|
THE
Senate, particularly its members who “weakened” the
cheaper-medicines bill, must account for its refusal to
consider, negotiate or even compromise on the
generics-only provision, a militant legislator said
Monday.
Party-list Rep. Risa Hontiveros of Akbayan also said the
Senate should also fully disclose to the public why it
wanted the generics-only provision dropped.
“The
House panel had to endure stonewalling from the Senate,
in particular from Sen. Pia Cayetano, who obstinately
insisted on unreasonable conditions in exchange for the
retention of the generics-only provision,” said
Hontiveros.
“Worse,
they made it appear as if the promotion of generics is
such a bad thing,” she added.
Hontiveros said the arguments the Senate panel raised
against generic drugs echoed the same line carried by
pharmaceutical companies and physicians.
“It is
not true that there was no lobby against the
generics-only provision. Big pharmaceutical companies
worked with doctors to block the generics-only
provision,” she revealed.
Hontiveros claimed that pharmaceutical giants like
Pfizer, Wyeth, Eli Lilly and GlaxoSmithKline, which are
all members of the lobby group Pharmaceutical Research
and Manufacturers of America, lobbied the US Trade
Representative’s Office to take a stand against the
bill, including the generics-only provision.
“Predictably, the
US
trade representative talked to some legislators last
December to lobby against the bill,” she said.
She said
that the
US
pharmaceutical lobby group said that the generics-only
provision “would severely affect market access for
innovative brand-name drugs.”
“This is
untrue. It is the opposite case that is happening in the
Philippines, where brand-name drugs dominate the market
because of the collusion between doctors and pharmas. A
generics-only prescription is necessary to break one of
the reasons medicines are expensive in the country,”
Hontiveros said.
Speaker
Prospero Nograles said on Sunday the House may defer
ratification of the bicameral conference committee
report of the proposed cheaper medicines bill until
House leaders are fully satisfied that the law will
truly guarantee cheaper medicines.
Nograles
made the announcement days after several legislators
assailed the “drastic weakening” of the measure with the
removal by the Senate contingent of the proposed
drug-price regulatory board and the generics-only
provisions.
He gave
the House contingent the free hand on whether or not to
go for its ratification.
“They
[members of the House contingent] now have full autonomy
to agree to go or not to go. I trust our bicam members
completely and I will support their decision,” said
Nograles.
He said
adding that despite minor disagreements, the members of
the panel are expected to act as one group in dealing
with their Senate counterpart.
Nograles
said he is now giving House contingent led by Kabalikat
ng Malayang Pilipino Rep. Antonio Alvarez of Palawan
full autonomy to deal with the Senate and would support
the panel’s decision on whether “to go or not to go” for
the ratification of the final bicameral report of the
proposed Cheaper Medicines Act.
Malacañang on the other hand still hopes that Congress
leaders would live up to their commitment to pass the
Cheaper Medicines Act, as well as the income tax
exemption of minimum wage earners, in time for Labor Day
on Thursday.
Press
Secretary Ignacio Bunye issued the statement amid
threats by the House leadership not to ratify the
bicameral conference committee report on the cheaper
medicines act because of its dilution by the Senate.
“As far
as the cheaper medicine bill is concerned, we still go
by the commitment that was made during the Ledac
[Legislative-Executive Development Advisory Council]
meeting, that this will be passed on or before May 1.
Hopefully, that happens,” Bunye said.
President Arroyo earlier recommended the deletion of the
generics only provision in the cheaper medicines bill,
thinking it was the only hurdle left in the ratification
of the measure by both houses of Congress.
Arroyo
said that she would rather have an “imperfect” law
rather than a “perfect” bill that would never be passed.
(With M. Gonzalez) |
