Taxpayers fund flavoured condoms

Last updated 23:49 20/08/2008

Relevant offers

Health

Plucky mother intent on recovery ACC beneficiary admits he cheated Cafe's stub-out stance a winner Doctor sceptical about boy's alternative cancer care Calls to stop the spread of fast food outlets Information withheld puts children 'at risk' Kiwi scientist urges halt to doomsday flu research City doctors earn less than country cousins Mounting cost of coping with mental illness Death linked with HIV stigma

Flavoured condoms will be subsidised by taxpayers to encourage safe sex and reduce the risk of disease and unplanned pregnancies.

The flavours - including strawberry, vanilla, chocolate and banana - became available this month after government drug-funding agency Pharmac reviewed its range of subsidised condoms and identified a need for wider choice.

It already spends about $1million a year subsidising more than nine million condoms, and the range will now be extended to include large, extra large, ribbed and super-sensitive varieties.

Pharmac chief executive Matthew Brougham expected the broader assortment, which would be about 10 per cent cheaper, to be popular among a range of age-groups.

As New Zealand had high rates of unplanned pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases, he believed subsidising more condoms would encourage safer sex.

During consultation some stakeholders had questioned whether it was the right decision, but Mr Brougham had no doubts.

Health Minister David Cunliffe was also in favour of the move. "A wider subsidised choice for patients may assist with increasing condom use."

Pharmac Acting medical director Dilky Rasiah said that overall the decision was about getting better health outcomes through a greater use of condoms, and increasing choice for a lower price.

"Improving sexual health is a government health priority so increasing the range of condoms available can only be good in terms of encouraging safe sex practices."

Each year New Zealand prescribers issued some nine million condoms, which cost the taxpayer less than $1m of the $635m pharmaceutical budget. Under the latest decision, the supplier's price would reduce by 10 percent, she said.

"Condoms are already funded and always have been. This decision sees a 10 percent price reduction for all condoms, which frees up funds that can be used to purchase other new medicines."

Conservative lobby group Family First has labelled the subsidised flavoured condoms as "morally bankrupt and an insult to people with breast cancer, high blood pressure and heart disease".

It called for the Government to reverse this spending decision. National director Bob McCoskrie said it was "tragic and a national disgrace".

"At a time when Pharmac can't find funding for sufferers of breast cancer, heart disease, high blood pressure and other serious problems, that they can find funding to subsidise flavoured condoms," he said.

"This is simply about funding sexual behaviour that shouldn't be at the cost of the taxpayer or other more life-threatening medication.

Ad Feedback

"Is Pharmac going to consider subsidising sex toys next?"

He cited a number of people missing out on funding for drugs.

"Yet Pharmac can find funding for strawberry flavoured condoms."

- With NZPA

- © Fairfax NZ News

National Homepage

Sponsored links

Share this page

Email Facebook MySpace Digg StumbleUpon Delicious Reddit Linkedin Twitter

58 comments

Expand All

Oldest First

T Davies #58 05:26 pm Jan 28 2009

I agree that it is for a good cause...a very good cause!!! I do though wonder how pharmac can justify the funding of flavoured condoms when they will not fund drugs that will help people who are terminally ill?? Would love to know the answer pharmac!

Craig #57 05:26 pm Jan 28 2009

I think the point that is being missed by Bob McCoskrie is that by introducing a new range the total cost is down by 10% therefore allowing more money to be spent elsewhere.

Clare Reynolds #56 05:26 pm Jan 28 2009

Why not ribbed ones instead? I'm not planning on tasting the damn thing.

Luke #55 05:26 pm Jan 28 2009

Why should we the tax payer have to pay for losers to have a great sex life. You never know what to expect from this labar gov hopfully she wont be in power for much longer, her only motive is to help people that dont help them self " no hopers"

Ty #54 05:26 pm Jan 28 2009

How in the world is flavored condoms going to change anything, they aren't three year old kids you cannot lure them with yummy tasting treats. You will find it will not make any difference at all just because they are flavored, this is simply outrageous.

Lisa #53 05:26 pm Jan 28 2009

I have recently had a breast cancer scare and taken an interest in the battle of who will or will not fund Herceptin, and was greatly disappointed at the results... ok so teen pregnancy is an issue... i am 21 and do not have nor intend to have children anytime soon... the fact that they are going to fund "flavoured" (which i can only see as being more "fun") condoms is beyond me... does the flavour prevent the spread of STD's or risk of pregnancy any better than the regular kind of condom that you can get in bulk from local family planning or GP?????? the thing that needs to be remembered is that it is not that hard to get your hands on condoms nor the contraceptive pill (most college nurses will supply this after A simple blood pressure test) so why do they need to add flavoured condoms when the money could be going to much better use to help these women who need it and not throwing it away on teenagers foe that extra bit of "fun"... cancer isn't fun... why dont they help the sufferers?????????

Kat #52 05:26 pm Jan 28 2009

I object to my taxpayer money being used for this purpose.

Donna #51 05:26 pm Jan 28 2009

Condoms do not stop the spreading of STD's, they only decrease the risk of pregnancy. Pharmac, ironically is spreading disease!

Pauline #50 05:26 pm Jan 28 2009

I am not too sure where you got your statistics from but it's certainly not from World Health Organization (WHO). According to WHO, June 2000(http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs243/en/index.html), "Condoms are the only contraceptive method proven to reduce the risk of all sexually transmitted infections (STIs), including HIV". It is also stated that if the usage of condom is inconsistent and incorrect, pregnancy is rate is 10%-14% compared to perfect use (3% at 12 months).

Gail #49 05:26 pm Jan 28 2009

Fantastic news! Sounds like a really effective use of money to prevent larger health costs down the road. Like they say, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, and there was never any reason not to subsidise multiple sizes. Increasing variety to increase usage only makes sense, and with the flavoured ones, this may help stem the spread of orally transmitted sexual infections. HPV, the same virus linked to causing cervical cancers, is linked to causing cancers of the mouth and throat. Honestly, only $1m goes towards funding these? It seems like this is a much more cost-effective method than many other health initiatives.

Ad Feedback

Show 1-48 of 58 comments

National Headlines

RSS