Go back to the Europarl portal

Choisissez la langue de votre document :

  • bg - български
  • es - español
  • cs - čeština
  • da - dansk
  • de - Deutsch
  • et - eesti keel
  • el - ελληνικά
  • en - English (Selected)
  • fr - français
  • ga - Gaeilge
  • hr - hrvatski
  • it - italiano
  • lv - latviešu valoda
  • lt - lietuvių kalba
  • hu - magyar
  • mt - Malti
  • nl - Nederlands
  • pl - polski
  • pt - português
  • ro - română
  • sk - slovenčina
  • sl - slovenščina
  • fi - suomi
  • sv - svenska
Parliamentary questions
PDF 38kWORD 9k
21 January 2020
Question for written answer
to the Commission
Rule 138
Stefania Zambelli
 Answer in writing 
 Subject: Private financing of the World Health Organisation

The World Health Organisation (WHO) plays a central role in planning vaccination strategies in Europe and has set guidelines on recognising the harm which some vaccines have been shown to cause here. However, for some years now, the WHO’s biggest financial backers have not been its member states, but private entities, which provide three quarters of its financing. Among the most conspicuous donors are vaccine producers and organisations, such as the Gates Foundation and GAVI Alliance, whose objectives include increasing vaccine uptake.

Given the above, and setting aside the issue of whether recommended or mandatory vaccines work and offer value for money, for some of these private investors there is an obvious conflict of interest which is undermining the impartiality of the WHO and calling its authority into question.

In view of the above:

What action do the EU institutions plan to take to resolve this conflict of interests and enable the WHO to find alternatives, whether direct or indirect, to funding provided by organisations connected or sympathetic in some way to vaccine producers, ensuring that, unlike now, when the WHO takes decisions, including on vaccines, it does so impartially?

Last updated: 6 February 2020Legal notice - Privacy policy