<p class="MsoNormal"><b style><span style="font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB">WHO under siege from private sector<span style> </span></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b style><span style="font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB"><span style> </span></span></b><span style="font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB">by Tom Fawthrop</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB">It was symbolic
of the crisis facing the United Nations’ World Health Organisation that
billionaire Bill Gates, the Chairman of Microsoft, was the special guest-speaker
addressing last year’s World Health Assembly (WHA) of WHO member states. </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB">This followed
from Gates’ previous address at the 2005 edition of the WHA. Commenting on the
then unprecedented invitation extended to Gates to deliver a keynote speech at
the WHA, the People’s Health Movement (PHM) viewed it <span style="color:#323232">as
‘part of an alarming trend of various UN organisations, including WHO,
kowtowing to global multinational corporations under the guise of the
“Global Compact” and so-called “Public-Private Partnerships”’.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Garamond;color:#323232" lang="EN-GB">‘It
is time to either declare Microsoft a WHO member country, or stop the shameful
promotion of global corporations at important UN meetings,’ <span style>said a PHM spokesperson.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Garamond;color:#323232" lang="EN-GB">The
membership of the PHM is made up of doctors, public health specialists and
health activists committed to the principles of free universal health systems. </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Garamond;color:#323232" lang="EN-GB">While
Gates was ostensibly invited to the 2011 WHA in his capacity as co-chair of the
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, activist groups say that the line dividing
his philanthropy from his links to pharmaceutical interests and his company’s
business strategy is very thin. <span style></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB">Many corporate giants have been adopted by
WHO since 2010, as private sector partners working together for ‘better global
health’.</span><span style="font-family:Garamond;color:#323232" lang="EN-GB"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB">The origins of
this public-private sector partnership process can be traced to WHO’s chronic
funding problems. Over 80% of its budget is based on emergency services and voluntary
contributions, as opposed to compulsory financial commitments from member
states.<sup>1</sup></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB">Hence, in the WHO
search for extra resources, the private sector came up with the Global Fund to
Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria. The private-sector-funded Global Fund has
emerged as a new player on the increasingly fragmented field of world health
alongside the World Bank, the Gates Foundation, and other charities and non-governmental
organisations (NGOs).</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB">Australian
health researcher David Legge points out: ‘The reform proposals that [WHO
Director-General] Margaret Chan took to the WHA in 2011 had clearly been
discussed in advance with Bill Gates. They came up with a package that included
an evaluation of WHO and a proposal for a” World Health Forum” to include<span style> </span>drug companies like Big Pharma, the development
banks, and big foundations. ‘ (ed- this is where the quote ends)</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Garamond">Naturally Chan needed to </span><span style="font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB">reassure member states that WHO, in ‘the interest
of safeguarding public health’, was ‘not afraid to speak out against entities
that are far richer, more powerful, and better connected politically than
health will ever be’, adding that ‘we need to maintain vigilance against any
real or perceived conflicts of interest’.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB">But the
question is: have her actions in promoting public-private partnerships, been at
odds with her speeches on defending the basic mandate of WHO to promote the
public health interest on the global stage?</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB">Whatever the role of the Director-General</span><span style="font-family:Garamond">,</span><b style><span style="font-family:"Angsana New"" lang="TH"> </span></b><span style="font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB">the private sector package presented by
Chan has raised much concern among member states.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB">There is little doubt that Chan understands to some degree the conflict
of interest posed by private sector forces ranged against the WHO commitment to
public health systems, in contrast to their promotion of privatised healthcare.
</span><span style="font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB">The principle of
partnership with the private sector has created a dangerous blurring between dedication
to public health on one side, and the ambivalent role of philanthropy and the
private sector. In the case of the private sector Ms Chan seems to think that
corporations with good-are not only profiting from global health problems</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB">But
financially can be part of the solution.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Garamond;color:#323232" lang="EN-GB">Nowhere
was this more evident than at the </span><span style="font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB">UN General Assembly special meeting on non-communicable diseases (NCDs)
held in New York
in September.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB">The problems arising from WHO sharing the same bed with private corporations
became very obvious during the meeting. That’s because<span style> </span>non-communicable diseases — such as heart
disease, stroke, cancer, diabetes and emphysema — are deeply entangled with
important global industries, not only tobacco but also food, pharmaceuticals,
advertising, transportation and construction. And NCDs are the planet’s biggest
health problem, responsible for 63% of all deaths each year, with incidence
growing steeply in the rapidly urbanising low-income nations of the world.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB">A <i style>Washington Post</i> report queried: ‘What is
the responsibility of rich countries, and the pharmaceutical companies located
in them, to improve medical care in poor countries, where 40 percent of deaths
from non-communicable diseases occur before age 60?’</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB">At a UN meeting
in June billed as an opportunity for charities, NGOs and the public to voice
their views on the outcome document of the September NCD summit, the tabled
speakers included representative</span><span style="font-family:Garamond;color:#333333" lang="EN-GB">s of the International
Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers and Associations, the International
Food and Beverage Alliance, and the World Federation of the Sporting Goods
Industry. </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Garamond;color:#333333" lang="EN-GB">Among those attending the September meeting itself on
behalf of ‘civil society’ were industry representatives, according to the <i>BMJ</i>
(British Medical Journal). The journal also reported that GlaxoSmithKline,
Sanofi-Aventis and the Global Alcohol Consumers Group were included within the
official US
delegation. And o</span><span style="font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB">ne
well-attended breakfast for conference delegates was hosted by PepsiCo.</span><span style="font-family:Garamond;color:#333333" lang="EN-GB"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Garamond;color:#333333" lang="EN-GB">Over 100 NGOs and medical groups signed a petition
in July saying that there needed to be a code of conduct with industry, as
there was a ‘lack of clarity of roles for the industry sector in UN health
policy setting and shaping’.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><i style><span style="font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB">‘Our position is that
partnership isn’t the right word. It implies trust and respect,’ said Patti
Rundall, who helped run the campaign against infant formula sales in Africa 30
years ago and today is working to limit the marketing of processed food in the
developing world. ‘The allegiance of the food companies is to create profits.
Their voluntary commitments are only good for as long as they want to keep
them,’ she said</span></i><span style="font-family:Garamond;color:#c00000" lang="EN-GB">.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Garamond;color:#333333" lang="EN-GB">The Davos-inspired assault on WHO </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB">During the 1980s the World Bank effectively sidelined WHO as the primary
influence on health policies of governments of the South. The Bank’s Structural
Adjustment Programmes (SAPs) imposed major cuts to public health services. At
the same time privatisation of healthcare was assiduously promoted.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB">Today key areas of public health and policymaking across the globe such
as prevention of disease, strengthening public health systems and primary
healthcare – the key terrain of WHO and the responsibilities of member states –
are being coveted by private interest groups led by the new ‘rulers of the
world’ known as the World Economic Forum.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB">It is all part
of the WEF’s Global Redesign Initiative to rebuild institutions and mechanisms
of global governance, according to </span><span style="font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB">Garance Upham, a researcher on health
issues.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Garamond">Upham, who delivered a lecture at the International
Association of Health Policy – Europe conference held in Ankara, Turkey
last year, </span><span style="font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB">explained that the WEF advocates a new governance paradigm for dealing
with global health issues which requires a drastic reform of WHO.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB">The WEF, which holds its high-profile annual meetings in Davos, Switzerland,
argues that ‘T<i>he model of development characterised by donors and recipients
is dead ... In place we need to think about collective responsibility. A world
where an increasing number of stakeholders should have a role in shaping and
making policy is a given. Governance does not equal governments alone.’</i></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB">Indeed WHO and public health is not only about governments.
Other</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB">stakeholders are doctors, nurses, patients and communities, but
these stakeholders are missing or marginalized in the Davos blueprint. The
Davos-distorted definition of ‘stakeholders’ is clearly set out in the proposal
to establish a World Health Forum (WHF), perhaps modeled on their very own WEF.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB">The Davos group is advocating that private donors to global
health campaigns should enjoy more or less equal seating alongside WHO in
formulating policymaking and supervising global health initiatives. All this is
coming at a time of growing economic crisis, with many governments only too
eager to cut back on health budgets and their contributions to WHO. </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Garamond;color:#333333" lang="EN-GB">It perhaps comes as no surprise that, along with
Tony Blair and Kofi Annan, Peter Brabeck, a former CEO and current Chairman of
Nestle, is a board member of the WEF.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB">Upham argues that all this would downgrade WHO from its vital
role in intervening to control epidemics, supervising international health
standards and promoting primary healthcare, to a more humble role mediating
between major donors to the Global Fund, private medical charities like the
Gates Foundation and even certain drug companies.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB">Within this paradigm, Mr. </span><span style="font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB">Goslin argues, ‘h</span><span style="font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB">ealth is an
area in which entrepreneurship</span><span style="font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB">
can flourish. It is the mission of the [World Economic] Forum’s Health Team to
galvanise business to take action in global health.’</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB">A response to this comes from public health academic A. Shukla, who writes:
‘P</span><span style="font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB">rivate involvement carries large overhead
costs and simply needs to deliver some form of profit. There is thus simply an
insurmountable gap between public interest and private privilege. Only through
putting pressure on the state will the excesses of the private sector in health
be eventually done away with.’</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB">It is clear that public-private partnerships
are a dangerous path for any vulnerable UN agency to go down. A coalition of
conflicting interests usually results in one partner swallowing the other or
bullying it into submission. </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB">A fundamental issue is at stake here: whether
our world<span style> </span>health policy is in the hands
of health professionals, health ministries and grassroots NGOs, or falls into
the clutches of the unelected gnomes of Davos and their business blueprints for
ever greater control over the vital sector of public health. </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:8pt;line-height:115%;font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB"><br></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:8.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB">Tom
Fawthrop is a journalist and filmmaker who attended the founding conference of
PHM –The Peoples Health Movement in 2000,and also participated in their Cuenca Ecuador
summit. He is director of <i>‘ Swimming Against the Tide</i> ‘ a documentary on
the Cuban health system. DVDs are available from</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:8.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB"><<a href="mailto:Eurekafilmsdocos@gmail.com">Eurekafilmsdocos@gmail.com</a>></span><span style="font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB"><br></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB">Endnote</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB">1. Some UN
agencies such as the UN Development Porgramme (UNDP) receive compulsory
contributions from member states. But in the case of WHO, its fixed
contributions have been whittled down and it is now increasingly dependent on
voluntary contributions. See </span><span style="font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB">Delhi Statement, ‘Time to Untie the Knots: The
WHO Reform and the Need for Democratising Global Health’, May 2011, available
via </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB"><a href="http://www.medico.de/en/themes/health/documents/time-to-untie-the-knots-the-who-reform-and-the-need-for-democratizing-global-health/1177">www.medico.de/en/themes/health/documents/time-to-untie-the-knots-the-who-reform-and-the-need-for-democratizing-global-health/1177</a>.</span><span style="font-family:Garamond" lang="EN-GB"></span></p>