The Royal Australian College of General Practitioners (RACGP) has called on the Senate to put patients first and pass 60-day dispensing reforms to save patients money and time, and free up GP appointments. This reform is widely supported by patient and consumer groups. It will double the amount of medicines that pharmacists can dispense for stable conditions, on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, from 30 to 60 days – saving patients at least $180 a year and more if they’re taking multiple medicines.

The pharmacy lobby group has fought against this and have moved a disallowance motion in an attempt to stop 60-day dispensing reforms passing the Senate. The Pharmacy Guild of Australia feel that having more medicines on hand could cause overdoses, worsen medicine shortages, prompt pharmacy closures and force chemists to cut home deliveries.

They also feel that pharmacies will incur financial losses. A decline in income and profitability due to less foot traffic will mean less incidental sales. They may also have to shorten trading hours, and there may also be resultant job losses.

One local gentleman The Bugle approached for an opinion said that he felt that there is a range of social benefits for some people to see their pharmacist more regularly (than every 2 months) as it gets them out of the house and gives them the opportunity to meet with people and do some socialising on their trip to the Chemist.

Yet GPs feel that this will make a big difference for some of the most vulnerable people in our communities, who are struggling with rising costs, as well as people in rural areas who have a long drive to their nearest pharmacy.

Dr Nicole Higgins, President of RACGP, says, “As a GP from rural Australia, I know our patients deserve better. 30-day dispensing doesn’t make sense for people who’ve been on the same medications for stable conditions for years. It’s an unnecessary financial pain, and for people in rural and remote areas, frequent drives to the closest pharmacy are a real burden.”

The Bugle asked around town for some local opinion. Nola Tucker wades in, “We are pensioners and already receive a very good deal. I do feel that the advice we both get from our pharmacist is always reliable and informed and in our best interests. It really is not a big deal having to go as often as we do. We do, after all, buy groceries at least once a week and there has been no mention of any inconvenience or extra expense in that process! Imagine only buying the milk and bread not to say meat and fresh vegetables every 60 days! Subsidised medicine is an incredible benefit. If it keeps us healthy and above ground, I do not begrudge our very helpful and hard-working pharmacists their profit.”