[Ip-health] MSF intervention at WHO EB on Expert Working Group report

[James ARKINSTALL]

=0D
Hello=0D
=0D
Please find below the intervention delivered on Tuesday 19 January by=0D
Michelle Childs, Director of Policy and Advocacy at Medecins Sans=0D
Frontieres' Campaign for Access to Essential Medicines under agenda item=0D
4.3 Public health, innovation and intellectual property: global strategy=0D
and plan of action.=0D
=0D
Contact numbers are at the foot of this message. Thanks.=0D
--------------=0D
=0D
=0D
Thank you Chair.=0D
=0D
M=C3=A9decins Sans Fronti=C3=A8res will focus our comments on the executive=
 summary=0D
of the report from the WHO Expert Working Group on R&D Financing.=0D
=0D
We wish to highlight a number of areas of concern in relation to the=0D
analysis and recommendations in the Executive Summary.  In particular, it=
=0D
does not build on the conclusions of the CIPIH report and the Global=0D
Strategy and Plan of Action in key areas, such as the need to develop=0D
proposals for financing mechanisms that delink the costs of R&D from the=0D
price of health products to deliver both innovation and access.=0D
=0D
It appears to endorse the role of intellectual property as an incentive for=
=0D
research. This goes against the findings of the CIPIH report , which=0D
clearly found that intellectual property fails as a tool to stimulate R&D=
=0D
for diseases affecting millions of poor people in developing countries, and=
=0D
acts as a barrier to accessing life-saving medicines.=0D
=0D
The criteria used to select and evaluate the proposals appear not to have=
=0D
been changed, despite the flaws which favoured the status quo, identified=
=0D
by civil society and Member States in the public hearing . The Global=0D
Strategy aims to promote new thinking. The summary=E2=80=99s recommendation=
s=0D
however predominantly favour those organisations and companies currently=0D
involved in R&D, and assume that they should be the focus of designing a=0D
new system and will be the main beneficiaries of proposals.=0D
=0D
It has discarded proposals that seek to delink the cost of R&D from the=0D
price of health tools, and proposals from Member States and civil society=
=0D
that suggest new norms for the coordination and funding of R&D .=0D
=0D
We are also concerned, as others, about the process, as it is reported that=
=0D
representatives from the pharmaceutical industry appear to have had early=
=0D
access to confidential documents, and had the opportunity to potentially=0D
influence the recommendations now before the EB.=0D
=0D
Such events and flaws cast doubt on the validity of the summary=E2=80=99s r=
eview of=0D
proposals, and on the approach the EWG has taken.    We note the proposals=
=0D
to review the full report and support those proposals, to assess whether it=
=0D
is consistent with the Global Strategy and Plan of Action, and if necessary=
=0D
to amend the selection criteria to ensure consistency with the direction=0D
given by the CIPIH and the Global Strategy.=0D
=0D
However we note that the implementation of the Global Strategy should not=
=0D
be delayed, and we urge Member States and WHO to lead on a pro-health=0D
approach to priority setting and financing of R&D and the management of=0D
intellectual property.=0D
=0D
Thank you Chair.=0D
=0D
-ENDS-=0D
=0D
James Arkinstall=0D
Managing Editor=0D
MSF Campaign for Access to Essential Medicines=0D
office +33 1 40 21 28 35=0D
mobile + 33 6 13 99 77 51=0D