Would an independent Scotland benefit pharmacy?

Today the Scottish Government agreed with the Electoral Commission's findings over the proposed wording of next year's question in the forthcoming Scottish independence referendum, due to be held in the autumn of 2014. Pharmacy in Scotland isn't exactly immune from the effects of the recession with pharmacies having to take on the effects of category M cutbacks and pharmacists, particularly newly qualified ones, struggling desperately trying to get their foot on the pharmacy employment ladder.

Would an independent Scotland pave the way for a creative new way to deal with the current issues that are overshadowing the pharmacy profession north of the border?

None of us know what an independent Scotland will really look like. But nobody can also doubt either the opportunity it may bring as well.

Frankly, nobody has the right to assert that Scotland is incapable of running its own affairs effectively. To suggest so would be petulant. Many newly formed independent nations have managed just fine since embracing their own independence and nobody can really deny that whether they support the union or independence.

But the choice next year will be really down to what is in Scotland's best interests. Whether Scotland is better staying together with the rest of the United Kingdom, hoping that the coalition's austerity measures will result in future economic prosperity. Or whether Scotland's position in the union is untenable and therefore being independent is the only way forward.

Scotland already runs its health service very differently from England, Wales and Northern Ireland. The major difference can be seen between the coalition government's proposal to radically reform the way the NHS is administered by allowing GP's more of a say in the way services are commissioned in England. Scotland, under the Scottish National Party run government at Holyrood, has ruled out the private sector from running any aspect of the National Health Service.

A lot of the arguments for independence are based on the way the economy should be run. Many people north of the border do not approve of the austerity measures being brought about by Westminster and want to go down an alternative route by administering their own affairs and economic decisions.

As pharmacy are concerned, I can imagine nearly every contractor up and down Scotland do not necessarily welcome the category M cuts with glee. Although health policy is different in Scotland, could general economic policy from Westminster be holding the profession back?

Or could even a lack of creative thinking be holding back the profession? Some people argue that we already have enough powers north of the border to take an alternative route when it comes to administering and satisfying the needs of the pharmacy profession, pharmacy contractors and pharmacists.

But some others argue that because the Scottish Government has to resort to only a grant from Westminster for funding of public services in Scotland, it doesn't hold enough power to raise the necessary capital to adopt a different economic policy, despite the fact that the Scottish Parliament has the power to vary income tax by three percent over or under the current levels of income tax.

I would quite like to see some sort of a national debate set up and run, for example by the Royal Pharmaceutical Society in Scotland, to see what everyone in the pharmacy profession in Scotland thinks about what Scottish independence could mean for the future of pharmacy in Scotland.

Please let me know what you think: anas@officialanashassan.com