[Ip-health] OECD high forum, where are the NGO voices?

[Spring Gombe]

http://www.keionline.org/index.php?option=3Dcom_jd-wp&Itemid=3D39&p=3D45

WHO IGWG
OECD high forum, where are the NGO voices?
June 14th, 2007 by Spring Gombe

The OECD High Level Forum to be held in the Netherlands on June 20
and 21, proposes to discuss new policy strategies to stimulate
innovation for and access to medicines for neglected diseases. The
meeting has on its face very laudable goals. But while NGOs have been
invited to the HLF, they have not been given sufficient opportunity
to contribute to the discussion Only one NGO has been invited to
speak. By contrast other actors from academia and industry have been
given multiple opportunities to present their views.

Assuming NGOs have been invited because we have played a pivotal role
in raising the political profile of neglected diseases through access
campaigns, advancing new policy mechanisms, such as prize funds, and
delivering care to the populations who form the focus of the
discussions, it is surprising that we are being given such limited
opportunity to speak, other than the possibility of asking questions
from the floor.

Keynote speakers from WHO and health and development ministries know
better than most that the crisis facing the populations suffering
from neglected diseases would be far worse, but for our interventions
(insufficient as they are), and the political spur we have delivered
to compel others to act. Indeed, it is as a result of this knowledge
that they and all WHO member states called for our involvement in the
recently established WHO IGWG, as experts, and as NGOs in official
relations with the WHO.

The outcomes of the HLF are meant to feed back into the work of the
WHO IGWG. These results will have less credibility if it is perceived
that one section of stakeholders is severely restricted from formal
participation. Participation does not mean just being in the room, it
requires the ability to present one=92s viewpoint, rather than being
restricted to asking limited questions in a debate framed and
presented by others. It is difficult to say if this exclusion is
intended as a slap in the face, or if it reflects a lack of
integration between the work of the OECD and the work that has
proceeded over years at the WHO and elsewhere, often led by NGOs,
with great effect, in the area of access and innovation. Whatever the
case, the result is a shabby thing=85


Spring Gombe
spring.gombe@keionline.org