Ruling the world

The song says everybody wants to rule the world, but in reality most people are too busy working and raising families. Some might be tempted, only to realize that others are better-qualified. Some might say sure, but just so as to be able to hobnob with the rich and famous, while others are too dangerous or incompetent even to be considered. Well have no fear, because NGOs are ready, willing and . . . let’s just leave it at that.

What are NGOs and why do they want to rule the world? They are Non-Governmental Organizations and they want the job because, like Mount Everest, it’s there for the taking, but mostly because they believe strong global governance is desperately needed to combat the ills of globalization.

Toward that end, they plan to meet at a special forum in New York City to provide a “civil society” component to a broader effort to reshape the United Nations into a stronger global body (morally stronger, if nothing else). ENGOs, or environmental NGOs, will also be in attendance at the September forum.

What do NGOs and ENGOs do? They are “policy entrepreneurs,” or, to put it another way, freelance, non-governmental bureaucrats. Using a mix of private and public funds, they draft policies and resolutions on everything from global warming to poverty and then negotiate treaties and agreements with governments. That’s phase one. Once the government adopts or endorses the treaties and agreements, they “sell” implementation services to the private sector, as well as monitoring services. That’s phase two. Many NGOs and ENGOs are vertically integrated, thereby adding downstream value to the process. Rules have to be enforced, after all, and business is business.

NGOs typically focus on social issues, though economic ones have lately moved to the forefront because of the need (in the words of the UN) “to make globalization more inclusive, to create more opportunities for all, and not leave billions of people in a state of poverty and exclusion.” Their critics describe them as the “army of social engineers,” out to transform the world into their under-achieving likeness.

ENGOs want strong global governance too — strong as in Maurice Strong, the Manitoba-born one-man NGO/ENGO whose treaties on everything from climate change to bio-diversity now provide the legal foundation for international environmental standards, as well as the enforcement of those standards. Since 1988, Canada has been a party to, or endorsed, more than 230 binding, international agreements and non-binding instruments on the environment. Many of these are Strong’s creations.

Why should the mining industry care? Because NGOs and ENGOs “care” a great deal about the effect of the mining industry. Just ask any company developing a mineral project anywhere in the world. The ink on the prefeasibility study is barely dry before NGOs and ENGOs come knocking to ensure that social, environmental and other non-technical objectives are being given their rightful due by the project’s proponent.

And when they knock, corporations must open the door . . . and their wallets. To keep them shut is to incur the wrath of the vice squad of globalization. NGOs and ENGOs are the self-appointed trustees of the global commons, flexing their moral muscles over the rapacious developer. They are a business, and their business is your business.

There are as many as 17,000 NGOs and ENGOs worldwide, and new ones are popping up every day. And while they espouse a myriad of schemes to solve the world’s ills, most share a deep-seated suspicion of the profit motive and what is often termed “the corporate agenda” (whatever that is). And yet NGOs have their own agenda, many of which have harmed, rather than helped, the world’s poor.

More worrisome still is that they are usurping the role of government and other elected bodies that are supposed to set the standards for resource development, and then enforce them. NGOs and EMGOs argue that government institutions lack the resources and the will to do their job properly. But don’t worry, they say, let us help. Governments have willingly legitimized their existence, and almost every country now has laws that require the proponents of a project to fund NGOs and EMGOs. “Intervenor funding” is what they call it, though what it amounts to is paying critics to criticize your project.

NGOs and ENGOs want to make the world a better place, and that, in itself, is admirable. Many of them serve humanity with distinction and honour, always keeping in mind the greater good. Our concern is that there are simply too many and that, in many cases, corporations are being overwhelmed with bureaucratic demands that are strangling their projects.

Other major concerns are accountability and national sovereignty. If global governance is the way of the future, let’s set up institutions which ensure that people are elected and made accountable to the constituents they purport to serve. Global governance without democracy is a recipe for disaster.