<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
There are many instances of glaring conflict of interest in the
information society policy spaces, but this one takes the cake....<br>
<br>
ITU and UNESCO has set up a Broadband Commission with the 'key aim of
accelerating the attainment of the goal of introduction of ubiquitous
access to broadband within the global partnership for development". The
commission will give its report to UN secy gen in sept 2010 immediately
before the summit to be held in New York to review MDG progress
<br>
<br>
The commission is chaired by the President of Rwanda and the world's
richest person, Carlos Slim Helu, who made his money by acquiring
Mexico's public sector telecom companies through means which, as per
the wikipedia entry on him ( <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlos_Slim">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlos_Slim</a>
), have been questioned. Now, hold your breath, Carlos's company owns
90 percent of the landlines in Mexico and 80 % of the mobile lines....
(same source as above)<br>
<br>
Now does it look like as if Carlos has a clear and strong conflict of
interest in whatever the Broadband Commission will recommend to the NY
Summit on MDGs. but who cares.... this is the brave new world of
partnerships and openness...
Carlos will make recommendations to the UN general assembly on
broadband policies which, it is assumed, will in turn recommend to the
Mexican government ...... <br>
<br>
parminder wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:4C0D16BB.5050908@itforchange.net" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<br>
A news like " Possible WHO-Industry Conflict of Interest on Pandemic
Flu Under Investigation"<br>
<br>
(see
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/2010/06/07/possible-who-industry-conflict-on-pandemic-flu-under-investigation/">http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/2010/06/07/possible-who-industry-conflict-on-pandemic-flu-under-investigation/</a>
)<br>
<br>
looks to be an anachronism from an old bygone era for those in the
brave new world of information society discourse. <br>
<br>
One wonders why should there be so much uproar about the simple fact of
industry players with clear vested interest in policy outcomes being
involved in giving policy advice.... Is that not what
multistakeholderism is all about. <br>
<br>
<blockquote>"A <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/340/jun03_4/c2912">report by
the BMJ with the Bureau of Investigative Journalism</a>
found that WHO guidelines for handling a pandemic originally drawn up
in 1999 were prepared in collaboration with the European Scientific
Working Group (ESWI), funded by Roche and other drug manufacturers and
staffed by scientists who had participated in creating marketing
material for Roche and also in trials testing the efficacy of a
Roche-owned influenza treatment."<br>
</blockquote>
Apart from actual participation of interested actors in policy advice,
why would anyone bother with anything as innocuous as who funds
what.... After all, even the IGF is funded by private players. UN -
GAID has actually made announcements which more or less ties advisory
positions in GAID with contributing funds. There has been considerable
talk of multistakeholder funding (read, private sector funding) of
policy forums/ bodies, in this (civil society) list, in some recent
official government statements etc... <br>
<br>
<br>
It is not important whether the allegations in the above WHO related
news item are true or not. It is about the discourse (and normative
frameworks) of public interest and public policies. See how WHO defends
itself against the allegations. Its spokesperson asserted that <br>
<br>
<blockquote>"WHO has all of its expert advisers complete a
declaration
of interest and if necessary recuse themselves from discussions."<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
What a stupid idea really!! How would it work in a multistakeholder
(MS) system, I wonder. Would it not be so impolite to ask all the
private sector players sitting on a policy advice body to declare their
interests, and opt out if they have any.... So terribly old fashioned
!! Isnt MSism actually about having interest in a policy decision; so
what is all this ruckus about.<br>
<br>
Apologies for the ironic tone, but i do think it is really quite ironic
how the contemporary discourse in global health policy arena should be
so much bothered with issues that in another arena - which,
unfortunately, may be the pointer to the future - are considered simply
meaningless, and perhaps absurd. <br>
<br>
Maybe, it is time, before it gets too late, to give some thought to
what the new 'governance think' in IG, and perhaps all of information
society arena, means to the long cherished ideals of public life - to
democracy, equity, rights etc.....<br>
<br>
Parminder <br>
<br>
<br>
<h2 class="posttitle"><big><i><small><font
face="Times New Roman, Times, serif"><big><small><small><small> </small></small></small></big></font></small></i></big></h2>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>