 I want to welcome everybody to our panel on the future of the Millennium Development Goals. Sorry, Mike Sanna. I want to welcome everybody to our panel on the future of the Millennium Development Goals. We have a terrific panel here this morning. I'll just introduce everybody very quickly. To my left, obviously, is Prime Minister David Cameron, Queen Rania of Jordan, Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, Bill Gates, President Kagame, Helen Gale, President and Chief Executive Officer of CARE, USA, and Paul Pullman, the head of Unilever. Just to remind everybody, because the subject today is going to be the fact that in the year 2000, 189 nations got together and agreed on eight development goals over the next 15 years, and we're now approaching the expiration of them. And the question we really want to reflect on is should we set new goals? Are some of these more relevant, less relevant? Where have we made progress? And just to remind everyone what those goals were, they were one, eradicate extreme poverty and hunger, two, achieve universal primary education, three, promote gender equality and empower women, four, reduce child mortality, five, improve maternal health, six, combat HIV, AIDS, malaria and other diseases, seven, ensure environmental sustainability, and eight, develop a global partnership for development. I think we'll just do this in the order we're all seated. So Prime Minister Cameron, I wonder if you could kick us off. Well, thanks very much, Tom. I'll give you my five quick points on what we should try and do with this review of the MDGs. First point, let's not waste the time between now and 2015. Let's actually do everything we can up to and including 2015 to meet more of the goals. They have been inspiring. They have inspired the world to raise their game. That's point one. Second thing is, I hope that in the work we do to work out what comes next, we don't kill off something that's good and that's simple and that holds government to account. There's always a danger of creating something incredibly complicated, very long, and basically governments will then slide off their responsibilities because we won't have those specific measurable deliverable targets. Third thing, I think we've got to keep that inspiring overall aim, which should be ending eradicating completely absolute poverty in our world. We can do it if we look at how many fewer people there are living on $1.25 a day today than there were 10, 20 years ago, as I was saying on the stage today. It can be done. Fourth point, which I suppose should really be the first point, we must listen to the poorest people in the world and the poorest countries in the world about the things that they most want. The MDGs were fantastic, but there was a slight sense that this was the rich world setting out a set of things that everyone should try and achieve. And I find when you hold listening exercises and you listen to people, you get an enormous amount that comes back not just about shortage of money or shortage of food, but shortage of justice, problems of corruption, problems of bad government, lack of property rights, lack of an ability to get on in life. And that leads me to my fifth point, which is I hope we can include what I call the golden thread, which is those things that help countries and people go from poverty to wealth, the absence of war, the absence of corruption, the presence of good government, the presence of property rights, a free media, the ability to start a business, to employ people, to grow and to achieve your goals. Those things are absolutely vital, as well as the important health and educational targets that are contained in the MDGs. So we've been given an impossible task by the Secretary General on the high-level panel, but we're going to proceed on the basis that nothing is impossible and try and build on what's been a great global success. Thank you. Thank you so much. Queen Romney, you've been working on a lot of these in your own country where you faced a lot of these challenges. What's been your experience? And is there anything on that list from your own work? You'd say has got to be on the next list of millennium goals. Well, building on what the Prime Minister said, I think it's very important for the process to be inclusive. Everybody has a stake in this, so everybody has to have a say. And I think in the Arab world, over the past two years, people have made their voices heard. And what we've seen in my part of the world is as much of a demand for economic justice and freedom from want as it is for political justice and freedom from oppression. I mean, we are the youngest region in the world with over 50% of our population under the age of 25. And the gap between what these young people expect and what they experience is very wide. And that needs to be bridged. So in our part of the world, we really need to achieve that economic transformation with individual countries laying down the national building blocks for growth and sustained prosperity. Our young people, they just want to reach their potential. They want a chance to be part of the growth that they feel that they've missed out on in the past. And a couple of things that we really need to focus on in our part of the world is equality education. Today, the kind of education that our young people receive is not relevant. They are transitioning into adulthood unprepared and facing an uncertain future. They need to feel equipped with the kind of 21st-century skills that can give them a chance to fulfill their potential. Another issue is job creation. And here entrepreneurship is a critical thing that we need to work on. And you visited Jordan, you saw that there's a lot of excitement around entrepreneurship. Yet the ecosystem, the supporting ecosystem for entrepreneurship is out of balance because there is plenty of red tape. The financial enablers are very underdeveloped. So only 8% of lending goes to small and medium-sized enterprises. Again, education gaps. So a lot of work needs to be done in that regard. But I think entrepreneurship could be a very important ingredient as an engine for employment. And it's not until we are able to give our young people the skills that they need and the creation of opportunity for them that we'll see that transition in the Arab world to a better future. Thank you. Secretary General. Thank you. This is a very good opportunity. As the target date of 2015 is a fast approaching, discussing this matter, raising the awareness and importance of meeting the target of MDG at the Davos Forum among world leaders and business leaders is quite important. Before I go further, I'd like to recognize the presence of my distinguished predecessor, former Secretary General Corfianan, who initiated this MDG in 2000 together with the world leaders on the occasion of the new millennium. And this has become our framework for development. MDG has been, I think, quite successful in rallying the importance of development, particularly for poor people, abject poverty, poor people, how we can sustain this planet Earth in a more sustainable and hospitable way. Those have been, I think, our top priorities now. I'm committed to bring this MDG to a successful conclusion mandated by the world leaders. As moderator has briefly introduced, we have made the good progress so far. We were able to reduce the number of abject poverty by half, and that is the announcement of World Bank. And also, we have been able to provide the safe for drinking water. The number of those people who do not have access to safe drinking water has reduced, and we were able to improve the life of at least 200 million slum dwellers to improve their living standard. All these are some of the achievements which we have done, including primary education. Rwanda is one of the exemplary countries where they have been meeting this target. Now, we have three priorities, three objectives and priorities at this time. First, we have to keep our promise. We have to keep promise. That means we have to meet the target. The scorecard is not even, uneven, depending upon where you are going, depending upon the countries. That we have to make even and harmonious accomplishment of this millennium target goal. That requires political will at the political leadership. After all, we are living in a world of limited resources. When you have limited resources, depending upon where the president and prime ministers will focus their national development priority, I think that will make a difference. So we have to keep our promise. Second, we have to have a good successor of this MDG after 2015. That is what we have already started. In Rio de Janeiro last year, June last year, the member states have adopted sustainable development outcome. They are going to discuss and set sustainable development goals, which will be carrying this MDG in a broader set. And I would like to thank Prime Minister David Cameron, who has willingly accepted our United Nations invitation to serve as chairman of this high-level panel of eminent persons. He is working very hard together with President Yudhoyono of Indonesia and President Johnson Solia of Liberia. They represent both developing, developed, and emerging countries. I have asked the leaders to come with bold, but practical one. Mr. Polman is also a member of this high-level panel sitting there. I'm expecting, on the basis of their recommendation and also in close cooperation with the member states, we will be able to have sustainable development goals reflecting all these 26 major issues identified by the Rio Prost 20 summit meeting. This is a top priority, number two priority. These SDGs, I think should include most of the MDGs, but in a broader sense, it should include other issues to make our world sustainable. That should be very clear, concise, and easy to communicate as MDG has become a family household name. Everybody now understands what MDG is aiming for. That we have to make sure that what SDG is aiming for. Thank you. Bill, I want you to take up this question, and I'd also like to add a question that I'm going to ask everybody to reflect on. If you were to add one more, if there were one more to the eighth, what would it be, knowing what you know from the work you've been doing? Well, it's fantastic how successful the Millennium Development Goals have been. It's during this period that we've improved the human condition faster than ever before. At the base, which was taken as 1990, 12 million children a year died every year, and by the time we get to 2015, we'll be below 6 million. So it's a 50% reduction, and never, that's way faster than we've ever done before. And the idea of measurement is pretty key here. What happened was every country looked at their goal and they looked at their rate of progress and they compared it to the other countries. And they saw what were the tactics, the affordable tactics that really worked in the countries that did well, and basically for child to death, having good primary health care system and great vaccine coverage is the primary determinant. And so countries like Ethiopia that went from limited primary health care to really investing in that, they've seen over a 65% reduction in that child to death rate. And so people, for the first time, were learning from other people and it made aid donors, instead of just having good goals and amounts of money in mind, it meant that they were going to the people who were following best practices as proven by progress. And so the aid community became more like the business community in being driven by best practices and really saying, why did you do so well? Or for the ones who didn't, why did you do so poorly? What's the contrast there? And we see that across the different development goals. The factor was consensus, the factor was a limited number, we knew how to measure them. It really made a difference and people actually shifted aid into the impactful areas, like health aid got a big boost during this period because of the Millennium Development Goals. I'd say going forward, I'd be worried that the most successful measurement exercise the UN ever did, everybody will want to piggyback that for their cause. And so the clarity that, hey, this is about the poorest and the tactics we use to help them. It's not really telling China how to run its country or the US how to run its country. It's more about how the world community comes together for the countries that we still need work for them to be self-sufficient. So personally, I would not add a goal. I would update like four, which is the education goal. Yep, I'd put a little quality metric in. It was purely kids in primary education. You need some quality measures in there. The disease goal, yeah, maybe it is time to add a few additional diseases. And of course we have to update what we think the target should be. I think in the next 15 years, we can cut child to death in half again. I think that's very doable and that gets you down to 3 million. But I don't think I'd add home the category. I think I don't know that that's what's going to happen. But I'd leave it alone. It's hard to argue with success because this success is measured in millions of lives. If you were to add a disease or diseases, what would they be? Well, the infectious diseases are where you have magic solutions, specifically vaccines. And they come in at costs that are very affordable to the poor countries. For the things that we're getting in the rich countries, we have $30 billion a year of government R&D working on cancer. So as you get cheap solutions, you want to make sure that what used to happen with vaccines, where it took 30 years between when the rich kids got it, who didn't really benefit as much as the poor kids were exposed to the diseases. You want to make sure you're taking those cheap interventions and getting them out there. But for a lot of these diseases, we don't have those things. And the UN is not where the research is going to be done on cancer and some of those things. We're starting in terms of blood pressure and a few other things to have very low cost off-patent pills. And so I would add a heart disease goal that there are interventions that the poorest countries can do there. But just two or three that wouldn't double the amount of text in MGG6. President Kagami. Thank you. Well, first of all, I'll speak from the point of the opportunity I have had in two ways. One, to serve on the advocates panel as a co-chair, but also coming from a country that has been right at the center of this and beneficial in many ways. And I would give testimony to the fact that the MDGs have been very valuable in many ways and also proof to what the world is capable of doing once it has committed itself and come together around certain principles. And here in this case, the world committed itself to the MDGs. And seeing objective poverty eradicated and the fight against different diseases and so on and so forth. So this is to give testimony that things have worked. And they have worked for a number of reasons. And the way to get more progress as we have already realized, it has been to give local interpretation of what this means and what can be done. In other words, bringing in the local communities together with their governments and other partners that have been central to this has translated into improvement of lives on the ground. And from this, therefore, when we have in mind, as the Secretary General has articulated, from here how do we continue or where do we go? This means consolidation of what has been achieved already where countries that have taken responsibility for themselves, their governments, the local communities, the partners that have come in, we've seen good results. There have been good results in many places on our continent, in my own country, through these partnerships, partnerships that have also built on accountability. I think Prime Minister Cameron mentioned that when it comes to governance, accountability to making sure that for every contribution that has been done for every dollar, there is no time expected in improving these lives. So we've seen countries that have taken ownership, register good results. So we kind of built on this for... Can I ask a follow-up, though, because you know this program so intimately from the inside and no program is perfect. One thing you'd recommend fixing going forward, what would it be? How can we make it better? Well, I think it should continue centering on the local situation because the local situation brings the local culture and innovation and people, even at the local level in rural areas, they have the kind of ingenuity to contribute to improving their lives. And I think it has been said, it's not that there are experts out there who come to tell people what they should be doing and they just do that. I think building on the needs of the people and the expressions is very important. But let me add something, we need not stop here. Much as I agree that the MDGs need to be kept simple and few and concentrate as a central point, I think we need to be seeing this in a much wider context. How do we make progress on this, whether at the same time have in mind that there are other things that would even improve the situation much better. For example, we can go beyond that and mobilize for public and private partnerships, for bigger investments in other areas that will actually make sure that what we have achieved here hold sustainably. For example, when we talk about investing in infrastructure, it's a big thing. It may even sound you are diverting from what the original objective was of simplicity of these goals. But in a big way, if you bring in the private sector and mobilize, you're not necessarily committing yourself to bringing in the resources because that's another issue. But we can use the power that is within the people who are advocating for this to mobilize, just mobilizing for that. Thank you. Ms. Kelly. Well, first and foremost, I think it is going to be important that we make sure that we do the most we can in the next 1,000 days. And it is clear success breeds more success. And I think the more we can do to make sure that we go for broke, if you will, for the time that we have remaining for the current MDGs. Second, I think that the more we can learn lessons and improve upon what we did well with the current MDGs, learn from that and continue to improve. And so I think some of the things that many people have said, they were simple. They were measurable. They were great in generating political will. They had a clear focus, all of those sorts of things. And they really did have the effect of really focusing the world on poverty and the fact that it is doable to make poverty history and eliminate poverty. So I think all of those things, we should make sure that we maintain. And I think the challenge will be that there, because people really felt they were so useful, that there will be this challenge of keeping them simple. The world has changed. There are many great needs, but I think the simplicity, the targeted, the focused nature of them really was what made us be able to achieve some of the successes that we have. So I think, again, learn from what we know. The other thing, though, that the world has shifted, and there are some things that we need to look at differently. Climate change clearly will have one of the greatest impacts on poverty of any other issue. And so whether it's food security, whether it's disease, income, all of those things, climate change is going to have a huge impact. And so whether we need to have a climate change-specific MDG, if you will, or realize that that needs to be part of the framework. The issue of equity, I think, is something that we didn't talk about as much. But even in countries where goals have been met, there's great pockets of inequity. And within countries as well as between countries, inequity is, I think, an issue that we are thinking about more and more. And so I think looking at how do we make sure that inequity is included in the way that we think about these issues. Another very positive aspect, I think, in the original MDGs was the gender focus. It is something that I think that is important that we do not lose. We aren't there yet. And that was one of those cross-cutting issues that I think was clearly important throughout. And so I think some of those are some of the things that were really important that we need to keep, but make sure that we look at some of the new things. People have mentioned, and this is clearly both a good part, the participatory nature of the current MDGs, but they were in many ways seen as something that galvanized governments. And civil society business did not have as much of a role, and I think being able to make sure that we really make this a multi-stakeholder effort and make sure that we do hear the voices, as Queen Ronja said, of the people who are affected by this and make this something that really is seen as a global effort, still making sure that we maintain the poverty focus. So those are some of the sorts of things that I think both learning lessons but continuing to innovate as we go along and recognizing that this second phase, this next phase needs to be different and reflect how the world is changing. Just finally, I think several have mentioned that this was very important to galvanize resources, but we didn't think about resource considerations until somewhat after the fact, and I think we should go into this clearly with a financial framework up front so that in this tough economic time we don't have any excuse to back away from the financial commitments that it's going to take to really make sure that we continue to maintain progress. Let me ask you this just quick follow-up as an aid provider. Should number nine be governance, that is, can we be effective with one through eight without improvements in governance? Yeah, I think governance has to be something that is, whether it is a specific item or if it's part of a framework that we think about and I think governance is clearly cuts across all of these issues and I guess, in addition to governance, the whole area of conflict we just finished hearing about conflict and humanitarian emergencies which didn't get as much focus the first time around and both because of climate change as well as the crises we continue to see I think we have to take that into consideration because it's having a huge impact on poverty. I just want to ask the Prime Minister, do you think governance can or should be part of this in a more high-profile way? I very much hope that it can. I think we have to grapple with this problem that some things that are very important in terms of helping people and countries go from poverty to wealth are difficult to measure and where I absolutely agree with Bill is some of the things that we are measuring are simple, they're accountable and you know that if you spend money, you can deal with them. Vaccination programs, children into school, these are things you can measure and there are things where aid money can make a real difference and these are the easiest things to measure and I say this as the Prime Minister of a country that is very proud that we're meeting our goal of 0.7% of GNI to aid at a difficult time but I make the argument because I think it's important that countries keep their promises as a more responsibility but we should look at those things that are more difficult to measure but really do make a difference and there's no doubt that governance makes a difference and so I'm going to cheat and give you two thoughts on future things we should at least think about measuring. Maybe it's not possible but let's take one which is the importance of being able to own property and for particularly for women to be able to own property. If you don't have a proper land registry, nobody knows what land you own, whether you own your house however small it is, you can't borrow money, you can't start a business, you can't expand the private sector. This is an incredibly important issue that people like Hananda DeSoto have written so powerfully about so I think we should think about that. Another one, as I've said, I find when you ask people what are you most lacking? Of course there are issues in our world still about hunger, about under nutrition and we should really hit those hard this year but you also get the cry what about freedom from corruption? What about access to justice? So that I think is another area in the governance heading where I hope we can be bold and say look it is difficult to measure this stuff but just because it's difficult let's not give up because it matters so much. So those are some thoughts. Thank you. Paul, go ahead. Yeah, well the first thing on what is new now versus what was then is in fact the last Millenian gold that probably including the private sector was an afterthought and with the courage of the Secretary General, the Prime Minister, David Cameron and others you now have two members of the private sector on the high level panel and if you think that nine out of ten people in the world are directly or indirectly in the private sector it is common sense that we're included. We've also discovered that it's not so easy to be in politics so we have more respect for politicians now since I started this job than I even had previously. We just did a poll at the consumer goods community here at the World Economic Forum and the two things that are on everybody's mind is equitable growth within the planetary boundaries. This world needs growth. We still have two billion people coming. We start from a bad position. Over 200 million people unemployed need to generate 40 million jobs to become a global problem, by the way, not just one for the aspiring markets and at the same time we need to do that in a way that is sustainable within the planetary boundaries at a moment that many of these biomarkers are already on shop or are exceeded and businesses increasingly see that as a limitation to that growth. So finish the job. We get back from anybody in the business community. Clear targets, accountability is obviously what business likes focus on growth. We know how to do that best. Doing that in partnership, keeping the planetary boundaries into account and that we need to play up hopefully a little bit more in the goals that we will develop or in the upcoming meetings in Monrovia and in Bali. Within that food security is going to be a big thing. You cannot solve your poverty, the zero poverty, your job creation if you don't attack the issues of food security and this. Again, Mr. Prime Minister was the upcoming G8 and the conference we already had in Downing Street at the time of the Olympics to put nutrition in there because it's not about calories. It's about nutrition is a very important thing. And when you talk about diseases, what you asked Bill, I think the biggest disease in my opinion is going to be the chronic diseases. There are more people dying of heart attacks and the diabetes to the obesity on the one hand was the food. We have a very bizarre situation in the world right now where you have 890 million people go to bed hungry, not knowing if to wake up the next day. 170 million children stunted as we now work with nutrition. Then we're able in between to waste about 30, 40% of the food as if it doesn't matter, with all the climate change effects on top of that. And then we try to figure out how another billion can eat more than they need and end up being obese at an alarming rate. So these are these issues that destabilize the world but also destabilize the business community. And increasingly, businesses understand even more so since I believe the 2008 crisis that any system where too many people are excluded or left behind is not a system that's an equilibrium, is not a system that's good for business either. So we are at a very important point I think in humanity and that's why I volunteered to be part of the high-level panel because we're in a period probably over a decade if we are honest amongst ourselves and we've seen many manifestations of that in the last few days here where the political process is kind of difficult to move things forward and without going into the many things with the DOA rounds or the climate change agreements, the solving of the European problem, the outcome of Rio plus 20 itself and yet the time is ticking away and the best chance we have I believe to put a global moral framework in place before we see others taking that place as we've seen in the past with nation states or institutions the Millennium Development Goals could potentially be the best opportunity we have that moral framework. And I think the current goals that have been in place although not totally achieved have been incredibly helpful for business. The Secretary-General's every woman, every child for example got over $1.6 billion from business. We just came from the scaling up nutrition zero hunger, $3 billion. These are enormous things that align business communities to get the results. So let's not miss this opportunity that we have. Finish the job between now and 2015 and then put goals in place that we all align ourselves under between now and 2030 and hopefully then we can go home and look our children in the eye and say we don't even try or we didn't even try we actually made this a better world for all. I'm going to go to the floor for questions in a second but Bill I want to get you to follow up on the Prime Minister's point about governance that you're running the world's biggest foundation dealing with multiple governments all over the world can should that be part of this? I completely agree that quality of governance is such a key factor in where we see progress. The question I would have is who's good at rating governance? So for example the World Health Organization at one point tried to rank health systems and those guys were fired because the member states don't like being rated by the organization they control and so what I would say is what Mo Ibrahim's done taking people that we support like Transparency International his governance index which covers a lot of the different issues is phenomenal. I don't think we'll do better than that and I think if we gave it to the UN we would politicize that what would the US ranking be? It better be number one or maybe not and so the question is who's best equipped to criticize governments? Is it a club of governments or perhaps not? Let's go to the floor and please if you identify yourself and if you want to pose the question to the whole panel or to anyone in particular it's a little hard for me. We've got right over there gentlemen and they're going to bring you a microphone. Peter Prove from the Acumenical Advocacy Alliance based in Geneva thanks to all the panelists for the brilliant interventions one comment I didn't hear I don't think anybody referred to human rights. Reactions? Very much part of the Golden I mean I would say the human rights are very much part of the Golden thread and all those things which aren't always about money but things that actually help people to enjoy prosperity rather than poverty and so access to justice freedom from corruption, human rights democracy, a free press all of these things are essential and I would respond to Bill by saying that you know if we're going to take the public with us on this yes they absolutely back action to vaccinate children to make sure kids are going to school proper health outcomes but the public knows that if you have corruption if you have conflict if you have bad governance all the aid in the world won't solve the problems of poverty and I think we need to have frank conversations I mean for instance Britain and Rwanda have a very close relationship Britain's a big investor in terms of aid into Rwanda but when we have disagreements as we have recently over the conflict and the DRC we should be frank in saying so I think we need a we shouldn't be frightened of disagreeing with each other and we shouldn't be frightened of talking about human rights, governance, freedom from corruption and above all freedom from conflict because if there is war taking place in your country it doesn't matter what else is going on you will not make a journey out of poverty into prosperity Secretary General Let me briefly add to this human rights issue human rights is one of three pillars of the United Nations charter so this is an absolute value and principle which in every aspect of United Nations missions or activities that's a basic principle there is a serious problem of human rights there are many countries where human rights are grossly violated then what to do with this aid and development and you know country where good governance is not the practice what to do with that very serious discussions we call it chief executive board meeting all the heads of United Nations agencies including World Bank and IMF we meet twice a year under my chairmanship and we discuss all the issues starting from political issues and development issues and human rights issues and how we can work together that's one good principle on many occasions the questions have been raised what to do with this particular country where human rights are grossly violated then what about development of course development side they said we have to help to bring prosperity and economic development and human rights department and agencies they said we have to make sure that as long as they do not respect and uphold human rights principle we have to rethink my answer was that human rights is an absolute value principle therefore human rights should prevail over all the issues of course there are counter argument when the security is not assured people cannot protect the human rights but there is a very important principle of accountability whenever and wherever even though it may be sometime after those human rights perpetrators will have to be held accountable so just because nobody has mentioned human rights that does not mean that we are not taking care of for human rights let's try to get a couple more questions if we can write down here if you could introduce yourself I'm an assistant professor of economics at Columbia University my question is directed specifically at bill but anyone else who has thoughts you mentioned that one change you might make to the education goal is to add a quality metric and that really resonates with me because I think it's true that even though we've increased enrollment by a lot hundreds of millions of kids are exiting school systems without basic math skills so I was wondering if you had thoughts on what quality metrics might actually look like and also ideas or things that you've seen in your experiences on what ways people have actually been able to improve quality at scale in public school systems and queen Ronnie could I ask you to follow up with bill because you've run your own teachers academy I know and I'm on so bill go ahead well this action area where the OECD does a fantastic job they are able to take education at various levels reading skills math skills and do very good global measurement they do it extremely efficiently they do in-depth interviews about the tactics that different countries use the thing that always jumps out is it's about running a personnel system if you make sure your teachers show up you make sure they're evaluated you make sure they have ways of improving then you have a great education system which large parts of Asia do and if you don't have enough feedback and don't run that personnel system then you're not going to be up in the top rank so it's really about how good the teachers are your question really speaks to my region because we're a region that has invested a lot in education although we've achieved much better rates in terms of access and completion the relevance and the quality of our education has been trailing behind so schooling for us has not been synonymous with learning unfortunately and I think that that is a key ingredient to changing the situation in our part of the world and teachers again I will just re-emphasize what Bill has said it's such an important ingredient for example I remember just a couple weeks ago I went to visit a remote village in the south of Jordan I went to a classroom for sixth grade girls and they had just taken a creative writing class so this is a group of 30 girls 12 years old and they were sitting there debating, very engaged very focused discussing their feelings their fears, their challenges their hopes and dreams there was this one particular girl and she stood up and she was telling us about her story her story was about her grandmother who was a famous storyteller in the village she had entertained generations very old with famous folktales and Noor was saying well my grandmother narrated other people's stories I want to narrate my own because I, she stood up very proudly and said I want to be an author and I can't tell you how proud I was of this little girl in this remote village not exposed to very much in her life but already plotting her future because she had the kind of education that's empowering her own future now the point of this is that moments like these in classrooms don't happen by coincidence the teacher of this young girl had just completed a three year training course at the teachers academy in Jordan which was established in 2009 in cooperation with Columbia University and this is the thing I think good teachers teach great teachers transform and they can really be drivers of change not just in schools but across society this academy had reached about 6,000 teachers out of 75,000 which is nowhere near enough but I found that failed programs I try not to lose any sleep over failed programs it's the successful ones that I worry about which brings us to the issue of scale in any government in any country in order to try to have the impact that you want you have to make scaling up success an explicit part of your long term planning you also have to make sure that the goals are dynamic and time and space sensitive so from our experience teacher training is absolutely essential you have to scale the success up you have to make sure that governments are involved you have to make sure that partners and donors stay engaged in order to see the impact most importantly it's about the public when the public demand a better education and they make it a priority and they make their governments listen the chances are that this will move up the national agenda for the country and achieve the success that's needed because across all of the millennium development goals and we're grappling with what should be and what shouldn't be our world has changed but in many ways economic empowerment can deal with most of the issues and education quality education is absolutely essential to achieve that one more question I can't see so well write down here one more and I want to make sure that Mr. Pullman Ms. Gail and President Kagami I get a chance here I'm Nilmini Rubin I'm a young global leader alumnus I work for the Information Technology Industry Council I wanted to push back on something Mr. Gates said about measuring corruption in addition to Moe Ibrahim's great index there are lots of other measures the international budget project has a measure of budget transparency and I think it's a really important underpinning governance of all of the other millennium development goals that we all care about and my question is to President Kagami with the beneficiary countries or in your country would be able to be comfortable with a governance measure President Kagami if you'd like to take any of those Ms. Gail and Paul let me deal with the two issues briefly I try to as briefly as possible first of all I think the last question raised is key and building on what you had raised who is right or who is well placed or better placed to give us a measure of governance and so on it's a very tricky area because governments may not be able to benefit from other governments doing the criticism or something like that but I still think there are even with the so called independent institutions like the one you mentioned because in the end when you look carefully across the board so many countries rated differently you see politics in it this is the experience I'm telling you from the experience on the other side you see independence is really subjective depends on where you are standing so but if you have a number of these organizations acting independently then you can look at across them and get a feel of what is correct not relying on one because there is not a single individual or a single country or institution that we can say has a monopoly of being right in making the judgment so if you have many doing it then you have a better chance but let me quickly answer something also to do with human rights that was mentioned because there is a problem here in my experience over the years again it's the same question who really has the monopoly or the sole right to define because there are some gray areas that are human rights that are obvious when they are violated you see that you know who is responsible you can't do that but there are others the definition keeps changing and you also find in the process of judgment a lot of politicization and in fact that judgment being used to make decisions even if there are policy decisions or other decisions depending on who they are having in mind not because of what has happened it's a real problem so it calls for a serious debate human rights are rights lived by people they are not things that are just abstract and there is not a single person there is not a single country there is not a single institution that has the monopoly over defining what human rights constitute in that broadness thank you Ms. Gale just touching on a few of these I think that clearly there will be issues like governance and human rights that will be difficult issues to tackle they are political they are tough to measure but I think that doesn't mean that they shouldn't be debated ultimately they may or may not end up in the next set of goals but I think that they should be debated and they should be discussed and we need to push ourselves on the things that we know really do make a difference for people at the end of the day if we are able to end poverty that will go a long way towards human rights and social justice and so I think if we continue to remember what is it that we really want to make sure we do we want to make sure that we have a more equal and more just planet we want to make sure that people have healthy lives and we have the opportunity to make a living that they have the tools to do that like education that they are free from hunger and if we continue to think about what are the big things that we know make a difference for people and how do we do those in the most practical focused measurable way I think we will come out of this with a set of goals that we can live by that we will fund towards those that said I think that there are key things like human rights, like governance and other issues that we should grapple with but until we really come up with answers and not say no until we've actually had those discussions but I think we don't want to get to the point where because things are tough that we don't develop consensus on the things that we can actually move ahead on and I think that's why this set of millennium has really had an impact because we came to consensus on some things that we could do we've made some progress and I think if we can keep that framework in mind then we will continue to move towards our broader goals of a better society a more just world and as you said being able to look our children in the face and say that we didn't just stand there and not make the world better Paul, we're going to give you the last word I'll make it one minute one more question because you introduce yourself as a young global leader in the technology sector and these are two things we haven't talked enough half of the world population is below 25 years old so the young are going to get the answer they happen to be 50% of the world population today by my calculations they happen to be 100% of the world population tomorrow and they understand better what is going on than we do sustainable and equitable growth what it means to have a governance or rule of law whatever words we want to put around it where everybody gets a chance and these people are indeed in the technology sector two and a half billion people are connected on the internet soon we will have 50 billion connected devices in the world and increasingly especially the young know how to use this and we see some of these manifestations already often led to frustration because with age or lack of age if you may say is lack of experience so if we can provide the frameworks they certainly have the energy and the power the third nation in the world right now after China and India is Facebook with over a billion people on social networks and increasingly we see that on any of these things how it moves governments the situation in India where a girl loses her life in tragedy and finally a million people on the street and within a month you have the court system set up and rule of law is hopefully taking place for things that we would expect to be normal anywhere in the world so we have to enroll in this process the young we have to figure out how to better efforts the social networks that are giving us many more opportunities all of us accountable on what we do which brings me to my last thing we have a very limited period of time it was Viktor Frankl who said in his book Man Search for Meaning that when they built the Statue of Liberty on the east coast of the United States they forgot to build the Statue of Responsibility on the west coast all the people in this audience were very fortunate to be on the liberty side including myself I wouldn't have been sitting here with everybody a chance in his world as well but as we have that liberty we also have that responsibility that responsibility to participate into what the next post 2015 development goals are going to be there are goals there are the goals for the future of the planet there are the goals for the future of humanity so please please please reach out to the high level panel or the future we want website or other things to give your opinion this is not a moment to be a bystander we won't get there otherwise so thanks for your help it was a great wrap up thanks to all our panel and thanks to all of you