Skip navigation

Indymedia UK is a network of individuals, independent and alternative media activists and organisations, offering grassroots, non-corporate, non-commercial coverage of important social and political issues

Dubious agenda of "Make Poverty History" backer

Stephen | 03.06.2005 01:53 | G8 2005 | Analysis | Bio-technology | Technology | Birmingham

Do all the backers of Make Poverty History really have the interests of the poor at heart?

The Make Poverty History campaign, which has recently announced its collaboration with Sir Bob Geldof, is a coalition of NGOs and other organisations planning organised dissent around the G8 summit.

The campaign is generating widespread publicity for the G8 protests and this has to be most welcome. However, amongst the members of the Make Poverty History coalition, there are some rather dubious names.

For one, there is The Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council . This is a public body that describes itself thus:
“BBSRC was established by Royal Charter in 1994 by incorporation of the former Agricultural and Food Research Council with the biotechnology and biological sciences programmes of the former Science and Engineering Research Council.
BBSRC funds research in some of the most exciting areas of contemporary science, including:
· Genomics, stem cell biology, and bionanotechnology, that provide a basis for new technologies in healthcare, food safety, plant and livestock breeding, and bioprocessing
· Whole organism biology relevant to our understanding of diet and health, ageing, animal health and welfare, infectious diseases and immunity, and crop productivity
· Biological populations and systems that underpin agricultural sustainability, biodiversity and novel bio-based and renewable processes for energy and manufacturing“

BBSRC describes its “mission” as:

“To advance knowledge and technology (including the promotion and support of the exploitation of research outcomes), and provide trained scientists and engineers, which meet the needs of users and beneficiaries (including the agriculture, bioprocessing, chemical, food, healthcare, pharmaceutical and other biotechnological related industries), thereby contributing to the economic competitiveness of the United Kingdom and the quality of life.”

The council is chaired by Dr. P. S. Ringrose who is also a non-executive director of no less than three private drug companies, and deputy chaired by Professor J. M. Goodfellow – the wife of Professor P.N. Goodfellow who is the Senior Vice President of Glaxo Smithkline.

Furthermore this organisation has, on its council, representatives of two major pharmaceutical companies (Glaxo Smithkline and Inpharmatica), with the majority of the council in the pay of large, and multinational drug companies through shareholdings or funding.

BBSRC are representing the interests of the very corporations who have withheld AIDS drugs from the poor of Africa for a decade. The likes of Glaxo Smithkline are corporations serving the interests of shareholders. Shareholders are interested in one thing: profit, and African children aren’t remotely profitable. BBSRC also freely admit in their mission that their reason-to-be is to “contribute to the economic competitiveness of the United Kingdom”. Indeed, why is this organisation so interested in “Making Poverty History”?

Are BBSRC hoping that the UK and European taxpayers are going to subsidise biotechnology programmes that help feed the world’s poor through the increasing of “crop productivity”, while the Biotech companies reap all the profits?

Whatever their motives, they seem very keen to be part of “Make Poverty History”. For an organisation of this kind to join a campaign of this sort, there must and will be a profit agenda.

Please read the following links:

Firstly, the agenda of BBSRC. Don’t trust me. See for yourself:  http://www.bbsrc.ac.uk/about/Welcome.html

Secondly, the conflicts of interest of each board member:
 http://www.bbsrc.ac.uk/about/gov/council/conflicts.pdf

And thirdly, some of the corporations represented on BBSRC’s council:
 http://www.inpharmatica.co.uk/discoverypartnering.htm
 http://www.gsk.com/index.htm


I suggest we keep tabs on which organisations are backing the MPH campaign. Follow up comments, perhaps….

See the link below for a list of MPH’s members:
 http://www.makepovertyhistory.org/whoweare/members-a.shtml

Stephen
- e-mail: harryjoyce@consultant.com


Comments

Hide the following 11 comments

maybe nothing...

03.06.2005 03:42

did a quick whois (don't u just love firefox?) on the MPH site....

Registrant Organization:Comic Relief
Registrant Street1:5th Floor
Registrant Street2:89 Albert Embankment
Registrant Street3:
Registrant City:London
Registrant State/Province:London
Registrant Postal Code:SE1 7TP
Registrant Country:GB
Registrant Phone:+44.02078205555
Registrant Phone Ext.:
Registrant FAX:+44.02078205500
Registrant FAX Ext.:
Registrant Email: red@comicrelief.com

Oi!


Blair

03.06.2005 09:07

Isn't Tony Blair backing 'Make Poverty History'?

-


Blair

03.06.2005 09:58

Is this approach not merely a mechanism to control / sanitize or dilute true oppostion to the G8 summit?

Curious Sue


Make Markets Busy

03.06.2005 12:26

There are obvious reasons why the likes of Blair and 'big business'TM would want to be associated with Make Poverty History... I'm sure there is a special word for it in the PR industry but we would generally call it greenwashing.

It simply looks good to be associated with 'good causes' (ask McDonald's)

But of course there are other agendas at play. Obviously the Make Poverty History campaign isn't going to result in the parasitically countries of the industrialised north suddenly giving up their claim on 'debts' suppossedly incured by the south. At best we will see those so-called debts being reduced in exchange for agrements on 'reform'. This 'reform' will be dressed up as positive steps to improve the economic and social fabric of the countries involved but will in effect simply be IMF style restructuring of public services, government and the economy in order to suit 'big business'.

The ultimate effect of course will be the further exploitation of the resources, people and economies of the south for the benefit of a few already very very rich people and their corporate entities.

Make Poverty History ? Make Markets Busy more like...

ben


Good work!

03.06.2005 17:18

This is good research by the original poster. The MPH campaign is something that on the surface seems hard to disagree with. At the same time it's also a trap to be automatically cynical (rather than sceptical) about such things.

From today's BBC News:

"As well as 100% debt relief, Mr Brown wants to set up an International Finance Facility (IFF) to double development aid to Africa in order to pay for education and medical programmes like mass immunisation."

 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4606197.stm

There is a lot of politics and a lot of money sloshing around this one. Pharmaceutical companies obviously have a vested interest in the issue, especially when governments start talking about massive funding for immunisation programmes. At the same time, we still have to keep our focus on what is actually best for Africans, even if the process is inefficient, corrupt or less effective than it might otherwise be. (No, I don't know what's best for Africans either.)

It's a complex issue and I don't know what the answers are. I do know that if poverty is going to be reduced it's going to require the support of governments and most probably big business too (same people, really). Many of these people are compromised and some will be on the make but the overall process may well produce net benefits, especially if it's well scrutinised.



Zorro


Thanks Ben!

03.06.2005 17:43

Sorry. I presume, from your post, that you felt something was missing from my article. I thought this was a news site for people to post news rather than mere opinions. As a news piece, I feel this story has been fairly well researched and stated. Your comments are "message board" opinion which may turn off people who are naive to the facts.

We can all write a diatribe about how and why MPH is going to fail but it would be more helpful to identify rogue funders in its make-up that comprimise its integrity rather than re-state a widely held opinion on modern government.

Why not try finding out some details about one of MPH's backers and posting that instead?

Stephen


Oh, I don't know

03.06.2005 21:58

Oh, I don't know...I thought Ben's was quite the useful and necessary analytical addition to a well-researched original piece. People instinctively, and correctly, recoil at the Geldof-state-corporate-feelgood unioin, but avoiding the trap of knee-jerk cynicism (likewise a pertinent observation) requires better understanding of the economics of Marshall plan style economics, namely donations with important strings attached, always "a flimsy disguise for imperial ambition" (Chomsky, N. 1973. "For Reasons of State". New York: Pantheon Books, p.24)



Stevie


another odd rally backer

04.06.2005 14:41

Something else curious re anti poverty rally:-

"Organisers of the rally, from the charitable Hunter Foundation, run by JD Sports tycoon and philanthropist Tom Hunter, will meet the authorities this afternoon to discuss their plans."

JD Sports - surely making his money from sweatshop products partic. Nike etc....

make capitalism history


.

05.06.2005 10:07

I just been checking out the whole membership list of MPH.

Looks like there's only one dodgy organisation (apart from perhaps the odd missionary group) and that's the one listed above.

.


AIDS in sub saharan Africa

06.06.2005 02:41

Interestingly Gordon Brown´s focus on "a plan to support a new international platform for research into vaccines and cures" (1) meshes nicely with the BBSRC's mission to "support the exploitation of research". Is this just coincidence? If it isn't, is it a bad thing? If so why? Does it help to preserve the existing structures of power and privilege? Does it deter genuine democracy in the sense of popular control of local social instutions? What alternatives can the left suggest for dealing with AIDS in sub-saharan Africa?

1. Brown, G., June 5, 2005, "Spend Now, Save Lives", The Observer:London,  http://observer.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,6903,1499475,00.html

Stevie


Photos for feature

06.06.2005 11:19

2004 Protest at Glaxo Smithkline patents programme
2004 Protest at Glaxo Smithkline patents programme

Glaxo Smithkline logo
Glaxo Smithkline logo

2004 Protest at Glaxo Smithkline patents programme
2004 Protest at Glaxo Smithkline patents programme


here are some photos to accompany the original article.

Stephen
mail e-mail: stephen.lee@blueyonder.co.uk


Links