Voice your Issue

Our recent work with a couple of clients has meant we are more aware of the potential opportunities in India, especially for UK pharmaceutical consultancy & design expertise. Many global conglomerates have facilities in India and we’ve found making contact with the local Embassy is a good way of arranging relevant introductions. But accessing a market this geographically distant requires a financial investment, one that is often out of the reach of SMEs without some level of government support. The abolishment of the RDAs makes this a very concerning time for companies and their export strategies.

As a company making upward strides from being the Small in SME towards Medium, we have exhausted the generic business support available through BusinessLinks and the Chamber (with a mixed experience all around). We now need specialist market knowledge and support to help us identify new areas within the medical market to target, and provide advice on how to reach the key decision makers. Does anyone know what the coalition government’s plans are to support established companies, as all the rhetoric seems to be around start-ups?

As one of the first strategic health authorities to use Alvolution’s telehealth product comparison site, NHS Telford and Wrekin has been involved in its expansion, providing significant user input. As the population ages, Telehealth will expand rapidly. Our teams already dedicate a considerable number of hours to sourcing technology that supports members of our community who wish to live independently. By using this single repository, we can refer products on to commissioning teams, clinicians and community workers with real confidence. How do we encourage more widespread use, to share this as an example of best practice?

One of the key advantages of mobile technology for clinical staff is getting the real-time information they need when and where a medical decision has to be taken about a patient.

I was recently at the BioPartner Annual Dinner, at which several companies commented on how US universities allow time for the maturing of technologies that they have nurtured. whilst UK universities are pressurised by the finance framework, into making to narrow a market valuation and then having to internationalise to soon. Other pressures to internationalise to soon were considered to be due to the poor adoption rates for technology in the home market

I believe it’s essential that those of us in the public sector set new standards of best practice and promote new healthcare technologies internally and externally. Healthcare devices now range from mobility to memory aid to medicines compliance, and a single device can perform many functions, potentially helping the NHS and councils improve care while saving costs. I’m using Alvolution’s assisted living product comparison website to demonstrate that just as there are a range of issues, there can be a range of solutions. But here, knowledge is the most important factor. This application means that we can inform the public, share our product expertise with our colleagues and fellow professionals and recommend solutions. So how are others sharing product knowledge between departments?

There seems to be a plethora of events taking place in the field of mobile apps for healthcare. Most of these events seem to be skipping over the complicated discussion about regulation and getting apps approved for medical and/or personal use. The exception is MedilinkWM. MedilinkWM is hosting an event on 21st July which I have agreed to speak at. It is the only event addressing the needs of the app developers and key regulatory compliance issues that must be met to get to market legally. There will be some innovative clinicians in the room with whom we'll be able to debate this issue with. This technology is important for more efficient and more personalised healthcare, we all need it to happen. However the regulations matter, and are there to protect the public health. Everyone wants to know who looked after the safety and risk compliance issues when something goes wrong when using an app! And yes innovative product development and regulatory compliance can be achieved, the use of well developed technology can benefit us all.

I've been noticing that in these tough economic times many more companies are working together to get new products to market. myM-link, the membership arm of MedilinkWM, has had a hand in directly assisting a number of companies to increase their bottom line, most recently putting Kimal and Openhouse together for the nationally-recognised launch of the UK’s first mobile pack for people reliant on infusion for nutrition or pain relief. Is this because partnership can be a way to share the cost, shorten development times and reduce risk?

I’ve been to three innovation events this month and am concerned there is still a lot of talk and not enough adoption taking place of new technologies. At each event companies expressed the same challenge: the NHS, as the largest purchaser of products and services, is not being adequately incentivised to explore new technologies and instead the procurement officers are just beating down the costs of the current suppliers. How can this be addressed with the cuts and efficiencies being driven down from the top which still seem incapable of looking at the overall cost savings as opposed to individual budget savings?

We recently received an Advantage Proof of Concept Fund award through AWM which allowed us to get an idea to market. These types of funds are valuable to small businesses wanting to develop new ideas and realise commercial value.

The Regional Task and Finish Group has made the following recommendations for medical technologies in the West Midlands: 1)create a specialist tendering and sales support service; 2)integrate regional support mechanisms; 3)articulate clear, consistent messages describing the region's capabilities and support mechanisms to promote the region. Is there anything we've missed which you would like to see included?

GPs should be looking at the effectiveness of the medicines they prescribe INCLUDING the cost effectiveness since money saved is money available for further care

The budget announcement is good news for Herefordshire cider makers, bad news for Birmingham video game developers...and several of those companies are leading the country in medical simulation.

Is there any reason the NHS can't be an early adopter?

According to the BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/10285950.stm), the British Medical Association is questioning the effectiveness of NHS Direct, claiming it delayed patients getting healthcare. Is this where cuts could be made?

So the new independent fiscal watchdog has downgraded the economic growth projections for the UK economy. Is this bad news for business?

More than €50million of EU funding and £10million of UK funding is available for firms researching Assisted Living technology. Mike Biddle, the Technology Strategy Board (TSB) team leader for the Assisted Living Innovation Platform, will be at two MedilinkWM workshops to explain how firms can improve their chances to access the £10 million funding to be invested by the Technology Strategy Board, the Economic and Social Research Council and the Department of Health’s National Institute for Health Research. He'll also focus on the call from Ambient Assisted Living (AAL) for ICT-based Solutions for Advancement of Older Persons’ Independence and Participation in the “Self-Serve Society”. This European competition for funding of more than €50million, seeks proposals from firms developing innovative Assisted Living technology. This is an amazing opportunity for companies to receive free funding for their research and development, but what more can be done to help companies take advantage of these opportunities?

High levels of indebtedness, credit constraints and forthcoming fiscal austerity raise the likelihood that UK domestic demand will remain relatively weak over the next few years. As such, it raises the question of where UK economic growth will come from. In my article, I look at the UK manufacturing sector and how manufacturers have become more innovative and more entrepreneurial. Looking ahead, we are optimistic that the UK can improve its export performance. To date, companies have seemingly held back from passing on the fall in the exchange rate through lower prices, preferring instead to bolster their profit margins as they seek to repair their balance sheets. Over time, however, we suspect the fall in the exchange rate, in both nominal and real terms, will start to have a more pronounced impact on the UK�s export performance. Such a strategic shift is likely to be aided by policy, with the new coalition government indicating that it also believes the opportunity for growth lies in an expansion of exports, particularly to emerging Asia. To capitalise on this opportunity, however, it is imperative that the UK continues to invest in those high-value added industries in which it has a comparative advantage.

Two important messages seem to be emerging from the new coalition government that relate to our industry. The first being the continuing importance of life science's to the economy, with distinct life science responsibility being given to two senior ministers in Vince Cables BIS ministry. The second is the jettisoning of the notion that all regions of the UK should receive economic assistance of equal measure in order to support and encourage growth within industry. There seems to be an emerging policy in targeted public sector economic support being given to those parts of the country that still have, challenging conditions, significant market failures and rising unemployment. Is my perception of the current climate correct and if it is are the approaches being taken the best for UK PLC??

The first regenerative medicine based on stem cells could be filed for approval in Europe later this year, bringing the groundbreaking medical technology a step closer to reality. In my article, the European Medicines Agency (EMEA) has said that it had been informed about the "intent of a European manufacturer to submit the first application for marketing authorization for a stem cell-based product." For many investors in pharmaceutical companies, stem cells remain off the radar screen for now after early excitement about the science was followed by delays and disappointments in the clinic, but pharmaceutical companies pioneering the technology have not given up and a growing number of large pharmaceutical companies are also starting to dip their toes in the water.

The recast of the Medical Devices Directive 2007/47/EC will see medical device manufacturers facing, among other things, more stringent clinical trials. How do you think these changes will affect our industry?

The BBC's recent article about Otto Bock Healthcare's mind-control arm, touches on the availability of advanced prosthetics on the NHS, and those available to UK troops. BBC News - Otto Bock Healthcare's mind-control arm. You have to wonder to what extent innovation like this is being stifled in the UK due to lack of resource.

MedilinkUK.com has asked each of the three major political parties for a summary of their policies that will affect, enhance and support the life science market. This is your chance to share your thoughts and comments too, or take part in our independent poll.

Over a decade of sustained investment by Labour has rescued science and research in the UK. The UK research base ranks as among the best in the world, supporting business development and inward investment, and is second only to the US on research citations. We are the most productive nation in the G8, per researcher and per public pound spent. By 2010-11, Labour investment in science and research will have doubled from its 1997 level, to over £6 billion.

Supporting curiosity driven research creates knowledge. This in turn generates innovation and creates employment in emerging new sectors.It is clear that a business led recovery, underpinned by excellent science and ground-breaking technologies, will enable the UK to secure strong economic growth. As the economy recovers, we will build on our strengths at creating knowledge in the UK and become even more effective at transforming that knowledge into economic growth. We need more young people to undertake STEM degrees. To enable this to happen we will recruit 20,000 extra undergraduates on courses starting in September 2010.

We are already taking action to make sure that innovative new businesses succeed. For example, we have started to invest in centres of excellence in emerging technologies. Facilities such as the recently launched Stevenage Bioscience Park, the Composites Centre, the Printable Electronics Technology Centre (PETEC) and the European Space Agency’s investment in a new space technology centre at Harwell will play a critical role in commercialising the outputs of our world leading research and developing the platform technologies and industries of the future.

Labour’s Innovation Investment Fund will back entrepreneurs who need capital for their businesses to grow. Financed by £325m of government investment and private venture capital, the fund will support the next generation of technology-based businesses. The fund will be invested in important growth sectors, such as low carbon, digital, life sciences and advanced manufacturing. We have simplified the research and development (R&D) tax credit scheme to further support small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). SMEs will no longer have to own any intellectual property attributable to their R&D expenditure as a condition of being able to claim under the R&D tax credit SME scheme. The change will apply to any expenditure incurred in accounting periods ending on or after 9 December 2009.

We will continue helping businesses to fully exploit the commercial potential of their intellectual property. The Intellectual Property Office has introduced a raft of measures to improve the granting of patents and trademarks. These include a fast track procedure for green patents to support the rapid growth of climate-friendly industries. Building on the Hauser Review, which is looking into the role of science in the UK economy, we will ensure that the UK’s Technology and Innovation Centres achieve their potential to commercialise new British discoveries. We will encourage businesses from all sectors to benefit from the introduction of the 'Patent Box'. From April 2013, the Patent Box will apply a 10 per cent rate of corporation tax to income received from UK patents to ensure the UK that remains an attractive location for innovation.

The process of transforming knowledge developed in the UK into economic benefits for the UK must be a key focus of policy in the years ahead. This is reflected in a new commitment to increase our focus on the economic and social impact of research. Through changes in the new Research Excellence Framework, we will do more to incentivise universities to broaden and deepen their links with business and users of research and to think further about the impact they generate. We will provide further incentives for universities to commercialise their research. We will invest up to £25 million in a University Enterprise Capital Fund, which will provide crucial early stage funding for the commercialisation of some of the most promising university innovations.

We will implement key recommendations from Sir James Dyson’s Review into how to achieve our goal of making Britain Europe’s leading hi-tech exporter, including: encouraging the establishment of joint university-business research and development institutes; initiating a multi-year Science and Research Budget to provide a stable investment climate for Research Councils; creating a better focus on Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths (STEM) subjects in schools; and establishing a new prize for engineering.
 
Research and development tax credits will be improved and refocused on hi-tech companies, small businesses and new start-ups. At the same time, we will give strong backing to the growth industries that generate high-quality jobs around the country. We will improve the performance of UK Trade and Investment with a renewed focus on high priority sectors and markets where the return on taxpayers’ money is highest. We will regularly compare government support for exporters and inward investment against the services provided by our competitors. We will work for the successful conclusion of the Doha trade round and support bilateral free trade negotiations between the European Union and other countries.
 
Thirteen years ago, Britain’s tax system was one of the most competitive in the developed world. Over the last decade, other countries have cut their tax rates while our tax system has become one of the most complex in the world. Our competitiveness rating has fallen, while the burden of regulation and the impact of taxation have risen. We can only make a sustainable economic recovery if we send a clear signal that Britain is open for business again. That means stopping Labour’s jobs tax, lowering corporate tax rates, reducing the regulatory burden, and supporting innovation and sustainable development – changes that will benefit businesses of all sizes and boost employment.
 
The Conservative Party believes in lower and simpler taxation. That is why we will ensure that by far the largest part of the burden of dealing with the deficit falls on lower spending rather than higher taxes. Cutting the deficit is the most urgent task we need to undertake if we are to get the economy moving, but it is not enough. So, initially, we will cut the headline rate of corporation tax to 25p and the small companies’ rate to 20p, funded by reducing complex reliefs and allowances. To boost small businesses and life sciences start-ups, we aim to deliver 25 per cent of government research and procurement contracts through SMEs by cutting the administrative costs of bidding.

It is critical that the education system provides young children with properly funded, high quality science education.  This initial enthusiasm must then be cultivated by ensuring that science is viewed as an attractive career choice. Alongside setting out our vision, practical action is needed as well.  That’s why we will:

• Invest a further £2.5bn a year in the education system directed at the most disadvantaged pupils in the form of a ‘pupil premium’.  This will improve the quality of maths and science education by reducing class sizes. 
• Expand the TeachFirst programme to get more top graduates in our classrooms, particularly in shortage subjects like maths and physics.
• Scrap university tuition fees so that access to higher education is based on an individual’s ability, not their bank balance
• Reform the existing bursary system for university students so that bursaries are awarded on the basis of studying strategic subjects (such as sciences and mathematics) as well as financial hardship.  This will promote the supply of skilled scientists that we need.
 
The current career structure in science is not letting talented young researchers make the most of their education, and this is a waste of resources. We would explore with stakeholders across the sector how these concerns could be addressed, by measures such as expanding the number of postdoctoral places, as well as making PhDs more industry-friendly, funded by reducing the surplus of under-utilised PhD places.
 
Liberal Democrats recognise that UK science needs long-term planning in order to be structurally viable and internationally competitive. We are therefore committed to not cutting science spending in the first year of the new Parliament. In the current economic climate it is not possible to commit to growth in spending and, as a matter of principle, the Liberal Democrats have ruled out guaranteeing spending commitments to any individual department until a full spending review has been undertaken and we are clearer about the scale of the reductions needed.  However, we are clear that rebalancing the economy is a key objective and the Liberal Democrats recognise the importance of science investment to economic recovery.  We also acknowledge the important contribution being made by the Technology Strategy Board and will seek to ensure that this continues. The honest reality is that public spending will be tight even for priority areas as we seek to rebuild the public finances onto a sustainable footing.  In this context, we need to make better use of the resources that we do have and introduce new mechanisms that support private sector funding. 
 
The UK has an excellent track record of generating innovative new ideas but frequently this knowledge is trapped within a university or other higher education institution.  We must develop more of these ideas to the point of commercial production.  We will encourage universities to work more closely with businesses, particularly SMEs, to combine the technical knowledge of academics with the business experience of local entrepreneurs. Commercialisation of new ideas is a risky business, more suited to being financed by equity than debt.  Sources of UK equity for small innovative manufacturers are scarce as existing UK markets do not serve smaller business well.  We will therefore support the creation of new mechanisms to provide smaller businesses with access to equity by connecting investors with businesses in their own region:

• Local Enterprise Funds - tax efficient investment vehicles to provide seed capital to start-up/early stage businesses as they commercialise their ideas
• Regional Stock Exchanges - regional platforms matching local investors with growing SMEs.   They will provide SMEs with cost effective access to equity through a simple operating model that meets the needs of smaller companies

Business leaders in the life sciences sector have criticised the NHS for 'silo thinking' - especially in respect of departmental savings vs enterprise-wide benefits. Attitudinal change typically takes years to achieve. Any suggestions for how the new Life Sciences minister should address this problem?

Medilink UK welcomes Gordon Browns announcment following the budget that there will be a minister for life sciences if labour win the election but what would we want him or her to achieve on behalf of our industry

I was interested to hear about the HMO system from Sweden that Trevor Lewis mentioned in your first webcast, and I'd like to know more. What did they do and how did it bail them out? What are the lessons learned that we could implement over here in the UK?

The introduction of the 10% Patent Box is welcome news for companies such as mine who are investing heavily in R&D. It also supports the concept of keeping the innovation in the UK. The only real concern we have about this scheme is waiting until 2011, especially after the successful drive of the Office of Life Science and their recent launch to deliver the blueprint- what’s the rational and where’s the investment short term?

What about the small, innovative companies who struggle to have the resource to actually file patents? Couldn’t the Government also do something to support the patent application process, or is this only a bill for big industry?

Would others agree that The NHS procurement organisation rules, regulations and general bureaucracy are a hindrance to the UK industry base which is 98% SME and unable to invest the amount of time and energy required to comply.

Shouldn't life sciences OEMs be sourcing components from companies like mine so that all the economic benefit stays in the UK?

Funding for start-up companies with innovations past the concept stage but some way from commercial reward, commonly called ‘the valley of death’, is still sparse. Funding for pure research is readily available. Funding for expansion of an established commercial entity with a sound business plan and track record is relatively easy to find but the bit in the middle is where we all are losing valuable initiatives. Even the VC community is loath to invest, or if they do, they will stifle the creative spark in their quest for a quick return.

I see the main difficulty faced by any small company, be it start up or established SME, lies in the barriers which discourage adoption of new technologies within the NHS. Yes, a level of patient protection is needed, but many innovations fall foul of the full range of defenses even when there is little or no risk and great benefits. Despite a number of well sounding bodies and initiatives, I am yet to be convinced that a simple route exists through the labyrinth.

Has anyone else had experience of negotiating and agreeing a central price for a product or service (e.g. Drug Tariff) only to be then drawn in to attempts at a local PCT level to re-negotiate that price?

Is Medical Simulation Stimulating Users and Producers?

UK SMEs operating in the medical diagnostics industry want to compete with the global companies yet often need a reminder about the importance of regulatory issues. A word of advice: appropriate risk management approval processes may protect you from future liability issues, so make sure your documentation is detailed and conforms to the European standards.

Universities and higher education institutions have a lot of IP trapped in their empires which is potentially quite lucrative – how do we help them understand that by working with us clever SMEs who are skilled and experienced in the commercialisation process, we all will benefit?

I am still concerned by the discourse around the Medical Device Directive, and its possible recast, which may draw it closer to pharmaceutical regulation. Medical devices are significantly different than pharmaceutical products and deserve their own regulations without the added complications of pharmaceutical laws which could hinder innovative development and penalise small businesses. Such a change could also highlight further the current inconsistencies between Notified Bodies which appears to be on the increase.

I think the pressure on the NHS to save 5% each year for the next three years will increase pricing pressures on its suppliers. We are reacting to this by working with our customers to source generic products with significant cost savings. I believe this strategy of building a UK company focused on delivering quality products with significant cost savings will enhance our opportunity and break down the barriers to entry that currently exist where the market leaders are largely International healthcare organizations.

In its report on catheters, the Rapid Review Panel refers to a recent report by the international Cochrane Collaborative which highlighted that ‘the results suggest that the use of BARDEX(R) I.C. silver alloy indwelling catheters for hospitalised adults short-term reduces the risk of catheter acquired urinary tract infection. The relative risk of symptomatic urinary tract infection was 40% lower than if a standard catheter had been used.’ Therefore, I concluded that the RRP is a necessary step in the device evaluation process, but now I’m finding that’s not necessarily the case. And just because a product is ‘approved’ by the RRP it does not guarantee the NHS will adopt it. So what is the point of the Rapid Review Panel?

There are several issues I feel are hot right now: - Differing registration requirements in EU Member States affects the ability to gain reimbursement - Clinical trial reporting requirements for trials started prior to 21Mar10 - Unique Device Identification (UDI) is coming and companies should get involved now to understand it as it affects the whole supply chain - Software classification of all kinds (patient records/data handling, and more importantly when s/w is used in the diagnosis of the patient and involves some form of processing/interpretation)

Given the financial status of the UK, one of the only arenas that has experienced growth is the Biotech market and it has been shown that investment in Biotech, gives much higher returns that other sectors. However this needs to stay as a focus as if the UK does not continue to invest and concentrate on new products, we risk this strong position. Continued development in UK innovation and NHS involvement with UK companies should be seen as a win-win situation and needs to be given increased focus and drive from all levels. The UK seems to get bogged down in red tape for implementing products and services that may make total common sense. All parties need to look at ways in which these can be used as they may increase patient outcomes and therefore overall costs in the long run. There are obviously areas in which we need stringent Regulation but there are also areas where if the product does not need to be regulated so thoroughly.

We contribute directly in the manufacturing chain to the safety of pharmaceutical industry. We are one of the gatekeepers for Quality, and as we are audited to do so (from MHRA) we ensure that the medication is what is supposed to be and is safe. This is a global market and as such, multiple outsourcing is occurring at a high level. This has mainly been dictated by ‘Big Pharma’ and the Generic manufacturers working in niche markets. Pharmaceutical product recalls are very expensive for companies, and the fact that they still happen is amazing. Even politically, the EU is dragging its feet on the way to go for legislation. Globally there are 22,000 API (Active Pharmaceutical Ingredient) manufacturers, and they are not all the same in standards of excellence. The good companies with cGMP (current Good Manufacturing Practice), actively show the quality certificates of the products made. The not so good ones, try to cut corners and save money, and creep into the drug chain. The consumers want cheaper drugs, but quality counts, and this has to be paid for. Currently the role of the ‘QC gatekeeper’ is one that has not been looked at as a key element by some. Just like Health & Safety it is integral to a company, and it only becomes important to everyone, when there is a problem. This is a burning issue to us, as we are the QC Gatekeeper, and as such, we are driving the Quality issues from the bottom up. People and companies are aware, however, cost is always a pressure for some with regards to QC Analysis. The UK leads the way for Quality, historically and currently. This needs to be put across to those that need services like this the most. In the global market our drum is small, but we are banging it harder than ever... so for 2010 onwards we hope to make sweet music

The single thing that really concerns me is the capability (actually the lack of it) of the NHS to rapidly implement best practice, productivity reforms, movement to community and home, and all the other things they know they have to do before the 15 and 20 billion black hole hits in a couple of years. They currently seem incapable of getting out comparatively simple tenders. Where is the inspirational leadership delivering the change and innovation needed? Many people at the top know what is needed (I have just been with Lord Darzi at Arab Health) but the delivery mechanisms seem so disparate. All I can foresee are pockets of change and innovation, but huge areas where waiting lists grow and cuts occur.

Our experience from the BioEntrepreneur School is that overseas graduates in the UK are much more interested in setting up their own companies than our home grown graduates.

Why is it so difficult to get funding for early stage life science technology businesses? Does the classic model of VC funding and exit by floatation or trade sale still work?

We are routinely coming across pharma companies (small & large) who just don’t keep up with or monitor changes in packaging legislation that will have a major impact on their businesses. A good example is the impending Braille legislation which is now MANDATORY for ALL pharma packs sold in Europe and has to be in place within the next 7 MONTHS. As a consequence of non-compliance, an estimated 20% of pharma companies could have their products delisted. So why do companies ignore it?

There seems to have been a lot of announcements recently about the importance of being able to trial medical devices and as a manufacturer we have seen an increase in demand for evidence of efficacy. But is the NHS really going to be industry-friendly or will all products quickly become as highly regulated as the pharma industry?

We saw in the local press recently an announcement on a Health Innovation and Education Cluster (HIEC) being awarded in our region. We normally pay no attention to these NHS Quango announcements, but this one mentioned collaboration with industry. Does anyone know how these things will work? And what will they do?

It's been over a year since Gordon Brown guaranteed small businesses would be paid within 10 days for work done for the government, including the NHS. Is it happening?

The European Commission has asked us to become advisors on a future of medical devices EU parliament process. We are representing on behalf of UK industry on Trade and Innovation.
Please let me know your thoughts on the following four issues:

- Is the European regulatory framework appropriate?
- What are the main market access challenges and how would you reduce the technical barriers to trade between member states?
- Is it necessary to improve international regulatory coordination?
- Is counterfeiting a significant issue for medical devices?

However any observations on selling into Europe would be more than welcome.

Click here to download the Voices of Industry Recommendation Letter & Supporting Evidence

The Proposal document is complete and ready for comment/feedback. Please feed any thoughts/edits directly back to me via email Michelle@MedilinkWM.co.uk or feel free to upload as a comment on this microsite.

Tony Davis will be delivering the final proposal document to Lord Drayson and the OLS on Tuesday, 30 June 2009. Thank you to everyone who has participated in our Voices of Industry campaign.

Click here to Download

We know there are grants available to support companies to export, but we have not applied for any recently because the forms are so cumbersome the return is not worth it. In the last two years alone we have spent hundreds of thousands of pounds on documentation and approvals in other countries, with no support from UKTI. With subsidy to expand my overseas business I would be able to employ more people and increase the overall wealth of the country.

It is vitally important for the SME voice within the medical technology and healthcare market, and the life sciences sector as a whole, to be heard and appreciated. This is a strong theme from the report which industry and government has recently published and for which an action plan is now getting underway. As a majority stakeholder in medical manufacturing, the UK SME community plays a vital role in the growth and prosperity of larger businesses with its quick response times, competitive pricing and entrepreneurial spirit.

SME organisations within the pharmaceutical market are a prolific source of innovation and new ideas, fuelling the work of many large companies.
With varied levels of funding and resource they are not often recognised for the contribution they make as a well-spring of innovation.

The Voices of Industry campaign demonstrates the willingness for each of the areas within Life Sciences (pharmaceuticals, diagnostics, healthcare and medical device technologies) to work together to ensure this vital sector is recognised at all levels.

The ABPI is happy to support this campaign and would like to encourage all of its members to participate

(Principal Analyst - Healthcare Editor at Clinica-Scrip) The IVDs sector in the UK needs a long-term commitment to the early health model. A simply structured, well worded commitment to promoting, using and monitoring use of these technologies will result in benefits all round - to patients, to the healthcare system, and thus to the government. Too little is invested in this vital segment from the UK healthcare budget.
Click here for more

The BIA applauds this campaign. The chronic lack of access to capital is a challenge that unites all SMEs. These are particularly tough times for SMEs involved in crucial life sciences research, with viable enterprises still struggling to obtain the follow-on investment they need to be able to grow their businesses into the success stories of the future. Industry needs to send out a clear, united message on how to deal with this problem and get investment moving again. The package of work under discussion at the new Office for Life Sciences must be implemented to make a difference.

If there were a mechanism for easily identifying the procurement route within the NHS for a particular product, more companies would be able to achieve UK sales and not have to spend so much resource targeting overseas markets.

The Medical Technologies industry is one of the strongest performing industry sectors currently, but there is still much that could be done to improve the conditions for SMEs in this area. The Voices of Industry campaign is a great initiative by Medilink West Midlands to try to capture the issues facing SMEs today. The campaign will be used to make decision makers and policy shapers in central government listen to what industry has to say, so I hope as many companies as possible will take the time to share their views.