PREAMBLE: Need for Objectivity in light of Japan’s Emergency.
The situation of Japan, following the world’s fifth largest recorded earthquake since 1900 and resulting tsunami, is catastrophic. It is possible that tens of thousands may have drowned, swept away with their coastal infrastructure. Hundreds of thousands of people, perhaps millions, have been displaced and lost family members and their livelihoods.
The catastrophe has given rise to a new emergency as a result of damage to several nuclear power plants. There is a risk of reactor meltdown. Containment efforts now underway are in a dynamic phase, with changes in status reported on a continuous basis.
Although there appears to have been comprehensive coverage of Japan’s humanitarian disaster, the global media is also monitoring this sub-story with an intensity that may turn out to be disproportionate to the overall catastrophe, or perhaps not, giving time to both nuclear power proponents and adversaries to vent their opportunistic viewpoints.
Even some mainstream media in Canada (e.g., CTV 10 pm News, March 14 Pacific DST) appeared to hype this aspect of the disaster, seemingly appealing to populist fear about nuclear power, rather than objectively placing this in the perspective of the far greater human impact of a massive earthquake and tsunami. American PBS Newshour at 6pm was more balanced.
In light of these observations, we searched for up to date sources of scientific information on nuclear safety, and selected as a primary reference for this issue a recent Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) report Comparing Nuclear Accident Risks with Those from Other Energy Sources [1]. We refer readers to it (reference below) for a policy-relevant technical document, written for intelligent lay readers.
A RATIONAL APPROACH TO ENERGY CHOICES
Some Observations (our italics added for selective emphasis)
As the 2010 OECD report notes, many countries are reconsidering the role of nuclear energy in their energy mix, as a means to alleviate the concerns over climate change, security of energy supply and the price and price volatility of fossil fuels. However, nuclear energy remains a contentious technology in some political circles and in the minds of many members of the public.
One of the common themes of concern is the safety of nuclear power plants. However a rational choice of energy sources should involve an even handed comparison of risks across the various energy chains available.
There is little value in rejecting one source if that which replaces it presents even greater hazards. The purpose of the OECD document therefore, is said to provide energy policy makers with quality data and information that will enable understanding of how accident risks are managed in nuclear plants and also to provide a rational analysis of the relative risks presented by the various major energy chains used for the production of electricity.
The OECD report presented data compiled by the Paul Scherrer Institute (Switzerland) on accidents causing five or more prompt deaths in the energy industry between 1969 and 2000, during which there were 1870 such severe accidents globally resulting in 81,258 deaths. The only severe accident at a nuclear power plant (Chernobyl) killed 31 plant and emergency workers.
Regarding long range health impacts in areas affected by Chernobyl, one set of OECD estimates project up to 33,000 eventual deaths over 70 years, using a particular assumption. However, the assumption is that of a "linear dose response relationship with no threshold" (LNT), and if the same logic is applied to background radiation (normally experienced by all people) … "for the 70 years…the collective dose from natural background would be… 1500 times larger, therefore theoretically causing 1500 times as many fatalities (~50 million) due to exposure to natural background radiation…” Clearly the validity of the LNT model is controversial at best, and some consider it discredited.
With nuclear accidents being so rare, and data on resulting adverse health and safety outcomes therefore being so limited, the OECD analysis also uses an alternative technique called “probabilistic safety analysis”. Applied to a Swiss nuclear power plant, this shows a 1 in 1 million-year probability of an accident serious enough to cause 2000 latent fatalities. Overall, the likelihood of an accident and radiological release at a new nuclear plant is 1600 times lower than it was when the first reactors were built.
Interestingly, latent deaths from accidents in non-nuclear energy sources were not included, although premature deaths caused by particulates from fossil fuel generation are estimated at around 288,000 per year worldwide.
Translation: Consider this in terms of over a million dead every four years from inhaling the emissions of burning fossil fuel!
From such OECD analyses and observations therefore, it is difficult not to recognize and concur with their observation that...
"Overall, accident-related deaths from (nuclear) energy use are much smaller than those that result from the health effects of fossil fuel emissions, but they attract much more media and public attention."
Discussion
The US Academy of Sciences, like scientific advisory bodies of other nations, has recognized for decades that all energy systems entail some health, environmental, or socio-political risks. But there is considerable difference among various energy systems in the magnitude, timing, and nature of these associated risks. It is this difference that allows (and requires) a degree of choice,…with regard to selecting energy alternatives.[2]
However, Japan’s current nuclear power plant emergency is being utilized by at least some of the world media to focus concern on the global expansion of nuclear power as an alternative to fossil fuel. Although there may be some special interests also involved in this position, such concerns have a completely legitimate foundation, especially in Japan, the only country ever to have experienced the human tragedy of nuclear bombing. Nonetheless, issues surrounding the development of nuclear power are highly complex and choices between nuclear and alternative sources should involve relevant comparisons of risks and benefits.
The body of up to date scientific evidence presented in the referenced OECD report indicates that nuclear power may be the safest available option to meet the energy demands of developed and developing nations.[1] By contrast, based on the evidence, fossil fuels are actually the most hazardous, whether through the perspective of human health (short or long term) and environmental impacts e.g., global warming due to greenhouse gas emissions. Hydroelectricity appears safe (notwithstanding that the worst energy-related accident is the Banqiao/Shimantan dam failure in China, when ~30,000 people were killed in 1975), but the reality is that most hydro opportunities are already exploited. The potential of biofuels, wind and tidal power, also appear to have significant trade-offs (e.g., crops for food versus fuel; environmental and aestheic impacts of wind power; fish migration, bird habitat disruption, silt build up with regard to tidal power); however, there may be more potential in these options than currently realized as technologies advance, and this may be true also for solar and geothermal power.
Conclusion
In the end, it is obvious that risks are associated with every source of energy. And of course, in each setting decisions must be made as to the viability of available choices. However, rather than the media exploiting reactor damage associated with Japan’s major earthquake and tsunami, surely it would be more responsible journalism to promote a debate better informed by scientific evidence, taking into account long term biological and environmental sustainability, and placed in the global context.
References:
1. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. Comparing Nuclear Accident Risks with Those from Other Energy Sources OECD Nuclear Energy Agency NEA No. 6861. ISBN 978-92-64-99122-4. http://www.oecd-nea.org/ndd/reports/2010/nea6862-comparing-risks.pdf Accessed March 14, 2011.
2. Energy Policy and Strategy. National Center for Atmospheric Research. In: Proceedings of a Conference on Non-Fossil Fuel and Non-Nuclear Fuel Energy Strategies. Volume 4, Issue 5, October 1979, Pages 919-931 Honolulu, Hawaii.
Monday, 14 March 2011
Monday, 14 February 2011
REGULATORY CAPTURE – A CASE STUDY FROM CANADA: Dietary Sodium Regulation
PREAMBLE:
The theory of regulatory capture was set out by Richard Posner, an economist and lawyer at the University of Chicago, who argued that "Regulation is not about the public interest at all, but is a process, by which interest groups seek to promote their private interest ... Over time, regulatory agencies come to be dominated by the industries regulated."[1] More descriptively he referred to this as "Gamekeeper turns poacher, or at least helps poacher".
The ethical principle stated here has long roots and other important ramifications across many areas of activity. For example, in the field of public health, it is well recognized that "People who work on not only tobacco control, but on chronic disease control, should be critical about receiving money from revenue generated through tobacco sales."[2]
Beyond the tobacco industry, there are numerous examples where the credibility of policy makers, regulators, researchers and practitioners may be undermined on the basis of their association with industry e.g., the energy industry, mining interests, agricultural chemical companies, pharmaceutical firms, beverage industries, arms manufacturers, the gambling industry… and so on. This is why government needs to remain at arms length from such industries, and not be involved simultaneously in regulating and operating such industries. Regulation needs to be based on the best scientific objective evidence; while industrial interests are also relevant, those interests should follow, not lead.
Our blog for this month focuses on regulatory capture recently facilitated by Canada’s Conservative government in favour of the food industry. For the source of this story, we have taken verbatim an article in the Globe and Mail, fully acknowledged, as cited.
1. Posner R. The Economist - Business School: Research Tools. http://www.economist.com/research/economics/alphabetic.cfm?letter=R)
2. White F. Pacific Health & Development Sciences Inc. Uneasy money: Tobacco philanthropy and conflict of interest in global health. ProCor Global Dialogue. Dec 13, 2010. http://www.procor.org/globaldialogue/globaldialogue_show.htm?doc_id=1435171
CASE STUDY
Canada’s federal government has dismantled its sodium reduction task force and is handing responsibility over to a group with heavy ties to the food industry. Clearly this jeopardizes efforts to curb Canada’s excessive sodium consumption. Why is this important? Sodium intake is strongly linked to the risk of hypertension and stroke, which are major preventive causes of morbidity and mortality in our country. The government is also proposing new sodium reduction targets for food that are clearly not tough enough and give too much leeway to manufacturers. For the purpose of this case study, we are quoting the entire report verbatim below, as it appeared in the Globe and Mail:...
According to the report:
“The federal government has dismantled its sodium reduction task force and is handing responsibility over to a group with heavy ties to the food industry, a move many medical and consumer experts fear jeopardizes efforts to curb Canada’s excessive sodium consumption. The government is also proposing new sodium reduction targets for food that experts say are not tough enough and give too much leeway to manufacturers.
The developments have taken many key players in the initiative by surprise and are raising doubts about the government’s commitment to cutting the population’s salt consumption. ‘It’s certainly a cause for concern because there’s lots of work still to be done,’ said Kevin Willis, director of partnerships at the Canadian Stroke Network and a member of the former Sodium Working Group. ‘My major overall fear is that we will make slow progress on reducing the sodium in the food supply.’
The working group was created by the government in 2007 to develop a comprehensive strategy to slash the country’s dangerously high sodium intake, a key risk factor for high blood pressure and subsequent heart problems or stroke. The average Canadian consumes 3,400 milligrams of sodium a day, and nearly 80 per cent comes from processed foods such as soups, sauces, bread and salad dressings.
The group released a report last summer that called for a voluntary program to reduce sodium consumption to 2,300 milligrams a person by 2016. The goal hinges on the ability of the food industry to lower the amount of sodium in its products. The working group had planned to monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of the voluntary program by 2016, and, if necessary, call on the government to create binding regulations.
But Dr. Willis said he and others in the working group were told during a conference call in December their responsibilities would be handed to a group called the Food Regulatory Advisory Committee.
Members of the former working group say that they had expected to be involved in national sodium reduction efforts for years to come and that Health Canada has not told them why responsibility is being transferred. ‘I’m pretty upset by [the disbandment],’ said Norm Campbell, a pre-eminent sodium expert who was a member of the working group and holds the Canadian Research Chair in hypertension prevention and control.
Health Canada spokeswoman Leslie Meerburg said in a statement the department is moving to the next phase of the sodium reduction strategy and ‘will continue to consult’ former members of the working group when necessary.
Many members of the new Food Regulatory Advisory Committee are involved in the food industry, or have little or no experience in matters related to sodium or high blood pressure. For instance, chair Paul Paquin, a professor at Laval University, is also vice-president of the Canadian arm of the International Dairy Federation, which represents the dairy industry. Associate chair Keith Mussar heads the food committee of the Canadian Association of Importers and Exporters and has held management positions with companies such as Kraft-General Foods and Labatt Brewing Co., according to his Health Canada biography.
Bill Jeffery, national coordinator of Ottawa’s Centre for Science in the Public Interest and former Sodium Working Group member, said Health Canada’s moves are ‘indirect evidence they don’t place a high priority’ on sodium reduction. Sodium experts are also criticizing new proposed sodium reduction targets for food. The proposals use a ‘sales weighted average’ approach, which would allow manufacturers to keep higher levels of sodium in some of their products as long as they are reduced in others.
In a consultation document that contains the proposed targets, Health Canada said the approach ‘provides companies the ability to plan their sodium reduction efforts according to which products are most amenable to reformulation or discontinuation. …’
But Dr. Willis said that rationale means Canadians will continue to be exposed to high-sodium food products that could be detrimental to their health. 'Obviously, I would have liked to have seen more aggressive targets,’ he said. ‘We want reduction of sodium in all products across the board.’”
Reference: Weeks C, Galloway G. Ottawa Disbands Sodium Reduction Task Force. The Globe and Mail. Published on-line Thursday, Feb. 03, 2011 8:40PM EST. Also published in hard copy as Doctors Fear for Canadian’s health after Ottawa disbands task force into sodium consumption. The Globe and Mail. A4 February 4, 2011.
Commentary
Under Canada’s Conservative government, there are other examples of regulatory capture, most visible being the oil sands industry where adverse environmental impact is becoming more daily more evident. The industry has been given disproportionate representation over independent scientists, for example on advisory groups now examining the contamination of fresh water sources. Later this year, we will examine this as a case study. The political mentality, having nothing to do with “conservation”, is increasingly revealed as an ideology that places commerce above science or public health as a basis for public policy. Regulatory Capture appears part of their modus operandi.
The theory of regulatory capture was set out by Richard Posner, an economist and lawyer at the University of Chicago, who argued that "Regulation is not about the public interest at all, but is a process, by which interest groups seek to promote their private interest ... Over time, regulatory agencies come to be dominated by the industries regulated."[1] More descriptively he referred to this as "Gamekeeper turns poacher, or at least helps poacher".
The ethical principle stated here has long roots and other important ramifications across many areas of activity. For example, in the field of public health, it is well recognized that "People who work on not only tobacco control, but on chronic disease control, should be critical about receiving money from revenue generated through tobacco sales."[2]
Beyond the tobacco industry, there are numerous examples where the credibility of policy makers, regulators, researchers and practitioners may be undermined on the basis of their association with industry e.g., the energy industry, mining interests, agricultural chemical companies, pharmaceutical firms, beverage industries, arms manufacturers, the gambling industry… and so on. This is why government needs to remain at arms length from such industries, and not be involved simultaneously in regulating and operating such industries. Regulation needs to be based on the best scientific objective evidence; while industrial interests are also relevant, those interests should follow, not lead.
Our blog for this month focuses on regulatory capture recently facilitated by Canada’s Conservative government in favour of the food industry. For the source of this story, we have taken verbatim an article in the Globe and Mail, fully acknowledged, as cited.
1. Posner R. The Economist - Business School: Research Tools. http://www.economist.com/research/economics/alphabetic.cfm?letter=R)
2. White F. Pacific Health & Development Sciences Inc. Uneasy money: Tobacco philanthropy and conflict of interest in global health. ProCor Global Dialogue. Dec 13, 2010. http://www.procor.org/globaldialogue/globaldialogue_show.htm?doc_id=1435171
CASE STUDY
Canada’s federal government has dismantled its sodium reduction task force and is handing responsibility over to a group with heavy ties to the food industry. Clearly this jeopardizes efforts to curb Canada’s excessive sodium consumption. Why is this important? Sodium intake is strongly linked to the risk of hypertension and stroke, which are major preventive causes of morbidity and mortality in our country. The government is also proposing new sodium reduction targets for food that are clearly not tough enough and give too much leeway to manufacturers. For the purpose of this case study, we are quoting the entire report verbatim below, as it appeared in the Globe and Mail:...
According to the report:
“The federal government has dismantled its sodium reduction task force and is handing responsibility over to a group with heavy ties to the food industry, a move many medical and consumer experts fear jeopardizes efforts to curb Canada’s excessive sodium consumption. The government is also proposing new sodium reduction targets for food that experts say are not tough enough and give too much leeway to manufacturers.
The developments have taken many key players in the initiative by surprise and are raising doubts about the government’s commitment to cutting the population’s salt consumption. ‘It’s certainly a cause for concern because there’s lots of work still to be done,’ said Kevin Willis, director of partnerships at the Canadian Stroke Network and a member of the former Sodium Working Group. ‘My major overall fear is that we will make slow progress on reducing the sodium in the food supply.’
The working group was created by the government in 2007 to develop a comprehensive strategy to slash the country’s dangerously high sodium intake, a key risk factor for high blood pressure and subsequent heart problems or stroke. The average Canadian consumes 3,400 milligrams of sodium a day, and nearly 80 per cent comes from processed foods such as soups, sauces, bread and salad dressings.
The group released a report last summer that called for a voluntary program to reduce sodium consumption to 2,300 milligrams a person by 2016. The goal hinges on the ability of the food industry to lower the amount of sodium in its products. The working group had planned to monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of the voluntary program by 2016, and, if necessary, call on the government to create binding regulations.
But Dr. Willis said he and others in the working group were told during a conference call in December their responsibilities would be handed to a group called the Food Regulatory Advisory Committee.
Members of the former working group say that they had expected to be involved in national sodium reduction efforts for years to come and that Health Canada has not told them why responsibility is being transferred. ‘I’m pretty upset by [the disbandment],’ said Norm Campbell, a pre-eminent sodium expert who was a member of the working group and holds the Canadian Research Chair in hypertension prevention and control.
Health Canada spokeswoman Leslie Meerburg said in a statement the department is moving to the next phase of the sodium reduction strategy and ‘will continue to consult’ former members of the working group when necessary.
Many members of the new Food Regulatory Advisory Committee are involved in the food industry, or have little or no experience in matters related to sodium or high blood pressure. For instance, chair Paul Paquin, a professor at Laval University, is also vice-president of the Canadian arm of the International Dairy Federation, which represents the dairy industry. Associate chair Keith Mussar heads the food committee of the Canadian Association of Importers and Exporters and has held management positions with companies such as Kraft-General Foods and Labatt Brewing Co., according to his Health Canada biography.
Bill Jeffery, national coordinator of Ottawa’s Centre for Science in the Public Interest and former Sodium Working Group member, said Health Canada’s moves are ‘indirect evidence they don’t place a high priority’ on sodium reduction. Sodium experts are also criticizing new proposed sodium reduction targets for food. The proposals use a ‘sales weighted average’ approach, which would allow manufacturers to keep higher levels of sodium in some of their products as long as they are reduced in others.
In a consultation document that contains the proposed targets, Health Canada said the approach ‘provides companies the ability to plan their sodium reduction efforts according to which products are most amenable to reformulation or discontinuation. …’
But Dr. Willis said that rationale means Canadians will continue to be exposed to high-sodium food products that could be detrimental to their health. 'Obviously, I would have liked to have seen more aggressive targets,’ he said. ‘We want reduction of sodium in all products across the board.’”
Reference: Weeks C, Galloway G. Ottawa Disbands Sodium Reduction Task Force. The Globe and Mail. Published on-line Thursday, Feb. 03, 2011 8:40PM EST. Also published in hard copy as Doctors Fear for Canadian’s health after Ottawa disbands task force into sodium consumption. The Globe and Mail. A4 February 4, 2011.
Commentary
Under Canada’s Conservative government, there are other examples of regulatory capture, most visible being the oil sands industry where adverse environmental impact is becoming more daily more evident. The industry has been given disproportionate representation over independent scientists, for example on advisory groups now examining the contamination of fresh water sources. Later this year, we will examine this as a case study. The political mentality, having nothing to do with “conservation”, is increasingly revealed as an ideology that places commerce above science or public health as a basis for public policy. Regulatory Capture appears part of their modus operandi.
Saturday, 15 January 2011
The VIENNA DECLARATION - Evidence-Based Drug Policy and the Need for a Paradigm Shift
PREAMBLE Canada’s minority Conservative government is currently considering Bill S-10, the Penalties for Organized Drug Crime Act. This Bill proposes amendments to the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act and other related Acts, including the introduction of mandatory minimum prison sentences.
Unfortunately, this proposed legislation and its provisions demonstrate an approach to policy development that is ideological and not evidence-based and that will likely not meaningfully improve health and safety in Canadian communities.
Research indicates that the approach proposed by Bill S-10 will only serve to create greater health and social harms. Canada needs an evidence-based approach to drug policy that prioritizes public health, not costly incarceration schemes that will take resources away from effective prevention and treatment initiatives.
As health professionals and health systems researchers, our goal is to improve public health and safety. Pacific Health & Development Sciences Inc. recently joined the Canadian Public Health Association, the Urban Health Research Initiative and the BC Centre for Excellence in HIV/AIDS in petitioning the federal government on behalf of doctors, scientists, researchers, and scholars concerned about this proposed legislation, and particularly the potential impact of introducing mandatory minimum sentences.
In support of this position, this issue of PacificSci Global Perspectives draws attention to the Vienna Declaration (www.viennadeclaration.com). The Declaration is a scientific statement seeking to improve community health and safety by calling for the incorporation of evidence based research into the development of illicit drug policies.
The Vienna Declaration was the official declaration of the XVIII International AIDS conference (AIDS 2010) held in Vienna, Austria from July 18-23, 2010.
Since its launch on June 27, 2010, the Vienna Declaration has been endorsed by six Nobel Laureates, thousands of scientific experts, law enforcement leaders, and former heads of state including Fernando Henrique Cardoso (former President of Brazil), Ernesto Zedillo (former President of México) and César Gaviria (former President of Colombia). In Canada, the declaration has been signed by five chief provincial medical health officers, the Canadian Public Health Association, the Health Officers Council of British Columbia, and a growing number of municipalities which deal with these issues first hand. Pacific Health & Development Sciences Inc. also has signed.
The VIENNA DECLARATION
[Note: We took the liberty of adding italics to highlight particular areas of emphasis. The wording is otherwise unchanged.]
In response to the health and social harms of illegal drugs, a large international drug prohibition regime has been developed under the umbrella of the United Nations.(1) Decades of research provide a comprehensive assessment of the impacts of the global “War on Drugs” and, in the wake of the XVIII International AIDS Conference in Vienna, Austria, the international scientific community calls for an acknowledgement of the limits and harms of drug prohibition, and for drug policy reform to remove barriers to effective HIV prevention, treatment and care.
The evidence that law enforcement has failed to prevent the availability of illegal drugs, in communities where there is demand, is now unambiguous.(2),(3) Over the last several decades, national and international drug surveillance systems have demonstrated a general pattern of falling drug prices and increasing drug purity—despite massive investments in drug law enforcement.(4),(5)
Furthermore, there is no evidence that increasing the ferocity of law enforcement meaningfully reduces the prevalence of drug use.(6) The data also clearly demonstrate that the number of countries in which people inject illegal drugs is growing, with women and children becoming increasingly affected.(7) Outside of sub-Saharan Africa, injection drug use accounts for approximately one in three new cases of HIV.(8),(9) In some areas where HIV is spreading most rapidly, such as Eastern Europe and Central Asia, HIV prevalence can be as high as 70% among people who inject drugs, and in some areas more than 80% of all HIV cases are among this group.(10)
In the context of overwhelming evidence that drug law enforcement has failed to achieve its stated objectives, it is important that its harmful consequences be acknowledged and addressed. These consequences include but are not limited to:
• HIV epidemics fuelled by the criminalisation of people who use illicit drugs and by prohibitions on the provision of sterile needles and opioid substitution treatment.(11), (12)
• HIV outbreaks among incarcerated and institutionalised drug users as a result of punitive laws and policies and a lack of HIV prevention services in these settings.(13),(14),(15)
• The undermining of public health systems when law enforcement drives drug users away from prevention and care services and into environments where the risk of infectious disease transmission (e.g., HIV, hepatitis C & B, and tuberculosis) and other harms is increased.(16),(17),(18)
• A crisis in criminal justice systems as a result of record incarceration rates in a number of nations.(19),(20) This has negatively affected the social functioning of entire communities. While racial disparities in incarceration rates for drug offences are evident in countries all over the world, the impact has been particularly severe in the US, where approximately one in nine African-American males in the age group 20 to 34 is incarcerated on any given day, primarily as a result of drug law enforcement.(21)
• Stigma towards people who use illicit drugs, which reinforces the political popularity of criminalising drug users and undermines HIV prevention and other health promotion efforts.(22),(23)
• Severe human rights violations, including torture, forced labour, inhuman and degrading treatment, and execution of drug offenders in a number of countries.(24),(25)
• A massive illicit market worth an estimated annual value of US$320 billion.(26) These profits remain entirely outside the control of government. They fuel crime, violence and corruption in countless urban communities and have destabilised entire countries, such as Colombia, Mexico and Afghanistan.(27)
• Billions of tax dollars wasted on a “War on Drugs” approach to drug control that does not achieve its stated objectives and, instead, directly or indirectly contributes to the above harms.(28)
Unfortunately, evidence of the failure of drug prohibition to achieve its stated goals, as well as the severe negative consequences of these policies, is often denied by those with vested interests in maintaining the status quo.(29) This has created confusion among the public and has cost countless lives.
Governments and international organisations have ethical and legal obligations to respond to this crisis and must seek to enact alternative evidence-based strategies that can effectively reduce the harms of drugs without creating harms of their own.
We, the undersigned, call on governments and international organisations, including the United Nations, to:
• Undertake a transparent review of the effectiveness of current drug policies.
• Implement and evaluate a science-based public health approach to address the individual and community harms stemming from illicit drug use.
• Decriminalise drug users, scale up evidence-based drug dependence treatment options and abolish ineffective compulsory drug treatment centres that violate the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.(30)
• Unequivocally endorse and scale up funding for the implementation of the comprehensive package of HIV interventions spelled out in the WHO, UNODC and UNAIDS Target Setting Guide.(31)
• Meaningfully involve members of the affected community in developing, monitoring and implementing services and policies that affect their lives.
Basing drug policies on scientific evidence will not eliminate drug use or the problems stemming from drug injecting. However, reorienting drug policies towards evidence-based approaches that respect, protect and fulfill human rights has the potential to reduce harms deriving from current policies and would allow for the redirection of the vast financial resources towards where they are needed most: implementing and evaluating evidence-based prevention, regulatory, treatment and harm reduction interventions.
References
1. William B McAllister. Drug diplomacy in the twentieth century: an international history. Routledge, New York, 2000. [↩]
2. Reuter P. Ten years after the United Nations General Assembly Special Session (UNGASS): assessing drug problems, policies and reform proposals. Addiction 2009;104:510-7. [↩]
3. United States Office of National Drug Control Policy. The Price and Purity of Illicit Drugs: 1981 through the Second Quarter of 2003. Executive Office of the President; Washington, DC, 2004. [↩]
4. United States Office of National Drug Control Policy. The Price and Purity of Illicit Drugs: 1981 through the Second Quarter of 2003. Executive Office of the President; Washington, DC, 2004. [↩]
5. World Drug Report 2005. Vienna: United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime; 2005. [↩]
6. Degenhardt L, Chiu W-T, Sampson N, et al. Toward a global view of alcohol, tobacco, cannabis, and cocaine use: Findings from the WHO World Mental Health Surveys. PLOS Medicine 2008;5:1053-67. [↩]
7. Mathers BM, Degenhardt L, Phillips B, et al. Global epidemiology of injecting drug use and HIV among people who inject drugs: A systematic review. Lancet 2008;372:1733-45. [↩]
8. Wolfe D, Malinowska-Sempruch K. Illicit drug policies and the global HIV epidemic: Effects of UN and national government approaches. New York: Open Society Institute; 2004. [↩]
9. 2008 Report on the global AIDS epidemic. The Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS; Geneva, 2008. [↩]
10. Wolfe D, Malinowska-Sempruch K. Illicit drug policies and the global HIV epidemic: Effects of UN and national government approaches. New York: Open Society Institute; 2004. [↩]
11. Lurie P, Drucker E. An opportunity lost: HIV infections associated with lack of a national needle-exchange programme in the USA. Lancet 1997;349:604. [↩]
12. Rhodes T, Lowndes C, Judd A, et al. Explosive spread and high prevalence of HIV infection among injecting drug users in Togliatti City, Russia. AIDS 2002;16:F25. [↩]
13. Taylor A, Goldberg D, Emslie J, et al. Outbreak of HIV infection in a Scottish prison. British Medical Journal 1995;310:289. [↩]
14. Sarang A, Rhodes T, Platt L, et al. Drug injecting and syringe use in the HIV risk environment of Russian penitentiary institutions: qualitative study. Addiction 2006;101:1787. [↩]
15. Jurgens R, Ball A, Verster A. Interventions to reduce HIV transmission related to injecting drug use in prison. Lancet Infectious Disease 2009;9:57-66. [↩]
16. Davis C, Burris S, Metzger D, Becher J, Lynch K. Effects of an intensive street-level police intervention on syringe exchange program utilization: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. American Journal of Public Health 2005;95:233. [↩]
17. Bluthenthal RN, Kral AH, Lorvick J, Watters JK. Impact of law enforcement on syringe exchange programs: A look at Oakland and San Francisco. Medical Anthropology 1997;18:61. [↩]
18. Rhodes T, Mikhailova L, Sarang A, et al. Situational factors influencing drug injecting, risk reduction and syringe exchange in Togliatti City, Russian Federation: a qualitative study of micro risk environment. Social Science & Medicine 2003;57:39. [↩]
19. Fellner J, Vinck P. Targeting blacks: Drug law enforcement and race in the United States. New York: Human Rights Watch; 2008. [↩]
20. Drucker E. Population impact under New York’s Rockefeller drug laws: An analysis of life years lost. Journal of Urban Health 2002;79:434-44. [↩]
21. Warren J, Gelb A, Horowitz J, Riordan J. One in 100: Behind bars in America 2008. The Pew Center on the States Washington, DC: The Pew Charitable Trusts 2008. [↩]
22. Rhodes T, Singer M, Bourgois P, Friedman SR, Strathdee SA. The social structural production of HIV risk among injecting drug users. Social Science & Medicine 2005;61:1026. [↩]
23. Ahern J, Stuber J, Galea S. Stigma, discrimination and the health of illicit drug users. Drug and Alcohol Dependence 2007;88:188. [↩]
24. Elliott R, Csete J, Palepu A, Kerr T. Reason and rights in global drug control policy. Canadian Medical Association Journal 2005;172:655-6. [↩]
25. Edwards G, Babor T, Darke S, et al. Drug trafficking: time to abolish the death penalty. Addiction 2009;104:3. [↩]
26. ref:3 [↩]
27. ref:3 [↩]
28. The National Centre on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University (2001). Shoveling up: The impact of substance abuse on State budgets. [↩]
29. Wood E, Montaner JS, Kerr T. Illicit drug addiction, infectious disease spread, and the need for an evidence-based response. Lancet Infectious Diseases 2008;8:142-3. [↩]
30. Klag S, O’Callaghan F, Creed P. The use of legal coercion in the treatment of substance abusers: An overview and critical analysis of thirty years of research. Substance Use & Misuse 2005;40:1777. [↩]
31. WHO, UNODC, UNAIDS 2009. Technical Guide for countries to set targets for universal access to HIV prevention, treatment and care for injection drug users. [↩]
SOURCE: http://www.viennadeclaration.com:80/the-declaration/
Unfortunately, this proposed legislation and its provisions demonstrate an approach to policy development that is ideological and not evidence-based and that will likely not meaningfully improve health and safety in Canadian communities.
Research indicates that the approach proposed by Bill S-10 will only serve to create greater health and social harms. Canada needs an evidence-based approach to drug policy that prioritizes public health, not costly incarceration schemes that will take resources away from effective prevention and treatment initiatives.
As health professionals and health systems researchers, our goal is to improve public health and safety. Pacific Health & Development Sciences Inc. recently joined the Canadian Public Health Association, the Urban Health Research Initiative and the BC Centre for Excellence in HIV/AIDS in petitioning the federal government on behalf of doctors, scientists, researchers, and scholars concerned about this proposed legislation, and particularly the potential impact of introducing mandatory minimum sentences.
In support of this position, this issue of PacificSci Global Perspectives draws attention to the Vienna Declaration (www.viennadeclaration.com). The Declaration is a scientific statement seeking to improve community health and safety by calling for the incorporation of evidence based research into the development of illicit drug policies.
The Vienna Declaration was the official declaration of the XVIII International AIDS conference (AIDS 2010) held in Vienna, Austria from July 18-23, 2010.
Since its launch on June 27, 2010, the Vienna Declaration has been endorsed by six Nobel Laureates, thousands of scientific experts, law enforcement leaders, and former heads of state including Fernando Henrique Cardoso (former President of Brazil), Ernesto Zedillo (former President of México) and César Gaviria (former President of Colombia). In Canada, the declaration has been signed by five chief provincial medical health officers, the Canadian Public Health Association, the Health Officers Council of British Columbia, and a growing number of municipalities which deal with these issues first hand. Pacific Health & Development Sciences Inc. also has signed.
The VIENNA DECLARATION
[Note: We took the liberty of adding italics to highlight particular areas of emphasis. The wording is otherwise unchanged.]
In response to the health and social harms of illegal drugs, a large international drug prohibition regime has been developed under the umbrella of the United Nations.(1) Decades of research provide a comprehensive assessment of the impacts of the global “War on Drugs” and, in the wake of the XVIII International AIDS Conference in Vienna, Austria, the international scientific community calls for an acknowledgement of the limits and harms of drug prohibition, and for drug policy reform to remove barriers to effective HIV prevention, treatment and care.
The evidence that law enforcement has failed to prevent the availability of illegal drugs, in communities where there is demand, is now unambiguous.(2),(3) Over the last several decades, national and international drug surveillance systems have demonstrated a general pattern of falling drug prices and increasing drug purity—despite massive investments in drug law enforcement.(4),(5)
Furthermore, there is no evidence that increasing the ferocity of law enforcement meaningfully reduces the prevalence of drug use.(6) The data also clearly demonstrate that the number of countries in which people inject illegal drugs is growing, with women and children becoming increasingly affected.(7) Outside of sub-Saharan Africa, injection drug use accounts for approximately one in three new cases of HIV.(8),(9) In some areas where HIV is spreading most rapidly, such as Eastern Europe and Central Asia, HIV prevalence can be as high as 70% among people who inject drugs, and in some areas more than 80% of all HIV cases are among this group.(10)
In the context of overwhelming evidence that drug law enforcement has failed to achieve its stated objectives, it is important that its harmful consequences be acknowledged and addressed. These consequences include but are not limited to:
• HIV epidemics fuelled by the criminalisation of people who use illicit drugs and by prohibitions on the provision of sterile needles and opioid substitution treatment.(11), (12)
• HIV outbreaks among incarcerated and institutionalised drug users as a result of punitive laws and policies and a lack of HIV prevention services in these settings.(13),(14),(15)
• The undermining of public health systems when law enforcement drives drug users away from prevention and care services and into environments where the risk of infectious disease transmission (e.g., HIV, hepatitis C & B, and tuberculosis) and other harms is increased.(16),(17),(18)
• A crisis in criminal justice systems as a result of record incarceration rates in a number of nations.(19),(20) This has negatively affected the social functioning of entire communities. While racial disparities in incarceration rates for drug offences are evident in countries all over the world, the impact has been particularly severe in the US, where approximately one in nine African-American males in the age group 20 to 34 is incarcerated on any given day, primarily as a result of drug law enforcement.(21)
• Stigma towards people who use illicit drugs, which reinforces the political popularity of criminalising drug users and undermines HIV prevention and other health promotion efforts.(22),(23)
• Severe human rights violations, including torture, forced labour, inhuman and degrading treatment, and execution of drug offenders in a number of countries.(24),(25)
• A massive illicit market worth an estimated annual value of US$320 billion.(26) These profits remain entirely outside the control of government. They fuel crime, violence and corruption in countless urban communities and have destabilised entire countries, such as Colombia, Mexico and Afghanistan.(27)
• Billions of tax dollars wasted on a “War on Drugs” approach to drug control that does not achieve its stated objectives and, instead, directly or indirectly contributes to the above harms.(28)
Unfortunately, evidence of the failure of drug prohibition to achieve its stated goals, as well as the severe negative consequences of these policies, is often denied by those with vested interests in maintaining the status quo.(29) This has created confusion among the public and has cost countless lives.
Governments and international organisations have ethical and legal obligations to respond to this crisis and must seek to enact alternative evidence-based strategies that can effectively reduce the harms of drugs without creating harms of their own.
We, the undersigned, call on governments and international organisations, including the United Nations, to:
• Undertake a transparent review of the effectiveness of current drug policies.
• Implement and evaluate a science-based public health approach to address the individual and community harms stemming from illicit drug use.
• Decriminalise drug users, scale up evidence-based drug dependence treatment options and abolish ineffective compulsory drug treatment centres that violate the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.(30)
• Unequivocally endorse and scale up funding for the implementation of the comprehensive package of HIV interventions spelled out in the WHO, UNODC and UNAIDS Target Setting Guide.(31)
• Meaningfully involve members of the affected community in developing, monitoring and implementing services and policies that affect their lives.
Basing drug policies on scientific evidence will not eliminate drug use or the problems stemming from drug injecting. However, reorienting drug policies towards evidence-based approaches that respect, protect and fulfill human rights has the potential to reduce harms deriving from current policies and would allow for the redirection of the vast financial resources towards where they are needed most: implementing and evaluating evidence-based prevention, regulatory, treatment and harm reduction interventions.
References
1. William B McAllister. Drug diplomacy in the twentieth century: an international history. Routledge, New York, 2000. [↩]
2. Reuter P. Ten years after the United Nations General Assembly Special Session (UNGASS): assessing drug problems, policies and reform proposals. Addiction 2009;104:510-7. [↩]
3. United States Office of National Drug Control Policy. The Price and Purity of Illicit Drugs: 1981 through the Second Quarter of 2003. Executive Office of the President; Washington, DC, 2004. [↩]
4. United States Office of National Drug Control Policy. The Price and Purity of Illicit Drugs: 1981 through the Second Quarter of 2003. Executive Office of the President; Washington, DC, 2004. [↩]
5. World Drug Report 2005. Vienna: United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime; 2005. [↩]
6. Degenhardt L, Chiu W-T, Sampson N, et al. Toward a global view of alcohol, tobacco, cannabis, and cocaine use: Findings from the WHO World Mental Health Surveys. PLOS Medicine 2008;5:1053-67. [↩]
7. Mathers BM, Degenhardt L, Phillips B, et al. Global epidemiology of injecting drug use and HIV among people who inject drugs: A systematic review. Lancet 2008;372:1733-45. [↩]
8. Wolfe D, Malinowska-Sempruch K. Illicit drug policies and the global HIV epidemic: Effects of UN and national government approaches. New York: Open Society Institute; 2004. [↩]
9. 2008 Report on the global AIDS epidemic. The Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS; Geneva, 2008. [↩]
10. Wolfe D, Malinowska-Sempruch K. Illicit drug policies and the global HIV epidemic: Effects of UN and national government approaches. New York: Open Society Institute; 2004. [↩]
11. Lurie P, Drucker E. An opportunity lost: HIV infections associated with lack of a national needle-exchange programme in the USA. Lancet 1997;349:604. [↩]
12. Rhodes T, Lowndes C, Judd A, et al. Explosive spread and high prevalence of HIV infection among injecting drug users in Togliatti City, Russia. AIDS 2002;16:F25. [↩]
13. Taylor A, Goldberg D, Emslie J, et al. Outbreak of HIV infection in a Scottish prison. British Medical Journal 1995;310:289. [↩]
14. Sarang A, Rhodes T, Platt L, et al. Drug injecting and syringe use in the HIV risk environment of Russian penitentiary institutions: qualitative study. Addiction 2006;101:1787. [↩]
15. Jurgens R, Ball A, Verster A. Interventions to reduce HIV transmission related to injecting drug use in prison. Lancet Infectious Disease 2009;9:57-66. [↩]
16. Davis C, Burris S, Metzger D, Becher J, Lynch K. Effects of an intensive street-level police intervention on syringe exchange program utilization: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. American Journal of Public Health 2005;95:233. [↩]
17. Bluthenthal RN, Kral AH, Lorvick J, Watters JK. Impact of law enforcement on syringe exchange programs: A look at Oakland and San Francisco. Medical Anthropology 1997;18:61. [↩]
18. Rhodes T, Mikhailova L, Sarang A, et al. Situational factors influencing drug injecting, risk reduction and syringe exchange in Togliatti City, Russian Federation: a qualitative study of micro risk environment. Social Science & Medicine 2003;57:39. [↩]
19. Fellner J, Vinck P. Targeting blacks: Drug law enforcement and race in the United States. New York: Human Rights Watch; 2008. [↩]
20. Drucker E. Population impact under New York’s Rockefeller drug laws: An analysis of life years lost. Journal of Urban Health 2002;79:434-44. [↩]
21. Warren J, Gelb A, Horowitz J, Riordan J. One in 100: Behind bars in America 2008. The Pew Center on the States Washington, DC: The Pew Charitable Trusts 2008. [↩]
22. Rhodes T, Singer M, Bourgois P, Friedman SR, Strathdee SA. The social structural production of HIV risk among injecting drug users. Social Science & Medicine 2005;61:1026. [↩]
23. Ahern J, Stuber J, Galea S. Stigma, discrimination and the health of illicit drug users. Drug and Alcohol Dependence 2007;88:188. [↩]
24. Elliott R, Csete J, Palepu A, Kerr T. Reason and rights in global drug control policy. Canadian Medical Association Journal 2005;172:655-6. [↩]
25. Edwards G, Babor T, Darke S, et al. Drug trafficking: time to abolish the death penalty. Addiction 2009;104:3. [↩]
26. ref:3 [↩]
27. ref:3 [↩]
28. The National Centre on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University (2001). Shoveling up: The impact of substance abuse on State budgets. [↩]
29. Wood E, Montaner JS, Kerr T. Illicit drug addiction, infectious disease spread, and the need for an evidence-based response. Lancet Infectious Diseases 2008;8:142-3. [↩]
30. Klag S, O’Callaghan F, Creed P. The use of legal coercion in the treatment of substance abusers: An overview and critical analysis of thirty years of research. Substance Use & Misuse 2005;40:1777. [↩]
31. WHO, UNODC, UNAIDS 2009. Technical Guide for countries to set targets for universal access to HIV prevention, treatment and care for injection drug users. [↩]
SOURCE: http://www.viennadeclaration.com:80/the-declaration/
Saturday, 18 December 2010
INTERNATIONAL & GLOBAL DEVELOPMENT - YEAR IN REVIEW 2010
PREAMBLE: This is our 4th annual review of topics that we covered over the year. We lead off with praise (“flowers”) and criticism (“fertilizer”) within three categories: global stewardship, international development, and human rights. Then follows a synopsis of each of the 12 blog themes throughout the year.
1. Global Stewardship
This year our pick of flowers for world leadership must go to South Africa for its enormous success in hosting the 2010 FIFA World Cup of Football with evident warmth, safety and competence. This nation, much more than most, symbolizes the universal striving for world peace. So much is evident in its peaceful overthrowing of apartheid, and efforts to seek truth and reconciliation in its internal affairs. A standard is set for others to follow - we can all learn from South Africa. The blog itself celebrates the role of sport in the cause of world peace.
Our pick for the Fertilizer Prize is the recently concluded UN Climate Conference in Mexico. Its not that it was a complete failure, but that it – thanks to countries like our own (Canada) that have been foot-dragging their way forward (some would say backward) in finding ways (not) to meet this challenge – fall far short of what the world community should be doing.
We want to remain positive about the progress in Cancun, but it is very obvious that more fertilizer (this time in a positive sense) is needed. For those interested in examining an authoritative assessment of the outcome, we recommend visiting http://climateprogress.org/2010/12/02/un-climate-summit-in-cancun-mexico/
2. International Development
We make a post-humus gesture of flowers on this occasion to Frank Fenner who passed away at the ripe old age of 95. Fenner, an Australian, was a giant in the field of international and global health, most notably leading the WHO smallpox eradication certification effort, achieved in 1980.
Our choice of Fenner for flowers in this category is doubly relevant, given the poor progress achieved by the world on climate change (see: 2nd paragraph above, under Global Stewardship), as he is recently famous for the following quotation:
“Homo sapiens will become extinct, perhaps within the next 100 years” he told the Australian newspaper in June. “A lot of other animals will too. It’s an irreversible situation. I think it is too late.” Surely we must do more now than simply hope that he is wrong about this.
The Fertilizer award in this category, now in negative sense, goes collectively to the G8 group of countries, for their continuing dismal performance, especially when set against their continued failure to live up to a UN agreement in 1970 that committed rich nations to allocating 0.7% of their GNP for this purpose. Although Sweden, Norway, Luxembourg, Denmark and the Netherlands comfortably meet this target, no G8 nation gets close to it (range = UK 0.52, Italy 0.16). In fact, when compared with other nations monitored by the OECD, the G8 whose brief meetings cost billions of dollars, perform even less well than the rest.
Really now, with a G8 like this, who needs it?
3. Human Rights
We offer flowers to the International Criminal Court (ICC) the permanent tribunal to prosecute individuals for genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression (although it cannot currently exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression). The creation of the ICC is commonly viewed as the most significant reform of international law since 1945, giving teeth to the two bodies of international law that deal with treatment of individuals: human rights and humanitarian law. The court came into being on 1 July 2002 and can only prosecute crimes committed on or after that date. The official seat of the court is in The Hague, Netherlands, but its proceedings may take place anywhere.
We take this opportunity to draw attention to the ICC’s recently launched Outreach Report 2010 and related video, which presents the ICC Outreach Unit’s work from 1 October 2009 to 1 October 2010. The English-language version of this report, the video, and previous annual reports are available on the ICC website.
And we close our awards section this year with a very big pile of very smelly Fertilizer for French President Nicholas Sarkozy for his treatment of the Roma. We agree with the findings of EU Justice Commissioner Viviane Reding, who, in September, likened the recent deportation of almost 1,000 Gypsies to Romania and Bulgaria to Vichy France's treatment of Jews in the second world war. No amount of histrionic pirouetting by the perfidious Sarkozy can allow his decision to stand as other than another blow to France’s patchy record in the annals of human rights.
[http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/sep/14/roma-deportations-france-eu-disgrace].
2010 AS WE RECORDED IT...
January: FOOD 2030 - A NATIONAL REPORT WITH GLOBAL IMPLICATIONS
This issue highlighted the British Government’s new Food Strategy, released January 5th, 2010. It is a timely document, with implications for both the UK and the rest of the world. Here are some of the key findings:
Demand for food and energy will jump 50% by 2030 and for fresh water by 30%, as the world population tops 8.3 billion. Climate change will exacerbate matters unpredictably. The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) predicts widespread water shortages across Africa, Europe and Asia by 2025. The amount of fresh water available per head of population will decline sharply during that time. The issue of food and energy security rose high on the political agenda last year during a spike in oil and commodity prices, but then slipped in priority with falling prices. At present, 30-40% of all crops are lost due to pest and disease before they are harvested, and future droughts and increasing salinity will affect growth and produce.
February: CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE BY PRIESTS AND COVER-UP BY CATHOLIC CHURCH
In this issue, we posted verbatim, a CNN report that outlined a decades old cover-up of child sexual abuse at the hands of Catholic priests in Ireland. The actions of Irish priests and the inaction of their church hierarchy represent the height of hypocrisy and flagrant criminal behavior, and bring into disrepute the entire edifice of organized Catholicism.
Although the action now being taken came about as a result of a commission of inquiry put into motion by the nation of Ireland, one then had to ask why this took so long and why no criminal charges have ever been laid.
The world has since learned from a leaked US diplomatic cable that the Irish government was forced to grant Vatican officials immunity from testifying.
[Reference: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/10/wikileaks-vatican-child-sex-abuse-investigation]
In our view, this clearly does not absolve the state itself from some share of the responsibility and the consequences. Clearly it does not absolve the Vatican, which now appears to have used its enormous influence to engage in obstruction of justice.
March: OVER A BILLION HUNGRY PEOPLE IN THE WORLD - IMF AND FAO REPORT
This issue gives space to the text of an International Monetary Fund report entitled “Hunger on the Rise” developed by David Dawe and Denis Drechsler, and based on The State of Food Insecurity in the World, published by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) in 2009 (full citations provided in the blog).
In summary, world hunger spiked sharply in 2009, significantly worsening an already disappointing trend in global food security since 1996. The combination of food and economic crises has pushed the number of hungry people worldwide to historic levels.
April: DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE FOR HEALTH – NEW IMPLICATIONS ABOUT COMPARATIVE AID EFFECTIVENESS OF GOVERNMENT VS NON-GOVERNMENTAL FUNDING
This issue extracted from a report recently distributed by the Pan American Health Organization, PAHO/WHO, referring to work jointly published in the Lancet by Harvard University, and the University of Washington, revealing that investment in the non-government sector may result in more favourable health spending by government than by investing directly in the government sector itself.
Specifically, the study found that debt relief, and development assistance for health (DAH) to government had a negative and significant effect on domestic government spending on health such that for every US$1 of DAH to government, government health expenditures from domestic resources were reduced by $0•43 (p=0) to $1•14. However, debt relief, and development assistance for health DAH to the non-governmental sector had a positive and significant effect on domestic government health spending.
May: MATERNAL MORTALITY – AN INTEGRITY TEST FOR POLITICIANS
For the lead item of this month’s blog, we presented the polite but authoritative view of the Lancet on Canada’s G8 Leadership, emphasizing the inadequacy of Canada’s approach to maternal health as a global public health issue, and followed this by the first good news in many decades, that maternal mortality globally is finally being reduced.
This issue was labeled “an integrity test for politicians” because many of (what Canadian Conservative politicians like to refer to themselves as) the “political class” appear intellectually challenged by scientifically sound evidence regarding the nature of the problem, and what works or doesn’t. It is also an ethical test… whether our ruling party is in it for cheap political gains among their home base, or whether higher reasoning will prevail in the interests of the health of millions of women around the world.
Postscript: Canada’s eventual funding commitments to address maternal and child health (MCH) excluded access to safe abortion, and made only weak provisions for family planning. (This observation was further elaborated in the September blog).
June: THE GAZA FOG OF ASYMMETRICAL VIOLENCE Need for International Inquiry
This issue presented verbatim, a recent report by Amnesty International, outlining the desperate situation of the people of Gaza due to the Israeli blockade. While this seemingly archaic military tactic continues to be excused by Israel as an act of self-defence, independent analyses have revealed this to be capricious in terms of the range of prohibited items, and it is obviously counter-productive to the peace effort although apparently good politics in Israel itself. On the ground however, the situation is nothing less than a humanitarian disaster, especially as over half the Gaza population are children.
July: FOOTBALL WORLD CUP PROMOTES SPORTS AS A FORCE FOR WORLD PEACE
We took the opportunity of the World Cup as a timely moment to take note of initiatives to bond international sport to the cause of world peace. Interestingly, this particular issue turned out to be the most frequently visited issue of our blog since it commenced in 2006!
August: HISTORIC UN RESOLUTION ON WATER AND SANITATION AS HUMAN RIGHTS
On 28th July, the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution calling on States and International Organizations to provide financial resources, build capacity and transfer technology, particularly to developing countries, in scaling up efforts to provide safe, clean, accessible and affordable drinking water and sanitation for all. The Assembly, in a text on the human right to water and sanitation, highlights that 884 million people lack access to safe drinking water and more than 2.6 billion are without access to basic sanitation.
Regretfully a full consensus was not achieved and the resolution was approved with 122 votes in favour, none against and 41 abstentions. We noted disappointment in our own Canadian government, which abstained from the vote, giving no adequate explanation.
September: MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS – OUR UNDERACHIEVING “LEADERSHIP”
Under United Nations auspices, from 20 to 22 September, a Summit on the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) was held in New York. With five years left until the 2015 deadline to achieve the MDGs, Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon called on world leaders to accelerate progress towards these goals, the overall aim being to reduce World Poverty.
Despite the dire need of over a billion people living in poverty around the world, it is increasingly clear that few if any of the MDGs will be achieved by the target year of 2015. Clearly there is a crying need for a strong reaffirmation with donor policies and resources to match.
Unfortunately, recent years have witnessed a track record littered with false promises and broken commitments and in some instances shallow comprehension of what is needed to resolve on the major issues underlying world poverty. All too often, “world leaders” have pandered to their domestic political bases rather than genuinely taking on these issues.
October: CANADA LOSING ITS INFLUENCE IN THE WORLD – FOREIGN POLICY FAILURES AND "MAPLE SYRUP DIPLOMACY"
On October 12th, 2010, Canada lost in its bid for a seat on the United Nations Security Council. Despite Canada’s tradition of global leadership, and having gained this seat on every prior bid for it, impoverished Portugal (pop 11.6 million) beat Canada by a virtual landslide. It is no exaggeration to say that, approaching the vote, Canada’s Conservative government revealed a sense of entitlement to the seat, being 7th largest donor of the UN, and hosting this year’s G8 and G20 meetings. Besides Prime Minister Stephen Harper making two appearances before the General Assembly during the run-up (having otherwise mostly ignored the UN), as a bizarre gesture, Maple Syrup gifts were given to representatives of UN members before the vote.
The juxtaposition of these events suggest that a combination of clumsy leadership and diplomatic ineptitude may lie at the root of this foreign policy failure. While Canada’s stated principles do create positive images, when you look closely at how they are interpreted under the Conservative government, the reality reveals a narrow vision that is too often arrogant, ignorant and ignoble.
November: CHINA SHAMES ITSELF - IMPRISONS MAN FOR PUBLIC HEALTH ADVOCACY
In this issue we draw attention to how China is persecuting a man following his advocacy on behalf of public health, especially the health of children.
This is the first time we have given space to the issue of human rights in China. Like many other observers, we are impressed by China’s material advances and recognize its growing importance on the world stage. However, until human rights are elevated in importance, it will fall short of global expectations as a potential world leader.
December: INTERNATIONAL & GLOBAL DEVELOPMENT – YEAR IN REVIEW 2010…
This Issue!
AND A HAPPY NEW YEAR!We extend to readers our best wishes for 2011, with hopes that the global challenges of recent years will be better understood and more humanely managed going forward. For this to happen we need more enlightened world leadership. PacificSci will continue to offer an independent view.
1. Global Stewardship
This year our pick of flowers for world leadership must go to South Africa for its enormous success in hosting the 2010 FIFA World Cup of Football with evident warmth, safety and competence. This nation, much more than most, symbolizes the universal striving for world peace. So much is evident in its peaceful overthrowing of apartheid, and efforts to seek truth and reconciliation in its internal affairs. A standard is set for others to follow - we can all learn from South Africa. The blog itself celebrates the role of sport in the cause of world peace.
Our pick for the Fertilizer Prize is the recently concluded UN Climate Conference in Mexico. Its not that it was a complete failure, but that it – thanks to countries like our own (Canada) that have been foot-dragging their way forward (some would say backward) in finding ways (not) to meet this challenge – fall far short of what the world community should be doing.
We want to remain positive about the progress in Cancun, but it is very obvious that more fertilizer (this time in a positive sense) is needed. For those interested in examining an authoritative assessment of the outcome, we recommend visiting http://climateprogress.org/2010/12/02/un-climate-summit-in-cancun-mexico/
2. International Development
We make a post-humus gesture of flowers on this occasion to Frank Fenner who passed away at the ripe old age of 95. Fenner, an Australian, was a giant in the field of international and global health, most notably leading the WHO smallpox eradication certification effort, achieved in 1980.
Our choice of Fenner for flowers in this category is doubly relevant, given the poor progress achieved by the world on climate change (see: 2nd paragraph above, under Global Stewardship), as he is recently famous for the following quotation:
“Homo sapiens will become extinct, perhaps within the next 100 years” he told the Australian newspaper in June. “A lot of other animals will too. It’s an irreversible situation. I think it is too late.” Surely we must do more now than simply hope that he is wrong about this.
The Fertilizer award in this category, now in negative sense, goes collectively to the G8 group of countries, for their continuing dismal performance, especially when set against their continued failure to live up to a UN agreement in 1970 that committed rich nations to allocating 0.7% of their GNP for this purpose. Although Sweden, Norway, Luxembourg, Denmark and the Netherlands comfortably meet this target, no G8 nation gets close to it (range = UK 0.52, Italy 0.16). In fact, when compared with other nations monitored by the OECD, the G8 whose brief meetings cost billions of dollars, perform even less well than the rest.
Really now, with a G8 like this, who needs it?
3. Human Rights
We offer flowers to the International Criminal Court (ICC) the permanent tribunal to prosecute individuals for genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression (although it cannot currently exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression). The creation of the ICC is commonly viewed as the most significant reform of international law since 1945, giving teeth to the two bodies of international law that deal with treatment of individuals: human rights and humanitarian law. The court came into being on 1 July 2002 and can only prosecute crimes committed on or after that date. The official seat of the court is in The Hague, Netherlands, but its proceedings may take place anywhere.
We take this opportunity to draw attention to the ICC’s recently launched Outreach Report 2010 and related video, which presents the ICC Outreach Unit’s work from 1 October 2009 to 1 October 2010. The English-language version of this report, the video, and previous annual reports are available on the ICC website.
And we close our awards section this year with a very big pile of very smelly Fertilizer for French President Nicholas Sarkozy for his treatment of the Roma. We agree with the findings of EU Justice Commissioner Viviane Reding, who, in September, likened the recent deportation of almost 1,000 Gypsies to Romania and Bulgaria to Vichy France's treatment of Jews in the second world war. No amount of histrionic pirouetting by the perfidious Sarkozy can allow his decision to stand as other than another blow to France’s patchy record in the annals of human rights.
[http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/sep/14/roma-deportations-france-eu-disgrace].
2010 AS WE RECORDED IT...
January: FOOD 2030 - A NATIONAL REPORT WITH GLOBAL IMPLICATIONS
This issue highlighted the British Government’s new Food Strategy, released January 5th, 2010. It is a timely document, with implications for both the UK and the rest of the world. Here are some of the key findings:
Demand for food and energy will jump 50% by 2030 and for fresh water by 30%, as the world population tops 8.3 billion. Climate change will exacerbate matters unpredictably. The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) predicts widespread water shortages across Africa, Europe and Asia by 2025. The amount of fresh water available per head of population will decline sharply during that time. The issue of food and energy security rose high on the political agenda last year during a spike in oil and commodity prices, but then slipped in priority with falling prices. At present, 30-40% of all crops are lost due to pest and disease before they are harvested, and future droughts and increasing salinity will affect growth and produce.
February: CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE BY PRIESTS AND COVER-UP BY CATHOLIC CHURCH
In this issue, we posted verbatim, a CNN report that outlined a decades old cover-up of child sexual abuse at the hands of Catholic priests in Ireland. The actions of Irish priests and the inaction of their church hierarchy represent the height of hypocrisy and flagrant criminal behavior, and bring into disrepute the entire edifice of organized Catholicism.
Although the action now being taken came about as a result of a commission of inquiry put into motion by the nation of Ireland, one then had to ask why this took so long and why no criminal charges have ever been laid.
The world has since learned from a leaked US diplomatic cable that the Irish government was forced to grant Vatican officials immunity from testifying.
[Reference: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/10/wikileaks-vatican-child-sex-abuse-investigation]
In our view, this clearly does not absolve the state itself from some share of the responsibility and the consequences. Clearly it does not absolve the Vatican, which now appears to have used its enormous influence to engage in obstruction of justice.
March: OVER A BILLION HUNGRY PEOPLE IN THE WORLD - IMF AND FAO REPORT
This issue gives space to the text of an International Monetary Fund report entitled “Hunger on the Rise” developed by David Dawe and Denis Drechsler, and based on The State of Food Insecurity in the World, published by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) in 2009 (full citations provided in the blog).
In summary, world hunger spiked sharply in 2009, significantly worsening an already disappointing trend in global food security since 1996. The combination of food and economic crises has pushed the number of hungry people worldwide to historic levels.
April: DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE FOR HEALTH – NEW IMPLICATIONS ABOUT COMPARATIVE AID EFFECTIVENESS OF GOVERNMENT VS NON-GOVERNMENTAL FUNDING
This issue extracted from a report recently distributed by the Pan American Health Organization, PAHO/WHO, referring to work jointly published in the Lancet by Harvard University, and the University of Washington, revealing that investment in the non-government sector may result in more favourable health spending by government than by investing directly in the government sector itself.
Specifically, the study found that debt relief, and development assistance for health (DAH) to government had a negative and significant effect on domestic government spending on health such that for every US$1 of DAH to government, government health expenditures from domestic resources were reduced by $0•43 (p=0) to $1•14. However, debt relief, and development assistance for health DAH to the non-governmental sector had a positive and significant effect on domestic government health spending.
May: MATERNAL MORTALITY – AN INTEGRITY TEST FOR POLITICIANS
For the lead item of this month’s blog, we presented the polite but authoritative view of the Lancet on Canada’s G8 Leadership, emphasizing the inadequacy of Canada’s approach to maternal health as a global public health issue, and followed this by the first good news in many decades, that maternal mortality globally is finally being reduced.
This issue was labeled “an integrity test for politicians” because many of (what Canadian Conservative politicians like to refer to themselves as) the “political class” appear intellectually challenged by scientifically sound evidence regarding the nature of the problem, and what works or doesn’t. It is also an ethical test… whether our ruling party is in it for cheap political gains among their home base, or whether higher reasoning will prevail in the interests of the health of millions of women around the world.
Postscript: Canada’s eventual funding commitments to address maternal and child health (MCH) excluded access to safe abortion, and made only weak provisions for family planning. (This observation was further elaborated in the September blog).
June: THE GAZA FOG OF ASYMMETRICAL VIOLENCE Need for International Inquiry
This issue presented verbatim, a recent report by Amnesty International, outlining the desperate situation of the people of Gaza due to the Israeli blockade. While this seemingly archaic military tactic continues to be excused by Israel as an act of self-defence, independent analyses have revealed this to be capricious in terms of the range of prohibited items, and it is obviously counter-productive to the peace effort although apparently good politics in Israel itself. On the ground however, the situation is nothing less than a humanitarian disaster, especially as over half the Gaza population are children.
July: FOOTBALL WORLD CUP PROMOTES SPORTS AS A FORCE FOR WORLD PEACE
We took the opportunity of the World Cup as a timely moment to take note of initiatives to bond international sport to the cause of world peace. Interestingly, this particular issue turned out to be the most frequently visited issue of our blog since it commenced in 2006!
August: HISTORIC UN RESOLUTION ON WATER AND SANITATION AS HUMAN RIGHTS
On 28th July, the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution calling on States and International Organizations to provide financial resources, build capacity and transfer technology, particularly to developing countries, in scaling up efforts to provide safe, clean, accessible and affordable drinking water and sanitation for all. The Assembly, in a text on the human right to water and sanitation, highlights that 884 million people lack access to safe drinking water and more than 2.6 billion are without access to basic sanitation.
Regretfully a full consensus was not achieved and the resolution was approved with 122 votes in favour, none against and 41 abstentions. We noted disappointment in our own Canadian government, which abstained from the vote, giving no adequate explanation.
September: MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS – OUR UNDERACHIEVING “LEADERSHIP”
Under United Nations auspices, from 20 to 22 September, a Summit on the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) was held in New York. With five years left until the 2015 deadline to achieve the MDGs, Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon called on world leaders to accelerate progress towards these goals, the overall aim being to reduce World Poverty.
Despite the dire need of over a billion people living in poverty around the world, it is increasingly clear that few if any of the MDGs will be achieved by the target year of 2015. Clearly there is a crying need for a strong reaffirmation with donor policies and resources to match.
Unfortunately, recent years have witnessed a track record littered with false promises and broken commitments and in some instances shallow comprehension of what is needed to resolve on the major issues underlying world poverty. All too often, “world leaders” have pandered to their domestic political bases rather than genuinely taking on these issues.
October: CANADA LOSING ITS INFLUENCE IN THE WORLD – FOREIGN POLICY FAILURES AND "MAPLE SYRUP DIPLOMACY"
On October 12th, 2010, Canada lost in its bid for a seat on the United Nations Security Council. Despite Canada’s tradition of global leadership, and having gained this seat on every prior bid for it, impoverished Portugal (pop 11.6 million) beat Canada by a virtual landslide. It is no exaggeration to say that, approaching the vote, Canada’s Conservative government revealed a sense of entitlement to the seat, being 7th largest donor of the UN, and hosting this year’s G8 and G20 meetings. Besides Prime Minister Stephen Harper making two appearances before the General Assembly during the run-up (having otherwise mostly ignored the UN), as a bizarre gesture, Maple Syrup gifts were given to representatives of UN members before the vote.
The juxtaposition of these events suggest that a combination of clumsy leadership and diplomatic ineptitude may lie at the root of this foreign policy failure. While Canada’s stated principles do create positive images, when you look closely at how they are interpreted under the Conservative government, the reality reveals a narrow vision that is too often arrogant, ignorant and ignoble.
November: CHINA SHAMES ITSELF - IMPRISONS MAN FOR PUBLIC HEALTH ADVOCACY
In this issue we draw attention to how China is persecuting a man following his advocacy on behalf of public health, especially the health of children.
This is the first time we have given space to the issue of human rights in China. Like many other observers, we are impressed by China’s material advances and recognize its growing importance on the world stage. However, until human rights are elevated in importance, it will fall short of global expectations as a potential world leader.
December: INTERNATIONAL & GLOBAL DEVELOPMENT – YEAR IN REVIEW 2010…
This Issue!
AND A HAPPY NEW YEAR!We extend to readers our best wishes for 2011, with hopes that the global challenges of recent years will be better understood and more humanely managed going forward. For this to happen we need more enlightened world leadership. PacificSci will continue to offer an independent view.
Sunday, 14 November 2010
CHINA SHAMES ITSELF - IMPRISONS MAN FOR PUBLIC HEALTH ADVOCACY
PREAMBLE
According to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, public health measures and access to medical care constitute a human right, as stated in Article 25 (1):
Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.
Reference: The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948. http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/
In this issue we draw attention to how China is persecuting a man following his advocacy on behalf of public health, especially the health of children.
THE STORY
A Chinese man who organized a support group for fellow parents of children sickened in one of the country's worst food safety scandals was found guilty of inciting social disorder and sentenced on November 10, 2010 to 2 1/2 years in prison.
According to an Associated Press report of that date, “Zhao Lianhai had pushed for greater official accountability and compensation for victims and their families after the 2008 scandal that shocked China. His sentence (is) particularly severe because the case related to a public safety incident that the embarrassed leadership had pledged to tackle in a bid to restore consumer confidence.”
In 2008, six children died and nearly 300,000 were sickened by baby formula tainted with melamine, which can cause kidney stones and kidney failure. The industrial chemical, used in the manufacture of plastics and fertilizer, was added to watered-down milk to increase profits and fool inspectors testing for protein. Several dairy industry figures were prosecuted and punished, including three people sentenced to death. The epidemic of toxic renal disease itself also spread to numerous other countries through the export of dairy products, thus defining this as a threat to the health of children around the world.
However, prosecutors subsequently leveled three charges against Zhao Lianhai: That he organized a gathering of a dozen parents of sick children at a restaurant, held a paper sign in front of a court and factory involved in the scandal as a protest, and gave media interviews in a public place. According to his lawyer, “the court wouldn't receive our evidence and testimony and even wouldn't allow our witnesses to speak”. Thereby found “guilty”, his sentence is being condemned in China by those with the courage to speak up, and around the world.
Amnesty International states: "We are appalled that the authorities have imprisoned a man the Chinese public rightly view as a protector of children, not a criminal," said Catherine Baber, Amnesty’s Asia-Pacific deputy director.
Because Zhao Lianhai was in effect upholding The Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948, Article 25 (1), cited above, within which the World Health Organization (in part) operates, it is our view that the Director General of WHO, Dr Margaret Chan, should convey concern directly to the relevant Chinese government authorities regarding the persecution of this public health advocate.
China clearly has made a serious mistake in this instance, both in terms of public health and universal human rights. By so doing, it is suppressing the tradition of advocacy on which public health measures around the world owe their origin. Everyone expects better from China today: at this point in its history, when it is emerging as an economic power, not to reverse this punitive legal decision at a higher level will illustrate to the world that China is far from ready to lead in matters of public health, let alone human rights.
Reference: Associated Press November 10, 2010. Chinese father punished for food safety activism. http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jaj3zrfNc_Bfr6sI5q43ycIBD1pQ?docId=62d9798ca29a4cd4b26fadfdc5206d58
THE ISSUE IN GLOBAL PUBLIC HEALTH PERSPECTIVE
For additional perspective on China’s outmoded, corrupt and vindictive approach to public health advocacy, we extract the following item from Human Rights Watch.
Chinese Corruption Is Hazardous to Your Health - Local officials often prioritize economic gain at the expense of public health. By Joe Amon, Health and Human Rights Director. Published in: Asia Wall Street Journal. May 13, 2010
"At the end of March (2010), a Chinese newspaper reported that four children died and many more fell ill in Shanxi province after receiving vaccines that were not properly stored. The heat-sensitive vaccines had been taken out of air-conditioned rooms because government labels-required to show that the vaccines had been bought from official suppliers at inflated prices-would not adhere to cold vials. The result? An untold number of children are now vulnerable to polio and other diseases.
Instead of investigating the matter, local health officials denied the story as "basically untrue," threatened outraged parents and prevented them from seeking help from higher authorities. The whistleblower, an employee of the Shanxi Center for Disease Control and Prevention, was demoted.
Covering up corruption and official mismanagement in health care is a common response among Chinese officials. That's despite government promises that lessons were learned in 2008, when producers of baby formula discovered it was cheaper to poison infants than sell authentic formula. Thousands of babies became sick from ingesting milk tainted with melamine-an industrial product more commonly used to make plastics.
Like the tainted vaccines, the melamine scandal is a story about local officials sacrificing the health of Chinese citizens to make a profit. Factories that produced the tainted milk were able to slide through the regulation pipeline by partnering with local government officials. And when children became sick, the local government's response was to threaten and arrest parents rather than offer help to the sick children.
This month the Chinese government announced a new set of health-care priorities. These goals include strengthening the rural health insurance system and raising production standards for pharmaceuticals. But the government's health-care wish list ignores the corruption, greed and mismanagement that are key barriers to providing essential medical care. These issues are clearly illustrated in what will likely be the next big scandal, brewing on an even larger scale.
Industrial pollution is causing heavy-metal poisoning in almost every corner of the country. Local government officials in the cities where the poisoning occurs deny and cover up the health consequences rather than providing help for thousands of adults and children suffering from lead poisoning. In one village, local officials prevented a bus carrying parents seeking medical help from reaching the hospital in a nearby town.
Perhaps most troubling are consistent accounts that hospitals have been paid to withhold or give false results for children who are tested for lead poisoning. Many of these children have serious neurological and developmental problems, but treatment and sustained medical care have been practically nonexistent.
Medical care for victims of industrial pollution is guaranteed under the Chinese constitution, yet victims' care has apparently taken a backseat to the protection of local officials with a financial stake in the polluting factories. In Fengxiang, Shaanxi province, where thousands of children have lead poisoning, local officials demonstrated their priorities by allowing the polluting factory to re-open, with no change in its operations.
The Chinese government has laws on the books designed to tackle corruption and protect the health of the Chinese population, but these laws lack an enforcement mechanism to ensure accountability. It's no surprise then that local officials prioritize economic gain at the expense of public health. Penalizing corruption and rewarding local officials for improvements in public health should be recognized as a critical part of legal and health-care reform.
In a globalized world, the effects of cover-ups by corrupt officials are felt far from China's borders. Melamine-tainted dairy products from China were found in countries all over the world. In February, three Chinese babies headed to the U.S. for adoption were rushed to the hospital with extremely high levels of lead in their blood. From fake cough syrup killing children in Panama to toys coated in lead harming children in the U.S., the cases exposed by the free media outside China suggest that we all face hidden risks."
Source: Amon J. Human Rights Watch. Chinese Corruption Is Hazardous to Your Health - Local officials often prioritize economic gain at the expense of public health. Published in: Asia Wall Street Journal. May 13, 2010
http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2010/05/13/chinese-corruption-hazardous-your-health
According to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, public health measures and access to medical care constitute a human right, as stated in Article 25 (1):
Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.
Reference: The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948. http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/
In this issue we draw attention to how China is persecuting a man following his advocacy on behalf of public health, especially the health of children.
THE STORY
A Chinese man who organized a support group for fellow parents of children sickened in one of the country's worst food safety scandals was found guilty of inciting social disorder and sentenced on November 10, 2010 to 2 1/2 years in prison.
According to an Associated Press report of that date, “Zhao Lianhai had pushed for greater official accountability and compensation for victims and their families after the 2008 scandal that shocked China. His sentence (is) particularly severe because the case related to a public safety incident that the embarrassed leadership had pledged to tackle in a bid to restore consumer confidence.”
In 2008, six children died and nearly 300,000 were sickened by baby formula tainted with melamine, which can cause kidney stones and kidney failure. The industrial chemical, used in the manufacture of plastics and fertilizer, was added to watered-down milk to increase profits and fool inspectors testing for protein. Several dairy industry figures were prosecuted and punished, including three people sentenced to death. The epidemic of toxic renal disease itself also spread to numerous other countries through the export of dairy products, thus defining this as a threat to the health of children around the world.
However, prosecutors subsequently leveled three charges against Zhao Lianhai: That he organized a gathering of a dozen parents of sick children at a restaurant, held a paper sign in front of a court and factory involved in the scandal as a protest, and gave media interviews in a public place. According to his lawyer, “the court wouldn't receive our evidence and testimony and even wouldn't allow our witnesses to speak”. Thereby found “guilty”, his sentence is being condemned in China by those with the courage to speak up, and around the world.
Amnesty International states: "We are appalled that the authorities have imprisoned a man the Chinese public rightly view as a protector of children, not a criminal," said Catherine Baber, Amnesty’s Asia-Pacific deputy director.
Because Zhao Lianhai was in effect upholding The Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948, Article 25 (1), cited above, within which the World Health Organization (in part) operates, it is our view that the Director General of WHO, Dr Margaret Chan, should convey concern directly to the relevant Chinese government authorities regarding the persecution of this public health advocate.
China clearly has made a serious mistake in this instance, both in terms of public health and universal human rights. By so doing, it is suppressing the tradition of advocacy on which public health measures around the world owe their origin. Everyone expects better from China today: at this point in its history, when it is emerging as an economic power, not to reverse this punitive legal decision at a higher level will illustrate to the world that China is far from ready to lead in matters of public health, let alone human rights.
Reference: Associated Press November 10, 2010. Chinese father punished for food safety activism. http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jaj3zrfNc_Bfr6sI5q43ycIBD1pQ?docId=62d9798ca29a4cd4b26fadfdc5206d58
THE ISSUE IN GLOBAL PUBLIC HEALTH PERSPECTIVE
For additional perspective on China’s outmoded, corrupt and vindictive approach to public health advocacy, we extract the following item from Human Rights Watch.
Chinese Corruption Is Hazardous to Your Health - Local officials often prioritize economic gain at the expense of public health. By Joe Amon, Health and Human Rights Director. Published in: Asia Wall Street Journal. May 13, 2010
"At the end of March (2010), a Chinese newspaper reported that four children died and many more fell ill in Shanxi province after receiving vaccines that were not properly stored. The heat-sensitive vaccines had been taken out of air-conditioned rooms because government labels-required to show that the vaccines had been bought from official suppliers at inflated prices-would not adhere to cold vials. The result? An untold number of children are now vulnerable to polio and other diseases.
Instead of investigating the matter, local health officials denied the story as "basically untrue," threatened outraged parents and prevented them from seeking help from higher authorities. The whistleblower, an employee of the Shanxi Center for Disease Control and Prevention, was demoted.
Covering up corruption and official mismanagement in health care is a common response among Chinese officials. That's despite government promises that lessons were learned in 2008, when producers of baby formula discovered it was cheaper to poison infants than sell authentic formula. Thousands of babies became sick from ingesting milk tainted with melamine-an industrial product more commonly used to make plastics.
Like the tainted vaccines, the melamine scandal is a story about local officials sacrificing the health of Chinese citizens to make a profit. Factories that produced the tainted milk were able to slide through the regulation pipeline by partnering with local government officials. And when children became sick, the local government's response was to threaten and arrest parents rather than offer help to the sick children.
This month the Chinese government announced a new set of health-care priorities. These goals include strengthening the rural health insurance system and raising production standards for pharmaceuticals. But the government's health-care wish list ignores the corruption, greed and mismanagement that are key barriers to providing essential medical care. These issues are clearly illustrated in what will likely be the next big scandal, brewing on an even larger scale.
Industrial pollution is causing heavy-metal poisoning in almost every corner of the country. Local government officials in the cities where the poisoning occurs deny and cover up the health consequences rather than providing help for thousands of adults and children suffering from lead poisoning. In one village, local officials prevented a bus carrying parents seeking medical help from reaching the hospital in a nearby town.
Perhaps most troubling are consistent accounts that hospitals have been paid to withhold or give false results for children who are tested for lead poisoning. Many of these children have serious neurological and developmental problems, but treatment and sustained medical care have been practically nonexistent.
Medical care for victims of industrial pollution is guaranteed under the Chinese constitution, yet victims' care has apparently taken a backseat to the protection of local officials with a financial stake in the polluting factories. In Fengxiang, Shaanxi province, where thousands of children have lead poisoning, local officials demonstrated their priorities by allowing the polluting factory to re-open, with no change in its operations.
The Chinese government has laws on the books designed to tackle corruption and protect the health of the Chinese population, but these laws lack an enforcement mechanism to ensure accountability. It's no surprise then that local officials prioritize economic gain at the expense of public health. Penalizing corruption and rewarding local officials for improvements in public health should be recognized as a critical part of legal and health-care reform.
In a globalized world, the effects of cover-ups by corrupt officials are felt far from China's borders. Melamine-tainted dairy products from China were found in countries all over the world. In February, three Chinese babies headed to the U.S. for adoption were rushed to the hospital with extremely high levels of lead in their blood. From fake cough syrup killing children in Panama to toys coated in lead harming children in the U.S., the cases exposed by the free media outside China suggest that we all face hidden risks."
Source: Amon J. Human Rights Watch. Chinese Corruption Is Hazardous to Your Health - Local officials often prioritize economic gain at the expense of public health. Published in: Asia Wall Street Journal. May 13, 2010
http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2010/05/13/chinese-corruption-hazardous-your-health
Thursday, 14 October 2010
CANADA LOSING ITS INFLUENCE IN THE WORLD – FOREIGN POLICY FAILURES AND "MAPLE SYRUP DIPLOMACY"
PREAMBLE On October 12th, 2010, Canada lost in its bid for a seat on the United Nations Security Council. Despite Canada’s tradition of global leadership, and having gained this seat on every prior bid for it, impoverished Portugal (pop 11.6 million) beat Canada by a virtual landslide. It is no exaggeration to say that, approaching the vote, Canada’s Conservative government revealed a sense of entitlement to the seat, being 7th largest donor of the UN, and hosting this year’s G8 and G20 meetings.
Besides Prime Minister Stephen Harper making two appearances before the General Assembly during the run-up (having otherwise mostly ignored the UN), as a bizarre gesture, Maple Syrup gifts were given to representatives of UN members before the vote. The juxtaposition of these events suggest that a combination of clumsy leadership and diplomatic ineptitude (maple syrup diplomacy?) may lie at the root of this foreign policy failure.
In response to the stinging electoral defeat on October 12, 2010, the first such loss sustained by Canada since the UN’s inception in 1946, Canada’s Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon declared, "I do not in any way see this as a repudiation of Canada's foreign policy… The principles underlying our foreign policy, such as freedom, democracy, respect for human rights and the rule of law, were the basis of all our decisions." [CBC News October 13, 2010 8:00 PM ET.]
Our take on Cannon’s so very defensive declaration is that these stated principles do create positive images, but when you look closely at how they are interpreted under the Conservative government, the reality reveals a narrow vision that is at once arrogant, ignorant and ignoble. The focus of this issue of PacificSci Global Perspectives therefore is to examine this assertion, uttered by Cannon on behalf of a Canadian government currently led by Prime Minister Stephen Harper.
Historical Note: Canada has been a driving force behind the formation of the Internatinal Criminal Court, the Treaty Banning Landmines, the interdiction of blood diamonds, and an array of other worthy and respected global initiative. This tradition of Canadian leadership at the global level was built on a sound foundation laid by former Prime Minister (Liberal) and 1957 Nobel Peace Laureate Lester B Pearson. As President of the UN General Assembly in 1952, Pearson led UN efforts to mediate a settlement to the Korean War. His work gave rise to Canada’s reputation for fairness and balance, and the effective use of diplomacy rather than militarism. His leadership also gave rise to the (now diminished) Canadian military tradition of peacekeeping. It is out of respect for this legacy that Global Perspectives includes a quotation from Pearson in our masthead.
FOREIGN POLICY MISSTEPS & ABERRATIONS
Our view of this situation is that Canada’s foreign policy under the current Conservative government of Stephen Harper is largely responsible for its inability to win this UN Security Council seat in a contest with Portugal. Consider the following selected actions (often inactions) of the Harper government, which we have organized according to the following headings - global, international and national with global implications:
Global
o Refusal to Sign the Treaty for the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
o Refusal to Sign the Treaty recognizing Water as a Human Right.
o Undermining the Copenhagen Climate Change Conference.
o Withdrew financial support for UNRWA (UN Relief & Works Agency).
o Shifting Aid Priorities from Africa to Latin America, despite human needs.
o Promoting a maternal health initiative deficient in family planning and excluding access to safe abortion within this (a discredited Bush-era policy).
o Down-grading Canada’s contribution to UN peacekeeping — Canada (almost unbelievably) now ranks 57th, behind Yemen and Uganda.
International
o Uncritical support for Israel e.g., in 2006, the only vote at the UN supporting Israel’s policy on settlements. Note: Most nations support Israel’s right to exist but not illegal settlements.
o A clear lack of anything close to comparable compassion for displaced Palestinians (in occupied territories and refugees).
o Refusing entrance to 4 term British MP George Galloway, alleging that he supported terrorism. Note: this view was recently over-ruled by the Supreme Court of Canada, and lays the government open to criminal proceedings.
o Belated attention to Canada’s relationship with China, first opened up by former Liberal Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau, and now of major economic importance.
National Policy Failures with International & Global Ramifications
o Refusal to release files that may indicate knowledge of torture in Afghanistan, and when forced to do so these were so heavily redacted as to render them virtually useless. They have thereby challenged the freedom of Canadians to know what their government is doing - the freedom of information process.
o Refusal to act even on its own Charter of Rights and Freedoms regarding certain Canadian citizens abroad e.g., Abousfian Abdelrazik stranded in Sudan for 6 years after Canada refused to issue a new passport to him because he was on the UN Security Council terrorist blacklist. Now in Canada thanks to a Supreme Court of Canada ruling in his favour, Abdelrazik accuses the government of blocking his repatriation and helping to arrange his imprisonment.
Note: There is a double standard here (perhaps even overt racism) where others, like Brenda Martin (white, Canadian born) charged with money laundering in Mexico, obtain Ministerial intercession and a prompt flight home.
o Refusal to act on international law regarding Canadian prisoner Omar Khadr (a child soldier no less) in Guantanamo, the only western government not to repatriate its nationals from US military tribunals which lack legitimacy even in the eyes of the US Supreme Court. The Harper regime has in effect redefined human rights by supporting the suspension of habeas corpus and allowing indefinite imprisonment with no charges.
o Canada grossly overspent on this years G8 and G20 meetings. At >$1 billion, 50 times more than other nations spent in previous hosting, the Conservative government placed Toronto at predictably high risk of civil disturbances so as to impress visiting dignitaries. The mass arrest of >900 people, a large majority without charge, was unprecedented in Canadian history, and lowered the esteem of Canada within and outside our borders. To have so wasted so much money at a time of severe economic hardship was a disgraceful use of public funds.
o Discontinuing funding support for Canadian NGOs such as Kairos (an ecumenical organization), the Canadian Arab Foundation (language services to new immigrants) and disrupting the governance of advocacy group Rights and Democracy, out of ideological misrepresentations of humanitarian work.
COMMENT: Any of these actions and inactions (and others like them) can be debated, but taken together they reveal an ideological mindset that represents a deviation from Canada’s more honourable past. It has been described by one of the Harper government’s own government members (on this month’s loss of its use of an airbase in the United Arab Emirates seemingly due to a Canadian failure of good faith) as “hard core, truculent, unreasonable and against Canada’s short and long term interests”. (Globe and Mail, Oct 13th, 2010) Note: Source un-named – presumably to avert political reprisals.
This selection of examples represents on the global stage a pattern that is increasingly evident within Canada itself: a government out of touch with the needs of real people.
Conclusion: For Minister Cannon therefore, and ultimately Prime Minister Harper himself, to contend that the outcome of the UN vote was “not” a repudiation of Canada's foreign policy is actually quite stupid. Obviously we lost our bid for a seat primarily due to our foreign policy. To quote from a viewer’s comment published on the CBC website (http://www.cbc.ca/politics/ October 12):
“The Harper government's inability to actually consider or accept that their foreign policies may affect other countries' opinions of Canada and the Harper government is a perfect illustration of their fundamental flaw: they're absolutely incapable of accepting opinions that are in opposition to their own, and blame everyone else for the consequences of the failures that result from that inability.”
Long before the world passed judgment on us this week, Robert Fowler, Canada’s former top diplomat, said last year: “I’m not sure that Canada deserves to win this election, for we no longer represent the qualities which we Canadians have long insisted that candidates for the council should bring to such responsibilities . . . The world does not need more of the kind of Canada they’ve been getting.”
[Reference: Haroon Siddiqui. Editorial: World passes judgment on Harper’s foreign policy. The Star. Thursday Oct 14, 2010.]
In closing , for those interested in exploring this collapse in Canada's global prestige, we wish to draw attention to the following excellent article by Robert Silver in the Globe and Mail (Its Stephen Harper’s Loss Tuesday, October 12, 2010 3:22PM EDT) which illuminates his hypocrisy on foreign policy: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/second-reading/silver-powers/its-stephen-harpers-loss/article1753829/
Besides Prime Minister Stephen Harper making two appearances before the General Assembly during the run-up (having otherwise mostly ignored the UN), as a bizarre gesture, Maple Syrup gifts were given to representatives of UN members before the vote. The juxtaposition of these events suggest that a combination of clumsy leadership and diplomatic ineptitude (maple syrup diplomacy?) may lie at the root of this foreign policy failure.
In response to the stinging electoral defeat on October 12, 2010, the first such loss sustained by Canada since the UN’s inception in 1946, Canada’s Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon declared, "I do not in any way see this as a repudiation of Canada's foreign policy… The principles underlying our foreign policy, such as freedom, democracy, respect for human rights and the rule of law, were the basis of all our decisions." [CBC News October 13, 2010 8:00 PM ET.]
Our take on Cannon’s so very defensive declaration is that these stated principles do create positive images, but when you look closely at how they are interpreted under the Conservative government, the reality reveals a narrow vision that is at once arrogant, ignorant and ignoble. The focus of this issue of PacificSci Global Perspectives therefore is to examine this assertion, uttered by Cannon on behalf of a Canadian government currently led by Prime Minister Stephen Harper.
Historical Note: Canada has been a driving force behind the formation of the Internatinal Criminal Court, the Treaty Banning Landmines, the interdiction of blood diamonds, and an array of other worthy and respected global initiative. This tradition of Canadian leadership at the global level was built on a sound foundation laid by former Prime Minister (Liberal) and 1957 Nobel Peace Laureate Lester B Pearson. As President of the UN General Assembly in 1952, Pearson led UN efforts to mediate a settlement to the Korean War. His work gave rise to Canada’s reputation for fairness and balance, and the effective use of diplomacy rather than militarism. His leadership also gave rise to the (now diminished) Canadian military tradition of peacekeeping. It is out of respect for this legacy that Global Perspectives includes a quotation from Pearson in our masthead.
FOREIGN POLICY MISSTEPS & ABERRATIONS
Our view of this situation is that Canada’s foreign policy under the current Conservative government of Stephen Harper is largely responsible for its inability to win this UN Security Council seat in a contest with Portugal. Consider the following selected actions (often inactions) of the Harper government, which we have organized according to the following headings - global, international and national with global implications:
Global
o Refusal to Sign the Treaty for the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
o Refusal to Sign the Treaty recognizing Water as a Human Right.
o Undermining the Copenhagen Climate Change Conference.
o Withdrew financial support for UNRWA (UN Relief & Works Agency).
o Shifting Aid Priorities from Africa to Latin America, despite human needs.
o Promoting a maternal health initiative deficient in family planning and excluding access to safe abortion within this (a discredited Bush-era policy).
o Down-grading Canada’s contribution to UN peacekeeping — Canada (almost unbelievably) now ranks 57th, behind Yemen and Uganda.
International
o Uncritical support for Israel e.g., in 2006, the only vote at the UN supporting Israel’s policy on settlements. Note: Most nations support Israel’s right to exist but not illegal settlements.
o A clear lack of anything close to comparable compassion for displaced Palestinians (in occupied territories and refugees).
o Refusing entrance to 4 term British MP George Galloway, alleging that he supported terrorism. Note: this view was recently over-ruled by the Supreme Court of Canada, and lays the government open to criminal proceedings.
o Belated attention to Canada’s relationship with China, first opened up by former Liberal Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau, and now of major economic importance.
National Policy Failures with International & Global Ramifications
o Refusal to release files that may indicate knowledge of torture in Afghanistan, and when forced to do so these were so heavily redacted as to render them virtually useless. They have thereby challenged the freedom of Canadians to know what their government is doing - the freedom of information process.
o Refusal to act even on its own Charter of Rights and Freedoms regarding certain Canadian citizens abroad e.g., Abousfian Abdelrazik stranded in Sudan for 6 years after Canada refused to issue a new passport to him because he was on the UN Security Council terrorist blacklist. Now in Canada thanks to a Supreme Court of Canada ruling in his favour, Abdelrazik accuses the government of blocking his repatriation and helping to arrange his imprisonment.
Note: There is a double standard here (perhaps even overt racism) where others, like Brenda Martin (white, Canadian born) charged with money laundering in Mexico, obtain Ministerial intercession and a prompt flight home.
o Refusal to act on international law regarding Canadian prisoner Omar Khadr (a child soldier no less) in Guantanamo, the only western government not to repatriate its nationals from US military tribunals which lack legitimacy even in the eyes of the US Supreme Court. The Harper regime has in effect redefined human rights by supporting the suspension of habeas corpus and allowing indefinite imprisonment with no charges.
o Canada grossly overspent on this years G8 and G20 meetings. At >$1 billion, 50 times more than other nations spent in previous hosting, the Conservative government placed Toronto at predictably high risk of civil disturbances so as to impress visiting dignitaries. The mass arrest of >900 people, a large majority without charge, was unprecedented in Canadian history, and lowered the esteem of Canada within and outside our borders. To have so wasted so much money at a time of severe economic hardship was a disgraceful use of public funds.
o Discontinuing funding support for Canadian NGOs such as Kairos (an ecumenical organization), the Canadian Arab Foundation (language services to new immigrants) and disrupting the governance of advocacy group Rights and Democracy, out of ideological misrepresentations of humanitarian work.
COMMENT: Any of these actions and inactions (and others like them) can be debated, but taken together they reveal an ideological mindset that represents a deviation from Canada’s more honourable past. It has been described by one of the Harper government’s own government members (on this month’s loss of its use of an airbase in the United Arab Emirates seemingly due to a Canadian failure of good faith) as “hard core, truculent, unreasonable and against Canada’s short and long term interests”. (Globe and Mail, Oct 13th, 2010) Note: Source un-named – presumably to avert political reprisals.
This selection of examples represents on the global stage a pattern that is increasingly evident within Canada itself: a government out of touch with the needs of real people.
Conclusion: For Minister Cannon therefore, and ultimately Prime Minister Harper himself, to contend that the outcome of the UN vote was “not” a repudiation of Canada's foreign policy is actually quite stupid. Obviously we lost our bid for a seat primarily due to our foreign policy. To quote from a viewer’s comment published on the CBC website (http://www.cbc.ca/politics/ October 12):
“The Harper government's inability to actually consider or accept that their foreign policies may affect other countries' opinions of Canada and the Harper government is a perfect illustration of their fundamental flaw: they're absolutely incapable of accepting opinions that are in opposition to their own, and blame everyone else for the consequences of the failures that result from that inability.”
Long before the world passed judgment on us this week, Robert Fowler, Canada’s former top diplomat, said last year: “I’m not sure that Canada deserves to win this election, for we no longer represent the qualities which we Canadians have long insisted that candidates for the council should bring to such responsibilities . . . The world does not need more of the kind of Canada they’ve been getting.”
[Reference: Haroon Siddiqui. Editorial: World passes judgment on Harper’s foreign policy. The Star. Thursday Oct 14, 2010.]
In closing , for those interested in exploring this collapse in Canada's global prestige, we wish to draw attention to the following excellent article by Robert Silver in the Globe and Mail (Its Stephen Harper’s Loss Tuesday, October 12, 2010 3:22PM EDT) which illuminates his hypocrisy on foreign policy: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/second-reading/silver-powers/its-stephen-harpers-loss/article1753829/
Tuesday, 14 September 2010
MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS – OUR UNDERACHIEVING “LEADERSHIP”
PREAMBLE: Under the auspices of the United Nations, from 20 to 22 September 2010, a Summit on the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) will be held in New York. With only five years left until the 2015 deadline to achieve the MDGs, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon has called on world leaders to attend the summit to accelerate progress towards these goals, the overall aim of which is to reduce World Poverty. Visit the Summit website! http://www.un.org/en/mdg/summit2010/
Despite the dire need of over a billion people living in poverty around the world, the initial intentions behind the goals and efforts to showcase what had been achieved, it is increasingly clear that few if any of the MDGs will be achieved by the target year of 2015. Clearly there is a crying need for a strong reaffirmation with donor policies and resources to match.
Unfortunately, recent years have witnessed a track record littered with false promises and broken commitments and in some instances shallow comprehension of what is needed to resolve on the major issues underlying world poverty. All too often, “world leaders” have pandered to their domestic political bases rather than genuinely taking on these issues.
A case in point is Canada’s minority Conservative government whose leader Stephen Harper and fundamentalist colleagues ensured that this country’s commitment to address maternal and child health (MCH) excluded access to safe abortion, and made only weak provisions for the inclusion of family planning within Canadian funding commitments.
In fact, it is estimated that 20 million unsafe abortions occur around the world annually and that 70,000 of these result in the woman's death. Clearly there must be more emphasis on the provision of family planning, and removal of barriers to this practice and also quite obviously access to safe abortion, as a core element of a harm reduction strategy.
Harper’s approach to maternal health is in effect a northern echo of the Bush administration’s “global gag rule” (no funding for MCH unless abortion is specifically excluded), since repudiated by the Obama administration. Ironically, women in Canada long ago won the right to chose, so it is invidious that “Harper’s Canada” discriminates against these practices abroad.
There is still hope that Canada may amend this approach reasonably soon, with the return of a more compassionate philosophy. What is needed is to change the party in power, the only currently viable alternative being the Liberal Party of Canada, with (virtually guaranteed) support from all other parties: only the Conservatives (with little more than 30% public support) are holding up the need for enlightened policy.
We therefore endorse the following statement (Globe and Mail, Feb 2, 2010) made by the leader of that party, and of the official opposition Michael Ignatieff: “We want to make sure that women have access to all the contraceptive methods available to control their fertility because we don’t want to have women dying because of botched procedures, we don’t want to have women dying in misery.” This quote regains resonance in light of the looming MDG Summit next week in New York.
This example of Maternal and Child Health (MDG 5) is but one of the MDGs falling short of sufficient progress for any of them to be achieved by 2015 without an infusion of more genuine commitment by “world leaders” such as Mr Harper.
The eight MDGs are now listed for ease of reference:
Goal 1: Eradicate Extreme Poverty and Hunger
Goal 2: Achieve Universal Primary Education
Goal 3: Promote Gender Equality and Empower Women
Goal 4: Reduce Child Mortality
Goal 5: Improve Maternal Health
Goal 6: Combat HIV/AIDS, Malaria and other diseases.
Goal 7: Ensure Environmental Sustainability
Goal 8: Develop a Global Partnership of Development.
NOTE: This internationally agreed framework of 8 goals and 18 targets is complemented by 48 technical indicators to measure progress towards the Millennium Development Goals. These indicators have since been adopted by a consensus of experts from the United Nations, IMF, OECD and the World Bank.
As our feature for this issue, we present below a September 10, 2010 IPS Inter-Press Service report by Aprille Muscara (full reference below).
GLOBAL DEVELOPMENT BLUEPRINT REVEALS URGENT UPHILL BATTLE
By Aprille Muscara
UNITED NATIONS, Sep 10, 2010 (IPS) - A document outlining the U.N.'s strategy to achieve the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) by 2015 was finalised Thursday after months of heated negotiations.
The text, titled "Keeping the Promise – United to Achieve the Millennium Development Goals", will be formally signed off on by world leaders at the upcoming MDG summit, which is to be held here from Sep. 20-22.
The final 27-page version, obtained by IPS, differs considerably from the 14-page "zero draft" base text from which member states inserted, amended and removed passages.
However, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) worry that the completed text, called an outcome document, falls short of the substantial action plan it was hoped to be and is instead a rehash of already-made promises and generalised commitments.
"This document lacks the adrenaline boost to accelerate the MDGs, and with only five years left, world leaders coming together in New York must commit to concrete actions that will ensure all people are lifted from poverty in our lifetime," said Emma Seery, a spokesperson for Oxfam International.
Over the years, NGOs and aid groups have advocated for a human rights-based approach to tackling the MDGs. A review of the document at different draft stages reveals the addition of key human rights language, such as inclusion of the right to development, the right to food, the right to health and the right to education.
"We recognize that the respect, promotion and protection of human rights is an integral part of effective work towards achieving the MDGs," the final document states.
But notably absent from the list is access to clean water and sanitation, which the U.N. in a resolution declared a basic human right in late July. The resolution proved to be a divisive one, however, with 41 countries, including the United States, Britain and Canada abstaining from the vote.
Although water and sanitation is not explicitly framed as a human right in the final outcome document, they appear frequently throughout as basic needs essential to achieving the MDGs.
Absent, as well, is the assertion "that gender equality is a basic human right, a fundamental value and an issue of social justice" – a statement that was inserted during the draft process but failed to make it through to the end. The final version reads: "We acknowledge the importance of gender equality and empowerment of women to achieve the MDGs."
Indeed, the evolution of the outcome document, which at one point ballooned to 38 pages, reflects a process of political wrangling over touchy wording. With its numerous additions and amendments, the final product is at once more specific in its language yet still general in its pledges.
Language on peace and security matters appears to have been especially contentious. For instance, references to "armed violence," present in the zero draft, and "transnational crime" and "trafficking in persons," introduced in subsequent drafts, as posing threats to the attainment of the MDGs have been removed entirely in favour of the more benign "conflict."
However, one instance of both "foreign occupation" and "terrorism" – new additions – as hindering achievement of the MDGs appear in the final version, reflecting a political compromise between the Group of 77, a coalition of developing countries, and the European Union and the United States.
In the final stages of ironing out problematic language, the E.U. and U.S. and the G77 were often on opposing sides in typical developed-developing, North-South fashion.
It is common practice, a U.N official told IPS, for the relevant parties to go to extremes in their proposed amendments in anticipation of having to make concessions.
Thus, the G77's insertions that claim the current global financial structure – from trade to aid – is "non- inclusive," "ineffective" and "inadequate" for developing countries were removed in place of more watered down wording stressing the need to further reform international financial systems.
A greater focus on the particular needs of the developing world, rural populations and specific mention of regional efforts by the global South in attaining the MDGs are also additions, reflecting G77 bargaining.
Meanwhile, the importance of parliaments, national ownership in developmental efforts and mutual accountability for commitments made towards achieving the MDGs suggest concessions made to the West.
Among the other numerous differences from the zero draft is an acknowledgement of the impact of the world financial crisis, volatile food and energy prices and humanitarian emergencies in stunting developmental gains. And of the eight goals, the document characterises maternal health, MDG5, as making the slowest progress. [Emphasis Added]
Also added is a litany of references to U.N. conventions, agreements and agencies, which serves to reinforce the commitments and goals made in those forums, but also highlights the world body's role in ensuring the accountability of governments.
To this end, the final document requests a "Special Event" to take place during the 68th session of the general assembly in 2013, two years shy of the deadline, to follow up on efforts made toward achieving the MDGs.
Ultimately, despite its acknowledgement of the uneven advances made thus far, the document reflects the urgent uphill battle left on the path to 2015.
"Progress on other MDGs is fragile and must be sustained to avoid reversal," it states.
Source: Muscara A. Development Blueprint Reveals Urgent Uphill Battle. IPS Inter-Press Service. Geneva Sept 10, 2010. http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=52788
Despite the dire need of over a billion people living in poverty around the world, the initial intentions behind the goals and efforts to showcase what had been achieved, it is increasingly clear that few if any of the MDGs will be achieved by the target year of 2015. Clearly there is a crying need for a strong reaffirmation with donor policies and resources to match.
Unfortunately, recent years have witnessed a track record littered with false promises and broken commitments and in some instances shallow comprehension of what is needed to resolve on the major issues underlying world poverty. All too often, “world leaders” have pandered to their domestic political bases rather than genuinely taking on these issues.
A case in point is Canada’s minority Conservative government whose leader Stephen Harper and fundamentalist colleagues ensured that this country’s commitment to address maternal and child health (MCH) excluded access to safe abortion, and made only weak provisions for the inclusion of family planning within Canadian funding commitments.
In fact, it is estimated that 20 million unsafe abortions occur around the world annually and that 70,000 of these result in the woman's death. Clearly there must be more emphasis on the provision of family planning, and removal of barriers to this practice and also quite obviously access to safe abortion, as a core element of a harm reduction strategy.
Harper’s approach to maternal health is in effect a northern echo of the Bush administration’s “global gag rule” (no funding for MCH unless abortion is specifically excluded), since repudiated by the Obama administration. Ironically, women in Canada long ago won the right to chose, so it is invidious that “Harper’s Canada” discriminates against these practices abroad.
There is still hope that Canada may amend this approach reasonably soon, with the return of a more compassionate philosophy. What is needed is to change the party in power, the only currently viable alternative being the Liberal Party of Canada, with (virtually guaranteed) support from all other parties: only the Conservatives (with little more than 30% public support) are holding up the need for enlightened policy.
We therefore endorse the following statement (Globe and Mail, Feb 2, 2010) made by the leader of that party, and of the official opposition Michael Ignatieff: “We want to make sure that women have access to all the contraceptive methods available to control their fertility because we don’t want to have women dying because of botched procedures, we don’t want to have women dying in misery.” This quote regains resonance in light of the looming MDG Summit next week in New York.
This example of Maternal and Child Health (MDG 5) is but one of the MDGs falling short of sufficient progress for any of them to be achieved by 2015 without an infusion of more genuine commitment by “world leaders” such as Mr Harper.
The eight MDGs are now listed for ease of reference:
Goal 1: Eradicate Extreme Poverty and Hunger
Goal 2: Achieve Universal Primary Education
Goal 3: Promote Gender Equality and Empower Women
Goal 4: Reduce Child Mortality
Goal 5: Improve Maternal Health
Goal 6: Combat HIV/AIDS, Malaria and other diseases.
Goal 7: Ensure Environmental Sustainability
Goal 8: Develop a Global Partnership of Development.
NOTE: This internationally agreed framework of 8 goals and 18 targets is complemented by 48 technical indicators to measure progress towards the Millennium Development Goals. These indicators have since been adopted by a consensus of experts from the United Nations, IMF, OECD and the World Bank.
As our feature for this issue, we present below a September 10, 2010 IPS Inter-Press Service report by Aprille Muscara (full reference below).
GLOBAL DEVELOPMENT BLUEPRINT REVEALS URGENT UPHILL BATTLE
By Aprille Muscara
UNITED NATIONS, Sep 10, 2010 (IPS) - A document outlining the U.N.'s strategy to achieve the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) by 2015 was finalised Thursday after months of heated negotiations.
The text, titled "Keeping the Promise – United to Achieve the Millennium Development Goals", will be formally signed off on by world leaders at the upcoming MDG summit, which is to be held here from Sep. 20-22.
The final 27-page version, obtained by IPS, differs considerably from the 14-page "zero draft" base text from which member states inserted, amended and removed passages.
However, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) worry that the completed text, called an outcome document, falls short of the substantial action plan it was hoped to be and is instead a rehash of already-made promises and generalised commitments.
"This document lacks the adrenaline boost to accelerate the MDGs, and with only five years left, world leaders coming together in New York must commit to concrete actions that will ensure all people are lifted from poverty in our lifetime," said Emma Seery, a spokesperson for Oxfam International.
Over the years, NGOs and aid groups have advocated for a human rights-based approach to tackling the MDGs. A review of the document at different draft stages reveals the addition of key human rights language, such as inclusion of the right to development, the right to food, the right to health and the right to education.
"We recognize that the respect, promotion and protection of human rights is an integral part of effective work towards achieving the MDGs," the final document states.
But notably absent from the list is access to clean water and sanitation, which the U.N. in a resolution declared a basic human right in late July. The resolution proved to be a divisive one, however, with 41 countries, including the United States, Britain and Canada abstaining from the vote.
Although water and sanitation is not explicitly framed as a human right in the final outcome document, they appear frequently throughout as basic needs essential to achieving the MDGs.
Absent, as well, is the assertion "that gender equality is a basic human right, a fundamental value and an issue of social justice" – a statement that was inserted during the draft process but failed to make it through to the end. The final version reads: "We acknowledge the importance of gender equality and empowerment of women to achieve the MDGs."
Indeed, the evolution of the outcome document, which at one point ballooned to 38 pages, reflects a process of political wrangling over touchy wording. With its numerous additions and amendments, the final product is at once more specific in its language yet still general in its pledges.
Language on peace and security matters appears to have been especially contentious. For instance, references to "armed violence," present in the zero draft, and "transnational crime" and "trafficking in persons," introduced in subsequent drafts, as posing threats to the attainment of the MDGs have been removed entirely in favour of the more benign "conflict."
However, one instance of both "foreign occupation" and "terrorism" – new additions – as hindering achievement of the MDGs appear in the final version, reflecting a political compromise between the Group of 77, a coalition of developing countries, and the European Union and the United States.
In the final stages of ironing out problematic language, the E.U. and U.S. and the G77 were often on opposing sides in typical developed-developing, North-South fashion.
It is common practice, a U.N official told IPS, for the relevant parties to go to extremes in their proposed amendments in anticipation of having to make concessions.
Thus, the G77's insertions that claim the current global financial structure – from trade to aid – is "non- inclusive," "ineffective" and "inadequate" for developing countries were removed in place of more watered down wording stressing the need to further reform international financial systems.
A greater focus on the particular needs of the developing world, rural populations and specific mention of regional efforts by the global South in attaining the MDGs are also additions, reflecting G77 bargaining.
Meanwhile, the importance of parliaments, national ownership in developmental efforts and mutual accountability for commitments made towards achieving the MDGs suggest concessions made to the West.
Among the other numerous differences from the zero draft is an acknowledgement of the impact of the world financial crisis, volatile food and energy prices and humanitarian emergencies in stunting developmental gains. And of the eight goals, the document characterises maternal health, MDG5, as making the slowest progress. [Emphasis Added]
Also added is a litany of references to U.N. conventions, agreements and agencies, which serves to reinforce the commitments and goals made in those forums, but also highlights the world body's role in ensuring the accountability of governments.
To this end, the final document requests a "Special Event" to take place during the 68th session of the general assembly in 2013, two years shy of the deadline, to follow up on efforts made toward achieving the MDGs.
Ultimately, despite its acknowledgement of the uneven advances made thus far, the document reflects the urgent uphill battle left on the path to 2015.
"Progress on other MDGs is fragile and must be sustained to avoid reversal," it states.
Source: Muscara A. Development Blueprint Reveals Urgent Uphill Battle. IPS Inter-Press Service. Geneva Sept 10, 2010. http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=52788
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
