[LINK] Standards Australia's standard for "conflict of interest"

[Roger Clarke]

Which Department provides funds to Standards Australia?

I think the Minister needs to be told about the enormous harm that 
will be done to Australia's reputation in this field.

I can see no Annual Reports on the web-site, and this helps little:
http://www.standards.org.au/cat.asp?catid=25

It will be impossible for the delegates not to become aware that the 
organisation that represents Australia has sent as one of only two 
delegates a consultant who is compromised in at least three different 
ways.

1.  The person has performed recent and relevant work for the organisation
     whose document is being reviewed

2.  The person has performed recent and relevant work for the protagonist
     seeking to have its specification adopted as an international standard

3.  The person was the subject of accusations of unethical behaviour in
     relation to adaptations made to the Wikipedia pages on the topic

Does anyone want to prepare that letter?  (Feel free to use those 
words as a basis if they help).

Is this a suitable matter for ISOC to take up?

Is there another organisation that it should come from?

(As a longstanding member of the ACS, I'd have liked to think it 
would have played a role.  But it's been very conservative in the 
last few years, and prefers to be seen as a responsible organisation 
that doesn't say things that Ministers might not like to hear. 
Anyone able to disabuse me on this, please do so!).


At 14:01 +1030 20/2/08, Glen Turner wrote:
>The passage of DIS29500, Office Open XML, as an international
>standard has just gotten stranger.  I didn't think that was
>possible.
>
>There is a Ballot Resolution Meeting next week, where the
>Draft Standard, the Comments submitted by national standards
>bodies, and the Response to Comments written by EMCA will be
>considered.
>
>The Australia Delegation will be two people: Panjan Navaratnam
>and Rick Jelliffe.  Navaratnam is a project manager at Standards
>Australia. Jelliffe is a consultant, particularly in XML
>technologies.
>
>Unfortunately, Jelliffe wrote part of the materials forming
>ECMA's Response to Comments.  That is, at the Ballot Resolution
>Meeting he will be evaluating his own work.  Hmmm, wouldn't
>school children just love that!
>
>You'll also recall that Jelliffe has been a consultant to
>Microsoft, most notoriously paid by them to update the
>Wikipedia page on OOXML.
>
>In short, he's a most unsuitable choice as a technical advisor
>to Navaratnam as he is riddled with conflicts of interest.
>
>Standards Australia's view?  Since Jelliffe was never an
>employee of ECMA there is no conflict of interest.
>
>Politicians everywhere will rejoice in this new standards
>body-issued definition of "conflict of interest".
>You can hear the cries from West Australia now: "No, I
>was never and employee of Brian Burke, so there is no
>conflict of interest".
>
>--
>Glen Turner <http://www.gdt.id.au/~gdt/>
>0416 295 857 or +61 416 295 857
>
>_______________________________________________
>Link mailing list
>Link at mailman.anu.edu.au
>http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

-- 
Roger Clarke                  http://www.anu.edu.au/people/Roger.Clarke/

Xamax Consultancy Pty Ltd      78 Sidaway St, Chapman ACT 2611 AUSTRALIA
                    Tel: +61 2 6288 1472, and 6288 6916
mailto:Roger.Clarke at xamax.com.au                http://www.xamax.com.au/

Visiting Professor in Info Science & Eng  Australian National University
Visiting Professor in the eCommerce Program      University of Hong Kong
Visiting Professor in the Cyberspace Law & Policy Centre      Uni of NSW