PHA-Exchange> Re: Bangkok Charter - Action Needed!

[David Werner]

from David Werner

Ref the Bangkok Charter:
http://www.who.int/healthpromotion/conferences/6gchp/hpr_050624_bangkok_char
ter_hp.pdf

Dear friends in the PHA forum,

I agree very much with the view of Nandri, Kumanan, and the New Zealand
group that this new Bangkok Charter has glaring and in some ways dangerous
weaknesses. Not only does it take a "neutral" view on globalization, but it
takes an uncritical view of private-public partnerships, many of which
advance corporate interests at the expense of people's health. Worst of all,
the new charter takes the corporate line that the interests of the powerful
corporations are basically (or at least potentially) pro-people, and that
their commitment to equity, public health, and sustainable environment
should be voluntary rather than through strong regulation and democratic
process. In essence, it lets the crook off the hook! The Bangkok charter is
typical of corporate and World Bank double-speak: all the progressive
rhetoric with faulty analysis and unworkable solutions.

Such deadly proposals need to be exposed and strongly opposed (not just
amended). I think this should be a concern for PHA2.

Best wishes,

David Werner

-----Original Message-----
From: pha-exchange-bounces at lists.kabissa.org
[mailto:pha-exchange-bounces at lists.kabissa.org]On Behalf Of Kumanan
Rasanathan
Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2005 7:21 PM
To: pha-exchange at lists.kabissa.org
Cc: alisonb at hpforum.org.nz
Subject: PHA-Exchange> Bangkok Charter - Action Needed!


Vannakkam and Kia Ora Koutou

Please find enclosed the latest draft of the Bangkok Charter from the
WHO website. As you may be aware, the Bangkok Charter is to be launched
at the Bangkok conference on health promotion in August, as a
significant update of the Ottawa Charter. The Bangkok Charter is an
attempt to address the significant global developments that have
occurred in the last twenty years. Significant work has been undertaken
to produce a document with the aim of meaningfully influencing the
practice of health promotion to engage with these issues to improve
health. As such, the rationale behind this document should be supported
by all those who advocate "health for all".

However, many of us in New Zealand are concerned about the latest draft
of the document. In particular we are concerned about its neutral
treatment of globalisation (as shown by the proposed commitment to
ensure that "globalisation becomes more health friendly"!), its lack of
consideration of indigenous health, and its failure to clearly endorse
the MDGs and recent international human rights and environmental
treaties. We are concerned that this document will thus be cynically
used as a roll-back position, which is possible given the international
endorsement it will receive. Comparing the draft Charter to the
People's Health Charter, there are obvious problems. Furthermore, the
latest draft is more tepid than previous versions, removing references
to the need for equity and the consideration of the impact of war on
health.

We have not seen anything on the PHM list about this document. We
believe that the PHM could make a material difference to improve this
document. The consultation process for the document has been unclear up
to now, but essentially it is being driven by WHO. WHO is now seeking
comment by the 14th of July at:

http://www.who.int/healthpromotion/conferences/6gchp/bangkok_charter_comment
s/en/


We understand that the PHM is fully occupied at the moment preparing
for the PHA-2. However, the Ottawa Charter is widely used in New
Zealand and elsewhere, and we believe that a well framed Bangkok
Charter could be a valuable tool in the fight for "health for all".
Moreover, as currently framed, we are concerned it could have a
negative effect. As such, we would appreciate your suggestions on how
the PHM can advocate to improve this document. One of us (Kumanan) will
be at the IPHU and PHA-2 in Cuenca, and it would great if we could make
time there to discuss this. However, it may be important to submit
something by the deadline of July 14. We are hoping that among the PHM
ranks, some of you may have a better idea about the best way to proceed
with this.

We look forward to hearing from you.

Nandri

Kumanan Rasanathan and Alison Blaiklock