Pharmacy DailyPharmacy Daily | Review credibility cloud

THE Pharmacy Guild of Australia has again called on the Pharmacy Remuneration and Regulation Review to disclose its dealings with Deloitte Australia to address concerns that the Review's independence and credibility have been compromised (PD 20 Dec 16).

The Review engaged Deloitte Australia to conduct a study of international pharmacy remuneration and regulation, including comparison with the Australian model.

At the same time, Deloitte has produced a major report which was appended to the Chemist Warehouse submission to the Review on reforming ownership and location rules for community pharmacy in Australia.

The Guild argues there is a fundamental conflict of interest having an organisation working for the Review, while simultaneously participating in its submissions.

Guild national president George Tambassis said, "This conflict seriously undermines the independence of the Review and makes it virtually impossible for it to make untainted recommendations, particularly in regard to location rules."

A formal statement was issued on 22 Dec with a spokesperson for the Department of Health saying all procurements conducted in relation to the Review had been performed in line with departmental guidelines "to ensure accountability and transparency in decision making" (PD 23 Dec 16).

In this case Deloitte had previously undertaken work for a number of stakeholders, including pharmacy banner groups and the Pharmacy Guild itself, the spokesperson explained.

Because these engagements had been completed, the Department did not consider Deloitte's prior experience represented an actual conflict of interest.

Deloitte also defended itself citing internal controls as separating the various projects to prevent a conflict of interest.

Tambassis countered with an appeal for the public release of all documentation relating to the Review's interactions with Deloitte.

The Guild is pursuing a Freedom of Information (FOI) request to hold the Review accountable, but this action need not proceed if the Review were to release all relevant information in a transparent and accountable way, Tambassis said.