EU presidency plans no more discussions of European Commission proposal.
The Spanish presidency has turned its back on EU plans to provide the public with more information about prescription medicines. It is planning no discussions of the European Commission proposal – now more than a year old – during its term of office.
A Spanish health ministry spokesman said it was not proper for information on such medicines to go direct to patients without the filter of a health professional. He said the subject was not on any presidency agenda, and that no member state had asked for it to be discussed.
The Commission defends its proposal as a response to the spread of information on the internet – mostly unofficial and frequently misleading. One of the main aims is to create a regulatory framework in which authorised information on products can be provided – including information from drug firms.
But health campaign groups have accused the Commission of offering pharmaceutical manufacturers an open road to advertising. Health Action International’s Barbara Mintzes described the proposal as a charter for “disease-mongering rather than disease awareness”.
But Jorgo Chatzimarkakis, a German Liberal MEP, welcomed the proposal in the opinion he has drafted for the European Parliament. He sees “an urgent need to provide citizens with objective and non-promotional information”.
Discussion was scheduled to start on 27 January in the Parliament’s committee on industry and research, but has been delayed. Christofer Fjellner, a Swedish centre-right MEP who is responsible for the report for the environment and public health committee, told European Voice that he is aiming to produce a draft in February.
By contrast, the Spanish presidency is moving ahead rapidly with the two other elements in the pharmaceutical package – measures to improve monitoring of medicines on the market (known as pharmacovigilance), and to combat counterfeiting. It has programmed 17 meetings of the Council working party for member-state officials to examine these proposals.
Draft reports on both these proposals were discussed for the first time in the Parliament’s environment and public health committee on 26 January, and both are scheduled for a committee vote in April. Signs of compromise are already emerging on some of the points that have proved contentious until now.
Linda McAvan, a UK Socialist MEP, in charge of the pharmacovigilance report, indicated that she would no longer oppose plans for member-state representatives to sit alongside experts in a new supervisory committee. And Marisa Matias, a far-left Portuguese MEP who is drafting the anti-counterfeiting report, and who is insisting on action to curb internet sales, was appeased by expressions of limited support from Commission officials during the debate.