logo
Funding Gavi is the simplest financial decision facing Keir Starmer. He must get it right

Funding Gavi is the simplest financial decision facing Keir Starmer. He must get it right

Telegrapha day ago

When he announced he was cutting international cooperation and aid to its lowest level on record, Keir Starmer promised he would protect global health. He is now about to take a decision that will show how serious he was. Will he maintain the UK's support for the global vaccine alliance, Gavi, which has prevented an estimated 18 million deaths since its inception in 2000? In the view of Save the Children and more than 150 other organisations around the world, it is critical that he does.
Gavi has been one of the most effective investments in public health in modern history. In the last 25 years, the alliance has helped immunise more than a billion children. Gavi supports the rollout of vaccines for everything from measles to polio to Ebola. In doing so, it not only saves lives but builds up national health systems, strengthens pandemic preparedness and helps protect us all – everywhere including Britain – from the spread of infectious disease.
Five years ago, through the Covid-19 pandemic, we witnessed that when it comes to health, nobody is safe until everyone is safe. Gavi's purpose is to shield us from the re-emergence of pandemics and lethal but preventable diseases. The fact that it is struggling to secure enough money to continue its critical mission tells us a lot about the geo-political climate today and the false instinct to draw back from international cooperation to solve global problems.
Vaccination is one of the most cost-effective health interventions known to mankind. The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates the return on routine vaccinations at $54 for every $1 invested. You'll be hard-pressed to find a more attractive investment proposition; and that's before you take account of the human factor. Anyone who has met a mother mourning a child who could have been saved by a routine jab or seen toddlers gasping for breath because their measles has turned into pneumonia, will know what I mean.
I understand it can feel difficult to back aid in times of economic crisis, budget deficits and a struggling NHS here at home. When it comes to Gavi and global health security, however, the benefits so outweigh the costs that any vacillation seems incomprehensible.
Infectious diseases know no borders, and the cost comes home to Britain. In 2023-24, more than 20 per cent of secondary care bed days in the NHS were attributable to infectious disease or infections. The cost to the NHS was £5.9 billion. Gavi's role in supporting routine vaccination and its stockpiles of vaccines against killers such as Ebola, cholera and yellow fever represent our first line of defence against future pandemics and the terrible costs counted in ruined lives and devastating economic damage.
Some say governments in the Global South could, and maybe should, buy their own vaccines. They ask why British taxpayers should pay for jabs for African arms. This misses an important point: vaccine markets, like many essential commodities, are global. If every country did its own procurement, the poorest – those with the lowest bargaining power – would immediately be priced out of essential, life saving vaccines.
Perhaps the most important thing Gavi has done in the last 30 years is to shape this market. By guaranteeing the purchase of hundreds of millions of vaccines over many years, Gavi has enabled pharma companies to manufacture many more doses and, through economies of scale, do it much more cheaply than would otherwise be the case.
It has also enticed other firms to enter the fray and compete. Witness the Serum Institute of India, which played a major role in supplying Covid-19 vaccines during the pandemic and has now become a vaccine manufacturing giant.
And Gavi works with countries to 'graduate' so that they pay for an increasingly large share of their own vaccines as they become richer, thereby ensuring that aid-funded doses go to the poorest and most vulnerable countries.
The UK, as a founding member, has helped Gavi become the world-changing alliance it is today. Our partnership has put British scientific leadership in the global spotlight. From 18 million doses of ground-breaking malaria vaccines that are already saving lives in Africa to digital biometric identification and record-keeping that are transforming health systems in Ghana, Gavi links UK scientists and innovators with partner governments in the global South.
At Save the Children, we're working with national governments and local communities – for example in Malawi where a recent cholera outbreak killed more than 1,700 people – to make sure children are protected from deadly and debilitating illness. With our private sector partner GSK, we are targeting millions of 'zero-dose' children who are completely unvaccinated in Nigeria and Ethiopia. In war-torn Sudan, we are transporting vials into a country whose health services are shattered.
All this would be immeasurably harder to do without Gavi ensuring that vaccines are made affordably in large enough quantities for the most vulnerable populations.
To keep up UK funding of Gavi is one of the most straightforward decisions this government must make. I know a bargain when I see one. I hope Keir Starmer will too.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Every time Nigel Farage has fallen out with his colleagues
Every time Nigel Farage has fallen out with his colleagues

Telegraph

time36 minutes ago

  • Telegraph

Every time Nigel Farage has fallen out with his colleagues

Nigel Farage's bust-up with Zia Yusuf is only the latest in a string of extraordinary sackings, resignations and break-ups in his political career. Mr Yusuf, the former Reform UK chairman, quit on Thursday following a disagreement over a Reform MP's call for a burka ban. But Mr Farage has fallen out with multiple senior figures in the party and its predecessors, Ukip and the Brexit Party. Godfrey Bloom Nigel Farage was forced to suspend the Ukip party whip from economist Godfrey Bloom after he described women at a party conference in 2013 as 'sluts'. Mr Bloom also hit journalist Michael Crick over the head with the conference brochure. Mr Farage, furious that one of his conference speeches had been overshadowed, said: 'We can't put up with it. We can't have any one individual, however fun or flamboyant or entertaining or amusing they are, we cannot have any one individual destroying Ukip's national conference and that is what he's done today.' Douglas Carswell Douglas Carswell was Ukip's first MP after defecting from the Conservatives in 2014. He won the Clacton seat twice for the party but soon fell out with Mr Farage, who accused him of trying to block efforts to put him in the House of Lords. The party leader branded Mr Carswell a 'Tory party posh boy' and accused him of trying to 'undermine everything we've stood for for a very long time'. Mr Carswell quit Ukip at the 2017 election to stand as an independent, but he lost to the Conservatives. Suzanne Evans Suzanne Evans was the most senior woman in Ukip but fell out with Mr Farage over his leadership style in 2015. She called for two of the Ukip leader's advisers to resign and praised Patrick O'Flynn, economy spokesman, after he accused Mr Farage of being 'snarling and aggressive'. Ms Evans later went on TV to say Mr Farage was seen as 'very divisive' – a move that saw her sacked and party officials told not to have any further contact with her. Diane James Diane James was elected leader of Ukip in 2016 after Mr Farage quit in the wake of the Brexit referendum victory. But within three weeks, he was back, after senior party figures refused to accept her as leader. The story of Mr Farage's role in Ms James' departure is not fully understood. Ben Habib After leaving Ukip in 2018, Mr Farage set up the Brexit Party, which campaigned for a final ending of ties with the EU, and later Reform UK. Its co-deputy leader was Ben Habib but he was sacked soon after last year's general election. He later quit Reform, saying Mr Farage needed to learn that the party 'should not be controlled by one man'. Asked what impact his departure would have, Mr Farage said: 'None whatsoever.' Rupert Lowe Businessman Rupert Lowe was one of five Reform MPs elected last year – but his ego clashed with that of Mr Farage. After he accused Mr Farage in an interview of acting like a 'messiah', Mr Lowe lost the party whip and was reported to police over allegations he had physically threatened Zia Yusuf, then party chairman. Mr Lowe said at the time: 'I am 67 years old, and I have a 67-year-long unblemished record with the law. These are false allegations, designed to maliciously smear my name and ruin my reputation after I dared to bruise [Nigel] Farage's ego.' A party source told The Telegraph: 'This is what happens when you mess with Nigel.'

Revealed: 'Love cheat' Navy chief Sir Ben Key's affair with junior female officer was 'exposed after her husband reported them to the MoD'
Revealed: 'Love cheat' Navy chief Sir Ben Key's affair with junior female officer was 'exposed after her husband reported them to the MoD'

Daily Mail​

time38 minutes ago

  • Daily Mail​

Revealed: 'Love cheat' Navy chief Sir Ben Key's affair with junior female officer was 'exposed after her husband reported them to the MoD'

An affair involving the suspended head of the Royal Navy and a junior female officer was exposed by her husband, sources have revealed. Admiral Sir Ben Key, 59, was told to 'step back from all duties' last month over claims the married father of three had an affair with a female officer. At the time, allies of the former First Sea Lord claimed the allegation was part of a 'dirty tricks campaign' against Sir Ben following months of fierce in-fighting at the top of the Armed Forces. But now it has emerged the 'consensual' relationship came to light after the officer's non-serving husband filed a complaint with the Ministry of Defence (MoD), The Telegraph reported. It is understood the husband believed Sir Ben should be held accountable to the same standards as those beneath him. He stands accused of breaching regulations barring sexual relations between commanders and those below them in rank, while endangering the marriage of a comrade is also forbidden. A source said: 'The husband was upset, because this is a man who prides himself on his Christian values and how he was raised by missionaries – but was doing this with someone else's wife.' Sir Ben, who was formerly in the running to become the next Chief of the Defence Staff, now faces a misconduct probe. Admiral Sir Ben, pictured with his wife Elly, is the subject of a misconduct probe following a complaint to the Ministry of Defence about the affair It is the first time in the 500-year history of the Navy that its First Sea Lord has come under such scrutiny. Insiders understand that he had attempted to retire 'quietly' once the affair was exposed, but General Dame Sharon Nesmith, the Vice Chief of the Defence Staff, and John Healey, the Defence Secretary, insisted on an investigation. Many female officers particularly are understood to have felt 'let down' by Sir Ben's double standards. The source said: 'The female naval workforce feels shockingly let down by his moral high stance and hypocrisy.' In March, Sir Ben appeared in Parliament to provide oral evidence on the treatment of women in the armed forces and commented on 'unwelcome sexual behaviours'. He told the defence select committee: 'We are absolutely determined to create a Royal Navy in which people are judged for their professional conduct, welcomed for the contribution that they make, and accepted for who they are. 'Behaviours that run counter to that will not be accepted, and particularly those around unwelcome sexual behaviours. 'We have removed people from the service, including those who have commanded, where we have discovered that their behaviours were not appropriate, or we have removed people from positions of responsibility before situations have got out of hand.' In March, Sir Ben appeared in Parliament to provide oral evidence on the treatment of women in the armed forces and commented on 'unwelcome sexual behaviours' Those close to Sir Ben previously told MoS that they were 'shocked' by the news of an affair. A senior Navy source said: 'Across the board he is very popular, very competent and the majority of the naval service are extremely shocked and really sad to see it potentially end like this.' Another insider added: 'He is a stand-up bloke and treats everyone well.' His wife Elly has previously told of the 'burden' being in the Navy can place on family members. Last week Sir Gwyn Jenkins became the first Royal Marine to be appointed as head of the service. An MoD spokesman said it would be inappropriate to comment while the investigation into the matter continues.

UK government signals it will not force tech firms to disclose how they train AI
UK government signals it will not force tech firms to disclose how they train AI

The Guardian

timean hour ago

  • The Guardian

UK government signals it will not force tech firms to disclose how they train AI

Campaigners have accused ministers of lying to parliament and the creative industries after the government signalled it would not force AI companies to disclose how they train their models. Ministers are holding firm in a standoff with the House of Lords, which has called for artists to be offered immediate copyright protection against artificial intelligence companies. Peers voted by 221 to 116 on Wednesday to insist on an amendment to the data bill that would force AI firms to be transparent about what copyrighted material they use to train their models. In an amendment tabled on Friday, the government dismissed the Lords' request and reiterated its promise to publish an economic impact assessment and technical reports on the future of AI and copyright regulation. Beeban Kidron, the cross-bench peer and film director who has campaigned on behalf of the industry, said during Wednesday's debate that she would 'accept anything that the Commons does' after this week. 'I will not stand in front of your Lordships again and press our case,' she said. But the News Media Association (NMA), which represents publishers including the Guardian, said peers could table further amendments to the data bill when it returns to the Lords next Wednesday. Industry figures said the government was acting in bad faith by not addressing the Lords' concerns and called for it to make further amendments of its own before MPs vote on it on Tuesday. Kidron said: 'The government has repeatedly taken all protections for UK copyrights holders out of the data bill. In doing so they have shafted the creative industries, and they have proved willing to decimate the UK's second biggest industrial sector. They have lied to parliament, and they are lying to the sector.' She said the government's action 'adds another sector to the growing number that have an unbridgeable gap of trust with the government'. Owen Meredith, chief executive of the NMA, said: 'the government's refusal to listen to the strong view of the Lords … risks undermining the legislative process. 'There is still time for the government to do the right thing, and take transparency powers in this bill. This would be a key step towards rebuilding trust with a £126bn industry.' Sign up to Headlines UK Get the day's headlines and highlights emailed direct to you every morning after newsletter promotion The government's approach to copyright has drawn the ire of major creative artists and organisations including Paul McCartney, Kate Bush and the National Theatre, with Elton John describing the situation as an 'existential issue' this week. Opponents of the plans have warned that even if the attempts to insert clauses into the data bill fail, the government could be challenged in the courts over the proposed changes. The consultation on copyright changes, which is due to produce its findings before the end of the year, contains four options: to let AI companies use copyrighted work without permission, alongside an option for artists to 'opt out' of the process; to leave the situation unchanged; to require AI companies to seek licences for using copyrighted work; and to allow AI firms to use copyrighted work with no opt-out for creative companies and individuals. Kyle has said the copyright-waiver-plus-opt-out scenario is no longer the government's preferred option, but Kidron's amendments have attempted to head off that option by effectively requiring tech companies to seek licensing deals for any content that they use to train their AI models.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store