The People's Poet!

The People's Poet!
Right on, kids!

Sunday 26 January 2014

Subversive Threats

Real subversive threats are those that provide an example to others of how to extricate themselves out from under oppressive regimes. Oppressive regimes need not necessarily be totalitarian juntas, there are many oppressive regimes acting out of socially democratic nations that serve to undermine the sovereignty of the populations they target. Wikileaks provided an example of this behaviour being orchestrated against New Zealand when it published the cablegate files. Most New Zealanders would not regard Pharmac as a subversive organisation, but seen from the context of US pharmaceutical corporations Pharmac is a threat as it provides an example to other countries of how to provide affordable medication at the expense of corporate profits. During 2004 the subject of Pharmac's 'subversive' activity was the subject for discussion in a US's Wellington embassy cable.
1. (SBU) Summary: After trying in vain for years to persuade the New Zealand government to change its restrictive pricing policies on pharmaceuticals, the drug industry is taking another tack: reaching out to patient groups with information designed to bolster their demands for cutting-edge drugs not already covered by government subsidy. Several U.S. drug companies also hold out hope that a New Zealand-U.S. free-trade agreement could be a lever for improving their access to New Zealand's pharmaceutical market. 2. (C) The government contends it already is increasing drug availability by boosting the budget for pharmaceutical purchases over the next three years. In actuality, its spending on drugs in real terms is declining. U.S. pharmaceutical companies continue to struggle in what they view as one of the most restricted free-world markets. They are cutting local staff, and they are slashing investment in New Zealand-based research and development. Attempting to make inroads against a government mindset that is hostile to the drug industry, post is working with the industry to identify speakers and engage in other public diplomacy efforts that could help educate New Zealanders on the benefits of gaining access to a wider range of effective pharmaceuticals. End summary.
The embassy is effectively outlining a plan to undermine New Zealand's independent drug purchasing scheme in favour of a regime which serves the profit motives of US pharmaceutical corporations. New Zealand's current government's interest in pushing through the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement has already seen the prospect of Pharmac's subversive activities being curtailed by corporate US predators - however, this attempt to dismantle Pharmac's established negotiating position is too politically toxic for even a government as far right as the current Key regime to contemplate.
Tim Groser is confident the TPP will have a marginal impact on public institutions like Pharmac. “It certainly won’t result in higher prices for pharmaceutical products for New Zealanders. This is really about protecting the model of Pharmac to ensure that they’re in a tough negotiating position with international pharmaceutical companies, and we’ve got some very good negotiators who are doing just that.” Groser says parallel importing will continue as long as it’s consistent with intellectual property law. “There’s some complicated issues about the interface of this with copyright and that’s a legitimate concern, and our negotiators will work their way through those issues.”
The Pharmac model is not a threat to the profits of the pharmaceutical giants, the New Zealand market is just too small to make a difference in this respect. Pharmac's threat is the idea provided as an example for other countries to follow, an example which if taken up could undermine the oppressive nature of the global pharmaceutical industry's regime.

1 comment:

  1. In the above piece I observed the following: "New Zealand's current government's interest in pushing through the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement has already seen the prospect of Pharmac's subversive activities being curtailed by corporate US predators - however, this attempt to dismantle Pharmac's established negotiating position is too politically toxic for even a government as far right as the current Key regime to contemplate."

    It turns out I was wrong if Jane Kelsey is to be believed. In a later press release than the one concerning Groser, Kelsey writes, "Groser sells out on medicines at TPPA Singapore Ministerial - not even for 30 pieces of silver!

    ‘Forget all the glib promises that the National Government will protect the “fundamentals” of Pharmac and defend of our public health system in the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations’ said Professor Jane Kelsey who is monitoring the TPPA trade ministers’ meeting in Bali.

    ‘Also forget all the plaudits for New Zealand’s strong positions that were revealed in the intellectual property text posted by Wikileaks last month’.

    Washington Trade Daily has reported that ministers from all TPPA countries, except one developing country, have dropped their objections to the US-based intellectual property chapter, with some modifications.

    That means Australia, New Zealand and Canada have agreed to a ‘very high standards’ text with unspecified transition clauses for developing countries.

    ‘We assume “high quality” is code for the same position the US was pushing in the leaked chapter on crucial questions of data exclusivity, including on biologics (eg cancer medicines), patent linkage and patent term extensions’, Kelsey said.

    ‘Groser has sold out, as I always suspected he would. But we also hear that the US has not tabled any significant proposals for agricultural market access. So he has played Judas with our health system, without even 30 pieces of silver in return.’


    Jane Kelsey is far more credible than the lickspittle Tim Groser.

    ReplyDelete