HC Deb 04 May 1964 vol 694 cc885-6
8. Mr. Edelman

asked the Ministry of Health what is the percentage allocation in expenditure by British drug companies on basic research, taking their gross sales as 100.

Mr. Barber

I regret that the information is not available in the form requested.

Mr. Edelman

Is the Minister aware that, although this information may not be available to him, it has been put out by the pharmaceutical companies concerned? Is he not aware that, according to the figures given in the document I hold in my hand, in 1961 the turnover of the drug industry was approximately £215.3 million and that research expenditure, including the development of so-called "me-too" drugs, amounted to a mere £7.8 million, or under 4 per cent. of total turnover? Do not those figures illustrate that, despite the Minister's apologia about the drug companies allegedly spending so much on research, the total percentage of turnover spent on research is minimal?

Mr. Barber

This is not so at all. The hon. Gentleman, in his Question, asked me about basic research. The £7.8 million contributed to research was for general research. That goes far wider than basic research, which I am told has been defined as "research carried out solely in order to increase scientific knowledge". Regarding the value of "end-use" sales for 1961, which has been put by the industry at £187 million, from which the hon. Gentleman drew his proportion, I should like to point out that this includes household medicines, veterinary products and horticultural products, as well as sales to the National Health Service and exports, which amount to £53 million a year.

Mr. K. Robinson

Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that what he calls "sniping" at the pharmaceutical industry has been engaged in not only by the Opposition but by the all-party Public Accounts Committee? Is he really saying that what the Public Accounts Committee has done has not strengthened his hand in the current negotiations with the industry?

Mr. Barber

Indeed it has, and I am extremely grateful to the Public Accounts Committee. I accept what it says. What I object to is the exaggerated criticisms of some hon. Members which are not justified by the facts.