Senator LUNDY (11:37 AM) —The Intellectual Property Laws Amendment Bill 1998 , which the opposition will be supporting today, contains three major elements within it. The first is to implement the government's decision to allow an extension of patent term for up to an additional five years for pharmaceutical substances. This recognises the long time it takes to develop a substance and bring it to the market—time that effectively erodes the patent term available in which to recoup on investment.

The bill will provide an effective and realistic patent life for pharmaceuticals closely reflecting that of other areas of innovation. The new arrangements will also allow manufacturers of generic drugs to undertake certain work prior to the expiry of the patent for the purposes of meeting pre-marketing approval requirements. Springboarding by manufacturers of generic drugs will be allowed after a patent extension has been granted.

The second element is to provide for the introduction of a new regime for regulation of the patent attorney profession and to deregulate professional practice in trademarks and designs. This will allow greater choice of providers of professional services in the areas of patents and trademarks. The third is to make some minor changes of a technical nature to the patent regime, making it easier for applicants to transact business.

Before I conclude, there are a few other points that I would like to make on the importance of this legislation. Intellectual property protection is a critical factor in the increasing cost of drugs and health care in the future. The impetus is the genetic revolution and fast moving developments in biotechnology. Those countries that do not keep step with developments in the protection that intellectual property affords will be at a disadvantage. Those countries that do not develop such intellectual property regimes will inevitably suffer, both in terms of their ability to attract the research and development dollar and in the products that are available to consumers.

All the evidence points to the increasing economic importance that pharmaceuticals will have globally. By the years 2010 to 2020, projections are that between 20 and 25 per cent of the US GDP will be allocated to health care. A significant proportion of that will be on pharmaceuticals. In Australia, pharmaceutical spending is continuing to grow as a proportion of overall health spending. That is a good thing, for it is far better to dispense medicine to patients and cure them than to perform surgical procedures.

To maximise Australia's stake in the growth of the use of pharmaceuticals, we need to manage that expansion properly. This legislation is vital to ensuring that Australia is a place that is attractive to international pharmaceutical investment as well as being a place that fosters the development of our own home-grown scientists. The legislation is vital to encouraging an environment of certainty for investment. The Intellectual Property Laws Amendment Bill 1998 is part of the mosaic that will attract investment. In the short term, that means increased costs in terms of the pharmaceutical benefits scheme, but the long-term benefits are clear.

There have been some discussions with the pharmaceutical company Astra, primarily about the inclusion of their drug Losec. I understand that the government will not accept an amendment to include the Astra drug mainly on the grounds of cost, but there are also problems with generic manufacturers who may have started work, at some cost, in the expectation that the drug will go ex-patent soon. The opposition is of the view that the bill should go through, and it would be bad for the industry as a whole if the bill were held up at this stage.

I would like to seek an assurance from the government today that it will further investigate Astra's claims that they have been unfairly excluded and that it undertakes to report back and introduce amending legislation if required. It is my understanding that the government is already committed to doing so in discussions about this bill, and I am seeking a commitment to this undertaking in this place today. In conclusion, the opposition will support this bill for the reasons I have just outlined.