§ 7. Mr. Edelmanasked the Minister of Health whether he is aware that proprietary tetracycline is marketed at present at £45 per 1,000 tablets and that imported tetracycline was sold last year to hospitals at £6 10s. 0d. Per 1,000 tablets; and what approach he has made to domestic suppliers in order to obtain an explanation of the difference in these prices and to encourage them to make appropriate reductions.
§ Mr. BarberYes, Sir. The hospital supplies were purchased from an unlicensed supplier and royalties have still to be negotiated; the price of tetracycline for the general pharmaceutical services is the subject of negotiations under the Voluntary Price Regulation Scheme.
§ Mr. EdelmanDoes not the gap between these two prices suggest that someone is squeezing Ferranti-type profits out of the National Health Service? In those circumstances, would the Minister say whether when he contracts for pharmaceutical products on a large scale he invites the contracting companies to submit costings of their profits?
§ Mr. BarberI do not wish to say anything today which would prejudice the negotiations which are at present going on. The purchase of tetracycline for hospital use under the special powers of the Patents Act was, I think, in the circumstances, justified. I think that any attempt to supply the whole field of the 885 pharmaceutical services in this way could have extremely serious repercussions for the industry as a whole, and I do not think we should undertake that lightly. Apart from other considerations, it might well lead to a curtailment of research in this country. Again, in answer to the hon. Gentleman's point and the connected one he made last week, one cannot consider research costs in relation only to drugs which are successfully produced. I am told that it has been estimated that 3,000 substances are investigated for every one marketed.
§ Mr. K. RobinsonCould the Minister say whether the patent for tetracycline expires in two years' time, and does he think that these difficulties will be eliminated then?
§ Mr. BarberI cannot say offhand whether it is in two years' time, but I am pretty sure from my recollection that the period is coming to an end.
§ Mr. EdelmanI am not advocating the extended use of the blunt instrument of the Patents Act to bring prices down, but is the Minister aware that he did not reply to my question as to whether he asked pharmaceutical companies to offer him costings when they charge such exorbitant prices as are illustrated by my Question?
§ Mr. BarberI do not accept that, in general, considering the pharmaceutical services as a whole, any difference between the price which is obtained when Section 46 of the Patents Act is invoked and the ordinary price to wholesalers is necessarily excessive. It is a wrong assumption on which to proceed, and I am bound to say, with all respect to the hon. Gentleman, that I believe that this constant sniping at the pharmaceutical industry—[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."]—yes—is only a means for softening up the public for what I described last week, quite rightly, as the gradual nationalisation of the drug industry, which is the Opposition's policy. I believe that this would do no good to the health of our people.