|
HOWEVER
acrimonious the fight over the Cheaper Medicines Act
(CMA) may look these days, and whatever remaining
tactics the international drug companies may employ to
stop it, do not despair. The law will eventually come
out of the bowels of this Congress before the current
session is over. This is a law whose time has truly
come.
When
both houses of Congress passed their respective versions
of the Act before Christmas last year, many thought or
hoped it would just be a matter of time before a final
act was hammered out. The bicameral conference
committee, composed of key members of both chambers,
began the harmonizing process in January. But now, more
than three months later, the debating and heavy
bargaining is still going on.
Yet,
even if the ordeal of the CMA looks more torturous than
that of Iraqi detainees in Guantánamo, the challenge
will be surmounted. Sooner or later, the Cheaper
Medicines Act of 2007 will emerge from the
deliberations, and it will then be submitted to
President Arroyo for signing into law.
I say
this because we can cut the public clamor for the law
with a knife. People are hurting and dying from the
regime of high drug prices. The media have backed the
campaign all the way. Not a single legislator voted
against the bills last year. In short, the hurdles,
which were once so formidable, have come down.
It’s
regrettable, of course, that this campaign for the CMA
has been running so long, even its title has become
antiquated. The adjectives “cheap” and “cheaper” no
longer qualify to be part of its official title. The era
of high prices is upon us. To lower public expectations,
Sen. Mar Roxas II has settled on “quality, affordable
medicines” as his proposed title.
Why
should passing such an important piece of legislation be
so difficult?
The
quick answer is that the multinational drug companies
have been fighting it tooth and nail. The other reason
is that the Senate and the House have different visions
of what solutions will truly avail. Senate proponents
believe government policy should only strive to amend
the patents law and enable the parallel importation of
patented drugs. House proponents want to go farther and
impose drug-price controls.
Parallel
importation of drugs whose patents have not expired
locally is envisioned by both versions as a key legal
mechanism for bringing down prices. But there are
apparently still some differences as to the extent of
parallel importation that should be allowed. Some
legislators want to open parallel importation to both
the government and approved private-sector entities.
Others want to limit importation to just government
bodies to avert the influx of fake medicines into the
country. I think the argument for both government and
private importation will win the day.
House
proponents are pressing price regulation as a fail-safe
measure, in case parallel importation is handcuffed by
foreign drug companies. Senate proponents are wary of
controls; they would rather give their trust to the
President’s already existing power in the Price Act of
1991, which allows her to impose drug-price ceilings in
times of calamity, public-health emergencies and illegal
price manipulation.
Representatives like Teddy Boy Locsin are aware of
price-control measures that have been successfully
applied in other countries, so they don’t see why these
cannot also work in the Philippine setting. In contrast,
Senator Roxas is more concerned about the free market
and does not trust price regulation. He really believes
that more competition through parallel importation will
ensure the lowering of drug prices.
It’s a
sign, however, that the two sides will eventually come
to terms when the House dropped a provision in its
version requiring medical practitioners to write
prescriptions stating only the generic name of the drug
or medicine. This makes the chances of the Act passing
by Labor Day tomorrow possible.
Through
all this, the multinational drug lobby continues to
calculate and hope that the clamor for lower drug prices
will peter out, and that the houses of Congress will
continue to bicker and so stop short of passing a law.
There is no chance of this this time. Money cannot stop
this train from arriving at its destination. Neither can
threats by foreign chambers about pulling out if the
legislation is passed.
The
international drug firms have to recognize, once and for
all, that the days of unfettered drug pricing in the
Philippines are over. We are moving irreversibly into a
regime of flexibilities in patent laws on medicines,
greater oversight over drug prices and intensive
development of generic medicines. We are aligning our
actions with reforms being taken elsewhere in the world
to make lifesaving medicines accessible and affordable
to all. Among the international best practices being
adopted in the cheaper-medicines law are the
parallel-importation policy now practiced in the
European Union, Japan, Argentina, Cambodia, Thailand and
Vietnam.
Instead,
therefore, of hanging on to their old tactic of
stubbornly resisting all public initiatives to lower
drug prices, why don’t they adopt a more conciliatory
approach? Why not say that they finally understand the
people’s clamor for more reasonable and affordable drug
pricing? This way, they can make the case for the real
need for continued research and innovation in the
pharmaceutical industry.
All
stakeholders in the drug and health-care industry have
to work together toward a common strategy on the
divisive issues of drug development, patenting and
pricing. There is a need for fairness to all
stakeholders and all interests. The challenge is to work
on both the immediate need for access to quality,
affordable medicines, while also working to encourage
innovation. |
