Sir Patrick Vallance -Vaccine Conflict of Interest

[FTMF30]

Any thoughts on the article below:

www.expressandstar.com/news/uk-news/2020/09/24/no-conflict-of-interest-in-vallance-holding-vaccine-company-shares-hancock/

I personally find it to be a huge conflict of interest and actually quite sinister. I just don't know what/who to trust anymore.

Anyone?

He's a civil servant, so will have declared the shares when he took the role of Chief Scientific Adviser a few years ago. In his job he'll have no involvement in vaccine procurement. It's not an issue.

I find it a massive conflict of interest and find the fact he didn't declare it very worrying too. He stands to make an awful lot of money from a GSK vaccine. Not declaring it shows a lack of judgement, honesty and transparency and erodes public trust. How can we be sure the government is awarding contracts to the "best" vaccine, rather than the one that will line the pockets of the Chief Scientific Officer?

If there was a conflict of interest he's have had to give up the shares or not take the role. CS recruitment is really strict on these things. Not like politicians.

It’s no issue. He won’t be the one developing the drug.

Exactly @Hippymama

@Hippymama

I find it a massive conflict of interest and find the fact he didn't declare it very worrying too. He stands to make an awful lot of money from a GSK vaccine. Not declaring it shows a lack of judgement, honesty and transparency and erodes public trust. How can we be sure the government is awarding contracts to the "best" vaccine, rather than the one that will line the pockets of the Chief Scientific Officer?

Exactly!

@Hippymama

I find it a massive conflict of interest and find the fact he didn't declare it very worrying too. He stands to make an awful lot of money from a GSK vaccine. Not declaring it shows a lack of judgement, honesty and transparency and erodes public trust. How can we be sure the government is awarding contracts to the "best" vaccine, rather than the one that will line the pockets of the Chief Scientific Officer?

Where does it say he didn't declare it? It just said that Hancock didn't know, and there's no reason why he should

I don't see an issue at all to be honest. Surely part of the reason he got the CSO job in the first place was based on his vast experience in running the Research Division of a major Pharma company. And shares schemes are part of how most employees of private companies get paid.

Surely it would only be an issue if the share holding was not transparent and not in the public domain. That is not the case here.

Honestly I think this is part of some dark arts in casting doubts over both Chris Whitt's and Patrick Vallance. That for me is the more interesting question

@Cinderellashoes

It’s no issue. He won’t be the one developing the drug.

Of course that's not an issue. But there is an issue in someone using his powers to promote a vacccine as a solution to coronavirus whilst he has shares in the vaccine we will be encouraged to take.

@FTMF30 @Hippymama @yawnsvillex ok, you just don't know how the civil service works

Oh give over!

He worked for GSK, it's not a secret. In fact his work with them is one of the reasons he is where he is now.

And GSK are one of 20 or so companies that are involved with the UK government.

Is it that he is a very wealthy man? Is that the reason for this sudden 'revelation' do you think?

FFS!

@CuriousaboutSamphire working somewhere and having shares in something is entirely different though.

It’s a huge issue that will cost lives. He has done nothing wrong, however the anti vaccine brigade and conspiracy theories will jump on this and less people will take the vaccine/believe Covid19 is real. He needs to either give up his role or his shares.

There are many issues with those in such positions of authority having vested interests in companies or industries related to their role.

Should be banned

Declaring it doesn't negate the conflict of interest in my opinion

ok, you just don't know how the civil service works

Maybe they don't but I do and I agree with them

Using his powers to promote vaccine use?

OMG! The levels of paranoia!!

Do you want an expert in diamond drilling to lead the search? We can all look sparkly in our splendid isolation!

Not when you work at the level he did. Deferred shares are absolutely normal!

I don’t think it’s an issue at all. They aren’t new shares.

Wouldn’t it be more worrying if, despite GSK being the best company for the job, they went with a different company because he held shares?

[quote FTMF30]@CuriousaboutSamphire working somewhere and having shares in something is entirely different though.[/quote]
No it isn't. Many people who work for a company are given shares in it as part of their pay, as an alternative to hard cash.

Even my dad, as a lowly clerk in his company when I was a kid, was awarded shares in the company.

And if the fact that the man in his job used to work at a high level in the industry and has some of the usual remunerations makes some people make stupid decisions then blame them, and the meedja hacks who tout this crap.

He had done nothing wrong. You are looking at a witch hunt and are buying into it!

I think the best way to handle conspiracy theorists etc is with education and transparent, open discussion.

As you said, he's done nothing wrong.

In the scientific world there's always conflicts of interest, whether that's share holdings, consulting work, research funding etc etc But transparency enables scrutiny

@saraclara Yes, but there is a difference in vested interest in something when you have shares rather than merely working for a company withno shares.

CS recruitment is very strict on these matters so he would have declared it when be accepted the position. This means he would have nothing to do with the contract and/or would be checked by independent CS.

Its nothing sinister or anything to be worried about.

Here. Read down to the bottom.

A government source outlines what should happen.

Another, one involved in the process says it was all done as it should have been...

Ta da! No conspiracy, no withholding information. Just some meedja hacks doing what hacks do

www.thelondoneconomic.com/politics/uks-chief-scientific-adviser-has-600k-shareholding-in-firm-contracted-to-develop-vaccines/24/09/

Ah, the anti vax lunes walk among us once more.

Just what exactly is it people want to happen here? For the GSK vaccine to be discounted on the basis that someone who (with their employer’s knowledge) used to work for them?

The media just love the idea of discrediting everyone here don’t they? Let’s discredit the scientists now shall we?