A disputed doctorate. The students of the University of Louvain-la-Neuve opposed the granting of an Honorary Doctorate to Pascal Lamy. In my opinion, their conduct was anti-democratic, unfair, mistaken and presumptuous. Let me explain.
Anti-democratic. The students are part of the Academic Board which grants Honorary Doctorates. This participation they have been granted presupposes on their part the respect of the rules of play. Yet, the decision relating to the European Commissioner was approved by 26 to 3.
Unfair. Here are the complaints against Pascal Lamy in the students' "petition": "We consider that his action as Commissioner, and more broadly the policies promoted by the European Commission at the opening of the new round of trade negotiations in the framework of the WTO (World Trade Organisation), have contributed and will most likely contribute to worsening the inherent excesses of neo-liberal globalisation, such as the growing impoverishment of a large part of the Southern populations and the gradual and insidious merchandising of public spaces and goods".
Vigilance vis-à-vis the WTO is justified and the students must be congratulated for their critical sense. But, in this case, they are completely off target, just like the other signatories of their petition. The EU in general, and Pascal Lamy in particular, are fighting to ensure that the advantages for developing countries is the priority goal of the new world negotiations, and that the liberalisation of trade be dependent on ecological and social criteria. This stance has already had its effect in many aspects of the WTO Agenda, and the EU will make no concession to the detriment of poor countries; on the contrary, it is giving the example, by concrete autonomous measures playing in their favour (see next page for Mr. Lamy's declarations).
Mistaken. WTO negotiations are continuing with the participation not only of rich countries but also India, China, as well as South American, African, Asian countries, as it is in this framework that conduct criticised by the "anti-globalisationists" can be revised and policies decided upon that can improve the situation of developing countries (which are fighting so as not to be sidelined). In this struggle, their best "Western" ally is Pascal Lamy. He is obviously held to negotiate on the basis on a brief handed to him by the Council (thus, Member States); that is, moreover, precisely what gives him his strength as he is speaking on behalf of Europe. Whosoever bothers to read EU documents without prejudice, will note that the justified demands of movements that, in Seattle in 1999, caused, the first attempt by the WTO to initiate a new round of negotiations to fail, are now found in the stances of the Europeans. These movements should therefore back Pascal Lamy's efforts, instead of denigrating them, especially as one of the battles he has to fight, that on agriculture, is still far from having been won. It is obvious that he cannot present all his personal opinions in Geneva and must agree to compromise, but (with a few others) he has managed soften certain theses in favour of the idea of "liberalisation first", and today Europe's general movement is clearly in the right direction.
Presumptuous. The language of the President of the students of Louvain, Francois Schreur, is typical of this "intelligentsia" that studies problems on paper without any concern for realities on the ground, and is dogmatic without checking the exactitude of claims. He claims that the EU neglects the notion of public service whereas the opposite is true. He claims that the EU is in favour of the "merchandising" of education, that it would become merchandise like any other, but that's wrong: the EU believes that this domain does not come within services to be liberalised, and that each country must be free to consider education - and university - as a public service. I could go on.
Incomprehension. If I have insisted on this really minor incident, one that has had no influence on events (As planned, on 3 February Pascal Lamy was made Honorary Doctor of the Catholic University of Louvain-la-Neuve, see other page of this bulletin), it's because the attitude of the students demonstrates a lack of information and fairly broad incomprehension of the role the EU plays in the negotiations in Geneva, as well as because it provides us with the opportunity of letting Pascal Lamy speak for himself, in our "Texts of the Week" section.
(F.R.)