David Kidney
The Global Fund for HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria
Debate in the House of Commons
16th November 2004
Mr. David Lepper (Brighton, Pavilion Lab/Co-op): My right hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh, East and Musselburgh (Dr. Strang) has secured this important debate at an important time: the board of the Global Fund is due to meet in a few days at Arusha in Tanzania.
I do not want to repeat what has already been said about the development of the Global Fund and the possible threats that it now faces. I would like to focus on the work of the International HIV/AIDS Alliance, which works as part of the Global Fund system. I am proud that the alliance is based in my constituency of Brighton, Pavilion. I am sure that my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary will recall his visit to its headquarters with Dr. Peter Piot and me when it marked the tenth anniversary of its valuable international work.
The International HIV/AIDS Alliance has a long-standing relationship with the Global Fund board, as part of the NGO delegation. It has on the board of directors an employee of its India office, who is also a board member of Communities Living with AIDS, TB and Malaria. It is the principal recipient of global funding in Ukraine. The programme in Ukraine for which the alliance is responsible has been judged one of the 10 best organised programmes in a country that is funded by the Global Fund. The alliance provides technical support to Global Fund recipients in Asia, Africa, Latin America and eastern Europe.
The alliance has worked primarily on providing technical advice and resources to enable the effective participation of civil society organisations in the Global Fund's country co-ordinating mechanisms in 40 countries, including Honduras and Bolivia, as well as working with the Caribbean Regional Network of People Living with HIV/AIDS. It also provides advice and resources to Nigeria, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, the Philippines and the Democratic Republic of Congo.
Since earlier this year, the alliance has been the principal recipient in Ukraine. Its work there focuses on developing community participation and involvement in capacity building among country-based organisations. It centres on preventive work, care and support for people living with HIV/AIDS, clinical care, procurement and supply management, and information and education on policy and advocacy.
In Ukraine, it is estimated that there are now 49 projects, serving an average of 1,000 clients each. The financial support totals about million and the overall number of people who receive services is about 30,000 to 40,000. Over the past quarter, 350,000 condoms have been distributed as part of the work that is being undertaken in Ukraine. The programme is important and its work is best judged by its effect on individuals. The International HIV/AIDS Alliance provides examples that bring home to us what lies behind the talk of funding and programmes—the impact on the lives of individuals.
In Ukraine, Tamila was helped by Light of Hope, a local organisation, with the support of the Global Fund. She is 19 years old and was admitted to a psychiatric
clinic after an unsuccessful suicide attempt. The ambulance doctors found out that she was living with HIV and revealed her status to the doctors at the psychiatric clinic. Tamila was not using drugs and was not involved in the sex trade, but she was treated aggressively and beaten by medical staff in the resuscitation unit at the hospital to which she was taken.
Through the work of Light of Hope, the local organisation with which the International HIV/AIDS Alliance works, there has been intervention in Tamila's case. A review was held and she now receives the emotional, medical and legal support that might not otherwise have been available to her. She would have become another wasted life because of the prejudice that exists towards those living with HIV/AIDS.
I shall cite a further example of the way in which bureaucracy can prevent help from reaching those who should receive it. Working with a locally based charitable foundation called Alternative, the alliance found out about a HIV-positive woman who had given birth and, because of the circumstances in which she was living, had left her child in the hospital. She believed that she could not give it proper care. Later, because she had a job and her life had become more stable, she felt able to try to reclaim her child, but Ukrainian bureaucracy and stereotyping about socially vulnerable people made getting the child back a complicated task.
The project staff at Alternative, backed by the Global Fund, did all they could to help. Eventually the woman was able to establish her parental rights and her child came back to her, but the child was suffering from TB by then. Once again, agencies funded by the Global Fund, working through the guidance of the International HIV/AIDS Alliance, were able to intervene in people's lives. The lives of those two people might otherwise have been wasted. None of us in the Chamber has any doubts about the importance of the Global Fund's work.
I echo the concerns expressed by other Members. The fifth round is crucial, as are decisions that are to be taken later this week. There has already been delay, and there is concern that the US Government may be pushing for a further delay of the fifth round. That could lead to the removal of funds from some of the most successful work on all three diseases, thus denying many people who desperately need it access to care, support and medicines, such as anti-retroviral treatment, and delaying the start-up of much-needed prevention programmes. Will my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary tell us what the Government are doing to ensure that no such delay occurs?
As hon. Members have said, 2005 is a crucial year for all development programmes: the UK will lead the European Union and G8 presidencies and the millennium development goals will be reviewed next autumn. We know that we are falling short of those goals and that one of the main reasons for that is the failure of many G8 nations to respond adequately to the AIDS pandemic. It is possible to reverse the impact of AIDS and to care for those who are suffering. Next year, the UK Government will be in a central position to influence what happens. What specific commitments are they considering making during their EU and G8 presidencies to ensure that we take those vital programmes forward to combat all three preventable illnesses, and the impact of HIV/AIDS?
