August 2007
Dear BPG Member,
This is the second time I am writing since the sad death of Jane
Morrison. We still have no Administrator, though the team at the
BAUS office are between them providing support. This time it is
to get your views on the future of the Group please.
The BPG remains since its inception in 1973 the only organisation
which brings together scientists and clinicians interested in
all forms of prostatic disease, and offers two scientific meetings
per year. More recently we have been keen to combine with the
voices of patient support groups and charities in calling for
more funding for prostate cancer basic research. However the BPG
has some financial pressures in that the running costs are at
present considerably higher than the income from Membership subscriptions,
leaving us with the pressure to cover the deficit by profit from
our meetings. Unfortunately, not every meeting makes a profit,
since this depends upon the income from sponsors and registration
fees versus the costs of hiring the venue etc. Suffice it to say
that at present the BPG is not in a good financial state.
The Executive Committee is exploring various options, one of
which is to increase Members annual subscriptions to £100
for clinicians and £50 for scientists (excluding trainees).
To compensate for any increase we would look at improving the
discount for meeting registration fees. I would like to know if
each of you would be happy to continue to support the BPG on this
basis?
In addition, I would value your opinion on whether the BPG is
a viable organisation in the face of the proliferation of other
organisations with overlapping interests, and the changes in the
training of junior urologists/oncologists? There is a parallel
organization, the British Breast Group, which like the BPG exists
solely to organize meetings, and is extremely successful. This
reflects that, in the arena of breast cancer research, there is
still felt to be a need for a national meeting devoted to breast
cancer research, organized like the BPG despite the other meetings
which exist. Is this true of prostate research also, or are the
needs of our scientific community adequately met by the other
existing UK meetings? In the words of our Chairman Professor Malcolm
Mason “If the BPG didn’t exist, would you invent it
today?”
I would be very grateful if you could spare a few minutes to
reply.
Please
click here to provide a response
Yours Sincerely
Mr Simon F Brewster, Secretary, British Prostate Group
|
