MHRA Monopoly
MHRA Monopoly
Exposing DIA-bolical conflicts of interest at MHRA
Refuting Their Foreword
Before we begin, we must fold down a false claim by the MHRA (Medicines & Healthcare products Regulatory Agency). They state that their board has “no involvement” in “regulatory decisions”, and claim the Chief Executive Officer has the responsibility for decision making…
…however, the Chief Executive Officer is part of the Board (they’re in the board listing), so the statement is categorically false:
They thought if they shuffled the Chief Executive down by one place, people wouldn’t notice. Another government document goes on to state that the board advise on the ‘strategic direction of the agency’ (whatever that means), and thus contrary to the false claims above, has undue influence over the MHRA:
The same document also reveals another name for the “executive committee” — the decision makers at MHRA — is the ‘senior leadership team’:
Remember that line, it’s going to become relevant soon.
The MHRA and UK government lie through their teeth trying to pretend there’s any sort of separation between the board (of which the chief executive is a member) and the numerous conflicts of interest the board and the wider MHRA have.
Who Are The ‘Senior Leadership Team’?
MHRA does not transparently disclose this, however, thankfully through pharmaceutical bragging we can compile an incomplete list, and start to see the conflicts of interest borne out.
Mick Foy
A member of ‘DIA global’. DIA (‘Drug Information Association’; above), who appear to represent themselves as essentially allowing companies to “reach” (lobby) pharmaceutical regulators.
Mick Foy has spent 30 years in the MHRA, and an unspecified amount of time as part of DIA (DIA have a ton of regulators and pharmaceutical shills in-bed with each other).
With ties to the pro-vaccine third party profiteering Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and pharmaceutical lobbying group DIA global, Mick Foy being in-charge of the Yellow Card Scheme (a vaccine injury reporting scheme) is a giant red flag.
It also explains why the MHRA’s Yellow Card reporting scheme did their best to hide and obfuscate the figures.
Mick Foy can be found listed and buried on the MHRA ‘ExCo’ (short for ‘Executive Committee’) above with none of his conflicts of interest listed. Oops.
‘ExCo’ List Reveals Further Board Ties
From this above ‘ExCo’ list (page 70) we can see several other board members (refuting the lies they have any separation of powers), including Claire Harrison…
…Glenn Wells. ‘ExCo list’:
‘Board list’ (you get the idea):
Rose Braithwaite:
Marc Bailey:
Alison Cave:
and Laura Squire:
Contrary to the lies that "The Board and its Non-Executive Directors have no involvement in any regulatory decisions affecting medicines", we see no less than 7 members (6 above plus Chief Executive Officer Raine) out of 16 board members, both on the Board and the Executive Committee.
It is a point blank lie to say the Board have “no involvement” in decision making.
We can establish the Board has undue influence over MHRA decision making, with access to 7 of the key Executive Committee members (June Raine, Claire Harrison, Glenn Wells, Rose Braithwaite, Marc Bailey, Alison Cave, Laura Squire).
Thin Veneer
What you will notice is the MHRA have put on a thin veneer of trying to appear impartial, by ensuring those who cross the boundary lines don’t have appear to have any conflicts of interest.
Except Mick Foy, whose ties to DIA global are not disclosed by the MHRA, and he appears on the Executive Committee (‘senior leadership team’) meaning he is part of the decision making for the MHRA on product regulation. Curiously he’s absent from the board — likely because if he was present, he’d have to disclose his ties.
DIA global, clearly a regulator lobbyist firm, already bridge the gap between Board and ExCo. Board member Junaid Bajwa is an active member of DIA global, the same company Executive Committee member Mick Foy works for. Bajwa also has ties to Microsoft (who in turn have ties to the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation) and pharmaceutical companies Merck, Ondine and Novartis.
It is reasonable to assume they collaborate (for that is DIA global’s stated purpose; to form networks amongst members lobbying regulators), thus bridging the gap. Even if there was no bridging, Mick Foy’s financial conflicts of interest with DIA are so blatant as to warrant removal.
Tory Corruption
Usually appealing to one party or another is irrelevant, given Uniparty politics (they’re all corrupt), but in this case it highlights a conflict of interest between the present party in power and the MHRA, showing undue influence.
Another member of MHRA’s ExCo is Davinder Virdi.
He’s a Tory councillor for Rushcliffe. He’s a member of the ironically named ‘Governance Scrutiny Group’ (page 81). He does not appear to have any relevant medical qualifications that would justify his appointment to the Executive Committee of the MHRA.
Expenses Reveal More Ties
Another curiousity is the expenses paper trail of ExCo member Vanessa Birchall-Scott.
One expense in 2018 (above) has her visiting LGC Ltd, Teddington for an agency board meeting (she isn’t listed on the MHRA board, though).
LGC Ltd seem to be a third party, private firm. Why is the MHRA hosting their meetings in third-party locations?
Another expense from 2019 reveals another meet-and-greet boondoggle, the “Whitehall & Industry Group Learning Set” (amusingly called ‘WIG’ for short).
They claim to be a charity for ‘cross-sector’ ‘stakeholders’ to collaborate. Read: more intra-government corruption (‘Whitehall’ in the name is a dead giveaway it is a UK government boondoggle).
Revolving Door Jobs
Jon Fundrey is no longer part of the MHRA, because he’s left for a revolving door job to join the UK government’s legal department (so they won’t be prosecuting themselves any time soon).
Other Conflicts Of Interest
No doubt there are more conflicts of interest — this article is solely to get the ball rolling with others, and is not a deep dive (many results will get buried, and it is difficult to know what is relevant).
Switching tack from the Executive Committee members, we will highlight the stated Board member conflicts (bearing in mind the Board has undue influence on the Executive Committee, and DIA global has undue influence on them both and other regulators).
June Raine
Ties to the pro-vaccine WHO.
The WHO keep falsely declaring diseases have been eradicated by vaccines only for them to mysteriously come back (the Guardian fails to note the 1978 case was from a vaccine research lab leak).
Amanda Calvart
AstraZeneca, of causes fatal blood clots fame. Athenex and Fennix pharmaceutical companies. High Value manufacturing Catapult aims to “transform UK manufacturing” (read: probably involves mRNA adoption into shots).
Graham Cooke
Ties to Imperial College London (of second generation mRNA shots manufacturing association, see ‘Viki’ ‘Male’), Pfizer (of mRNA shots harm), and ‘consultant’ to Sanofi (vaccine manufacture), 30 Technology Ltd, DNAnudge Ltd, Seventh Sense biosystems, all pharmaceutical-related companies.
Haider Husain
Healthinnova is another ‘for-profit’, get rich-quick scheme that most of the board members seem to be involved in. Microsoft ties, again, as well as conflicts of interest involving the BBC.
Raj Long
A man with so many financial conflicts of interest they don’t all fit on screen and roll-off onto the next page. An active employee of the Gates Foundation, the WHO, the EU, with ties to pharmaceutical firm Bristol-Myers Squibb.
Conflicts A-Okay?
The MHRA aren’t even trying to distance themselves from financial conflicts of interest; isn’t working at the MHRA supposed to be their main full-time job? Why are they taking taxpayers’ monies and then also working as employees for other job roles in other companies with financial conflicts of interest?
Former MHRA members have defended this practice of hiring blatantly conflicts of interest by claiming these blatant conflicts of financial interest are desirable:
And yet they hire Tory councillors and people without medical qualifications, along with persons who have so many overwhelming financial conflicts of interest they roll over to the next page and can’t fit on-screen. It is blatantly obvious this is a lie.
Industry “experience” is not what is being imported, but corruption and conflict of interest. These are not desirable traits. Why are people with such blatant conflicts of interest working at the MHRA?
See any other connections of corruption, dear reader? Let us know in the comments below.
Related Articles To Read
BioNTech, Moderna Lobby To Stop EU 'Gene Therapy' Classification
Bacterial Endotoxins In mRNA Shots Exceeds FDA Acceptability Criteria | EMA Leaks
Found this informative?
Help inform?
Thoughts, dear reader?
[Note: Paying subscribers accidentally got sent a preview copy of this article to Daily Beagle Predictions, which is why you’re seeing a ‘duplicate copy’. Judging by the likes it was received well. The other version has been discontinued.]
I looked into the MHRA in 21/22 and the apparent conflicts of interest. First and foremost I have a problem with the 'registered charity' set up of what is essentially part of the NHS and the tax breaks and preferred treatment that it therefore receives. There was also a board member from E&Y whose background was in digital IDs but I can't remember his name.
I used to onboard banking clients in the City, corporate, private, politically exposed persons so am aware of just how cosy these relationships are but the MHRA is one of the worst examples of clear conflicts of interest I have ever come across. It has been a very long and gradual erosion of standards and professionalism that have brought the West to this point. Almost as if by design. Very early on in my career I went for a job at the regulator, FSA as was, and when asked at interview what I thought the biggest challenge facing the FSA, replied 'being funded by the institutions it regulates'. I didn't get the job.
I also think Raine is a man... 😜
Yes I have something Underdog. For the monthly transactions over £500, the statements thru October 2019 - March 2020 are MISSING. That's just before the start of the "pandemic"! Link showing this here:
https://www.data.gov.uk/dataset/03e53585-6f29-4f31-b14b-8157bc33f322/mhra-gpc-transactions
Why are they missing? What is in those statements? Something is very fishy about this!!