Last reviewed by Jonathan Meadows (Solicitor, Regulation Resolution) on 21 July 2026.
Quick answer. On 10 June 2026 the General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) published advice for pharmacists who qualify from summer 2026 under the 2021 initial education and training standards and join the register as independent prescribers from day one. The advice tells new prescribers to prescribe only within their knowledge, competence and experience; to agree and document a defined scope of prescribing practice; to put support and mentorship arrangements in place; to hold indemnity that covers their prescribing; and to build prescribing into revalidation. The GPhC is explicit about the stakes: not taking steps to prescribe safely “could result in harm to patients and to your registration being put at risk.”
Summer 2026 marks a structural change in pharmacy in Great Britain. For the first time, pharmacists completing the reformed MPharm and foundation training year join the GPhC register as annotated independent prescribers on the day they register — prescribing is no longer a post-registration qualification earned years into practice. It is a landmark for the profession, and it is also, from a regulator’s perspective, a new risk surface: thousands of prescribers with full legal prescribing rights and, by definition, no post-registration prescribing experience.
That is the context for the advice the GPhC published on 10 June 2026 (read the announcement, or the full advice document). It is short, practical and — read carefully — quite pointed about where responsibility sits. This guide walks through what the advice says, what it expects of you in practice, and why it matters to your registration as well as your patients.
Who the advice applies to
The advice is aimed at pharmacists qualifying from summer 2026 onwards under the GPhC’s 2021 standards for the initial education and training of pharmacists — the first cohorts whose degree and foundation year embed prescribing knowledge, skills and supervised experience throughout. It sits alongside, and does not replace, the GPhC’s standards for pharmacy professionals and its existing guidance for pharmacist prescribers, which continue to apply to every prescribing pharmacist whatever their route to annotation.
Scope of practice: the centre of gravity of the advice
The single most important concept in the advice is your individual scope of prescribing practice. Registration gives you the legal authority to prescribe; it does not make every prescribing decision within your competence. The advice is unambiguous: you must “only prescribe within your knowledge, competence and experience”, and your initial scope derives from your core training — with the specific boundaries agreed with your employer.
The advice identifies situations where a newly qualified prescriber should refer or seek support rather than prescribe, including:
- Higher-risk medicines that require additional safeguards or monitoring.
- Complex conditions needing specialist input.
- Patients with incomplete medical histories, or undifferentiated presentations where the diagnosis is not yet clear.
Perhaps the most practically useful sentence in the document is the acknowledgement that staying in scope “may sometimes mean saying ‘no’ to a prescribing request which you consider to be outside of your current knowledge, skills and competence.” That sentence is your shield. It applies whether the request comes from a patient, a colleague — or your employer.
Document your scope, and document your refusals. A written, regularly reviewed scope of practice — and a note of occasions where you declined to prescribe and why — is precisely the evidence that protects you if a decision is ever questioned. The GPhC expects you to “be able to justify your prescribing decisions”; a contemporaneous record is how you do that.
Growing your scope safely
The advice does not intend new prescribers to stand still. Scope is expected to expand — but through documented, structured learning, using recognised tools such as the RPS competency framework for prescribers, prescribing logs and portfolios, and development pathways. Reviews of your documented scope with a supervisor or mentor should include reflection on incidents and near misses. The pattern the regulator wants to see is deliberate expansion supported by evidence, not drift.
Support and mentorship
The advice expects newly qualified prescribers to have support arrangements in place: clinical supervision, mentors (who can come from other professions in the multidisciplinary team), peer networks, and the support available from professional leadership bodies, unions, indemnifiers and educators. If you are heading into a role — for example a single-pharmacist community setting — where that support is not obviously available, the advice effectively puts you on notice to build it: isolation is itself a risk factor, and “I had no one to ask” is not a defence the regulator will find attractive.
Indemnity: check before you prescribe
The advice is brief but firm on indemnity: your professional indemnity “should cover the risks that may arise as a result of your practice” — which now includes prescribing. Do not assume an existing or employer-provided arrangement automatically extends to independent prescribing, private prescribing, or particular service types. Check the terms, confirm prescribing is covered, and comply with any conditions your indemnifier attaches. Practising without appropriate indemnity is itself a registration issue, separate from any prescribing error.
Private prescribing: extra checks
For pharmacists prescribing privately, the advice flags an often-missed regulatory layer: depending on the service and where you work, registration with the systems regulator may be required — the Care Quality Commission in England, Healthcare Improvement Scotland, or Healthcare Inspectorate Wales. Private and online prescribing models are an area of sustained regulatory attention, and a newly qualified prescriber entering that market should be doubly careful that both the service and their own role within it are properly set up.
Revalidation: build prescribing in from the start
Finally, the advice asks you to make prescribing part of your revalidation from the outset: “revalidation provides a structured opportunity to reflect on your prescribing experience and demonstrate how you are building your competence in this area. It is important to include prescribing in your revalidation submissions.” Treat this as an opportunity rather than a chore — a well-kept prescribing portfolio does triple duty as a revalidation source, a scope-review tool, and protective evidence.
What your employer is expected to do
Notably, the advice addresses employers and managers directly. They are expected to support pharmacists to understand and document their scope, to make sure prescribing requests stay within each individual’s competence, to avoid asking pharmacists to prescribe beyond their current scope — which the GPhC says “could put patient safety at risk” — and to provide supervision, training and services that match the workforce’s actual scope. If you are being pressed to prescribe outside your documented scope, the advice gives you regulator-backed language to push back with, and it is worth doing so in writing. For registrants, the flip side is understanding the fitness to practise risks this new landscape creates.
How we help. Regulation Resolution advises pharmacists at every stage of GPhC proceedings, from investigation letters to fitness to practise hearings and interim orders. If a prescribing decision has been questioned — or you are under pressure to prescribe outside your scope — early advice protects both you and your patients. Contact us in confidence.
Frequently asked questions
What is the GPhC’s new advice for newly qualified pharmacists?
Published on 10 June 2026, it is practical advice for pharmacists who register as independent prescribers from summer 2026 under the 2021 education standards. It covers scope of practice, support and mentorship, prescribing decisions, private prescribing, indemnity, revalidation and employer responsibilities.
Can newly qualified pharmacists prescribe anything once registered?
Legally, an annotated independent prescriber can prescribe within the law; professionally, the GPhC requires them to prescribe only within their individual knowledge, competence and experience. Prescribing outside that scope risks both patient safety and their registration.
Do I have to have a documented scope of prescribing practice?
The advice expects your initial scope to be agreed with your employer and documented, then reviewed and expanded through structured, evidenced learning. A documented scope is also your best protective evidence if a decision is challenged.
Can I refuse to prescribe if my employer asks me to?
Yes. The advice expressly contemplates saying no to prescribing requests outside your current knowledge, skills and competence, and it tells employers not to make such requests. Decline in writing and record your reasons.
What happens if I prescribe outside my competence?
A prescribing error or an out-of-scope decision can lead to a GPhC fitness to practise investigation and, in serious cases, interim restrictions or sanctions. The GPhC’s advice states plainly that failing to prescribe safely could put your registration at risk.