Hodgson Pete: Therapeutic Products and Medicines Bill — First Reading 
Hodgson Pete: Therapeutic Products and Medicines Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:636;Page:7072] 
Hon PETE HODGSON (Minister of Health) 
: 
 That was a bad call by the National Party. With the Closer Economic Relations now over 20 years old and with the building blocks of a single economic market between Australia and New Zealand being put in place one by one I regret that a major political party in this Parliament would turn its back on this opportunity to further cement the relationship between our two countries despite the National leader meeting with the Prime Minister of Australia just last week. It was a bad call. It was short-term politics. It was strategically hollow. It was sad it was shameful and it is straightforwardly wrong. 
Then because of the proclivities of National’s health spokesperson Tony Ryall dropped to personality politics for most of the speech. It was not about the future of our health system not about the future of our medicines regime not about the future of the Australia - New Zealand relationship. It was personality politics only. He misrepresented he misquoted he was misconstruing he was mischief. That is all. There was no policy just short-term political mischief. He knows it was a junk speech. It was a bad call. 
I would like to acknowledge the work of my colleague the Hon Annette King Minister of State Services on this Therapeutic Products and Medicines Bill and thank her for her tireless efforts on progressing the proposed joint scheme with Australia and for her efforts to involve all political parties in this House—with greater success in some areas than in others. 
I will focus my comments on Parts 6 and 7 of the bill which are the parts that relate to New Zealand only. I will also comment on direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription medicines. The bill updates the offence provisions in this country to ensure that they are consistent with the proposed enforcement regime for the joint scheme. Parts 6 and 7 contain similar search and seizure provisions as do those in Parts 1 to 5. The bill retains the ability for officers under the Medicines Act and for the police to obtain a search warrant in respect of offending against the Medicines Act whether or not the specific offence features a term of imprisonment. 
A new continuum of penalties is introduced to reflect the seriousness of each specific offence and to make penalties comparable with other modern legislation in this country. Penalties range between a fine of $5000 for an individual up to a fine of $250000 for a body corporate and 12 months’ imprisonment for serious offending. The bill includes two new offences one to prohibit the prescribing of prescription medicines by individuals who are not prescribers and another for persons who do not dispose of medicines in the manner prescribed in regulations made under the legislation. 
The bill confirms the Government’s policy on pharmacy ownership. It incorporates recent reforms to the licensing regime for pharmacies made to the Medicines Act in September 2004 in conjunction with the passage of the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act 2003. The bill requires operators of community and hospital pharmacies to be licensed by the Director-General of Health. Ownership of pharmacies is restricted to pharmacists who must hold at least a 51 percent share of a pharmacy. Companies may also operate a pharmacy as long as a pharmacist or pharmacists own 51 percent or more of the company’s share capital. Neither a pharmacist nor a company may hold a majority interest in more than five pharmacies. Pharmacies legally carrying on business when the bill comes into force will be deemed to have a licence to operate. 
It is proposed that xenotransplantation be covered by the joint scheme but until new controls are in place to govern the safety of the practice regulation needs to be covered by the Medicines Act. The provisions will expire on 31 December 2008 allowing sufficient time for the new controls to be in place under the proposed joint scheme. The bill does however provide for this date to be extended by Order in Council should the need arise. It is important that there is no gap around this challenging technology. 
The bill continues to allow direct-to-consumer advertising. The Government’s preference was to ban direct-to-consumer advertising. However it is clear that there is not the necessary support within Parliament for that to happen at this point. Retaining direct-to-consumer advertising means that advertising and promoting prescription medicines direct to consumers will continue to be permitted in New Zealand. The Government is concerned about direct-to-consumer advertising and its effect on the appropriate use of medicines. I am assured that under a proposed Australia New Zealand Therapeutic Products Authority advertising code advertisements for medicines will need to meet standards for content including that consumers be provided with balanced and truthful information. This will ensure that consumers are better informed about the benefits and risks of medicines and therapeutic health treatments so that they can make better informed choices. 
Feedback on this proposal will be sought when the draft advertising rule under the proposed joint regulatory scheme is consulted on. In March of this year the Ministry of Health consulted on direct-to-consumer advertising. Of a total of 115 submissions received 69 were concerned about direct-to-consumer advertising. Although direct-to-consumer advertising can provide consumers with more awareness of health conditions and treatments branded information in advertisements does not provide further benefits to consumers. Direct-to-consumer advertising can result in discussions between general practitioners and their patients becoming focused on one particular choice of treatment rather than assessing the advantages and disadvantages of all treatment options including non-prescription treatments and lifestyle changes. 
These changes to the Medicines Act 1981 along with the provisions in Parts 1 to 5 will ensure effective regulation and enforcement across the joint scheme and domestically. The result will be more modern and seamless legislation for the regulation of therapeutic products and a still closer relationship between the nations of Australia and New Zealand.