registration assessment provisional registration as a pharmacist was introduced as a temporary measure in response to the covid-19 pandemic. it was secured through an application process, and was open to those who had completed their university studies in pharmacy, and pre-registration training year. those who joined the provisional register had not sat a registration assessment beforehand. only those who intended to practise as pharmacists needed to apply. those who were successful in the application could join the register from 1 august 2020. in the pharmacist registration assessment of july 2021, 2625 candidates sat the assessment for the first time, of which 259 were provisionally registered pharmacists. 2189 candidates passed it, of which 172 were provisionally registered pharmacists. the results were announced on 9 september 2021. therefore, 66.4% of those who were provisionally registered pharmacists, and 85.2% of those who were not, passed the exam. the assessment in july was the second opportunity for provisionally registered pharmacists to sit the assessment, the first opportunity having been provided in march 2021. provisionally registered pharmacists did not have to sit the assessment in march 2021; the numbers referred to above are only those who sat it for the first time in july 2021. the results of the july 2021 assessment raise the question as to why those who had spent time in practice as pharmacists - which in some cases may have been almost 1 year at the point of sitting the assessment - would be less likely to pass the exam than those who had not previously practised as pharmacists. it also raises the issue that 33.6% of the provisionally-registered cohort who sat the assessment - those who failed it - had been allowed to practise as pharmacists, and in all likelihood had already done so. this was before sitting an assessment which showed that by the gphc's ordinary standards for entry onto the register, they would not have been fit to do so, since the ordinary requirement is that the person has passed the registration assessment. it is not clear what effect this had on public safety and protection. the gphc has not said whether it has checked for or observed any trends in terms of concerns raised to it in respect of the provisionally-registered cohort, and it does not have oversight or monitor dispensing errors or other pharmacy incidents. a further issue is that the pass mark for the calculations part of the exam - paper one - was 25 out of 40 questions (62.5%). if the questions had been set at a level at which it was expected that candidates would be able to do them, this raises the question as to whether a 62.5% pass rate for this part of the assessment is sufficient; should the extent of the assurance provided to the public by the assessment be that pharmacists may only be able to get calculations right at least 62.5% of the time? these issues were not mentioned by the gphc when it announced the assessment results. potential collusion / failure of integrity of the pharmacist registration exam in june 2022 the gphc's organisation of the june 2022 pharmacist registration exam led to protests outside of its offices on 13 july 2022 and a petition alleging "systematic failure in properly regulating the gphc exam", which had attracted more than 1,500 signatures as at 14 july 2022. the exam was held on 29 june 2022, and resulted in the gphc issuing a formal statement on the same date apologising for the delayed start at 5 out of 113 test centres. however, further issues emerged from student accounts in the days immediately following the assessment. these included reports that students were at test centres for 14 hours, including 8 hours without food; were made to end the test 30 mins early because the centre ‘had to close the building’; candidates being able to use phones with a delayed exam start; loud, distracting noise in some test centres; some trainees being able to look at others' screens during the exam; invigilators not checking calculators for the calculations part of the exam; some candidates being allowed to use a scientific calculator; some questions being almost a page long to read with 3 minutes per question not being enough time; candidates whispering in the exam with no action taken by invigilators; and technical issues whilst attempting the exam with the software used. the gphc is accountable and responsible for how it chooses to conduct the assessment, and the measures it puts in place to ensure it is properly conducted. despite the exam being (in the gphc's own assessment) a crucial measure to protect the public, the gphc decided to allow provisional registration, subject to eligibility criteria, for those who were severely impacted by its own shortcomings in ensuring the proper conduct and management of the assessment, and who as a result did not pass the exam. reflecting its anger at its own shortcomings, it issued a formal statement saying that "we share the sense of anger that many have expressed about the severe delays that some candidates sitting the registration assessment have experienced." the decision was made in part to "going a long way to allaying candidates’ concerns about employment and income" (matters which are not part of its regulatory objective of protecting the public). malversation in relation to provisional registration the gphc's decision in july 2022 to provisionally register as pharmacists individuals who had not passed the june 2022 registration assessment, was based in part on the principles “to support the nhs and community pharmacy by strengthening the workforce at this critical time” and "to minimise blockages or gaps in the pipeline for qualified new registrants to join the profession in 2022 and in the coming years". these principles were commensurate with its earlier statement in relation to provisional registration, first introduced in response to the covid-19 pandemic, that its "final decisions have been guided by a set of principles, including... the importance of maintaining the workforce pipeline". the gphc has no statutory role in “maintaining the workforce pipeline”, or "support the nhs and community pharmacy". these objectives are in direct conflict with and antithetical to the gphc's statutory duty to protect the public; the gphc has a regulatory role in ensuring appropriate standards among those joining the register, and in removing registrants from the register if they are not fit to practise. “maintaining the workforce pipeline” operates against it making decisions to remove registrants from the register, set appropriate standards, and restrict registration only to those who are fit to practise. oversight of health and social care regulators the professional standards authority for health and social care (psa), is an independent body accountable to the uk parliament, which promotes the health and wellbeing of the public and oversees the nine uk healthcare regulators, including general pharmaceutical council. it reviews the gphc's performance annually, but has no power to compel it to do anything.