Pharmaceutical Price Regulation Scheme (Hansard, 18 March 1985)

§ Mr. Hickmet

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services (1) why the National Health Service pays for the sales promotion expenditure of companies within the pharmaceutical price regulation scheme at the rate of 9 per cent. of the value of the industry's sales to the National Health Service; and if he will make a statement;

(2) when the pharmaceutical price regulation scheme will be next reviewed; and if he will make a statement;

(3) whether expenditure on advertising expended by the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry in 384W opposing his limited drugs list proposals will be an allowable expense within the pharmaceutical price regulation scheme; and if he will make a statement;

(4) pursuant to his reply of 28 February, Official Report, column 273, why allowable sales promotion expenditure of companies within the pharmaceutical price regulation scheme is to be reduced to 9 per cent. of the industry's sales to the National Health Service; how the current figure of 10 per cent. was arrived at; when he next plans to review its level; and if he will make a statement;

(5) pursuant to the reply of 28 February, Official Report, column 272, if he will list the expenses incurred by general practitioners which fall within those described as directly reimbursed expenses; how general practitioners claim such expenses; and if he will make a statement;

(6) pursuant to his reply of 28 February, Official Report, column 272, if he will itemise the services, in respect of which general practitioners were reimbursed indirectly £9,290 in 1983–84; if he will describe the system by which this money is claimed and paid; and if he will make a statement;

(7) pursuant to his replies of 25 February, Official Report, column 71, and 28 February, Official Report, column 272, what steps his Department took in the latest year for which complete returns are available to satisfy itself that expenditure incurred by companies within the pharmaceutical price regulation scheme on representatives, advertising, literature and information items was reasonable; when the last comprehensive review of such expenditure took place; and if he will make a statement;

(8) pursuant to his reply of 28 February, Official Report, column 273, if he will explain the nature of the ad hoc formula which is used to control sales promotion expenditure within the pharmaceutical price regulation scheme; how the formula is applied; what are its components; and if he will make a statement;

(9) pursuant to his answer of 9 January, Official Report, column 497, what steps his Department takes to satisfy itself that gifts offered by drugs companies and received by general practitioners do not contravene the advice given by the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry; and if he will make a statement;

(10) how he satisfies himself that expenditure on representatives by companies within the pharmaceutical price regulation scheme is reasonable; what assumptions he makes for this purpose about the level and manner of the remuneration of representatives; what is the source of the information upon which he bases these assumptions; and if he will make a statement;

(11) pursuant to his reply of 28 February, Official Report, column 272, what was the average total sum which general practitioners actually received from the National Health Service and from all other sources of public money for which he has responsibility, by way of income, fees, expenses or any other payments (a) in the period from 1 April 1983 to 31 December 1983 (grossed up to give an annual figure) and (b) in the year from 1 January 1984.