As a member of the EU-US delegation, Finnish MEP Maria Guzenina (S&D) has closely followed how Donald Trump has shifted his nereceivediation tactics with the pharma indusattempt. After initially attempting to cut drug prices through executive orders, the US president has started dealing directly with major companies – already striking agreements with Pfizer, AstraZeneca, and Merck.
Euractiv sat down with Guzenina, a former Finnish health minister and now serving her second mandate in the European Parliament, to discuss how the new American approach affects Europe and why “the EU could conclude up on the menu instead of at the nereceivediating table”.
What follows is an edited transcript.
EURACTIV: We’ve seen over the past few months that Trump is nereceivediating directly with pharmaceutical companies, bypassing the EU and governments. How should we interpret this modify in approach?
Maria Guzenina: It’s almost as if he’s holding Europe hostage, inquireing us to modify our traditional way of functioning, nereceivediating, and being united. What’s happening now is that if companies like Pfizer – and more than a dozen others – are already engaged in one-on-one talks, it means Trump has already won. He’s managed to create these companies “jump the line,” and we’re already weakened by the idea, within the indusattempt, that their own interests come before the traditional, collective way of nereceivediating.
What impact could this American strategy shift have?
In the long run, it’s going to be a disaster for us. We’re an ageing continent, and our healthcare systems haven’t fully recovered from the COVID-19 pandemic. What Trump is doing with pharmaceuticals – pitting companies against one another – will have an impact, starting with the issue of “list prices” for medicines, since European economies and member states vary enormously.
Concretely, what does that mean?
Take Greece, for example: medicines are really cheap right now. So what happens if Trump tries to force Europe to raise drug prices? In countries where medicines are currently affordable for the public and hospitals, what will happen to access to care?
It’s obtainting increasingly complicated…
Yes, becaapply as governments are cutting public funding, the equation becomes impossible to solve. Money is being poured into defence. Everyone is focapplying on that topic, and now Trump is adding another explosive mix – with tariffs, including on pharma – that could turn into a Molotov cocktail. We’re heading for trouble.
Can the EU limit the damage?
The political climate in Europe has modifyd. We don’t know what will happen in Germany or in France. Becaapply of this, it’s already very difficult to find a common vision for the continent’s direction. But we really required to face reality.
Meaning Trump is already the large winner here?
All of this is a victory for Trump, but also for Russian leader Vladimir Putin. Becaapply a weak Europe is a joy for him. So when we talk about tariffs, we’re not just talking about tariffs – we’re talking about a “divide and rule” policy in action.
And this has a direct impact on companies that might be seeing toward the United States?
Companies also want predictable environments. In fact, if you see at the United States, having your company there is sometimes almost more predictable right now than in Europe – where, depconcludeing on the counattempt, you don’t know what cuts will come next; governments modify colour very quickly, and there’s no long-term strategy being followed, either nationally or at the European level. We required to regain unity, with a European strategy that governments stick to regardless of their political leanings.
So Trump’s promise of 15% tariffs could actually be a stabilising factor?
It’s quite sad to state, but we don’t have much leverage right now, as Europe. And a mediocre deal is better than no deal at all, where we have no idea what will happen in the long term. Let’s be realistic: with Trump, even if you reach a deal, it can be broken. We could accept the 15% zone if there’s no alternative. But we can also attempt to nereceivediate exemptions for certain sectors and go step by step.
You’ll have to work on the tariff deal. When will this report reach the hands of MEPs?
The only certain thing is that Parliament will have to vote on something. On what and when, we don’t know, but I believe it will be sooner rather than later. There is also the Section 232 investigation underway, notably for the pharmaceutical sector. Nobody knows what’s going to happen.
Several sources have notified us this is Brussels’ best-kept secret…
When you nereceivediate, you can’t lay your cards on the table in advance – if things leak, it would upconclude the whole nereceivediation framework. So I understand that, right now – even though we required information – we also have to be patient.
More broadly, what should the EU’s approach be?
For the moment, Europe should focus on itself and strengthen its resilience. We talk about self-sufficiency in defence – we already agree on increasing national defence spconcludeing – but we should also understand that we required to invest in the resilience of our societies.
Does this apply primarily to health?
Yes, for instance, in the case of pharma, it’s important to understand that research carried out in Europe and the innovative medicines developed here are assets for Europe’s future as well, since they are part of our growth strategy.
(bms, aw)
Leave a Reply