Thursday, November 10, 2011

consulting firm in the reorganization of the board of the NHS to protect forests that benefits only big business. Its secret is a concern

This week, The Guardian revealed evidence of McKinsey based on the reorganization of the NHS. Meanwhile, McKinsey was paid £ 250,000 a year by the British government for advice on the transition to the vision of health secretary Andrew Lansley for the service.

McKinsey

refusal to respond to public concerns about potential conflicts of interest and value for money while working in the field of public policy is not new. On the other hand, the NHS is not the system of life support that is involved in decommissioning.

This year, Greenpeace conducted a thorough investigation into the work of McKinsey on Forests Government of the Democratic Republic of Congo, Guyana, Indonesia and Papua New Guinea. The work was funded by donors such as the British government and do not represent value for money.


McKinsey indicates that the data used in the model must be kept secret for reasons of commercial confidentiality, which means that the scientific basis for public policy decisions is opaque and not open to review and test the value of money. Even Benoît Bosquet, coordinator of the Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF), World Bank, one of the main agencies responsible for managing the money for forest protection, admitted concern about the secrecy of McKinsey.


McKinsey Consulting division for the sectors of mining, pulp and paper and forest, the same sectors that benefit from the advice of McKinsey on forests. At the same time refuse to answer questions about potential conflicts of interest.


Find best price for : --Papua----Indonesia----Greenpeace----McKinsey----Guardian--

0 comments:

Blog Archive