Prof Rajiva Wijesinha, Secretary General of the Peace Secretariat, was in Amsterdam last week for the 5th Anniversary of the Third Chamber. This is a shadow-parliament in the Netherlands to look at issues of international development. Prof Wijesinha had served in the Third Chamber in 2004, and was amongst former members invited for the celebrations which included debates and discussions, culminating in a celebration at the Koepelkerk.

Amongst the meetings set up was a discussion with Prof Rob van der Vaart of Utrecht University, who heads a commission set up to identify a canon of topics and themes young people should engage with, to understand the world they live in and be able to live as a global citizen in the Netherlands.

Prof Wijesinha was unable to attend the meeting as he was engaged, as a member of the delegation of the Council of Asian Liberals and Democrats, in meetings with the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe in Brussels. He therefore put forward the following topics for discussion.

The Dutch influence in developing trade monopolies

In studying the history of relations between different periods, and in particular the effects of colonialism, I think it would be illuminating if one of the principal Dutch contributions to the colonial experience were highlighted and understood.

I refer to the policy of the Dutch as a colonial power to promote monopolies in trade. As the world now realizes in looking at colonialism, in the first wave, associated with the great Age of Exploration beginning at the end of the 15th century, the purpose of the voyagers was to obtain goods which they sold for vast profits in Europe. They bought these for what were comparatively small sums to them, but which satisfied the local vendors – ie, an example of market principles at work in the first example perhaps of globalized trade.

Unfortunately the Dutch developed the idea of promoting monopolies. They wanted to tie the vendors down to supplying only them, thus cutting out their European rivals. They also sought to develop commodity monopolies in the areas that came under their sphere of influence, thus distorting the market and in some cases adversely affecting the social structures of those areas.

This phenomenon has been explored in recent studies, though the concepts may need to be simplified for school students. However it would contribute immeasurably to understanding how the modern world was shaped, and lessons from what happened may help in developing strategies to ensure fair as well as free trade for the future.

The logic of free movement of labour

In discussions and debates on globalization, much stress has been laid throughout on the benefits of the free movement of goods. This expanded to encompass services and has now been extended to capital too. However there is little stress on the wider benefits of the free movement of labour.

From the perspective of developing countries, this seems to exemplify the manner in which the developed world governs the terms of debate. Goods and services and capital are elements in which the developed world does well, whereas labour is the preserve of the developing world. Whilst the developed world is assured of the benefits of free trade, and that initial disruptive effects will be overcome, no such argument is put forward about the free movement of labour.

A less selective way of considering these issues would immeasurably promote development in poorer countries. It would also help richer countries to deal more systematically with the problems of falling birth rates and even labour shortages in some fields. Accepting that short term labour contracts would not entail residence rights (as is the case with migrant labour in the Middle East for instance) will ease some problems, and would allow market principles primacy, as needed in this regard by the developing world.

Prof Wijesinha was also unable to attend the meeting with the Christian Democrat spokesman for Development Cooperation, Kathleen Ferrier. He had however, in the light of reports he had received from civil society in Colombo about the return of Dutch aid money to the Netherlands, requested that the issue of transparency with regard to aid programmes be raised. This was agreed by the membership, which noted the importance of recipient countries being aware of funds both governments and non-governmental organizations received, the rationale for disbursements and the choice of partners for cooperation, and the impact and effectiveness of development projects.