Home|About Us|Our Work|Join Us|Guide to Debt Crisis|Resources

 




 

GFI Lauds G20’s Committments on Bank Secrecy, Economic Transparency, Illicit Financial Flows


Friday, September 25, 2009

Washington, DC — The G-20 reaffirmed its commitment to pressing uncooperative secrecy jurisdictions to adopt more rigorous reporting standards, tackle banking secrecy, and increase overall transparency in global finance in a communiqué released at the conclusion of today’s summit in Pittsburgh.

“Transparency and accountability in global finance are the cornerstones of a strong and robust world economy,” said Global Financial Integrity (GFI) director Raymond Baker. “The critical next step will be defining the rules of play with respect to improving the standards of information exchange and best practices for financial institutions.”

Today’s announcement contained an ambitious range of initiatives including strengthening financial regulation, clamping down on illicit outflows from developing countries, and improving tax transparency and exchange of information in tax law enforcement.

Language in today’s communiqué closely echoed language in a letter submitted to G-20 delegates on Monday by the Task Force on Financial integrity and Economic Development, as well as language in a briefing paper prepared by Task Force members GFI, Christian Aid, Global Witness, and Tax Justice Network.

From the G-20 Communiqué:

As we increase the flow of capital to developing countries, we also need to prevent its illicit outflow… We ask the FATF to help detect and deter the proceeds of corruption by prioritizing work to strengthen standards on customer due diligence, beneficial ownership and transparency. (paragraph 42)

“Combating illicit outflows from developing countries as part of economic development and poverty alleviation efforts may prove to be the game changer as we move ahead,” said Baker. “GFI estimates that developing countries lose as much as $1 trillion every year in illicit financial outflows.”

On the G-20 language on non-cooperative jurisdictions (paragraph 15) GFI noted the inclusion of money laundering, proceeds of corruption, and terrorist financing as problems to be tackled alongside tax evasion.

“What is needed now are automatic tax information exchange agreements and financial institution protocols which will make it more difficult for the proceeds of corruption, tax evasion, money laundering, and other illicit financial practices to be moved across borders and into secrecy jurisdictions,” said Mr. Baker. “The G-20 has made achieving these critical aims far more likely today with their statement of strong support for tax transparency and exchange of information.”

Task Force members GFI, Christian Aid, Global Witness, and Tax Justice network have prepared a brief with recommendations for the G-20 available at www.financialtaskforce.org.



G-20 Leaders remain vague on commitments to world's poorest


Friday, September 25, 2009

25 September - UN Millennium Campaign, New York

G-20 LEADERS REMAIN VAGUE ON COMMITMENTS TO WORLD’S POOREST
Not a good start for the “premier forum for international economic cooperation”

The United Nations Millennium Campaign is disappointed that the recently concluded G-20 meetings ended with nothing more than vague commitments to the needs of world’s poorest represented by the Millennium Development Goals .

Although the global economy is starting to show signs of stability, poor countries are only beginning to feel the worst effects of the crisis and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future.  Yet expectations that the richest members of the G-20 would deliver on their $50 billion commitment from the last G-20 to poor countries (of which less than 50% has materialized) were dashed to the ground.

“G-20 leaders have focused on issues such as bonuses and compensation and not on the needs of the 1.4 billion people living on less than $1.25 per day whose very lives are threatened by the economic crisis,” said Salil Shetty, Director of the United Nations Millennium Campaign.  “The G-20’s failure to address the needs of the world’s poorest is a worrying sign. Going forward it is critical that the G-20 focus its attention and resources on achieving the Millennium Development Goals.”

The just concluded G-20 meeting in Pittsburgh has not fulfilled its responsibility to the poorest people in the world in the following areas:

       AID:
Missing from the communiqué is any mention of the $50 billion G-20 leaders pledged to poor countries in April – of which less than half has been delivered. The richest members of the G-20 have failed to address or make provisions for the predicted  $33 billion aid deficit through 2010; a deficit created by unmet aid commitments and the reduced value of the Gross National Income of donor countries.

       TRADE:
Once again, G-20 leaders urged that the Doha Trade talks be completed next year without announcing any real commitment on the elimination of trade-distorting agricultural subsidies in the richest countries and continue to put in place protectionist measures themselves.

       GOVERNANCE OF INTERNATIONAL FINANCE INSTITUTIONS:
The G-20’s proposal to give emerging markets slightly more voting power does nothing to help the poorest countries with the smallest economies which have been driven to the brink of a debt crisis by massive loans from international financial institutions. This despite widespread recognition at the start of the economic crisis that a more inclusive global financial architecture is desperately needed.  The proposals in this regard from the G-20 are far too limited and do not reflect any urgency.

       CLIMATE CHANGE:
The G-20 discussed the need for efficient and effective financing to address climate change, but they did not provide plans or funds to make this happen. Any future financing for climate change should not be a re-allocation of money previously promised to the world’s poorest.



Rudd must go further in his calls for reform of financial architecture, says Jubilee Australia


Thursday, September 24, 2009

MEDIA STATEMENT

Anti-poverty NGO Jubilee Australia welcomed Prime Minister Rudd’s call overnight for fundamental reform of the international financial architecture, particularly the International Monetary Fund.

Speaking at the Foreign Policy Association in New York last night, Kevin Rudd said: “We would be failing in our duties as leaders at this point in history if we do not revitalize, reform and rebuild the international system”.

Mr. Rudd suggested that at the G20 Conference in Pittsburg, starting today, the IMF should be empowered and its legitimacy increased in order for it to address the problem of global economic imbalances.

While Jubilee Australia welcomed the engagement of the Prime Minister in these issues, it believes that the Prime Minister’s analysis and solutions don’t go far enough. Jubilee Australia spokesperson Professor Ross Buckley* said: “As the report released this week** by Nobel Laureate and former World Bank Chief Economist Joseph Stiglitz demonstrated, policies pushed by the IMF have contributed to the severity of the current crisis itself”.

Jubilee Australia believes Mr. Rudd would do well to listen to Professor Stiglitz, whose report not only called for fundamental reform of IMF, but also for greater role for the United Nations in oversight of the Bretton Woods institutions. Under its current structure, the IMF is still under the de facto control of the G7 countries.

Jubilee Australia also welcomed Mr. Rudd’s renewed push for greater transparency in financial markets, and argues that one of the most effective immediate measures to reduce financial market speculation would be the adoption of the financial transaction tax (‘tobin tax’) in Pittsburg this week. ‘A financial transactions tax is a good idea whose time has come’, Professor Buckley said. ‘It can raise enough money to halve global poverty and hunger, improve the workings of important financial markets, and cost you nothing.

‘By dissuading very short-term speculative investments and thus reducing ”white noise” in the market, the tax will allow the market to react to the long-term transactions and function more efficiently. It will essentially be a win-win for markets and for the poor,’ he said.


*Ross Buckley is Professor of International Finance Law in the Faculty of Law, University of NSW.
“Tobin Tax - much needed source of revenue to fight global poverty & hunger", Australian Financial Review 3 September 2009, Ross Buckley,
http://www.jubileeaustralia.org/BlogRetrieve.aspx?BlogID=799&PostID=44555
“The G20’s Missed Opportunity”, Canberra Times / Inside Story 24 August 2009, Ross Buckley, http://inside.org.au/the-g20s-missed-opportunity/

**Report of the Commission of Experts of the President of the United Nations General Assembly on Reforms of the International Monetary and Financial System September 21, 2009 http://www.un.org/ga/econcrisissummit/docs/FinalReport_CoE.pdf



Stiglitz speaks out on the multiple shortcomings of the G20 agenda in Pittsburgh


Thursday, September 24, 2009

Pittsburgh, 24 September – Third World Network

At an event in Pittsburgh organized by a coalition of several non-profit organizations and social movement groups, Stiglitz spoke to an audience of several hundred on the G20 Summit in Pittsburgh, assessing what the G20 has achieved so far and where it has fallen short.  The key problems in the world economy and financial markets that has led to the deepest recession since the Great Depression have not yet been effectively addressed by the G20.  Instead, the world is witnessing how the very banks that were deemed ‘too big to fail’ are only getting bigger, having been offered a carte blanche by the world’s most powerful leaders.

One of the major problems with the international financial system is big banks.  “Our ‘too big to fail’ banks are only bigger today, and meanwhile, we did not give enough funds to the smaller banks who lend money and create jobs,” Stiglitz highlighted.  The US financial crisis response policy did not focus on lending.  Instead it focused on the institutions whose primary activity is gambling, of making profits by trading, not by lending.”  Risk management as it is currently practiced is not reflected in the rewards given to bank and investment firm gamblers.

“I call the bank bailouts an ‘Ersatz capitalism,’ marked by the privatizing of gains and the socializing of losses,” said Stiglitz.  The Obama administration’s way of dealing with America’s ailing banks is actually a win-win-lose proposal, where the banks win, investors win, and taxpayers lose.  This distorts incentives, and the US has not even begun to address the incentives problem underlying the subprime crisis.

The financial sector regulation enacted so far has not been enough.  There are five lobbyists from Wall Street institutions for every Congressman in the United States government.  For years the financial sector has been pushing deregulation, massive bailouts of banks and investment firms, and innovative ways to stifle major financial regulations that are needed to ensure that crises do not keep recurring.  There is a valid fear that these lobbyists will drive the crisis-response agenda in Congress.  France and Germany have been pushing very hard on incentives, however, the US has done almost nothing on the issue of ‘too big to fail’ banks.

One of the key questions is how to get financial institutions to do what they are supposed to do, which is to provide financial assistance to taxpayers and communities.  While the G-20 has been trying to stop risk-taking, they are still not directing banks to provide taxpayers and homeowners with, for example, mortgage assistance, which other countries have sound systems in place for doing so.  The US financial market has resisted doing what the people in a society expect and need it to do.  The best that can be hoped for out of the G-20 Summit this week is that it sets an agenda for the next meeting.

Stiglitz said that while the Group of 20 is marginally better than the G-8 or the G-7, there is still only little more possibility of democratic accountability than previously.  Although it is easier to organize 20 leaders than 192 on a practical level, there is not a single representative for sub-Saharan Africa in the G-20 other than South Africa.  In relative comparison to the G-192 of the United Nations, the G-20 does not reflect the voice and priorities of the global community

Why is there a need for global governance at all, asked Stiglitz.  In economics, there is the concept of externalities, in that what one person does affects another.  The US financial market had enormous negative effects on the rest of the world.  Through the process of deregulation, not only did the US export its toxic assets, but also its recession.  And yet, the United States has not taken responsibility for its actions in the rest of the world.

“For many of the Western leaders, climate change is a problem for the future.  But in many developing countries it’s an issue of here and now,” said Stiglitz.  For example, countries such as Bangladesh and the Maldives are forecasting that much or all of their land will be submerged underwater in the near future.  There is now a broad consensus that the way in which the rich countries have industrialized, and continue to do so, will not just harm other countries, and in particular the poorest countries in the South, but will put the entire planet in risk.  How do we share the burden equitably between the rich countries and the poor?

At the UN Climate Summit just held in New York, China came out with a very strong statement about how it will reduce its emissions.  However, the United States produced only rhetoric about how the world needs to address climate change together, because when it comes to climate finance, the most critical aspect in the upcoming negotiations in Copenhagen in December, the US is not conceding significant amounts of funding for developing countries to be able to employ the technology and money needed to combat the climate crisis.  The amount pledged for climate finance is about $100 million for mitigation and another $100 million for adaptation.  “What is this amount worth?  In light of the trillions spent to bail out banks and financial institutions, it is not much,” Stiglitz emphasized, while reiterating the sentiment that “climate change is part of the solution to the financial crisis not part of the problem.”

“The global economic recession is not over, and it is not likely to be over for a very long time,” said Stiglitz.  The strength of the ‘green shoots’ we see emerging is not strong enough to provide the legs needed for a substantial boos in global and national employment.  “That means if we are not growing by a GDP rate of at least 3.2%, employment will not reach pre-crisis level.  This is not time to be talking about an exit strategy.”  Discussion of an exit strategy from the fiscal stimulus and loose monetary policies, which have been the pillars of the developed economies response to the crisis, is on the agenda of the current G20 Summit in Pittsburgh.

The poorest of the middle-class in the US has become 4% poorer in 2008 than 2007.  What most Americans were told is to not be bothered by the fact their income is going down.  Americans were instead told to consume as if their income is going up, and to do so by borrowing, which proves beneficial for banks.  However, that model has now been broken.  Most Americans have to accept that their standard of living is going to go down, and nobody has been talking about that so far.

The issue of global imbalances, the surpluses of emerging market and developed nations juxtaposed with the deep deficit of the US, is at the center of the discourse of what caused the crisis.  One response to addressing China’s large trade surplus is a suggestion that China and some other countries need to have more flexible labor market policies (i.e., lower wages and less labor law practices).  This is not the answer.  Germany and France have done much better than other countries because of job market protections. 

A global response is now necessary from the G20.  “Developing countries have been much worse affected than even the United States, and they do not possess the resources that we in the United States have,” said Stiglitz.  At the G-20 Summit in London on April 2nd world leaders committed a substantial amount of money ($1.1 trillion), but almost all of it ($750 billion) was through the International Monetary Fund.  “This is a problem,” Stiglitz stressed, “because most developing countries are just recently getting out of a major debt overhang, and the IMF’s loans exacerbate debt problems.  Second, the IMF is the very institution that promoted free capital markets and economic and financial liberalization.”  The fact that the G-20 allocated its funds, almost entirely, to the IMF means in part that the world does not yet have the right kind of institutions for effective crisis response.  However, this does not mean that countries have to rely completely on the IMF.  Other global institutions, such as the International Labor Organization, should be among the institutions given responsibility to implement some of these solutions.  This G-20 Summit is the first one where the head of the ILO will be present.

In conclusion, Stiglitz mentioned the work he has been doing with the International Commission on the Measurement of Progress.  “In a performance-oriented society, what we measure is what we do. Therefore, our systems of measurement become very important.  Unfortunately, they are very flawed.  They don’t for instance take into account, for example, environmental degradation.  As a result there are no performance incentives to focus on the environment.”  Instead, world economies measure output by input.  The healthcare sector in the US is the most inefficient in the world, however, the input into the sector is measured at 16% of GDP, which is what the sector is measured by.  However, the output should instead be measured.

 

 



Generous lending or seeds of new debt crisis?


Wednesday, September 23, 2009
The World Bank has nearly doubled lending in 2009 and the Asian Development Bank plans to increase lending by more than $10 billion in 2009-10. The G20 also announced an additional $250 billion in support for trade finance over the next two years, most of which will flow through export credit guarantee agencies (see our Export Credit Watch campaign) which have played an important role in sovereign debt creation in the past.

What does this mean for middle and low income countries facing an increasingly unsustainable debt burden?

In March, the IMF reported that the debt-to-GDP ratios of 28 low-income countries exceeded 60 per cent, twice the threshold the IMF considers sustainable for countries with so-called weak policies. The United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) went further, citing concerns in 49 least developed countries in a February report Yuefen Li, the head of the debt and development finance branch.

Read Update, Flexibility or Seeds of New Crisis? Gail Hurley



World Bank spends billions on coal-fired power stations


Tuesday, September 22, 2009
The World Bank is spending billions of dollars subsidising new coal-fired power stations in developing countries despite claiming that burning fossil fuels exposes the poor to catastrophic climate change.

Read the full story



Breakthrough: World Bank suspends lending to Palm Oil Companies


Tuesday, September 22, 2009
NGOs representing the interests of local communities have been fighting for many years to shut down the World Bank's financing of Palm Oil plantations in countries like Indonesia and PNG. Jubilee Australia's 2007 Report, 'Under the Influence', documented the damaging impacts and called for the International Finance Corporation (IFC), the private sector arm of the World Bank, to stop supporting Palm Oil projects (see below).
 
In August, the Compliance Advisor Ombudsman (CAO), an internal watchdog, published a report exposing that the International Finance Corporation (IFC), favoured commercial interests over environmental and human rights concerns in palm oil extraction in Indonesia.

The CAO found that despite being "aware for more than 20 years that there were significant environmental and social issues and risks inherent in the oil palm sector in Indonesia [the] IFC did not develop a strategy for engaging in the oil palm sector. In absence of a tailored strategy, deal making prevailed."

In September, World Bank president Robert Zoellick made a surprise statement, saying "until we have a new strategy in place, the IFC will not approve any new investments in palm oil." (more)

This is a big win for NGOs, including ACF and Jubilee Australia, who have long been calling for the World Bank to get it's act together and take action on Palm Oil.

Link to our Partners to read more

"Stop Subsidising Large-Scale Biofuels Cultivation" - Policy Brief, Australian Conservation Foundation and Jubilee Australia, April 2009
"Under the Influence: How IFIs fund deforestation in Asia Pacific" - Report, Jubilee Australia, September 2007






Copyright © Jubilee Australia
RSS