[governance] Re: [bestbits] Three NETmundial submissions launched for endorsement at bestbits.net

[Guru गुरु]

On 03/08/2014 05:14 PM, Jeanette Hofmann wrote:
>
>
>> Conversely, since there is considerable interest here in
>> multistakeholder policy making, even at national levels, would you
>> support pharma companies, for instance, sitting in bodies making -
>> actually making - health and drug policies, and big publishers in
>> education policy making, and so on...
>
>
> The problem is that the pharmaceutical companies have been doing this 
> for decades - but behind closed doors.

Jeanette,

Yes, they have been doing such  acts in India as well in many ways, 
which often border on the unethical/illegal - essentially it is lobbying 
for private interest to triumph public interest.  This is a serious 
problem. do you agree it is wrong and should be resisted/opposed.

> National legislation is not done without consulting with industries 
> affected. Sometimes, particularly on the EU level, they even write the 
> draft legislation. Multistakeholder offers the chance to broaden the 
> consulation process and bring this process in the open daylight so 
> that everybody can see what has been going on in secret.

Since robbery is happening, daylight robbery is better ! this is not 
what civil society position ought to be.

Civil society would certainly need to oppose closed door/secret 
lobbying,  and strongly push for public policy that promotes public 
interest, made through transparent processes.  This is how CS acts in 
other spaces. CS certainly ought not welcome private interest actively 
being pushed in policy making on the fatuous ground that it is anyways 
happening - this logic can be used to justify any wrong!   (the argument 
is not about 'consultation', it is about offering private sector an 
equal footing in the public policy making processes)

CS that connects to larger civil society constituencies,  is clear about 
the ethical basis of its work, and its normative role in promoting 
public interest will have nothing to do with these kinds of compromised 
positions/reasoning. And imho, the real/underlying problem with the some 
of these "CS"  positions in the IG space, is in it being so compromised 
as to condone obvious wrong and offer such simplistic reasoning.  And I 
believe that the large scale use of ICANN tax revenues as well as the 
untaxed profits of the Google's often funds these kind of 
positions/organisations and seriously distorts CS work/role. (I remember 
Norbert raised transparency of funding sources as a serious concern but 
he was simply shouted down)

Guru

>
> jeanette


-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

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