[Ip-health] George Laking: Trade deal widens health care gap

Claire Cassedy claire.cassedy at keionline.org
Mon Jun 22 07:27:54 PDT 2015


http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11466728

George Laking: Trade deal widens health care gap

5:00 AM Thursday Jun 18, 2015

NZ is heading towards a two-tier health system, and it could get a whole
lot worse, writes George Laking.

You are sitting in a doctor's clinic next to someone you care about
greatly, who has just learnt they have incurable cancer. Although there is
a treatment that can help, it offers only a 10 per cent chance to still be
alive in five years. But, says the doctor, there is a new treatment that
can offer 20 per cent in five years, and maybe even a cure.

In New Zealand, how things go from here depends on the effectiveness of
Pharmac, our publicly funded medicines purchasing agency. Perhaps Pharmac
has been able to sign a deal for the new treatment and you can relax. But
if it hasn't, the next thing you will hear is that the medicine can still
be had, for a cost. A typical figure would be $2000 per week for a year, or
sometimes $120,000 for a three-month course (a third option, to take part
in clinical research, is not always available).

And now it's decision time. Perhaps you say, "Let's do this thing!", and
get to work on your credit card, or your mortgage, or community
fundraising, to make it happen.

Or perhaps you are like the other people I have seen in my clinic. A quiet
look at the floor, an exchange of glances with the person next to you ...
"I'm sorry, doctor, that's just not going to be possible." And so we make
do with the resources available.

Why do these things happen? Although Pharmac gets criticised when it can't
strike a deal, the underlying issue is the price of medicines. No one
expects medicines to be free. But why so expensive? The answer is because
that's what people are willing to pay. When you've got them over a barrel
with concern for someone they care about, they are willing to pay quite a
lot.

The mathematics are simple. You have to maximise [unit price] x [units
sold]. The ethics are also simple. As publicly listed companies, major
pharmaceutical manufacturers are obliged to maximise return to their
shareholders.

I'm writing this because of a worry, voiced by many of my colleagues, that
New Zealand is headed towards a two-tier health system. Previously, there
hadn't been a great difference in treatments available in public and
private. But we now see the above scenario more often. In our increasingly
unequal society, there will be many for whom the new price is out of reach.

As doctors and health professionals, we fear the Trans-Pacific Partnership
Agreement will only make things worse. Development of these secret
documents has been one-sided, to the exclusion of civil society and
advantage of commercial interests. It is clear the US pharmaceutical
industry has a particular disdain for Pharmac.

The US Government noted that "industry has expressed serious concern about
the policies and operation of New Zealand's Pharmaceutical Management
Agency (Pharmac), including, among other things, the lack of transparency,
fairness, and predictability of the Pharmac pricing and reimbursement
regime, as well as the negative aspects of the overall climate for
innovative medicines in New Zealand".

Their actual complaint is that Pharmac is a threat to profitability. By
putting a steely-eyed broker into the equation, Pharmac removes the
"you've-got-me-over-a-barrel" psychology of medicines pricing.

Trade Minister Tim Groser promised New Zealanders that any TPPA deal would
keep "the fundamentals of Pharmac intact". But that is only part of the
story.

The recently leaked "TPPA Annex on Transparency and Procedural Fairness for
Pharmaceutical Products and Medical Devices" reveals a fundamentally intact
Pharmac, tied up in a procedural and legalistic straitjacket.

Under the proposed changes, Pharmac would be pressured to make important
decisions within shorter time frames under more intensive input and
scrutiny from industry. There would also be more strenuous requirements to
release information which could be used to challenge decisions through a
review process.

Pharmaceutical companies could respond to Pharmac decisions by suing the
Government in offshore tribunals (investor-state dispute settlements). The
threat of expensive lawsuits would constrain Pharmac's efforts to get the
best deals.

The end result is that Pharmac's ability to deliver would be less.
Inevitably, New Zealand's health system will grow its second tier. You have
to ask why the TPPA's authors would go to the trouble of writing an "annex"
document on pharmaceuticals? Why pharmaceuticals, and why not tractor
tyres, or instant coffee?

For this, New Zealanders can take credit, because the obvious answer is
Pharmac and the constraint it offers on otherwise unfettered pursuit of
profit.

• George Laking is a medical oncologist who works in Auckland and
Northland. He also advises Pharmac. He writes here on behalf of Doctors for
Healthy Trade.

- NZ Herald



More information about the Ip-health mailing list