Knowing me, Knowing you

Manisha interviews delegates from the G20

The representatives of the G20 are required to be highly proficient at handling financial situations. This is an interview of two of the representatives from the country of India and Saudi Arabia.

1. What do you think about GLASS?

Saudi Arabia: This is my third MUN and GLASS is a very economic and policy based MUN and G20 particularly highly economics based council, all though political ideals should have led the council in a much larger way but economic views dominated the council.

India: This is my sixth MUN. It’s good, one of the best I’ve been to. I like GLASS.

2. What do you feel about the motion and what is your country’s stance on the same?

Saudi Arabia: Political ideas were present, but they did not lead the council. Whenever political inclusion was being talked about the autonomy of the bank was brought into the picture and hence the political relation to the bank was ignored.

India: Lot of topics could have been discussed which weren’t discussed to a very large extent. Even though the delegates are very well researched they couldn’t implement their research in the correct direction. And I personally feel that there were other topics that should have been discussed such as the counter measures of inflation, revaluation of currency. These things which are highly imperative when we sit in a global forum like this and we discuss about something as concrete as the central bank and them being a Guardian of the economy. Things like these have to be taken into account however I’m expecting something to happen tomorrow, we’re also expecting a communique.

3. Whose arguments did you think were good and consistent with the spirit of the debate? Name countries, please.

Saudi Arabia: India was really good and the arguments were easier to comprehend by the rest of the council, this is because the rest of the council isn’t very comfortable with the economic jargons. And maybe the pace at which Japan was introducing and leading the debate wasn’t very comfortable to many debaters.

India: Japan and China. They’re really good debaters and their content also was very well researched. There are certain things that the committee members don’t know so they could have explained in lay man’s terms; the committee would have functioned better. That would have been a better approach; after all it’s a learning process for us.

4. What was one difficulty that you faced, that was common to all other representatives as well?

Saudi Arabia: Central banks is an internal organisation of a particular sovereign nation and dictating terms for what is a good form of central bank and what is not kind of paralysed the debate at a certain point.

India: I believe the one thing was that we were not sticking to a caucus topic and that was one thing we could have worked upon.