[Reporter's View] Why the rush for drug pricing reform?

While the pharmaceutical industry and citizen groups are calling for a postponement of the drug pricing system reform, the government is remaining silent.

With the conclusion from the Health Insurance Policy Review Committee imminent, doubts persist regarding the effectiveness and feasibility of the reform.

The reform plans appear underdeveloped, leading to concerns that achieving National Health Insurance (NHI) financial savings may prove difficult. Under these circumstances, the government may need a break to ensure the successful achievement of its policy goals.

Voices calling for the establishment of a social consultative body are mounting. Following the pharmaceutical industry and the Federation of Korean Trade Unions (FKTU), civic groups, including the Citizens' Coalition for Economic Justice, have joined in expressing concern over the enforcement of policies without adequate communication.

Regarding the price reduction of generic drugs, a backlash involving the weakening of the industrial base and employment instability is anticipated. If the reform is implemented in its current state, pharmaceutical companies are predicted to shift toward austerity measures rather than expanding investment in research and development (R&D).

Furthermore, the policy to enhance access to treatments for rare diseases continues to draw demands for clarity on financial management and post-monitoring measures. This is precisely the concern raised recently by these organizations.

Critics question whether a management plan is in place for the NHI budget, which is expected to increase as the entry barriers for high-priced new drugs are lowered. If the funds saved from generic price cuts are entirely absorbed by high-priced drugs, the anticipated drug expenditure reduction effect of the reform will vanish.

The Ministry of Health and Welfare (MOHW) cites the restructuring of the Korean pharmaceutical industry and the creation of momentum for global expansion as the expected goals of this reform. However, the policy could unexpectedly cause industrial imbalance and exacerbate an unstable growth foundation. This suggests a need for the government to take the time to address concerns from the field.

No one disputes the justification for improving the generic industry's constitution or enhancing access to rare disease treatments.

However, policy is not made by good intentions alone. The MOHW repeatedly emphasizes the number of generic items to justify the need for structural reform. In response to the industry's question, "Why the rush?", the government must show a willingness to discuss qualitative strategies for constitutional improvement rather than merely listing quantitative figures.

On the 10th, the Korea Pharmaceutical and Bio-Pharma Manufacturers Association (KPBMA) announced a resolution calling for a postponement of the reform and presented the government with an impact assessment of the proposed changes. Additionally, citizen groups have announced a follow-up press conference on the impact of the generic drug pricing reform. As industry, citizen, and labor groups all express a sense of crisis, the government must communicate to find ways to minimize adverse side effects.