urgently needs to catch up and to operate at the global level.

The creation of the World Trade Organisation can be seen as an attempt to close that governance gap. But the WTO is doomed to fail as became clear when I was invited to give a talk there last year. You might be surprised to know that in the preamble to its articles, the WTO has the stated goal of promoting global prosperity on an equitable basis. So what is prosperity and how is it created? If we define it as equitable and sustainable development, that surely depends not just on trade but also on a healthy environment and a fairly paid labour force. Rather like a Tristar jet, having only one or two of its three engines running just will not do: all three are needed. But here�s the problem: that the WTO is occupied with only the trade engine. The environmental and social �engines� are left out of the equation on the popular, free-market assumption that, if sufficiently liberated, the trade engine will automatically create the necessary wealth to fuel the other two.

Before going on, however, lets ask ourselves why �trade� occurs at all? Well, as a businessmen I can easily answer that question: trade only occurs when a profit can be made from the transaction. But to profit to the maximum extent, costs must clearly be reduced or, preferably, eliminated altogether. Unfortunately, however, labour is a cost and so is environmental protection. So we should be clear that the three engines of our �prosperity Tri-star� do not operate in natural equilibrium; if left to itself, the trade engine will operate at the expense of the other two; left to itself, therefore, our Tri-star jet will just go round in circles � until it runs out of fuel.

Now in the 1960s and 70s this wasn�t a problem because capital was not free-flowing and corporations tended to operate nationally rather than globally. This meant that capital and corporations generally remained within the regulatory sphere of national governments who could impose the necessary measures to protect labour and the environment without fear of capital and corporations moving elsewhere. They were also in a position to implement redistributive taxation and other necessary measures resulting in a virtuous prosperity circle. So governments, as the pilots of our plane, were in those days able to maintain a reasonable balance of fuel supply between all three engines.

In today�s global economy, by contrast, these conditions no longer apply as I have explained. As capital and corporations now move across national borders to wherever costs are lowest and profits highest, far from increasing regulation to eliminate the effects of destructive competition, nation states, whether developed or developing, must instead progressively dismantle the little regulation they already have in order to stay �internationally competitive�. This translates into a deteriorating environment, a rapidly expanding gulf between rich and poor, and a noticeable tendency of under-privileged sections of society to resort to far-right political parties. Not for nothing have we recently witnessed rioting in many northern English cities and the rise of far-right demagogues like Le Pen.

So today�s free movement of capital and corporations removes from governments of any political leaning, the freedom to pursue those restorative policies their predecessors of the 60s and 70s were able to benefit from. Instead, the power of today�s markets means that governments have effectively become the puppets of a quasi-dictatorship of transnational capital which demands business-friendly policies regardless of the party in power. That�s why the world�s Old Labour parties have all morphed into quasi-Thatcherite �New Labours� and democracy has been subverted into little more than a pseudo-democratic charade where voting has become virtually meaningless. Little wonder we have voter apathy!

In conclusion, therefore, the assumption the WTO is based on: that liberalising trade will eventually improve social and environmental problems is based on a premise which simply no longer applies. Competition has thus become a globally destructive vicious circle in which governments, businesses and citizens are all locked. If we fail to bridge the global governance gap soon, our Tristar jet will run out of fuel and crash. Global warming, the widening gap between rich and poor and the rise of the Far-Right are the warning buzzers going off in the cock-pit. But it seems our governmental pilots are all out to lunch.

But unlike some other NGOs or activist groups, the International Simulaneous Policy Organisation contends that this is not really the fault of business people or of market traders or fund managers. Indeed, in a globally competitive market, business can only afford to be as socially and environmentally responsible as its main competitors. Similarly, for market traders to refrain from investing in countries which permit poor social or environmental conditions would cause them to lose out to traders without such scruples. Under these vicious circle conditions, therefore, restraint is positively futile. Or as we business people rightly say: "If we don�t do it, our competitors will!".

The solution, as I suggested earlier, can only come from the provision of adequate, equitable and democratic global governance. Governments of nation states therefore need to cooperate with one another to implement policies which remove the destructive elements of competition. So the lesson we�re learning here, is that an integrated management approach which ensures that all three engines of our Tri-star - economic, social and environmental - are all adequately and equitably fueled to produce prosperity for the common good is vital.

It�s for that reason some call for the WTO to build social and environmental concerns into its trade rules. Now that may sound like a great and fair idea, but "rules" necessarily mean a �one size fits all� regime for all nation states who are not equal and find themselves at dramatically different stages in their development. Can it be right, realistic or fair, for example, to expect Guatemala to have the same environmental standards as Germany? Would we expect a featherweight boxer to be pitted against a heavyweight? Of course not. But these are the inevitable and idiotic outcomes of a rules-based system which ignores fundamental differences in each nation�s ability to compete on a level playing field. So rules alone are not enough.

What is also needed are methods of raising global taxes; of redistributing incomes across borders to the poorest; of providing debt-free technical and financial assistance to non-industrial and developing countries to help them out of