Pharmaceutical firms recruit former politicians and EU officials to gain privileged access, expertise, and influence within the political and regulatory systems.

This practice, often referred to as the "revolving door," allows companies to navigate complex legal landscapes, shape policy in their favor, and build powerful networks that benefit their business interests.

Access to Decision-Makers

The most immediate and obvious reason for hiring former officials is the access they provide. A former minister, Member of Parliament (MP), or high-ranking EU official possesses an invaluable network of contacts cultivated over years in public service. This network includes not only their direct colleagues but also the lower-level bureaucrats, policy advisors, and staff who are often the real gatekeepers of legislative and regulatory processes. This access allows pharmaceutical companies to:

• Bypass Official Channels: They can have informal conversations and private meetings with current officials, which may not be subject to the same transparency rules as formal lobbying encounters. This allows for early influence on policy formulation, well before it becomes public.

• Secure Favorable Legislation: By having a direct line to lawmakers, companies can advocate for specific policy changes that benefit their products, such as stronger patent protections, expedited drug approval pathways, or tax incentives for research and development.

Insider Knowledge and "Bureaucratic Capital"

Beyond just access, these individuals bring a form of "bureaucratic capital" that is a tremendous asset to the private sector. This includes:

• Understanding the System: Former officials have a deep, firsthand knowledge of how the government and regulatory agencies work. They know the unwritten rules, the internal timelines, and the personal dynamics that can make or break a policy proposal.

• Navigating Complexity: The pharmaceutical industry is one of the most highly regulated sectors in the world. A former EU Commissioner or UK minister who understands the intricacies of a regulatory body like the European Medicines Agency (EMA) or the UK's Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) can provide a competitive advantage by helping a company navigate complex approval processes more efficiently.

• Predicting Policy Changes: Having a former insider on the team can give a company advance warning of potential policy shifts or incoming regulations, allowing them to prepare and respond proactively.

Mitigating Regulatory and Political Risk

For a pharmaceutical firm, political and regulatory uncertainty is a significant business risk. Hiring former officials is a way to mitigate that risk by helping the company anticipate and respond to potential threats.

• Defending Against Price Controls: Governments, particularly in Europe, are constantly under pressure to control healthcare costs. Companies hire former officials to help them push back against policies that could cap drug prices or reduce the profitability of their products.

• Managing Public Relations: When a company faces public criticism, having a former political figure on its team can help in crafting a more effective public relations strategy. These individuals are skilled in political communication and can help frame a company's actions in a way that is more palatable to the public and policymakers.

The "Revolving Door" as a Conflict of Interest

While companies frame this practice as a legitimate way to acquire talent and expertise, critics argue that it is a systemic flaw that leads to conflicts of interest and erodes public trust.

The concern is that officials, while still in public office, may make decisions that are influenced by the prospect of a high-paying job in the private sector after they leave. This creates the perception of regulatory capture, where the regulator is more focused on the interests of the industry than the public good.

This practice is particularly problematic in the pharmaceutical sector, where policy decisions directly affect public health outcomes and the accessibility of life-saving medicines.

The movement of individuals between government and the industry they regulate makes it incredibly difficult to ensure that policy is being made in the best interest of patients, not for corporate profit.