Civil society opposes Gates Foundation’s official role in WHO

Civil society organizations are concerned about the official endorsement of an official relation between WHO and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) at the WHO Executive Board (EB) meeting this week. In an open letter to the EB, over thirty civil society organizations – including Wemos – expressed their concerns about conflict of interest.

The endorsement is one of the first examples of the implementation of the Framework of Engagement with Non-State Actors (FENSA). We are concerned that FENSA does not contain strong provisions to avoid and/or properly manage the conflict of interest that could evolve from engagement with non-state actors like philanthropic organizations and international business alliances.


Conflict of interest

Now that BMGF is allowed to enter into official relations with the WHO, the foundation can attend and speak at the World Health Assembly and the Executive Board meeting, the governing bodies of the WHO. However, there is a conflict of interest: the foundation is entirely financed by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation Trust, which is heavily invested in food, drug and alcohol companies. The fact that the trust benefits from sales of unhealthy consumer products does not coincide with WHO’s mandate to ensure health for all.


Integrity and credibility of WHO

During the EB meeting, only India strongly stated the necessity of a conflict of interest policy in addition to FENSA. Merely excluding actors with interests in the arms or tobacco industry is not sufficient. A careful look should be taken into the due diligence of official relations of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and other organizations if the WHO wants to protect its integrity and credibility.


Read more about FENSA:

FENSA: Blessing or curse?

Recent News items

The Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation policy document does not sufficiently address access to healthcare for poorer people


The new policy paper of Minister Schreinemacher of Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation, “Doen waar Nederland goed in is (“Doing what the Netherlands is good at”), is very much focused on Dutch business interests and seems to have insufficient attention for realising access to health care for poorer population groups. The Minister indicates that she wants to invest more in public-private collaborations in low- and middle-income countries, also in healthcare. As a result, there is a great risk that healthcare will become more commercial and therefore unaffordable for people with fewer financial resources. To provide good healthcare, the Minister should, instead, contribute to strengthening the capacity and financial resources in the public sector. 

Continue reading

What are best practices to address brain drain of health workers?


What are best (regional) practices when it comes to addressing brain drain – i.e. the emigration of skilled workers, including health workers – and what action is needed on EU level? With this open consultation, the European Commission is interested in feedback on the scale and dynamics of brain drain, and in successful practices and regional strategies and policies to tackle the emigration of qualified workers. Wemos has provided input to the consultation. We recommend, for example, that EU Member States use existing instruments to implement policies and strategies based on evidence, to strengthen their health workforce.

Continue reading