>> coming up, a discussion about cities and globalization. for heatherrial heyer while protesting a white supremacist march. our interview with a former helpsnationalists who now people leave hate groups. forum on global cities, looking at the role of cities in globalization. tory, a include john former mayor of rio de janeiro. onted by the chicago council global affairs and the financial times.

gentlemen, -- theelcome to chicago and 2017 form on global cities. difficult to imagine a more timely moment for us to convene this particular forum. met,e years since we last we have seen examples of something that is extremely an extraordinary. cities are important as players on the national stage, bypassing cities look to each other. mayors and city leaders across this country affirmed their support for what had been an nations, theng

paris climate accord. climate change is not an outlier in city to city coordination. it is happening on issues of inclusion, immigration, health, security. extraordinary is perhaps the wrong word to describe this trend. direct city to city coordinations emerging and wonderfullycoming ordinary. why? urbanization is the most consequential force shaping our political order in this century. it is the most dynamic force. 500 cities around the world have a population of more than one million people.

that statistic it does not capture the staggering pace at which cities are growing. world0 one third of the lived in urban areas. today over half do. thirds, 6.3ver two billion people who will live and work in urban areas. at this moment, a chicago sized city is being added to the world's population every two weeks. we need to engage new people moving to cities and being born there. the next generation about the challenges that cities have is even more important. fromding 32 students global universities around the

world. cities hold great economic power . greater than ever. the output comes from cities. 70% ofo more than greenhouse gases being admitted in the world. cities are the vanguards of openness. important qualities in the time when nationalists and anti-global sentiments are merging. together, a future dominated by cities is rapidly becoming our present. gatherede done, we are in this global city to shakeup -- discuss the role of global cities in the changing world. this year in some ways it is different. the questions we hope to answer are entirely new for good reason. theyously we asked if

drove the public economy. now we ask how they will. before we asked if cities can have a foreign policy. now we are interested in diplomacy at their best. before we asked whether such power onn challenge the global stage, today we know they are. we want to know how they will do so and better the lives of citizens of our cities. many ways to start. a newunselor has released report that outlines the priorities for chicago's global strategy. that report is a great resource for leaders from chicago and global cities on how to organize ourselves and the many ideas we have learned not only from chicago but traveling and having a form like this about how we

can meaningfully create agenda for global change. i encourage you to read the task force report at your leisure. we have copies available of a special report on cities published today. journalists here with us are moderating or participating in the panels. they have contributed to the special section. none of this happens by accident. i would like to thank the speakers who were joining us today. here as wello be in this wonderful setting in which mayors and architects, educators and journalists, and all of you are gathered because forward thinking corporations

believe level issues addressed here today are critical. our supporting sponsors, united airlines, usg corporation. sponsors.undation thanks to all of you for your support. i want to thank our international and civil partners who made possible the richness of the content of the next few days. none of this is possible without your support. i want to thank the 500 delegates who join us here from three dozen countries. they made the trek to chicago. we gave you the nice weather, which comes free. it is part of what we do here in the council.

very pleased to have you. tweet early and often. is #ghtag is lobalcities2017. it is our hope what is said here will enrich discussions and other global cities. before we start i want to take a moment to remember benjamin barber. a friend and partner who worked with us on cities, and passed away early this year. ofwas a pioneering leader thinking of the roles of cities in the world today. insights he shared in best-selling books, and on this stage two years ago. enjoyedhe would have the program we have planned for you. it's my pleasure to welcome the u.s. manager of the financial

gillian tett. gillian: welcome to the event. 'swould like to welcome ivo words. ivo is a powerful, effective man. i didn't know he could control the weather gods. this is the third year we have .ad perfect weather three out of three is a pretty good score. chicago asoes show to its great advantage. it provides perfect frame to talk about these incredibly serious issues.

is veryabout cities now important. trtly because of the great word. donald. cities are being asked to carry a lot of the burden of infrastructure. a lot of the burden of economic generation and growth. we live in an era where quite inadvertently the administration has put cities and states at the heart of the climate change debate. we live at a time when the question of immigration and the question of how different communities can or cannot live together is crucial. cities are once again at the center of that. time when theat a question of how we find effective leadership, how we find politicians people can

believe in in these fragmented times is absolutely centerstage. we were having a discussion in the green room talking about which politicians we did or did not admire. somewhat relevant given the u.k. election. what became clear is many people looked to city leaders of people they can trust in these troubled times. cities on to the center stage but even without donald trump, if you can remember a world without donald trump, cities are incredibly important and growing in importance for all the reasons ivo has just said. we are delighted to be involved with this. so many of these thieves -- things on central to

our pages every day. we can cover these issues and cover these debates well. so well that if you are already a subscriber, you will know that we have a special supplement that came out on the question of the future of cities. if you are not a subscriber, we deal, special promotional a newsletter talking about the discussions we are going to be having and you can get a free trial subscription through that. my one commercial plug. otherwise, several journalists in the group in the next few days. myself. our chief u.s. commentator. our asia managing editor. economiclf, commentator.

and johnson, our u.s. news editor. we would love to have a chance to talk to as many of you as possible about these issues and hope that you enjoy the debate, create an interesting set of stories for us to write about, and hopefully read about, and kick us off this discussion, we begin with a panel called open cities, closed borders. a response to globalization. in the supplement we have a column by martin wolf which starts the world's great cities are inherently dynamic and diverse. they are naturally open to the world. how should they respond if their countries seek to close themselves against outsiders? how should they do view their responsibilities to the world? one of the great questions of

the age. i look forward to hear some answers. thank you. [applause] , ivo daalder.tor [applause] >> thank you for that kind introduction. it is welcome again. good to see you. some very with important forces or we can have a good discussion about where cities are heading in an age of globalization.

the way competing with in which our international system has been organized. an international system based on the interaction of mission state. isare seeing globalization posing real questions for not the viability of nationstates, but how do nationstates cooperate with the challenges we all face, and how do cities offer an opportunity to cooperate ind dealing with these fashions? an offer solutions. we have practitioners and thinkers, journalists and politicians, to ask these kind of questions. people who have served at high levels of government, who have not served in these high levels. people who have served

nationally and local levels. we have john them the mayor of toronto since 2014. great to have you with us. the chief economics commentator at the financial times. already cited in the kickoff here. the former mayor of rio de janeiro including during the summer olympics. and the cities climate leadership group, the former prime minister of new zealand. we are going to have a discussion. thisy want to talk about fundamental question of governing a world where political power of cities is not commiserate with economic and cultural power. let me start with you. sectione in the special

, the financial times put out today, and we haven't had a chance to look at it, please do. what has the past year revealed to you about the changing global order and the role cities are playing? >> first of all, thank you for the question. it's a great pleasure to be back here in chicago involved with a program we are running with you. i've always enjoyed being involved with the global council. start, how many hours do i have. obviously the last year has taught us that we are in a spectacular mess in the west as far as globalization is concerned. quite particularly, in the united states and united kingdom, which one would have regarded as the heartland of

international liberalism defined in the english sense of the term . not the american one. so, these are not the only backlash is which against globalization. we dodged a bullet in france. plausible the biggest party in italy. that could have big consequences. we have to ask ourselves, what is going on, and what does it mean for cities? the answer i think is that we are now living in a. period of fragility. the most important parts. we have not succeeded in

persuading a large part of our populations that the global has workede defaults for their benefit. manipulativew, politicians have as you would expect,, have exploited this. the form of exploitation takes the form of a return to tribalism. link aroundities ethnicity and nationality. which are by their nature hostile to globalization and the idea of an open society in its many different respects. why? we have had rising inequality. stagnant wages in the last 10 years. we had a gigantic financial

crisis from which in the view of many citizens the bankers themselves were saved and they weren't. see this isn't going to get better. veryf the things that is revealing, so many people don't think the future for their children will be better than their own. this is the context. what does it mean for the challenges for cities? in some ways, thinking about my own country, the brexit referendum captured this stress between growing tribalism and the outward looking metropolis of london. isdon's population foreign-born. the place where there are incredibly large number of immigrants.

it voted to remain. it is completely a relaxed about this. it opened. the links to the world are colossal. it is in some ways the antithesis of the movement which led to brexit. the people who voted for briggs .t were voting against london voting against the saying it embodied. london is an and norma source of fiscal transfers to the country. by depriving of london of its position in europe they will greatly impoverish themselves. the resentment being built up are such that they are choosing policy at the national level, which impoverish themselves because of resentments that a

city like london creates. they are similar things in other societies. challengess immense at the national level and city level. i don't believe cities can escape from national context. but they have to be aware of the national context in which they are operating. the core element is this return of tribalism shown so clearly in the results. we have an enormous challenges to confront. >> take us from there. you are a national leader. a local leader. international leader. staying with the local and national for a moment, cities are often characterized, non-big

cities have a sense of cities having too much power and influence, too much say over what is going on. they are viewed as elitist, out of touch. where does this perception come from? why is it occurring? what can we do about it? it's not a healthy way in which to live. ollects there is a tendency -- >> there is a tendency to have polarization between a large dominance and smaller cities. let alone the role of hinterland. is this havingng an overlay of globalization. so, that exacerbates what is often a traditional tension.

somehow it becomes bad. the fact that because of the scale of the cities, they have more political power in the legislators of federal legislatures as well. this builds up a resentment. bighis big place, these places are seen as doing better than i am in my smaller place on the periphery, that creates antagonism. trashalso then easy to the cities as the places where the pointy heads are. the academics. what do they know. it is where the big media centers are.

populism has taken on attacking the media. some cold sure again. that can be represented as pointy-headed. the cities give space to the expression of liberal values than one finds in a hinterlands. multiculturalism. feminism. lgbt writes. the political left, which may not be found in the hinterland. for all these reasons we are in a time and place where traditional periphery dividers is exacerbated. what we can do about it is a harder issue. governance, for political tendencies for those we areed about populism seeing at the moment, the issue

is how to run economic and social policies which are more inclusive so you don't set of these divisions. how do we become more cohesive, more inclusive in the way countries are run? >> we will come back to this issue of the city and the periphery can come together more and share in the benefits of openness. staying for a moment with the city, global cities in particular, yours being one of them proclaim they are open to the world. almost 40% of london's population is foreign-born. in your city it is even larger than that. they are open, but also not particularly open in some ways. they are leaving people within their own cities behind.

what are the tensions playing out? >> different kinds. tensions of a sort but not the kind of tribal tensions. the challenge is you don't want them to develop into that. canada has been fortunate in that are shared values are broadly shared across the country included in the big cities. we do have 51% of the population born outside of the country. we have somehow managed to have people feel accepted and embraced. if there is tension, it is not nationalities or faith. if i challenges in front of us that could lead to tensions, not trying to pretend we have achieved part -- perfection. i am probably the single greatest unifying feature in canada and the i am the largest and most disliked eddie in the country. i consider that my contribution.

tensions about inclusion versus noninclusion. if you look at the people not , they tend toated the people who have come from somewhere else. it is not because anyone is trying to salute them. we have been working hard at courses.g the language some of that is i am sure by design. professions that don't admit it that put up barriers to entry. we are developing transition courses, community hubs were these people live to avoid tension arising from a lack of

inclusion. we are working at things as simple as language courses. how can anybody be included if they can't speak one of our official languages? isare working at that but it -- where is the challenge for us? that is where it is. tribal roots the of tensions that exist elsewhere in the world. refugees coming on took a in votes but we very open approach. when it was put forward by leaders including myself that we should be open, this was not a subject of any particular debate. we didn't have the same pressures that countries in europe would have. it is just the attitude and the values. we still have a challenge with

inclusion. >> brazil has different challenges. there is an urban rule challenge. is in some ways affecting policy and policy making, and voting behavior. how has this manifested itself? is there a populism that comes with that difference and the challenge of the rapid changes happening in the urban areas in brazil? >> it is always going to be a difference when we speak from the global north. i would like to go back a little bit in brazilian history. crazy going through a time in politics. two or threeike years ago the country was doing great. if you look at the past two decades, 10 years, inequality has become smaller.

things were getting better. the economy was doing well. why would i like to go back a little? in 2013 we had lots of protests. the economy was growing. almost no unemployment. brazil finally had become a great country. and everyone went out on the streets and was protesting against the politicians. it was nice to have so many people protesting. issue of always the the olympics and the world cup. end, something between the global self and the glow -- self and north, we face the big problem. representative democracy. instill choose our leaders

the same way we did centuries ago. it got better. women are voting. no more slaves. these people who have more information. people have access to politicians. thathas become a thing when you look at cities, it can mean a big difference between a rule area and the cities. -- we arecall it are a to a point, we generation of people that have to go through this adaptation. cities are the place where direct democracy can come back. people are always wanting to discuss. they did not go out into the streets of brazil to complain

about the services because they were better than they were before. people were complaining about the lack of representation. in these things cities can make a big difference. moment, i'm optimistic about what is going to happen. atrywhere else, if you look latin america, if you look at south america, lots of populists. it comes from the left, it comes from the right. but by the end, this is a transition. i think cities will play a major role. i see cities, the way cities can change representative a great machine to change what is going on.

sweden,t to talk about and go beyond that. sleep has gone through all of in recent years, the inclusion dynamic has been one. the social and economic dynamic, the difference between city and non-city has not been as great. perhaps as it could have been in countries like the u.k. and the u.s.. reflect a little on that. , as part of a transition to where are we, but what we do about it? what are the challenges big cities are facing that cities are better placed to tackle? >> i think to state the obvious, it is not a question of cities

or nationstates, or global organizations. it has to be all of them. cities are becoming more important. mega trends in global development, to megatrends are going to be dominant. industrialization. of thet the end industrial age, the beginning of the digital age. we are in terms of technology roughly where the industrial age was with the steam engine. that is going to be enormously of orton. -- other is urbanization and enormously important. the other is urbanization. people are moving into cities. two thirds of the population is going to be in cities. sweden.arly

africa. what is going to happen there? enormous cities are going to be created. it is not that politicians are forcing people. difficultings can be in cities, they prefer life there for different reasons. actually it is there to find solutions for cities in cities. that will have to be done. the -- some of the issues are going to need the same. issues that needs to be addressed, to take a couple of them. we are going to see the impact of the more profoundly on the

city level. what can be done there with automation, self driving, things like that. of the area of los angeles taken up by highways. if you take away the cause and have them automated and shares it transforms the landscape. mumbai.about they are going to catch up with the digital age. that is one issue. the other one debated, the and energyity issues. but going to return to that.

and security issues. we can talk about the threat of terrorism for national police forces, but at the end of the day local policing, local security. the difference in belgium. that is one nationstate. brussels,orces in completely different systems, completely different effects in terms of security they are able to provide. do need to learn. sweden, they have been a nice country. once uponbe said that a time, more people living in

chicago. then in mos life in time when sweden wasn't as glorious. people thought chicago was better. whether that is still the case i don't know. we have gone through major challenges in development as urbanization.of the biggest change was the mechanization of four street. forget, a lot of people were living on farms. there were no machines. they were doing this year round. large parts of sweden were depopulated as they moved into urban is a raise -- urban areas.

then we had immigration. have arees that we different than the figures -- people coming to toronto, canada have a high level of education. they have something to do with the canadian system, it has to be said. we are open to refugees. they are coming often with an education. other groups are highly educated and have done well. we do have a challenge. have we mastered that fully? no. broadly ok. broadly ok is not enough. 80% but faild with with 20% you have a massive problem. you need to succeed with 95 percent. there is no question immigration has contributed to the vitality of our cities.

these tendencies and politics to .ay take up the drawbridge >> thanks. i think we have a diagnosis. the question is how do we solve it? addressing the problems that we see. you, we have with this tension about the economic and cultural importance of cities, and the lack of political power on the other. london.ioned the importance london was in the entire country. london is a good example. is there a way he could use economic clout that are? -- better?

we have seen brexit as one of those examples. is there a way we could redistribute power from the national level or where it seems to reside to effectuate change that benefits all? >> when i was asked to write the column that appears in our special report, it forced me to go back to think about some questions that it interested me for a large part of my life. a long time in history. i have been profoundly persuaded by the work of jane jacobs, who i regard as a genius. i was privileged to know. were the great invention of the era.

economic progress has always occurred in cities. it puts forward a wonderful , that scholars are debating, that cities invented agriculture. we can discuss that. it is a completely persuasive argument. don't underestimate her. citiesnt is, when formed, in the early period of human development, many of the entities, the city state is not just an episode. samaria beginning of were a dominant entity. of course in the west, very unlike asia.

aty states have played staggering role in our cultural development through italy and so forth. i found it thinking, how did this change? today singapore is the only city state of any independence. even though that we meant, city generate close to half of the gdp of their country in territories. we emphasize them, they shape the world system. a scale that dwarfs even their cities. political power ended up in countries which contain many are as whose interests

expressed in their political systems very separate from those of their global cities, whose economic role in my view is as dominant as ever, and their political role is remarkably significant. what do we do about this? i don't think it is plausible the cities which lack armies and lack on tribal loyalties, which i rather like, when to rise up and say give us independence. i wrote a column in which i argued that it will be a good thing if london became singapore. if it became an independent city states. i do not expect them to see to that. so we are not going to have political independence.

we are not going to be able to frame the legal environment with in this occurs. discussions are about how the city should deal with one another. one of the things cities have to do is to take the argument to their countries. they have to persuade people who are not living in metropolitan cities that their existence that offends them. -- benefits them. this is one big issue i want hard on, they have to show people can live in them. there is no housing in them. the housing in almost every become so has expensive it is unthinkable for most to live there unless

they want to live in squalor. get engaged nationally. of livingecome models together in retail harmony. models of what their country should become. showrsue policies that climate change is still possible. they can work hard at that level to show how you integrate people from abroad and people from other parts of the country's. they can become integration machines. with the city regions which they are part of, if they tried to spread their influence and thoseunities not just to

inside but the people who are fairly close to them. there is quite a complex set of things within this context without being able to run countries or run the world. helen, reflect on what martin said. you talked about the difference between the center and the periphery. can't gets the center away from the periphery. what it can find a way to bring the periphery into the political and economic advantage of the center. reflect on that, the urban small between large and cities. how do you make them feel there

is an advantage to be part of the city rather than think that we are better off by cutting ourselves off from the rest of the world? what is a practical politician do to get that agenda implemented? >> my leadership was at the national level. inclusive, to the noninclusive dimensions of policy. i think national governments have the obligation to ensure , don'tnets of growth monopolize all the prosperity and opportunity in the country. there is a responsibility to prosperity more than we are seeing. to put that in numbers, we have a global population of seven and

a half billion now. it is heading for nine and a half, 10 billion by 2050. all of that extra population is going to be in cities. to be even bigger, even more powerful. the role of the national governments trying to spread prosperity becomes even more accentuated. there are things cities could do to affirm their own value proposition to hold countries. how did the goods get out of the market. it is generally through the ,ajor city trends and hubs where it was processed. citiesppens in the matters a great deal.

on martin's point on housing is a very important one. we are saying global cities become places where only those of consider romance can afford to live. the answer to that, how they housing andcial mixed income housing, there is a responsibility of central government. trends of affordability have been exacerbated the level of housing subsidy or whatever support which enables those who do the work in the city's. so, in summary i think it is the responsibly of the national government, on the cities themselves, and i think that

cities can be the model of what we would like our world to be, more inclusive, more tolerant, more open innovators. but we have to have some shared prosperity. >> thanks very much. i should mention we are going to open up the floor for you pretty soon. we are living in a digital world rather than virtually. webpage ifess our you put that into your browser and your smart phone. you can type in questions. i want to go from the nation to an international and more international perspective of how cities can deal with this. increasingly cities are looking

not just to their national governments or their peripheries, they are looking to counterparts to address the problems that they face, to find solutions. you are active in something called urban diplomacy. . describe what you are trying to do specifically with those issues and the impact you are saying as it relates to overcoming the divisions and tensions you find in your own city in society. did, just in the election, big cities had a caucus of the biggest cities which represented a huge portion of the members of parliament. unity getting them into housing and transit. it was very successful.

it wasn't so much about trying to convince anybody in the outlying areas of the merits of our case. it was convincing politicians we were electing. because we stayed united on it worked well. on the question you ask, we have the good fortune in canada, a lot of what we would do, cities should he supported the national ambitions of their country. there should be a consistent the -- consistency between the two. country, alln the of them have aspirations that are consistent with the national in that regard. gavin diplomacy today has more to do with the practical delivery of services and the solution of some problems.

whether it is housing and trends in -- transit. who integrates refugees? cities do. who builds public transportation? who fixes the environment? retrofitting of buildings? do people invest in cities or do they invest in countries? by and large today they are investing in city regions. simplyantage of this is -- i don't mean this to be disrespectfull -- , they are ripping us off. and don'tservient have the ability to do the things we're responsible for doing. i'm going to learn more from a meeting with rahm emanuel in

chicago. about all of those things i just mentioned. they are not actually delivering these services. we are. you can learn from talking to anybody. to sitiplomacy allows us in a room with people who have responsibilities and compare. that is where the rubber hits the road. not interest rates. on everything that matters to people in her ability to integrate them. it is in cities. >> a good segue to your that example of climate and sustainability where cities in the last 5-6 years have come together because they are responsible for the problem.

how youtalk about cooperated together, how you try to influence national governments? learning from other cities in a practical way to achieve real results. >> he spoke before me, because we could make a sweet transition here. when he made the presentation, i'm quite a talk about this but, i'm not here anymore. i'm not looking for more -- i left office. i'm not looking for more power here. day, there isthe a problem with representative democracy.

isch level of government living the everyday problems of the people? which is dealing more and more with the issues that matters to people? -- i don't listen think we need to get rid of national governments. that would be impossible. there needs to be a transition, a change, where most of the revenues, the taxes don't go to the central government. that is a model that is not working anymore. it will keep not working. we need to decentralize. we need to give more power to mayors. people like to live in cities. that is why the world is becoming more urbanized.

that in institutions. a little bit about urban city diplomacy or whatever. i remember it was created almost 16 years ago, but in 2012 we had that's the picture there -- we had this summit in rio. 1992.national states got together in rio. with certainee things on tax. together, and there are actions that we copied from toronto and new york and copy from chicago. a bunch of great experiences. when we look at the figures, cities can do 40% of the tax.

-- when we paris went to paris, there was an agreement. it seems like there wasn't a disagreement anymore. president trump went last week are out of the paris agreement. i can guarantee you the united deliveringapable of what was the paris agreement. i know the american mayors are very committed to that. if mayors get together and and get things done, i really believe there is , despitebe a point the fact that diplomacy is different, but there will be a point where most of the changes,

the world that we want to live in will be run by cities and mayors. they will play a major role and that is why i am optimistic. things will get better. i think this will get local governments to be more powerful and the changes will be stronger. to thent to go back slightly less optimistic version of the one eduardo just put on the table. one portly, our national politics are divergent. in some places. certainly, we saw it in the brexit vote in the u.k. and the vote here in our country.

-- if you belive you believee -- if there is some division between the national politics and the way big cities are approaching the problem, how do you overcome that problem? have independent city states. that is a given. had you make sure the national politics continue to have the open markets and bordersopen mad minds that we used to have in our western politics? how do we have cities and nations come together in the right way? is this something just in the transition phase that we shouldn't worry about? how do you see it? everything is in a transition phase because we are in transition from where we are to where we are going.

yes, we are in a transition phase. we are in a bigger transition days. if you look at this particularly from the european point of view, the development of our political institutions, we have been living through the area of the nationstates when that has been dominant. more power has been concentrated in nationstates. that is from the french revolution --from french revolution and onwards. we have seen that reflected in a number of elections, but we see there is a need for more powers. more powers of things that need to be sorted out. global trade, sustainability, those things are in if we go

back a couple of decades. there is a need to devote power. there is a demand from people and there is a need because need to beproblem's addressed and different ways. that means we do have tension not astionstates being dominant as they were but still dominant in the perception of people who say that in elections. regionalfor more of a of regional autonomy. i think this is one way of sorting out the problems that indicates the tensions that could be there. at the end of the day, what you want is for cities or nations to sort out the problems they have to meet the demands they desire for security or public services or jobs. having the appropriate political

structure is key to making that possible. political structures will have to be slightly different in the future then what was dominating in the european development for 200 years or something like that of until now. this is slightly philosophical. the importance of cities , they are the nationstates in europe. a few people have heard about the holy roman empire of the german nation, but it was there for 1000 years. there wereity, different cities that were

united by the same rules for commerce and trading groups and developing technologies and things like that. these are fairly glorious. in terms of development, but it was looser on that particular area. i think we are returning to that. here in allenge governance sense is that you you global challenges and require global cooperation treaty cities are not participating in that level of government this is perhaps a challenge we face. is there a way in which the it canent structure says bring power down? u.n.hey bring it up to the level and the eu level. in some ways, international organizations need to become ifn to non-national voices,

not non-national books. that is where the tension is starting. ed if you look at what happen in the meeting of the united nations, mayors are meeting there. when you look at paris, it was a completely different environment. if it might because get to the mayors, it can get us into trouble. again, it is a way of getting closer to the reality. nk institutions are much more open to mayors now. i think part of this is the s view.the new, -- crisi

openness andabout a sense of sharing of the world as where we want to go, then the igical consequence is -- would go back but it doesn't really matter -- the world in is "abovereignty solute" and is concentrated in nationstates, which are structures designed for obedience, and that concept -- which is clearly what has returned in the brexit vote and in the last election here, no doubt about it -- what happens when you are frightened. that is one conception, which to be the absolutely

wrong conception. that is not the way we can continue. the right way, if we need to continue as a species well and successfully, we have to diffuse that measure. this is not how it always was. in which power is ,istributed horizontally starting at the global level and all the way down to localities. for the nationstates and those who rely on the nationstate to this concept is terrifying. i think we -- that i absolutely have no doubt this is where we have to go. the european union was a great attempt to achieve that. that's one of the reason why i find the brexit vote so horrifying. in some ways, the united states.

as a federal state is a great attempt to do this. can we make is, this where power is divided in a horizontal way? different way of organizing the world. if we do not organize the world that way, i think we will destroy ourselves. >> let it go to some of the questions that have been asked. one of those is on the role of the private sector, which we really focused on the public sector here. but the role of the private sector, which, in some ways is not bound by national boundaries. have the private sector be a force to help address part of these problems? theill have to rely on private sector being a economic

force. what is the role of the private sector in making the case for cities coming more powerful? on?o you want to take that perhaps maybe incorporating into it the way in which cities are adopting the global agendas. two significant once that came out of 2015. the parent -- the paris climate agreement and sustainable development. they can't be implemented unless cities do the heavy lifting because the size and the scale of the global cities in the world economy. while cities are not represented citiesu.n., without the being active, nothing much is going to happen great -- to happen. we have seen encouraging trends in the interest of the global

private sector. partya climate change every year, as i have for the last eight years during the global private sector is there and constructively there. -- make it criticisms from you may get criticisms from some ngos. there are some natural alliance is there between the global cities, the global private sector seeing things have to be done to move with the times. the leadership in the cities and the global iva sector will carry it through. >> what i think is going to happen automatically is this will be a driver. look at what is happening now with the development. momentlk about it for a

and it will be different five years from now. phenomenon.ban the leadership of airbnb, you look at cities, be that chicago, shanghai, stockholm. you look at airbnb the same. if you're in the business of agriculture or machinery, you might have a different perspective. otherwise, they will see these developments and they will compare the markets and they will look at opportunities in respectively of national borders. they are driving it and the it and the digital age will be fosters. -- be fostered. change,ing of climate the development of the new methodologies with respect to energy. willll come to pride -- it

come from private ingenuity and capital. i think we need to get over the fear and anxiety. everybody is going to get ripped off and so on and so on. i think we have to remember, when the government do is they don't have a lot of ingenuity when it comes to development and new products, but they do have the upper hand in terms of regulating those things. you can remember the government have the upper hand but then harvest the ingenuity. is there a role or should there be a role? we cannot cope with the transition to the digital age solving problems like climate change without discipline from the private sector, properly overseen by those with the position to do so. i always find difficulty.

suppose what i feel -- it is clear the private sector's capitalism is global. marx wrote about this. across naturally go borders. we have a very global capitalist system at the moment. it brings these benefits we talk about. by many of theen people who are angry, and understandably so. it started with the people who bandoned them.- a when mr. trump get on the phone is is you shouldn't take your factory to x, he is responding to a need. i think the job of the private sector is more complex than this. they have to be global because they are. they have to see the world abandon, but they can't

the people of the countries in which they operate and for which they began. if they do, they will be seen and they are seen as fundamentally as loyal. -- disloyal. -- will give you one answe i will give you one answer. one responsibility they had is to pay tax. the taxn't just exploit system, they created the tax system. let us be clear for their benefits. this is absolutely subversive of democratic governments and it is not tolerable. [applause] >> i will say, that is the big focus. i watch in our own city was really happening. we represent much more of the solution we are talking about.

two-personing from businesses and four-person businesses. global capitalism is big differences that are global by definition, but there are more of these small, local businesses where people figure it is better to create a job instead of not knowing how to get one. i think that is part of the transition referred to earlier on as part of the digital age. of them become global overnight. even small businesses can be global. that is a genuine part of the digital revolution. >> it does raise a final question that i want to pick up from the audience. it raises the question of leadership. we have two national leaders and two local leaders. >> the only one that is in power -- [laughter] >> we have experience at the local level. of leadership at the local level, desiring to

change? does that need to change? it used to be that you came from the bottom and became a city councilmember, then a mayor, then the governor, then a senator, then the vice president or president. what kind of leadership we need to address the kinds of questions we have been discussing here for the last hour? four here whom i know have the answer. >> i would go to what i said in the beginning. being a leader, being a office,an, running for you need to get closer to people. i think we came to a moment were politicians were too far away realities, and

that is a big problem. the higher you go it will be tougher. going to local politics. i don't mean you need to be a city councilmember than a mayor whatever.gressman, otherwise, president trump would it be the president of the united date. the thing up -- the united states. think workingi at the local level makes you become a better leader. i think the leadership of the city really matters and i think the government really matters too. the cities of the smaller countries, like my own, need to

be well governments. they need to be able to perform, as we would ask that many nations it to do. neednk leaders in cities to really be seen and a way of premieres. they need to set the tone of tolerance and inclusion in their cities. they need to set the vision of what the city can be economically and socially. they need to practice inclusive government. they need to be accountable. we're setting quite a high standard, more than just being this elected chair of the council. it is somebody who can stand up take a vision of where the city can go. >> i think in order to be an effective national leader, you localo have a bit of experience, local politics, absolutely. i think -- i wouldn't say absolutely necessary.

you need to have a global perspective. or global.uropean, the cities are becoming far more global. i started in politics by being elected to the stockholm council. some of them were boring. i have absolutely no influence over anything because it was run by local urography, but i did learn a number of things, also by challenging the local bureaucracy. i benefited from that when i was dealing with legislation later on. locallected me to the whatever it was called, the community leadership. departmentstribute between the priest. i learned a lot. you learned a bunch of international things, which are

equally boring. i think it is incredibly important upon structure. think it is very difficult to govern the city well if it is not integrated with the city region in which it is. i can give many examples. i thought about this a lot. the structure in new york city is very difficult. it is divided amongst many states and it sucks. when problem in london is the greater london area is much too small. the region is where it could be solved, but it is not under its control. city regions have to be governed as regions. importantlievably that the cities need the

relevant supplies to solve their problems. your mistaken attempt at independence. nevermind. [laughter] >> we won't go there. governants -- governments are jealous of fiscal power. written is extreme, but far too much is concentrated at the national level. it is hard if you don't control the revenue. i know a bit about india because i worked on it. this is a monstrously big problem in india because it is of the level at which plenty this and revenue comes. the chinese do it better.

the structural questions are very important if we are going to get the future cities to work. >> i disassociate myself with the comments of helen and martin. have the quality of leadership necessary to get the job done. first.ple look they look first to the cities to solve any problem. they are oblivious to and themrated by you telling it is some other local was --ents who is governan responsible for thatce -- governance responsible for that.

in our country, eight cents of the dollar is collected by the responsibilities of the city. fiveve to rely on -- iris -- i described myself as a little boy in short pants. they and the people expect us to do these things. that has to be addressed. it is not a matter of who is in office. thank you so much for getting us started today. [applause] >> "washington journal" life every day. thursday morning, sarah westwood discusses president trump's comments about the recent violence in charlottesville. then, robert jones talks about his book.

"bloomberg" economic editor. be sure to watch "washington journal." join the discussion. c-span at 8:00 p.m. eastern. a look at the opioid epidemic. suing several drug companies for their marketing of opioid painkillers. >> what is different about this problem is how pervasive it is. it is everywhere. it is in our smallest communities and our cities and our most affluent suburbs. 8:00, a profile interview with tom price. >> i think my passion for trying to help people and a healthy society, this just feels like

the culmination of a life's work. the 20 plus years in critical practice. for patients overlapped with the 20 plus years i had in the representative life, the state, senate, and in congress. to have the opportunity at this pivotal time in our nations history and a health care system we have to leave this remarkable department is as fulfilling as anything. p.m. with the supreme court justice. >> clear a constitutional democracy. that means the judiciary has an important role to play in policing the boundaries of all the other branches. that can make the judiciary and -- an unpopular set o