Life sciences companies have a fresh chance to highlight policy levers they think should be pulled to enhance the UK sector’s global competitiveness.
A call for evidence was issued by the Science, Innovation and Technology Committee, which is leading a UK parliamentary inquiry into life sciences investment after MSD and AstraZeneca recently announced the respective cancellation and pausing of major UK projects.
Last month, MPs on the Committee quizzed senior executives of the two companies about those decisions. At the time, Ben Lucas, MSD vice-president and the company’s managing director for the UK and Ireland, described the UK’s commercial operating environment – from drug development to commercialisation – as “difficult” and in need of being addressed. Tom Keith-Roach, UK president of AstraZeneca, told the Committee the UK “is an increasingly challenging place actually to bring forward innovation to get through the front door of NICE into the NHS and bring forward innovation to patients”.
Speaking at the same session, Dr Richard Torbett MBE, chief executive of UK industry body the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry (ABPI), told the Committee that the UK has lost a third of its share of the global R&D market over the last 10 years, citing examples of investors choosing the US, Belgium, Ireland, Singapore and Germany instead.
Both Lucas and Keith-Roach agreed with the assertion from former health minister George Freeman, who sits on the Committee, that the principal problem is NHS and Department for Health and Social Care policy on purchasing, innovation and drugs.
Now the Committee has invited other businesses and industry stakeholders to share their views on matters they consider relevant to the competitiveness of UK life sciences. Evidence can be submitted up until the end of the day on Monday 13 October.
The Committee has suggested that stakeholders share their views on everything from the effectiveness of the UK government’s life sciences sector plan and biggest barriers they see to increasing investment in the UK, to the impact that the recent shift in US policy – including the Trump administration’s insistence on the operation of most-favoured-nation pricing for US patients – has on the UK’s life sciences sector.
Other areas for input, it has said, could include the current metrics NICE uses for assessing medicines for prospective use on the NHS, as well as how the UK compares with other countries on pricing and uptake.
The Financial Times reported last week that the UK government is set to make concessions to pharmaceutical companies over drugs reimbursement – potentially as part of a wider agreement the government might strike with the US – at a time of significant economic uncertainty for the industry. Both Lucas and Keith-Roach criticised how the current voluntary scheme for branded medicines pricing, access and growth (VPAG) operates in the evidence they gave to MPs.
Gina Bicknell of Pinsent Masons said: “While the UK life sciences sector faces challenges, there are grounds for optimism amidst ambitious government plans to make the UK ‘the third most important life sciences economy globally’ by 2035, behind only the US and China.”
“The UK is still recognised as a major talent hub in the field of scientific research – something that was acknowledged by both Ben Lucas and Tom Keith-Roach in their Committee evidence session. This, as Anne Lane, chief executive of UCL Business, pointed out in a recent op-ed for the Financial Times, is helping to attract investment, collaboration and subsequent licensing and spin-out opportunities,” she said.
“While the government is right to look at how it can make mechanisms such as the VPAG more attractive, so as to encourage life sciences companies to develop and launch innovative new products here in the UK, it should also look at how it can further foster the world class research environment that already helps deliver growth for investors. Stakeholders should use this opportunity offered by the Science, Innovation and Technology Committee to provide their thoughts on how the government can better support this going forward,” Bicknell added.
Contact an adviser
