Report - LifeSciences BC

criteria/processes, be transparent, clearlycommunicated to all potentially interested partiesand fair. Task Force members further noted thatthe tendering process, a cost controllingprocurement methodology, should not be utilizedas an indirect method to effect clinical outcomes,(for example, tendering to indirectly implementtherapeutic substitution).Issue Three: Strengthening patient careand choice and building positive relationsbetween government decision makers andindustry to achieve those objectives.This aspect of the Task Force mandate hasbeen substantially addressed earlier in this report.Meaningful engagement, transparency inevidence-based decision-making processes and agenuine commitment to a much higher degree ofpartnership-based shared risk arrangements areviewed as the critical elements of a moreconstructive, cost-effective and higher qualitypharmaceutical management system.In many respects, the Task Force processitself has been a useful exercise in thedevelopment of improved relationships and itwould be in the public interest if the PSD andthe various stakeholders continued to buildupon that foundation after the work of the TaskForce is complete. The existing level ofengagement and cooperation between theparties is not sufficient and must be improved.At present stakeholder relations aremanaged almost exclusively by representativesof the PSD. While the Task Force sees this asuseful, and believes it will be important for aneven greater degree of engagement in thefuture, it would also be beneficial if patientgroups and the other key stakeholders had anannual opportunity for an accountability sessionwith the Deputy Minister of Health to discussprogress on improved patient outcomes and thelevel of constructive engagement between theparties.Recommendation Ten:The Deputy Minister of the Ministry of Healthshould commit to participate in an annualaccountability session to hear from patientgroups, from industry and from other keystakeholders regarding improved relationsand the strengthening of the commonobjectives of patient care and choice.Issue Four: The effectiveness of theCommon Drug Review and proposals forimprovement.The Task Force had the benefit of a veryuseful briefing and dialogue with Michael Teirneyof the Common Drug Review who wasforthright and helpful in addressing the status ofthe work conducted by the CDR.We were impressed by the responsivenessof the CDR to recently completed reviews ofthe agency that offered a number ofrecommendations regarding CDR practices andprocedures. It was evident, for example, thatthe CDR had taken steps to improve publicTHE REPORT OF PHARMACEUTICAL POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE MINISTRY OF HEALTH 23 APRIL, 2008