Vis à Vis : LES 2 MONDIALISATIONS
Vis à Vis : THE GLOBALIZATION DIVIDE
Porto Alegre (WSF) - Davos (WEF)

HELLO AND WELCOME. I AM PATRICE BARRAT FROM THE FRENCH PRESS AGENCY ARTICLE Z . I AM GOING TO BE A DISCRETE MODERATOR FOR WHAT WE WANT TO BE A DIRECT DIALOGUE BETWEEN DAVOS AND PORTO ALEGRE.

BUT I NEED TO DO A NOT SO SHORT INTRODUCTION : TOGETHER WITH ALTER DOC AND INTERNEWS INTERACTIVE , WE HAVE BEEN WORKING SEVERAL MONTHS TO MAKE THIS HAPPEN.

ORIGINALLY IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE AN OFFICIAL DIALOGUE BETWEEN THE WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM AND THE WORLD SOCIAL FORUM.

A JOINT MEETING WAS EVEN PLANNED TO PREPARE THIS DIALOGUE.

BUT JUST BEFORE CHRISTMAS, THE ORGANISERS OF THE WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM PULLED OUT.

THEY WANTED A RIGHT OF VETO ON THE CONTENT OF THIS PROGRAMME. WE DID NOT WANT THIS. AND ALSO , THEY FELT THAT PORTO ALEGRE WAS TOO MUCH OF AN ANTI-DAVOS. IF A DIALOGUE WAS TO TAKE PLACE, THEY SAID, WITH CRITICS OF THE DAVOS FORUM, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE IN THE WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM ITSELF.

STILL, WE DECIDED TO MAINTAIN THE PROJECT OF THIS DIALOGUE ABOUT GLOBALISATION. THIS EXPLAINS WHY WE ARE NOT IN THE CONGRESS CENTER BUT IN A PROTESTANT CHURCH WHICH HAS ACCEPTED TO HAVE US HERE

I WANT TO THANK THE PANELISTS ON THIS SIDE WHO HAVE ACCEPTED TO COME AND DISCUSS AS INDIVIDUALS REPRESENTING THEIR ORGANISATIONS , BUSINESSES OR GOVERNMENTS.

NOW , ENOUGH OF ME SPEAKING, I WANT TO ASK THE MAIN PANELISTS ON BOTH SIDES TO INTRODUCE THEMSELVES MAINLY FOR THE PEOPLE ON THE OTHER SIDE. AND ALSO FOR THE AUDIENCE IN BRAZIL, IN EUROPE AND IN THE US.

HERE IN DAVOS, PLEASE DO IT FROM LEFT TO RIGHT AND THEN WE WILL GO TO PORTO ALEGRE.

YOU MIGHT ALSO SAY RIGHT AWAY BRIEFLY WHY YOU ACCEPT TO TALK TO PEOPLE WHICH SOME CONSIDER AS POTENTIAL ENEMIES.

AND NOW IN PORTO ALEGRE.

George Soros

I am George Soros, I am the semi-retired manager of an international hedge fund. And I am also the founder of a network of foundations devoted to what I call an open society.

And I am happy to participate in this debate because I am interested in reforming but not destroying global capitalism.

Bjorn Edlund

Hello my name is Bjorn Edlund I work for a company called ABB, (INAUDIBLE) we are present in a hundred and some countries around the world , with a hundred and sixty thousand people, of those, about 45000 work in the developing world. It is important for us to understand the role that business can play constructively and making globalization work and I think this dialogue is a very good place to start to listening to the concerns of others.

John Ruggie

I am John Ruggie I work for Kofi Annan, the secretary general of the United Nations. Congratulations for putting on this programme. I am very delighted to be here. Let me challenge the promises that you stipulated at the outside there are no enemies. We are all working for the same goal, and that is to make the world economy work for all of the world people. A goal that we are very much dedicated to at the United Nations, and dialogue is the first step to world making any progress, and so we are very pleased to participate in this bridge, building efforts. Thank you.

Mark Malloch Brown,

And I am Mark Malloch Brown, the administrator of the UN development programme. I am delighted to have a chance to participate. Because I would have liked to have been in both places this week, I would have liked to have been in Porto Alegre, as well as here. Because for a UN development program, organisation, it’s critical to have a foot in both worlds ; in the world of economic globalisation as well as the world socil reaction to that. To ensure that it is indeed a balance between two sets of goals that benefits all. Thank you.

So,during the course of this debate, more people on this side will have a chance to express their views but now it’s important that the people in Porto Alegre introduce themselves too.

Bernard Cassen

Bonjour, je suis français. Je m’appelle Bernard Cassen. Je suis journaliste et directeur général du Monde diplomatique et également Président de l’ATTAC en France. Je suis ici à Porto Alegre au Forum social mondial avec tous nos amis et camarades pour montrer qu’un autre monde est possible.

Diane Matte

Bonjour, je suis Diane Matte, de la Marche mondiale des femmes qui est un réseau de femmes travaillant sur la mondialisation, et je suis ici particulièrement pour parler de l’impact de cette mondialisation sur les femmes du sud et du nord.

Walden BELLO

Hello, y name is Walden Bello and I’m the executive director of Focus on the Global South based in Thailand. I’m a Philipine citizen. I’m in Porto Alegre because Porto Alegre is the place to be and not Davos.

Aminata Traoré

Mon nom est Aminata Traoré. Je suis chercheur, auteur de L’étau, l’Afrique dans un monde sans frontières. Je suis ici pour relier cette quête de la jeunesse africaine qui demande aux gens de Davos de leur rendre leur avenir.

Odet Grajev

Meu nome é Odet Grajev eu sou cordenador da CIVIS (Associação Brasileira de Empresários pela Cidadania) eu sou presidente do Instituto ETHOS de empresas e responsabilidade Social e estou aqui no Forum Social Mundial para poder alertar o mundo sobre os perigos que corremos se permanecermos nos mesmos padrões de desenvolvimento e de consumo, e de produção de bens e de serviços.

Trevor Wanek

My name is Trevor Wanek. I’m from Soweto, Johanesburg, South Africa. I work for the Alternative Information and Development Center, an NGO which works closely in the antidebt campaign Jubile 2000. Like my colleague Walden here, the only thing which connects me with the people in Davos is the satellite link.

Rafael Alegria

Me llamo Rafael Alegria, soy de Honduras, represento al Movimiento Internacional de Campesinos sin Tierra, pequeños y medianos agricultores, mujeres rurales, trabajadores agrícolas, pueblos indígenas. Todos los aglutinamos en el Movimiento Via Campesina. Somos realmente uno de los sectores más afectados de la globalización.

Sandra Cabral

Meu nome é Sandra Cabral, sou diretora da Central Única dos Trabalhadores, Central Sindical a maior do Brasil e a 5ª maior do mundo, que reúne três mil sindicatos filiados e representa mais ou menos 20 milhões de trabalhadores. E estou aqui em Porto Alegre porque não só eu, mas toda a CUT, acredita num mundo diferente deste mundo pensado em Davos, um mundo com equilibrio, com justiça, sem violência ,um mundo de fato com distribuição de renda , onde não haja a exclusão provocada por este pensamento que querem que seja único. Não há um pensamento único com certeza.

Hebe de Bonafini

Soy Hebe de Bonafini, Presidenta de la Asociación de las Madres de la Plaza de Mayo. Estoy aqui en Davos para denunciar que los gobiernos pagan la Deuda Externa con vidas, y que Davos es el gran responsable de miles y miles de niños que en este mismo momento están muriendo en el mundo de hambre y de enfermedades de la pobreza.

Fred Azcarate

Hello, my name is Fred Azcarate. I’m the executive director of Job with Justice in the USA. I’m here in Porto Alegre with my brothers and sisters from all around the world because I think this debate is not just about the kind of Globalization we want, but it’s about the world we want. I think we have some serious ideas that another kind of world is possible and we are here to talk about them.

NJOKI NJEHU

My name is NJOKI NJEHU. I’m Director of the "50 years is Enough" network witch is a college in the USA, working for the profound transformation of the World Bank, and the International Monetary Found. I’m from Kenya, Africa. And I’m in Porto Alegre because it’s not just about the Debate we aregoing to have and what kind of world we want, but because I believe there is a fundamental difference between what we are discussing here in Porto Alegre and the kind of discussions and the visions that have been discussed in Davos.


(Patrice Barrat)

Thank you, I think there are more people also in other side. I must say that we have invited organizations like the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, the World Trade Organization, but they basically said they had no time to come here because they had made other plans before. They said they’d try to come. We have also invited other corporations like Vivendi Universal, Coca-Cola, McDonald’s, Microsoft, Hewlett Packard, but they declined. So, thank you again for being here.

Just to set certain rules for the debate, we would really like this debate to maybe lead somewhere. I want to share with you certain principles. First, because of the satellite link, we should really listen to each other; often in these debates, each side would rather speak than listen but, maybe not, and we offer the chance to hear what the others have to say. So, please don’t make long speeches that would create impatience. So, make sure that you answer to each other, that you won’t just say what you always wanted to say on television, OK?

Now, as an introduction to the debate, a way to put the debate within a certain context, we have prepared a 3-minute film to remind you how the protest movement started and grew, first in the street of certain cities around the world - Seattle, Washington, Bangkok, Prague and Nice - and this is a report of 3 minutes by Ben Kajdan.

(VIDEO)

(P.B.)
The Minister who was speaking in the story was from South Africa. Can we get your reactions to the story on the Davos side?

(George Soros)

Well, I think it’s fine to protest and actually the protests have done some good in drawing attention that something is wrong. But if you only protest and provoke violence because, after all, this is a challenge for the security authority to defend the organizations, then you won’t achieve very much. So, I think, now that these protests have occurred, and they have succeeded in drawing attention, I hope that we can start a dialogue and really discuss what needs to be changed to make these institutions work better.

(P.B.)
Another comment here or does Porto Alegre want to react?

(Mark Malloch)

I just want to say.. I mean…I think it’s balanced, I mean, it shows both sides of the piece in the sense that what was put in something that people would think was of the Deputy Director of the International Monetary Fund saying countries grow faster if they integrate into the world economy. I’m afraid it’s true. The issue, therefore, for the protests is either to sacrifice certain opportunity of growth or to try to find ways of harnessing that growth to a social agenda and to social priorities which do not represent a risk. So, I think it is a very reasonable piece to set up the debate.

(P.B.)
I think Porto Alegre wants to say something. Walden Bello has the microphone in his hands or someone else?

(Porto Alegre speaks)

Walden Bello

Well, first of all we would like to say that, we would like to express, the collective condemnation from all the groups here, of the repression that is now being visited on legitimate and peaceful protesters by the swiss authorities in order to defend Davos. And this is something that is extremely perturbing to us. The second concern we would like to evoque here is that we feel extreme lack of youngers sensitivity in having in quite all men panel and I think you guys are trying to make a statement. And let me say that I have been asked why I am here, and not in Davos. I’m here because Porto Alegre is where the future is and Davos is where the past is, at this point .I was in Davos last year and believe me it is not worth a second visit.The second point there I’d just like to say here is that we are in two differents planets OK? You guys, in Davos, are in the planet of the super rich and I would just like to say ,what Heminway said ,that the riches are different to you and me. We here in Porto Alegre are the planet of the poor, the marginalized, the opressed. We, in Porto Alegre are now concerned, all of us, in triyng to find ways to save the planet, to bring about social justice. You in Davos are trying to find ways to continue to make things corporate hegemony all over the world, and to think of ways of further corporate (inaudible) Let me just, and here, by saying, that we are very upset about what is happening in Davos at this point.And the best thing that can happen to the world is for the corporate executive thousands of them in Davos to be loaded in a spaceship and for that spaceship to take off and the world will be a better place for all of us. Thank you.

(Davos speaks)

(John Ruggie)

I wonder if I could just say a few words. I am not here to discuss or to debate the protest or the protestors. I do remind people that Khofi Annan came to Davos in January ’99, 10 months before Seattle. And in fact, he warned global business leaders who were assembled (several ?) here that a backlash against globalization was about to set in. And he posed the formulation of the problem, which I think is still correct today. Essentially, what he said was that largely through the expansion of corporations in the drive of technology we have created a single global economic space. But this global economic space does not have the social, the environmental and the social justice pillars that are required to make any kind of social system work. And unless we can work together to build up this social infrastructure, to defend and promote human rights, to defend and promote labor standards, to protect and preserve the environment for present and future generations, there will be a backlash and, indeed, the global economy as we know it and the open world economy that we’ve worked so hard to construct since World War II will unravel. Now, the second part of his argument I think also is true today and Mark has already alluded to it, namely the unravelling of an open world economy would not be a good thing. It would not be a good thing for the poor; it wouldn’t be a good thing for the rich; it wouldn’t be a good thing for the social future of our planet. We have been there before. We’ve been there in the 1930’s. Turning our backs on the open world economic systems in the past traditionally has led us to all sorts of ugly things, including nationalism, xenophobia and all sorts of other things we are very much opposed to. Our job, as we see it, is to make the open world economy work for all the world’s people and that requires making progress, much better progress, much better progress than we’ve made to date, in the area of human rights, in the area of labor standards, in the area of environment and social justice, more partly.

(P.B.)
It’s really important that you look at each other to create a dialogue, OK?. On the panel itself, I must say that there was a stage where we have three people who accepted and they’re all black men. That was the vice-president of Coca-Cola, Thabo Mbeki from South Africa, and Pierre Sané from Amnesty International. We also invited Klaus Schwab but today he refused the game. So, maybe Porto Alegre should react before mister Edlun from ABB wants to say something, as a chance...

(Porto Alegre speaks)

Aminata Traoré

La question que nous nous posons ici est quelle est l’image de, ou quelle est la leçon de démocratie que vous êtes en train de nous donner? Une minorité de nantis, de gagnants d’une certaine globalisation, réunis à Davos, en train de dicter au reste du monde la manière dont les économies devraient fonctionner. Vous n’écoutez pas. Alors, je pense aux chefs d’État du monde entier, et plus particulièrement à ceux d’Afrique, que vous jugez, vous estimez qu’ils sont corrompus, c’est des dictateurs. Et quelle est cette dictature à l’échelle de la planète. Et des acteurs privilégiés qui n’écoutent pas. Parce que nous ne pouvons pas vous croire sur parole. L’état des lieux rend suffisamment compte du fait que ça ne marche pas, le modèle ne marche pas. Alors ce qu’on vous demande, c’est de reconnaître l’échec du modèle. En fait, le fait de vous pencher aujourd’hui sur les inégalités dans le monde est un constat d’échec. Deuxièmement, en m’adressant maintenant à M. Malloch Brown, est-ce que vous pensez que le développement humain durable est conciliable avec la logique du marché, franchement?

(Mark Malloch)

Let me just respond to that and say, you know, we want a good debate, and we are here in Davos but as Walden Bello said, so was he last year, but he knows such things, as the Davos’ point of view to have a UN guest invited to allow the private sector to hear the UN’s view of the development goals. One is a brilliantly successful businessman who runs foundations which probably support many of you in Porto Alegre. And the other works for a corporation which has made a big push on social responsibility. So, when you say you understand that there is no Davos. It is a Davos which included Walden Bello last year, and many other NGO leaders and UN leaders this year. But what we are defending is the right for people to come together and discuss economics. Every bit as much as we defend the right for you to come together and debate these social issues and as a global solution we want to bring the two together. Now on sustainable development: sustainable development has several dimensions to it. It needs equity, it needs attention to its impact on non-renewable resources, but it also needs growth. We have almost half the world population living on less than 2 dollars a day. I don’t need to tell you that. And within the prescription for reducing poverty, there must be proper attention to growth. So, yes, global integration under the right terms is to me important and, working with Walden Bello and others, we are trying to look how we can make international trade serve the goals of development rather than the other way round at the moment, where too often international trade destroys jobs and undermines economies. But to throw the baby out with the bath water and say that to throw up protectionist barriers and limit trade is the solution is to my mind as extreme statement as those who say ‘Leave it all to the market’. Surely, for both of us in Porto Alegre or here the solution lies somewhere in the middle.

(Porto Alegre speaks)

Habla!
Sí. Efectivamente en Porto Alegre hemos analizado y hemos coincidido todos y todas de los desastres que ocasiona la Globalización y el Neoliberalismo. Creo que es necesario actuar con responsabilidad. Por ejemplo, los efectos en la economia para los grandes sectores de la sociedad civil, de campesinos, obreros, trabajadores, es terrible. Por ejemplo, las privatizaciones han desplazado a millones de trabajadores que realmente hoy deambulan por las calles buscando un empleo y no lo encuentran. En el campo hay una desatirculación total de los servicios estatales, en marcos jurídicos que no les permiten a los campesinos acceder a la tierra. Porque está privatizada, la tierra. E igualmente la tecnologia, los mercados. Nos hablan de Libre Mercado, pero nosotros no entendemos ese Libre Mercado porque los pequeños y medianos agricultores no entramos al mercado. Es un mercado controlado y manejado por las grandes Multinacionales. Entonces, es una situación trágica la que estamos viviendo. Millones y millones de personas en el mundo cada día aguantan hambre y miséria. La misma FAO, en 1996 reportó 800 millones de personas hambrientas en el mundo, y ahora se están reportando 845 millones. Eso significa que de no parar esta situación del modelo Neoliberal el 2005 vamos a estar en una situación terriblemente dificil para estas grandes mayorias. La pobreza se incrementa cada día más. Se privatiza todo. No hay acceso para nada de los sectores populares como tal. El Estado ahora es indiferente a los aspectos sociales como educación, salúd, vivienda, infraestructura, porque, según los teóricos, en este caso ustedes, creen y dicen de que eso lo va a resolver el mercado, el Libre Mercado. Entonces el Estado ya no se interesa por estos problemas sociales de su ciudadania. Entonces, señores, hay una situación muy dificil, trágica. De no parar este modelo injusto, excluyente, antihumano, la situación va a ser muy delicada. La inestabilidad social y política va a crecer. Seatle, Bangkok, Washingtong, Praga, y ahora que estamos en Porto Alegre, es un sentimiento total de repúdio y rechazo a estas políticas de exclusión del modelo Neoliberal. Este mundo hay que cambiarlo. Hay que cambiar estas políticas. Y el señor de Naciones Unidas, que está haí, deveria estar aquí, con nosotros. Es decir, y no con ustedes. Naciones Unidas tiene que tener una responsabilidad más grande de buscar un equilíbrio entre un mundo mejor para estas grandes mayorias. De manera, señores, que es necesario cambiar. Esos organismos internacionales como el Banco Mundial, Fondo Monetario Internacional, Organización Mundial del Comércio, no tienen razón de ser. Son ellos los responsables directos de que haya tanta pobreza y tanta exclusión. Nunca habíamos estado en una situación tan dramática como ahora. El mundo está dividido entre muchos, pero muchos que no tenemos nada, pobres, millones de pobres, y pocos ricos que acumulan cada vez más ganancias. Eso no puede ser, no puede ser. Definitivamente, nuestro llamado es ferviente y firme, de que tenemos que cambiar esta situación o nos exponemos a una confrontación. Que ya no será la Globalización de la economia sino la confrontación global entre los pueblos y los que dirigen el mundo como ustedes.

(Davos speaks)

(Bjog Edlung)

I would like to say a few words about what we, in business, possibly could do to help. First, I think it is a question of examining our own behavior because the only thing we can influence is the behavior of the people who work for us. And the behavior of the people who depend on us, such as our suppliers and, to a certain extent, our customers. For that we have to find a framework of behavior that has been born with the UN Global compact which includes sustainable development that is a balancing of the economic, environmental and social responsibilities of an enterprise. The framework of behavior is really a way to address the concerns and the real problems that are out there partly through what business can do. Business cannot be government business, cannot be more than mainly an economic player, but it can play its role in a way to help others that depend on it. And this is, I think, something that should be considered in the debate, and rather than trying to heating each other we should find ways of working together, because I think that mi amigo de Honduras que está ahí hablando tán fuerte sobre la globalización tiene que escuchar también.

(P. B.)

Patrice Barrat introduit le film vidéo sur le Forum Social Mondial à Porto Alegre.

P.B.
May I just say that it was Bjorn Edlun, Vice President of ABB speaking, (inaudible) self introduction at the beginning. And you’ll all have a chance to talk again but we’d like to show you, at this stage, another little film showing what the Porto Alegre Forum looks like.

So, this is a film by Gonzalo Arijon and Laurence Jourdan that…

Porto Alegre, if you could please send that tape and then we’ll continue this debate and maybe Mr John Ruggie who wants to answer to what have been said before…

They were not ready!

(Porto Alegre speaks)

Oded Grajew

Gostaria de fazer, uma colocação uma pergunta, para o senhor Soros... primeiro…

( PAUSE )( DAVOS)

O.Grajew
Gostaria de fazer uma pergunta para o senhor Soros, primeiro gostaria de ouvir os comentários do Senhor Soros sobre os seguintes dados : Em 1960 a distancia entre os 20% mais ricos da humanidade e os 20% mais pobres era de 30 vezes .Em 1998 esta distância subiu para 84 vezes. Eu também gostaria de fazer 3 perguntas para o senhor Soros. Em 1º lugar quanto dinheiro, quantos dólares , quantos trilhões de dólares estão hoje girando no mercado financeiro internacional ? A Segunda pergunta : Quantos dólares os países subdensenvolvidos pagaram em juros da divida externa nos últimos 20 anos ? E a última pergunta : Quantas crianças destes países subdesenvolvidos morrem de fome a cada dia ? Gostaría se o Senhor soubesse me responder.

(Davos speaks)

(George Soros)

But certainly, the difference between rich and poor has greatly increased in the last decade or two since we have had two globalizations in the sense of global financial markets. And, I think that, probably, certainly there has also been an increase in total value. A faster rate of growth than before, but the differences have become much greater and not enough is done to alleviate this increasing disparity. Just a sort of help to debate, I think I should clarify that there is a Davos. But, I think that we are sitting here perhaps not the best representatives of a Davos, because if we were, we probably wouldn’t be here. So, I think that all of us sitting here recognize the problems that you are stating, and what we could talk about in order to have a worldwide dialogue is ‘what can we do to correct these social injustices.?’ I don’t think that destroying the system is the best way because it is a machine for creating wealth. The previous speaker mentioned all the agriculture workers who lost their jobs, but I think that we have to recognize that multinationals actually produce, that very few workers produce more than the peasants on the land. So, we then have a problem of how do we find jobs for the people who have been desplaced. And I would very much like to hear your views on how could we change this, how could we improve the situation.

(Porto Alegre speaks)

O.Grajew
Se o Senhor responder as 3 perguntas que eu fiz talvez eu posso lhe dar uma idéia. Quanto dinheiro circula no mercado finaceiro internacional ? Quantos os países pagaram de júros nos últimos 20 anos, países subdesenvolvidos, e quantas crianças nestes países morrem de fome a cada dia ? Se o senhor me responder a essas 3 perguntas certamente nestas perguntas há já também as respostas para essas perguntas.

(Davos speaks)

(George Soros)

There are trillions of dollars circulating every day and I’m sure that there are millions of children dying. I don’t know the exact number.

(P.B.)
May I ask Mr. John Ruggie to answer the question that we had asked before: Why is the UN not in Porto Alegre represented or is it?. I know that Khofi Annan sent a message in writing to the World Social Forum few weeks ago. So, why is he not in Porto Alegre?

(John Ruggie)

First of all, the UN (Mark can speak to this issue) is there because some of his colleagues, in fact, are there. I think it’s important to be clear about the fact that there are many different social roles to be played and improved in the world in which we live. Khofi Annan’s visit here to Davos, in part, was again to challenge the business leaders themselves who did have an interest in improving the performance, the social justice, the distribution of benefits of the global economy because if those things don’t improve they are going to be out of business because the system is not sustainable. And he said that in a number of occasions. So, he’s here because this the best place to come to challenge the global business leaders. But, if I may, could I make another point. We are meeting in a small village in Switzerland. A century ago, Switzerland was a poor agricultural country. Today, it’s about as well integrated into the global economy as any country can be, and yet Switzerland has transformed itself to be extraordinarily successful in the distribution of wealth and in the protection of minority rights. There is a dialect of German spoken in this part of Switzerland which is archaic and which German speakers anywhere else in the world don’t understand. So, it is possible to be, if you will, integrated into the global economy, and to be successful domestically as a system of social justice, as a system that protects minority rights and protects and sustains cultural differentiation. How and why? In part, in large part, the issue is political and we have to devise a common political agenda. Building social safety nets is a political process. Protecting human rights is a political process. Now, I would like to discuss with our friends in Porto Alegre what a political agenda should look like at the international level as well as domestically. We are here to work with them because that’s what the UN does. We are here to fight poverty, to protect human rights, to protect the environment. We want to work with them. Let’s talk about how to do these things, that we all agree need to be done.

(P.B.)
I think that Bernard Cassen, President of ATTAC, want to say something.

(Porto Alegre speaks)

Bernard Cassen :

Je suis quand même surpris par le caractère incantatoire que revètent certains discours. Vous répétez global economy, économie globale, économie globale, économie globale, alors que plusieurs arguments qui vous ont été donnés, vous reconnaissez vous même M. Soros que les inégalités n’ont fait qu’augmenter. On vous a posé des questions mais on comprend bien que tout le monde n’ait pas les réponses sur lui sur le montant des capitaux spéculatifs qui circulent chaque jour dans le monde, sur le nombre d’enfants qui meurent chaque jour, qui est de l’ordre de plus de 20 000, et le représentant des Nations Unies nous dit "cette économie globale, elle n’est pas encore assez globale". Donc vous ne tirez aucune conséquence de l’échec total de vos politiques, qui d’ailleurs est présent dans vos rapports, vous ne lisez même pas vos propres rapports, des organismes de la famille des Nations Unies, ou même de la Banque mondiale. Donc je crois qu’il est significatif que M. Soros nous ait dit que maintenant qu’il y a eu des manifestations, il a compris qu’il y avait de la pauvreté. Mais dans quelle planète vivez-vous pour ne pas avoir remarqué ce phénomène bien antérieurement? Je crois qu’il est important que vous quittiez cette planète, ce trône où vous vous situez, que vous quittiez les lunettes, dans le cas de M. Soros, du mégaspéculateur, et pour revenir, en quelque sorte, sur terre. Visiblement nous ne vivons pas dans le même monde. Alors vous nous demandez s’il y a un agenda alternatif, s’il y a des mesures à prendre. Bien oui, nous pouvons dès à présent vous répondre, avant même la fin du Forum social mondial, et vous serez heureux d’ailleurs d’avoir le point de vue de la table de Davos sur ce sujet. Par exemple, nous disons, il faut taxer très lourdement la spéculation financière, sur les monnaies, il faut mettre en place une Taxe Tobin, de manière non seulement à diminuer l’instabilité financière, je suis désolé pour vous, M. Soros, ça vous retirera du travail, mais également pour produire des sommes qui serviront à satisfaire des besoins sociaux dont nous avons parlés. Deuxième idée que nous vous suggérons, c’est la remise, l’annulation complète de la dette publique du Tiers Monde, tout simplement parce que cette dette publique a déjà été payée plusieurs fois. Alors, voilà deux mesures très simples, est-ce que vous êtes prêts à, Davos, à franchir cette nuit du 4 août de la Révolution française, à redescendre sur terre, à vous placer non plus du point de vue de la finance et des multinationales, mais du point de vue des sociétés, nous vous demandons simplement de redescendre sur terre, de revenir avec nous, dans la société, et non pas de continuer à voir la société comme une ressource pour vous, pour vos spéculations, pour vos profits.

(Davos speaks)

It may surprise you that I am actually in favor of Tobin Tax. So, this is one issue that we could discuss and I think that there are some problems with it, technical difficulties, but I think it could be very useful in providing income to the international institution that is concerned with providing global public goods, that is to say, alleviating or fighting infectious diseases, providing funds for universal primary education and so on. So, it happens to be against my personal interest as a speculator, but I think it would be in the common interest to have such a tax.

(P.B.)
Anybody else in favor? You? You know what the "Tobin Tax" is?

(Mark Malloch)

The reference was made that we don’t read our own reports. It’s well known that the first promotion internationally of the Tobin Tax was in the UNDP Human Development Report. It is also the UNDP Human Development Report which has been quoted about this new level of inequality. I think we've got to say it again: it may be convenient for you to try make George Soros so this panel character two versions of international capitalism. We can’t say how much we would like to be with you in Porto Alegre. We made it clear I have colleagues there in Porto Alegre. We came to discuss what changes could we make together to make the world a better place. Clearly, there is an intellectual political difference of view about open economies and where do they lead to open societies. But there is no difference of view that people are getting poorer, that there needs to be a new political agenda, a new social agenda. And I would urge you not to fall into the trap of those you’re attacking and caricature you opponents and pretend that anybody who wants to take a few hours out there at Davos took the schedule to try to hear your views in Porto Alegre. By doing that is some champion of global capitalism. I’m sure that if Wolden had been here this year he would be here listening to what you have to say. We want to hear your views. We are not here to fight with you. We are here to try to find solutions.

(Porto Alegre speaks)

Hebe de Bonafini

Señores, ustedes ya luchan contra nosotros. Señores, ustedes son nuestros enemigos. Son hipócritas en sus respuestas. Contesten cuantos niños matan por día con sus planes. Respondan ! Cuantas madres tenemos que seguir aguantando la muerte por la Globalización o el Capitalismo o el nombre que ustedes le quieran poner. Respondan señores ! Son como monstros que se comen todo, que tienen cabeza y barriga pero no corazón ! Como madre les pregunto: cuantos niños matan por día ?! Señor Soros, con esa cara de hipócrita, sonriente, muriendose de risa ante la muerte de millones de niños por hambre! Conteste, señor Soros ! Míreme a la cara si se anima !

(Davos speaks)

George Soros

I am looking at your face and I am smiling because that’s the only thing I can do. I’m trying to have a dialogue with you but you don’t seem to want to have any dialogue with me. So we can as well stop talking.

(John Ruggie)

I think that in the interest of keeping the dialogue going, one of my friends in Porto Alegre was talking before about the landless farmers and the plight that they face. There is an international agenda to be pursued here which I ask again to work with us. For example, we, the EU has an extensive agricultural subsidy program. Something like $350 billion dollars a year. What are some of the consequences for third world agricultural exports? They are severe. One of my colleagues made a calculation not long ago that we could put every cow in the EU into first class flying around the world. That’s how much money is being spent in agricultural subsidies in the EU. We must ensure market access for agricultural exports from developing countries. That’s a major, major contribution to ending poverty in developing countries. Similarly, with regard to such exports is textiles. A commitment was made in the most recent round of trade negotiation to dismantle the multifiber agreement. To this date, most of the industrialized countries have done nothing to implement that. And Third World textile exports are still subject to protectionism and to quotas. We must fight to end those. Because, as Mark said before, development does require growth and growth requires exports in areas that developing countries can export, and textiles and agriculture certainly are among those. We also need to fight hard to ensure much greater corporate social responsibility. I know that our friend Grajet is sitting on the other side and I am very glad to see you. We are very happy to work with Instituto ETHOS in Brazil to bring greater social responsibility into the corporate sector because that too is an important step to take. So, there are many many things that we can do to work together to advance the cause of the poor, to advance social justice in this world. But, I’m afraid George Soros is correct: that we are going to make very little progress if we shout across each other, shout at each other across this space bridge that is designed to enhance dialogue.

P.B.
At this stage of the debate, may I ask to the Porto Alegre panelists, since the goal of the World Social Forum is, to say that,‘another world is possible’, do as Bernard Cassen did, that is, to suggest certain things that the gentlemen here might accept as new steps towards another globalization.

(Porto Alegre speaks)

Sandra Cabral

Eu gostaría de propor uma nova agenda, que o que me antecedeu em Davos pedía. Esta nova agenda só é possivel primeiro: se a gente aprender o que é diálogo. Diálogo não presupõe concordância com tudo, presupõe inclusive ter a paciência de ouvir inclusive aquilo que se julga agressão. Primeira coisa, ou não se pode continuar dorando a pilula. Segundo, é a mudança da agenda. Eu acho que não há paz nem equilíbrio suficiente no mundo para que Davos possa se dar ao luxo de descutir as questões sociais, de melhorar a Globalização. Nós, aqui em Porto Alegre, no Brasil, e no 3º mundo e nos países emergentes, nós discutimos economia, sim ! Nós defendemos,diagnosticamos, sabemos quantas crianças morrem, sabemos quantos trilhões circulam por dia, nós fazemos os diagnósticos, mas nós discutimos economia, sim !E esta economia, esta nova agenda, pressupõe discutir um novo modelo econômico. Um novo modelo econômico onde os organismos internacionais não imponhãm as regras dos ditos países pobres e os obriguem a fazer os ajustes extamente nas políticas que os senhores agora dizem defender. Eu acho que é essa a hipocrisia que a companheira da Plaza de Mayo se referia, e diálogo pressupõe discussões fortes, sim !! É preciso que nós estabeleçamos essa nova agenda. Nós aqui em Porto Alegre, assim como disse o nosso companheiro da ATTAC, não só apartir de Porto Alegre, há tempos temos contruído, temos elaborado, temos colocado à disposição dos senhores novas alternativas, um novo modelo econômico. Só que é um dialogo de surdo, a gente fala, fala, fala, e vocês respondem com repressão,vocês respondem com ironía , com hipocrisía. Esta nova agenda só é possível se houver de fato respeito. Aí sim, nós poderemos estar virando de ponta à cabeça .Aí sim, nós poderemos estar construído o equilíbrio, com paz, com harmonia, se houver uma sociedade com distribuição de renda, uma sociedade, que de fato, coloque a distribuição da riqueza feita pela humanidade nas mãos da maioria.

(Davos speaks)

(Bjorg Edlung)

I think I would like to say a few things that are important. I’m here because I think we can only find solutions if we work together. I totally agree with what you say. I’m also here and I would like to explain to you why I think that we belong together and to give you a personal anecdote, which is more than an anecdote; it is a very sad and terrible truth. My son-in-law who comes from Argentina lost his father in the military dictatorship when he was 4 years old. So, I understand the anger that some of you feel in the situation where you’re in, but we are here and I am here as a representative of business because we see that something is lacking in maintaining a sound balance or creating a sound balance in our world. There’s a globalized and opened and I don’t think we can do much about it becoming even more globalized. And I think we have found the way forward. That’s working together, finding ways to integrate, a dialogue with all different stakeholders in the society, business, organizations, such as UN development found, local governments and talk about real concrete situations on the ground: where a factory is being built, where a road is being built, where a power line is being built, where somebody may want to build a dam or not to create economic development through electricity. Whatever the situation is. It’s only by sitting down and blowing off some steam like this for a couple of hours before we start to getting into the project. But in the end, we have to agree with something that we can achieve together. We have to decide whether we want to make a difference or whether we want to make a point. The point has been made. Let’s start to make a difference.

(Porto Alegre speaks)

Njoki Njehu

I think that it is important to start by responding to a couple of the things that I have been saying before the last speaker, before going on to some of the proposals that we have, which are not new, and too very simple and very direct to say, but this is not about letting off steam, let’s be very clear about that. This is not about acquiring your understanding. This is about making or tracking a new path, saying that we have been doing enough talking, that has been enough talking. We know where the problem is, we need to address it. The first question I would like to ask is: ‘The UN has had a UN special structure adjustment program. Is the UN willing to make a statement and say: "Right, millions of people in the global South have been saying: ‘stop structure adjustment immediately’".

Second question on debt cancellation: "Not debt relief, not debt management. Like the Epic initiative. Is the UN really to say and to put its political power behind it, debt cancellation, talk about debt cancellation without structure adjustment programs again? Is the UN willing to say that the UN Global Contact is highly, highly and fatally flawed because it gives blue washes. Multinationals corporations like Nike and Shell, organizations multinational corporations that are being forced by some of the minorities that are representatives from the UN talk about having the interests and the rights protected, the case of Algoni in Nigeria is very well known. Other UN agencies, like the UNEP (United Nations Environmental Program), around the environmental protection, not management, not cable trading, not all of those processes and not all of those techniques that we have been hearing about. There is a question here for me about the intent of multinational corporations, of the UN versus the outcome. The outcome is that in Africa, 19 thousand children, according to the UN, are dying every single day because of debt 19000 children. This is genocide. More children are dying each year in Africa than died in the holocaust. We have to talk about these facts and to really ask directly. That’s not talk around. Those are very specific questions. Are there actions coming from the UN or more talk? Thank you.

Mark Malloch

Let’s take the two issues. My colleague John will talk about the Global Compact, but let me talk about debt and economic policies. The UN has repeatedly been on record most recently in the Millennium Declaration that the needs to be more debt relief, than under the Epic initiative. We are pressing for more radical deeper debt relief. However, it’s not the UN management which has the last word on it, but it is the governmental process. And governments are willing through the UN to press for more debt relief. They are not willing to press for all debt being retained off because, you know the argument, they believe that there must be a relationship between debt and performance. In other words, countries which perform well, which spend money on education and health should get a greater debt relief than those which don’t. But we all agree that we’ve got to lift the burden of debt of the poor in Africa. Children have been dying tragically in Africa for many years. It did not stop with the debt. It did not stop with globalization. It belongs in the horrors of poverty, conflict and broken down healthcare systems. Those problems have not been solved by globalization but they were not created by globalization. And whether it is in trying to attract more development systems, trying to get more growth and investment, we are struggling to end the cause of those children’s death, which is poverty. It is not debt relief. Debt relief is part of the solution. But it is giving them and their parents a decent living, and that cannot be reduced to just very simplistic slogans.

(John Ruggie)

On the Global Compact, I could just follow up with a few remarks. The initiative of the Secretary General announced here in Davos a couple of years ago on the Global Compact is an attempt to bring together all of the relevant stakeholders in society around the issue of corporate social responsibility and to get corporations to enact in their own corporate spheres principles that we’ve drawn from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the ILO Labor Standards and the Real Principles on Environment and Development. We, in fact, like to believe that it is a microcosm of a desirable model of global governance. Why? Because it involves governments that define the principles; it involves corporations whose behavior we want to change; it involves international labor; the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions. Labor are the people in whose hands the concrete process of global production takes place. It involves civil society organizations representing the wider community of stakeholders and it involves the United Nations as a facilitator, as a convener, and as an arbiter, if you will. It fully a multistakeholder process. It does not certify companies, it does not reward companies, and there is very little opportunity for blue wash, as you call it, and you cannot cite a single example of a corporation being cited by the UN in any kind of bluewash sense. Our sole purpose is to identify good practices and to promote them and to work with all of the other stakeholders to do that. We think it is an example of progressive change. We believe it is an example of how one can make a difference even if only in small steps. But I believe it was chairman Mao who said that every long march begins with a small step.

Let me differ from you a little bit on the Global Compact. I think it is well intended, but it does have an element of white wash or blue wash in it. I know that you are full of good will and I recognize your sincerity. But it’s very hard for business to sort of step out of its skin. Business is basically run for profit and it’s, of course, desirable that business should have a greater social consciousness. It’s good, but to think that this could change the world, that this could bring about enough change that is needed, I think I cannot go along with that.

P. B.

Mr Soros, are you trying to get yourself invited to Porto Alegre next year?

(George Soros)

You know, I can understand the anger, but let, let…

It is actually in my book. So, I’m public with this.

P. B.

Yes, Mr Bello…

W. Bello

Yes. Hello, Davos. This is really quite absurd. We had 4 interventions in the row in your side all saying the same thing, all saying the same slogans, OK? You are the guys who are not listening. You don’t want to dialogue. You want to monologue. We want to change the rules of the game. We want more speakers on our side to speak on a more continuous fashion because we feel that you are unfairly taking advantage of this format and that’s so typical of the Davos mentality. So Trevor, please.

Trevor M.

Yeah. And I think that I had someone complaining that had some black people to lined up to join the Davos panel. I’m not surprised that they’re not there because I think they’re ashamed to be seen with the delights of George Soros. They know that they were elected by millions of people in their respective countries. I come from South Africa. We still had a hope that liberation, freedom would bring houses, would bring jobs, would bring good education for our people. But since the World Bank, since our governments got closer to people like George Soros, we have lost a million jobs, as I am talking now, we had an outbreak of cholera because the government was forced by the likes of Soros to introduce privatization of basic services like water and electricity. So as far as I am concerned, the gentlemen in Davos are in the minority in the world today. I think the future is beginning today here in Porto Alegre and I think the fact that we chose Porto Alegre is a clear indication of things to come. The Workers’ Party of Brazil controlling this State and this city is showing through processes like the people’s budget that we want an economy run by the people which is responsive to the needs of the people. Thank you.

Aminata:
Merci. Je voudrais enchaîner. Vous savez, l’Afrique, c’est tellement la région du monde qui souffre le plus de cette fameuse globalisation. Je ne vais pas m’attarder sur l’état des lieux. L’Afrique est en train d’exploser. Vous faites partie de ces instances qui donnaient des instructions quand aux élections, nous passons d’élection en élection. Je voudrais poser la question suivante: est-ce que vous n’avez pas l’impression qu’il y a un lien absolument étroit entre la nature des réformes économiques qui sont imposées à nos pays, et les guerres civiles ? Ça c’est une question. Moi je crois que ceux qui sont à Davos aujourd’hui, nous ne les avons pas élus. Nous ne vous avons pas donné le mandat de décider pour nos pays. Et je crois que l’un d’entre vous nous posait des questions sur la question des droits de l’homme. Impunité pour impunité, qui va punir ? Ceux qui confisquent le pouvoir que nous avons confié à nos élus.

Diane:
Je pense que, effectivement, on est au coeur un peu du questionnement de la difficulté du dialogue, vous nous présentez l’économie de marché comme une fatalité. La marche mondiale des femmes a voulu effectivement mener des actions au delà de 161 pays pour amener justement ce questionnement sur l’économie de marché, ses impacts sur les femmes, ses impacts économiques mais ses impacts sociaux aussi. Je pense que le dialogue est très difficile à partir du moment où vous le prenez de cette façon là, et qu’on ne questionne pas effectivement le besoin à une échelle globale de parler du modèle économique. Je pense aussi que l’on doit regarder les effets multiples, on a parlé de l’effet de l’impact des guerres civiles en Afrique, je pourrais parler aussi du trafic sexuel des femmes, de l’esclavage des femmes. Dans un rapport récent du PNUD, on parle d’une augmentation, d’une réalité où au delà de 4 millions de femmes sont vendues, c’est-à-dire femmes et fillettes, sont vendues par année. Vendues pour du travail domestique, des mariages forcés, du trafic sexuel. Et quand on analyse un peu plus d’où viennent ces femmes vendues là, on voit que ce sont des femmes du sud qui sont vendues vers le nord, la même direction dans laquelle la dette est due. Et pour nous, c’est des questions qu’on voulait discuter, on a même demandé et obtenu des rendez-vous avec la Banque mondiale, le Fond monétaire international, avec le Secrétaire général des Nations unies. À la Banque mondiale, tout ce à quoi nous avons eu droit, c’est une petite leçon de "allez donc lire les programmes que la Banque mondiale offre aux femmes". Aux Nations Unies, on a eu malheureusement le discours que la mondialisation a ses bons côtés et c’est une fatalité, nous devons faire avec. Et je pense que le Forum social mondial et le mouvement des femmes qui est présent ici, au Forum Social Mondial vous dit, cette fatalité là, on n’y croit pas, et on pense qu’il y a urgence pour l’ensemble de la planète, et les hommes et les femmes de discuter des fondements de votre projet à Davos. Je voudrais aussi savoir, M. Soros, je suis contente de savoir que vous êtes prêt à perdre de l’argent, avec en autre la taxe Tobin, je voudrais savoir, est-ce qu’à Davos, vous faites avancer cette idée là auprès de vos collègues ?

(Davos speaks)

(P.B.)
At this stage, does Porto Alegre want to continue speaking now? We have 20 minutes left. So, maybe... OK! Go ahead.

(Porto Alegre speaks)

Fred (Job for justice)

Gentlemen, I think you hear a righteous anger amongst my brothers and sisters sitting around this room with me, and we need you there to do something for us. You are there with corporate leaders, with business leaders, world economic leaders at the World Economic Forum, we need you to help us relay that this anger that we saw in Seattle, that we saw in D.C., that we saw in Prague, that we saw in Bangkok, is still out there. Nothing has been done to mitigate this anger, there has been no movement to oppose what the people have made the Tobin tax, or the elimination of debt of the poorest country of the world. Folks will be out there, whether it is in April in Quebec city, whether it is in Genoa over the summer, whether it is in Washington DC again this fall. There is a movement that is growing not just here in Porto Alegre, but around the world of people that wanto to talk about solutions, but are angry when their solutions are not heard, are angry when movement isn´t made, are angry about what is happening day to day in each of our countries. So please, gentlemen, send that message to your colleagues there in Davos.

(P.B.)
So, before we try to reach some conclusions, just let me introduce an NGO which was in the World Economic Forum : (inaudible) who is next to me and explain why...

(Woman)
Hello, I’m here because I have to choose between being in Brazil and here. It seems to me that I would be more comfortable to be in Brazil and it would be the hard work to be in Davos. I think I could do something more useful to be in Davos, being able to take some of the society’s questions to the people here, and there is 2 days left off the Davos meeting, so, are there any specific projects, small practical particular things that you could say, mention or suggest to these people here in Davos so that we could serve as a bridge here?

(Porto Alegre speaks)

Njoki Njehu

May I say, may I take the stage and say you don´t represent us, we will not use you as our messenger, there have been hundreds of sessions where people have been talking about the alternatives, the initiatives that are coming from all over the global south that are innovative, that are trying to not only chart a new future, but also deal with the the crisis that we face. And I want to correct your mistaken impression that being in Porto Alegre is no hard work. The people who are here have been working hard not just at this conference, but all their lives, and they will continue to work. So, please do not insult us by assuming that you know what is going on here.

(Davos speaks)

(Woman)
It is not an insult, in your film Maria, you said that it was fun to be with people who are more like the people I am used to working with, my brothers and sisters in that sense. I would have found it fun. Many of the people I know are already there and I would love to be with you. That’s all I mentioned, that’s not an insult.

(P.B.)
Now we have about 15 minutes left. Do you want to continue arguing or some of you want to suggest that this dialogue could lead somewhere. Maybe... Yes, in Porto Alegre.

(Porto Alegre speaks)

R. Alegria

Hace ya ratos, con los organismos financieros internacionales, con los empresarios, entre nosotros hablamos de la pobreza, y hablamos y hablamos. Creo que ahora hay que hablar de la distribución de la riqueza. Ése es el punto clave. Por ejemplo, volver a los proceso de reforma agraria, distribuir la tierra para los campesinos que no la tienen. De esa forma se puede combatir la probreza, definitivamente. Pero, estas políticas globalizantes, lo que hacen es concentrar más la tierra en pocas manos, entre las transnacionales y desplazar a los campesinos. El Sr. de las Naciones Unidas sabe que en la Unión Europea, apesar de destinar muchos recursos para la agricultura, los beneficios sólo son para los grandes productores, y que en Europa 250 mil pequeños agricultores ya no pueden vivir en el campo y tienen que abandonar sus parcelas. Los subsídios, generalmente, en la Unión Europea están para los grandes y para fomentar la agricultura industrializada de agro-exportación, que genera damping en los mercados nuestros, que destruyen nuestros mercados. Hay que cambiar, también, esa política de ese famoso Libre Mercado. Hay que fortalecer los mercados internos para los pequeños y medianos agricultores. De manera que hay que democratizar el acceso a los recursos naturales. Además de la tierra, los bosques. Pero, los bosques, como riqueza natural, están también concentrados en empresas grandes, como multinacionales. Entonces, señores, hay que hablar de distribución de riquezas. No hay que tenerle miedo a las Reformas Agrárias. Esa política del Banco Mundial de acceso a la tierra no tiene éxito. Definitivamente no tiene éxito. Hay que destinar recursos para un verdadero desarrollo rural integrado. Así como están las políticas, lo que se está generando es más pobreza. Y seria muy importante que ustedes en vés de imponer políticas en los gobiernos, seria más bién apoyar políticas nacionales, de los Estados, en función a las realidades de nuestros pueblos. Definitivamente, ahora lo que hay son políticas dictadas desde afuera para favorecer intereses, como por ejemplo el pago de la Deuda Externa, y no interesa el beneficio social y economico de estas grandes mayorias. Yo creo que es necesario estructurar esa Agenda, pero orientada a distribuir riqueza. Nuestros paises son ricos en recursos naturales, muchos paises son ricos en recursos naturales pero tienen una población tremendamente empobrecida. Entonces, lo que significa es que hay una injusta distribución de la riqueza. Yo creo que, ahora, devemos tomar medidas en función al combate a la pobreza, pero distribuyendo riqueza.

Bernard Cassen

Vous avez appelé au dialogue, nous l’avons engagé. Mais il faut bien se rendre compte que nous connaissons parfaitement vos positions. Nous lisons vos livres, M. Soros, nous lisons les rapports des Nations Unies. Vous connaissez, je l’imagine, vous pouvez connaître parfaitement nos positions, donc ça peut être un dialogue de sourds si on continue comme ça. Il vous reste encore une journée à Davos, puisque le Forum économique mondial doit se terminer comme le nôtre demain 30 janvier. Donc, il vous reste encore tout le temps, par exemple, de faire signer, excusez-moi d’utiliser une méthode qui nous est familière, une pétition, je demande donc à M. Soros, je demande aux représentants des Nations unies, de rédiger un texte, si vous en avez besoin, on pourra vous le rédiger, demandant l’annulation de la dette publique du Tiers monde, premièrement. Deuxièmement, la mise en place de la Taxe Tobin. Troisièmement, l’interdiction totale des paradis fiscaux, que vous connaissez fort bien M. Soros, j’en suis persuadé, et vous pourrez d’ailleurs nous donner des conseils pour cette mesure. Rédigez ces pétitions, soumettez-les à vos collègues, patrons de transnationales, grands financiers, hommes politiques qui sont venus vous rendre hommage, et puis on verra à la fin de la journée de demain,30 janvier, combien de signatures il y a, et si vous arrivez à avoir un nombre conséquent de signatures, nous considérons que ce dialogue est fructueux. Sinon, et bien, nous serons obligés d’employer d’autres moyens, des moyens démocratiques évidemment, pour créer un nouveau rapport de forces qui vous fera réfléchir un peu plus et qui vous permettra, à votre seconde tournée de signatures, d’en avoir davantage. Voilà ce que nous vous proposons, et à travers vous, à tout le Forum économique mondial de Davos.

(Davos speaks)

George Soros

We would probably not collect too many signatures. We can talk about it, but I don’t think, we are not representatives of Davos here. So, I don’t think it will be too successful in getting signatures. Yet, I would like to appeal to you that I see that you are angry and I think that you have reasons to be angry, but anger can be a very bad counselor sometimes. And it can often hurt your own interests. I suggest to you that your anger is misdirected when your are attacking the international institutions because the international institution like the World Bank actually has as its mission to alleviate poverty. It’s a bureaucratic institution it is an intergovernmental institution and because of that it does not work very well. So, it does need to be changed. But, I think it’s the governments that need to be persuaded through their electors. And I think that a lot of the poverty actually originates at home. I mean, Africa is a rich continent but it has got really rotten governments. And the only difference I can see between a resource-rich country and a resource-poor country is that the resource-rich country has a more corrupt government than the resource-poor ones.

(Bjorg Edlung)

I would like to try to bring back to the level...

(Porto Alegre speaks)

François Houtard

Je voudrais dire aussi quelque chose : j’ai l’impression que Mr Soros est un excellent spéculateur. M. Soros est certainement un très bon spéculateur, mais je lui donnerais tout à fait zéro en sciences politiques et en analyses sociales. Il n’a véritablement pas la possibilité de faire une véritable analyse sociale des rapports de forces qui existent dans le monde. De savoir comment le capital agit vis-à-vis du travail, de savoir comment se construit la richesse, à quel prix, d’un point de vue social. Et en ignorant tout cela, en faisant le mort devant des situations comme celles-là, on peut donc tenir un discours purement théorique, qui paraît tout à fait rationnel et qui n’a rien à voir avec la réalité.

H. de Bonafini

Bueno, yo quiero decir que el señor sólo sabe cuánto dinero circula, pero no sabe cuántos niños matan con sus políticas tan represoras y tan asesinas. Quisiera que este señor, cuando se mire al espejo y se le rompa, vea los millones y millones de niños que por la política ésta de globalización están muriendo en el mundo. En nombre de esos niños y de esas madres que no saben leer ni escribir, que no saben que existe Davos, que no saben que existe Porto Alegre, pero sí saben que todos los días uno de sus hijos va a morir. Por su culpa, señores, por la culpa de ustedes, por la hipocresia, por la mentira, y sí tenemos rabia convertida en ódio. Pero es un sentimiento y hay que ponerlo en lo que corresponde. Los odiamos señores, porque son la muerte para los pueblos. Los odiamos.

Aminata Traoré

M. Soros, en tant qu’Africaine, je suis désolée. Je crois que ce que vous venez de dire est une insulte à l’Afrique. Vous nous avez toujours mis dos à dos avec les gouvernants. Ils sont certainement corrompus, ils ont leurs défauts, mais vous continuez à nous donner l’impression que le problème est en Afrique et la solution est ailleurs. Je voulais tout simplement vous dire que le problème aujourd’hui est ailleurs, la solution en Afrique.

N. Njehu

I would like to add that I think, this kind of characterization ignores the rule of the very international agencies that you were talking about, Mr. Soros, the complicity of the World Bank and the IMF we can name country after country: Zaire, my home country Kenya, South Africa, the Apartheid, Liberia, Somalia, all these countries where, yes we have our problems, but those problems are compounded by the complicity of both the International Community including the World Bank and the IMF. We’ve talked about and we have a proposal I’ll be putting forward to these institutions, including the United Nations, to implement a UN truth commission on debt and structural adjustment looking at where the money went for debt that is now being demanded from African governments as debt payment. Who was loaned that money and who knew it and what they did with it. Yes, we have corrupt people, but that money is not in the banks in Nairobi or Kinshasa. It’s actually in Switzerland, in London, in New York. I think we need to be very honest and to point the finger where it is and also to point the finger at the people who are collaborating; the people and institutions, the agents and agencies that facilitated that corruption. Mobutu would not have taken billions of dollars, or Somoza in Nicaragua, or Marcos in the Philippines if the World Bank and the IMF had not really given them that money.

P.B.
At this stage, Mr Bello, just, I want to say, we need to make some conclusions, so you are welcome to start but we’ve only less than 10 minutes left, so if you can each of you can make a conclusion or suggest something he has on mind to create conditions to a better dialogue maybe, so, Mr Bello, please…

(Porto Alegre speaks)

W.Bello
Well, let me just make a statement, because the delegate have to make a conclusion. I’m very disturbed by the fact that corporations in Davos are having themselves face us represented by two members of the UN. I think this is a terrible prostitution of the UN and I think this shows that under the leadership of Khofi Annan in whom we have so much hope, the UN has no linked itself solidly to the movements and interests of transnational corporations. The only thing that I would like to say is that Davos was founded in the 1970. It has been 30 years and poverty has increased, inequality has increased, environmental disequilibria has increased so that we can say that Davos and the (inaudible) I’d like to say. That I think I speak for many people throughout the world, if we say that we join our brothers and sisters in Davos and the streets of Davos who are saying that now it’s the time to shut down the world economic forum. It has outlive its time like the IMF and the World Band and the WTO and is a jurassic institution and needs to be given a burial at this point.

(Davos speaks)

(Mark Malloch)

Look, Walden, I really, I know better than you’ve just said about the UN representing Davos. We were invited by the organizers of this debate to come and dialogue with you about solutions to the problem of poverty. We were not asked to come here and represent Davos. Davos, as you heard at the beginning, refused to be represented at this Forum. You won’t eat up anyone who is put in front of you. One of your colleagues from an NGO movement offers a quite observation that you subscribed to one short year ago that it was worth trying to come and take these arguments to the leaders at Davos. Now you put her in the dark and accuse her of not representing your views and the views of those in Porto Alegre. Listen to yourselves. We came here tonight to reach out to you. That is the job of the UN. It is not to take, to promote the position of Davos or of the World Bank or of the IMF. And I see sniggering behind raised hands. Fine. The UN’s job is to listen and to try to find solutions to world poverty that all people can support and I am amazed that our attempt to hear the voice of Porto Alegre as well as Davos is turned back on us that we are somehow here representing or championing the capitalism of Davos. We are not.

(P.B.)
Since we are represented by business, Bjorg Edlung, would you like to comment or conclude?

(Bjorg Edlung)

I don’t want to conclude because I don’t think the voice of business would be the last voice you hear here. But, certainly, there are some of my observations. There is a fundamental misunderstanding, I think, also in the way we are talking to each other here. We come here because we meet people. This is not the world economic government. This a forum for dialogue between people of different opinions, from different parts of the society. That’s number 1 about Davos itself. Number 2: if there isn’t a way forward under a framework such as the UN is proposing, what is the way forward? I hear nationalism mixed with fairly absurd economic notions. Absurd because you have to create wealth before you can distribute it. It is not that the money is sitting somewhere in a big box and someone can decide to take that money and distribute in a different way. It would be naive to think that, and I am sorry to be so brutal in my language. Coming back to what business can do, we can try to be a constructive player together with other groups in society to find a better way forward. I would like to invite the participants in Porto Alegre to take part in local versions of the Global Compact when we come around to try to throw the stone in the pond to see the rings spread. I don’t think it’s a solution for everything, but it would be a way to do something together on the ground where it matters.

(P.B.)
So, please, in Porto Alegre, can you answer to this and conclude on your side and then we’ll finish this program?

(Porto Alegre speaks)

Njoki NJEHU

Sure! I am the person who responded to the NGO representative. I don’t know her and there are some people there in Davos that I know and I tell them the same thing. We have been talking about democratic principles. I don’t think any of us was consulted what NGO representatives were going to be present in Davos. So, that statement stands that I am not represented and I don’t think the organization that I work for is represented. On the UN and its presence in Davos, yes listening but chose to send the highest representatives with Davos and I don’t know what people within the UN system were sent to Porto Alegre. Certainly, they have not been very visible to me in the workshops and plenaries that I attended. If it’s about listening to economic ideas and alternatives, there are plenty of them in Porto Alegre and I invite all of you to come next time to Porto Alegre and work as hard as we have in all of these workshops and hear some of these ideas. It’s familiar to hear that kinds of lines that we have heard from many people from the panelists about not having the power to change anything willing to listen, not being the right agency, not being the right governant, and the rest of it, and I have to say that I’ve never heard anyone who took responsibility for the system, even those who participate in it at different levels. At the IMF and the World Bank, we are told that they do debating of the G-7 and sometimes of the US Treasury or someone else,…

P.B.:
Please, we are going to loose… We are going to loose the satellite link, so…

Njoki NJEHU

… and we are saying that we are the people, whether it’s our governments or the governments of the world, we are the people, we elected them and, therefore, they need to be listening and you need to be sending them back to us to listen to us as we demand justice. Not pity, not just more aid, but solidarity and opportunity to have lives of dignity and lives of justice. Thank you.

(P.B.)
Thank you. Please, just to conclude this program, could someone answer to Porto Alegre. Will any of you go to Porto Alegre next year?

-No one invited me!

Yes. We clearly have to go. And I want to make sure that you know will take to all people we see here the message of just how angry you are. We have to find ways to overcome this. This is not healthy what we’ve heard tonight.

-(George Soros)

And I would like to say that I might have gone to Porto Alegre next year, but I don’t feel like going now.

(P.B.)
OK Porto Alegre. Well, I want to thank everybody for taking part in this dialogue. It’s the first try. I’m not sure that television can solve all those problems, but at least you started a dialogue. So, maybe you can continue by going to Porto Alegre or we can organize something similar at another time. So thank you everybody and enjoy the rest of your Forums and try to carry the messages in both places, OK? Thank you. This is the end.