World Health Assembly: Members Debate US Proposed Advisory Meeting On Health R&D

Taking the World Health Assembly by surprise, the US delegation today made a proposal to advance progress on the monitoring, coordination, and financing of health R&D in committee discussions today. Their suggestion to convene an advisory meeting is being discussed in an informal drafting group in a side room. The committee has adjourned until Monday, but the drafting group will continue over the weekend.

One of the most contentious areas of discussion underway at the sixty-sixth World Health Assembly (WHA), meeting from 20-28 May, is the follow-up report of the Consultative Expert Working Group on Research and Development: Financing and Coordination (CEWG).

Member states were called to consider the report on the open-ended CEWG meeting, including a draft resolution, which came under fire from some quarters for lacking in ambition and clarity (IPW, WHO, 28 January 2013). Now attention has turned to an unexpected proposal made by the US during committee discussions today.

The US proposal suggests the following:

“Member States direct the WHO Secretariat to convene an advisory meeting including government representatives as well as, the discretion of the Secretariat, technical experts from external stakeholders and the private sector, at the earliest possible date, in order to take forward action in relation to monitoring, coordination and financing for health R&D, in accordance with the terms of Resolution A66/XX. Such a meeting should particularly include members of the biomedical research community at a technical level and those currently involved in managing funds for research and development, with a mandate to 1) assist in the identification of translational research projects and the methodologies for coordinating research for the demonstration projects, in ways that emphasize the de-linkage of cost of R&D from product price; and 2) identify ways to promote advocacy for identified R&D needs, and seek voluntary financing for the demonstration projects.”

As per the US proposal, this advisory meeting would focus primarily on the health R&D demonstration projects, one of the three action points included in the draft resolution. These projects, according to the draft resolution, should “address identified gaps that disproportionately affect developing countries, particularly the poor, and for which immediate action can be taken.”

Additionally, the US delegate said in his statement that they would also be open to convening the next open-ended meeting before the sixty-ninth WHA in 2016, as specified in the draft resolution.

By and large, the US proposal was met with member state support in committee. However, several member states raised concerns about who would be allowed to participate in the meeting and the scope of its mandate.

While commending the US for its willingness to “build bridges,” Bolivia, on behalf of UNASUR (the Union of South American Nations), stressed: the importance of including civil society in the meeting; the importance of continued dialogue on the matter of R&D financing and coordination for drugs in low- and middle-income countries; and that talks should take place simultaneously with the demonstration projects.

China expressed hope that the demonstration projects would provide evidence for long-term solutions for health R&D financing and coordination.

On the issue of financing the activities proposed in the resolution, the Maldives in alignment with the position of India, emphasised a need for all health partners to share contributions and urged contributions from all stakeholders.

Several civil society organisations made interventions including Health Action International (HAI), also on behalf of Knowledge Ecology International (KEI) and Berne Declaration, which emphasised the importance of making the process either “consultative with government or intergovernmental.” In the same vein, the Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF, Doctors Without Borders) statement stressed that “there should be a member state led process for the selection of experts to this group.”

In terms of the industry perspective, the International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers & Associations (IFPMA), delivered a statement [pdf] supporting the draft resolution, noting that it provides a “mix of vision and pragmatism.”

Finally, the chair of this committee, Kathryn Tyson of the UK, called on South Africa to lead an informal drafting group to take into consideration member state comments and clean up the language of the proposal.

Committee discussions on the proposal have been suspended until Monday while the drafting group works on making the editorial changes.

Brittany Ngo contributed to this report. She is currently completing her Master’s in Health Policy and Global Health at the Yale School of Public Health and previously obtained a Bachelor’s of Arts in Economics from Georgetown University. Through her studies she has developed an interest in health-related intellectual property issues.