Politics

ACT's Pharmacy First policy would expand pharmacist scope, scrap ownership cap and proximity rules

Hana SinclairPublished 3d ago4 min readBased on 5 sources
Reading level
ACT's Pharmacy First policy would expand pharmacist scope, scrap ownership cap and proximity rules
Photo by Doug Mountain / CC0

ACT New Zealand has announced a "Pharmacy First" policy that would expand the range of conditions pharmacists can treat, remove the five-pharmacy ownership cap, scrap proximity requirements blocking new pharmacies from opening, and introduce 24-hour prescription collection through secure electronic lockers.

Party leader David Seymour unveiled the package in Auckland on Thursday. The policy was published on ACT's website under the title "Your pharmacist should be your first stop" and distributed as a press release via Scoop ACT Party Scoop. RNZ and the New Zealand Herald both reported the announcement on 6 August RNZ NZ Herald.

ACT's proposal builds on existing government changes that already allow pharmacists to treat urinary tract infections, conjunctivitis, chest infections and ear infections. The party said it would expand the Minor Ailments Scheme to include additional conditions that pharmacists are trained to assess and treat, and would also let pharmacists manage stable long-term conditions RNZ.

On the regulatory side, ACT would explicitly remove the five-pharmacy ownership cap. The Government's own October 2025 Regulatory Impact Statement acknowledged that the cap was "not being meaningfully followed," according to ACT. The party would also remove proximity requirements that currently block new pharmacies from opening near existing ones. Under the policy, any pharmacy meeting safety and quality standards could open RNZ.

The third plank is a secure electronic locker system for prescription collection. Patients managing stable long-term conditions would be able to collect pre-dispensed medicines at any time using a digital code. Seymour called the e-locker plan a practical fix for rural communities in particular. The lockers would not be used to dispense controlled drugs, refrigerated medicines, or medications requiring monitoring RNZ ACT Party.

The ownership cap and proximity rules are long-standing features of New Zealand's pharmacy regulatory architecture, designed historically to preserve the owner-operator model and prevent clustering. The Government's own Regulatory Impact Statement conceding that the ownership cap is not being meaningfully enforced gives ACT a straightforward line of argument: the rules are already not working as intended, so removing them formalises the status quo rather than introducing radical change. Whether that framing holds up under scrutiny from community pharmacy operators who have invested on the basis of the existing framework is a separate question the policy announcement does not address.

Similarly, expanding pharmacist scope of practice into long-term condition management touches on workforce capacity and funding mechanisms that the policy announcement does not detail. Pharmacists can already treat a defined set of minor ailments under existing arrangements; extending that further into chronic condition management would likely require new funding protocols, clinical governance frameworks, and integration with general practice. The announcement is a statement of intent rather than a fully costed implementation plan.

The e-locker proposal is the most operationally concrete element. By restricting it to pre-dispensed medicines for stable conditions and excluding controlled drugs, refrigerated items and medicines requiring monitoring, the policy narrows the scope to a low-risk corridor. Whether the infrastructure investment falls on pharmacies, the government, or a mix of both is not specified in the announcement.

ACT's pharmacy policy sits within a broader health policy landscape in which the current coalition government has already moved to expand pharmacist prescribing and minor ailment treatment. ACT is positioning itself to extend that trajectory further and faster, while also deregulating pharmacy ownership and location rules that the Regulatory Impact Statement has already flagged as effectively non-functional.