NGO’s – THE BEST AND WORST OF THINGS TO COME

NGO’s – Non Government Organisations – are now major actors on the domestic and international stage. Perhaps the first transnational NGO was the Anti-Slavery Society of 1839, an early and successful NGO is the International Red Cross established in 1864 by Henri Durant after his brutal experiences in the Battle of Solferino. From about 1,083 in 1914, to 13,000 in the 1990’s, to an estimated 35,000 today. Many, such as the World Wildlife Fund for Nature, have bigger budgets than IGO’s, Inter Governmental Organisations. Greenpeace is a slick publicity machine and has more members than all the political parties in Britain. I’ve been a member of all the good and just causes, it’s easy – pay a few dollars a month to a good cause and feel better. It wasn’t until I was under siege by some aggressive NGO’s as Director-General of the World Trade Organisation did I realise that while I was paid up, I had never been invited to a meeting, my opinion never canvassed by people who grabbed headlines, set the public agenda saying the WTO was somehow undemocratic because it represented Governments (Parliaments) and not people. Sure, more people watched the American football Super Bowl than voted in the U.S. But if we don’t believe in democracy, what can we believe in?

NGO’s represent the best and worst of us. Idealistic young medical graduates go into the bush to help people, human rights activists bravely risk life and limb. Then there’s the NGO’s who are paid secret servants of Governments. A protectionist textile billionaire, an early John Bircher, Goldwater supporter, Robert Milliken ‘funded’ Public Citizen, a front for Green icon and Presidential candidate, Ralph Nader, who opposed a new trade round in Seattle. Many are exactly what they accuse elected politicians of – poll-driven, headline- grabbing, fund-raising opportunists. The difference is politicians have to get elected, they are accountable to their electorate, political party and a relentless media. Even left wing Governments, who oppose privatisation of health services are quite happy to contract out services to ‘social organisations’ that claim they are not motivated by the sordid profit motive. Please, this is true of only some, but the trend towards a ‘global civil society’ has in it the seeds of an anti-democratic, anti-parliamentary ethic. By taking the high ground, saying theirs is a moral position, many claim indemnity from the law and rules of society saying the ends justify the means even if it’s smashing up laboratories to force people to live according to their values.

Frank Euredis’ recent book, “The Politics of Fear” suggests, “In reality the lobbyist and activist’s critique of representative democracy is fundamentally an anti-democratic one. It is based on the premise that unelected individuals who possess a lofty, moral purpose have a greater right to act on the public’s behalf than politicians elected through an imperfect political process.” The media fall for this all the time, often giving them free kicks and TV grabs without the cynical scrutiny that politicians or business people face. They are insatiable in their demands and must be, once a goal is achieved, they raise the stakes and seek more. Why not? Their media operations are superb, they pick safe and popular issues. They must to prosper. Publicity is their ‘oxygen’ and people trust them, unlike politicians who must make hard decisions. That’s why bored Royals and celebrities are drawn to them. Power without responsibility is great fun. I tried and failed to get an agreed code of conduct that should govern the relationship between NGO’s and international Inter Governmental Agencies, perhaps similar rules that public companies and political parties in most countries face.

• Rejection of violence
• Transparency of finances, contributions, and decision-making
• A requirement to report to stakeholders at open annual General Meetings.

Businesses and well-meaning donors and Governments should not engage with groups that don’t sign up to transparent, democratic rules. It’s not all bad. The privatisation of diplomacy through the new network of NGO’s, interest groups and lobbyists can be healthy. It’s good that diplomacy is no longer practised just by elites in their castles. Although with the protest of recent years, leaders have been imprisoned in castles called conference rooms. NGO’s should, if transparent, be part of the process, have a voice but not a vote in the great global agencies. I have not meant to be too critical, after all I still spend much time doing pro bono work for some NGO’s, perhaps one day I will set one up – good tax regimes, almost as good as churches!