Introduction by Croakey: Many recent events have revealed the power of commercial interests over policy, from the mining industry lobbying against national environmental reform to an unholy alliance of gambling and media companies blocking gambling reform.
Given the importance of Parliamentary inquiries for influencing public policy and debate, it seems like a no-brainer that such inquiries would require formal conflict of interest declarations. And yet…
Alison Barrett writes:
Australian Parliamentary processes are failing to identify and manage conflicts of interest among stakeholders that contribute to public policy through submissions to inquiries, recent events suggest.
The Australian Association of Convenience Stores (AACS) was awarded the 2024 Dirty Ashtray Award this week for failing to disclose their industry funding to a Senate inquiry consultation on new tobacco laws.
According to the Australian Medical Association and Australian Council on Smoking and Health, AACS members include three transnational tobacco companies, and the organisation has actively campaigned against public health measures on smoking and vaping for over two decades.
In another development raising concerns about the influence of vested interests on policy, a recently published study shows that conflict of interest statements were provided by only one percent of written submissions and six percent of verbal testimonies to the Senate Standing Committee Inquiry on issues related to menopause and perimenopause.
“Women’s health issues are vulnerable to corporate capture,” said Professor Samantha Thomas, one of the academics involved in the study.
“Although disclosure cannot fully protect individuals and public policy from vested interests, it is an important step to support trust in scientific and public discourse, and transparency in decision-making.”
Thomas, from the Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, and Editor-In-Chief of the journal, Health Promotion International, said the amount and nature of information provided in COI declarations in the inquiry varied widely.
This was unsurprising, she said, “given the almost complete lack of direction given by the inquiry about reporting declarations of COIs”.
The researchers argue for an “explicit standardised guide” with “clear parameters about the type of detail needed for these declarations”.
“Importantly, processes for dealing with COIs should also be clear in any reports or recommendations that are made from the evidence presented at such inquiries,” Thomas said.
Policies lacking
The Clerk Assistants (Committees) for the House of Representatives and the Senate told Croakey there are no specific policies or guidelines relating to declaration of conflicts of interests for people or organisations submitting written or verbal evidence.
However, a committee may call witnesses to further investigate their claims or any potential conflicts of interest.
The House of Representative guidelines to help individuals and organisations make a submission do not mention a need to declare any conflicts of interest.
An information sheet on power, practice and procedure of committees states that people called as a witness are asked to “identify themselves and to state the capacity in which they are appearing before the committee – for example, as representatives of a particular organisation or as private individuals”.
“Committees provide a public forum for the presentation of the various views of individual citizens and interest groups.”
The Senate Committee guidelines for writing a submission says “the best submissions begin with a short introduction about yourself or the organisation you represent” but again, no mention of conflict of interest.
After it came to light that Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and other politicians accepted upgraded flights from Qantas, retired physician Dr Kerry Breen AO wrote in John Menadue’s Public Policy Journal that “conflicts of interest pervade community, political and commercial life”.
“As a minimum, any discussion of conflicts of interest should encompass its definition and advice as to what should be done when a conflict is identified. In both domains, problems immediately arise. Thus, for example, definitions of conflict of interest may be influenced by conflicts of interest,” he wrote.
“And advice on how to address a conflict of interest almost never emphasises the impact of the subconscious mind on an individual’s perception as to whether a conflict of interest actually exists.
“The impact of drug company interactions with medical practitioners have been extensively researched and the findings are unequivocal. Drug companies interact with medical practitioners in many ways, all designed to promote the company’s products.”
This may in turn lead to unnecessary or inappropriate prescribing practices, or medical practitioners lobbying for new drugs to be stocked in hospital pharmacies, he said.
Change needed
Last week, authors in the BMJ argued for “robust change” in the way that conflicts of interest are handled across institutions “who have the stated aim of improving human health” including health authorities, research funders, medical schools, charities and advocacy organisations.
The authors, from University College, the World Health Organization and the BMJ, call on governments to lead by example.
“Terms of engagement that end actual and perceived competing interests should be established while not precluding the possibility of discussion with these industries. Advisory committees, regulatory bodies and harm reduction strategies must be conflict free,” they said.
“The first step in limiting the harms caused by commercial determinants is to end their competing interests with those who would regulate them.”
Commenting on the latest Dirty Ashtray Award, CEO of ACOSH, Laura Hunter, said: “The tobacco industry is still campaigning hard to keep and grow their markets, but they are doing so via their friends and pretending to be legitimate.
“It is completely unacceptable to see the tobacco industry attempting to influence health policy.
“We need the public and our politicians to understand who is really talking when organisations like the AACS … lobby our elected officials, so that they can deliver public health policy based on the best evidence, not vested interests.”
Of course, these concerns about conflict of interest are also important for other areas affecting public health. They raise questions about whether, for example, organisations, researchers and others are failing to disclose funding from Meta, Google et al or other relevant interests (such as media companies angry they haven’t received such funding) when making submissions on proposals to regulate digital platforms.
Further reading
Melanie Randle and colleagues in Health Promotion International (2024): Conflicts of interest in submissions and testimonies to an Australian parliamentary inquiry on menopause
Dr Kerry Breen in the MJA (2004): The medical profession and the pharmaceutical industry: when will we open our eyes?
See Croakey’s archive of articles on conflicts of interest
