See this poll on: https://poll.fm/7341314/embed
Give others the chance to vote.
Share this poll, because the more votes the better.
Create your own.
Opinions! We all have them. Find out what people really think with polls and surveys from Crowdsignal.
closed
Please consider the facts
> The government agrees on the price of drugs with drug companies not pharmacists.
> Medicines are subsidised for patients by way of a payment for the cost of the drug, a dispensing fee and a small % markup.
> The TGA assesses and approves generic medicines.
> Generic medicines are cheaper than the originator brands.
> The price paid by pharmacists for medicines, both originator and generic is disclosed to the gvt - this is called price disclosure.
> The gvt alters the price it pays for medicines based on this information.
> On numerous occasions since price disclosure began, the gvt has revised downward the protected expenditure on the PBS.
> Without forewarning or consultation, the gvt has changed the timeline for price alterations
> The changes mean the average pharmacy will receive $30 000 less funding next year alone, on top of the expected $50 000 it already expected to lose from price disclosure.
> The argument for this is that if pharmacists are able to negotiate trading terms for generics, then these savings should be passed on to the gvt
> What is not mentioned is that savings can only be made by penetration of generic usage.
> By halving the time-frame for assessing and reducing the cost of drugs, the incentive for promoting generics is also reduced
>less incentive to promote generics means less penetration of generics into the market.
>Less penetration of generics means prices reduce slower, and generic drug companies are dis-incentivised to launch medicines in our market.
> The bulk of the savings made through price disclosure are for the cost of the medicine paid to the drug company, not for the pharmacists take home pay/profit.
> The proportionally smaller loss incurred by the pharmacy can be rectified by increasing the professional fee pharmacists are paid, or by using the money to fund other medication management services not related to dispensing in pharmacies
>The parallels in difficulties of running a community pharmacy and the difficulties of running a general practice are not dissimilar; staffing, rent, decrease government remuneration, and a forced push to increase volume at the lowest possible denomination. Pharmacists, GP's and independent medical specialists should be united in the fight to any cuts to either the PBS or MBS.
Luke (below) is correct. Price cuts and their timing have already been agreed and budgeted... the gov't has changed the rules and accelerated their savings without consultation. Our profession would not appreciate that.
It will be an interesting debate when other health professionals remuneration is on the chopping block!!
These intestinal jealousies between pharmacist and doctors are innate in human astute especially when it comes to reneration .We live in loosemeritocracy and for mine health workers in the large majority are underpaid visa vie Bankers and the Cut throat Supermarket executives.
Why is there a perception that trading terms on generic drugs are somehow a windfall to pharmacy owners? They are a part of the landscape of community pharmacy IN EVERY western country. The profits generated by them are used to do essential services like methadone, clinical interventions, wound management, needle and syringe exchange, triage, aged care and webster packs and so on. AND they are used to pay rent and wages. They are part of our business structure and we have business plans based on an agreed formula and timetable for price reductions; the increased rate of clawback will necessitate cuts to services perviously mentioned and more. Pharmacy has allowed hundreds of millions of dollars of savings to flow back into the PBS through it's efforts in supporting price reform; no-one can argue that we haven't done our bit but we deserve to be remunerated for the services we provide. If you want to cut the PBS then we must be recompensed through another mechanism not related to the prices of drugs.
This poll may have missed the point. The Pharmacy Guild is not fighting against "price cut". They are fighting against 'un-consulted sudden' price cut which jeopardize the cashflow of thousands of pharmacies. "Price drop" has already been negotiated and in-built into the normal price reduction cycle just three years ago. Price cut will happen irrespectively anyway. Our government has changed their policy on-the-run and decide to suddenly 'accelerate' the price drop by six months because they need the money... who cares about small business??