Statement & Argument — After an Enron-like disaster, should there be global audit norms? Arguments: I. Yes, global norms will ensure such disasters do not recur. II. No, global norms let developed countries pursue vested interests.

Introduction / Context:
Audit reform is complex. Strong arguments must avoid overclaims and provide credible mechanisms.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Global norms can improve consistency but cannot guarantee prevention of every failure.
• Claiming all global norms serve vested interests is speculative without specifics.

Concept / Approach:
Argument I overstates by promising that no disaster will happen again, which is unrealistic. Argument II alleges motives without evidence or a clear causal mechanism. Both as framed are weak.

Verification / Alternative check:
If I had said global norms reduce risk by improving comparability and enforcement, it could be strong. If II cited concrete governance capture risks with examples, it could be strong. As given, both fail.

Final Answer:
Neither Argument I nor II is strong.