미호주FTA와 의약품 접근권 관련 TV프로 녹취록 

 Here is the ABC National TV 7.30 report transcript reported in my 
previous email 
TV PROGRAM TRANSCRIPT 
LOCATION: http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2004/s1111710.htm 
Broadcast: 19/05/2004 
Trade agreement may threaten PBS 

Reporter: Tim Lester 

KERRY O'BRIEN: The Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme is one of the pillars 
of Australia's health system. 

Just ask anyone who has had to buy the more expensive drugs not listed 
on the PBS. 

Last week's Federal Budget gives an insight into just how much the PBS 
assists those who require expensive treatment. 

In the Budget, Treasurer Peter Costello announced that taxpayers would 
subsidise two new drugs for about 40 Australians with the rare enzyme 
deficiency, Fabry's disease. 

The cost - $250,000 per patient, per year. 

But with Australia and the US taking the next step towards a free trade 
agreement in Washington overnight, some are claiming both taxpayers and 
consumers will be paying more for prescriptions. 

Business and economics editor Tim Lester reports. 

TIM LESTER: In Washington, a ceremonial signing of the free trade 
agreement the US and Australian governments hope will win legislative 
approval in coming months. 

In fact, behind the flags and anthems both sides face hurdles. 

On the Australian side, one issue could spoil the deal. 

Will we pay more for our prescription drugs? 

TOM FAUNCE, AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY : We think it's going to be 
disastrous for the PBS. 

TIM LESTER: Canberra medicine and law lecturer Tom Faunce and David 
Henry, a Newcastle clinical psychologist, helped write a stinging 
assessment of what the free trade agreement will do to the 
Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme that keeps a lid on prescription drug 
prices that Australians pay. 

TOM FAUNCE: As Australians we have a world-class system in the PBS that 
is being used as a benchmark by even American states. 

DR DAVID JONES, MAINE GP: I have a lot of older patients who truly do go 
without appropriate treatment because they can't afford it. 

TIM LESTER: They just can't buy...? 

DR DAVID JONES: They just can't buy the medicines. 

TIM LESTER: In recent years, Americans have become aware of how much 
more they pay for prescription drugs than others. 

When we met retired American couple Granville and Marie Lamb, they'd 
found a way around their $1,500-a-month medicine bill -- drive across 
the border into Canada and buy the drugs for half the price. 

GRANVILLE LAMB: Well, I don't think any of them likes to do it, but you 
do what you have to do to get your drug. 

TOM FAUNCE: Australian drugs cost currently about a quarter of the price 
they do in America. 

TIM LESTER: But Tom Faunce and David Henry insist a new review committee 
to be formed under the free trade deal will change our drug prices 
forever. 

PROFESSOR DAVID HENRY, CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGIST: In Australia, for what 
we're paying at the moment, the drugs we're buying at the moment, we 
would pay more than $1.5 billion a year more and we would buy no extra 
health benefits from that. 

ALAN OXLEY, FREE TRADE BUSINESS GROUP: I think whoever says that should 
stop smoking whatever they're smoking. 

TIM LESTER: A former Australian trade ambassador, Alan Oxley, has been 
lobbying on behalf of business for the deal. 

ALAN OXLEY: This agreement changes in no way the Government's capacity 
to list drugs and price them and those who claim otherwise are, in fact, 
telling a very large fib. 

TIM LESTER: Both sides concede the agreement lacks detail on just how 
much power the new review body will have over our PBS. 

A Government official told me today all we have to do is have a review 
process, we don't have to have a review process the US likes. 

But critics would argue -- why would the US agree if it gives them no 
influence? 

On this part of the free trade agreement they see the fingerprints of 
America's powerful pharmaceutical lobby. 

PROF DAVID HENRY: I don't think there's any question about it at all. 

The pharmaceutical companies essentially rort the rules for multilateral 
trade agreements and they're writing the rules for the bilateral trade 
agreements -- they've done this before. 

They have had the Australian PBS in their sights for years. 

This body will really be, I think, the straw that breaks the camel's 
back. 

ALAN OXLEY: It's not forcing any decisions. 

It's requiring the people to make the decisions to show how and why they 
take them. 

That's an improvement for all of us in all parts of life. 

TIM LESTER: Even if the review process is that powerless, the 
agreement's critics say it will hurt generic drug makers and force 
Australia to take intellectual property rights much further than we 
should. 

These are among issues that might cause the Australian Senate to baulk 
at enabling legislation needed for the deal to go through. 

Though, if it does, Alan Oxley's jaw will drop. 

ALAN OXLEY: We'd be a laughing stock. 

I think other countries would just be incredulous at the idea that a 
chance to have a free trade agreement with the world's leading economy 
and to get some agricultural access, which is so hard to get, it's 
almost gold, even it was less than people wanted, they be amazed that 
someone would turn their back on it. 

TIM LESTER: In the US, Congress looks likely to pass the deal. 

American business wants it for the Australian access it would give their 
manufacturers. 

The one missing voice so far is Democratic presidential candidate John 
Kerry. 

A spokeswoman for the man who could be elected president before the 
trade pact comes into force, says John Kerry is still reviewing it and 
is undecided. 

And from the US, signs they've used some contentious parts of the free 
trade agreement very differently to us. 

LINDA WEISS, UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY: American farmers have already been 
putting quite precise dollar estimates on the gains that they expect to 
win from eliminating our quarantine standards. 

TIM LESTER: This recent assessment of the agreement from one of the 
powerful American agricultural lobby groups bases all its stated 
benefits to US exporters on changes to Australia's quarantine and food 
safety regulations. 

And concludes: "Failure to get these barriers removed will tip the 
scales considerably against expanded United States exports to 
Australia." 

But who said anything about changing our quarantine and food standards? 

LINDA WEISS: It's quite clear from all the literature that we can see 
that the reduction and eventual elimination of our quarantine standards 
is not just a side-effect of these new arrangements. 

It's actually - it's a stated goal of both trade officials and US 
farmers. 

ALAN OXLEY: Quite frankly our quarantine system's in a mess. 

Our trading partners are playing games with it. 

The European community has taken a major challenge under the WTO 
procedures against the basic processes. 

And what's wrong with our system is that the processes just aren't up to 
scratch. 

What the Americans now have the right is every now and again to ask to 
observe the processes and see how it's going. 

A bit of external accountability will actually improve the processes, I 
think. 

TIM LESTER: Having looked at the views on this from America's side, 
politics and economics lecturer Linda Weiss sees a far greater threat to 
our quarantine standards. 

LINDA WEISS: This clean and green status, which gives us a very strong 
competitive advantage in agriculture and, incidentally, minimises the 
risk of the use of toxic pesticides, all this is about to be destroyed 
forever under the deal. 

TIM LESTER: In trade deals, the tougher the issue, the more vague the 
language is likely to be. 

That way both sides can go back to their constituents and put a good 
face on it. 

Little wonder the sections on pharmaceutical benefits and quarantine 
lack some detail. 

And already it's clear on these issues at least - there are different in 
interpretation on either side of the Pacific. 

KERRY O'BRIEN: And of course, there's a tough road ahead both through 
the Congress and the Australian Parliament. 

Tim Lester with that report. 

-- 
Dr Patricia Ranald 
Principal Policy Officer 
Public Interest Advocacy Centre 
Level 1, 46-48 York St 
Sydney NSW 2000 
ph 61 2 9299 7833 
fax 61 2 9299 7855 
email pranald at piac.asn.au