Medicines (Amendment No. 3) (Jersey) Law 201-

Information about the publication of Ministerial Decisions

A formal published “Ministerial Decision” is required as a record of the decision of a Minister (or an Assistant Minister where they have delegated authority) as they exercise their responsibilities and powers.

Ministers are elected by the States Assembly and have legal responsibilities and powers as “corporation sole” under the States of Jersey Law 2005 by virtue of their office and in their areas of responsibility, including entering into agreements, and under any legislation conferring on them powers.

An accurate record of “Ministerial Decisions” is vital to effective governance, including:

demonstrating that good governance, and clear lines of accountability and authority, are in place around decisions-making – including the reasons and basis on which a decision is made, and the action required to implement a decision
providing a record of decisions and actions that will be available for examination by States Members, and Panels and Committees of the States Assembly; the public, organisations, and the media; and as a historical record and point of reference for the conduct of public affairs

Ministers are individually accountable to the States Assembly, including for the actions of the departments and agencies which discharge their responsibilities.

The Freedom of Information Law (Jersey) Law 2011 is used as a guide when determining what information is be published. While there is a presumption toward publication to support of transparency and accountability, detailed information may not be published if, for example, it would constitute a breach of data protection, or disclosure would prejudice commercial interest.

A decision made 31 May 2011:

Decision Reference: MD-HSS-2011-0023
Decision Summary Title :	Medicines (Amendment No 3) (Jersey) Law 201-		Date of Decision Summary:	31st May 2011
Decision Summary Author:	Chief Nurse		Decision Summary: Public or Exempt?	Public
Type of Report: Oral or Written?	written		Person Giving Oral Report:
Written Report Title :	Medicines (Amendment No 3) (Jersey) Law 201-		Date of Written Report:	24th May 2011
Written Report Author:	Chief Nurse		Written Report : Public or Exempt?	Public
Subject: Draft Medicines (amendment No 3) ( Jersey) Law 201-
Decision(s): The Minister approved the Draft Medicines (Amendment No 3) (Jersey) Law 201- and determined that it should be lodged au Greffe as soon as possible.
Reason(s) for decision: The object of this amendment to the Medicines (Jersey) Law 1995, is to enable the Minister for Health and Social Services to specify a wider range of practitioners that may prescribe medicinal products. Currently the Minister may specify whether doctors, dentists or veterinary surgeons are to be appropriate practitioners for prescribing medicinal products under Article 57 of the Law. After the amendment the Minister will be able to specify doctors, dentist, veterinary surgeons, registered nurses, certified midwives or other practitioners or other persons as appropriate practitioners. It is important to note that the amendment to the law is the enabler only. Secondary legislation is required to implement the Law and to ensure that appropriate safeguards are in place in line with the statutory requirements as set out by the regulatory bodies such as the Nursing and Midwifery Council and the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency. Article 110 of the Medicines Law provides that before making any Order the minister shall consult with the Medicines Advisory Council (MAC) The amendments have been forwarded to the members of the MAC and feedback has been in support of the amendments.
Resource Implications: None for the amendment to the Law
Action required: Request to the Greffier of the States to ensure that the draft Medicines ( amendment no 3) Law is lodged forthwith and is provisionally listed for debate by the States Assembly at the earliest opportunity
Signature:		Position: Minister for Health and Social Services
Date Signed:		Date of Decision (If different from Date Signed):

Medicines (Amendment No. 3) (Jersey) Law 201-

Amendments to the Medicines (Jersey) Law 1995

Introduction

Further amendments to the Medicines (Jersey) Law 1995 are necessary to enable a legal framework for appropriate practitioners other than Doctors and Dentists the opportunity to independently prescribe medicine in the future.

Jersey is not unique in facing similar challenges to other Westernised health care models in terms of the need to deliver safe, cost effective and appropriate health care. Effective medicines management contributes to a significant proportion of the overall healthcare budget. Based on research within other Westernised economies and in particular England, it has been demonstrated that specialist and advanced, appropriately educated non medical prescribers have offered an effective solution to this challenge.

Context

Over the last 15 years a series of changes to United Kingdom Medicines Law have seen appropriate practitioners, which include nurses, pharmacists, midwives, physiotherapists gain full prescribing rights identical to their medical & dental colleagues. This has enabled these appropriate practitioners to safely reconfigure their roles within their professional scopes of practice, to provide comprehensive medicines management.

The amendment to the Medicines (Jersey) Law 1995 will enable a similar legal framework to support future opportunities to develop this area of practice, within a governance framework. All aspects of prescribing practice will similarly be regulated by individual professional regulatory bodies.

The envisaged benefits to the Jersey Island community include improved patient access to treatment, enhanced patient care, maintaining and improving patient experience, enhanced professional satisfaction and application of professional skills, building interprofessional working, enabling effective use of medical staff time and maintaining public health standards.

Future specialist and advanced non medical health professionals will thus be well placed to develop new models of healthcare delivery in line with strategic projected healthcare trends. This amendment will ensure recommendations are met in the Island Plan, The Public Health strategy and the overall organisational development of Health & Social Services. The preliminary data from KPMG, similarly supports Non Medical Prescribing as fundamental in contributing to future health care provision, and within this medicines management, which is fit for purpose and practice.

Other perceived benefits include management of chronic disease, healthcare delivery to an aging population, specialist aspects of care including mental health & substance misuse, sexual & reproductive health, management of minor illness and injury and public health education and promotion. The benefits are envisaged for both primary and secondary care settings where medicines management is integral.

This report has been prepared following consultation with the Medicines Advisory Council, Medicines Governance Committee, Senior Nurse Forum, & Nurse Educational Team. The changes currently being proposed are summarised below and have been subject to detailed legal advice from the Law Officers’ Department and a comprehensive human rights audit.

Effects of the Law amendments

Enabling appropriate practitioners to undertake independent prescribing within their professional scope of professional practice, assuming full prescribing rights as non –medical prescribing practitioners.

Implementation

A further report will follow which will detail the implementation plan.

Financial & Manpower Implications

There are no financial or manpower consequences regarding amending the legislation.

European Convention on Human Rights

The Minister for Health and Social Services has signed a statement to the effect that, in accordance with the provisions of Medicines (Amendment no.3) (Jersey) law 2011, the provisions of the projet de loi to be lodged au Greffe are compatible with the Convention rights.

May 2011

References

Berry, D, Courtenay, M, Bersellini, E. Attitudes towards, and information needs in relation to supplementary nurse prescribing in the UK: an empirical study. Journal of Clinical Nursing 2006; 15, 22-28.

Bradley E. & Nolan P. Impact of nurse prescribing: a qualitative study.

Journal of Advanced Nursing 2007; 59 (2), 120-128

Brooks N, Otway C, Rashid C, Kilty E, Maggs C. The patients’ view; the benefits and

limitations of nurse prescribing. British Journal of Community Nursing 2001; 6: 342-348

Carey, N.J., Stenner, K.L , Courtenay M. Stakeholder views on the implementation of nurse prescribing in dermatology services. Journal of Clinical Nursing 2009; 19, 498-506.

Courtenay, M., Stenner, K., Carey, N (2009). Nurses’ and doctors’ views about the prescribing programme, Nurse Prescribing, 7 (9), 412-417

Courtenay, M & Carey, N. J (2009). Nurse prescribing by children’s nurses: views of doctors and clinical leads in one specialist children’s hospital. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 18, 2668-2675.

Courtenay M, Carey N. (2008). Nurse Independent Prescribing and Nurse Supplementary Prescribing: Findings from a national questionnaire survey. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 61 (4), 403-2 41

Courtenay, M., Gordon, J (2009). A survey of therapy areas in which nurses prescribe and CPD needs. Nurse Prescribing 7 (6) 255-262

DoH (2001). Patients to get quicker access to medicines

(Press Release). London: DoH.

DoH (2002).Supplementary prescribing. London: DoH.

DoH (2005) Written Ministerial Statement on the expansion of independent nurse

prescribing and introduction of pharmacists independent prescribing, DoH, London.

DoH (2009). AHPs and medicine supply mechanisms scoping project. London: DoH

Drennan, J., Naughton, C., Allen, D., Hyde, A., Felle, P., O’Boyle, K., Yreacy, P., Butler, M. National Independent Evaluation of the Nurse and Midwife Prescribing Initiative. Dublin: University College Dublin 2009

Hall, J., Cantrill, J., Noyce, P (2006). Why don’t trained community nurse prescribers prescribe? Journal of Clinical Nursing 15, 403-412

Harrison, A. Mental health service users’ views of nurse prescribing. Nurse Prescribing 2003; 1 (2), 78-85.

HO (200&). Supplementary prescribing of CDs by nurses and pharmacists. London: HO

Jones, M., Bennett, J., Lucas, B., Miller, D., Gray, R (2007). Mental health nurse supplementary prescribing: experiences of mental health nurses, psychiatrists and patients. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 59 (5), 499-496.,

Lomas, C (2009). Nurse prescribing: The next steps. Nursing Standard, 14th July.

MHRA (2009). Revised statement on medical and non-medical prescribing and mixing medicines in clinical practice. London: MHRA

NMC (2006) Standards of Proficinecy for Nursing & Midwife Prescribers

Page, D., Grant, G., Maybury, C. Introducing nurse prescribing in a memory clinic.

Dementia 2008; 7 (1), 139-160