Merck Research Site Debate
Full Debate: Read Full DebateLord Markham
Main Page: Lord Markham (Conservative - Life peer)Department Debates - View all Lord Markham's debates with the Department for Energy Security & Net Zero
(1 day, 15 hours ago)
Lords ChamberThere is no doubt that Brexit had an effect on the entire sector. It also had an effect on academia and led to us ending up with a very much reduced income from the Horizon Europe programme. There was a significant effect there. It is true that NHS uptake of new medicines as a percentage of the total has decreased; that decrease started somewhere around 2014-15 and has been relentless since. That has been part of creating an environment that is not conducive, and part of why, as part of the Life Sciences Sector Plan, we are determined to support R&D, company formation and growth and to make sure that the NHS is an adopter of innovation.
Unfortunately, contrary to the bigger picture just painted by the Minister, the actual picture is one of a 50% decline in investment in life sciences in the past few years, the loss of three major investments—AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly and Merck—and the fact that 35% of the newest drugs available on the continent are no longer available or not being made available in the UK. The unfortunate situation is that the Treasury is looking at this only as a saving to the NHS and is not considering the wider impact on drugs for patients, valuable UK jobs and the life sciences industry. Has the Treasury performed a cost-benefit analysis that looks at all the costs to industry, patients and business versus the NHS savings? If yes, will the Minister commit to publishing it? If not, will he commit to commissioning one as soon as possible before we lose any more jobs?
I thank the noble Lord for that question. It is a point I agree with: this is about the overall economic picture as well as the health costs. It is something that we need to look at as we think about the way medicines are used in this country. I think that the macroeconomic picture is different from the simple health economics picture, and it is something that is an active part of discussion. It is something I have discussed with macroeconomists, looking at ways in which we might think about introducing that as part of the system.