[governance] conflict of interests and multistakeholderism

[parminder]

There are many instances of glaring conflict of interest in the 
information society policy spaces, but this one takes the cake....

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

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 ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlos_Slim ), 
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)

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 ......

parminder wrote:
>
> A news like " Possible WHO-Industry Conflict of Interest on Pandemic 
> Flu Under Investigation"
>
> (see 
> http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/2010/06/07/possible-who-industry-conflict-on-pandemic-flu-under-investigation/ 
> )
>
>  looks to be an anachronism from an old bygone era for those in the 
> brave new world of information society discourse.
>
> 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.
>
>     "A report by the BMJ with the Bureau of Investigative Journalism
>     <http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/340/jun03_4/c2912> 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."
>
> 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...
>
>
>  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
>
>     "WHO has all of its expert advisers complete a declaration of
>     interest and if necessary recuse themselves from discussions."
>
>
> 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.
>
> 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.
>
> 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.....
>
> Parminder
>
>
>     / /
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20100607/8fa0da5e/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t