4. 4. Statement: Establishment of the New Treatment Fund and the Independent Review of the Individual Patient Funding Request Process

Part of the debate – in the Senedd at 4:02 pm on 27 September 2016.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of David Rees David Rees Labour 4:02, 27 September 2016

Diolch, Ddirprwy Lywydd. Can I thank the Cabinet Secretary for his statement this afternoon? I very much appreciate the effort that’s gone into this. In the fourth Assembly, the Health and Social Care Committee looked at the cancer delivery plan, and one of the recommendations was that we needed a review of the IPFR process, with a view that, perhaps, we would have a single panel to look at the consistency better across Wales. So, I very much appreciate that that’s coming through.

A couple of quick points—I’m very pleased you answered the previous question on treatment, because I notice that the statement focuses very much on medicines and not on treatments, and we talk about treatments very much. I know you believe in treatments, Cabinet Secretary, but it is important that we get that message to the public.

One of the issues I have is the need to actually communicate with the consultants. I notice in your—. It’s in your remit, in a sense. I have constituents who are desperate for some medication, and they come and say that the consultant has said, ‘We need to apply for this, but it’s not likely we’re going to get it’. I think we need to build confidence in consultants and the clinical profession to ensure that the process is going to deliver for clinical need.

On that point, I am a little bit disappointed that we still have the words ‘clinical exceptionality’ in there. I would’ve rather seen it justified as to why it should be there than, actually, whether it is appropriate or not. Clinical need is the issue, and, sometimes, we can’t put a price on clinical need. I have a constituent—as you know, because I’ve written to you about the constituent—who needs a particular drug. That drug will prolong life, and will, perhaps, allow the one-year-old child to remember his or her mother as a consequence of that particular drug. So, it is a need more than an exceptionality question. I think it is important that we address the word ‘exceptionality’. I, personally, would like to see it gotten rid of and look at clinical need, but I appreciate that your remit actually says ‘appropriateness’. Perhaps we can go a bit further than that. The communication aspect is critical. We need to make sure our profession has confidence in the system we are delivering.