A former Royal Pharmaceutical Society president has voiced concerns over the way the organisation is progressing towards seeking Royal College status.

RPS chief executive Paul Bennett has responded, saying no final decisions have yet been made and it is important that the views of members are heard. “Assembly will review the comments and views from members at a special meeting on 11 February.”

In an open letter to the RPS chief executive, the president and Assembly members, Mr Soni affirmed his support of the RPS’ decision to seek Royal College status and become a charity but challenged the transparency of the process.

“This is critical as the engagement of the profession and trust in the outcome is essential if it is to be the success it needs to be,” he said. “There is a substantial risk that, as with other decisions made by the Society in the recent past, this move is seen as decided by the few with disregard to those to whom it matters.”

The Assembly has made decisions without having engaged the membership in those discussions, he alleged. “The papers available for the open part of the Assembly meeting were comprehensive, apart from the section on the proposed governance changes. There was a paper regarding the process for the special resolution vote but nothing else.

“Given the changes proposed I would have thought the governance changes would have been fully thought through and discussed as part of the ongoing dialogue with members.

“This would have enabled Assembly members to have time to consider their views on any proposals and for them to seek input from members. This is particularly important when those voting have a clear conflict of interest with any decision made.”

Mr Soni challenged chief executive Paul Bennett on why he had decided to make this a verbal item rather than one based on a detailed paper outlining reasons and options for change. He also said there should have been greater clarity on the actual timelines for the special resolution vote.

Mr Soni moved on to question the decision to extend the terms of the officers and Board chairs and vice chairs.

“Firstly, can you confirm that they all absented themselves from the vote with their conflict of interest, or if they didn’t, why not? Secondly, in terms of the Board chairs/ vice chairs, were the National Board members involved in that decision as they are elected within the National Boards and not by Assembly,” Mr Soni said.

“Thirdly, the implication, regardless of the correctness of the process followed, is that this is effectively because of the move to being a charity, and therefore a consequence of the Charity Commission. In that regard could you point to where that is articulated by the Charity Commission?

As the membership has yet to vote in support of for the Society to become a charity extending the terms of officers “feels presumptuous” Mr Soni said. “As there is no confirmed timeline for that vote, it becomes potentially self-serving rather than good governance.

“Even if the vote is in favour, it is unclear how long completing this process will take … does this mean that the entire governance of the organisation will stagnate until completion?”

Mr Soni concluded by saying that “the decisions made by the RPS Assembly are significantly flawed …. therefore I ask that the Assembly overturn the decisions taken and revisit them after the vote, which should include a vote on whether members support these proposals, stating the reasons for and against any decision”.

Responding to Mr Soni’s letter, RPS chief executive Paul Bennett said: “I’d like to thank members who have responded to our request for comment on this issue via the gazetting process. No final decision has yet been made and it’s important that the views of our members are heard.

“Assembly will review the comments and views from members at a special meeting to consider this item alone on 11 February. They will make a final decision on the date for the rescheduled elections based on member feedback and final discussions. As usual, we will publish the outcome of Assembly’s considerations soon after the meeting.”