Connect with us

Developing countries

Policymakers and lobbyists must heed Oxfam's message

SHARE:

Published

on

We use your sign-up to provide content in ways you've consented to and to improve our understanding of you. You can unsubscribe at any time.

peoples-climate-march-oxfam-1220x763Opinion by Natalia Alonso

As policymakers and lobbyists took their places for last week’s round of free trade talks between the EU and the US, the ventilated meeting rooms and complimentary nibbles they shared stood in stark contrast to the conditions of those most drastically affected.

Far removed from the tables of Washington negotiations, millions of people around the world wait in hospitals and health centres that can’t provide the most basic of medicines. This most fundamental of problems could be further worsened by the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), both within European borders and around the globe.

The quality of healthcare available to people in Europe is intrinsically linked to these negotiations. One of TTIP’s most controversial elements is the inclusion of an ‘investor-state dispute settlement’ mechanism. This brutal legislation gives commercial businesses, including pharmaceutical companies, the right to sue governments for compensation if any government action interferes with expected profits - jeopardising the legitimate right of European states to implement their own healthcare policies. It may sound hypothetical, but this threat is real. Due to the lawful invalidation of two of its patents, the American pharmaceutical giant Eli Lilly is currently seeking around €350 million in compensation from Canada under the North American Free Trade Agreement rules, which also is likely to apply to TTIP.

Proposed changes to intellectual property (IP) laws and regulations also endanger the safety and health of European citizens by prioritizing pharmaceutical profits over the ability of states to provide affordable medicines. These draconian measures would keep the cost of medicines higher for longer by stifling competition and awarding monopolies on life-saving treatments. The rationale for this is that greater monopoly protection to boost the value of patents results in increased innovation.

This is a fallacy. More monopoly protection will not fill the innovation gap for new life-saving medicines. But it will restrict generic competition, which is the only proven method of sustainably reducing the price of pharmaceuticals. Companies are seeking stricter IP rules to protect and expand their markets, rather than prioritising public health goals that benefit patients.

This profit-driven approach to medical research is evident in how only 10 per cent of research funding is spent on diseases that affect 90% of the global population. It’s hardly surprising that there is no cure for unprofitable diseases such as Ebola.

Advertisement

Meanwhile, monopoly protection actively creates high prices for new life-saving medicines.  For example, the new anti-hepatitis C treatment Sovaldi is priced at an astronomical figure of €786 a pill – or over €66,000 a treatment - making it difficult for health systems in Europe and the US to afford. Such exorbitant prices are completely out of reach for the majority of the 150 million people infected who live in lower and middle income countries, such as Egypt and Pakistan.

There are alternatives to bring down prices. Generic competition lowered the price of the anti-retroviral medication used to treat HIV by 99 per cent to just €79 a year per person in developing countries. But such an important achievement is no longer possible as India, the major world producer of generic medicines, has had to implement an IP regime fully consistent with the World Trade Organization’s Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights Agreement (TRIPS). Free trade agreements, such as TTIP and the currently negotiated EU-India agreement, make the situation even worse as they go beyond even TRIPS. TTIP now seeks to set a new global standard for stricter IP protection around the world.

The link between last week’s TTIP negotiations and inadequately stocked hospitals and clinics may appear tenuous, but strict IP protection and improper investment laws could permanently block people’s access to medical treatment in both Europe and developing countries. Whatever reasons are suggested for the inclusion of such overbearing legislation, EU negotiators must not sell out the public’s right to healthcare by rewriting the law to protect pharmaceutical monopoly profits.

Last week’s round of TTIP talks ended with a conventional closure discourse, keeping citizens in the dark, as usual. IP standards and regulations of pharmaceutical products will remain an area of concern for health campaigners in the near future.  The new European Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmström will be leading upcoming negotiations from the EU side. In her recent hearing in front of the European Parliament, she committed to greater transparency and taking civil society concerns seriously. It remains to be seen whether she will be better at keeping her promises than her predecessor Karel De Gucht.

To end on a positive note, I'd like to stress that we welcome yesterday’s decision by EU governments to make the TTIP negotiating mandate public, following mounting pressure from the public in recent months.  This move needs to be followed up by greater transparency around the negotiations moving forward.

Natalia Alonso is Oxfam’s Advocacy and Campaigns deputy director.

Share this article:

EU Reporter publishes articles from a variety of outside sources which express a wide range of viewpoints. The positions taken in these articles are not necessarily those of EU Reporter.

Trending