Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-01-30-Speech-4-038"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030130.2.4-038"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, HIV, malaria and tuberculosis claim millions of lives each year. At least five million people died in the world’s poor countries during last year alone. These three diseases are different by nature, and different types of effort are required to prevent them and cure people of them. They have one thing in common, however. They first and foremost affect the poor people of the world. It is therefore logical to coordinate aid when it comes to combating them.
During the vote, I shall table an additional proposal that is necessary if our decision is to be in accordance with the new rules governing the budget.
I am convinced that we must soon discuss further contributions to this work, and mainly the issue of ‘fresh’ new money. I myself was recently in Kenya and saw how badly just one poor country had been hit by these problems. When as many as 20 to 30% of a country’s people are infected, the consequences are disastrous. Mind you, it is not only Africa that has been affected. Rather, we are now seeing a rapid spread of disease in countries such as India and China too.
These three diseases will constitute a serious problem for a long time to come. When the new head of the Global Fund, Richard Feachem, was here recently, he stated that the HIV epidemic would not reach its peak for another 60 years if far greater preventive efforts were not made. Sixty years is a long time. After just 20 years, more than 40 million people have now already been affected. The imagination is barely capable of understanding the consequences of another 60 years of a galloping HIV epidemic. Those are reasons enough for strongly supporting today’s report.
We in Parliament have for many years demanded that the Commission should increase its efforts in the health sphere. When, at the end of 2000, the Commission put forward a plan consisting of measures to step up the fight against these diseases, it was therefore a welcome decision. Commissioner Nielson deserves recognition for having made the fight against these diseases a priority within the EU.
The regulation we are discussing here today is extraordinarily important. It provides the framework for the way in which the programme of measures is to be implemented. An important aspect is the Commission’s own programme. It is important for adequate resources in terms of personnel to be set aside so that the programme is effective. The other aspect is the EU’s contribution to the Global Health Fund which has recently been set up.
Large parts of the Commission’s proposal for a regulation are constructive. During the reading in committee, we tried to strengthen the wording in a number of areas and tried to give more weight to the whole issue by increasing the level of the budget. We have conducted parallel discussions with the Council in an attempt to reach unanimity at first reading, an objective I hope will be achieved.
What is noted first of all in those areas in which we propose stronger wording is the importance both of efforts at prevention and of efforts to give support and care to those who have been infected by HIV or who have fallen ill with AIDS. Vigorous endeavours to prevent these diseases cannot take place in a vacuum. That is why, secondly, it is so important, parallel with these efforts, purely and simply to strengthen the health systems in the poor countries. Thirdly: even if this regulation does not specifically support research, it emphasises the importance of investing significantly more money in research to produce vaccines against HIV and malaria and more effective medicines. Coordination with other donors is emphasised. The same naturally applies to coordination with those working in the area of reproductive health and family planning.
In the report, we stress how important it is for countries that have been hit hard by these diseases to be able to import cheap and generic medicines. It is sad to see that this issue has still not been resolved in spite of long and intensive negotiations within the WTO.
We consider the budget appropriation to be inadequate, given the needs that exist. Calculations have shown that ten billion dollars a year would be required in order effectively to combat these three diseases. At present, just a couple of billion dollars are being invested.
The EU’s investment has so far been small, but a number of positive things have nonetheless happened during the discussion of this matter, for example last autumn’s budget agreement concerning the contributions to the Global Fund. At the same time, it is clear that the EU’s endeavours to combat these diseases must not of course be directed primarily by what is required to obtain a place on the Global Fund’s board. What counts, of course, is what is needed for doing the actual work on combating disease.
The budget that we in the committee are now proposing is also too small, but we nonetheless see the fact that we have succeeded in increasing the budget level as a step forwards. This hopefully means that, together with the contributions from the EDF, slightly more than EUR 500 million will be invested in this area in the period of the next four years."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples