In Germany there is since 2009 what we call a black-yellow coalition. Black is the colour of the Conservative party CDU and its Bavarian branch CSU, yellow is the colour of the liberal FDP party. The cohesion of this current coalition seems to be challenged on ACTA, as the liberal Justice Minister, Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger, declared in a video statement (in German) last Friday that Germany wouldn't sign the agreement until further notice, explaining that:
“The European Parliament has a responsibility to engage with and evaluate the facts regarding ACTA. But Germanyhas no need to enact such legislation. We have lifted any censors on websites, and see no reason to block internet connections due to copyright infringements.”
The next day, around 50,000 people demonstrated against ACTA all over Germany despite the cold, under the active organization of the German Pirate Party and the German Greens.
The statement from the Justice Minister led to 'corrective' reactions from the Conservatives; first via the CDU leader who would like 'the general design of the Treaty not to be put into question by anyone, including the Justice Minister'. The Government spokesperson also announced that Germany does still have the ACTA ratification in view, even if the government would be open to get clarifications on newly raised questions, if ever.
Despite the conservative reactions, the FDP seems to show support to its minister by maintaining its will to wait first for the European Parliament's decision on ACTA, that could also imply the seizure of the European Court of Justice, before signing the Treaty, hinting at the fact that the position from the European Parliament could condition German's signature, whereas the conservatives say the European Parliament's decision do not impact Germany's ability to sign and ratify it. Since the signature of the Foreign Minister, equally hosted by FDP leader Guido Westerwelle, is also needed, and that FDP holds on their position, it seems Germany's signature is really blocked.
The FDP claims to show particular attention to civil rights protection, including in the digital environment. The recent demonstrations in Germany have apparently boosted their positions. On their website's homepage we can read comments such as:
'The observation of civil rights should be the basis of such agreement (ACTA). It should definitely not lead to a global surveillance of internet users, obtained via i.e. content control or a providers' third-part liability." (FDP spokesperson for Home Affairs Piltz), Or, from Manuel Höferlin, in charge of internet policy, who states that even if ACTA does not explicitly mention any particular obligation as regards internet blocking nor intensification of the providers' liability, 'it gives the path to it, and this we refuse it as such'.
It is remarkable that the FDP, who has been informed of the ACTA negotiations since 2009 as a governing party, did not opt for this position back then. The party has been constantly loosing voting intentions in the polls since it is in power because it would not obtain from its conservative coalition counterpart of the CDU/CSU significant tax cut as promised to its voters. In Berlin last year , the FDP dropped to 1.8% of votes. Their current strong statement towards ACTA could be a way for the FDP to surf on the Anti-ACTA protest wave and re-gain some popularity.
Suspicions of illegal prescriptions business
A former employee from the pharmaceutical company Pharmafakt Gesellschaft für Datenverarbeitung (GFD), near Munichis accusing several German data centers to have illegally dealt with millions of drug prescriptions by selling them to clients such as pharmaceuticals. He said he would have been instructed by his managing board to buy uncodified and unanymous data from the two main German data centers. The business would enable the data purchaser to know who consumes what pharmaceuticals, and which doctors prescribed.
A GFD representative denies the allegations by saying there was no personal data selling of any kind, only data collection for study purposes.
According to the data protection center of the land Schleswig-Holstein (North of Germany), the file documents seem to be valid and could lead to the biggest data scandal of the country in the pharmaceuticals sector!
22 year-old fried potatoes = 2000 Euros
In Munich, a pair of original 22 year-old French fries, who inspired an artist to create his work 'Pommes d'or', a gold cross of two fries, was stated to have an economic value and condemned the art gallery who lost it to pay 2000 Euros to the artist. I will look at my plate diffently now...
It's an unrelated comment but I've had the opportunity to advocate big pharma databases for clinical trials twice the last week. Once to a Johnson&Johnson lobbyist(!) who frowned his eyebrows very worriedly and quickly said that he did not believe in any general transparency laws in this area. Hahaha.
Like here, for instance: http://www.astrazenecaclinicaltrials.com/trials/last-30days-trials/?dateRange=30
It's the AstraZeneca clinical trial database, you can see which ones are running, which ones are failed, where, results, etc. GlaxoSmithKlein also has one, and maybe Hoffman-La Rouche, except I'm not entirely sure if I visited personally the last one. Seems maybe the European enterprises are more happy to be transparent about their clinical trials than their European counterparts (unless anyone knows anything about Eli Lilly?)
Lägg till ny kommentar