Developing Countries May Need Up to $700 Billion to Battle AIDS Pandemic

A new study says developing countries will need between $400 million and $700 million over the next 20 years
to battle HIV/AIDS. The findings appear in The Lancet medical journal. The estimates are being released at a
time when overall funding for HIV/AIDS has flatlined in a troubled world economy.

At this month’s replenishment round for the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, TB and Malaria, donor nations
pledged $11.7 billion over three years - an amount several billion dollars below what many had called a bare
minimum.

Dr. Robert Hecht says the situation underscores the need for long-term financial planning.

“This epidemic is not a short-term phenomenon. We’ve been battling with the virus and with the epidemic now
for almost three decades. And we still have a long way to go. It’s important now that we move out of the
short-term emergency mode and mentality and look long term. Even while we act in the short-term, we need to
see where this epidemic is going<” he says

Hecht is managing director of the Results for Development Institute in Washington and lead author of The
Lancet article.

Take action now

Five million people are currently receiving anti-retroviral therapy. But it’s estimated at least 10 million people
should be receiving the life-saving drugs.

“Actions we take today to prevent new infections – and this is where we need to do a great deal more than we
are right now – will have huge consequences for what happens 5 to 15, 20 years ahead of us,” he says

The Lancet article estimates the cost for developing countries to fight HIV/AIDS will range from $397 billion
to $722 billion. Hecht says it all depends on the choices developing countries make now.

“Countries do have distinct choices. They can do much better to target and use their dollars for prevention.
They can avoid people becoming infected at a higher rate if they do the right things. And this has big savings
down the road when it comes to treatment and caring for orphans,” he says.

Take heed He warns if funding and treatment efforts level off in the coming years, the number of new HIV
infections could rise to more than 3-million annually by 2015. That’s up from 2.3 million in 2009. If an
aggressive prevention approach is taken, he says, the number of new infections each year could fall to one
million. Hecht calls that “progress,” but says without a cure or an effective vaccine the epidemic will continue.

“Even if we expand the prevention services that we have today, the things that are in our prevention toolkit, we
will still be seeing more than a million people becoming infected 20 years from now. We still will not have
completely stopped AIDS in its tracks,” he says.

He describes that as very sobering news for donor countries, who will need to target countries most in need.
These include countries with very high HIV rates and weak economies.

“Using whatever money is available in the most targeted and efficient way I think is only underscored by the
situation that’s occurring right now with the challenges of the global fund and the leveling off of U.S. bilateral
assistance for HIV,” he says.

The Lancet article also calls for greater investment in research and development to “generate game-changing
technologies” and to “intensify targeted cost-effective prevention.”
Election 2010: Gordon Brown's speech in full
Here is Prime Minister Gordon Brown's second statement, which he made outside 10
Downing Street today:

"I want to make a statement. With the outcome of the General Election we find ourselves in a position
unknown to this generation of political leaders, with no single party able to have a Commons majority, and
therefore have a majority Government.

"I therefore felt that I should give you, and through you the country, my assessment of where we are.

"I do so as Prime Minister with a constitutional duty to seek to resolve the situation for the good of the country,
not as the leader of the Labour Party, less than a day after the election.

"What we have seen are no ordinary election results. People have been talking for sometime, inside and outside
Government, about the possibility of a hung Parliament.

"That possibility has now become very real and pressing. The question for all the political parties now is
whether a Parliamentary majority can be established that seems to reflect what you the British people have just
told us.

"First it is well understood that we face immediate economic challenges that must be met.

"A meeting of the euro group is being held tonight to discuss Greece and other issues. In advance of this the G7
finance ministers, including America and Britain, are meeting by conference call to discuss the deteriorating
situation in the euro area.

"Alistair Darling is participating for the UK. Our economic priorities for Britain are to support economic
recovery this year 2010, and as the recovery stabilises to move swiftly to implement our deficit reduction plan.

"On the critical question on the formation of a Government which can command a Parliamentary majority, I
have of course seen the statements of other party leaders.

"I understand and completely respect the position of Mr Clegg in stating that he wishes first to make contact
with the leader of the Conservative Party.

As you know we already have in place mechanisms and facilities that will give the political parties any civil
service support that they may need.

"Mr Cameron and Mr Clegg should clearly be entitled to take as much time as they feel necessary.

"For my part, I should make clear that I would be willing to see any of the party leaders.

"Clearly should the discussions between Mr Cameron and Mr Clegg come to nothing, then I would of course be
prepared to discuss with Mr Clegg the areas where there may be some measure of agreement between our two
parties.

"There are two areas in particular where such discussion would be likely to focus.

"The first is the plan to ensure continuing economic stability, where there is substantial common ground, and
the plan to carry through far-reaching political reforms, including changes to the voting system.

"Both of us have made clear our commitment to this in our manifestos and the electorate has sent us a very
strong message which must be heard.
"My view is clear, there needs to be immediate legislation on this to begin to restore the public trust in politics
and to improve Parliament's standing and reputation, a fairer voting system is central.

"And I believe that you the British people should be able to decide in a referendum what the system should be.

"What all of us need to be mindful of is the imperative for strong and stable Government and for that to be
formed with the authority to tackle the challenges ahead, and one which can command support in Parliament.

"It is with this in mind that all of us should be facing the times ahead.

"I understand, as I know my fellow party leaders do, that people do not like the uncertainty or want it to be
prolonged.

"We live however in a Parliamentary democracy, the outcome has been delivered by the electorate. It is our
responsibility now to make it work for the national good.

"I am sure that you will understand that this is all that I have to say at this stage today. Thankyou all very
much."
Indonesia Considers Moving Capital to Another Part of Country
With a population of nearly 10 million people, the Indonesian capital Jakarta is bursting through its seams. To
solve the overcrowding, politicians are reconsidering an old idea – moving the capital to another part of the
country.

The rainy season is under way in Indonesia, and that signals trouble ahead. In normal times, the average car on
Jakarta's streets crawls at a meager 8.3 kilometers an hour. But when it rains, traffic can stand still for hours as
young men wade knee deep in water trying budge cars and buses.

Congestion costs

By some estimates the congestion on Jakarta's streets cost as much as $1.4 billion a year in idle hours wasted
away.

There are other problems with crowding – the city is badly polluted, it has trouble finding clean water and
because it is on swampy land near the ocean, it is vulnerable to rising ocean levels.

So President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono last year called for a study on moving the capital away from the
congestion.

Jakarta Governor Fauzi Bowo is not convinced the idea will improve conditions in the country's largest city.

"I would be happy if some of the central government premises would be moved outside Jakarta, but it doesn't
mean that the problems of Jakarta would be lessened," Bowo said.

The problems do not show signs of easing any time soon. Every day, more than 500 new cars and 1,500 new
motorbikes are registered in Jakarta, while the effort to build an integrated public transportation system is
behind schedule. In addition to those who live in the city, every day more than a million travel in from the
suburbs to work or study.

Crumbling infrastructure
The city does not have enough roads to accommodate its commuters, and its crumbling infrastructure
compounds to the problem. Last month, a stretch of highway collapsed for lack of maintenance, causing a
traffic jam that lasted hours near the country's main harbor.

But urban planning expert Marco Kusumawijaya says moving the capital from the city is not the solution.

"At the most, there is only 350 000 public servants, and I think maybe 10 or 15 percent of them are using cars.
So I think it is delusional in the sense that it is not based on the actual causes of traffic jam that we want to
solve," said Kusumawijaya.
Solution to the problem
Indonesia's first president, Sukarno, thought of moving the capital to Palangkaraya, a city on Borneo island.
That was in the 1950's, long before Jakarta had a traffic problem.

Palangkaraya was an option for several reasons: it sits in the heart of the sprawling archipelago, away from
quake-prone areas and the densely populated island of Java, where most of the population and the economic
and political powers are concentrated.

The government later considered another city on Java. But neither plan moved forward.

Palangkaraya is back in the running today to become Indonesia's next capital. The government, however, is
weighing the cost of a move – which could top $11 billion dollars, against the cost of improving Jakarta's
infrastructure.