August 5, 2010
GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO THE SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE REPORT “EVIDENCE CHECK 2 : HOMEOPATHY
By providing homeopathy on the NHS and allowing MHRA licensing of products which subsequently appear on pharmacy shelves, the Government runs the risk of endorsing homeopathy as an efficacious system of medicine. To maintain patient trust, choice and safety, the Government should not endorse the use of placebo treatments, including homeopathy. Homeopathy should not be funded on the NHS and the MHRA should stop licensing homeopathic products. (Paragraph 157)
We note the Committee’s view that allowing for the provision of homeopathy may risk seeming to endorse it, and we will keep the position under review. However, we do not believe that this risk amounts to a risk to patient trust, choice or safety, nor do we believe that the risk is significant enough for the Department to take the unusual step of removing PCTs’ flexibility to make their own decisions. We believe that providing appropriate information for commissioners, clinicians and the public, and ensuring a strong ethical code for clinicians, remain the most effective ways to ensure quality outcomes, patient satisfaction and the appropriate use of NHS funding.
The regulation of homeopathic products enables the MHRA to protect the public from unsafe products and unwarranted claims to treat serious illness. The requirement for regulation of homeopathic products is laid down in a European Directive and is a treaty obligation of the UK. “
SEE WITCH DOCTOR: THE RESURRECTION OF THE WOO-WOO WIBBLERS
July 16, 2010
PROJECT EUROPE 2030 – CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES
Our findings are reassuring neither to the Union nor to our citizens: a global economic crisis; States coming to the rescue of banks; ageing populations threatening the competitiveness of our economies and the sustainability of our social models; downward pressure on costs and wages; the challenges of climate change and increasing energy dependence; and the Eastward shift in the global distribution of production and savings. And on top of this, the threats of terrorism, organised crime and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction hang over us.
Will the EU be able to maintain and increase its level of prosperity in this changing world? Will it be able to promote and defend Europe’s values and interests?
Our answer is positive. The EU can be an agent of change in the world, a trend-setter, and not just a passive witness. But this will only be possible if we work together; the challenges ahead are too large for any European country to address on their own. Our ability to influence developments beyond our borders will in turn depend on our capacity to secure solid growth and internal cohesion within the Union. This is the conclusion reached by our Reflection Group, following intensive deliberations and consultations with numerous experts and institutions.
All our members agree on one fundamental issue: Europe is currently at a turning point in its history. We will only overcome the challenges which lie ahead if all of us – politicians, citizens, employers and employees – are able to pull together with a new common purpose defined by the needs of the current age.
March 2, 2009
THE COSTS OF REGULATION AND HOW THE EU MAKES THEM WORSE
“Everyone, including politicians, agrees that red tape stifles the economy. Unnecessary and preventative regulation, based on no data or scientific investigation, let alone a risk assessment, impedes entrepreneurial activity, social existence and liberty. It makes the lives of those it tries to protect, empty and dull; it prevents technological development; and lowers economic performance, keeping many people in poor conditions.
William Mason looks in this paper at the development of the regulatory structure and the forces that drive it – political ambition, the need for officials to make a mark for their career, single-issue lobbying organisations that do not have to deal with the consequences and, above all, the European Union.
Regulation for the European Union is a necessity as it is the strongest method of integration, the political structure’s aim. Only by imposing endless legislation and strengthening the regulatory structure can the various bodies of the EU show their power over national parliaments. What has actually developed with the various sources from which regulations can hit us is a regulatory competition, with each politician, organisation and political body trying to outbid the others. The result is catastrophic for the economy, social existence and any idea of freedom and responsibility.
William Mason analyses the sorry state of affairs we have found ourselves in, gives examples and even provides the solutions of how to create a freer and more harmonious society – better able to help each individual achieve his or her potential.
Politicians need to have the courage to implement radical changes if we are to survive as a free people. If we do not take action to eliminate the drivers of over-regulation, there will be no society left to decide what level of regulation is appropriate – merely individuals and the state.”