Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
Excellences, ladies and gentlemen,
thank you very much for coming in and getting seated and settled.
It's always a tough call after the parties
and the events of a Friday night to get everyone together so I am glad we've got
people here ready to look at our new session, or this morning's session.
I am Riz Khan of Al Jazeera English. It's also nice to be outside America where
traditionally people hear the word Al Jazeera and then run for the doors.
Although now they are watching us a bit more, I think it is a little bit better.
The session is called ‘Creating Shared Norms: The Century's Leadership
Challenge'. With the aim of covering four areas of interest: comparing 20th and 21st
century norms, bridging political divides across stakeholders, defining a new social
contract and closing gender and generational gaps.
I am going to try to make it as interactive as possible for you all once
we've from each of panellists briefly. And for that reason I'll just kick off
with a quick question to each of them.
Let me introduce first of all so you know who they are.
To my immediate left here is Sharan Burrow is General Secretary of the International
Trade Union Confederation, the ITUC,
who is here from Belgium. Next to her is the Prime Minister of Thailand,
Abhisit Vejjajiva. We have next to the Prime Minister, Herman Van Rompuy, the President
of the European Council of the European Union. He is joining us from Brussels.
Next to him we have Prime Minister Salam Fayyad, the Prime Minister of the
Palestinian National Authority.
Deputy Prime Minister and Economy Minister of Turkey, Mr Ali Babacan. And Carlos Ghosn
is Chairman and CEO, Renault-Nissan Alliance. A member of the board also of
the World Economic Forum. He is in from France. I thank you all for taking part.
Just to kick off with a quick question to everyone and perhaps, Sharan Burrow,
I could start with you, ma'am. I know your interest in discussing this
idea of creating shared norms is the need for a new social contract.
What do you mean by that?
Well, the first challenge is to recognise that there's an absence of shared norms.
In the first third of the twentieth century, there was much more attention to
the needs of people, the needs of income security and yet right now, in a word,
you just have to say Tunisia. This was sparked by a single act of desperation in an
economic context that denied employment, social protection, rights and freedoms.
An economic context supported by a political context where freedoms simply
weren't available. People didn't come first.
Now Egypt. And if you look at this week, you'll have seen all the challenges for
the world on display, from climate action, to unemployment, massive unemployment.
The bitter crisis now of unemployment.
And yet we don't see, in fact, the real solution to tackle global imbalances.
To put people first. And, indeed, to actually see the political
courage to act on a global scale.
So we want to see a new social contract. We want to see a new growth model.
We want to see a share of wealth. And we would say to business,
if governments have to have the political will to act then business has to recognise
that wealth must be shared.
Thank you very much. Great start so we can actually discuss
these various issues that arise.
The Prime Minister of Thailand, Mr Abhisit Vejjajiva what we heard just there from
Sharan Burrow is very significant, the idea of a new social contract.
But, of course, each region has a different challenge.
And I know one of the considerations you have is meeting those different problems
in different ways.
Well, I see three real challenges in terms of the need to create shared norms.
The first is at the global level.
And I think this challenge should be very, very clear this year when in fact while we
feel that many of us have pulled through from the worst financial crisis.
The fact of the matter is there is now a divergence of problems.
Some regions have to address jobs problems, others inflation, others debt
problems. And yet we haven't really created a conceptual framework or taken
solid action to prove that we do have a shared norm.
And the proof of this is the failure to reach an agreement in Doha Round.
The proof of this is in the failure to reach a deal on climate change.
When, in fact, these should be common objectives for all countries.
The second challenge, I think is the political process.
What we have seen last year this year has been levels of violence increasing,
extremist groups taking more and more control and political space.
This has to be stopped if you want to create a norm of a democratic,
peaceful process of resolving differences. That's something that cuts across all
societies. And we need to create that norm. The third challenge I think is that
we have discovered time and again that unless the public and private sectors work
in partnership, not just to fix the economy but also to address social,
environmental and other problems. Taking into account the impact of their
actions and therefore actually internalising what we used to call
economic externalities. Then again we wouldn't have a shared norm
among the different sectors in society to resolve to common objectives and common
problems. Prime Minister, thank you sir.
Herman Van Rompuy of course Europe has proved that it can create some shared
norms, can create some common values. But I know your concern is a new social
compact. What do you specifically feel that needs to be addressed?
Well, my introduction will be a little bit more philosophical than my colleague
because European society has changed in the last forty or fifty years.
And as a major shift from community life, community thinking to individualisation.
And of course, individualisation has big advantages: growing awareness of
individual, especially women, less depending on vested authorities and so on.
But when individualisation turns into individualism then something is changed in
society. And one of our major problems today is that we have rising individualism
in the midst of globalisation. And people who are only relying on
themselves can be very quickly scared when they see something strange,
something different coming to them.
And that gives the result of rising populism. Utilising those fears and those
anxieties and those uncertainties and that turns even in some countries into
anti-Europeanism. But also a lack of solidarity for this outsider world
and outside Europe. So we have a big task to promote social cohesion again in a world
of globalisation.
And there is a lot of work to be done by politicians, of course, but it is
a collective responsibility.
Our work is to strengthen social cohesion as much as possible by stimulating
associative life, by defending social security so that people feel protected
even if it has to be reformed.
Combating fraud and corruption, encouraging families and families with
children. But we have to be aware that politics have
only limited possibilities.
Also on the economic side, sanctioning people to be more capable to getting their
place in a very changing world. Training, education so as that we can
limit the negative impacts of globalisation and empower people.
I think there is a big role also for politicians showing political courage,
fighting very easy ideas of rising populism, showing respect for opponents.
So there is a general climate that we have to change in society so that there is much
more social cohesion and community thinking than it is today.
Social bonds and linkages are indispensable for that new idea that came
up last years in a lot of European countries. That idea of happiness.
So my introduction was more philosophical, political but I think it is in the heart
of the problems we face today in Europe.
Sir, thank you very much.
Prime Minister Salam Fayyad, of course you know it is a challenging world politically
and economically. And I wonder when you look at the
perspective you have on this, I know that one of the considerations you think about
is the need for governments to be more sensitive to change.
What is missing right now then?
As a matter of overall disposition,
I believe governments have to be responsive to the desire for change on the part of
those who govern.
I think governments should honour that desire. I believe, certainly, they should
not be dismissive of it, as a matter of overall disposition.
Of course, under that heading and disposition there are measures that are
required. People's desire for change is often, of course, if not always expressed
against the backdrop of lack of satisfaction of status quo politically,
economically, socially, culturally, what have you.
Overall, I think to the extent that governments find themselves in a position
where they are not leading the change. They should, certainly, under those
conditions should embrace it.
That against with, certainly, honouring the desire for change.
It requires understanding where that's coming from and taking corrective
measures, beginning with owing up to problems to the extent that there are
problems. Fully without evocation or hesitation, out of wanting to do the right
thing. Generally speaking, those measures fall under the heading of governance.
Good governance precepts whether in a political sense, whether in an economic or
legislative sense. Fundamentally, it really boils down to the
full acceptance of the need to be, as the President mentioned in the latter as part
of his remarks, respectful of the sensitivities and disposition of those who govern.
Sir, thank you very much. We will get back to some of the points you
made very shortly.
Let me bring in Deputy Prime Minister Ali Babacan of Turkey, Economy Minister too.
So, you know, you are saying that it's important that there are some common
values and universal values that have to be implemented.
Turkey and Spain, of course, led this movement that has come under the UN
umbrella, the Alliance of Civilisation and has tried to address some of these issues
that we are looking at here. Let me ask you then, what is the biggest
challenge in trying to implement universal values?
Well, when we look at what is going on
country by country within Europe or in other parts of the world.
When we look at the growing discrepancies between different cultures and tensions
rising in different parts of the world,
it is very important to come up with supra-nation umbrellas,
supra-national universal values,
norms. And not only just mention them but
implement them, raise the awareness of them. How to create more ownership for
those values and common understanding.
Within this approach, Spain and Turkey we started an initiative called Alliance of
Civilisations and it is mostly about inter-faith dialogue,
intercultural dialogue. It is about empathy, it is about how to bridge the differences.
We mentioned this idea, we started to voice it and we opened a list called
Friends of Alliance. And we were actually quite surprised that right now already
more than one hundred countries signed up to that list.
We had one major conference in Madrid,
a second one in Istanbul, a third one in Brazil and many regional organisations
going on right now for this.
That is an active involvement of governments, opinion leaders, NGOs.
If there is no active involvement, then we are afraid that these differences could
lead to even further problems.
What is going on right now, especially in the close vicinity of Turkey, when we look
at Middle East, when we look at Central Asia, when we look at even Europe,
there are many problems.
And countries are becoming more closed.
The differences and polarisation is growing within each country.
And inward looking approaches, unfortunately, more and more prevailing.
Politicians have a lot to do with this.
Opinion leaders have a lot to do with this. Sometimes it is easy for politicians
just to follow the developments in the society. Just look at the public opinion
polls and trying to give pleasing messages to them.
However, right now it is the time to lead the opinions, to lead the changes in the
societies and then if we just follow the public opinion polls.
If we just tell good things, which just people want to hear about, then the rising
populism as Mr President has already told is going to be the unfortunate outcome for
us. Turkey is a country in between continents,
in between cultures, in between very different regions.
And historically for hundreds and hundreds of years we have been in a way at the
junction of all this quite different and complicated different parts of the world.
But what we are doing right now in our country and with our foreign policy is to
have a more encompassing approach to defend international law wherever we are
in the world. To defend fundamental rights,
freedoms wherever we are in the world. To defend democracy wherever we are in the
world. Unfortunately, sometimes we observe some countries, even developed countries,
developed democracies to embrace these values at their homeland but then have
a different standards, a different approach to other countries in different parts of
the world. So in order to have more ownership and in
order to have a more inclusive approach
for different segments of the society, for different cultures, for different
countries and nations, we should really have a much larger encompassing umbrella
to find the commonalities. To emphasise commonalities, rather than
make politics on differences.
Sir, thank you very much.
Carlos Ghosn, Renault-Nissan, of course, you have interesting challenges there.
It's almost like you a microcosm of the world in the sense that you have 350,000
employees representing about 120 nationalities. And I know that in this
increasingly globalised world you feel that diversity is a fundamental lever we
have that we could you use. Well, you know, it is very common now to
talk about the new normal.
Yes, diversity used to be something relatively good to have, optional,
a little bit modern,
futuristic. Now it is the main lever of management. And let me give you a few examples so we
can speak very concretely about it.
I mean a few years ago, what you would see in corporation is probably male-dominated
corporations, with a specific age in charge in the company and this age can be
very different. For example, in Japan if you are 60 years
old you are considered probably as immature. You can't take a top job if you
didn't cross 60 years old. In France when you are sixty, you know,
you are already retired or pre-retired. And you had a very specific age for top
management. The third element, I would like to mention is again not a long time
ago. The companies based in Japan or France or the United States used to have
particularly citizen of their own country managing the group.
That means the non-home citizen were very rare at the top level of large
corporation. All of this today we know is gone.
And we are trying to eliminate gender gap, generational gap and also try to have as
much as possible non-citizens coming to large corporation in order to understand
and embrace diversity.
But the main element, not only we need it but at the same time the best practice in
each one of them, you need to share them.
Because it is the exactly the same way you empower woman in a large corporation.
The best practices are exactly the same as how do you reduce the generational gap or
how do you bring more foreigners into your company, no matter how your company
is based. It is exactly the same practice, you know, in terms of succession planning,
in terms of quota, in terms of coaching, etc. So when you talk about shared norms,
yes we are going to have to share a lot, the best practices.
We are facing a lot of norms and we don't have too much time.
So thank you very much and thank you all for keeping those introductory comments
brief so we can actually involve our participants too.
And if anyone has a question, please do put your arm up very clearly and I will
try to get the microphone to you in the order in which hands go up.
Did we see one go up anywhere? Trying to see.
Good we have a little more light. So we have the microphone standing by.
Please do put your hands up and give us your thoughts on this topic and on some of
the comments made by our participants. While I wait for the hands to go up,
Sharan Burrow, expand a bit on what you said on the issue of the need for a new
social contract and you said Tunisia is an example and we should be watching this
now. Do you feel the change that's been driven by what we see in place such as
Tunisia now, of course, in Egypt as well has a broader implication?
Or is it because everyone said certain governments in certain countries should be
aware. But is there a broader implication? Is it a lesson for countries which don't
have this potential political turmoil but as you suggest maybe some social
considerations to address?
Well, I think President Van Rompuy was right, this isn't an issue just for
Northern Africa. Although, of course, let me say that we are all watching that with
great anxiety because of the threat to lives now and not just livelihoods but
there has been a shift from us to me. And there's an even bigger shift in terms
of the divorce from the political representatives who were elected by people
to actually make societies better for people, who are in fact fearful.
I mean, there is a deficit, I am sorry to say, of political will.
Good people, all these politicians here good people,
well-intentioned. But collectively fearful of upsetting the
market, fearful of the now standing up in Europe to the bond markets.
Fearful of putting in place financial sector regulation.
Although two years ago that was the biggest thing that governments promised to
do. Fearful of investing in jobs and social protection, irrespective of the
fact that if you go back to the 1930s the developed world got rich off the back of
investing in people in social protection, in jobs.
And these countries weren't wealthy then they'd just come out of the Great
Depression. So we do see a lack of political will, a lack of shared norms
and I'm really pleased to hear the CEO of Renault-Nissan introduce issues like the
gender gap, like the inter-generational gap. We are in danger of losing
a generation of people and ignoring the capacity of women to solve the problems of
the world because we haven't got the respect for the norms that we do share.
And I'd simply say that we have the tools.
We actually have the tools. There is a Human Rights Declaration.
There are labour laws. And yet you hear labour laws called
protectionism. But how do you distribute wealth if you don't have social
protection, if you don't have minimum wage, you don't have collective bargaining
rights. You don't invest in jobs and skills. I mean these are the things that
actually keep the economy going.
And yet business, equally with politicians, are holding us captive to
a market driven world rather than a world that is about people that is facilitated
by healthy markets. I am going to pick up on something you
said in just a moment. But I think we have our first question
from our participants. Thank you for your patience.
Tell us who you are and where you from as well.
I have a question for Carlos Ghosn.
Too often in Davos I have a feeling that, you know, we talk about a lack of willingness,
a lack of courage. It comes in different guises.
Ultimately, I think, it's a lack of leadership. And I do have to say you know
I deal with a lot of politicians. Sometimes I feel that there is a lack of
charisma and a lack of leadership among politicians. Maybe they face constraints
but I do wish they would inspire us a little more.
So I wonder Carlos Ghosn, whether you, as a business leader, who has inspired a lot
of people, certainly in your company, can give some lessons or some tips to
politicians to become little more charismatic and inspiring.
Well, I'm in trouble.
Frankly, I think when we are talking about diversity if we take this point because I
think this is going to play a big role.
You have to have conviction. It is not a question, you know,
rationale. You know you have to do this because you come to this conclusion.
You have to have conviction, people have to feel that behind the rationality there
is a belief, there is an engagement, there is an involvement.
I think what you call, whatever, charisma or motivation is connected to the fact
that people feel that behind the rationality there is passion and there
is belief and there is engagement. And every time no matter who is the
person, it's a political figure or a business leader, whenever people listen to
what you say and that they can see that behind what you are saying there
is engagement, there is involvement, there is conviction they are going to listen to you
even if they don't agree with what you say. You know, they have a tendency to
listen and eventually try to understand what is the issue.
So in my opinion, you know my own experience is that no matter where you
are, you know, just make sure if you want to go through a certain challenge just
make sure you are convinced of it because if you are not people are going to notice
it and if they notice you're not convinced then they are not going to listen.
Thank you, sir. Now something Sharan Burrow said was
interesting. You talked about the need for the economic challenges that often face
people in society at the lower end certainly to build a stable society.
These economic challenges need to be addressed. So we can do something a little
unusual here. We've got a video message here to all of
us from a gentleman who was hoping to attend in person.
You will know who it is in a second and a very well-known person, was unable to
attend but he kindly sent us his thoughts on this topic of creating shared norms.
And I wanted to make sure he could share them with you.
He is, of course, the winner of the 2006 Nobel Peace Prize and founder of the
immensely successful micro-institution the Grameen Bank, Dr Muhammad Yunus This
is what he sent us as a message.
I am sorry that I couldn't be with you this time in Davos. Circumstances in
Bangladesh do not allow me to come to Davos this time.
But I am very happy that I could be with you in participating on this topic,
shared norms, creating shared norms.
It is a very important goal to achieve that but in order to achieve that we need
some basic consensus.
Basic consensus and objectives.
What kind of life we want to have?
What kind of role we play on this planet?
What do we see the future of the world?
What kind of world do we want to build?
So once we have a general consensus of these ideas about our life, about the
planet then we can talk about our shared responsibilities to achieve that.
Without that responsibility, shared responsibility, it would be difficult to
establish the shared norms.
And today we have difficulties in creating those shared norms because of a basic flaw
in the conceptual framework of the economic world that we have,
particularly the economic world based on a capitalist framework. That is too limiting factor in
the capitalist framework that we have right now.
We are all pursuing our individual goals, individual goals of maximising profit.
So that's a very self-centred or individual-centred, person-centred kind of
world that we look forward to.
That shared dreams have to be achievable. And social business allows us to achieve that.
So I am very happy in Davos I see great attention to the social business and this
year in Davos I hope social business will go to a greater level of attention
and there will be initiatives all around the world so that we can create a better
world, a world we can address to solve problems for all of us and then shared
norms will emerge from this shared objectives. Thank you.
Thank you for listening to me.
And our thanks of course to Dr Muhammad Yunus for sending us that message
and sharing his thoughts. It leads me on to ask Prime Minister
Abhisit Vejjajiva on something that you raised here.
You talked about, well let me just refer to Dr Yunus said, he talked about the need
for basic consensus before we can have shared norms.
And he said we have shared responsibilities and you mentioned the
lack of shared norms that we have, giving an example such as the lack of agreement
on environmental issues, the failure. What is the reason for that?
Why do we not have these basic consensus issues addressed?
Is it the capitalistic framework that Dr Yunus referred to?
No, frankly speaking, I think, despite what global leaders say, they are very
much dictated by domestic politics. They are still very much dictated by their
own national agenda and conditions.
And many of my colleagues have already shared the pressure these days that
leaders have to respond to the issues of the day to the internal controversies that
happen within their own borders.
And always it is more convenient, it is easier to take to the convenient way,
the easy way out so rather than doing the best for the common good, you just address the
short term issues. I think that's what we need to really
address. And when I mentioned the failure to reach agreement with the trade round,
with the climate change talks, it is a clear reflection that while we talk about
globalisation, common goals we still cannot move beyond our own national
interests and are still confined by the environment within which we work
politically. And of course Herman Van Rompuy you've
talked about your concerns of this climate of rising individualism that we are
encountering. Do you think that plays into this idea of not having the shared norms,
not having the basic consensus?
Yes, but let's be not too pessimistic neither. Because we are fully aware of our
problems inside our societies.
I will just give a brief comment on the lady who put that question just a few
minutes ago. But that's clear that we have all problems
inside our borders but I saw certainly in the beginning of the financial crisis also
that efforts to take things, to put it in another way, I saw that effort for
a global governance and that was the G20. The G20 went well in the beginning of the
crisis. And don't forget that this was the biggest crisis in 70 years, a financial
crisis. And after one year and some countries not even one year, we get out of
the crisis and in some way out of the recession and that we had more positive
economic growth all over the world. A crisis of the thirties never stopped,
it ended in the war.
So let us not be over pessimistic neither.
Because we know we have big challenges
and new problems climate change
and globalisation, interconnectedness. And so the problem of one country can
become the problem of a lot of countries.
In Europe we started with a problem with one country of 10 million inhabitants it
became the problem of 350 million and in the end it was a world problem.
So it is completely new.
And we need of course global governance but it is a process step by step.
We will not reach it, we will not get it overnight.
So I am little more optimistic than the thoughts I hear, not here because we
haven't discussed it already. But in a general climate we are very
pessimistic over what is going on in the world. But we never faced problems of that
scale and I believe we are at the beginning of a process of global
governance and don't expect too much. But that is one of the big problems today,
there is a lot of impatience. We all see the problems.
But we are raising, raising expectations
and then there is a need to deliver immediately. You can do it.
You can do it. But direction is important.
That if you are working in the right directions. Speed is less important.
But, of course, we haven't to raise too much the expectations so that we stay
credible and that we get trust from the people. I see a lot of political courage
in many countries to face their problems.
I see a lot of political courage. Certainly, in Europe but also outside
Europe. But we need to have a new kind of political leadership.
Not by raising expectation, being over charismatic. But step-by-step going in the
right direction. And I hope that we can do it on a global
scale. But this is a new approach but I am fully aware of the problems.
I am fully aware of all what is lacking these days.
But still the G20 was for me a sign of hope but we have to continue that process.
It is not only a meeting each year, it is a process for every day.
Sharan Burrow, you had a comment. Yes. Absolutely. The crisis for working people
is not over. And in fact they were conned by the G20.
We went out and supported the G20 in coordinated stimulus measures because we
thought that the country leaders believed in jobs.
They told us in London and Pittsburgh, absolutely quality jobs would be at the
heart of the recovery. The same unorthodox approach to saving the
financial sector would be there for jobs. Our money, tax-payers money, propped up
the financial system but unemployment, 210 million, the biggest challenge the world's
faced. A 45 million young people every year entering the labour market.
No jobs. And indeed women, millions of women,
not on the statisticians books either being forced or choosing to want to participate
in the labour market not there. But in Europe, I'm sorry, you go from
coordinated social Europe to fragmented austerity, irrespective of the
consequences and without a plan for growth. We believe in fiscal consolidation
but over time, leveraged off growth. And I must say the European Commission,
their conditionality now against the rights of working people is the worse than
the IMF. In fact, we are working with the IMF.
Think about that shift in approach, a labour leader saying the IMF is a better
deal today for working people, potentially around jobs than the European Commission
that's just told Romania to take away collective bargaining, rights to lower the
minimum wage, to cut workers' pay in the public sector by 25%.
Now hopefully we will get through that with dialogue.
But we say to politicians, you can't have said to us spend, spend, spend not raised
an issue about debt before the crisis. Watch the financial sector,
absolutely bonuses are back, profits are back. But not make one contribution.
No financial transactions tax. How did the people of Africa feel?
All of the promises and yet the corporate world the government will not raise
a fraction of a dollar. A fraction of a dollar either on bunker
fuels or a financial transactions tax to look after the people.
So, yes, we're pretty angry.
I am going to see if any more hands go up. Please, Prime Minister.
Can I respond to some of the issues that has been raised?
And it comes back to the basic point I was making, that we have to move beyond the
old paradigm of how these problems are solved. I'll give an example in Thailand
when you are faced with the economic crisis and we said that the number one
priority was to make sure the jobs are still there.
We didn't do it through the typical stimulus package of government investment
in infrastructure, we knew that was going to take time.
What we did was to go around the private sector and agreed on what needed to be
done in terms of incentives to be provided so that they would retain and retrain
their people. I think we need to look at these kinds of
new models of resolving problems. Even the issue of increasing security for
our workers. We have so many in the informal sector.
I mean for so long the various governments in Thailand have tried to incorporate
people in the informal sector into social security and failed.
Basically, because they never listened to the communities, to the people themselves.
Now we have got a solution because we listened to them.
What needed to be done to change the regulations to get them in.
And sometimes you need the people themselves to implement and enforce among
themselves the discipline that is needed to create a social security system.
So I am saying that there are problems that need new ways of thinking and new
ways of resolving and we need to move beyond the old models.
Now I know both Mr Fayyad and Mr Babacan have a comment.
Mr Fayyad first, sir. Yes, thank you.
First of all, capitalism maybe it can be blamed for many things but I do not
believe that it by itself can be blamed for a lack of ability to forge consensus
on shared norms.
I think it's really more competition and rivalry, more domestic considerations,
particularly in advanced countries that take over.
And I think it's probably more reflective of the fact that, notwithstanding that
globalisation proceeded very fast,
progress towards putting together an adequate framework for global governance
did not match that.
So, yes I agree that it is important first that we ensure we are on the right track.
But I disagree that speed is not important. I think it is really important
to move as fast as possible in order to create that convergence because unless
that happens convergence on shared when it happens is not going to manifest itself or
reflect itself in changes on the ground.
Particularly on those countries which have a lot of distance to cover to catch up,
to bridge that gap.
So speed is absolutely essential. And I think it is very important to first
develop that framework of global governance.
Now just a thought here Prime Minister you are asking for this speed at a time when
people are tightening their belts and presumably this need to embrace change
that you referred to in the opening comments is being limited by the fact the
austerity measures are needed are the priority?
Let me give you an example. The impact of those austerity measures,
or the scope of the austerity that may be required to deal with an economic shock,
a price shock of sorts, can be mitigated or suddenly it doesn't have the scope,
doesn't have to be as broad as it would otherwise needs to be if, in fact,
advanced economies around the world were to deal with fundamental issue of
protectionism. Lack of adequate access to their own markets, particularly on
agriculture. What developing countries miss out generally has decided comparative
advantage. I think it's much better for the welfare of consumers everywhere in
advanced economies and LDCs as well for there to be an opening up of markets,
for certain. Before I get to another question from our
participants Mr Babacan you had one as well.
Well, talking about shared norms the global governance is also another
important subject here.
After the Second World War we have institutions, Bretton Woods Institutions.
We have United Nations, United Nations Security Council especially which is an
important set up there.
Then we came up with G20 Summits, unfortunately it was only after the crisis
that G20 meetings were held at leaders' level. Then we came up with really good
ideas. And decisions of G20 had a wide base and hence it was legitimate in the
eyes of the people.
And then we made important decisions, for example, the governance of IMF changed.
There were reserved seats for five countries and now at the Board, it will be
an all elected board. Now we have a United Nations Security
Council where we have again reserved seats for five countries.
And when the set-up of the Security Council is like this the decisions taken
and the legitimacy of the decisions taken are always under question.
Another important element here which I want to just open parenthesis on and touch
on is Turkey's process into the European Union. It was a very important project
because it was about also peace of cultures in a way, about an interaction of
cultures in a way. And we always though European Union is
a big peace project. Again started after the Second World War,
many countries joined around common values and norms having more and more countries
involved but then the enlargement process of the European Union literally stalled.
The open door policy is no longer there.
And then we are seeing European Union more and more of a closed entity, more inward
looking entity. And one of the big themes about why Turkey
cannot be become a member of the European Union is that it is a Christian club.
This is, in our view, very, very dangerous. If we are talking about
universal values, those values should be encompassing all ethnicities,
religions, religious sects. And it should be about commonalities,
not about differences. So this is an important process because
everybody is following very, very closely whether the European Union is going to say
‘okay, this is the wall and we don't want anyone else' or are the doors going to be
open for any country fulfilling the norms, fulfilling the criteria.
And this is influencing a lot in our region because everybody is looking at
what is going on and what kind of a Europe, what kind of a European Union we
are going to be seeing in the future is going to be of immense importance in terms
of what kind of message it sends throughout the region.
Minister, a quick thought, isn't there a feeling nowadays that the world
is starting to look a lot more east than west?
Well, I think there is still a long way. What's happening right now.
East is gaining more power in terms of economy but this is not yet translating
into fundamental rights, freedoms, rule of law is still not there.
But hopefully by having more open societies. By having access to
information. By having more shared ideas through social networks.
This may be a later stage in the process. Unfortunately, there is going to be a lag
between what is going on. Thank you sir.
Sir, thank you for your patience. Let's get your question.
Tell us who you are and where your form and then we'll come to our second guest
after that.
My organisation has about 18,500 norms,
if I could put it that way.
It seems to me that there's two levels we can be talking about here.
One is the very high level political, international, economic view.
The other is a more pragmatic one where people are actually wanting to have some
guidance. People are actually wanting to make some progress.
People are wanting to know pragmatically how they can actually make a difference.
I'll give you three examples, my organisation this year will publish
standards on water foot-printing, energy efficiency and we have published
a standard on social responsibility. Why? Because, basically,
business, consumers and NGOs and governments are looking for norms but not norms at a high
level. Norms on how you can actually do stuff. I wonder if the panel could comment
about how you actually can make progress and tangible progress.
Because I think there is a huge amount of frustration out there where people are
talking endlessly and going around in circles and talking about different speeds
and actually nothing is pragmatically happening.
Thank you sir. Now Sharan Burrow, it's an interesting
comment and I wonder where the two levels you are talking about, the higher level
and the grassroots level are diverging. What voice does that grassroots level have?
Well they are diverging but they actually have to come back together.
You do have to empower people. And if you go to Egypt, for example,
it was just a few months ago, a mere month or so after I took up this new role, that I
spoke to the labour Minister from Egypt and I encouraged her to go back
and seriously think about freedom of association because we knew the
frustration that was there. To put proper laws about collective
bargaining in place. To look at social protection and minimum
wages to give people some hope that they'd have security and opportunity.
Now needless to say she didn't listen and we know that right now, I've got people
there talking to our independent unions
who are joining with the people to say we want a better deal.
The same happened in Tunisia of course and so on.
But you know if you go back to Copenhagen it broke people's hearts because, in fact,
the people did expect their leaders to act on climate.
They were absolutely there with them heart and soul and yet the leaders of the world
couldn't come to a basic agreement under a UN framework.
Those institutions that we heard the Deputy Prime Minster talk about were
really important in the last century.
They were, however, rendered more and more impotent towards the end of the century
and unless we rebuild global institutions, global governance with the application of
community values and norms then we are not going to actually see the challenges that
we face today dealt with in any significant way.
And the discord will grow.
There is no doubt, you know, we believe in social dialogue.
My mission is to fix problems, to drive advocacy work in people but to sit at the
table with business and fix problems. And yet we see all manner of discord right
now between even European companies who have a good social record in their own
country but actually deny fundamental rights and freedoms in the countries of
others. And we heard that touched on. So we say to business you've got to work
with us and the people. The people have to have confidence in
their governments. And we've got to actually find that global
governance that meets the test of what people are asking for.
Carlos Ghosn, that is an interesting point. And is there a pressure on big
business and the private sector to pick up where the governments are failing to
deliver. This lack of deliverance perhaps is now pressure on you guys.
Let me answer from another point of you. Because as you said let's go down from the
50,000 feet vision and go to the ground.
There is a little bit expectation that you know whenever a new product come and new
service come that we don't have different norms and different standards because
consumers today you know are looking, they are surfing and they don't understand why
this diversity and what is the benefit of this diversity.
So there is a big opportunity today because of the renewal.
I mean the products are becoming obsolete very quickly.
The technologies are really moving up. I don't think we can fix the past.
I think it is going to take too much time, too much energy to fix the past but what
we can do is fix what's coming. Let me give you a specific example.
You know very well in terms of cars, there are new technology coming.
Let me take one example, electric cars, electric cars are coming.
There are new batteries, there are new ways. And this is very important for
consumer. And what we try to do as an industry and it's tough because there are
a lot of competitive issues is to say let's make sure that you have one plug.
One plug, okay? Because if consumers start to say ‘Okay,
if I move to one country to another, I have a different plug I have a different
advice,' it's a problem. For the suppliers it is a problem.
For the suppliers it is a problem, for the legislator it is problem, for the
electricity company it is a problem. So just making sure that you have one plug
for this technology is very simple, you know, requires some effort of
standardisation. We are going to have to do more of it by trying to be extremely
pragmatic. And looking at it not only from a competitive point of view, or from
a national point of view or from a regional point of view but from a consumer or
a citizen point of view. I think what you say is relevant, I am
sure everyone in this room has been carrying travel adaptors.
A quick thought, Mr Babacan. Just a very, very short additional
comment. Now what we probably need is more of a good discussion environment among
leaders about what is needed to be done. Now G20 so far discussed only economic
issues nothing else.
We believe that G20 should also start discussing political issues,
security issues because a good representative group and you have twenty leaders around the
table which can have a healthy discussion. And we don't have a substitute for that in
any setting.
G7, G8 okay. But it is not representative.
United Nations? United Nations is too wide and it is very
difficult to discuss things for a healthy discussion with more than 190 leaders
around one table. It is going to be just delivered speeches
of two minutes.
So we need a healthy discussion environment but a healthy discussion among
leaders of countries which could be representative of the world in a way.
So this is something which we want to be more upbeat on.
Let me just, we have a guest waiting patiently with a question.
Tell us who you are as well sir. My name is Denis Simoneau. I work for GDF
Suez, an energy and environment company, present in more than 70 countries in
Thailand, in Belgium, in Turkey. We are facing quite an interesting in Tunisia
and Egypt and Ms. Burrow just spoke about it. My question would be to the panel.
I would be very interested in your comments on the current situation and the
expectations, especially, maybe, Mr Fayyad, Mr Babacan. But all members of the
panel would be interesting to hear, thank you.
And in trying to keep it with the theme of this session of creating new norms,
shared norms. Prime Minister Fayyad, perhaps your thoughts on that.
What's happening now in Tunisia and the way its escalated elsewhere might perhaps
affect, well I guess you look at a business perspective and the issue of
stability and investment in the region. First of all I cannot but say I am
intrigued by the comment of Mr Ghosn on the one plug issue.
And I wish the cellular phone industry would follow that and we need to make this
one plug for adaptors and all.
Also a good comment on what my colleague from Turkey said about the need for fora
other than the UN for fear that the UN is too diffused.
It may be the case that there are too many too small countries around the world.
And we Palestinians are trying to add to that, another small country.
But I am a firm believer in the need for the United Nations. And to have that
supplanted by other fora, well the voice of those small countries is somehow
subsumed by countries of regional standing that they think is important enough to
project. I do not believe that from longer term point of view that's necessarily
a contributor to stability and healthy international relations.
This is a call for looking again at why the United Nations was established for
and making it work better rather than coming up with alternatives to this.
On the issue of change in the region. How it might affect business,
business environment. No question, when you go through a period of decline that our
region is going through. I liken it, and we had this conversation
right before the session here, to a turbulence that a plane goes through.
It is not likely that in this particular case the plane would go through the
turbulence and emerge out of it in the same way it got into it.
There is no question that there are changes that need to take place.
While that is happening, obviously that creates a period of uncertainty, a bit of
tension. Nevertheless, I believe, if this process of change is managed well and that
begins again by those in government not being dismissive of the desire for change,
given the high degree of dissatisfaction with status quo.
I think if the process is managed with that in mind, I believe the environment
would then give way to a more stable, in a sustainable sense, the environment would
be good for business. It is important of course as part of the
effort of going forward to think in terms of adequate structures of government in
each and every one of those countries in a way that is responsive to the needs of
those who govern, respectful again of their rights as citizens in those
countries. That creates for, on a more lasting basis of course, for a more stable
and sustainable business environment. Thank you,
sir. There unfortunately we are out of time. It is interesting when you talked about
the UN it made me remember a joke I'd been told when I was 11 years old.
They said ‘You know what happened when the maid serving Christmas dinner at the
United Nations stumbled and fell? It caused the downfall of Turkey,
the overflow Greece, the destruction of China and the starvation of Hungary.'
Thank you very much for your participation. A round of applause for our
panellists please.
Sorry we have no more time. Thank your participation. Thanks.