The Royal Pharmaceutical Society (RPS) English Pharmacy Board have stated that the government’s proposed public health funding cut of £200m could potentially hinder the growth of healthy living schemes provided by community pharmacists and may also increase demands on NHS and social care services.

At present, over 1000 Healthy Living Pharmacies in England are commissioned to offer services that improve people’s health, reduce health inequalities and promote healthy behaviour, while working with other healthcare providers. However, the government is looking at reducing public health grants to local authorities for 2015–2016 to help reduce the deficit. The RPS English Board opposes the cut and calls for a reversal of the decision. They instead request that the grant be protected against any future reductions.

A spokesperson for the Department of Health explains, “Difficult decisions need to be made right across government to reduce the deficit and ensure the sustainability of our public services. That’s why we have been consulting on how best to deliver these savings in a way that minimises any impact on services. We are now considering the responses.”

However, Sandra Gidley, Board chair and community pharmacist, states: “The RPS English Board would like to see the government strengthening public health provision rather than curtailing spending in this vital area, enabling the skills of community and ‘healthy living’ pharmacies to fulfill their key role in supporting the public’s health. Community pharmacies situated in convenient locations are an important healthcare provider for people, particularly those living in areas of high levels of deprivation and ill health. Skilled Healthy Living Pharmacy teams are providing a very positive impact on supporting healthier communities as well as providing cost-effective support to GP surgeries and other areas of the NHS.”

She continues: “The RPS English Board has heard that the proposed cut to public health funding is already preventing the launch of further pharmacy-led healthy living schemes to the detriment of public health. We want to see funding for public health provision reinforced to support existing schemes and enable the desired expansion of this successful and cost-effective model of integrated primary care provision to progress.”