Activities of Cecilia WIKSTRÖM related to 2016/2057(INI)
Shadow opinions (1)
OPINION on EU options for improving access to medicines
Amendments (10)
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas EUmany of the EU Member States' public budgets, including those covering health expenditure, are under significant constraints; whereas Member States have exclusive competence to fix the prices of medicinal products;
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the WTO Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health acknowledgunderlines the role of intellectual property protection in the development of new medicines, while expressing concerns about its effects on prices;
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas competithe legal protection of inventions can lower costs, reduce expenditure on medicines andontribute to the progress of science and technology and therefore improve access to affordable medicines;
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Highlights the factNotes that the WTO TRIPS Agreement provides flexibilities to patent rights, such as compulsory licensing, which have proved to be a major tool in bringing prices to reasonable levelsbrought prices down; However, underlines that the exclusivity periods granted through patent law and other mechanisms provide incentives to originator companies to continue innovating;
Amendment 45 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Considers that exclusive protection periods granted to pharmaceuticals through patents or other mechanisms hinder competition, lead to high prices and negatively impact access to neededis essential to promote innovation and the development of new medicines;
Amendment 54 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Recalls that the Pharmaceutical Sector Inquiry Report adopted by the Commission in 2009 showed that some manufacturers of medicines have developed abuggressive strategies in connection with patent claims in order to hinder market entry of generic medicines, which should be avoided;
Amendment 60 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the Commission to undertake a critical review ofassess the impact of intellectual-property-related incentives on biomedical innovation, and to explore alternatives to monopolies for the financing of medical R&D and to evaluate the functioning of the applicable limitations to patent allocations;
Amendment 73 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls onNotes that the European Patent Office (EPO) and the Member States to grant patents on health products that strictly fulfil the patentability requirements of novelty, inventive step and industrial applicability as enshrined in the European Patent Convention;
Amendment 79 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on the Commission to encourage Member States to fully implement existing patent limitMember States to fully cooperate and exchange informations and flexibilities when confronted with excessive pricing or abuse of monopoly righexpertise among each other in order to prevent excessive pricing of medicines and to ensure market access of generic products;
Amendment 84 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Commission to establish full transparency on the results of publicly financed R&D so that patenting and licensing conditions guarantee a public health return on public investments and reflect the structure of R&D fundingudy the different factors which cause excessive prices, such as national regulatory and economic approaches, and to assess how those issues could be tackled at European level.