Alex White (Dublin South, Labour) | Oireachtas source

The Deputies make some compelling points on this issue, and I thank them for doing so. I thank Deputy Ó Caoláin for raising the issue in the manner in which he has done.

I indicated in my response my view of the INN, international non-proprietary name, and the practice of using the non-proprietary name, or the generic name, in the circumstances we are dealing with here. However, I would not be disposed to accepting this amendment from Deputies Ó Caoláin and Kelleher, notwithstanding that I am persuaded to consider this question of the INN in the context of further changes that we may be required to make or may decide to make in future in this area of prescribing and medicines. I do not need to repeat what I said about the INN. It has a huge value. Internationally we can see that, and there is no doubt that the literature points to the value of the INN.

Deputy Naughten comes close to the truth in the point he makes, which is that there is an issue of timing with regard to this but I would prefer to examine this particular proposition as a specific objective. If we decide to bring it into our law, we should do so as a specific objective. I would prefer, and this is not a criticism of Deputy Ó Caoláin or Deputy Kelleher, if we were doing this by way of legislation to have the opportunity to consider carefully its undoubted implications. One example that occurs to me is where we talk about "in the opinion of the prescriber". When a discretion is put into law it always has implications, although not necessarily bad or sinister. When a discretion is accorded to someone, how does that operate? How do they exercise that discretion? When should they exercise it? Is there a legal framework for them exercising it and so on? All of these issues would have to be addressed if we are to put this into our law.

I am not disposed to accepting the amendment. However, I repeat the points I made in my initial response. We do not currently mandate the use of INN in this country for the reasons I outlined earlier. There is an additional factor of which the House is aware because I indicated it by way of responses to Deputy Kelleher and others in the course of parliamentary questions, that is, that as part of the EU-IMF programme of financial support for Ireland, the Department and the Health Service Executive commissioned a study on pharmaceutical prices, prescribing practices and the usage of generics in Ireland compared to similar EU member states.

The ESRI was commissioned to examine this issue. Originally, its report was targeted for completion by the end of March. However, issues arose around the processing of some technical data which delayed it. These technical issues are now in hand and the report will be finalised in the coming weeks. That report will fulfil a requirement of the seventh update of the memorandum of understanding, MOU, on specific economic policy conditionality, which is part of the EU-IMF programme of financial support for Ireland. The eighth update of the MOU requires a setting of high level annual targets for increasing the share of generic drug usage in the medium term. The deadline for this commitment is the end of September 2013. These targets will be informed by the findings of the report currently being completed by the ESRI.

This commitment also requires that enabling measures such as compulsory prescription by international non-proprietary name, INN, by the end of 2013, where appropriate, required for the achievement of these targets, will be put in place and kept under further review. For that reason, the inclusion of the INN name on prescriptions is being considered.

See this speech in context