Australia's most trusted source of pharma news
Perspective
Leadership or interference?
Posted 16 May 2018
Labor has signalled it will pursue Health Minister Greg Hunt in coming weeks for what it sees as ministerial interference in PBAC processing.
Shadow minister Catherine King is not the first to raise the alarm about Hunt's actions. Numerous stakeholders and health observers have talked about the minister making 'Captain's Calls' in recent weeks.
As one journalist was heard to remark, Hunt is a sucker for a cute baby.
Take, for example, the super-fast listing of spinal muscular atrophy drug Spinraza - added to the PBS less than three months after it was considered by the PBAC.
Reimbursed for 150 babies and children with a devastating medical condition, Spinraza attracted strong media attraction nationally in 2017 and was high on Hunt's wish list of drugs he particularly wanted to see listed.
Hunt is known to be in daily contact with PBAC chair Andrew Wilson and, with Spinraza rejected by the PBAC in November, Wilson was asked by the minister to find a solution. The result was a special PBAC meeting in February where sponsor Biogen was told to cut its price.
A return to the PBAC in March saw success for Biogen, with super-quick health and finance department negotiations resulting in a speedy June PBS listing.
Hunt's desire for the listing undoubtedly drove the process and ensured it moved much faster than normal. Decisions were reportedly being made in a day that usually took a more than a week.
But does this constitute undue ministerial interference?
Hunt's opponents say yes, and that less popular drugs are not getting the same special treatment as those which have attracted the minister's favour due to what they see as the 'cutesy' factor.
Hunt's supporters, who include Wilson, say he is a minister who cares and his actions to achieve his desired outcomes are entirely appropriate.
There is no doubt that Hunt is choosing a risky path. In government, doing nothing is always much safer than doing something.
Hunt's desire to make a difference while heading the portfolio has exposed him to criticism and opened a gateway for the Opposition to exploit, effectively putting a target on his back.
Yet the recent Edelman Trust Barometer found that Australians are looking for leaders to stand up and make decisions, and that doing nothing is considered to be worse than doing something and getting it wrong.
Whether Hunt's recent actions demonstrate strong leadership or undue interference is all in the perspective.
Megan Brodie
Posted 16 May 2018
Labor has signalled it will pursue Health Minister Greg Hunt in coming weeks for what it sees as ministerial interference in PBAC processing.
Shadow minister Catherine King is not the first to raise the alarm about Hunt's actions. Numerous stakeholders and health observers have talked about the minister making 'Captain's Calls' in recent weeks.
As one journalist was heard to remark, Hunt is a sucker for a cute baby.
Take, for example, the super-fast listing of spinal muscular atrophy drug Spinraza - added to the PBS less than three months after it was considered by the PBAC.
Reimbursed for 150 babies and children with a devastating medical condition, Spinraza attracted strong media attraction nationally in 2017 and was high on Hunt's wish list of drugs he particularly wanted to see listed.
Hunt is known to be in daily contact with PBAC chair Andrew Wilson and, with Spinraza rejected by the PBAC in November, Wilson was asked by the minister to find a solution. The result was a special PBAC meeting in February where sponsor Biogen was told to cut its price.
A return to the PBAC in March saw success for Biogen, with super-quick health and finance department negotiations resulting in a speedy June PBS listing.
Hunt's desire for the listing undoubtedly drove the process and ensured it moved much faster than normal. Decisions were reportedly being made in a day that usually took a more than a week.
But does this constitute undue ministerial interference?
Hunt's opponents say yes, and that less popular drugs are not getting the same special treatment as those which have attracted the minister's favour due to what they see as the 'cutesy' factor.
Hunt's supporters, who include Wilson, say he is a minister who cares and his actions to achieve his desired outcomes are entirely appropriate.
There is no doubt that Hunt is choosing a risky path. In government, doing nothing is always much safer than doing something.
Hunt's desire to make a difference while heading the portfolio has exposed him to criticism and opened a gateway for the Opposition to exploit, effectively putting a target on his back.
Yet the recent Edelman Trust Barometer found that Australians are looking for leaders to stand up and make decisions, and that doing nothing is considered to be worse than doing something and getting it wrong.
Whether Hunt's recent actions demonstrate strong leadership or undue interference is all in the perspective.
Megan Brodie
Drought, fire and now virus cut chance of PBS relief.
Don't do it for the accolades; do it for your kids.
New forms of rotavirus vaccine Rotarix.