Denis Naughten (Roscommon-South Leitrim, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I support these amendments. Amendment No. 6 makes much sense and the Minister agrees in principle with the thrust of it, as he made clear in his response. The issue he has is one of timing. The amendment makes sense not only for the reasons given by my two colleagues, as well as the fact that it would ensure consistency from prescriber to pharmacist, but also because it would follow through on the label for the patient and lead to consistency across the board.

The substitution of medicines will cause confusion for members of the public when they pick up their prescription or someone is doing that for them. If there is consistency in labelling across the board people will know their medicine is the same medicine they got last month even though the brand name is different. That is important not just in terms of efficiencies and streamlining the entire process but also in terms of compliance with taking the particular medicine. As we know, compliance is a particular difficulty with any medicine in terms of ensuring people take it at the appropriate time and that they know the reason they are taking it. It would also help to identify where a mistake has been made because if a person's drugs are being changed from one month to the next, even though they are for the same purpose, there is a risk that someone along that chain will make a mistake, and that most likely will be the person who must take the medicine because the tablet may be similar to one they took the previous month for a different purpose. If there was consistency regarding the name of the product across the board, it would assist in that regard.

I heard what the Minister said and I understand the timing challenge he faces but I suggest as a solution that he accept the principle of the amendments tabled by Deputy Ó Caoláin and Deputy Kelleher, make specific provision for the international non-proprietary name and bring it in by ministerial order at a later date. The Minister can bring in the other aspects of the legislation straight away. He can then sit down with the general practitioners and ensure that this new process is put in place as soon as possible, and then bring it in by ministerial order. The Minister said this is a place he would like to get to, therefore, he should now make the statutory provision for that in this legislation. It also has the added advantage that if it is already in primary legislation it might be easier to encourage GPs and pharmacists to begin implementing this on the ground of their own volition on the basis that if they do not get their act together now, this legislation will be introduced anyway and it is important to work on that basis.

The difficulty, as we are aware, is that GPs have been conditioned over the years to name a particular product, and we had many debates in this House and elsewhere on that issue. Perhaps we should start conditioning them the other way by including this in the primary legislation and bringing it in by statutory instrument separately from the other aspects. It meets with the argument we are making on this side and provides the Minister with a vehicle to ensure this is implemented as soon as is practical.

See this speech in context