Read what the "sustainable development" crowd has in store for the rest of us if their wacky schemes are ever seriously considered.
About 1,000 corporate leaders from around the world are attending the four-day forum, including Maria das Gracas Silva Foster, chief executive of Brazil's state-owned energy giant Petrobras, and another 1,000 labor activists, investors and government officials.
Kell stressed the need to harness "the power of corporate creativity and responsible capital" to foster women's emancipation, poverty eradication, social investment, renewable energy and sustainable food production, as well as to generate water resources.
Compact officials noted that upcoming infrastructure needs in the "green" sectors of economically key areas such as energy, agriculture and water are conservatively calculated in the hundreds of billions of dollars a year.
With the right incentives and enabling environment, the private sector can make significant and lasting contributions to the sustainable development agenda, Kell said.
"The kind of movement that has been developing around the Rio+20 summit and the issues that are covered by sustainable development cannot be dealt with satisfactorily without the business community," said Timothy Wall, a spokesman for the forum.
"Business is not against regulations," Wall said. "They like to know the rules of the road. Responsible corporations do not mind sanctions for damaging corporate behavior, and they like incentives to move in a direction that will help the environment and combat poverty."
By adopting the Global Compact launched in 2000, corporations pledged to respect 10 universally accepted principles dealing with human rights, work standards, environment and the fight against corruption to ensure fair trade.
The scheme has received 7,000 signatures from 135 countries but the aim is to collect 20,000 by 2020.
Unless you are a "responsible corporation" - i.e., groveling before the UN - businesses are likely to suffer enormous dislocations as result of this green agenda. How they define "damaging corporate behavior" is key. It goes far beyond simply obeying environmental regulations to protect wildlife and the flora of the planet. Anything a business does that, in their opinion, negatively impacts "women's emancipation, poverty eradication, social investment, renewable energy and sustainable food production," is cause for harsh penalties.
It's not about the environment; it's about the exercise of power. Time to stop this ball rolling before it gains any more momentum.