In a landmark decision, the Royal Pharmaceutical Society (RPS) has announced its intention to transition into a Royal College and register as a charity. This move represents a significant shift for the organisation, which serves as the professional leadership body for pharmacists and pharmaceutical scientists across Great Britain.
The announcement, the result of an 18-month independent review of the RPS’s governance and structure, marks a major step in the evolution of pharmacy leadership.
To delve deeper into the motivations, implications, and future of the profession, we sat down with Jonathan Burton, MBE, Chair of the RPS Scottish Board.
Jonathan, RPS is proposing to become a Royal College and register as a charity. This is a huge change for the organisation. What motivated this, and why now?
“It’s certainly a significant move, but one that has been carefully considered. Pharmacy as a profession has evolved rapidly in recent years—especially in terms of our clinical roles and public visibility. We’ve taken on more responsibilities, and it’s crucial that the organization representing pharmacists evolves with the profession.
“This transition will align us more closely with other Royal Colleges, giving us a stronger platform to advocate for the profession, both within the healthcare system and with policymakers. Becoming a charity brings added transparency and accountability, which is something we’re very keen on. It’s a change that allows us to better serve our members, the public, and, ultimately, the patients who rely on safe and effective medicines.”
The changes to the RPS’s publishing arm, Pharmaceutical Press, are a major part of the restructuring. Could you explain what’s happening and why it’s significant?
“Absolutely, the changes to the publishing arm are a critical aspect of this transition. Pharmaceutical Press has always been a core part of the RPS, providing essential resources like the British National Formulary (BNF) and Martindale: The Complete Drug Reference. However, as we move towards becoming a Royal College and a registered charity, it’s important to separate the commercial aspects of the organisation from the charitable functions.
“By establishing Pharmaceutical Press Ltd as a wholly owned subsidiary, we ensure that the publishing business remains accountable but operates separately from the main charitable body. This creates a clear distinction between our membership functions—such as education, professional support, and advocacy—and our commercial activities. The subsidiary will continue to generate income, which will then be reinvested back into the charity to support the broader work of the Royal College. In essence, it’s about maintaining financial sustainability while ensuring transparency and regulatory compliance as a charity.
“It’s also important to note the enormous contribution that the Pharmaceutical Press makes to the safe & effective use of medicines. It really is a huge depository of pharmaceutical knowledge, and that’s the way we see the business; it’s a knowledge business. The profession should be incredibly proud of what we contribute to safe medicine use via our publications like the BNF. The RPS, and hopefully the Royal College of Pharmacy in the future, really is the natural home for this knowledge base. The challenge in the future is how to continue to share that knowledge with the healthcare community going forward in an increasingly digitised world. These are complex challenges that Pharmaceutical Press needs to continue to explore and deliver on.”
The idea of separating the publishing arm from the membership function isn’t new. You’ve been involved with the RPS for a long time—why is this happening now? Couldn’t this have been done earlier?
“That’s a fair question, Johnny, and in some ways, you’re right—this has been discussed before. The challenge has always been finding the right time to make such a significant change, especially when the publishing arm has historically been a strong financial contributor to the organisation. However, becoming a charity forces us to re-evaluate our structure in a way that’s long overdue.
“Operating as a charity means we need to ensure full transparency and good governance across all areas of the RPS. Having a separate publishing arm that functions as a limited company allows us to focus on the commercial side of things without it interfering with our primary mission, which is to support and represent the profession. It’s about creating a structure that allows us to be more accountable and focused on our charitable objectives, while also maintaining a sustainable business model through the publishing arm.”
You mentioned that as a charity, the RPS will need to operate under stricter governance. Can you explain what being a charity will mean for the RPS in terms of regulation and accountability?
“Becoming a charity brings a whole new level of accountability, which is something we welcome. Charities are regulated by organizations such as the Charity Commission in England and Wales, and OSCR (the Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator) in Scotland. These bodies ensure that charities operate in the public interest and adhere to strict governance standards.
“In practical terms, this means the RPS will need to meet rigorous financial and operational standards. We’ll have a board of trustees responsible for overseeing the charitable activities, and they will be held to high standards of transparency and accountability. It also means that everything we do, from our educational programs to our advocacy efforts, must be clearly aligned with our charitable objectives.”
I suppose with this shift to charity status, there’s also a level of scrutiny that comes with it. There’s a perception that charities need to be even more transparent with their operations, especially when it comes to finances and decision-making. Is the RPS ready for this level of scrutiny, particularly when it comes to how funds are allocated and how decisions are made?
“You’re absolutely right, Johnny, the level of scrutiny will increase, but that’s something we embrace. As a professional leadership body, we’ve always strived to operate with transparency, but becoming a charity takes that to the next level. We’ll need to be clear about how we’re using funds—whether it’s through our educational programs, member support, or advocacy—and how those funds are directly benefiting the profession and, ultimately, patient care.
“For example, the income generated by Pharmaceutical Press Ltd will be clearly ring-fenced and reinvested into the charitable activities of the RPS. That income will help support our educational initiatives, professional development frameworks, and other programs designed to enhance pharmacy practice. Every pound we generate and spend will be scrutinized to ensure it aligns with our charitable mission, and I think that’s a good thing—it means we’re being held to the highest standards, which is exactly where we should be.”
It’s an interesting move, but I have to ask—why wasn’t this done sooner? It feels like this could have happened years ago. Do you think the RPS has been too slow to adapt, especially given the rapid changes in healthcare and the demands on pharmacists? I mean, there’s been talk of credentialing and advanced practice for years, but it hasn’t always felt tangible to the everyday pharmacist. Given the work of the UK Pharmacy Leadership Body, could this delay be seen as the RPS following rather than leading the profession?
“That’s a valid challenge, Johnny, and I’d be lying if I said there hasn’t been a sense of urgency behind this. However, these discussions have been going on internally for a long time. The idea of moving towards becoming a Royal College wasn’t something we rushed into—it required a thorough review of our structure, our governance, and, most importantly, how we serve our members.
“You’re right that some parts of the profession may have felt that change has been slow, but I’d argue that careful, thoughtful evolution is necessary. We didn’t want to make superficial changes that wouldn’t stand the test of time. Credentialing and advanced practice, for instance, are complex areas that needed a solid framework, and I think we’re now in a much stronger position to push these initiatives forward with real momentum.
“Externally, yes, the formation of bodies like the UK Pharmacy Leadership Body (UKPLAB) probably did push us to reflect even more on our role. But this move isn’t reactive—it’s been planned for a long time. That said, the profession is evolving, and we need to move with it. The time feels right now.”
The term ‘Royal College of Pharmacy’ sounds prestigious, but I have to wonder—how inclusive is it? There’s a concern that this might alienate certain groups within the profession, particularly pharmacy technicians, who may feel sidelined by the emphasis on ‘pharmacy’ rather than ‘pharmacists.’ Could this name create division at a time when we need more collaboration across the pharmacy team? Pharmacy Technicians currently have a thriving professional body of their own after all.
“That’s an important point, and we did have a lot of discussions about the name. However, the term ‘pharmacy’ was deliberately chosen to be inclusive. It represents not just pharmacists, but pharmaceutical scientists and others involved in the safe and effective use of medicines. We didn’t want to limit our scope to just pharmacists because, as you’ve said, healthcare—and particularly pharmacy—is a team effort.
“It’s also important to note that pharmacy technicians and other roles within the pharmacy team have their own representative bodies. Our aim is not to dominate but to collaborate. We want to foster a sense of respect across the profession. Becoming a Royal College isn’t about creating division—it’s about enhancing the profession as a whole. We’re committed to building bridges and strengthening relationships across the board, including with pharmacy technicians, prescribers, and healthcare professionals in other fields.
That’s encouraging to hear, but we’ve seen other healthcare professions struggle with inclusion once they adopt the ‘Royal College’ status. The name carries a certain level of prestige, but it can also come across as exclusive or elitist. How can the RPS, as a Royal College, ensure it remains approachable and relevant to the everyday pharmacist, particularly those who may feel disconnected from the profession’s leadership? Will this change really resonate with the average pharmacist working behind the counter or in a hospital ward?
“I completely understand where you’re coming from. The term ‘Royal College’ does carry prestige, but our aim is to use that status to better represent the entire profession, including the everyday pharmacist. The challenges pharmacists face on the ground—whether in community settings, hospitals, or GP practices—are what drive us.
“We don’t want to be seen as an elite or distant organisation. Instead, we want to use the platform that comes with being a Royal College to advocate for pharmacists more effectively, to push for better working conditions, and to ensure pharmacists get the recognition they deserve for their clinical expertise.
“The impact might not be immediate—no one will wake up the day after the vote and see radical changes in their day-to-day work. But over time, the benefits will become clear. A stronger voice with policymakers, better career support through credentialing, and more opportunities for professional development—those are the tangible outcomes we’re working towards.”
Collaboration is clearly a big part of this shift. But if we’re being honest, collaboration within the pharmacy profession hasn’t always been the easiest thing to achieve. The various representative bodies often operate in silos, and we’re not always great at sharing resources or working together. How do you envision a Royal College facilitating more effective collaboration, both within pharmacy and across healthcare?
“You’re absolutely right, Johnny. Historically, collaboration hasn’t always been easy, and pharmacy as a profession can be quite siloed at times. But that’s exactly why we think now is the time to make this change. A Royal College structure gives us a more solid foundation to foster collaboration—not just within pharmacy, but across healthcare professions.
“We’re not looking to become a dominant force or overshadow other organisations. Instead, we want to work with them, respecting their expertise and contribution. Whether it’s working more closely with special interest groups, other pharmacy bodies, or even Royal Colleges from other healthcare professions, our goal is to be more collaborative. We’ve already started that process, but becoming a Royal College gives us more leverage to make those partnerships stronger and more effective.”
That’s all well and good in theory, but what does collaboration really look like in practice? I mean, we’ve had the General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) and the RPS split for over a decade, and while both bodies are important, there’s a sense that the profession has become fragmented. Is there a real appetite for deeper collaboration, and how do we move from simply coordinating efforts to genuinely sharing resources and working towards common goals?
“It’s a tough challenge, no doubt. Moving from coordination to true collaboration is something we need to actively work on. There’s a lot of talk about working together, but the reality is that we haven’t always done it as well as we could. I think part of the solution is creating a culture where collaboration becomes the norm.
“As a Royal College, we’ll have more opportunities to bring people together. That could mean working on joint frameworks for credentialing, sharing research, or developing more integrated policies. We’re not aiming to dictate terms to other organisations, but we do want to lead by example in showing that collaboration is not just possible but essential for the profession’s future.”
This is all potentially big news for the profession. I wonder—what’s the real impact on pharmacists working on the ground? Will this change bring tangible benefits, or is it more of a symbolic shift? You mentioned before that it won’t be an overnight transformation, but how do we ensure that this transition translates into real improvements for pharmacists in their everyday roles?
“I appreciate your candor, Johnny, and it’s a valid concern. We need to manage expectations—this isn’t a change that will fix everything overnight. However, it’s about laying the groundwork for long-term benefits. The Royal College status will give us more influence to advocate for changes that matter to pharmacists, whether that’s around pay, working conditions, or recognition of clinical roles.
“What excites me most is the potential for better career development pathways. We’re already seeing progress in the areas of credentialing and professional frameworks, but becoming a Royal College gives us more clout to push these initiatives forward. Over time, this should lead to more structured support for pharmacists, especially those working in complex, high-pressure environments like community and hospital pharmacies. It’s about creating the right infrastructure to support the profession as it grows.”
Let’s talk logistics. What does the process look like from here? What do RPS members need to know about the vote, and what’s required for these changes to move forward?
“We’re aiming to hold the vote in early 2025. For the proposals to pass, we need two-thirds of those who vote to be in favour. Between now and then, we’ll be holding roadshows and online events across Great Britain to engage with our members, provide detailed information, and gather feedback.
“We want this to be a democratic and transparent process. Members need to understand the full scope of what we’re proposing and what it will mean for the future of the profession. It’s a significant change, and we want as many members as possible to be involved in the discussion and ultimately in the vote.”
To wrap up, what’s your final message to pharmacists who might be on the fence about this transition? Why should they support this move to become a Royal College?
“I would say to any pharmacist who’s unsure—this is about the future of the profession. It’s about ensuring that pharmacy has a strong, unified voice that can advocate effectively for our role in healthcare. Becoming a Royal College is about taking our place alongside other medical and healthcare professions and making sure that pharmacists are recognized for their expertise and contribution.
“We’re not doing this for prestige—we’re doing it to better serve our members, improve patient care, and ensure that pharmacists have the support they need to thrive. This is an opportunity for the profession to take a big step forward, and we want everyone to be part of that journey.”
The RPS will be holding a series of engagement events across Great Britain starting in October to provide further details and gather feedback on the proposed changes. Members are encouraged to attend and share their views. The vote on these proposals is expected to take place in early 2025.
For more information and to stay updated, visit the RPS website.