UK officials pressured to drop intellectual property demands in India trade talks

By Lucy White

A group of lawmakers, academics, medics and charities has urged the UK government to scrap intellectual property demands in their trade negotiations with India, which critics say could threaten imports of cheap life-saving drugs.

Leaked documents from negotiations showed the UK wants India to tighten its IP laws in the free trade agreement under negotiation. This would give patent protection to medications for longer than they currently get in the South Asian country — a position welcomed by major pharmaceuticals developers including Astrazeneca, Glaxosmithkline and Sanofi, which expect higher demand for their more expensive products.

But critics say the changes would damage India’s position as a leading provider of generic drugs — essentially “copycat” versions of those which fall out of patent. That would raise costs for the UK’s National Health Service and for poorer countries and healthcare charities.

In a letter published today, addressed to officials including UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak and Trade Secretary Kemi Badenoch, the UK Missing Medicines Coalition pulled together various groups expressing concerns about IP provisions. It’s being released as people close to the negotiations say a deal is in its final stages. Both sides are eager to reach a deal by the end of the year ahead of national elections due next year, but IP and separate rules dealing with the origin of products remain sticking points.

The criticism is uncomfortable for Sunak, who is trailing the opposition Labour party in polls ahead of a general election expected next year. While pushing India to impose stricter IP rules would be popular with pharmaceuticals firms, it would add to pressures on the NHS which already swallows about a fifth of the government’s total managed expenditure.

The letter has more than 50 signatories, including members of Parliament such as Labour’s Richard Burgon and Kim Johnson, charities including Oxfam and Medecins Sans Frontieres, and academics at institutions from the UCL Institute for Global Health to the University of Strathclyde. They said they were “deeply concerned” by the impact which the FTA might have on the price of medications.

“There are critical safeguards included in Indian patent laws which protect public health whilst complying with international IP rules,” the letter said. “Health systems around the world, including in low- and middle-income countries, rely on the availability of quality-assured, affordable generic medicines from India.”

A quarter of medicines purchased by the UK’s NHS are from Indian generic companies, the letter added. Currently the NHS only buys generic medicines when UK patents have expired. But because India’s patent rules are looser, by the time UK patents are up there is usually a ready supply of generic drugs that has already been made in India.

Forcing India to impose more stringent IP-protection rules would mean the NHS and other healthcare systems would have to buy more expensive products for longer.

When pressed on their IP demands, UK officials “repeat the mantra that ‘Nothing we do is going to damage the NHS,’” said Nick Dearden, director of campaign group Global Justice Now which is a signatory to the letter. “But they clearly don’t actually understand how the generic industry works. The reason we’re buying these drugs from India is precisely because it has looser rules on intellectual property, and therefore can be in a position to have drugs up and ready and running by the time the patent expires in the UK.”

A government spokesperson said officials would “never agree provisions that would increase the cost of medicines for our NHS.”

“The NHS, its services and the cost of medicines are not and have never been on the table for any trade deal,” the spokesperson said in an emailed statement. “The UK’s approach to IP is to strike a balance between encouraging innovation and ensuring access to affordable medicines – this has not changed.”

Transparency concerns

The letter also raises wider concerns around the UK government’s lack of transparency during trade negotiations. Charities and healthcare providers were only made aware of the contentious IP demands being made by the UK through a leak last year.

Yet a Freedom of Information request submitted by Medecins Sans Frontieres to the Department of Business and Trade showed that the UK is “regularly and consistently meeting with members of the multinational pharmaceutical industry to consult them on the FTA negotiations,” according to Roz Scourse, a policy adviser with MSF. The quantity of emails being sent between government officials and pharmaceuticals firms, at almost 4,000, was too large to be released in response to an FOI, DBAT said.

Dearden said he would be “astonished” if the UK’s trade department had come up with the measures it was asking from India “on its own.” He described the leaked demands from the UK as a “bog-standard extreme wish-list from the biggest players in the pharmaceutical industry.”

Global Justice Now is currently challenging the government on its lack of transparency in trade negotiations, with the latest hearing due to take place on Friday at the Royal Courts of Justice. The organisation is hoping to force the government to publish at least basic details such as the minutes from negotiations, and its mandate in trade talks.