Ciarán Lynch (Cork South Central, Labour)

I thank my Labour Party colleague, Deputy Michael D. Higgins, for introducing this Bill and I commend him on the extensive work that went into its preparation and the detail it contains. Hopefully, through the acceptance of this Bill today, Members will move beyond the impasse that exists between the HSE and the Irish Pharmaceutical Union, IPU. I intend to refer to three issues today, namely, the management by the Government of the matter, the ethos of community-based medical services and the basic premise of fair play.

I will begin by posing the most obvious question that people in the Gallery must be asking, namely, why Members are debating this Bill today. To an increasing extent, rather than taking up the reins of power as it was elected this summer to do, the Government has become crisis driven. Since the return of the Dáil last June, crises have arisen in respect of water charges, provisional driving licences, Shannon Airport and cancer services. Members now face another crisis because the Government's position has meant that it has failed to manage. Although it was the Government's responsibility to bring a solution to this House, it has failed to so do. The HSE is hiding behind the Competition Act 2002 and, in turn, the Government is hiding behind the HSE on this matter.

This issue also raises questions regarding the Government's current ideological position in this regard. Does the Minister simply believe in competition for its own sake? If this is the case, community-based service providers that provide a necessary health service will be driven from the market. Massive wholesalers that will be able to operate within the profit margins that will exist under the new contract will move in. The idea of an elderly person with a prescription going to a local pharmacist will become a thing of the past, as have local grocery stores to an increasing extent.

Last night, my Labour Party colleague, Deputy Joe Costello, referred to the concept of fair play and fundamentally this is what the Bill comes down to. The manufacture of pharmaceutical drugs involves manufacturers, wholesalers, retailers, patients and the HSE. The HSE has dealt with the manufacturers and the wholesalers collectively and the IPU deserves the same treatment. Had the Government been proactive in this regard, it would have negotiated with all the parties at the outset and the current position would have been avoided. The sector is moving from one crisis to another and the HSE has spoken of imposing another deadline in February. Matters are continuing without any direction coming from the Government to the IPU or in particular to elderly patients who wonder from where their next prescription will be attained.

When Professor Drumm held a meeting with Members one month ago, he stated that the Competition Act 2002 contains anomalies. If such anomalies exist, it is the Government's job to rectify them. The Labour Party is doing the Government's job for it by introducing a Bill. Should the Government finds flaws in the Bill, it should table amendments to correct them. The Labour Members will discuss them with the Government and will offer any support it seeks to amend the Bill. However, if I may use a pun, washing its hands of the Bill without having a prescription itself for the problem is a completely inexcusable position for a Government to adopt.

Through this Private Members' Bill, Labour Party Members hope to clear up the existing anomalies that separate the HSE and the pharmacists. I urge the Minister of State and the Government to follow suit. The IPU's position is clear. It does not want the Bill to set out prices but seeks an opportunity to begin discussions on this matter to bring them to a successful resolution. It is on record as so doing and all Members have received correspondence from Mr. Michael Guckian on this issue. It is a matter of public record that the IPU has adopted this position.

Furthermore, all Members have received correspondence from pharmacies located in their own constituencies. I assure the Minister of State that the pharmacists have read through the Bill and probably are more au fait with its contents than are the Government Members who spoke on it today. The latter have, at best, cherry-picked what they perceive to be its weaknesses. I reiterate the point that it is unacceptable and inexcusable that when a solution is proposed for an issue that has been before the House for such a long time, the Government simply washes its hands of it and states that it will consider it some time in the new year. This position is unacceptable. It is unacceptable for anyone who has a prescription or who requires pharmaceutical services on a regular basis to be left in a state of limbo because of Government inaction.

I ask the Government to revisit its position, accept the Bill, work through its weaknesses, if such exist, and bring the matter forward. The idea of Government Members leaving the Chamber today on the conclusion of Dáil business for a recess that will last until January and then returning having done nothing in the intervening period is completely inexcusable.

See this speech in context