Co-operation out as pandemic treaty loses focus
The original ethical commitments of the World Health Organization's pandemic treaty have been dramatically eroded during the recently concluded negotiation process.
The treaty was established in response to the Covid-19 pandemic and aims to strengthen global collaboration on prevention, preparedness and response to pandemic threats.
Our research identifies a series of major changes to the language and obligations of the treaty that raises concerns about the ethical trajectory of the agreement and its capacity to support a co-ordinated, equitable global response to health emergencies.
Though the pandemic treaty was guided by a cosmopolitan ethic that emphasised the equal moral worth of all people, emphasising solidarity, equity, and collective responsibility, our study finds that the revised text marks a notable departure from those intentions.
A comparison with the working draft reveals that the revised agreement consolidates broad principles such as solidarity but notably reduces the specificity of global obligations to those most in need.
The principle of sovereignty has been elevated to the pandemic treaty's central organising value. Commitments tied to equity and human rights are less directive and more open to interpretation.
These changes signal a broader retreat from cosmopolitan co-operation towards the protection of individual state interests.
The pandemic treaty now includes fewer principles grounded in cosmopolitan ethics and correspondingly weaker obligations to act on them.
The ethical dilution may undermine the agreement's capacity to address the public health shortcomings exposed by Covid and to mitigate similar threats in future.
During the pandemic, states often reverted to self-interested behaviours.
Many states pre-purchased enough vaccines to vaccinate national populations many times over, reducing the amount available to low-income countries unable to enter pre-purchase agreements.
In an interconnected world, where the actions of one individual, group and state affect distant strangers, self-interested behaviours exacerbate global inequities and can ultimately prolong pandemics and other public health emergencies.
A cosmopolitan framework, therefore, is practical as well as ethical.
We argue the diminished force of obligations placed on states in successive treaty drafts is symptomatic of ethical amnesia, a failure to uphold previously endorsed ethical commitments because of political expediency in the aftermath of the crisis.
During the pandemic, countries made calls to recognise global solidarity and associated obligations, to protect the health of all.
These now appear fleeting and disingenuous, as the pandemic treaty overlooks the very structural inequities it was intended to address.
Although there are predictable challenges in developing a treaty acceptable to all parties, the revisions reflect how state self-interest continues to erode well-intentioned global health goals.
At the opening of the 12th Intergovernmental Negotiating Body, WHO director-general Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus reminded negotiators "to come together, to see beyond purely national interest to the global interest — because the world can only be safer if every individual nation is safer".
Multilateralism is important in addressing global problems. The pandemic treaty should set the behavioural norms and expectations.
Although the treaty negotiations have now concluded, our research underscores the importance of returning to its original ethical commitments during implementation as the weakened ethical architecture of the treaty may compromise its effectiveness.
Current outbreaks of highly pathogenic avian influenza, mpox and the Marburg virus serve as stark reminders that a shift towards more co-operative, ethically grounded approaches to global public health remains essential.
The finalisation of a pandemic treaty is an important milestone, but implementing states must not lose sight of the treaty's founding principles.
Rather than turning back to self-interested behaviours, states should use their sovereignty to strengthen obligations in the pandemic treaty and embed a collective motivation for co-operation into domestic and international policies.
Without stronger commitments to multilateral problem-solving and cross-border solidarity, the risk of repeating fragmented and inequitable responses remains high.
Reaffirming commitments to equity, solidarity and shared responsibility is vital to ensure the treaty serves as more than a symbolic achievement and becomes a meaningful tool for just and effective global health governance. — Newsroom
• Emma Anderson is a PhD candidate in the University of Otago's Bioethics Centre; Dr Elizabeth Fenton is a lecturer in the Bioethics Centre at the University of Otago; John Crump is a Prof of Medicine, Pathology, and Global Health at the University of Otago. Last week New Zealand announced it would subject a draft Pandemic Treaty to a full National Interest Test before deciding whether or not to sign up to it.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NZ Herald
30 minutes ago
- NZ Herald
The NZ economy is still sick, doubts are growing about the Govt prescription
Are these the right antibiotics? Are the antibiotics making me feel sick? I do feel a little better I think. But it's taking longer than I expected. Maybe I should see the doctor again. Or am I just being impatient? Ugh, so much uncertainty. Hopefully, those who've tuned in for a fresh read on the state of the economy can see where this is going. Never let a metaphor go by, I say! Anyway, here's me and the New Zealand economy, both sick in the midst of a miserable wet winter and worrying about whether our recoveries have stalled. A run of negative data has knocked the wind out of the nation's sails. The bad vibes are being pushed along by a strong political current. Both the left and right are telling us that the Government has prescribed the wrong medicine. The left blames the Government for cutting spending into a downturn. The logic is pretty simple. Any good Keynesian will tell you, when demand in the private sector falls, that's the time for the Government to come to the party. Borrow a bit more, don't slash and burn civil service, hire more teachers and nurses, build more stuff ... it won't be inflationary because it won't be crowding out private sector competition, which is in recession. The trouble is, we're still in the aftermath of the last big spend-up, which went on too long. Labour's stimulus, once we got through the initial Covid shock, did clash with a private sector boom and exacerbated inflation. That muddied the political narrative. It made it inevitable that the incoming centre-right coalition would cut back despite the extra damage that would do to economic growth. In the context of using fiscal policy to drive economic prosperity, you can make a good case that successive governments have got things completely arse about face. You'd expect this argument from the left. But Christopher Luxon and Nicola Willis are being savaged even more aggressively from their right flank. The monetarists, the supply-side guys, the neo-liberals, (whatever you want to call them) are berating the Government for not dealing with the national debt and Crown deficit by administering a Rogernomics-style reboot of the whole economy. I doubt that would make the current downturn any more pleasant, but they argue it couldn't be much worse. And the payoff would be longer-term gains as the economy found a more productive and financially secure baseline. Both arguments can be compelling and, if nothing else, add to the concern that the current strategy of subtle market-oriented tweaks risks underdelivering on all sides. But through all of this gloom, one thing we need to remember is that most economists still believe the foundations of recovery are in place. Step back a bit from the mess of ugly recent economic data – the second quarter sucked, we get it! What are we actually experiencing? The labour market is tough. Unemployment is rising, and new job creation is almost non-existent. But this is not a surprise. In fact, while economists do get things wrong, they've been forecasting unemployment to be about where it is now for more than a year. We know it's one of the last pieces of data to turn in any recovery. Unfortunately, it is now overlapping with an unwanted and unexpected spike in inflation. Like a jump scare in the final scene of a horror movie, food prices (with rates and power, and insurance) have conspired to pause Reserve Bank rate cuts and rattled our faith in the recovery. Then there are tariffs and global unrest and all of that. It's not really surprising that it all feels bleak. So it's a bit ironic to be writing an optimistic take on the economy, especially given the rough week stuck at home that I've just had. My view wouldn't have been so upbeat if I hadn't been woken from my sick bed on Friday morning by a text from investment bank HSBC's Australian head of communications. He was asking how far away I was from my scheduled meeting with their global chief economist, Janet Henry and and Australia-New Zealand chief economist Paul Bloxham. Oops ... I was a long way away. But they kindly let me Zoom in later, and I'm very glad I did. As anyone with Australian cousins will know, sometimes it's healthy to be slapped in the face with a slightly condescending, external view of the New Zealand condition. Bloxham told me his forecasts currently make him one of the gloomiest economists on Australian growth. However, he's one of the most positive on New Zealand growth. Last year, New Zealand had the single largest contraction of any economy in the developed world, Bloxham points out. That inevitably comes with a hangover. But if you believe in the fundamentals of the New Zealand economy, which he does, there is no reason to assume the cycle won't turn. 'I suspect why I'm a little bit more upbeat than others is I sit in Sydney and watch it from the outside and go: hey, you've got two big forces at work that are set to continue to lift growth and give you a recovery.' No prizes for guessing those two forces – falling interest rates and booming agricultural commodity prices. The money flowing into the rural economy must eventually flow through to the cities and lift growth, Bloxham says. It won't happen overnight, but it will happen (my words, not his). We've had a big downswing, which means we're due a pretty big upswing to get back to trend, he says. And we've got monetary policy and the terms of trade in place to drive that cyclical upswing. 'All cycles look different. We always ask the same question going through: oh, it's not quite happening as quickly as we thought. 'The question you ask yourself is: is that because it's not working? Is it that interest rates aren't going to have the same effect? That a positive-terms-of-trade shock won't have the same effect? Or are things just a bit different this time around?' Great question. And look, the sun's finally out and I think my head's clearing. Time to go for a walk and ponder it all. Liam Dann is business editor-at-large for the New Zealand Herald. He is a senior writer and columnist, and also presents and produces videos and podcasts. He joined the Herald in 2003.
NZ Herald
30 minutes ago
- NZ Herald
Letters: We need skilled immigrants; are we losing our Kiwi identity?
Linley Jones, Half Moon Bay Price of butter Who would have thought butter would become such a hot topic? But it has. It's reminiscent of the toilet paper frenzy at the start of the Covid pandemic, although that was caused by the fear of being caught short, while now, it's the high price of an everyday staple that has got people riled up. In her opinion article, 'The slippery slope that is butter', Heather du Plessis-Allan says: 'We are being irrational about the price of butter,' and 'We simply have to pay the price that we pay.' I agree. To compensate for the rise in price, I'd suggest those who are concerned about it look at what's in their trolley before going to the checkout, and remove an impulse item or a non-essential item. The money saved by doing that will offset the butter price increase. Lorraine Kidd, Warkworth. Butter alternatives? Heather du Plessis-Allan obviously does not bake, telling us to use margarine or plant-based alternatives to butter. I bake one cake and one batch of biscuits a week. Butter has two ingredients: milk and salt. I have just looked at a plant-based substitute: 10 ingredients, plus preservatives and colouring. If you need to melt a butter substitute, it melts as water. Try making a white sauce using an alternative to butter. Yes, I do moan about the price of butter, but I will not use 'chemical butter', preferring a natural and NZ-made product. Wendy Galloway, Omokoroa. Trades v university I agree with Trevor Green's letter (July 27) stating that 'trades are not secondary to academia but are equal'. In fact, at a time when many university departments seem more intent on indoctrination rather than education, a trade would seem a better bet in a world that wants to ignore objective truths. His statement taking exception to Chris Hipkins' derogatory comments about education and the trades would seem to endorse this, given that Hipkins, at one point, had difficulty making an objective comment about how to define a woman. This from a man who majored in criminology and politics at university. I am pretty sure that any tradie who came to my door to do a job would have no trouble defining a woman. But then again, why would anyone bother to ask the tradie such a question, given that he or she wouldn't find that necessary to do the job? Bernard Walker, Mt Maunganui. A simple life Would life be simpler, easier, cheaper, happier and safer without TV, mobile phones, iPads, e-scooters and the coalition Government? Bruce Tubb, Devonport. Are we losing our Kiwi identity? One has been fortunate enough to spend a few days across the ditch in the sun. In this instance, it was in Far North Queensland. So, what was the biggest impact: the $1 bus fare from suburb to city or the second bottle of good NZ wine for less than half price? Neither. It was something entirely different, something that we are fast losing in the big cities - our Kiwi identity. It was great to see a bus driver get out of his seat and put down a ramp for a woman with a pushchair, and he smiled while doing it. Being able to understand what the shopkeeper said and a 'Thanks, darl' to boot. Plus, they walk on the left-hand side of the footpath. It's not the country we used to know and love. Politicians need to understand that this identity is more important than a few extra measly dollars. Reg Dempster, Albany. Speed up the negotiations Getting those dropkicks (to quote David Seymour) to register early will streamline the process. So would negotiating with potential coalition partners before an election and sorting out their key non-negotiable issues so the voting public can decide which freak show they would prefer to endure for the next three years. Both could speed up the process, one by denying voters choice, the other by increasing their educated choice. Best of all, let's change to the Australian system of preferential voting. Aren't the majority sick of Seymour claiming he's the 'bantamweight' champion of the coalition, just tipping the scales on 8% support? Steve Russell, Hillcrest.
Otago Daily Times
a day ago
- Otago Daily Times
Social worker suspended over dodgy Covid vaccine exemption
A Dunedin-based social worker who issued a shonky Covid-19 vaccine exemption has been suspended for a year. Dr Jacquelyn Elkington's case came before the Social Workers Complaints and Disciplinary Tribunal yesterday — but she did not. Elderly pay price for Covid 'complacency' The woman, who is listed on the University of Otago's website as a senior lecturer hauora Māori, failed to show up for the hearing and was promptly found guilty of professional misconduct after tribunal chairman Winston McCarthy found her behaviour was likely to bring discredit to the profession. It was the first time a social worker has been taken to task over a Covid-19 issue and co-counsel for the professional conduct committee (PCC) Becca Boles said the only appropriate penalty was deregistration. But the tribunal opted to suspend Dr Elkington for 12 months, censuring her and ordering her to pay costs of more than $13,000. In November 2021, during the height of the Covid-19 pandemic, the government introduced legislation narrowing the grounds for a vaccine exemption. Only a suitably qualified health practitioner could make the assessment and it had to be verified by the country's director-general of health. A month later, Dr Elkington — who was working in Auckland at the time — issued such an exemption for a "vulnerable" client. "She's not a medical practitioner, she's a social worker," PCC co-counsel Elena Mok said. "Her conduct took her outside the scope of her practice." A day later, the man used the exemption in a bid to gain entry to a recreational facility. A staff member subsequently raised suspicions and referred the matter to the health and disability commissioner (HDC). Ms Mok said Dr Elkington's conduct "snowballed" from that point, Dr Elkington thwarting the resulting investigations against her by repeatedly failing to provide information. In June 2022, the woman made an online application to renew her practising certificate with the Social Workers Registration Board. Dr Elkington falsely indicated she was not subject to any inquiry and when she was pulled up on her lie, she claimed she thought the HDC inquiry had closed. But a couple of months later she resubmitted the online application, again declaring she was free of any scrutiny. Dr Elkington's behaviour was "at least misleading, if not outright false", Ms Mok said. The social worker went on to claim she felt "harassed and threatened" by the probe into her conduct, and that it was "borderline bullying". Many requests for information — about client notes or records on how many vaccine exemptions she had issued — throughout 2024, after the file was passed on to the PCC, were met with silence. At other points, Dr Elkington said she could not provide the documentation as she did not have the consent of her clients. She occasionally claimed to have already submitted the requested information and also made references to the Bill of Rights Act and various international treaties. On one occasion Dr Elkington referred to the River of Lies documentary — which bills itself as revealing the truth behind the "New Zealand scamdemic" — produced by the controversial Billy Te Kahika. Her lack of engagement in the process showed a disrespect for the process and an ongoing lack of remorse and insight, reinforced by her non-attendance at yesterday's hearing, the PCC argued. "The vaccine exemption appears to have been issued because of Dr Elkington's personal beliefs about the safety of the vaccine and her views on the Covid pandemic," Ms Mok said. "Dr Elkington's attempt to justify her approach is an example of her effectively allowing these personal beliefs to influence her social work practice unduly." The University of Otago refused to answer questions about the woman's employment at the institution. In 2022, Dr Elkington ran for the Whakatāne mayoralty and posted online at the time her various theories, which included that the Covid-19 vaccination caused monkeypox. She came sixth out of seven candidates. Dr Elkington did not respond to requests for comment. The tribunal ordered that if the social worker returned to practice she must undertake monthly supervision for a year.
