|
Sen. Mar Roxas has assumed such a high profile in the passage of the
“Universally Accessible Cheaper and Quality Medicines Act of
2008” that whether he likes it or not, his political future will
be affected by the law’s success or failure. If it succeeds in
lowering the price of quality medicines, then it will give added
luster to his name. On the other hand, he will be blamed should
substandard and expensive medicines still permeate the market
despite the law.
Mar had been pressing for the availability of
lower-priced quality medicine since his stint as trade secretary 10
years ago. He authored the Quality Affordable Medicine in the 13th
Congress that was passed by the Senate, but got nowhere because the
House failed to pass its counterpart bill. In the 14th Congress, the
measure got a quick okay in the Senate but went through the gauntlet
in the bicameral conference committee. His blood pressure rose and
fell depending on the progress of the bill which lasted more than
four months with the bicam. Now that the bill is certain to become a
law, it is time to see if it could really deliver the promised
quality, cheaper medicines.
Mar and his co-author in the Senate, Sen. Pia
Cayetano, are confident that prices of medicines would go down and
their quality would go up because the measure would ensure stiffer
competition. Small drug stores could no longer be cowed by big
pharmaceutical companies because they would be required to carry
competing products in their shelves.
Another salient feature of the bill is the
provision for parallel importation. Mar explains that if a
particular medicine is cheaper in another country, the law’s
provision for parallel importation allows its importation so that
competition can be provided locally.
The Health secretary, with the approval of the
President, is given the power to set price ceilings. The
Intellectual Property Code is amended to allow drug companies to
prepare for the production of a patented drug before its expiry, so
that they could have a ready competing product on the day the patent
expires.
Previous high hopes not met
The bill has many features that should assure
its success. But then, there were previous laws that had failed to
meet the high expectations they had generated. A lot of voices were
heard in the House and the Senate proclaiming that the passage of
the Oil Deregulation Law would result in lower price of fuel because
of increased competition. Who can say now that it had actually
achieved the promised results? Instead of competing, the big oil
companies are even suspected of acting as a cartel in uniformly
increasing their price.
Then, there was the Electric Power Industry
Reform Act. The EPIRA was rushed in the dying days of the 12th
Congress because of imposition by the World Bank and the
International Monetary Fund. Just like the medicine bill and the Oil
Deregulation Law, the EPIRA was meant to bring down prices, this
time, of power. I used to pay a little more than P1,000 a month in
power bills. Now, I am paying more than P6,000. Where’s the
promised relief to consumers?
Mar worked like a man possessed for the passage
of the Universally Accessible Cheaper and Quality Medicines Act of
2008. I know he did so not for his personal glory but in the belief
that he was doing a great service for the nation. I am keeping my
fingers crossed that the measure would achieve its end, not just for
Mar’s sake but for the sake of the people.
Much ado about the bicam
Many still do not know it, but in a bicameral
conference committee meeting, the House and the Senate have only one
vote each. This should be made clear because of the apparent
confusion brought about by the opposition of two congressmen to the
provision in the bicam report giving price control powers to the
President through the secretary of Health instead of a Price
Regulatory Board.
The size of the House or the Senate panel does
not matter in a bicam, or else one chamber could simply outvote the
other by having more members. In the bicam on the medicine bill, for
instance, the House had 12 members while the Senate had only three.
The three senators are equal to 12 congressmen in a bicam because in
essence, it is the House and the Senate, both co-equal bodies, that
are meeting.
If the House panel could not agree on an issue,
then it should consult its principal before proceeding with the
bicam meeting. But when 11 of the 12 agreed to the price control
mechanism, then any fear about the bill’s approval is misplaced.
It should not have been overblown in the first place.
efrendanao2003@yahoo.com
|
