A colleague for and faculty of law d a junior fellow its a great plsure to have you here. [applause] the book is available for purchase at the bookstore pen with thing going in random house books as well and then we would entertain questions here and then to ask a question of the panel on the righthand side and then with law degrees from oxfordnd ran the first per gone corporation the pathologica pursuit and power in 2004 and in 20 languages also made into a movie at the time which one the best for documentary at the sundance festival. So with the sql with this new book with the book he wrote in 1987 and social law and with the tremendous around as the subject. Another book im quite keen on with the business targeting children in 2012 and then we will be joined the race of the millennials and a new generation to the future with the young people here and the junior fellow also at toronto faculty of law and Research Associate collaborating center for governance accountability and transparency in the pharmaceutical sector gradted a molecular agenda had and International Relations and has been interested between science and public policy. I want to thank her for agreeing to do the book s i am delighted to have you with us also professor schneiderman and potical science are very prolific coauthor in the past but his books are resisting economic globalization because red white and kind of blue and that constitutional culture and the next common one that i hope we will disss here and om in imperialism and death there are manyascinating aspects of about theook it was made into a movie thats the first thing its fun to read als a sense like a Michael Moore quest with the sense deeply committed so with that sobering account of the good Corporate Governance s when they he safety and suainability and social responsibility in the respoe pandemic, we always fall short of measures that interfere to contradict the business model. Lets watch a trailer and then we will have a discussion. A Green Economy is killing u us. We are steeped in this modification trying to distinguish between being a consumer and a citizen. This opened my eyes. Calling a cle one a corporation a psychopath you can see those resources to get them to focus. No such thing as corporate social responsibility. The change are coming faster than anybody thought. Completely out of control corporations every now big business opportunities. It is a 51 billiondollar per year market. In the health care system. The reach cannot be underestimated they know everything about us. They will push back they live in a world they are governed privately spirit the large corporate bailouts it is shameful a global pandem what do we do now . The democracy. And changes coming. Are you actually going to challenge the powerful corporations . You have to really ask yourself what was your goal . Its a good question. Let me begin by thanking you and recognizing all of you for coming here. I am thinking everybody. Thank you Panel Members very much for coming here. You watch that typical piece the legal scholarship but what i want to claim is legal scholarship what got me interested in the whole issue was back in the late 19 ninetie nineties, knowing that corporations were gaining powers in the world now challenging government it seems almost trite but at that time as a result of globalization these entities were becoming all governing institutions rather than society and the Democratic Institution so we thought so to look at this institution is a Political Institution and ask how is it constituted and thats what i did so Corporate Law deals with three things the most important is that it is created not created by the invisible hand but made by governments and states and with the three characteristics that says you dont have to be liable if things go sideways of the company that you invested in with a shareholder so you are moving the money you put into it that you are liable for but if it go sideways nobody will come after you your share price will just go down a little that is limited liability but if theyre not liable then who is so poor the rabbit out of a hat so somebody can assume the liabilities so we will say businesses the person only people can of the rights and responsibilities so we will make them a person limited liability to be connected in that way to find something that will pass in the legal system in the third thing is the one i became most interested in and the problem is how do we get people to put their money into ventures like railroads and factories in hand that over to do what they will. That their interest will be served by those managing the enterprise. To say everything a corporation does and quite a long time ago and with this idea that a corporation is a person legally constituted to act in its own selfinterest as a human person we were diagnosed it as a psychopath that forms the basic argument of the project but that rules out i was young and arrogant and full of myself so people watch the film and read the book and see the problem with it and everything will change. Ten years after that am sitting in the theater at the celebration of the tenth anniversary of the first film and it hits me like a rock what are we celebrating . Ten years have gone by and everything that we talk about has came true inequality, racial economics, global warming, corporations are bigge bigger, more influential. So we are going to the wrong direction and at the same te beginning around 200 corporation started saying were the go guys now we are the solution to the worlds proble problemwe are no longer the problem we are suainable and socially responsible. We a great and good actors now en there was the third piece traveling around the world doing research for the book and for the film i went to davos and talk to charles one Charles Schwab and the head of j. P. Morgan chase and one of the leading people in the world and realized there was a message i was getting from all the people that said were good now we can do a better than government. Let us govern i was the middle of the davos square during a interew and i was trying to get at this idea where did democracy go if it solves our social problem an environment so he is very powerful and very influential in the world in the Business World and beyond the political world as well you seem like the good guy and sustainability this is all good. And im quoting him directly to say not much a biever and political citizenship i belie in the power of the marketplace. And i was tak aback. The sic argument was corporations figured out w are good now. We have the resources or the will or the scope to solve problems like poverty and education and climate nobody trust them anyre democracy is not working so what i realize there is a quid pro quo and that they ould be able to have governg powers. That is the direction were going it is publicly mind is so they can plausibly claim we can deal with them protect and promote and do what traditionally we relied on decratic governments to do. The chilling piece of that, is that giving up on democracy. Will not saying the intentions are wrong or vast and that is wellintentioned and it moving fast and beyond leaving behind democracy and im not prepared to dohat yet so at the end of the book and at the end of the film how many people around the world to a very democracy and we see that as the way forward that is against the view that government should effectively be brought about and so i like this interaction with word brown looking after safety and then we realized with that whole premise will never change those to be structured in such a way summer read the book to say isnt that good you want to be less bad than before . Is there any room in their view for accountability . Had to even respond to the question . It is a really good question is in a better corporations try to be good than bad . Its hard to say it worked for them to try to be better but two things happen if it were simply the fact corporations were trying to be better than were trying to be better to leverage to gain more power , then i would say of course. But thats not the case. And that concerns me. The second problem, john brown the head of former British Petroleum he wasnt went deep water horin had the explosn that nearly destroyed the gulf of mexico but he created a culture of safety in many ways to facilitate that for sure. So part of that but the problem was i dont think he was insincere or hypocritical in all the postmodernist and when people are in a particular context that the entire concept has taken off with their conception then to focus on personal Safety Measures like he doesnt even think there is a broader range and the same thing happens with sustainability and human rights and all of the other things we care about that because they conceptualize and very narrow ways with profitmaking and because there is so much cultural firepower they are pushed out into the world in the narrow ways. That is the other thing i am arguing against. We buy not only the product but the ideas. We buy those ideas and also the idea we dont even know it and those within the corporate world by the idea it is about corporations deciding to be better. Why disagree with them. If its all they are doing, then we need to really robust regulatory democratic structure to ensure what theyre doing is good and doesnt do more harm. And so i think that is the problem is that there is almost taken for granted since when people say is a benefit the corporations a good. The accountability should come from within the court. Or the corporation. Theres nothing democratic about that. That is my concern as well. So youre new to this. We are shocked when you read the book. No will that was a good question. I guessed it the underlying part of the book by doing good. Another fundamentally ramifications for levees the corporation is an that they still is mandated to have profit. So as a result, during a good on a happens so far as what is possible that was idea is already familiar with vitamin dont think that i realize to the extent of that number of mechanisms for which there was. I think also what i found very interesting was doing so, we see that corporations become legitimized as they should be answered these questions not just a legitimate aspect of it but the primary actions. It was definitely very interesting for me to read about. Its predominantly in the pharmaceutical sector. And also in Regulatory Affairs and wellbeing prayed itself from the inside. Standing Government Accountability and as pharmaceutical sectors. In this passage here where he discusses the role of companies their involvement in making provisions. And about Climate Change in this idea of corporations, increasingly what the legislatures and the regulators the lobbying far greater resolve an not entered also getting involved in making healthy decisions themselves. But to see how does the future is Common Threat for the industry is very interesting to me. But that inspired you to stay in school. [laughter]. While i am still here. Because its about the new democratic project. At would probably be more inclusive. And maybe a little bit more peaful than what we been tolerating u to now. Is therenything that comes to mind in terms of what that trader says, we want to be in the corct side of historyhis one. Do you suggest any course of action for you. I guess it for being very honest about the nature of law school, a lot of graduates go on to work in large law firms for the primary is the big corporations. And i think that certainly, its a compelling argument to be made that we should understand that there are choices in terms of the career. It will necessarily affect their immediate clients. It has the potential to Impact Society with institutions and the government of society. This is that large. So that is quite heavy to me. In the first week of law school for unit and next thing, david, this is your subject matter. You been thinking about this issue for a long time. So what is your read in the book. It. Congratulations. I have a global appetite for it of course. But more thanhat, the writing to god. There was vivid the trails what happened. Not that i wanted to behere. But it was revealing. This book comes alive. With the portrayals of these people, and the thinking and also the phrases which are wasnt sure if that was you or your editor. So entirelyympathetic to the incorporation have a mandate the singlemindedly pursued his profit and benefit the sharehders. It could be classified as pathological. Doesnt turn towards the citizenship even the part of the book about education in primary Education Global sense. So i would recognize the intensity of this. You put in quite a lot of detail messages that are being spread around the world. And as you noted, somebody wouldve agreed the companies should give u on socialist responsibility. And celebrate the issues of that article. Companies are using other the people for money to pursue the socialist objective. This suggests that and 70s, theres back story to this idea of corporations mandating the citizens the fan that you did it mean,his is more critical read. Youeally talk about that. Now some of itppears for sure, and the corporationsnd you of dissolved yourself o that reonsibility. Think i should understand that the idea of this could shift. The idea corporations of governments, and the idea that corporations have social responsibility and that the will pickup. And pursue in a manner that ght be discounted in some ways. And i think so the book, seems to suggest that is the 2008 financial crisis in terms. On the part oforporaons read theres a lot of to this. And perhaps, you dont talk about, this revealed to me. Then its shorthand it. [inaudible]. Its shorthand for a project that initiated in the 1970s, taking in and wit hatcher in the united stas and with ronald reagan. You mentioned that. So that project has been going on for some time now. But the liberalism has bece, shorthand for the way in which we think of this. As desirable that our status as consumers something we should value. It becomes Something Like in a book of the fantasies, it becomes part of this early sam. So thats just of course, project that you mentioned here. Its going t be a difficult one for you to acknowledge that print the book is a really appreciated the message you wanted to send to the citizens taking power away from the corporations. Restoring old regulations and enacting new ones. I think thats important. About having corporations specifically. I think that you may, as a threat on the responsibility of citizens to call upon the representatives to do more and do better. That simply could happen. And we need to be having written need for a real legal reform. And read branding exercises and public relations. One thing thatou do call for is the new deal. And about franklin roosevelt, the response about the great depression. In the position of the American People in the united states. I dont mean to belittle the importance of those of the time read but, i think if they understood about conrad black talks about fdrs new deal. The same capitalism. So when enough if that is your project. [laughter]. So i think you want more than nearly new deal. And frankly, if i may say, to suggest that your gender Going Forward particularly when were talking by the global part of it is simply not on the horizon. In another project. But i would like to say any perhaps shell do another book. And is to try the complexities really and the devastation. Particularly during this pandemic. They want be able to recover much of that. So i think that we need to imagine other projects. Including the democracy and democratic practices of bringing people into the field the last part of the book is a hopeful part. Occupying the protest. I called for this in the public forum. Civil we are saying, are the connections. And having and facilitatin those new actors. And again it wouldve been nice to see if you had talke about moving up the polical precipitation and higher levels. An of the stories that you tell are at a mythical level. The reasons for that. So how we move that up a little. I want to suggest that one way of thinking about this is to borrow from any own liberal part of the book. So, friedman. It famously came together. With sn being called thought collective. Not only got the others but actively proceeded their agenda in everett avenue that was available. The media or politics orhether it was universities. And law schools of course. Infecting courts from the republican courtroom today. And this is an aggressive admittedly an objectionable way of thinking about pitical change. T thats different from the other side. I think that we will think about fighting for per. We have to anticipate with the other side will do. Yes. I think it anticipates what that should look like here. What im suggesting for you is any Movement Even post pandemic to write about that. Will thank you david. So let you respond. At the couple of questns. Intimate have some comments now that you have heard both anna and david prayed for mike and i, i would say this book is to optimistic about law think. So there are varying questions do you want to stay involved in law. Thansell d yes. The gre british marxism story that you talked about the rule of law and is an uualified guarded prayed and used that idea what he called the ideal notion of law. Thats law servingustice. Not only constuting and destined and vy important aspiration we should he. So really called for the rule of law. I feel that the corrate sector in their call for help with regulations for example are damnin to the rule of law. A sing we dont want laws. It and so anyway, its a very conservative argument about the rule of law and of the importance of us all being strained especially in a democratic socty were not as a reflection of the people. And so we achieve the democratic countability through law. And this what becomes and what we are talking about. Theres a whole chapter on the importance of regulation with that philosophical law. David, have a few thing to say. The fir is, probably a bit of a copout. I didnt know what the history of socialist responsibility because y pointed out. I lood at at t and their cafe. And talk about john brown is part of ts new way of in the late 1990s. Of the socialist. The second point that you made is about the bull is in. What is i said you and everybody else. These apparels as ancademic rate of trying to write a book for commercial