Updated on 17 November 2012
"We instigated an inquiry because of concerns that New Zealand has lost its advantage as a good place to carry out clinical trials. Most submissions we received backed this view and called for improvement. The main elements of the system can be put right at almost no cost, and we believe the returns for New Zealand patients, the health service, and the economy will be significant," says Dr Hutchison.
Healthcare professional-turned-politician
Dr Hutchison, who has more than 30 years of experience as a health professional, has worked as a specialist consultant both in public and private sector and was a founding director of one of New Zealand's first high technology day stay facilities.
He grew up in Wellington and went to Victoria and Otago universities for higher education. A specialist in obstetrics and gynecology, he did his post graduation at Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, US, and National Women's Hospital, New Zealand. He has also worked in the UK, Papua New Guinea, Samoa and the UAE apart from New Zealand.
In 1999, Dr Hutchison was elected as member to the New Zealand Parliament. Currently, he is part of foreign affairs, defence and trade as well as the Emissions Trading System Review Committee, along with being the chair of the Health Select Committee.
Triggering a change
Dr Hutchison said that the inquiry, which concluded in a report recommending changes in the clinical trials industry, began when he noticed that the Australians had initiated a task force on clinical trials in 2010 with the aim to provide the best opportunity for clinical trials in the Australia.
Survey Box
Subscribe to BioSpectrum Asia digital mag at an attractive price of US $49.99 a year
(Includes all 24 regular & special issues @ fortnightly frequency)
Send this article by email
Australia
China
India
Japan
Korea
Malaysia
New Zealand 
Singapore
Taiwan
Thailand
1Comment
Comment 1 - 1 of 1
Reg Harris 21 November 2012 at 07:06 AM
Dr Hutchison's 2011 report was timely. He drew attention to, amongst other things, the benefits to: the participants in clinical trials, the health system generally, higher education and the economy. He quoted a New Zealand Trade and Enterprise [NZTE]-sponsored paper on the biotech industry which showed that (1) for every $1m spent, a further $1.03m was created in the wider economy resulting in total output of $2.03m; (2) the multiplier effect for every dollar in terms of GDP was 1.95 and (3) the multiplier for jobs was 3.41. The not-unreasonable assumption was made that this general pattern would be reflected in the clinical trials 'sector'. Currently in New Zealand we are endeavouring to develop a cohesive Regenerative Medicine [RM] industry. The web page http://www.cmdt.org.nz/research-themes/ provides a general profile of RM which embraces clinical trialling in NZ as an integral component of its structure. It doesn't, I think, require a huge leap of imagination to visualise some of the benefits of having a strong and expanding sector. There are, of course, the overall outcomes noted in the NZTE study. But one might add the engendering of confidence on the part of biomedical researchers and their sponsors that products-to-be can be tested readily and affordably; the encouragement, springing from this, to continue with the necessary lab-end work; and the immediacy and colleagiality of researcher-clinician/trialler contact and the efficiencies arising. One could also mention the relative manageability [and low costs?] of carrying out trials in a small population and the accessibility of a wide range of ethno-cultural groups, the major ones of which encompass numbers suitable for robust study. The clinical trialling sector in NZ is a health, education and economic driver-in-waiting. Decision-makers and influencers need to recognise this and take the necessary action to help ensure the growth and further development of the sector. Cheers Reg
Reply