Medicinal Products: Advertising (Hansard, 8 February 1984)

§ Lord Molloy
My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order paper.

§ Baroness Trumpington
My Lords, the Government do not consider it necessary at present to issue new guidelines on advertisements for medicinal products. As recently as September of last year all product licence holders were reminded of their obligations under existing statutory and code of practice controls.

§ Lord Molloy
My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Baroness for that reply. I am sure that she is aware that with regard to drug advertising Great Brtiain has by and large a very good record, if not the best record in the world. But that record is deteriorating. Of course, we owe a great deal to the Committee on Safety in Medicine, but is the noble Baroness aware that, despite these endeavours, and despite the endeavours of the industry itself, there is now grave concern about the advertising of drugs? Would she not take this particularly on board as being serious: that general practitioners have to carry with them magnifying glasses to read the small print of an advert. which shows a drug's dangerous side effects? Also, some of the drugs prescribed for elderly people have resulted (because of GPs not properly knowing the side effects) in no fewer than 20 deaths?

§ Baroness Trumpington
My Lords, I do not accept the premise that advertising standards are declining. There are plans for proposals to amend the regulations on advertising to the public. These are relatively minor and are still under consideration. With regard to his supplementary question, I saw the recent article to which he referred. This information is designed to remind and assist prescribers that by law the information must be clear and legible. We can and do take measures to enforce this requirement. Furthermore, the pharmaceutical industry's own code of practice has a similar provision.

Lord Winstanley
My Lords, as far as drug advertisements directed at doctors are concerned, is not the answer the encouragement of doctors to adopt generic prescribing which would itself have a dramatic effect on drug advertisements?

§ Baroness Trumpington
My Lords, I am sorry but I do not know what "generic" is in this particular context. The code of practice of the Association of British Pharmaceutical Industry lays down in considerable detail the standards of conduct to be used in drug marketing. Much of the code, which is to be observed in the spirit as well as the letter, covers matters impossible or extremely difficult for legislation—for instance, good taste—and it is well put together and extremely comprehensive.

Lord Winstanley
My Lords, generic prescribing is prescribing by the pharmacological name rather than the brand name. If doctors prescribe in the pharmacological name, there will be less incentive on the drug industry to advertise brand name products.

Lord Hunt
My Lords, would the Minister not agree that the subject of Lord Molloy's Question relates in part to the responsibility of the Advertising Standards Authority, and that the Advertising Standards Authority is in the very good hands of my noble friend Lord McGregor of Durris?

§ Baroness Trumpington
My Lords, I entirely agree with the noble Lord's remarks, and I am grateful for them.

§ Lord Constantine of Stanmore
My Lords, is the noble Baroness aware—I am sure she is—that the drug companies issue a very comprehensive Compendium which not only describes the drugs but their side effects and those drugs which should be taken with great care?

§ Baroness Trumpington
My Lords, I thank my noble friend for his statement. With regard to what the noble Lord has just said, all drug companies which advertise to practitioners must provide each with a data sheet in a standard format specifically designed to give prescribers an objective statement of essential particulars about the product. It would be quite wrong to conclude that practitioners are having to prescribe medicine without proper access to prescribing information.

§ Lord Ennals
My Lords, do I understand from what the noble Baroness has said that the Government are satisfied that the industry is complying with the code of conduct which was accepted at the time when the pharmaceutical price regulation scheme was introduced in 1977? Furthermore, is the noble Baroness able to say what progress is being made in the review which the Government are undertaking of the PPRS with which the guidelines were originally associated?

§ Baroness Trumpington
My Lords, in reply to the noble Lord's first supplementary question, the Government are satisfied with existing controls on the advertising of medicinal products. The standards generally are high. With regard to the question of 1141 profits, there is a non-statutory agreement between the Government and the pharmaceutical industry which seeks to cover the industry's profits from National Health sales of ethical products. Companies are allowed to earn a reasonable profit which varies according to contributions made individually to the United Kingdom economy in terms of investment, research, exports, et cetera. The average target rate of profit for the industry has been reduced by four percentage points to 21 per cent.

§ Lord Ennals
My Lords, I wonder whether the noble Baroness could apply herself to the question. I know the PPRS, because I negotiated it with the industry, but since the Government have decided that there is to be a review of the PPRS I wonder whether the noble Baroness could say whether it has started and, if so, what progress is being made and when your Lordships will receive a report?

§ Baroness Trumpington
My Lords, it has started but I am not able to give any information as to when a report is likely to be received.

§ Lord Leatherland
My Lords, is the noble Baroness aware that the PPRS has been referred to three times? Can she tell us what it stands for?

§ Baroness Trumpington
My Lords, the Pharmaceutical Price Regulation Scheme.

§ Lord Molloy
My Lords, is the noble Baroness aware that, despite the code of conduct of the APBI, many drug companies are sometimes completely ignoring those calls and that £130 million is spent on drug advertising, of which £106 million is allowed as an expense? With all the points that have been raised in this Chamber today, would the noble Baroness be prepared to speak to her right honourable friend in another place to see whether there ought to be an improvement made to the legislation to prevent the cheating and do away with the threat to people and doctors in our National Health Service?

§ Baroness Trumpington
My Lords, I am always willing to speak to my right honourable friend in another place. I would remind the noble Lord that one man's meat is another man's poison.