Session Profile: Irja Lutsar
15th Riigikogu, 4th sitting, plenary session
2024-10-23
Political Position
It supports faster access to medicines and increased competition in the pharmaceutical market, especially in the treatment of rare diseases, but prefers a narrower wording of the draft bill. The political stance is cautious and policy-driven, emphasizing that the amendment should focus on life-saving drugs and emergency situations, rather than broad market intervention. Concern is expressed that granting broad import rights could lead to the nationalization of the market or increase bureaucracy for hospitals.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
Demonstrates deep expertise in pharmaceutical policy and supply chains, utilizing specific terminology such as "ambulatory network," "rare diseases," and "radiopharmaceuticals." References previous regulatory discussions (five years ago) and analyses by the Competition Authority, and also provides examples from Finnish practice. It details the distinctions between wholesale and retail drug sales, as well as the bureaucracy associated with applying for marketing authorization.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The style is formal, analytical, and at times cautious, beginning with the observation that "the topic is difficult." The speaker appears in two roles: as a neutral and detailed rapporteur for the Social Affairs Committee, and as the presenter of the critical position held by Eesti 200. The speaker employs logical arguments and poses numerous questions (e.g., concerning the logistics of outpatient care) to highlight the bill's loose ends and inherent risks.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
Active both in committee work and during the plenary session, serving as the representative of the leading committee appointed by the Social Affairs Committee. Participated in the Social Affairs Committee meeting on October 14th, where a lively discussion took place with the Minister. Spoke repeatedly during the same plenary session, presenting both the committee's report and the party's position.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The criticism is aimed at the market situation of pharmaceutical wholesalers (low competition, predominantly two players) and the Ministry of Social Affairs (SOM), which failed to convince the commission of the necessity of broad import rights. Concern is expressed that the state is interfering excessively in the private sector-driven pharmaceutical market and that there is a lack of open dialogue on this issue. It favors narrower regulation that would restrict hospital activities to emergency situations.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
It is reported that a "lively and constructive discussion" took place in the Social Affairs Committee, and the committee's decisions regarding the processing of the draft bill were consensual. Although the party's official position favors a narrower wording, this demonstrates a willingness to participate in a substantive and collaborative legislative process.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
It focuses entirely on national pharmaceutical policy and regulations, analyzing the problems and supply shortages within the Estonian pharmaceutical market. It uses the example of Finland for comparison to assess the potential scope of the law's implementation. There is no specific regional or local focus.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
It advocates increasing market competition to lower drug prices and shortening supply chains to ensure the best possible price. Concern is expressed that granting broad import rights could lead to the nationalization of one-third of the pharmaceutical market and increase hospitals' administrative costs and bureaucracy. It prefers solutions that improve accessibility without significantly restricting private sector activity.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
It focuses on improving access to medicines within the social welfare sector, particularly for patients with rare diseases whose treatment is often administered in an outpatient setting. It emphasizes that the availability and financing of life-saving medicines are critically important, which can lead to improved treatment outcomes.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The main legislative focus is on granting hospital pharmacies the right to direct procurement of medicines. It supports the processing of the draft bill but is critical of its broad scope, preferring a restriction that would allow direct procurement only for life-saving medicines, crises, or urgent medicines (e.g., radiopharmaceuticals). It actively participates in defining the metrics for the post-evaluation of the bill.
4 Speeches Analyzed