Minutes of a Meeting of the Clinical Governance Committee held

More documents

Recommendations

Info

PPC[M]2007/15 e) Demographic information regarding post code sectors G1.2, G4.0 and G31.2; f) Patterns of public transport; and g) NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde plans for future development of services. DECISION The Committee noted that this application had previously been presented in August 2007. The Committee had deferred consideration of the application on the grounds that a previous application had been approved for premises in the same parade of shops, and was awaiting decision by the National Appeals Panel (NAP). The NAP, at a hearing on 25 th September 2007 had determined that the application was not necessary or desirable as the provision of services to the neighbourhood was adequate. Having considered the evidence available to it and the PPC’s observation from the site visit, the PPC had to decide first the question of the neighbourhood in which the premises to which the application related, were located. The Committee noted the neighbourhood previously defined, and that defined by the National Appeals Panel. The Committee noted that the NAPs neighbourhood differed from its own only along the southern boundary. The PPC agreed that this southern boundary was logical. Taking all information into consideration, the Committee considered that the neighbourhood should be defined as follows: North: the M8 motorway. West: North Hanover Street. East: Castle Street and High Street. South: George Street. Adequacy of Existing Provision of Pharmaceutical Services and Necessity or Desirability Having reached that decision, the PPC was then required to consider the adequacy of pharmaceutical services in that neighbourhood, and whether the granting of the application was necessary or desirable in order to secure adequate provision of pharmaceutical services in that neighbourhood. The Committee noted that they had not been informed of any changes to the area in the meantime that would cause them to depart from the recent decision arrived at by the NAP, nor had the Applicant provided evidence that the situation in the neighbourhood had changed to the 16 of 21
PPC[M]2007/15 extent that the Committee would overturn this most recent decision. In accordance with the statutory procedure the Chemist Contractor Members of the Committee Scott McCammon and Alasdair MacIntyre and Board Officers were excluded from the decision process: DECIDED/- The PPC was satisfied that the provision of pharmaceutical services at the premises of the Applicant was not necessary or desirable in order to secure adequate provision of pharmaceutical services in the neighbourhood in which the premises were located by persons whose names are included in the Pharmaceutical List and in the circumstances, it was the unanimous decision of the PPC that the application be refused. The Chemist Contractor Members of the Committee Scott McCammon and Alasdair MacIntyre and Board Officers rejoined the meeting at this stage. iii) Case No: PPC/INCL06/2007 Ms Farzana Rasool & Mr Aziz Rasool, 111 Cambridge Street, Glasgow G3.6 The Committee was asked to consider an application submitted by Ms Farzana Rasool and Mr Aziz Rasool, to provide general pharmaceutical services from premises situated at 111 Cambridge Street, Glasgow G3.6 under Regulation 5(10) of the National Health Service (Pharmaceutical Services) (Scotland) Regulations 1995 as amended. The Committee had to determine whether the granting of the application was necessary or desirable to secure the adequate provision of pharmaceutical services in the neighbourhood in which the applicant’s proposed premises were located. The Committee, having previously been circulated with all the papers regarding the application from Ms & Mr Rasool, agreed that the application could be considered based on the written representations received, and that an oral hearing was not required. Prior to the meeting, the Panel had visited the vicinity surrounding 111 Cambridge Street, Glasgow G3.6, the pharmacies, GP surgeries and facilities in the immediate neighbourhood, and the wider area. The PPC was required and did take into account all relevant factors concerning the issues of:- a) Neighbourhood; 17 of 21 Contractor Services Supervisor
Page 1 and 2: PPC[M]2007/15 PRESENT: IN ATTENDANC
Page 3 and 4: PPC[M]2007/15 questions. The Intere
Page 5 and 6: PPC[M]2007/15 separate methadone/ne
Page 7 and 8: PPC[M]2007/15 that the application
Page 9 and 10: PPC[M]2007/15 Professor McKie, Mr T
Page 11 and 12: PPC[M]2007/15 There were no questio
Page 13 and 14: PPC[M]2007/15 g) Additional informa
Page 15: PPC[M]2007/15 The Committee was ask
Page 19 and 20: PPC[M]2007/15 The Committee noted t
Page 21: PPC[M]2007/15 The Committee having

Minutes of a Meeting of the Clinical Governance Committee held

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?