View this comment on-line at: http://tinyurl.com/WHO-Gates
30 public interest groups concerned about Gates Foundation's role at the
World Health Organization
January 27, 2017 (Geneva): The
following joint statement was issued to members of the World Health
Organization's Executive Board at its semi-annual meeting this week in
Geneva. The decision on whether to include the Bill and Melinda Gates
Foundation's in the WHO's governing body under new, apparently looser,
conflict of interest rules is scheduled to be considered on Monday,
January 31, 2017. The joint statement reads as follows:
January 2017
Open Letter to the
Executive Board of the
World Health Organization
Dear Members of the Executive Board,
Re: Conflict of interest safeguards far too weak to protect WHO from influence of regulated industries (the case of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation)
With all the World Health Organization’s posturing about conflict of interest safeguards and due diligence in its new approach to collaborating with non-state actors in
its recently revised constitutional “Basic Documents,” the WHO ended
speculation about its ambiguous plan when it proposed to admit the Bill
and Melinda Gates Foundation into “Official Relations” with the WHO and
as a non-voting member of its governing body, the World Health
Assembly.
According to the United States Government’s Securities and Exchange Commission, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation Trust endowment—the
source of revenue for the Foundation—is heavily invested in many of the
food, alcohol, and physical inactivity-related consumer products that
cause or treat the current crisis of preventable heart disease, stroke,
cancer, and diabetes. Gates Foundation Trust direct investments include:
- Coca-Cola regional company that operates in the Americas south of the U.S. ($466 million),
- Walmart
($837 million), the largest food retailer in the U.S. and a leading
retailer of pharmaceutical drugs and alcoholic beverages,
- Walgreen-Boots Alliance ($280 million), a large multinational pharmaceutical drug retailer, and
- two of the world’s largest TV companies (screen-time): Group Televisa ($433 million) and Liberty Global PLC ($221 million).
It is concerning that these conflicts of interest are not acknowledged in the WHO
Berkshire Hathaway Inc.,
a holding company that owns a US$17 billion share in the U.S.-based
Coca-Cola company and US$29 billion interest in Kraft Heinz Inc.,
another of the world’s ten largest food companies. These investments
make the Gates Foundation a beneficiary of sales of several categories
of products that are the subject of WHO standards and advice to
governments related to nutrition and physical activity. In addition,
approximately one-quarter of the Gates Foundation Trust assets are
invested in budget’s financial contributor database (which notes only that the Gates Foundation contributed $629 million to the WHO’s $4.5 billion two-year budget), or in the WHO’s Register of non-State Actors (which
notes only that the: foundation has “engagements with select members of
the pharmaceutical…[and] food and beverage industries.”).
Underfunding of the WHO by Member States undermines its capacity to perform its vital global public health work, which is especially important to low and countries
with limited local health policy capacities. Making up WHO budget
shortfalls with funding from major investors in food, drug, and alcohol
companies (which are often headquartered in wealthy countries) further
middle income compromises the independence of the WHO.
Granting the Gates Foundation Official Relations status signifies a
sharp departure from the post-WWII tradition of the World Health
Assembly and makes a mockery of the conflict of interest safeguards
purported to underpin the new “Framework of engagement with non-State
actors (FENSA).”
We urge the Executive Board to defer the decision to accept the Gates
Foundation and any other new and legacy applicants for Official
Relations status for which there has been no conflict of interest
safeguard review on the record for consideration by Member States
of the Executive Board. It is, of course, deeply troubling from a
governance standpoint that the Executive Board is being asked to approve
applicants for Official Relations and verify compliance with conflicts
of interest safeguards without being provided with any relevant
evidence—verified or otherwise—on the public record.
Respectfully submitted by the undersigned public interest, health, and citizens’ groups,
African Centre for Global Health & Social Transformation (ACHEST) (Uganda)
Alcohol Justice (USA)
Algerian Network of Small-Scale Fishing Organisation (Algeria)
Baby Milk Action (United Kingdom)
BUKO Pharma-Kampagne (Germany)
Centre for Health Science and Law (Canada)
FIAN International (Global, Germany)
Foundation for Alcohol Research and Education (FARE) (Australia)
Health Innovation in Practice (HIP) (Global, Switzerland)
International Assn. for Hospice and Palliative Care (Global, USA)
International Baby Food Action Network (IBFAN-Asia)
International Baby Food Action Network (IBFAN) (Brasil)
International Code Documentation Centre (Global, The Netherlands)
International Community Supported Agriculture Network (URGENCI) (France)
International Indian Treaty Council (Oceania Region)
INFACT Canada and Infant Baby Food Action Network IBFAN (Global, Canada)
Initiative for Health & Equity in Society (India)
IOGT International (Sweden)
Medico International (Germany)
Medicus Mundi Int’l Network Health for All (Global, Switzerland)
Nigerian Women Agro Allied Farmers Assn. (Nigeria)
People’s Health Movement (Global)
El Poder del Consumidor (Mexico)
Public Health Resource Network (India)
Third World Network (India)
Transnational Institute (TNI) (The Netherlands)
Wemos (The Netherlands)
World Public Health Nutrition Association (Global, United Kingdom)
[See letter for detils at: http://tinyurl.com/WHO-Gates]
--30--
For more information, contact: Bill Jeffery at the Centre for Health Science and Law at BillJeffery@HealthScienceAndLaw.ca or 613-565-2140 (mobile) or by Skype: CHSLBillJeffery.
Background on CHSL:
The Centre for Health Science and Law, a signatory to the joint
statement, is a non-profit health advocacy organization and publisher of
Food for Life Report, the first
issue (Jan/Feb 2017) of which was published this month. The Centre
accepts no funding from industry or government and Food for Life Report carries no advertising. |
|
No comments:
Post a Comment