Difference between revisions of "WSRO Report of meeting at WHO 28 June 2004"

From Powerbase
Jump to: navigation, search
 
(5 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 +
This is a text version of the leaked WSRO minute by [[Richard Cottrell]].  A pdf version is [http://www.spinprofiles.org/images/d/d6/WSRO_Report_of_meeting_at_WHO_28_June_2004.pdf here].
 +
 
==Report of meeting at WHO 28 June 2004-07-02==  
 
==Report of meeting at WHO 28 June 2004-07-02==  
  
 
Please treat the contents of this report with extreme discretion.
 
Please treat the contents of this report with extreme discretion.
 
   
 
   
Those present were Mr Andr e Prost (WHO) and Dr Richar d Cottr el l ( WSRO).  
+
Those present were Mr [[Andre Prost]] (WHO) and Dr [[Richard Cottrell]] (WSRO).  
This infor mal meet ing wa s bet ween the WSRO Direct or ­General a nd Mr Andr e Prost , who is a WHO Director with special responsi bility for relat ions
+
This informal meeting was between the WSRO Director-­General and Mr Andre Prost, who is a WHO Director with special responsibility for relations between WHO and both governments and private industry. Mr Prost has held this post throughout the period that Report 916 ('Diet , nutrition and the prevention of chronic diseases') and the 'Global Strategy on Diet, physical activity and health' were being prepared.
bet ween WHO and both gover nments and pri vat e industry. Mr Prost has hel d thi s post thr oughout t he period that Repor t 916 (“Diet , nutrit ion and the  
+
 
pr evention of chroni c di sea sesâ€?) and t he “Gl obal Strat egy on Diet , physi cal activity and heal thâ€? wer e bei ng prepar ed.  
+
'''Objectives'''
 +
 
 +
The purpose of the meeting was to ascertain the mood within WHO following the presentation of the Resolution to adopt the Global  Strategy to the World Health Assembly in May this year and the obvious embarrassment (to WHO staff) that it was only accepted with substantial modification.  
  
Obj ectives
+
Particularly, it was intended to seek advice as to the extent to which WHO staff blame the sugar  industry for this embarrassment and the attitude WHO is likely to adopt to WSRO in the future.  
The purpose of the meeting wa s to ascertai n the mood wit hin WHO followi ng the pr esentati on of the Resolution to adopt the Global  Strat egy to the
 
Worl d Heal th Assembl y in Ma y thi s year and the obvi ous embarra ssment  (to WHO staff)  tha t it wa s onl y accepted wit h substantia l modi fica tion.
 
Particularly, i t wa s int ended to seek advi ce as to the ext ent  to whi ch WHO st aff blame the sugar  indu stry for thi s embarra ssment and the attitu de
 
WHO is likely to adopt to WSRO in the future.  
 
  
 
'''Background'''  
 
'''Background'''  
Mr Prost is shortly to retir e fr om hi s curr ent positi on wi thin WHO but ha s been ask ed to stay on to assi st the Direct or ­General  in, a s yet, unspeci fi ed
+
 
wa ys. He wa s most  fri endly and helpful (he was pr evi ou sly in regular contact with the su gar indu stryespeciall y Graha m Somer vill e of CEFS and  
+
Mr Prost is shortly to retire from his current position within WHO but has been asked to stay on to assist the Director-General in, as yet, unspecified ways. He was most  friendly and helpful (he was previously in regular contact with the sugar industryespecially [[Graham Somerville]] of CEFS and [[Richard Cottrell]], while WHO Ambassador to the EU) .  
Richar d Cottr el l, whi le WHO Amba ssador  to the EU) .  
 
  
 
'''Atmosphere within WHO'''  
 
'''Atmosphere within WHO'''  
The main WHO staff members responsible for initiating Report 916 and the Global Strategy have either left  of their own volition or their contracts have been terminated.  These include Yach, Puska, and Waxman.  Only Nishida seems to have remained on WHO staff. Mme le Galles (the more
 
recently appointed Assistant Director General responsible for Non communicable Disease Prevention) seems entirely isolated and out of favour with the Director ­General (Dr  Lee). It is doubtful whether she will keep this post for much longer.
 
  
The events at the WHA in May were a considerable embarrassment to Dr Lee. It appears that  le Galles (new in her post) prepared for this meeting by contact with academic advisors (chosen by her staff, who were hardly impartial), with Non­Governmental Organi zations (most of whi ch have ideological agendas) and with the Health Ministries of Developed Countries. She seems to have ignored the Foreign Ministries, who are, in fact, the lead Ministry for Member Governments of WHO.  
+
The main WHO staff members responsible for initiating Report 916 and the Global Strategy have either left  of their own volition or their contracts have been terminated.  These include Yach, Puska, and Waxman.  Only Nishida seems to have remained on WHO staff. Mme le Galles (the more recently appointed Assistant Director General responsible for Non communicable Disease Prevention) seems entirely isolated and out of favour with the Director-General (Dr  Lee). It is doubtful whether she will keep this post for much longer.  
  
When the proposal for a Resolution on a Gl obal Strat egy ca me up for deci si on at t he Wor ld Heal th Assembl y, the Member Gover nment s’ Health  
+
The events at the WHA in May were a considerable embarrassment to Dr Lee. It appears that  le Galles (new in her post) prepared for this meeting by contact with academic advisors (chosen by her staff, who were hardly impartial), with Non-­Governmental Organi zations (most of which have ideological agendas) and with the Health Ministries of Developed Countries. She seems to have ignored the Foreign Ministries, who are, in fact, the lead Ministry for Member Governments of WHO.  
Mi ni stries wer e over ­rul ed by the For eign Mi ni st ri es in al most every case. Thi s seems to have been pri marily influenced by resi stance to wha t wa s
 
seen as an at t empt  to expa nd of t he influence of the Health Mi ni stri es int o territor y cosi der ed the pr operty of t he For ei gn Mi ni stries, rat her  than any
 
particular int er est in the issues themsel ves.  
 
  
The result was that t he Resolution would ha ve failed entir el y but for some rapi d manoeuvri ng by Dr Lee to encourage redra fting of t he Resolution (by
+
When the proposal for a Resolution on a Global Strategy came up for decision at the World Health Assembly, the Member Governments' Health Ministries were over-rruled by the Foreign Ministries in almost every caseThis seems to have been primarily influenced by resistance to what was seen as an attempt to expand of the influence of the Health Ministries into territory cosidered the property of the Foreign Ministries, rather than any particular interest in the issues themselves.  
Member Government r epr esentat ives,  not by WHO staff) int o a for m that  was acceptabl e. I t wa s not ewor thy that le Gall es was excluded fr om this
 
process.  The resi stance to the wording pr oposed for the Resolution wa s ver y widespr ead and not  confi ned to Developi ng Countries or t o sugar
 
exporting countries.  
 
  
Thus the role of the sugar industry, as such, is seen as secondary to these events, although sugar is seen as a key factor in the reasoning of many Member Governments. The WHO is a democratic organization and the voters rebelled against the staff.  Not a comfortable position for a new Director ­General.  
+
The result was that the Resolution would have failed entirely but for some rapid manoeuvring by Dr Lee to encourage redrafting of the Resolution (by Member Government representatives, not by WHO staff) into a form that  was acceptable. It was noteworthy that le Galles was excluded from this process.  The resistance to the wording proposed for the Resolution was very widespread and not confined to Developing Countries or to sugar exporting countries.
 +
 
 +
Thus the role of the sugar industry, as such, is seen as secondary to these events, although sugar is seen as a key factor in the reasoning of many Member Governments. The WHO is a democratic organization and the voters rebelled against the staff.  Not a comfortable position for a new Director-­General.  
  
 
'''Future Prospects'''  
 
'''Future Prospects'''  
Thus the likelihood of WSRO developing a constructive relationship with WHO, possibly leading to NGO status,  have not been irrevocably damaged by the events to date.  Mr  Prost  strongly recommended that  WSRO shoul d meet Dr  Beagl ehole, who a senior member of le Galles’ NCD Division and a well known epidemiologist. He also recommended contact  with his successor as Director  for  Government  and Industry Relations, Ms [[Susan Holck]].  
+
 
It i s cl ear that  WSRO will need to offer some form of collaboration wi th WHO, i nvol vi ng substantial sponsor shi p,  to be consi dered for  NGO statu s.  
+
Thus the likelihood of WSRO developing a constructive relationship with WHO, possibly leading to NGO status,  have not been irrevocably damaged by the events to date.  Mr  Prost  strongly recommended that  WSRO shoul d meet Dr  Beaglehole, who a senior member of le Galles' NCD Division and a well known epidemiologist. He also recommended contact  with his successor as Director  for  Government  and Industry Relations, Ms [[Susan Holck]].  
Our earlier  work on fluori dat ed sugar is now too far  in t he past to be seen as of much releva nce.  What i s not cl ear is the ext ent of sponsor shi p
+
 
expect ed and whet her it will be possi bl e to identify a pr oj ect that  would be acceptabl e to WHO but of direct value to the su gar indu stry (ot her tha n
+
It is clear that  WSRO will need to offer some form of collaboration with WHO, involving substantial sponsorship,  to be considered for  NGO status.  
mer el y a gesture of good will to WHO).  
+
 
It i s al so cl ear that  cer tain indi vi dual s connect ed with Report 916 remai n i mplacabl y hostil e to the sugar industry, i ncluding Yach. Fortunat el y, ther e
+
Our earlier  work on fluoridated sugar is now too far  in the past to be seen as of much relevance.  What is not clear is the extent of sponsorship expected and whether it will be possible to identify a project that  would be acceptable to WHO but of direct value to the sugar industry (other than merely a gesture of good will to WHO).  
does not now seem to be a defi ned gr oup of anti­su gar staff withi n WHO. It remai ns to be seen to what extent  pr essur es host ile to su gar coming fr om
+
 
out side WHO will influence deci sions wit hi n WHO in the futur e.  
+
It is also clear that  certain individuals connected with Report 916 remain implacably hostile to the sugar industry, including Yach. Fortunately, there does not now seem to be a defined group of anti-sugar staff within WHO. It remains to be seen to what extent  pressures hostile to sugar coming from out side WHO will influence decisions within WHO in the future.
Dr Lee is appar ently not i nclined to allow WHO to become hea vily involved in implementing any diet  and health activities. He i s hi msel f under  
+
pressure,  however , a s a result of t he poor per for mance of several  of hi s seni or appoi ntees. It is likely that there will be a number of changes in senior  
+
Dr Lee is apparently not inclined to allow WHO to become heavily involved in implementing any diet  and health activities. He is himself under pressure,  however , as a result of the poor performance of several  of his senior appointees. It is likely that there will be a number of changes in senior positions within the next few months.
positions withi n the next few months.  
+
 
[[Richard Cottrell]]
 
[[Richard Cottrell]]

Latest revision as of 12:52, 14 July 2006

This is a text version of the leaked WSRO minute by Richard Cottrell. A pdf version is here.

Report of meeting at WHO 28 June 2004-07-02

Please treat the contents of this report with extreme discretion.

Those present were Mr Andre Prost (WHO) and Dr Richard Cottrell (WSRO). This informal meeting was between the WSRO Director-­General and Mr Andre Prost, who is a WHO Director with special responsibility for relations between WHO and both governments and private industry. Mr Prost has held this post throughout the period that Report 916 ('Diet , nutrition and the prevention of chronic diseases') and the 'Global Strategy on Diet, physical activity and health' were being prepared.

Objectives

The purpose of the meeting was to ascertain the mood within WHO following the presentation of the Resolution to adopt the Global Strategy to the World Health Assembly in May this year and the obvious embarrassment (to WHO staff) that it was only accepted with substantial modification.

Particularly, it was intended to seek advice as to the extent to which WHO staff blame the sugar industry for this embarrassment and the attitude WHO is likely to adopt to WSRO in the future.

Background

Mr Prost is shortly to retire from his current position within WHO but has been asked to stay on to assist the Director-General in, as yet, unspecified ways. He was most friendly and helpful (he was previously in regular contact with the sugar industry, especially Graham Somerville of CEFS and Richard Cottrell, while WHO Ambassador to the EU) .

Atmosphere within WHO

The main WHO staff members responsible for initiating Report 916 and the Global Strategy have either left of their own volition or their contracts have been terminated. These include Yach, Puska, and Waxman. Only Nishida seems to have remained on WHO staff. Mme le Galles (the more recently appointed Assistant Director General responsible for Non communicable Disease Prevention) seems entirely isolated and out of favour with the Director-General (Dr Lee). It is doubtful whether she will keep this post for much longer.

The events at the WHA in May were a considerable embarrassment to Dr Lee. It appears that le Galles (new in her post) prepared for this meeting by contact with academic advisors (chosen by her staff, who were hardly impartial), with Non-­Governmental Organi zations (most of which have ideological agendas) and with the Health Ministries of Developed Countries. She seems to have ignored the Foreign Ministries, who are, in fact, the lead Ministry for Member Governments of WHO.

When the proposal for a Resolution on a Global Strategy came up for decision at the World Health Assembly, the Member Governments' Health Ministries were over-rruled by the Foreign Ministries in almost every case. This seems to have been primarily influenced by resistance to what was seen as an attempt to expand of the influence of the Health Ministries into territory cosidered the property of the Foreign Ministries, rather than any particular interest in the issues themselves.

The result was that the Resolution would have failed entirely but for some rapid manoeuvring by Dr Lee to encourage redrafting of the Resolution (by Member Government representatives, not by WHO staff) into a form that was acceptable. It was noteworthy that le Galles was excluded from this process. The resistance to the wording proposed for the Resolution was very widespread and not confined to Developing Countries or to sugar exporting countries.

Thus the role of the sugar industry, as such, is seen as secondary to these events, although sugar is seen as a key factor in the reasoning of many Member Governments. The WHO is a democratic organization and the voters rebelled against the staff. Not a comfortable position for a new Director-­General.

Future Prospects

Thus the likelihood of WSRO developing a constructive relationship with WHO, possibly leading to NGO status, have not been irrevocably damaged by the events to date. Mr Prost strongly recommended that WSRO shoul d meet Dr Beaglehole, who a senior member of le Galles' NCD Division and a well known epidemiologist. He also recommended contact with his successor as Director for Government and Industry Relations, Ms Susan Holck.

It is clear that WSRO will need to offer some form of collaboration with WHO, involving substantial sponsorship, to be considered for NGO status.

Our earlier work on fluoridated sugar is now too far in the past to be seen as of much relevance. What is not clear is the extent of sponsorship expected and whether it will be possible to identify a project that would be acceptable to WHO but of direct value to the sugar industry (other than merely a gesture of good will to WHO).

It is also clear that certain individuals connected with Report 916 remain implacably hostile to the sugar industry, including Yach. Fortunately, there does not now seem to be a defined group of anti-sugar staff within WHO. It remains to be seen to what extent pressures hostile to sugar coming from out side WHO will influence decisions within WHO in the future.

Dr Lee is apparently not inclined to allow WHO to become heavily involved in implementing any diet and health activities. He is himself under pressure, however , as a result of the poor performance of several of his senior appointees. It is likely that there will be a number of changes in senior positions within the next few months.

Richard Cottrell