PHA-Exchange> In preparation of the People's Health Assembly II (9)

[Claudio]

TOWARDS THE MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS: YES, BUT.

 

I have, for long, been on record to be very ambiguous about goals and  targets. 

What I keep reading in the postings I get is a mixture of a praise for having (a) goal(s) to strive for now, and active steps being taken to get there in many countries trying to build a united front. In this context though, one should not and cannot forget how many goals have come and gone without sorrow or glory.!

 

I have read that colleagues feel disappointment that ordinary people do not have a clue about the MDGs: does anybody really think it would make much of a difference given the almost nil power they have to change things? A better question would be: why were 'people' not invited to set the MDGs to begin with??

 

We are told 'MDGs are within reach' -- if only guidance (top-down?) is given on how to accomplish this; yes, but are they really within reach?

 

Here is a further sample of what I get to read:

- that MDGs have renewed our sense of urgency; yes, but have they really?

- that MDGs have given us a new sense of direction; yes, but have they really given as a 'new' sense?

- that, PRSPs can create thousands of jobs annually and  raise the GDP substantially keeping the inflation rate low; yes, so far, but have they really?

- that, in many developing countries, the quality of life over the past 20 years (measured as child deaths) has dropped; do we have any indication the trend has changed for the better?

- that the various MDG Progress Reports assert little if any progress, but that, by 2015 there will be a decrease in malnutrition; yes, but based on what more upbeat data?

-that, before 2010, Vitamin A deficiency will be eliminated in many countries through the production and consumption of nutritious foods, yes, but are we really seeing this happening?

- that new policies will go a long way in achieving MDGS; yes, but are they really?

- that accountable government will make sure these policies are enacted; yes, but are there any objective signs of this?

- that many governments have demonstrated renewed commitment to the MDGs; yes but do the deeds show this too?

- that, overall, more prevention will result in improved quality of life; yes, but has it really?

- that educational policies should strive for attaining universal access to primary education; yes, but have they increased to these levels?

- that repetition and drop-out rates will decrease; yes, but have they really?

-  that child labour will be reduced; yes, but has it really?

- that free school feeding will be given to children in poor areas; yes, but have they really?

- that gender equality still needs implementation..an honest exception here since women do need to take up leadership positions and participate in all debates.

- But.that many governments have committed themselves to mainstreaming gender issues; yes, but have they really?

- that MOHs around the world have set up several programmes to address reproductive health needs of women; yes, but have they performed up to MDGs standards?

- that the political commitment towards, HIV, TB and malaria has increased; yes, but has this had measurable effects?

- that national malaria strategies will measurably reduce morbi-mortality from the disease; yes, but has it really?

- that countries have shown progress in achieving MDGs; yes, but has there really been measurable progress commensurate to the promise, e.g in water and sanitation, community-based programmes, women's income generation activities (needing government setting aside funds to support these)?

- that nutrition is a key component of development; yes, but have the new programmes performed? Anything has happened beyond 'proposed' new policies?

- that food production is targeting population needs; yes, but has it really?

- that renewed political commitment has translated into funding and the provision of essential services; yes, but has it really?

- that nutrition empowers individuals and communities and leads to poverty reduction; yes, but through what magic automatic mechanism(s)?

 

I do not know (nor do I claim to know) if all my 'yes, but' questions are justified and/or are exposing broken promises. But, already being half through 2005, my point is that we have to get to the deeds: enough of grandiose pronouncements and empty promises, lest the MDGS become one more crutch to delay or fake needed action.  I keep reading the clauses 'the government should' or 'policies are needed'.well, that is not good enough for the MDGs to get there by 2015, I am afraid. Most governments simply do not have the will and the commitment --and we better begin accepting this.

 

So much for this long saga. The best thing about this "yes, but" approach is that it invites for a yearly follow-up essay along the same lines, because SOMEBODY has to keep asking every year from now to 2015: where are we beyond pronouncements and promises? Would any of our readers take up the challenge?  You can continue calling those future essays: "Towards the Millennium Development Goals: Yes, but. and add the year in which the review is done.

If anyone dares, I promise to help.

 

Claudio Schuftan, Ho Chi Minh City

claudio at hcmc,netnam.vn 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://phm.phmovement.org/pipermail/phm-exchange-phmovement.org/attachments/20040928/f170ab25/attachment-0001.html>