Michael I doubt that James Wolfensohn would have been as crudely honest as your source suggests. He's slick as they come. But on low-paid jobs, he did muddle into a little controversy when the Bank's mid-1995 World Development Report on labour markets came under intense criticism from trade unionists across the globe. Among other neoliberal attacks on workers' living conditions, it recommended dropping minimum wages and it accused unions of monopolisation. When asked about the report at a press conference sponsored by Oxfam-Interaction-Favdo a few months later, Wolfensohn was practically speechless. Journalist: "To what extent, along with the changes taking place, the Bank will give emphasis to this area of workers' rights and workers being able to participate fully and recognizing basically the ILO conventions, the core conventions of non-discrimination, lack of forced labor, lack of child labor, and these very important issues that have to do with workers' rights and also women's rights, to what extent these are being given emphasis in the changes that are taking place?" Wolfensohn: "I think it would take too long [to answer]. I think the World Development Report does indicate that the Bank's -- it's a very well-argued document. It's a -- has nothing to do with me. I inherited it, and I'm thrilled that I did. I think it shows a recognition of the issues in a way much more visible and with much more support from the Bank than you've ever seen before. And my belief is that you'll see a lot of progress from the Bank." The Bank was subsequently accused by Chinese democracy activist Harry Wu of financing projects which contribute to forced labour in China. They are now talking a bit about labour standards.
