PHM-Exch> Comments on Right to Hlth Care Fund (R2HCF) by Friedman, Gostin et al (2)

[Claudio Schuftan]

From: <dlegge at phmovement.org>

Thanks so much to Alison for this excellent analysis of the proposed
R2HCF.

I make two further points.

I fear that the proffering of the R2HCF as part of a ‘reimagined global
health architecture’ is in effect a further move away from WHO as the
principal coordinating authority for global health and a further move to
non-accountable (Trojan horse) ‘multi-stakeholder partnerships’ (MSP).

WHO is not perfect but it is the only member state organisation in this
field; it has many excellent features; and in my view must be supported (as
well as improved). Improving WHO will require lifting the freeze on ACs and
untying ear-marked donations, strengthening the accountability of member
states within the Organisation, and strengthening the domestic
accountability of member states for how they speak at WHA and how they
implement WHA decisions and resolutions. Civil society has a critical role
to play in this, at the global, national and local levels.

In this rush to ‘reimagine’ global health governance the MSP is the
preferred model for replacing WHO or rendering it irrelevant.

In this context it is useful to review the Covid Accelerator, presently the
multi-stakeholder partnership de jour, funded and governed outside WHO,
with philanthrocapitalism in the driving seat. Gates, who apparently does
not believe in health system strengthening, is directly involved in the
governance of the Accelerator and indirectly through the other MSPs which
he also funds! The Covax Facility, a further multi-stakeholder partnership,
appears to be heading for failure as the national donors, on which it
depends, bypass Covax and rush to seal bilateral advance purchase
agreements with the vaccine suppliers, draining both the funding and the
early vaccine supply.

A properly funded, independent WHO, could have done so much better.

Again, my appreciation to Alison for her excellent analysis.
dl





From: *Katz Alison* <katz.alison at gmail.com>



*Comments on proposals such as *

*Friedman, Gostin et al’s Right to Health Capacity Fund*

*or*

*All roads lead back to Alma Ata and a New International Economic Order*



A couple of months ago, G2H2 invited us to comment on the above proposal
for another international health entity described in « *Global Health in
the Age of Covid 19: responsive health systems through a Right to Health
Fund. **1* <#m_-3851101243438046404_m_-5614039656151272873_sdfootnote1sym>

*The short answer*

*After much thought, I have come to the conclusion that before commenting
on another proposal, we need to make a clear choice between two distinct
visions for the Right to Health and Health for All. *

   - *Plutocratic global governance of health dominated by so called
   multistakeholder partnerships (more or less the global health architecture
   today) *
   - *Health for All (Alma Ata version) and the Right to Health, with
   democratic global governance of health as one of various essential
   components (see below for the others). *

*These two visions are fundamentally incompatible. *

*Given this choice, commenting on proposals such as R2HCF, implies
evaluating to what extent it contributes to, fits with or fails to
challenge the first vision and to what extent it contributes to, fits with
or promotes the second vision. *

*My conclusion is that the R2HCF proposal fits with the first vision, fails
to challenge it, and therefore unfortunately contributes to its maintenance
and its credibility. And I say that while respecting that Eric and his
colleagues are committed to the Right to Health. *

*It is my hope that all those devoted to the social justice and human
rights based approach to health (as per the PHM Charter for example) will
today unambiguously reject the current global health architecture and will
support peoples’ social justice struggle for a fair international economic
order, as the absolute precondition for Health for All/the Right to Health.
*

*For many of you, this choice was made long ago and you need read no
further, you know the arguments backwards. My comments in detail are
attached. *

*In solidarity, Alison *

1 <#m_-3851101243438046404_m_-5614039656151272873_sdfootnote1anc>
https://www.hhrjournal.org/2020/05/global-health-in-the-age-of-covid-19-responsive-health-systems-through-a-right-to-health-fund/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://phm.phmovement.org/pipermail/phm-exchange-phmovement.org/attachments/20200903/759720e0/attachment.html>