Home Economics Please Don't Let This Ghastly Person Run The WTO

Please Don’t Let This Ghastly Person Run The WTO



Here we have a laying out of the proposed policy to be followed if this person becomes the new World Trade Organisation chief. This policy aim being an excellent reason why this person should not become the new World Trade Organisation chief.

The World Trade Organization needs to be at the forefront of the fight against the Covid-19 pandemic in order to help restore its battered reputation, one of the favourites to be its next leader has said.

Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, Nigeria’s choice to replace Roberto Azevêdo as WTO director general, said trade rules should ensure that medical breakthroughs save lives everywhere and not just in the countries where they were developed.

In an interview with the Guardian, Okonjo-Iweala said poorer nations had lost faith with the WTO owing to its failure to deliver on the promise of trade liberalisation focused on development, adding that the pandemic gave the organisation the chance to prove its relevance.

“There has to be equitable access to medicines and the WTO could be part of the solution to that. The WTO has to programme the rules of trade in light of Covid-19, she said

You’re running for the wrong job Honey. That’s the World Health Organisation – WHO, not WTO.

The WTO is an enforcement mechanism for what countries agree to do about trade. Each and every country gets to participate in working our what those rules are going to be. Each and every country has a veto – an absolute one – on the deal as a whole. It is then the WTO’s job to run the court system. So that if someone complains that the agreement is being broken there’s somewhere neutral to go and complain about it – possibly even get it rectified.

This is all long before the silliness of your actual proposal. For “equitable access” is current code for “screw the capitalist firms”. And if we do that then we don’t get any new medicines.

So, bad idea being proposed in the wrong place. Not a great job interview then. Admittedly, she did pretty well at the World Bank and as Nigeria’s finance minister but this is still a seriously bad idea.



  1. Why don’t the Nigerians, and for that matter all the Africans, ignore the medicines and vaccines developed by the filthy, racist white world and stick to the poultices, medicine men and herbal cures coming out of the continent. Particularly the sub-Saharan part.

    • Because, with the possible exception of people applying for senior jobs with international bodies, they rarely have the grievances and the very unhealthy obsession with race that are promoted by the left in high-income countries. If anything, they react to those attitudes with bewilderment.

  2. There is no need whatsoever for the WTO to get involved. “Big Pharma” subsidises the supply of medicines to the poorer countries out of the profits it rakes in from the rich ones. Glaxo, for instance, supplies anti-malarial drugs to “developing countries” below manufacturing cost (let alone any contribution to R&D costs), AstraZeneca have promised to supply their Covid-19 vaccine at no profit if it works and will bear the loss if it doesn’t. And so on …
    Equirtable access to medicines would *increase* the price in developing countries.

    • Fair point, hardly ever made.
      But really the positioning is about allowing local pharma companies to rake in profits, if of course they have the right political connections.
      In other words, the posturing is not about getting lower prices, it’s about allowing the local potentates to price gouge the local population, which of course they will do.

  3. But she does have sixteen million British pounds sterling (£16,000,000) locked in a bank account that she needs a little help moving overseas.

    • she’s got a lot more than sixteen million British pounds sterling locked in a bank account lol.
      Ten board membership/QUANGO memberships, at say £100k/year/membership, for a cool million GBP/year part time positions only.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here


in British English
expunct (ɪkˈspʌŋkt)
VERB (transitive)
1. to delete or erase; blot out; obliterate
2. to wipe out or destroy

Support Us

Recent posts

American Hyperconsumerism Is Killing Fewer People!

This report does not say what the Guardian headline writers think it does: Three Americans create enough carbon emissions to kill one person, study finds The...

Contracts Often Lag New Revenue Streams

I've been - vaguely and not with any great interest - anticipating a story like this: Scarlett Johansson sues Walt Disney over Marvel’s Black Widow...

Richard Murphy Rediscovers Monetarism

We have a delightful example of how Richard Murphy simply doesn't understand the basic nuts and bolts of the economics he wants to impose...

Vox Is Missing The Point About Having A Constitution

Not that we should be all that surprised by this from the progressives at Vox. No government- well, no one not controlled by...

So Let’s Have An Elitist Technocracy Instead!

There's been a certain amount - OK, a lot - of squealing in the US about how democracy is the ultimate value and we...

Recent comments