


It would seem that people up in arms about this have little idea what a needle exchange is, or it's purpose. I suggest you go and find out before trying to make it sound like a hang out for drug users.


Sickening!

This was blocked previously by people whipping up hysteria and saying it would adversely affect the chemist on North Cross Road. In fact I think the Chemist was one of the main protesters. Then, when the planning application was refused, the chemist promptly sold up to Lloyds.


I would like a 100 hour pharmacy at DMC as its my doctors, I have repeat prescriptions and work long hours.


The needle exchange is nothing I am concerned with, having lived near to a chemist that offered this service before moving to ED and having had no problems.


Knowing the NIMBY, vocal minority of ED though, I imagine this will be blocked again.

The issue I raised is about the use of a portakabin, not about any permanent and secure building.


ED and adjacent bits of SE London are full of little shopping and associated enclaves (often only 3/4 units) surrounded by residential areas - it's part of its charm. Clearly this proposal is about making money, rather than offering a social amenity, but what's wrong about that? 'High Street' chemists offer much more than the dispensing of ethical pharmaceuticals, which is what I suspect this will mainly be targeted at - the more competition in ED the better as regards service and range improvement to attract and retain customers.


The application(s) do not mention a needle exchange - Mr Barber is 'remembering' this from a previous application.

It seems the applicants have presented 2 options. One plan is to house the pharmacy in the existing building, behind the reception desk, with a portacabin out the back to house the displaced admin staff. The other is to have the pharmacy in a portacabin in the car park at the front of the building.


Personally I'd rather the DMC focussed on improving their core service.

Hi LadyDeliah,

If you support the application tell the councils planning officials.


Hi Chillaxed,

If you think the pharmacy should proceed tell the councils planning officials.



Plannin officials don't read forums. Even if they did they could use any of the comments.

Hi david_carnell,

The planning applications are to enable the Dulwich Medical Centre to use the pharmacy licence theyve already obtained. My understnading is that the pharmacy licence includes the needle exchange.


In planning terms planning applications dont have to be that specific. But the outcome of obtaining planning permission would result in this.


On that basis I don't think your suggestion is necessary. But thank you for asking.

James Barber Wrote:

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

> We think open a 100 hour retail pharmacy on such a residential street - taking deliveries, customers - isnt appropriate for such a residential street. If the surgery was on a commercial street it would make sense but not on Crystal Palace Street.




Who is "We"?


This is where I think you abuse your position as councillor James, at times you use the position to push your own NIMBY views, and it's not appropriate. And I think you do good work, but this is something that bugs me about your use of this forum.


You should have 2 totally separate log ins IMO. James Barber the resident who has his own personal views on things, and James Barber the Councillor, who represents public interest.


With regards the application, I would agree with Penguin68 that a portakabin pharmacy sounds like a pretty bad idea. However, I would fully support having a pharmacy once building work is complete. Realistically do you really think a load of drug addicts are going to take to Crystal Palace Road at 3am every morning like Zombies from an apocalyptic film?

1. What are you objecting too Councillor:

- A late night pharmarcy (regardless of the service it provides)?

- Use of a portakabin?


2. I find it very hard to believe that a pharmacy will be getting deliveries, at a time you are alluding too.


3 Surely a pharmacy opening for longer, regardless of a needle exchange, is a good thing?


4. Where do you think we should locate `extended hours needle exchange places`?

- Hospitals, are not the only answer, with more of them closing or having reduced services, is it not a risk?

- We could hide the problem and put it in 'less desirable surronding places' maybe? Howabout another ward?


5. As an elected Councillor for East Dulwich, are you protecting the interests of all local residents or just the ones that live on the road?

- Is the 'We' you mentioned, the local Lib Dem party? Is this policy?


6. Otta has dissected the absurdity of this whole thread, perfectly.


7. Are there any local 100 hour pharmacies?

Another planning application was submitted on 17 dec 2012 for the dmc on Chadwick Road for the same thing.


As a surrounding local resident I would have thought consultation letters would have been sent. I have not seen one


Any premises dispensing drugs till late would be concern to residents.


Strange that no local chemists want to remain open this late to supply. Why? what people will be turning up at 10.00 at night?

Oh, I don't richard, mainly junkies I reckon. Them and murderers.


Or perhaps people on shift work, those who have jobs that finish late, parents of young children who need emergency medicine, someone needing contraception or any other over-the-counter product at short notice......just the people who use a chemist the rest of the time but could do with it being open a bit later.

If you have ever used the Out of Hours Service via SELDOC and need an urgent prescription - you have to travel to Streatham as the nearest all hours pharmacy.


It was suggested at the last time this application came up that it made more sense to have a night time pharmacy based in Dulwich Hospital. Ther would be security already on site, people would not have so far to travel, had plenty of parking space. This was agreed to be a good idea by the then NHS Southwark. It would have been run by a private organisation not NHS.


Basically the Drs at the DMC are wanting a quick buck. Reseach by the 2 residents associations (BARA and Crystal Palace Rd RA) found that the Drs at DMC were directors of a pharmacutical company based in Beddington Lane Croydon,

Any money for precriptions received by NHS will eventually flow back to their own pockets. At the last application - the residents' associations legal expert also traced GPs and their spouses as directors to other medical supplies firms all over London (using company house details).


DMC are not providing a 100 pharmacy entirely out of their concerns for the local community - it is a money making scheme. Unfortunately all the pharmacists who turned up at the first applications' meeting all those years ago, did not

keep to their promise of providing a rota of late night pharmacys in Dulwich and Nunhead - so this is where the DMC has the advantage.

edhistory Wrote:

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

> > James Barber the resident

>

> ?

>

> John K



I admit I was making a presumption there, but previous posts of James' have led me to believe that he is a local resident. I could be wrong. If I am wrong, then he still shouldn't be taking it upon himself to object to things on behalf of residents without their support.

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

    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
    • You can get a card at the till, though, to get the discount. You don't have to carry it with you (or load it onto your phone), you can just get a different card each time. Not sure what happens if they notice 🤣
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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