In News

Follow this topic

Bookmark

Record learning outcomes

The National Pharmacy Association has told the Government its members who operate distance-selling pharmacies (DSPs) are concerned its contractual measure stopping them providing NHS-commissioned services face-to-face from their premises will have “a significant impact” on their businesses and patients.

Speaking to Independent Community Pharmacist, the NPA’s director of corporate affairs Gareth Jones said members are disappointed they were not consulted about the policy, which comes into effect in the autumn and was agreed as part of the 2025-26 contractual talks between Labour and Community Pharmacy England (CPE).

No new DSP applications will be permitted from June 23 after regulatory changes were laid in parliament this month.

“The vast majority of NPA members are brick and mortar operations but some with DSPs have raised concerns with us about the decision to change the regulations from the autumn,” Jones said. “In particular, they feel that they were not properly consulted about a change that will have a significant impact on the patients that they serve and their businesses.

“We are in constant touch with NHS England and Department of Health and Social Care about a wide range of issues, so have passed on their concerns, which are significant in a world where hybrid operations with elements of online and bricks-and-mortar service are likely to become more prevalent.”

Policy on DSPs is very worrying trend for entire sector

One DSP owner, Richard Brown, who runs the DSP Chippenham Pharmacy and Health Clinic, told ICP his biggest concern about the measure was that it could set a “worrying” precedent, not only for DSPs but also bricks-and-mortar pharmacies, if the Government decides to reduce their scope to provide services without a thorough consultation.

“The principle of this matter is they could fundamentally change your contract whether you’re a DSP, whether you’re a bricks-and-mortar pharmacy, and there’s nothing you can do about it,” he said. “That is a very worrying trend for the entire sector. It’s DSPs today but there could be a horrible change for bricks-and-mortar tomorrow just because they don’t like how somebody does something.”

Brown said the Government’s policy change will cost his business £30,000 a year, although DSPs will be able to administer Covid and flu vaccinations on their premises as part of an advanced, national enhanced or enhanced service until March 31, 2026.

Brown insisted the measure “disproportionately, negatively impacts DSPs” and did not rule out legal action against the Government if enough DSPs came together to challenge the policy.

“The honest answer is I’m not sure (about legal action). As an individual pharmacy, there’s no way I could afford to do it,” he said. “But if there was a look at some form of challenge to the Government at this being an unlawful change, then it’s about how we try to get that going.

“If DSPs feel they would want to be involved in some kind of challenge, then getting in touch with the NPA at least means we can co-ordinate where people stand on this. If there’s enough momentum behind people wanting to say ‘this isn’t right’ and that ‘we’re going to do something more formal’, then there’s that groundswell of opinion.”

Brown, who was one of around 25 DSPs who contacted the Competition and Markets Authority with their concerns about what they regard as an anti-competitive measure, said he sat in on an NPA webinar last month with a number of other DSPs to talk about the issue.

“The NPA is interested in getting members’ feedback on this and are concerned about the impact this is going to have on some of their members,” he said.

The NPA did not go into detail about what was discussed during the webinar but ICP understands it intends to send out a survey to its DSP members to get a picture of how the policy will impact their businesses and patients’ wellbeing.

NPA: Closing DSP exemption to market entry is sensible

However, Jones said that despite members’ concerns, the NPA thinks “the change relating to closing the DSP exemption to market entry is sensible, given how conditions have changed in the two decades since that exemption was introduced”.

Brown said he wanted to “bring DSPs together” and suggested the NPA “can play a really interesting role in terms of co-ordinating the feedback”.

“DSPs may also be members of other membership organisations, so if nothing else, even if they ask their own organisation and not the NPA to take a stand on this… you’ve also got Numark, you’ve got the Independent Pharmacies’ Association (IPA)," he said.

“It’s NPA for me because that’s my trade body but if a DSP was a member of IPA, they should look to that body to support them in challenging some of this.”

Numark and the Independent Pharmacies’ Association did not respond when contacted for comment. CPE also did not respond when approached for comment.

Urging DSPs to get in touch with him, Brown said: “Nobody was consulted. The DH didn’t consult. Nobody saw this coming. Me alone, I’m a singular, lone voice. But if we can get a groundswell of pharmacies that are saying ‘this isn’t right’, then that’s far more powerful than me standing alone.

“The principle of this matter is they could fundamentally change your contract whether you’re a DSP, whether you’re a bricks-and-mortar pharmacy, and there’s nothing you can do about it. And they could completely destabilise your pharmacy business when all you’ve done is do the right things. We haven’t broken any of the rules surrounding DSPs but they’re going to take our contract.”

Policy can be overturned if judge persuaded it's outside Ministers in the Act powers

The chair of the Pharmacy Law and Ethics Association David Reissner told ICP a successful legal challenge would involve overturning the change made to the National Health Service (Pharmaceutical and Local Pharmaceutical Services) Regulations 2013, which sets out who can provide services, where they are provided, what will be provided, how they are provided and how they will be paid for.

“Distance-selling pharmacies are aggrieved and are talking about a legal challenge on the basis that such a change in the law would be an unlawful restraint of trade,” Reissner said. “In a capitalist society, businesses are expected to be able to trade freely, subject to competition laws.

"However, when services are being funded by the public such as the NHS, there are always legal frameworks within which the services must be provided.”

He added: “A court is only likely to overturn a change made to the Regulations if a judge can be persuaded that the change would be outside the powers given to Ministers in the Act.”

DHSC: Increasing levels of DSP face-to-face delivery undermines market entry controls

A Department of Health and Social Care spokesperson said: “We agreed the changes through consultation with Community Pharmacy England, which represents pharmacies across England, including distance-selling pharmacies.

“DSPs were always expected to operate remotely as national providers, able to meet the demand for services not confined to a locality. Increasing levels of face-to-face delivery by DSPs undermines the market entry controls that underpin planning and commissioning of pharmaceutical services in England.”