Consumers would make big savings if the government followed the advice of its expert committee on pharmaceuticals, says Philip Clarke, a professor of health economics at the centre for health policy, programs and economics at the University of Melbourne. The price of another cholesterol medication, simvastatin, will fall by 44 per cent and, based on the advice of the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee, that should trigger a huge drop in the cost of atorvastatin. ''There should be automatic declines in the price of this drug,'' Professor Clarke said. ''And once the price drops below the $36 that triggers a government subsidy, those discounts should start flowing to consumers.'' He calculated that 180,000 people would be paying $170 more for atorvastatin than they would if the recommended price cuts were implemented. The rest have concession cards, meaning the government covers the excess cost. ''It all adds up and we are seeing an increase in people putting off filling scripts because of increasing costs,'' Consumer Health Forum head Carol Bennett said.

The health program director at the Grattan Institute, Stephen Duckett, said it was ''madness'' not to ensure Australia had the best deal for commonly prescribed drugs. ''We could save millions of dollars every month by bringing the price we pay [for atorvastatin] down to the international standard,'' Dr Duckett said. A recent Grattan Institute report found Australia was facing 10 years of budget deficits, primarily driven by rising health costs. The national director of cardiovascular health at the Heart Foundation, Robert Grenfell, said: ''If the government were to negotiate a more efficient wholesale price … this could be reinvested into the treatment and prevention of heart disease.'' But pharmacists say it would be unfair to pay less for the drugs because the government had locked in prices as part of a deal in which pharmacists agreed to significant discounts. A spokesman for the Pharmacy Guild said the price of atorvastatin had dropped sharply. He said the government was under no obligation to follow the recommendation that the price of atorvastatin should be linked to that of other drugs, and Professor Clarke's calculations were purely hypothetical.

''Taxpayers are reaping significant savings from the price disclosure process, which is being implemented in an orderly way, based on reality, not hypotheticals,'' he said. A spokeswoman for Health Minister Tanya Plibersek said atorvastatin's price had fallen 41 per cent since April 2012. ''The prices paid by the government for many PBS-listed medicines are being reduced in several ways, including through statutory price reductions and the extended and accelerated price disclosure,'' she said. ''The federal government is committed to keeping the PBS sustainable and affordable for all Australians.'' Jackie Gould, 50, from Croydon, has taken Lipitor since she had a heart attack and bypass surgery 14 years ago. Mrs Gould, who owns a dog biscuit business and is a hairdresser, says $36 for Lipitor ''is a lot of money'' even though, according to the label, it is not the full cost - it would be $52.73 without the government subsidy. Mrs Gould said the government might not be pressing drug companies to lower prices on cholesterol drugs because it might not see them as as important as, say, cancer drugs.

She says Lipitor should be cheaper. ''There might be a position where you can't afford it, then you would be going without, and therefore you might be put at risk. ''It's one of those things that I have to take, so therefore I have to go without something else so I can continue taking. We don't go out an awful lot, to the movies, say. ''We're certainly not poor; we're in the middle of the road, but I can see where, if you were on a pension and they were really expensive, where you'd go, 'Do I really need to take this?'''