My good friend Hilda Mak in Hamilton once said to me (and I think she was quoting someone else): You teach what you need to learn. I’ve never forgotten that statement, which has seemed ever more true to me. It’s specially applicable to this talk today, in which I’m discussing a topic about which I knew nothing whatsoever until this week -- except that (to borrow someone’s comment last week), “If it’s good enough for Phil de Gruchy, it’s good enough for me!” It’s been very important to me to learn about Jubilee 2000, and I deeply welcome the opportunity to open the topic up for your thinking, and to encourage you to take action on it if you’re so inclined. Following the service members of the congregation will have the opportunity to write to the Minister of Finance expressing their concern. There are four different sample letters for you to choose from; you can sign the one worded in a way which resonates most with you.
Jubilee 2000 is an international movement in over 40 countries advocating a debt-free start to the Millennium for a billion people. It is calling for a one-time cancellation of the unpayable debts of the world’s poorest countries by the end of the year 2000, under a fair and transparent process. Jubilee 2000 calls for the cancellation of unpayable debt -- debt that will never be fully paid or will be paid only by exacting totally unacceptable costs in diverting resources from health, education and human well-being. The year 2000 is an unprecedented opportunity to celebrate in a meaningful way -- by cancelling debts and giving a new start to the world’s poor.
Internationally Canada has shown greater concern for the poor than some other industrialized countries. However, as you will hear, the sponsors of Jubilee 2000 believe more should be done. Our voice may be a small voice, but with thousands of other small voices we can help bring about change -- change which is primarily the responsibility of those who have it in their power to bring it about, namely the affluent people of the world -- that’s us! Globally more than a billion people subsist on incomes of less than a dollar a day. This is a level of poverty that excludes most of them from the forum in which change can be initiated, so it’s up to the rest of us.
Our first Unitarian Universalist Principle is “the inherent worth and dignity of every person”. The second is “justice, equity and compassion in human relations”. The sixth is “the goal of world community with peace, liberty and justice for all”. The seventh is “respect for the interdependent web of all existence of which we are a part”. Of our seven Principles, four are directly related to today’s topic. See what you think our commitment to those Principles means in light of these facts:
Over 50 countries in the world have debts that will never be paid back but continue to be paid daily with people’s lives.
The debt burden of the poorest countries is, on average, 93 percent of each country’s income.
In Zambia, for example, averaging out the national debt means that every citizen now owes the country’s creditors $790 -- more than twice the average annual income.
Every year resources are being diverted from health, education and sanitation towards unproductive debt service.
The United Nations Development Programme in 1997 stated that 21 million children’s lives could be saved if the money used for debt service was put into health and education.
I want to repeat that last one: 21 million children’s lives could be saved if the money used for debt service was put into health and education.
It’s the belief of the Jubilee 2000 intiators that the current lending process is fundamentally unjust. International loans are negotiated in secret between local elites and powerful creditors like the IMF (the International Monetary Fund), the World Bank and government agencies. Loans are often (I would guess almost always) made for political reasons or to promote exports. In Britain, for instance, 96% of the debts owed to Britain by the poorest countries are a result of loans given as inducements to buy British exports. The situation’s very similar in Canada. Yet it’s ordinary people in those poor countries who pay the costs, as funds are diverted from water, health, education and sanitation into debt repayment. There’s no international bankruptcy law so no line is drawn under unpayable debts.
Instead any debt relief negotiations are always managed by the creditors, the people the money is owed to, who are naturally unwilling to write off debts. Jubilee 2000 calls for acknowledging the co-responsibility of debtors and creditors for the debt crisis, recognizing that the rich countries of the world have played a part in bringing about the crisis. Remission of debt should be worked out through a process in which the countries who owe the money, are partners in negotiations. One understandable reaction to the enormity of the debt crisis is retreat into the position that it’s beyond the capacity of ordinary people, or even one country such as Canada, to change. But because the organization “Jubilee 2000" is already in existence, there’s an opportunity here for us as individuals and for Canada as a country, to join in a powerful international movement.
When people have joined forces to change society, they’ve often succeeded, even against all odds. One parallel to the debt crisis is the institution of slavery in the last century, and it’s no accident that the poem by James Russell Lowell seems relevant, even with its extravagant, passionate expression. Slavery, like debt, was a system of international oppression accepted for generations as a normal and necessary part of trade and life. And it, too, resulted in the West benefiting from the resources of the southern hemisphere while southern countries, and particularly sub-Saharan Africa, along with the lives of the slaves themselves, were devastated.
In 1833 the slave trade was abolished in all British territories. It wasn’t because of one powerful individual or institution, but because of the concerted effort of thousands of people. Ordinary people were convinced by the uprisings among slaves and by the passion of individuals such as William Wilberforce in Britain, and Theodore Parker in America, that the status quo was wrong and could be changed. In America it took another 30 years and a civil war to achieve the end of slavery, but everywhere, above all, it needed the agreement and support of thousands of ordinary people to ensure the destruction of the trade in people, the idea that human beings can be owned by others. In the same way, the oppression of the debts of the poorest countries, who are in effect owned by the rich ones, could be ended in the year 2000. Then the world could begin the new millennium with new hope for the poor, and a new start for international relations.
One major hindrance to the abolition of slavery was the power of plantation owners, whose interests were best served by preserving the status quo. Slavery meant they could produce good crops and receive good prices for them. In the same way now, it’s in the short-term interest of many industrialized nations to maintain strong influence over the poorer countries of the world. One may argue that justice demands that richer countries give up unfair privileges, held at the expense of the poor, and that remission of debts could allow poor countries to compete on fairer terms and reduce their dependence on the rich parts of the world, but if the cost to powerful people is too great, the change won’t happen without enormous pressure from ordinary individuals such as us. And even among us there will be many, including myself, who will ask the question, “How much will forgiving the debts of the poor countries cost ME?” There are lots of things I’d like to do to make the world a better place, but when I’m honest with myself I know I’m not prepared to give up very much for them. A little bit, perhaps, but not a huge amount. So it was with some trepidation that I asked Phil de Gruchy the big question about how much Jubilee 2000 would cost. Here’s what he told me:
The outstanding debt to Canada by the Jubilee2000 countries is $1.2 billion and the cost to the average Canadian taxpayer to remit this would be $15 a year for three years.
I’m going to repeat that:
The outstanding debt to Canada by the Jubilee2000 countries is $1.2 billion and the cost to the average Canadian taxpayer to remit this would be $15 a year for three years.
Whew, what a relief! I can support this project with all my heart and soul, knowing that not only is it about justice, but it’s not expensive! Phil goes on to explain further,
This is the current outstanding debt as Canada has already remitted $1.3 billion of Official Development Assistance loans. Prime Minister Chretien has said that we will in future only make Assistance Grants and not loans. Canada has also agreed to totally remit debts to a number of countries including Honduras and Bangladesh even though they are not covered in the International Highly Indebted Poor Country list.
Canada really isn’t doing too badly regarding what’s owed to us in particular, but internationally things are less generous. The G7 countries propose to remit approx $100 billion US against the more that $200 billion owed to them collectively by the Highly Indebted Poor Countries. However to obtain this half-remission the poor countries have to accept the device of “restructuring” which involves faster repayment of the balance of debt. A Jubilee2000 research team says that as a result of this, 20 countries will collectively benefit and would be able reduce their debt repayments by $2 billion a year. However, 21 countries would have to increase their debt repayments collectively by $3.8 billion US. Thus the G7 countries and the International Monetary Fund would receive an additional $1.8 billion annually. (The rich get richer ..... what else is new?) This is not the fairest possible solution, to say the least, and after the service you’ll have the opportunity to select and send a letter which emphasizes this point. You may want to know a little bit more about the Structural Adjustment Programmes before sending a letter which refers to them, so here are just a few points:
These programmes require the removal of barriers to imports, including tariffs, to facilitate integration into the international market. In practice (and this may sound familiar from discussions about other “free trade” arrangements, this allows cheaper imports to flood the already richer countries, depressing local industry and agriculture and leading to more unemployment. For the debtor countries, it makes essential imports like medicines far more expensive, placing yet another strain on the poor, and encourages the production of cash crops and goods for export rather than for local use. The removal of price controls and subsidies increases the price of food and basic services, again making life more difficult for the poor. To assure the quality of exports demanded by the North, pesticide use and deforestation increase, leading to ecological destruction. Labour laws are weakened to drive down wages and increase foreign investment in export production. Bad deal all round -- except for the rich.
In countries which are concentrating all their efforts on debt repayment, interest rates rise, in theory to "depress excess demand" and decrease inflation. As a result, internal investment is restricted and farm credit, for example disappears. Local production falls and unemployment rises -- which does, in fact, "depress demand" by ensuring that people can no longer buy essentials like food, housing, and medicine! Many observers believe that the real intent of Structural Adjustment Programmes, whether it’s conscious and explicit or not, is to create a cheap pool of labour desperate for jobs, generate cheap exports of raw materials for international markets, and open new markets for Transnational Corporations. This is a model of capitalism and globalisation which sacrifices the well-being of the vast majority of humanity, as well as nature, to enrich a few.
In case you’re not yet convinced that debt forgiveness without restructuring is called for in the name of justice, equity and compassion, listen to this:
In 1996, indebted countries of the South [that is, the poor countries] sent back $187 billion more to Northern [rich] creditor countries than they received in aid. This flow of resources from poor to rich countries stems from [a] foreign debt that burdens the developing world, debt that is in the words of the ..... Jubilee campaign, "[ultimately] unpayable, illegitimate and immoral”.
[It’s] unpayable because over two years of attempts to address the debt crisis have proven it is impossible to pay;
[It’s] illegitimate because in some cases it was contracted by dictatorships, in others [the debt is] for failed projects or programmes, rarely to benefit the people now responsible for paying it back;
[It’s] immoral because in order to pay it back, governments in poor countries are creating a huge social deficit in terms of people’s health, education and nutrition.
According to the 1999 United Nations Human Development Report, the 3 richest people in the world have more wealth than the 600 million people who live in the least developed countries. But it’s not just those 3 richest people, or even the 3 richest countries, who are responsible for the current debt situation and for finding ways to solve it. It’s ordinary people, becoming conscious of the inequities in our world. We need to recognize that our current system of economic globalization is driving a deeper wedge between rich and poor countries, as well as between rich and poor people within many countries. (That Lowell poem talked about progressing ever onward and upward, but in this respect we seem to be going backward and downward!) Religious organizations and thoughtful individuals around the world are calling for debt cancellation as a vitally significant action towards narrowing the gap and affirming the inherent worth and dignity of every person. The Jubilee 2000 Initiative is offered as a model for a workable and acceptable solution to the problem of poor country debt. It would create a new, disciplined beginning to financial relations between North and South, and a fresh start for millions of the world’s poor.
In ending, I want to repeat to you, as urgently as I can, three things.
First, four of our seven Unitarian Universalist Principles: “the inherent worth and dignity of every person”, “justice, equity and compassion in human relations”, “the goal of world community with peace, liberty and justice for all”, and “respect for the interdependent web of all existence of which we are a part”.
Second, the fact that over 50 countries in the world have debts that will never be paid back but continue to be paid daily with people’s lives.
Third, this note of hope: 21 million children’s lives could be saved if the money used for debt service was put into health and education.