The Trans-Pacific Partnership's longer data protection for biologic pharmaceutical makers will push up the cost of the fastest growing primary health treatment in the country, the Medical Association says.
Biologic drugs account for more than 40% of new pharmaceutical products being developed and proposals in the TPP to extend the length of time manufacturers can retain the data in producing those products will delay the introduction of cheaper alternatives, Medical Association chairman Steve Childs told Parliament's foreign affairs, defence and trade select committee.
The trade and investment pact between New Zealand, the US, Japan, Canada, Mexico, Chile, Peru, Australia, Malaysia, Vietnam, Singapore, and Brunei proposes two options on biologics allowing for either eight years' data exclusivity, or at least five years protection plus additional measures to deliver extra market protection. New Zealand has a five-year data protection period.
In an oral submission on the TPP Dr Childs said his organisation, which represents medical professionals, is unsure what those additional measures would mean, and the Medical Association's fears a longer protection period will delay the process to develop generic alternatives to those biologics drugs.
"You're extending your cost monopoly for the producer of the products of the most expensive primary treatment that we offer. It is a concern," Dr Childs said. "It is the future – it is going to be the vast majority of healthcare we're going to provide."
The period covering biologics' data exclusivity was a major sticking point in the TPP's negotiations with the US pushing for a 12 year period, and a one-man US Trade Representatives' Office delegation coming to New Zealand is being seen as another attempt by the agreement's biggest partner to press its case as American policymakers increasingly oppose ratifying the deal.
Last week, Medicines New Zealand, which lobbies on behalf of drug companies, told the committee some firms won't bother supplying New Zealand with certain drugs if government funding through Pharmac wasn't available due to the small size of the private market.
While it didn't oppose the TPP outright, the Medical Association said it also had some concerns over the ability of investors and other states to sue the government if it introduced health policy or regulations that another party didn't like, and also the increased the administrative cost of introducing more transparency to Pharmac.
The association requested officials undertake an independent analysis of the agreement to look specifically at how it will affect the health sector.
This article is tagged with the following keywords. Find out more about MyNBR Tags
Most listened to
- It’s "odd" StuffMe applicants are "so sensitive about anonymous submissions," says competition lawyer Andy Glenie
- Andrew Little, James Shaw, Steven Joyce and Bill English all weigh in on how good the budget was for Kiwi businesses
- Rob Hosking does not think it's good enough the Budget has left out reduced taxation on savings
- Lawyers are playing musical chairs in this week's Briefcase with John Bowie
- NBR Radio: best of the week ended May 26, with Grant Walker