Conference on Responsible Business Conduct in a Global Context

Toespraak | 12-12-2011

Ladies and gentlemen,

Before I start, I would like to give a special welcome to Professor Ruggie.

Professor, it is an honour to have you here. In your capacity as the Secretary-General’s Special Representative for Business and Human Rights, you did an excellent job in proposing measures to strengthen the human rights performance of the business sector around the globe.

Your name now is a household name, and rightly so.

Ladies and gentlemen,

Only three years ago I was the Asia correspondent for a large Dutch newspaper. On one of my trips across the continent I met Christine Loh, a well-known businesswoman and human rights defender from Hong Kong.

About ten years before we met, she gave a lecture at the Asia Society in Seattle. There she expressed her firm belief in free trade, in small government, and in privatisation and liberalisation. By the time I met her, however, Ms Loh had some reservations about all that economic freedom.

‘Here in Asia I see sparkling cities and glittering boulevards, but I also see more and more inequality,’ she told me. Wealth was not trickling down, she felt, because greater democracy was simply not in the interest of the Asian elite.

Whatever your own position, her story illustrates one essential truth: you cannot separate freedom and prosperity – two of the main pillars of Dutch foreign policy. On the contrary, they are closely linked.

But there is another reason for opening with Christine Loh’s experience. The rise of Asia is at the heart of globalisation. Asia is where new economic superpowers are emerging. It is where technological progress is in full flight.

We should not forget that the business sector has a major role in Asia’s progress, just as its role is increasing elsewhere. Whether we like it or not, in this globalised world companies are at least as influential as governments. And that entails responsibilities.

Naturally, my government is aware of the ‘global governance gap’. We cannot impose our laws on Dutch companies operating in other countries. Nor does my government want to be too restrictive. In principle, businesses can assume that the government has faith in them.

We are constantly seeking the right balance between monitoring, accountability and trust. After all, there’s a big difference between a large multinational with a battery of compliance officers and a ten-man operation with limited resources. We don’t want to tie up such companies in endless red tape.

But that does not mean we can simply do nothing. One of John Ruggie’s biggest achievements is that besides describing the state duty to protect human rights, he has explicitly highlighted the corporate responsibility to respect human rights.

According to the Ruggie Framework, enterprises can fulfil this responsibility by assessing human rights impacts in a timely manner, and by ensuring that victims have access to effective remedies. My government fully endorses this Framework. And we actively promote its main concepts, like ‘Protect, Respect and Remedy’ and ‘due diligence’.

But that is not all. The general principles set out in the Framework have been enshrined in the OECD’s Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises. These guidelines are helping define Dutch international policy on corporate social responsibility.

Let me give you an example. We have linked grants for international enterprise directly to the OECD guidelines. Any company that receives a grant must explicitly endorse them. And of course, we also consider whether companies respect the ILO’s four Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work: the abolition of child labour, the elimination of forced labour, non-discrimination at work and freedom of association.

Next year I shall be inviting employers’ organisations and NGOs to give their input on how the OECD guidelines can best be incorporated in new development grant schemes for the private sector.

Here’s another example. Our embassies are very active when it comes to economic diplomacy. The principles of CSR and human rights play an important role here. Since 2009 eight embassies have been receiving extra funding to formulate policy in this area, including our embassies in China, Russia and India. Next year, more embassies will follow. Our goal is to get companies working constructively with the authorities. Only this kind of cooperation can ensure that human rights get the attention they deserve throughout the supply chain.

Or take another example. Using the Dutch Human Rights Fund we support the Fair Wear Foundation. This Dutch NGO is trying to put the Ruggie Framework into practice by reducing human rights violations in the garment industry in China, India, Turkey and Bangladesh. It does so by enabling workers to report abuses, for example. And by pressing its member brands to improve working conditions in their factories.

One last example. Together with the Ministry of Economic Affairs, Agriculture and Innovation, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is organising a series of meetings with the Dutch business community on the application of the Ruggie Framework. The sessions are intended to clarify exactly what the responsibility to respect human rights involves. And of course, trade unions, employers’ organisations and NGOs will also be included. After all, civil society plays a crucial watchdog role in monitoring respect for human rights.

Let’s return to Christine Loh, that small but tough businesswoman and human rights defender from Hong Kong. It’s true, I agree with the ‘old’ Ms Loh that free trade and liberalisation remain essential values.

But I also agree with the ‘new’ Ms Loh that sparkling cities and glittering boulevards are no substitute for equality.

The Ruggie Framework is an important instrument in the fight against inequality. That is why the Dutch government supports it, and will continue to support it in the future.

Thank you.