John Bunzl
Dialogues: #2, #7 & #22

John is a political activist and businessman. In 2000, he founded the Simultaneous Policy (SIMPOL) Campaign, a way for citizens to use their votes to drive politicians towards global cooperation. It has supporters in over 100 countries and enjoys the backing of a growing number of parliamentarians around the world. He has authored or co-authored a number of books including The Simpol Solution (with Nick Duffell), Monetary Reform – Making it Happen!, People-centred Global Governance – Making it Happen! and Global Domestic Politics and published numerous articles on global governance.​ John joins us from the UK, where he is based.

John believes that solving global problems requires solutions to be implemented simultaneously by nations so that no nation loses out. He argues that solutions need to cover multiple issues, so what a nation loses on one issue it can gain on another, and that citizens need to use their vote to incentivise politicians to cooperate globally.

Website | LinkedIn

Position Statement

Before globalization, national economies were less interconnected and governments were relatively free to determine national economic policy. Under globalization, by contrast, this is no longer the case. Today, governments regardless of the political party in office have no choice but to enact policies that keep their country „internationally competitive“; that is to say, relatively attractive to global markets, inward investors and multinational corporations and the jobs they bring. In practice, this means that the policy options open to governments are highly restricted to a very narrow range that necessarily favours the rich, global investors and corporations and, by the same token, disfavours the poor, the middle-classes and the environment. As a result, it no longer matters much which party citizens elect since whoever's party is elected has to implement much the same policies. This could be called ‘pseudo-democracy’: elections remain free and fair, but irrespective of who gets elected, the policies implemented stay much the same.
It is this phenomenon which explains why governments are failing to act adequately on climate and many other urgent global problems. It also explains why people have become so disillusioned with politics and why we are witnessing the rise of populist/nationalist parties across the Western world. Unable to implement policies to protect the poor and the environment because of the need to stay internationally competitive, parties on the Left can no longer support the poor or the environment. Meanwhile, although parties on the Right have a more nationalist orientation which attracts the poor, their economic policies remain oriented firmly towards competitiveness at the expense of the poor and the environment. Thus, neither the Right nor the Left have any solution.
Since capital and corporations today move globally across national borders and since all governments, regardless of party, are competing to attract them and the jobs they bring, it is clear that this is a global vicious circle that governments cannot escape. We call this vicious cycle „Destructive Global Competition“ (DGC) - the key enemy of both democracy and global sustainability.
Breaking that cycle requires a shift to a new (global) politics, based on international cooperation, capable of overcoming DGC in a way that allows governments to cooperatively deal with those issues where unilateral action by any nation would risk it suffering a first-mover competitive disadvantage. Such issues would include climate change, fair corporate taxation, re-regulation of financial markets, combating pandemics, wealth inequality and many more.

Proposal
To overcome DGC globally we have created SIMPOL, an international citizens movement which addresses this dynamic by campaigning for a new global politics that includes the following key features.

1. Simultaneous implementation: All or sufficient nations would need to implement an agreed solution simultaneously, on the same date, so that no nation need fear incurring a first-mover competitive disadvantage. If all move simultaneously, all win.
2. Protection of national sovereignty: Issues to be dealt with through simultaneous implementation are restricted to those which nations cannot implement alone (or in restricted groups, such as the EU) due to the risk of a first-mover competitive disadvantage. All other issues remain for independent national determination.
3. A multi-issue policy framework: A key reason why the UN COP process on climate change, for example, routinely fails to deliver adequate action is that it deals with just one single issue: CO2 emissions reductions. The problem is that, on almost any single issue, there will always be some nations that win and others that lose. Loser-nations with most emissions to cut will bear the highest costs and so there is no incentive for them to cooperate. This is an important reason why the UN COP process is failing to achieve adequate results. To remedy this, another global issue, such as a global wealth or currency transactions tax, needs to be included in any negotiation. In that way, loser-nations on emissions could be compensated from proceeds from the tax, so making their cooperation on emissions much more likely. Thus, what a nation may lose on one issue, it can gain on the other, so making immediate and adequate action to meet the necessary emissions reduction targets much more likely.
4. Detailed policies, not just targets: Simply agreeing targets on emissions reductions, as is customary with the UN COP process, is insufficient. It is insufficient, because no nation knows what every other nation will actually do to achieve those targets. Thus, no nation can be sure what other nations will do, nor what the impact on its economic competitiveness will be. Not surprisingly, little action results. For this reason, negotiations need to include an agreement, not just on targets, but on the detailed policies that each nation will implement to achieve them.
5. An electoral incentive to cooperate globally: To encourage politicians to cooperate globally, citizens (at least those in democratic countries) could incentivise this by giving strong voting preference at national elections to politicians and political parties that declare their willingness to follow the above principles, to the probable exclusion of those politicians or parties who don’t. In that way, politicians/parties that choose global cooperation stand to gain an electoral advantage. As global problems become more acute, such an electoral incentive could play a significant role. It could also afford citizens a strong influence over the policies to be implemented at the global level.