Latest news with #Sommen
Euractiv
09-07-2025
- Business
- Euractiv
Belgian MEP Sommen says ‘predictability is vital' from pharma trilogue
Belgian MEP Liesbet Sommen (EPP, CD&V) is urging swift progress on the EU pharmaceutical reform as trilogue negotiations between the Parliament, Council and Commission begin. For Sommen, political momentum must now translate into concrete results for patients, and predictability for patients and companies is vital, she said. 'What matters to me is the outcome,' she said. 'Now that the trilogues can start, I hope good progress will be made quickly.' Her remarks follow the announcement by Health Commissioner Olivér Várhelyi of the EU Life Sciences Strategy on 2 July. In a post on X, Várhelyi outlined his legislative priorities, naming the conclusion of the pharma package and the Critical Medicines Act as top priorities of what he called a 'health package by the end of 2025.' Sommen believes the legislative institutions are not too far apart on the core issues, a rare advantage that should be used to accelerate negotiations. 'The good news is that the positions on several sensitive issues are not too far apart,' she noted. 'The details will matter, of course, but this could help speed up the negotiations.' At the same time, she warned that broader geopolitical and health system pressures leave little room for delay. 'Our pharmaceutical sector is under pressure due to the international context, while the medical community and patients urgently need innovative medicines,' Sommen said, adding: 'Accessibility and affordability for the patient must always come first; we don't have time to waste.' Rethinking the access incentive One of the most contentious elements of the Commission's original proposal was the so-called access incentive, which would grant up to two extra years of regulatory data protection (RDP) to companies that made their product available in all 27 EU countries within two years. The Parliament chose to remove this mechanism altogether, replacing it with an obligation to respond to pricing and reimbursement requests. The Council, by contrast, retained a softer version, giving member states the right to request access and requiring companies to supply within four years. Sommen supports the Parliament's decision to drop the original incentive, which she believes was too rigid. But she insists the broader goal of equal access across the EU remains essential, especially for smaller markets like Belgium. 'In theory, that access incentive sounded promising,' she said. 'That should be the starting point of this revision: how do we ensure equal access for all Member States?' She pointed to the potential unintended consequences of the Commission's model. 'What if a company wants to make a medicine available in all 27 countries, but one country refuses? Sometimes it's better to have a clear baseline framework for data protection, with incentives where needed.' Predictability, she added, is vital not just for companies but also for national health systems and patients. 'That kind of predictability benefits everyone: the companies, the member states and the patients.' Antibiotic incentives under negotiation Another unresolved issue is how to incentivise the development of new antibiotics in the face of growing antimicrobial resistance (AMR). The Council favours a limited version of transferable exclusivity vouchers (TEVs), a reward mechanism allowing companies to extend the market exclusivity of another product. Meanwhile, Parliament has proposed alternatives, such as milestone payments and subscription models. Sommen said all these approaches remain on the table. 'It's true that vouchers remain part of the negotiations,' she explained. 'In the European Parliament, we examined other options, but we ultimately agreed to consider the voucher mechanism in a certain form.' However, she stressed that any reward system must be closely monitored and carefully controlled. 'The reality is we need to invest more in the fight against antimicrobial resistance. That requires new antibiotics, so we need to be open to systems that can incentivise additional scientific research, always with a critical eye.' 'What we must absolutely not do is give a blank cheque that allows other medicines to be sold at high prices for longer. That is unacceptable.' She said Parliament and Council had both introduced safeguards to avoid such outcomes. 'It's now up to the negotiators to find the right system. Once again, for me, the patient must be central. It's about availability and affordability.' Focus on real innovation for unmet medical needs Parliament had also proposed introducing a 'high unmet medical need' (HUMN) designation for products targeting rare or poorly treatable conditions, with additional regulatory incentives. However, the Council dropped the HUMN label in its final negotiating position. Sommen believes the concept remains valuable, even if its formal designation is no longer part of the proposal. 'The criterion of 'high unmet medical need' can certainly add value,' she said. 'It's important that, alongside conventional medicines, we continue to invest in scientific research into innovative treatments for diseases that remain difficult to treat.' She cautioned against a system that rewards only marginal improvements. 'We must not move toward a system where new medicines come to market that make little difference compared to existing treatments.' For Sommen, real innovation should be targeted where it matters most. 'I am convinced that governments have a role to play in ensuring sufficient research into rare diseases. Truly patient-centred policy means not just producing more medicines, but the right medicines for those who need them most.' Danish Presidency takes the lead Trilogue negotiations will be chaired by the Danish EU Presidency, which is under pressure to finalise the deal by the end of 2025. With Várhelyi's end-of-2025 deadline in sight, the window for political agreement is narrowing. For Sommen, success will not be measured by institutional wins but by results on the ground. [Edited by Vasiliki Angouridi, Brian Maguire]
Irish Times
30-04-2025
- Business
- Irish Times
How women pay the price every day: from deodorant to haircuts and razors as well as lower pay to higher taxes
Are women paying more than men? Let me count the ways. You've heard of the gender pay gap and the gender pension gap, but there are other ways, too, that women end up paying a higher price. From shaving your legs to buying shoes to paying your taxes, it pays to mind the gaps. READ MORE Pink tax If you're a woman who has ever bought deodorant, shampoo or razors, you'll know many are more expensive than equivalent products for men. A razor may differ only in colour, name or description, but because it is marketed as 'for women' it's priced higher. This is gender-based price discrimination, and women will find plenty of so-called pink tax products in their shopping trolley. Shower gels, vitamin pills, haircuts and jeans are other examples of pink tax products. Even some medication marketed specifically for period pain is the same as standard painkillers. You'll also see a pink tax on services such as hairdressing, dry-cleaning and in the beauty industry too. In January, Belgian MEP Liesbet Sommen raised the pink tax with the European Parliament , asking when unjustified price differences that resulted in higher costs to women would be tackled. There's been no comprehensive EU -wide research on the issue and the Commission must investigate and map the phenomenon to which many women have become accustomed, Sommen said. Services such as hairdressing, dry cleaning, facial treatments and tailoring came with separate price lists for men and women, German research found In 2017, Germany's Federal Anti-Discrimination Agency examined more than 1,500 products. It found that gender-based pricing of products wasn't widespread, but did happen. Men paid a higher price for a male variant of products in some cases, but women paid a higher price for the female variant in more cases. The average surcharge to women was €5. There were far more cases of gender-specific pricing in the service industry, the German agency found. Those offering services such as hairdressing, dry cleaning, facial treatments and tailoring often displayed separate price lists for men and women, it said. Germany identified 381 similar services variations for a specific gender, 59 per cent of these revealing a price difference: 50 per cent were more expensive for women, and just 9 per cent were more expensive for men. Hairdressing and dry-cleaning showed the most obvious gender-based price differences, the agency said, adding that 89 per cent of the hairdressers offered different rates for the same short haircuts for women and men, with women paying an average of €12.50 more. A hairdresser shouldn't draw conclusions about the expected effort required to cut a person's hair based on their gender, the German agency said. One-third of dry cleaners in the study had different flat rates for men's shirts and women's blouses. Women paid on average €1.80 more for the dry cleaning of blouses than men did for shirts. Price differences for basically the same product or services which are offered in two gender-specific versions through gender marketing must be justified, it said. In 2023, the European Commission said it had no plans to introduce additional measures to address gender price discrimination. Sommen is calling for these now and for a tightening of laws on indirect discrimination based on sex. In response to a query, the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission said there were no specific regulations here against prices being adjusted depending on a consumer's gender. 'Individual businesses can decide on the prices of the products they sell,' a spokeswoman said. 'They are allowed to adjust their prices in response to demand or other factors, as long as an accurate price is displayed to the consumer in advance so they can decide if they want to proceed.' Be informed and shop around, the CCPC says. To dodge the pink tax, it's up to women themselves to look critically at products and services they buy. Gender inflation gap Are you a woman who does most of the grocery shopping in your household? Then you might have experienced the gender inflation gap. The gender inflation gap is where women tend to have higher inflation expectations than men. This can affect women's finances, impacting spending and investing to their detriment. How people experience inflation depends on how they perceive things such as the price of food, health, clothing, transport, utilities. All of these matter, but perception of food inflation matters the most, according to a European Central Bank (ECB) blog, from September 2022, called What Drives Inflation Expectations of Women and Men?. The gender inflation gap has been attributed to some women's greater involvement in food shopping and exposure to volatile food prices, the ECB said. This may sound a bit 1950s, but men and women still spend their money on different things and have varying perceptions of inflation. The gender inflation gap was observed more among married people aged 35 to 49, partially reflecting how couples split tasks based on gender, the ECB said. It was less among younger, single women. Why does this matter? As consumers, the way we perceive inflation affects our actions. If the object you buy most is increasing in price or there is price volatility, then this may cause you to alter your spending in other areas. Women tended to perceive food inflation as higher, while men paid more attention to changes in transport, clothing and housing prices, the ECB said. 'Women might be less prone than men to cancelling, postponing or reducing their holiday plans when energy prices spike or be less influenced by a similar spike when planning to purchase a car,' the ECB said. Household shopping bills in Ireland have risen by more than 20 per cent when compared with late 2021, Kantar Worldpanel said. A person who expects that inflation is higher due to rapidly rising grocery prices may decide to save more instead of investing or might curtail pension contributions. This will have an effect on their financial wellbeing. Better financial literacy would help men and women bridge the gender inflation gap, the ECB said. This would broaden the evidence base on which they made financial decisions, better informing their shopping and investing decisions. Inflation Alongside women's perceptions of inflation, actual inflation affects women more, too. Soaring prices in recent years have disproportionately affected women, the National Women's Council says. In general, women have lower incomes, fewer resources, less wealth and greater unpaid care responsibilities, the council says. This limits their choices around paid work and means greater reliance on low-paid and precarious work. Six out of 10 low-paid workers are women. Lone parents, 86 per cent of whom are women, have less wealth and savings, too. They are less likely to own a home or to be able to access credit. All of this means women are less able to bear the impact of rising costs, the council says. People with childcare responsibilities faced an especially severe cost-of-living crisis, the World Economic Forum has said. But the high cost of childcare disproportionately affected women, making it more difficult to work. The inflation crisis also threatened to unravel progress on closing the gender pay gap for women, the forum said. Women were less likely than men to receive a salary rise at a rate higher than inflation in 2022, it said. To top it off, prices of products aimed at women rose faster than those aimed at men between 2020 and 2021, one analysis in Britain found. Women's formal shoes had price increases of 75 per cent in 2021, while those for men increased by only 14 per cent, an analysis of Office of National Statistics data by The New Statesman showed. Similar inequalities were visible when it came to electric razors, T-shirts, jeans and haircuts in the UK. Overall, inflation affects some women far more than men. Joint taxation bias If you're a married couple, being jointly assessed for tax will decrease your household's overall tax bill, but is it discriminatory? Joint assessment may inadvertently carry an implicit gender bias, according to Taxation's Impact on Gender Equality in the EU, a publication from the European Parliament Members Research Service published in January. The service is responsible for providing MEPs with policy research and analysis to help them in their parliamentary work. While joint assessment will reduce your household's tax burden, especially where there is significant income disparity between the two partners, it can also lead to a disproportionately higher marginal tax rate for the lower income earner who often is a woman. This effect can make additional earnings less financially rewarding, discouraging women from transitioning from part-time to full-time employment, the publication said. 'These tax structures can contribute to broader gender inequalities by limiting women's career advancement and undermining their economic independence in the long term,' author Pieter Baert said. Joint taxation systems are increasingly being phased out, although several European countries, including Ireland, continue to have them in place on mandatory or voluntary basis.
