Interview with Leon Byner, 5AA
Minister for Health and Ageing, Tony Abbott is interviewed by Leon Byner, 5AA, about the Free Trade Agreement (FTA).
View by date:
Previous Ministers25 May 2004
Interview with Leon Byner, 5AA
You might remember that last week, Professor David Henry, suggested that his research would deliver the fact that our public medicine, the medicine that's paid for by the taxpayer, that's you and I, subsidised if you like, and we have a pretty good system. It's going to increase because of the free trade agreement. The notion was that pharmaceutical companies around the world are somewhat envious of Australia's position because we have a very good system where we pay according to how effective drugs are, rather than on how much it costs to make them, which seems like a sensible way of doing things. But, of course we're the odd man out in the world, so to speak, and it was suggested by Professor Henry on this program last week that because of the free trade agreement, that the price of these pharmaceuticals would rise. The Federal Government have got a fascinating response and an interesting one and I thought it was worth canvassing this with the Federal Health Minister, Tony Abbott.
How do you respond to Professor Henry's claims from last week?
Minister:
Professor Henry's been campaigning against the free trade agreement from the beginning and I think he is ideologically opposed to any deal with the Americans and he's using the PBS as a bit of leverage. But, the fact is that the PBS is not going to change in any significant way under the free trade agreement. We had a big win. The American pharmaceutical companies did want to see the PBS change but they didn't get any joy and they have reacted in a very sour way generally to the free trade agreement.
Byner:
Have they?
Minister:
Yes.
Byner:
When you say that, give me what you mean.
Minister:
Well, when it was announced there was a fair bit of reportage in the States that the pharmaceutical companies weren't very happy with it and all we've done with the free trade agreement is to say that we are prepared to build in the kind of transparency and accountability provisions which frankly we'd be happy to put in there anyway. I want to make these three fundamental points, if I could, Leon?
Byner:
Sure, please.
Minister:
The legislation governing the PBS won't change, the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee will remain the gatekeeper to the system and cost effectiveness will remain the test against which all proposed new drugs will be evaluated.
Byner:
That's good to hear because when Professor Henry made this comment last week I thought to myself: 'what government of any persuasion in it's right mind … '
Minister:
Would do it? That's right … .
Byner:
Absolutely.
Minister:
I mean, why would a government decide to give a multi-billion dollar free gift to overseas drug companies? I mean, we just wouldn't do it and I mean sure, we think free trade with the United States is a very good thing, we think it's going to be good for Australia to be locked into the world's largest and strongest economy. We think it's great because ultimately we will have a domestic market that's more like 300 million people than 20 million people. But, we're not going to sell Australian citizens and voters down the river and you know, I'm a bit bamboozled by Professor Henry's continued ideological opposition to this thing given that the architecture of the PBS, which is a good scheme, is going to remain absolutely unchanged.
Byner:
Alright, so the people of this state can be assured that the PBS scheme will remain intact and won't be under any pressure from any negotiated free trade agreement.
Minister:
That's the assurance I give, now, let me make this point, Leon. If something is cost-effective, it should be on the PBS. If something isn't cost-effective it won't be on the PBS and that won't change under the system. Sure, if an applicant feels that the PBS advisory committee hasn't given the applicant a fair go there'll be this review process, but all that can happen as a result of the review process is that the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee might be asked to have another look at it, but they remain the gatekeepers of the system and cost-effectiveness remains the test.
Byner:
Whilst I've got you there as Health Minister I just wanted to draw you on something and you may not be able to give an answer straight away, but I'd like you to have a think about it if you wouldn't mind. A number of callers rang in yesterday discussing the fact that there are certain drugs, and let's stick to the dexamphetamines that are used with effectiveness, under proper supervision, for treated ADHD. A few people have questioned the fact that sometimes these drugs are prescribed for certain forms of depression, but they're saying that when they're prescribed for depression you don't get the PBS benefit that you do if it's being treated for ADHD.
Minister:
That's a pretty good question, Leon, and the basic issue is this cost-effectiveness … Now, if the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee on the basis of applications brought by the pharmaceutical companies are backed up by research in the field, if this committee thinks that the drug is effective in ways that existing PBS-listed drugs are not, for a particular condition, and if they also believe that the cost is reasonable under all the circumstances, then they'll make a recommendation for the list. Where they say that a particular drug is available for depression, for argument's sake, but not for ADD, that's because they think that there are more effective drugs or at least, as effective drugs, already on the PBS for ADD, but not in the case of depression. Now, this often gets down to some pretty fine arguments and I can understand why a lot of people tear their hair out in frustration and they say why is it that if I was depressed I could get this drug, but because I've got ADD I can't? Or at least, I can't without paying a fortune, and it's precisely because of the PBAC's rigour in looking at this and vigilance in trying to protect taxpayers as well as to help consumers of these drugs that the PBS has a very high reputation amongst some people but a not so high reputation amongst some drug consumer groups.
Byner:
Well, Tony, thank you for coming on the program and clarifying that fact and I just want to repeat again, you're giving a pretty much iron-clad guarantee that the free trade agreement will not effect in any way, adversely, our public benefits system with regards to drugs.
Minister:
That's correct.