wide eyed wonderings of the undecided
HIV and AIDS is not a health problem, it’s a social injustice.
Leave a Comment
Against a dramatic backdrop of an AIDS ribbon constructed from 6000 red flowers -one for every person that dies each day from AIDS-related illnesses, Stop AIDS campaigners from all over the country joined to demand that the UK Government keeps its 2005 promise of Universal Access to Treatment for HIV and AIDS by 2010.
In the lead up to World AIDS Day on December 1st, campaigners were keen to remind both politicians and the wider public that HIV is no longer a death sentence. “Unlike the 80s there are now medicines that can keep people living active and fulfilling lives. The devastating insult is that 71% of people who urgently need these drugs have no access to them. It is both a moral and economic imperative that the UK government takes action” remarked Rafi Rogans-Watson, BSMS student and MEDSIN activist.
For doctors and healthcare workers around the world this is particularly frustrating. Instead of battling against the disease they have to tackle the barriers placed by western governments, the world trade organisation and pharmaceutical lobbies, if they want to treat their patients.
Currently the producers of ARVs, such as Abbott Laboratories, who recorded a staggering $1.7bln profit in 2006, are awarded a 20-year patent by the WTO TRIPs law for their invention. This law prevents any other company from selling generic ‘copies’ of the drugs and therefore grants the inventor the monopoly power of charging whatever they like. Whilst rewarding inventors is essential for further research the current situation embodies the global inequalities that fracture the world. These large companies – backed by western governments and protected by a trade law that these same governments and companies shaped, are walking away with massive profits whist millions of people in the majority world die needlessly.
Where competition is allowed drug prices plummet and treatment becomes possible. Last year UK activists were instrumental in the effort of the Thai government to provide HIV treatment for its people. Thailand faced huge political and economic pressure from both Abbott Laboratories and the US government to withdraw its move of importing generic ARV drugs. Thanks to UK activists educating Hillary Benn about the situation and demanding he intervene, he spoke out directly in support of Thailand. This multilateral pressure proved sufficient to force US to reteat from its absurd position and 8000 people gained free access the HIV and AIDS treatment that will keep them alive.
In order to achieve the promise of Universal Access by 2010 the UK government needs to announce bold and ambitious measures in its new AIDS strategy due to be launched in spring 2008. Alongside promoting access to affordable medicines, the UK needs to strengthen health systems in developing countries and provide £2.5bln over the next three years to finance Universal Access. Without this bold and necessary action, student campaigners fear that the promise will be broken. “Unless the rate of scale up increases dramatically, less than 5 million people will be on treatment by 2010: a far cry from treatment for all.” Katy Athersuch, Student Stop AIDS Campaign Coordinator.
Campaigners were pleased but remained cautious with the speech made by Douglas Alexander. Though he reiterated his support for the cause he failed to commit to the funding levels required by the UK and failed to mention anything about generic drugs, care or support services.
Throughout the campaign young people have been at the forefront of progress and once again they will need to keep the pressure on the UK government to ensure that millions will not die needlessly.
You can take action and support international healthcare by demanding you’re MP raises the issue with Douglas Alexander and signs the EDM 183.
Unlearning Education
1 Comment
In August we shall have our annual ‘assessment’ of education standards and our perennial outcry over falling standards. The A-Level and GCSE results are but one of the many incomplete and misleading indicies in which we project our notions of education into.
Gordon Brown, inheriting a country with a profound distrust of politicians, faces a key challenge in trying to overhaul our failing approach to education that is failing our young people.
The New Labour obsession with targets was one of Blair’s primary weapons in convincing the public that a Labour government can spend public money accountably. In education these targets, means by which we judge the governments success with education, are based on the numerous examinations that kids are put under. Every three years we test our youth’s aptitude of English, maths and science (whatever that means), the results supposedly giving us a clear illustration of how successful our education system is. The limited scope, means and ambition of these targets lift the lid on just how fundamentally flawed our approach to education is.
Recently, a study found Britain to be one of the worst places in the world to be a child. Both a cause and consequence of this is the apparent ‘anti-social behaviour’ of much of youth culture. Though the topic is poisoned with class snobberies (in both directions), I’d argue that the disillusioned, alienated, and too often aggressive culture that pervades is an essential issue facing our society (terrorism, supposedly the gravest threat to our society has caused a fraction of the misery in comparison). Given that our kids are subjected to six hours of school, five days a week (until they take matters into their own hands), the obvious place to start, when looking at this issue, is our schools. And where better then Labour’s very own targets?
These suggest that under 10 years of Labour management schooling is improving, yet our children are seemingly unhappier and face more problems with and in society. All of which, points to a (for there are a few) route of the problem – our conception of education. Notice that for all that the targets do include, there is no mention of social confidence, personal contentment, relationships with others etc. Obviously these are harder to index (though we happily measure anti-social-ness), but their absence illustrates the misplacement of our priorities with education.
Our teacher training, national curriculum and targets by which we evaluate education should include wider personal and social issues. Key social factors such as identity, relationships and (imagined) concepts of race and gender our harnessed at school, yet completely ignored by educators. When this alienation manifests itself in society we are all suddenly surprised and offended.
Perhaps, rather then banning hoodies in shopping centers, or even hugging hoodies in shopping centers, we should have a radical and honest public debate about what education means, what we want from it, and how we should achieve it.
