Social Audit Ltd

P O Box 111 London NW1 8XG

Telephone/Fax 44 (0)171 586 7771

Dear Mike,

Thanks for your letter of 12^th. I'm glad you're in good health, hadn't doubted it, and wouldn't want it any other way. By 'indisposed', I meant unwilling rather than unable: I was commenting on the fact that the MCA, rather than the CSM, had been making all the running on the issues I raised. I'm quite sure you have been aware of the correspondence I've been having with the MCA since July, and that you've had opportunities to intervene, and I was simply commenting on your silence.

I'll send you a copy of the letter I write to the Committee on Standards in Public Life but perhaps I should have spelt out what I meant by conflicts of interest in my letter to Keith Jones - as I did when I wrote to the Secretary of State, in the following terms: "I have in mind here the conflict between Departmental sponsorship of the pharmaceutical industry and effective stewardship of the NHS, as well as the close links between pharmaceutical companies and most individual members of the Committee on Safety of Medicines." In particular, I queried Dr Montgomery's position, for reasons stated; if you think this unimportant, that concerns me all the more.

I look forward to discussing these issues further at the King's Fund meeting on March 3^rd. In the meantime, I am awaiting comment on a number of points I have raised in correspondence with the MCA. I would have thought some at least were matters for you and the CSM, and would have been reassured if you had felt able to tell me you might in some way try to help to resolve them.

Yours sincerely,

Charles Medawar

CLICK HERE TO READ ON

	Contents page
	List of MCA/CSM Correspondence