Speech by the Minister for Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation, Lilianne Ploumen, at the SID conference

Toespraak | 07-03-2013

But some people still haven’t accepted it ─ they stubbornly cling to cassette tapes.

Of course, hanging on to tapes is nostalgic, quirky and endearing.

But it’s rather marginal too.

The same goes for sticking to old-school development cooperation.

No doubt endearing, but also rather marginal in today’s world.

After all, things have changed radically in the last few decades.

New problems, new players, new playing field ─ you know the drill.

But out there, some people find it difficult to get used to it.

They regard the business community as a Trojan horse.

They still carry the ‘White Man’s Burden’.

They close their eyes to the decline of the West and the rise of the rest.

I never grow tired of explaining, ladies and gentlemen,

that these ideas are like playing an MP3 on a cassette player.

They don't match reality.

And without a sense of reality, real progress isn’t possible.

So, ladies and gentlemen, I warmly welcome your Building Blocks.

They are realistic ─ for example in stating

that ODA alone cannot bring about development,

that policies and instruments evolve over time

and that government is no longer the only major player involved.

But at the same time, the Building Blocks are ─ what I would call ─ basic.

Yes, global peace and justice is very important,.

Yes, governing and financing global public goods is one of the challenges.

Yes, inclusive and sustainable economic development is crucial.

And, of course, we need global governance and a new definition of ODA.

These things sound all too familiar.

And they’re hard to disagree with.

What the Building Blocks lack, in my opinion however, are practical proposals.

New proposals for putting theory into practice ─ that would be even more helpful.

Or, to quote Elvis Presley, a little less conversation, a little more action please.

The new Dutch government, ladies and gentlemen, is putting theory into practice.

For example, by appointing a Minister for Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation ─ me.

Some people think this combination is a toxic brew.

They fear that foreign trade will overshadow development cooperation.

I disagree ─ and here’s why.

Up to ─ let’s say ─ the eighties, major economies took the form of organised capitalism.

Then, two important things happened.

First: the rise of neo-liberalism.

And second: the emergence of globalisation.

Social democrats ─ here and elsewhere ─ responded to globalisation in a pragmatic way.

They sought new ways to promote traditional values.

Traditional values like equal worth, responsibility and opportunity for all.

Their key argument was that globalisation brings greater risk and insecurity.

But it was not the role of the welfare state to shield individuals from these risks.

Instead, it should provide people with the social capital to respond to those risks.

This meant no automatic commitment to either the public or the private sector.

It meant market and community; wealth creation and social justice.

In short: it meant a necessary reassessment of markets, companies and entrepreneurship.

Unfortunately, ladies and gentleman, this reassessment came at a bad time.

It came – as former Labour Party leader Wouter Bos said – when the nature of capitalism was changing at high speed.

What happened?

Along with globalisation came

the spread of shareholder capitalism,

diminishing state control over markets

and exclusive economic growth in emerging countries.

And the main features of neo-liberalism were privatisation and deregulation.

The combination of neo-liberalism and globalisation has done some serious harm.

We’re now being confronted with growing inequality in the world.

Nature, working conditions and social cohesion are under constant pressure.

And developing countries lack the policy space they need to choose their own path to economic growth.

This implies, ladies and gentlemen, that we should reassess our reassessment.

Not by shutting down business ─ of course not.

The free market might not be perfect, but it is crucial in the fight against poverty.

No ─ it should be our mission to steer global capitalism more strongly in the right direction.

Working towards justice and solidarity without losing the market’s energy.

That’s why aid and trade can be a good match.

Investment funds, corporate responsibility, global public goods ─ it’s all in my portfolio.

So rest assured ─ trade will not overshadow development cooperation.

Making the mutual benefits as big as possible ─ that’s the real challenge.

I do, of course, know that trade and development do not always have the same focus.

In Japan, it’s about trade. In South Sudan, it’s about eliminating poverty.

I also know that opposing interests could emerge between trade and development.

I have no problem in dealing with these issues along the way.

But in most countries, growth and the elimination of poverty are like magnets – they attract.

In Ethiopia, for instance, officials were relieved to talk about both issues with one person.

So who are we to tell them this is not a good idea?

Let’s not forget, ladies and gentlemen, that inclusive and sustainable growth is in everyone’s interests.

Let me give you the familiar example of cows grazing in a public pasture.

Farmers have a mutual interest in not spoiling the pasture by letting too many cows graze on it.

At the same time, it is in each farmer’s interest to have as many cows in the field as possible.

If you replace the word ‘pasture’ by ‘world’, ladies and gentlemen, the point is clear.

In the long run, plundering the planet and its people is bad for business too.

This is enough common ground for a trade and development minister to walk on.

And that’s exactly what I’m going to do ─ walk on common ground.

I hope you will all join me on this interesting journey, sharing your practical proposals.

Especially, ladies and gentlemen, I’m now drafting a policy letter to parliament.

It still needs some fleshing out,

but let me give you a few highlights.

I didn’t mention the cows in the pasture by chance.

Global public goods are crucial to my policy.

Not only strengthening multilateral organisations,

but also creating partnerships with others.

In these partnerships, the interests of emerging markets and low-income countries come first.

These countries often suffer from external factors,

and often lack influence in international forums.

Yet ─ at the same time ─ they could be the economic giants of the future.

Giving these countries a say in international affairs ─ that’s my goal.

Obviously, and unfortunately, I can’t take the full weight of the world on my shoulders.

So for reasons of efficiency and effectiveness, I’m focusing on five global public goods.

The first is water.

The second is food security.

The third is climate.

The fourth is peace and security.

And the fifth and last is migration.

So, ladies and gentlemen, I think the direction is clear.

First we had development aid.

Then development cooperation took over.

Now we are heading for international cooperation ─ including aid, trade and investment.

I truly hope that we can lead the way.

And truly cooperate.

Let’s not be marginal, let’s be pioneers.

Thank you.