Warning: Undefined array key "id" in /srv/www/uat2.g77.org/wp-content/plugins/insert-headers-and-footers/includes/class-wpcode-snippet-execute.php(287) : eval()'d code on line 2

Mr. Chairman,

I am grateful for the opportunity of taking the floor under your chairmanship for the first time in my capacity as Chairman of the Group of 77. I am glad also that my first statement should take place in the context of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee for the elaboration of an international convention to combat desertification in those countries experiencing serious drought and/or desertification, particularly in Africa. Your dedication to the challenging mission entrusted to you and your enthusiasm about the possibility of a significant breakthrough in international cooperation in this important area in the life of so many nations is well known, and I can assure you of the full commitment of the G-77 and China to contribute to the success of this great undertaking.

I also take pleasure in welcoming at your side a dynamic bureau and an effective secretariat led by Mr. Arba Diallo, which led to the fortunate outcomes which we are all welcoming today.

I take the floor today after 9th substantive sessions held by the Committee. I would like to highlight the work of the two working groups that have made progress in the negotiations by building on the common concerns felt in the face of the dangers of desertification and the effects of drought.

Mr. Chairman,

As far back as the preparatory stage of the Rio de Janeiro conference, the international community steered into actin by the growing scale of the phenomenon of desertification and its disquieting impact on the affected countries, agreed to treat this problem as a global phenomenon calling for universal mobilization. For this reason, resolution 44/228 of the General Assembly and chapter 12 of Agenda 21 placed it among the nine questions of greatest importance for the preservation of the quality of the earth’s environment, and especially for ecologically sound and sustainable development in all countries. General Assembly resolution 47/188 once again reaffirmed priority to be given to combating desertification.

The outstanding political will shown by the various parties since the first session of the Committee is a valuable asset on the basis of which we should now launch our enterprise of implementation of commitments entered into. In this regard, it is obvious that the test of the credibility of the partnership established by this Convention is, to a large extent, to be found in the mobilization of sufficient financial resources, new and additional funding and transfer of ecologically sound technologies for the benefit of developing countries.

The establishment of a global mechanism provided for in the provisions of the Convention will, from this standpoint, be an important first step towards taking adequate measures to combat desertification. We must also go immediately into action to ensure that this Convention does not ape the sad face of the Nairobi Programme of Action.
Mr. Chairman,

As we reiterated our position since the first session of the Committee, the desertification problem is a global environmental phenomenon on an equal footing with the problems affecting the ozone layer and climate change. The Convention to combat desertification cannot therefore be demoted to a second-class international legal instrument by comparison with the Convention on Climate Change and Biodiversity.

Therefore, the global mechanism of this Convention should receive equal interests and given the same attention and priority as the international conventions signed at Rio de Janeiro. The Committee should also formulate concrete recommendations to the conference of the parties regarding the mobilization of substantive new and additional resources within the global mechanism and the transfer of technology if it is really to become an effective operational instrument which will halt and reverse the phenomenon of desertification.

It is important also to mention that the Secretariat of the negotiating Committee should enjoy the full support of all member states. In this respect we regard it as essential that the budgetary funds be allocated to the Committee and that all Governments increase their financial contributions to the executive secretariat in order to enable all developing countries to take a full and effective part in the first session of the conference of the parties of the convention scheduled to take place in Rome from 29 September to 10 October 1997.
Mr. Chairman,

If the phenomenon of desertification spares no continent, it is especially in Africa that it has reached the greatest impact. In fact, in Africa, 60% of whose land is arid or semi-arid, more than half of its area suffers from a lack of rainfall the persistence of which has encouraged the encroachment of the desert, thereby threatening the existence of almost 200 million human beings and making extremely difficult and costly any effort to protect and restore the soil.

Today the desertification is affecting more than 40 countries on the African continent, and has been swallowing up every year approximately 6 million hectares and making totally sterile their productive capacity. Today, a hope is reborn with the promise of this Convention. It is important that the international consensus for specific measures of assistance to all developing countries produce as quickly as possible full effects so that the affected countries might be able to play a pioneering role in the strategy of the response of the international community to the challenge of desertification.

Mr. Chairman,

To conclude, I would like to say that above and beyond the important legal and technical aspects of the negotiations which will take place during these two weeks, I hardly need to stress the highly political significance that we attach to this process, and our hope and expectation that it will conclude successfully within the deadline set by the General Assembly.

I wish all success and positive outcome to our deliberations.

I thank you.

Mr. President,
Excellencies,
Distinguished delegates,
Distinguished guests,
Ladies and Gentlemen,

I have the distinct honour and privilege to address this South-South Conference on Trade, Investment and Finance. I would like to express on behalf of the Group of 77 and China our deep gratitude to the government and people of Costa Rica for their warm welcome, hospitality and excellent arrangements made for this meeting. Their generous offer for hosting this sectoral meeting is a testimony of their commitment to the cause of development of developing countries.

I wish to recall also our gratitude to all G-77 Chapters, the South Centre, UNDP, UNCTAD and UNIDO for their valuable contribution and support in the preparation of this meeting. It is a particular pleasure for me to welcome all participants to this Conference.

 

Excellencies,
Ladies and Gentlemen,

This sectoral meeting which coincides this year with the scheduled10th session of IFCC is expected to enhance the coherence of our approaches and positions, to bring about strength, cohesion and harmony in our respective endeavours for the benefit of the developing countries’ objectives and aspirations for development and prosperity.

I am convinced that the prospects of achieving such objectives and aspirations are closely related to our capacity to maintain and strengthen our coordination of the activities that the Group of 77 and China undertake in the various centres of the United Nations. The multilcentral character of our Group makes it imperative that such efforts should be harmonized and strengthened at the interregional, regional and subregional levels.

Excellencies,
Ladies and Gentlemen,

Economic and technical cooperation among developing countries represents an urgent need that is becoming more imperative than ever. Follow-up and implementation of the Caracas Programme of Action call for continuous coordination on the part of our National Focal Points fore ECDC/TCDC.

With the increasing obstacles faced in our economic development, with the North-South dialogue still to get under way, and the emerging complementarities within developing countries, the scope of economic and technical cooperation among developing countries is even more today than it was at the beginning of the decade when the Caracas Programme of Action was adopted. While it is true that we must provide greater momentum to TCDC/ECDC activities we should guard against the risk of undertaking projects without fully assessing their potential. Indeed, this can greatly harm the very cause that we seek to promote. We must at all times remember that TCDC/ECDC projects must provide mutual benefits to developing countries and should be economically viable.

The holding of technical meetings such as the San Jose conference represents also an instrument of great importance for the reactivation of South-South cooperation. In accordance with the decision of IFCC-VIII, two sectoral review meetings were held in 1995 and 1996. A sectoral review meeting on energy was held in September 1995 in Jakarta, Indonesia, and a asectoral review meeting on food and agriculture was held in Georgetown, Guyana, in January 1996. Today, we are holding another sectoral review meeting int he field of trade, investment and finance. We are very grateful to the Government of Costa Rica for hosting this meeting. On behalf of the Group of 77 and China, I would like also to express our sincere gratitude to the governments of Guyana and Indonesia for hosting these meetings and congratulate them for their successful preparation and outcome.

In this respect, I would like also to highlight once again the importance of holding such meetings, particularly on some critical issues for developing countries such as trade and finance. It is my sincere hope that our Group will be able to hold other sectoral review meetings during the next IFCC meeting (IFCC-X), which remains the primary body and mechanism for policy-making, follow-up and monitoring of all sectoral activities undertaken within the framework of the Caracas Programme of Action.

I would also encourage both Member States and Chapters in close cooperation with the South Centre and of various UN institutions to support the holding of sectoral meetings in other priority sectors of activities as identified by the Caracas Programme of Action.

 

Excellencies,
Ladies and Gentlemen,

The IFCC meetings, as you are aware, are an important occasion for developing countries to assess their cooperation in the context of the Caracas Programme of Action (CPA). It is an occasion which we value dearly, as it allows for the Group to come together to reinforce its solidarity and commitment for the cause of development of our countries. Today’s meeting will certainly contribute to strengthening ECDC/TCDC activities carried out under the CaracasPrograme of Action in the fields of trade, finance and investment.

The Caracas Programme of Action adopted in 1981, which is unique in concept, remains an important and valid framework for South-South cooperation. It provides a plan of action with clearly laid down mechanisms for support, follow-up and review with diverse components woven together into a precise time-table for implementation. It was a major step in ECDC/TCDC. The adoption of the CPA by the High-level Conference on ECDC fifteen years ago gave practical expression to the Charter of Algiers adopted by the First Ministerial Meeting of the Group of 77 held in October 1967. The two documents provided the vision of the South and dynamism for the promotion of South-South cooperation.

 

Excellencies,
Ladies and Gentlemen,

The structural reforms and adjustment programmes carried out by the developing countries in difficult conditions and with serious negative political, social and economic consequences on our populations, seem to be doomed to not reach their objectives as long as there has not occurred an improvement in the international economic environment which remains as always fundamentally unfavourable to a recovery and take off of the economies of Third World countries.

Thus, financial, commercial and technological constraints which make difficult and problematic the implementation of these reforms must be eliminated. The crisis of the external debt of developing countries, even if it is no longer a major threat to the stability of the international financial system, remains a question of the highest importance and the satisfactory dealing with this issue is absolutely apparent and urgent for the international community.

Despite the adoption of several approaches undertaken over the past decade by the international community, the debt crisis continues to persist as one of the main constraints for the development of developing countries, especially the least developed countries, and for those at the lower, lower-middle and middle-income levels. In this context, I would like to reiterate the urgent need for the international community, particularly the creditor countries and international financial institutions to adopt an effective, comprehensive and equitable, once-and-for-all development oriented and durable solution to the debt problem of the developing countries, including debt reduction and increased grants and concessional financial flows, in particular for the least developed countries and Africa.

It is a matter of urgency to assert the required political will in order to ensure an open, rule-based, equitable, secure, non-discriminatory, transparent and predictable multilateral trading system with the aim of achieving the complete integration of the developing countries into the world economy and the new international trading system. In this regard, I would like to express our deep concern regarding the outcome of the First Ministerial Conference of the World Trade Organization, held in Singapore in December, 1996, which fell short of ensuring the universality of the World Trade Organization.

In this crucial stage of the process of economic reform, the developing countries more than ever need stable, adequate and predictable financial sources as well as guarantees on preferential terms. The financial and monetary system must be reformed so as to release new and additional financial resources to meet the needs of developing countries in the field of development and economic growth.

 

Excellencies,
Ladies and Gentlemen,

The role of the United Nations in the field of South-South cooperation should be more effective. United Nations institutions and specialized agencies located at the Group of 77 chapters should play a more active role in the task of promoting and supporting ECDC/TCDC. Furthermore, the role of multilateral institutions, regional economic groupings, is vital for the promotion of South-South cooperation. In my capacity as Chairman of the Group of 77, I am committed to make every effort to involve the UN system in the cooperative activities of developing countries. UNDP, UNIDO, FAO and UNCTAD in particular have been specially receptive to this innovative approach. We will continue our efforts in this area, particularly towards improving the machinery for South-South cooperation at national, regional and the global levels.

It is my conviction that greater attention should be focused on critical sectors which have shown promise in the light of our experience. These include trade, finance, science, technology and technical cooperation. In my view there is an urgent need to intensify South-South cooperation in these areas within the framework of CPA and APEC.

In the rapidly changing climate of multilateral development cooperation, which has witnessed a decline in the resources available for such cooperation, South-South cooperation is likely to assume increased importance as a key instrument of international cooperation for development. I am convinced that the Group of 77 and the Non-Aligned Movement are fully committed to make south-South cooperation a dynamic strategy in support of the development efforts of the developing countries and as a mean of ensuring the effective participation of development countries in the international economic system.

 

Excellencies,
Ladies and Gentlemen,

In conclusion, I wish to reiterate my conviction in the continued validity and importance of the Caracas Programme of Action as a vital instrument to articulate and promote the collective interests of developing countries in the economic and social development fields.

The unity of the African, the Asian and the Latin American and the Caribbean countries is essential for the advancement of interests and the promotion of the cause of development of developing countries.

The solidarity of the Group of 77 also rests on its historical bonds and the recognition that despite our diversity, only joint and coherent action will enable it to achieve our principles and objectives of the year 2000 and beyond. Despite the diversity of the countries that constitute it, the Group remains an indispensable negotiating tool within the United Nations.

Recent world economic and political changes have been profound. The perception of problems have changed. While actors also change, the struggle for the right for development remains the same. It is the struggle of all for prosperity, justice and equity in international economic relations.

I wish all success to our deliberations.

Thank you very much.

Mr. Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Costa Rica,
Mr. Secretary-General,
Your Excellencies,
Ladies and Gentlemen,

First of all, I wish you all a happy new year and sincerely hope that 1997 will prove successful and a fruitful year for the Group of 77.

I would like to extend a warm welcome to Mr. Kofi Annan, Secretary-General of the United Nations, and to congratulate him on behalf of the Group of 77 for his unanimous election to lead the United Nations into the twenty-first century. I am very pleased to convey on your behalf our pledge of cooperation and support. Tanzania and the Group of 77 will cooperate with you and support you in your difficult task.

I wish also to acknowledge the presence of Dr. Fernando Naranjo, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Costa Rica, and Mr. Gustave Speth, Administrator of the United Nations Development Programme. We deeply appreciate their participation on this solemn occasion.

At this point, I would like to pay special tribute to the Government and people of Costa Rica for firstly agreeing to shoulder the responsibility, and secondly for allowing their Ambassador and Permanent Representative, Ambassador Fernando Berrocal-Soto, for leading the G-77 in 1996 and for the achievements made under Costa Rica’s Chairmanship. Tanzania hopes to build on that solid foundation to advance the common interests of the developing countries in 1997.

Today, I should like to renew to you the expression of our gratitude for the confidence deposited in us and I would like also to assure you that Tanzania will spare no efforts in responding to the needs of all of our countries linked by many aspirations and common interests and whose very diversity and multiple potentials are considerable assets in our joint enterprise. By working together in solidarity, we must strive to ensure the accomplishment of objectives which united our countries over three decades ago. The United Republic of Tanzania fully understands the meaning and scope of this display of confidence as well as the distinction bestowed upon my country in assuming the leadership of the Group of 77 for the year 1997. We are fully committed to discharge this high office with as much distinction as our predecessors.

Tanzania acknowledges the fact that to chair the Group of 77 at the United Nations we are aware of the importance of the responsibility linked to this prestigious as well as heavy mission. Ambassador Daudi Mwakawago and his colleagues in the Mission along with the staff of G-77 office, will attempt to serve the Group to the best of their abilities. This difficult but lofty task will fall within our faithful following of the guidelines of foreign policy for Tanzania as a Third World country.
Excellencies,
Ladies and Gentlemen,

1997 offers rather dampening perspectives in the world economy. In the countries of the South there will be a continuance of an appreciable level of growth. But globally the forecasts are far from being satisfactory and the economic situation for many countries in particular in Africa remains precarious.

Hence, the perspectives for improved access to the markets of developed countries for manufactured exports from developing countries remain uncertain. The demand for raw materials and commodities has dropped and the weight of external debt remains unbearable to a great number of countries of the South. If we add to that picture instability and conflict and unprecedented growth in the flows of refugees and displaced persons and the spread of absolute poverty, it is clear that the challenges facing our countries today, challenges which we are attempting to meet here within the United Nations still remain and become increasingly complex.

International economic relations are most definitely power relations. It is not easy that the countries which exert control in the prevailing international system accept reforms aimed at correcting the prevailing economic and institutional inequalities. Only the determined joint action by the countries of the South, based on clear development policies, a better utilization of their resources and capabilities and a solid strategy of economic cooperation, may offer possibilities for changing the current international economic system.

Excellencies,
Ladies and Gentlemen,

In its thirty-three years of existence, the Group of 77 has struggled to defend the interests of its member countries. There have been significant successes and many setbacks. It is incumbent upon all of us to consolidate the gains while tackling the shortcomings and setbacks with concerted action. Our main duty is to build and preserve the unity of the developing countries and to accommodate its different concerns and aspirations without jeopardizing the basic objectives and principles of the Group as stated in the Charter of Algiers adopted by the First Ministerial Meeting of the Group of 77 held in October 1967. The strength of the Group must rest on the clarity of its objectives, the effectiveness of its mechanisms, its unity and its internal cohesion. Only in that way will it be more real and less formal. The Group of 77 has an enormous potential for making use of its influence. Therefore, our duty is to persevere in the efforts to achieve its effective consolidation.

With the support of the Group, we also intend to explore actively and in cooperation with the Chairman of the Coordinating Bureau of the Non-Aligned Movement, the possibilities of resuming true dialogue among developed and developing countries. This dialogue should be based on interdependence, mutual interest and partnership. The Joint Coordinating Committee between the Non-Aligned Movement and the Group of 77 (JCC), I hope, will play a key role on this issue.

Excellencies,
Ladies and Gentlemen,

The remainder of the present decade will be decisive for the Third World. The Agenda for Development, the reform of the UN system, the UN financial crisis and the follow-up of the UN major conferences and summits and other related issues dealing with cooperation, growth and the development of our countries will define, in one way or another, the course of relations with the developed countries for the twenty-first century. My country, Tanzania, is fully committed to working closely with friends and allies to restoring the issue of development to the core of the UN agenda. I believe strongly that for peace and justice to be realized, there must be genuine development in the South.

I further would like to assure you that I will give the greatest priority to South-South cooperation. The results of the meeting of the Intergovernmental Follow-up and Coordination Committee held in Manila in February 1996, the results of which were endorsed by our Ministers, are and do provide in this field clear and pragmatic directives for South-South cooperation. Among other measures, Tanzania working along with all of you, is determined to implement decisions reached by Sectoral Meetings held in Georgetown, Jakarta and the recently held conference in San Jose. I take this opportunity to commend the Government of Costa Rica for hosting the South-South Conference on Trade, Investment and Finance and for leading it to its successful conclusion. The conference was truly an occasion for developing countries to reaffirm their solidarity and advance common position on relevant issues related to trade, investment and finance within the framework of the Caracas Programme of Action.

I intend also to undertake work aimed at the full implementation of the Caracas Programme of Action so that it can deal fully with the realities of today and of tomorrow. I intend also to launch consultations for adequate preparation of the tenth session of the Intergovernmental Follow-up and Coordination Committee (IFCC-X) to be held in late 1997/early 1998 in Africa in accordance with the principle of geographical rotation.

I am convinced that the IFCC-X meeting certainly would have to deal with the progress made by the Group in the field of Economic and Technical Cooperation among Developing Countries, but also and above all, it would have to look with foresight towards the content and the deployment of our future actions. I am encouraged by the preliminary exchange of views that have been held on certain issues among some of our Ministers last September, and I hope that I will be able to hold further consultations over the next few months.

I also intend with your support and assistance to develop closer relations with the United Nations system and with the South Centre in order to mobilize all available resources and skills in order to further and strengthen South-South cooperation.

At this point I cannot conclude without mentioning the supporting mechanisms made available to the Chairman of the Group of 77 in New York. Here again I count on the cooperation of delegations to provide full support for the core of assistants for the Chairman and to contribute financially to the ECDC account.

Similarly, cooperation and coordination with the various Chapters of the G-77 will be for us a concern at all times so that we can promote further and make fruitful the efforts of the developing countries at various United Nations centres.

Your Excellencies,
Ladies and Gentlemen,

The Group should articulate a global strategy that may enable it to respond adequately to changes that take place in the world scene and which may translate into true negotiating capacity. Otherwise we will progressively continue to be marginalized from the real world and our influence on the latter will continue to be virtually non-existent. A key component of this strategy should be the review of the functioning of the Chapters of the Group of 77. Up to now the latter have acted in a dislocated manner and without clear goals, which is reflected in the weakness of their positions and in their lack of continuity and dynamism. The disadvantage of the developing countries ultimately resides in the lack of a firm political platform for the 21st century. This is an issue which should be discussed in depth by the next ministerial meeting of G-77.

In continuing the action of our Group and in strengthening our tradition, the Tanzanian Chairmanship is determined to guide its efforts towards promoting constructive and pragmatic dialogue, working towards true renewed international cooperation for development.

In this task, which will be a major challenge in this era, the Chairman, strengthened with your support and your cooperation will devote himself resolutely to putting an end to the marginalization of the developing world and he will attempt to stimulate good will within the developed world for our legitimate quest for an international order of progress equally shared by all.

Lastly but not least, Tanzania would like to express very sincere appreciation to the United Nations, UNDP and in particular to its Special Unit for TCDC, for practical assistance provided the Office of the Chairman. Such assistance is critical to the efficiency and effectiveness of the Group of 77.

Thank you very much.

Mr. Chairman,

At the outset, I would like on behalf of the Group of 77, to take this opportunity to congratulate both Ambassador Percy Mangoaela of Lesotho and Ambassador Michael Powless of New Zealand, on their appointment to the challenging task of co-chairing the Working Group on Agenda for Development. It is our sincere hope that under their able co-chairmanship, the Working Group will be able to accomplish its task in a very fruitful manner. I want to assure both of them of my fullest cooperation and that of the Group of 77.

Mr. Chairman,

The Group of 77 having participated very actively in the negotiations for the Agenda for Development for the last four years, attaches great importance to an early and successful conclusion of the negotiations particularly chapter three. We believe that a successful negotiated agenda will not only promote an integrated approach to development aimed at strengthening international cooperation, provide a framework for the implementation of the results of the major UN conferences, but would also enhance the future role of the UN in development as well as give pointers to the direction the reform of the UN will take.

The Group of 77 notes with disappointment that for the last four years, the Working Group has not been able to reach an agreement even on the definition of the word “development” while negotiating chapter one and two. Increasingly we have witnessed reluctance to relaunch the debate on economic growth in developing countries as well as to recognize the need to restructure international economic relations, to ensure that developing countries could effectively participate in decision making; instead the thrust and focus of our negotiations has been on UN reforms. But if those issues and concerns are not addressed the very relevance of the United Nations will be called to question. For the plight of two thirds of the members of the Organization and world community is at stake.

Mr. Chairman,

In view of the above this opportunity should not be missed. As we are preparing to embark on our discussions on chapter three dealing with institutional issues and follow-up. The Group of 77 would like at this stage to express three particular concerns:

Firstly, the role of the United Nations as a locus of high level political dialogue on economic issues and on development has been overshadowed by overemphasis on peacekeeping, humanitarian and human rights issues. Although the issues are important they are only the symptoms. The United Nations has to address the root causes of the majority of peace and security violations. It is economic impoverishment and lack of equity in national development.

Secondly, in recent years, the impression cannot also be avoided that the role of the United Nations in global economic issues and development policies has somewhat eroded in comparison to the World Bank, IMF and WTO.

And lastly but not least, it is true that the UN Secretariat that deal with economic issues have generally weakened. This has been due to shift of focus and warped resource flows.

Mr. Chairman,

I do not have to belabour the extent to which international conflict, and indeed conflict within nations, is to a large degree a result of economic and social decline. Thus if the UN is to fully carry out its mandate as called for by the Charter, a certain balance and parallelism on these issues is inevitably necessary.

We are aware of the skepticism that some industrialised countries feel towards the UN as a forum for global economic issues. Thus, the core economic issues of macroeconomic policies, finance, debt, trade, monetary issues and technology have given way significantly to “soft issues” (environment, drugs, etc.) in the UN bodies.

Mr. Chairman,

A balance between economic growth and development on the one hand and social and environment issues on the other, is important. Without economic growth and accelerated development, the resources required to deal with environment and social problems will simply not be available.
Mr. Chairman,

While the Group of 77 hopes that the Agenda for Development will conclude in an expeditious manner, there will have to be greater clarity in the focus on objectives for the Agenda. The United Nations for whatever reasons cannot afford to renege on agreed positions negotiated very laboriously at the world major conferences. Indeed the Agenda would be incomplete if those concerns are not taken on board.

Mr. Chairman,

In conclusion, let me state that after taking stock of the two chapters which already have been negotiated, it is the view of the Group of 77, that before we proceed to chapter three, it is important to resolve our differences in the pending paragraphs in chapter one and two, particularly para 1, 1 bis and para 31. We believe that this is the only way to move forward expeditiously. Globalisation and liberalisation dominate the world’s economic relations. But it is vitally important that there is a correct interpretation of the same and a suitable policy response is put in place. During the coming weeks the Group of 77 will play its part in making positive contribution to the debate and negotiations that will take place.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The Co-Chairmen of the Ad Hoc Intergovernmental Panel on Forests,
Distinguished Guests,
Ladies and Gentlemen,

Speaking on behalf of the Group of 77 and China, I should like at the outset to sincerely congratulate you and all the delegations for the excellent job you have so far done in the Intergovernmental Panel on Forests (IPF) process. We are particularly pleased that in accordance with the agreement reached at the IPF-3 meeting last September, the Co-Chairmen have successfully compiled a draft final report which will be the basis of negotiations at this Fourth Session.

 

Mr. Chairman,

The Intergovernmental Panel on Forests process is an important contribution towards the elaboration of the Forests Principles which were agreed to at the Rio United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) in 1992, including, inter alia, proposals for the implementation of forest-related decisions at national and international levels, international cooperation on financial assistance and technology transfer, and institutional matters and appropriate legal mechanisms.

 

Mr. Chairman,

The implementation of forest-related decisions of UNCED and the IPF recommendations implies that the forest issue should be comprehensively addressed. This is especially important to ensure a rational and holistic approach to the sustainable and environmentally sound development of forests. Indeed, forests have wide-ranging implications for the successful implementation of various environmental conventions such as the Framework Convention on Climate Change, Convention on Biodiversity, and the Convention on Desertification and Drought. Furthermore, there is an urgent need for the management and conservation of all types of forests within different countries in order to ensure that resources and forest lands are sustainably developed to meet social, economic, ecological and cultural needs of present and future generations,

 

A specific anti-poverty strategy is therefore one of the basic conditions for ensuring sustainable forest development. In particular, it must be ensured that local community and forest dwellers are prime beneficiaries of the forest management programmer.

 

Mr. Chairman,

It was underscored at the Rio UNCED that the implementation of any agreed forest-related decisions would crucially depend on the availability of adequate additional financial resources and environmentally sound technologies. In developing countries, domestic resources for financing sustainable development are scarce, hence international financial sources remain vital. While developing countries strive hard to mobilize their own domestic resources, the international community is expected to provide additional support through the mobilization of new, innovative and additional forms of finance at bilateral, multilateral and private levels. Moreover, there is a need to examine new ways and find durable solutions to the debt problems of low income and least developed countries (LDCs) in order to provide them with the needed means for development, including the management and sustainable development of their forest sectors.

Official Development Assistance (ODA) is also an important source of funding for environment related projects in developing countries. It is encouraging to note that currently up to US$1.5 billion of ODA disbursement is earmarked for sustainable development programmes. However, ODA flows are generally below the internationally agreed target of 0.7% of developed countries’ GNP. The average ODA flows stand at about 0.3% and ODA reaching LDCs is a trickle 0.09%. Since ODA is the main source of bilateral assistance in many LDCs, it is important that donors increase their ODA contributions, including the additionality for sustainable development activities. In this context, we congratulate those donors who have reached the agreed ODA target and above.

 

Mr. Chairman,

Concerning technology transfer for sustainable development, it is the view of the Group of 77 and China countries that environmentally sound technologies should be made available to developing countries at affordable terms and without the stringency of intellectual property rights. It is regretted that at present there is no internationally agreed mechanism for the transfer of technology from the developed countries to the developing countries apart from the commercial exchanges mainly through the private sector, which most developing countries, especially the LDCs, cannot afford.

Mr. Chairman,

From the aforesaid, it is clear to us that if a solution to the issue of resources and technology transfer is not found, it would be difficult, if not impossible, to implement the environmental programmes as envisaged in Agenda 21 and IPF, in the developing countries.

 

Mr. Chairman,

Finally, I should like to offer preliminary comments on the future arrangements for the follow-up to the work of IPF, which is the focus of deliberations in programme element V.2 of the IPF agenda, Many useful options for action have been suggested at intergovernmental and interagency levels, as well as the necessary legal mechanism. It is the hope of the Group of 77 and China that after due consultations among the delegations, the IPF will recommend the most viable options for the CSD’s adoption. In this regard, it may be necessary to consider interim arrangements for the implementation of the programmes recommended by the IPF in the short-term in order to allow for dialogue for medium to long term arrangements for other instruments in further implementation of the Forest Principles.

 

Mr. Chairman,

I wish you and all the delegates attending the IPF great success in your deliberations of the agenda items before you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Chairman,

Allow me, on behalf of the Group of 77 and China, to extend to you and to the Co-Chairmen, our warmest congratulations on your well deserved election. We are confident that under your able leadership the deliberations of this meeting will be conducted efficiently and reach useful conclusions. We assure you of our full cooperation.

I should also like to commend the Secretary General of the UN and his dedicated staff in the secretariat, particularly in the Department for Policy Coordination and Sustainable Development for preparing the valuable and useful documents before us and making them available to delegations on time.

Mr. Chairman,

The Group of 77 and China attaches great importance to this process of consultations which are starting today in preparation for both CSD V and the Special Session of the UN GA scheduled for June, 1997 to review and appraise the implementation of Agenda 21. The UNCED review process provides governments with a unique opportunity to reiterate the commitments and the necessity of sustainable patterns of development.

The commitments agreed at UNCED in 1992 forged a new partnership for international cooperation in recognition of the fact that the goals and objectives of sustainable development could not be achieved without all nations agreeing to act together to preserve the global environment. UNCED also recognized the special situation and needs of developing countries, particularly the LDCs and urged that these countries should be given priority when implementing environmental programs. It was further stressed that in view of their different capacities and contributions to environmental degradation, states have common but differentiated responsibilities in redressing the problem of our common environment. These are still important principles in ensuring an equitable distribution of these environmental responsibilities.

Mr. Chairman,

Notable efforts have been made in the implementation of Agenda 21 in various countries. At the international level, it is gratifying to note that a number of international environmental conventions were concluded. These include the Framework Convention on Climate Change, the Convention on Bio-diversity and the Convention on Desertification and Drought. The conclusion of these environmental conventions is a demonstration of the resolve of the international community to address seriously the environmental questions in various fields. However, the record of implementation of these legal instruments and other environmental programmes is so far unsatisfactory, basically due to lack of adequate resources and the reluctance of countries with the needed environmentally-sound technologies, to make them available to developing countries on concessional and grant terms.

Concerning resources, it was estimated that the implementation of Agenda 21 would require about US $.125 billion, in additional resources to put the world on the path to sustainable development. This sum was considered to be too huge; instead the GEF was established as the main funding mechanism with initial capital of US $ 2 billion over a three year period. This is obviously insignificant in comparison with the total bill needed to undertake the critical environmental programmes. There is thus a need for increasing resources to correspond to the task of placing future global environmental development on a sustainable path. The GEF should also expand the scope and coverage of environmental issues beyond the existing priorities of climate change, bio-diversity, international waters and ozone layer. Furthermore, the disbursement terms for GEF funds should be improved to make them easily accessible to developing countries. In addition to GEF, the CSD should consider the establishment of funding mechanism for each environmental convention.

Anther means of supporting environmental programs is through ODA. In this regard developed countries should meet the ODA targets and beyond, as previously agreed and provide additional bilateral assistance to developing countries.

In a wider context, measures must be taken to enable developing countries to increase earnings, through means such as restoring commodity prices together with improvement in the access of these countries to the markets of developed countries particularly for the export goods and services in which they have a comparative advantage. The creditor countries and international financial institutions should also adopt an effective, comprehensive, proactive and development-oriented solution to the debt issue, including measures such as debt reduction, debt swaps, debt cancellation and increased grants and concessional financial flows.

Mr. Chairman,

Regarding technology transfer, UNCED underscored the critical role of environmentally safe technologies in the attainment of the ultimate goal of sustainable development. However, the process of making technological information available to developing countries as well as technology transfer has been extremely slow. The developing countries need to access urgently to these technologies if they are to fulfil their obligations under Agenda 21. These technologies are currently out of reach of the majority of developing countries because of their high costs and even more constraining is the lack of infrastructure and institutional capacities. It regretted that to-date there are no internationally agreed modalities on how to transfer technology from developed countries to developing countries. In this context CSD may wish to revisit the proposal of setting up an international clearing house for environmentally-safe technologies to be made available to developing countries at concessional rates. Such a mechanism, could also facilitate easy access to useful technologies which are in the public domain. Meanwhile, developed countries, relevant international institutions should endeavour to provide developing countries with needed technologies including support for manpower development and capacity building.

Mr. Chairman,

One of the major themes of Agenda 21, to which the G.77 and China attaches great importance is the eradication of poverty. Many developing countries, particularly the LDCs, are experiencing the twin problem of widespread poverty and environmental degradation. The rate of depletion of forests in these poor countries is particularly alarming. The message of forest preservation will thus take long to reach people there, if measures to provide them with alternative technologies are not taken on an urgent basis. We therefore reiterate that CSD should continue focusing its work on the linkage between poverty and environmental protection and ensure that more assistance is directed towards poverty alleviation projects and programmes.

Mr. Chairman,

We would like to conclude by stressing that the cross-cutting issues of financial resources, transfer of technology, trade and investments and poverty alleviation should be given adequate attention in the preparatory process for UNGA Special Session. We are convinced that unless these issues are resolved, the goal of attaining sustainable development will be difficult to achieve.

Thank you.

The G-77 welcomes the statement of the European Union, particularly because it has addressed some of the issues which the G-77 raised in its statement yesterday. In particular, we welcome the pledge to raise ODA contributions from the current average low of 0.3% to the agreed level of 0.7%.

The issue of FDI merits detailed and careful study and reflection by developing countries to evolve a globally agreed regime. For of the average $32 billion. FDI flows almost $18 billion went to Asian region, only $ 4 billion went to African region and the remaining amount elsewhere. The main reason is that FDI flows to countries with the necessary infrastructure. Unless measures are taken with international support to improve conditions in the LDCs, ODA and concessional funding including multilateral financial institutions will continue to be the main sources of international financial support in these poor countries.

On technology transfer, the emphasis that this should be through the private sector does not offer a profound solution to the problem as posed by G-77 yesterday. In the course of the consultations the G-77 invites other groups in the search for more concrete ways of transferring technology to developing countries.

Production, high consumption levels and lifestyles continue to make heavy demand on the global environment. In this regard, the North is overwhelmingly responsible for both pollution and resource depletion. In order to alleviate the situation, the North should agree to significant reductions of the emissions of greenhouse gases; curb the use of toxic chemicals and substances and of the export of toxic and radioactive wastes to the developing countries; initiate negotiations for conventions that would ensure that the activities of Transnational Corporations are environmentally safe, undertake measures to change consumption and lifestyle patterns that pose a major threat to the global environment; and transfer of environmentally-sound technology to the South on preferential and non-commercial terms.

Mr. Chairman,

The Group of 77 and China has reflected carefully on the proposals put forward in UN Secretary-General’s report contained in Document E/CN.17/1997/2 on the institutional framework and the future role of the Commission on Sustainable Development.

It is the view of the Group of 77 that CSD has done a commendable job since its creation principally in the coordination of policies relating to sustainable development in context of implementing Agenda 21. The G-77 therefore reaffirms that in the post UNGASS period, the CSD should continue providing the forum for policy coordination in all issues concerning environment and development.

Concerning the work programme, as proposed in the Secretary-General’s report above, Add.28, we support an approach that makes it possible to cover all the important sectoral and cross-cutting issues. This approach will be effective in the implementation of Agenda 21, at all levels, if the themes chosen for consideration by CSD takes into consideration the interests of all countries, in particular the developing countries. In this regard, the G-77 attaches special importance to the implementation of the agreements on cross-cutting issues of resource transfer, technology transfer, trade and investment and poverty eradication.

As regards to the review process as a whole, the G-77 is of the view that, this exercise should be balanced; the review should focus equally on the implementation of the commitments made at international and national levels. At present the trends show that much more emphasis on the work of CSD is placed on the review of national implementation in the developing countries than on the fulfillment of the commitments by the developed countries at UNCED, especially in the provision of new and additional resources for the implementation of Agenda 21.

Mr. Chairman,

Regarding the institutional structure, the G-77 would like to stress that the existing complementarity between CSD and other environmental bodies, should be maintained and strengthened, with respect to the implementation and follow-up of Agenda 21. In particular the mandates and decisions taken by other intergovernmental bodies in the field of environment, should be duly respected. Furthermore, the G-77 would like to emphasize that any proposal for review and reform of the institutional structure of any body in this area should be undertaken in the appropriate forum such as ECOSOC or General Assembly.

Mr. Chairman,

The G-77 and China further suggest that the Global Environmental Facility (GEF) should also be reviewed with a view to expanding its mandate beyond the specific areas of international waters, ozone layer, biological diversity and climate change. This implies an increase in the current GEF funding levels and the creation of additional funding mechanisms for each environmental convention.

Mr. Chairman,

The forest debate has received much focus and attention, especially during the IPF-4 process. The IPF report has been forwarded to CSD-V for consideration. The G-77 supports the approach taken at the just-ended intergovernmental panel on forests, of submitting to CSD, a menu of options reflecting the concerns of both developed and developing countries. It is the hope of the G-77 that CSD will consider this matter very carefully before recommending appropriate action to the UNGASS.

Mr. Chairman,

The UNGASS will be faced with the critical challenge of renewing the compact for international cooperation in the field of environment and development. It is thus important that that the preparation for UNGASS is done in the most thorough fashion, giving due attention to all the important suggestions made at the intersessional ad hoc working group.

Thank you.

Mr. Chairman,

The Group of 77 and China expresses its deep concern at the continuing financial crisis of the United Nations which has been exacerbated by the lack of political will and the failure of some Member States to meet their legal financial obligations to the Organization.

The Group of 77 and China reiterates its position on the financial situation of the UN as stated last year in document WG-FS/33. This position paper, which contains specific proposals to address the current A crisis of payments, is a serious and concrete effort by the Member States of the Group of 77 and China to secure a sound and viable financial basis for the Organization and to strengthen the UN’s capacity to fulfil all its mandated programmes and activities.

The Group of 77 and China has consistently maintained that the current crisis of payments is the direct consequence of the nonpayment of substantial arrears and overdue contributions by some major contributors. Viable solutions to the financial situation can emerge only when Member States take concrete actions to clear their arrears and pay their future assessed contributions in full, on time and without conditions or benchmarks, in accordance with article 17 of the Charter. The Group of 77 and China firmly believes that the present financial crisis can only be resolved if the Member States show firm political will to fulfil their legal obligation under the Charter.

The Group of 77 and China has carefully examined the question of the perceived linkage between the current financial situation and the methodology of the scale of assessments, and has come to the conclusion that the crisis of payments has not been caused by the scale of assessments. Revisions to the current methodology will not solve this crisis of payment since it will neither change the aggregate level for revenues available to the Organization nor guarantee payment of assessed contributions promptly and in full in the future.

The Group of 77 and China, which is collectively among the largest contributors to the peace-keeping efforts of the United Nations through the provision of troops and equipment, has in effect been financing the UN outlays as an indirect consequence of delays in payments by some major contributors of their assessed contributions. Hence, the Group has its legitimate interest in trying to produce as soon as possible, urgently needed results in the ongoing discussions on the crisis of payments confronting the United Nations.

Mr. Chairman,

As a result of the continuing financial crisis, these symptoms of a very deep rooted malaise have become apparent: (a) due to the problem of arrears the United Nations has to borrow money from peace-keeping budgets. This is not only an irregular practice but also troop and equipment providing countries are also not being reimbursed. This has created difficulties, especially for the developing countries; (b) the United Nations capacity to carry out its mandated activities would be adversely affected because of the crisis of payments; (c) The United Nations has resorted to a controversial practice of making use of the services of loaned personnel. This practice has affected the geographical balance and the very character of the international civil service. The Group of 77 and China further believes that the financial crisis has been aggravated by lack of requisite financial discipline, especially in the area of procurement as highlighted in the report of the Board of Auditors (doc. A/51/5).

Mr. Chairman,

The Group of 77 and China wishes to re-emphasize the legal obligation of all members to pay in full and on time as envisaged in the Charter, and also to reiterate the legal obligations of all Member States in arrears to pay their arrears. The Group of 77 and China wishes to express its confidence in the leadership of the new Secretary-General, especially for his vast experience and his deep understanding of the organization. The Group of 77 and China appeals to the Member States to pay their contribution in full, on time and without conditions or benchmarks, to enable the new Secretary-General to carry out his mandated tasks on a sound financial footing.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

This Conference is convening four months before the Special Session of the General Assembly that will review performance of the implementation of the Rio decisions of 1992 by the International Community. The date is significant in that for us the deliberations here may have a bearing on what will transpire in New York in spring. I refer here to the Commission on Sustainable Development popularly known as CSD scheduled to convene next month as Prep Com to the Special Session. It is with that background in mind that we have offered to share with you our perceptions of some of the problems in implementation.

This presentation will focus on five key areas namely the rationale of the conferences, the development paradigm, the demands and ramifications of globalisation, the case for new ethos of economic development cooperation and what institutional framework for sound global partnership that will not only be conducive to rapid growth but also will be equitable especially in relations to the South.

Let me start by reminding ourselves of the key statement made by Heads of State and Government when they met in New York to commemorate the Fiftieth anniversary of the founding of the United Nations. And here I quote:

“…the United Nations has convened a number of specifically focussed global conferences in the last five years. From these conferences, a consensus has emerged, inter alia, that economic development, social development and environmental protection are interdependent and mutually reinforcing components of sustainable development, which is the framework of our efforts to achieve a higher quality of life for all people…”

The message is quite clear. The conferences addressed the critical issue of the development of humankind on the one hand and on the other the centrality of liberating the person from all the hackles of underdevelopment. All the conferences adopted Programmes of Action in which a detailed division of labor was underwritten for all the players. Therefore, in analyzing the implementation of the decisions it is important to bear in mind the different roles played by governments, agencies and civil society. Such recognition will provide clarity in apportioning praise or blame. On balance, however, it can be stated without contradiction that the majority of the member countries in the Group of 77 and China were faithful implementers of the major decisions of the conferences. To some this assessment may be controversial. But the plain truth is that all the studies by leading authorities are in agreement that the South fulfilled its side of the bargain. It is the north that has yet to deliver. The crux of the matter is the lack of political will. For global partnership to be meaningful there must be a new attitude and commitment to cooperate both in words and action. And more in action.

 

DEVELOPMENT

There is a growing debate as to the meaning of development. Indeed it is important to have clarity on its efficacy. But to the people who cannot read and write, and do not know where the next meal will come from, let alone worrying bout their shelter, put simply development to them is the banishment of those inequities. Therefore, academics and intellectuals can argue about the finer points of definition, and indeed they should, however, there need to be a reasonable balance. The Declaration by the Heads of State and Government underscored the imperative of development that is the raising of the quality of life of all people.

The world has seen an implosion of knowledge in the last thirty years or so. The revolution in technology and informatics have raised the expectations of humankind to new levels. However, it is important to bear in mind that over one billion people live in poverty. That is, one-fifth of humankind is not enjoying the fruits of the revolution in technology. They cannot be wished away. Their plight has to be addressed seriously along with the requirements of the vast majority of humankind residing in the countries of the South.

Economic and social development are thus key elements. Economic growth is a prerequisite for any meaningful change in the pattern of life. Humankind has begun to realize with a sense of realism that poverty is not an inevitable part of human condition. All the conferences were unanimous in deprecating poverty. Poverty negates all notions of development and equity. In fact it is a menace which has to be eradicated. Given that a very substantial segment of humankind is afflicted by poverty, it is incumbent upon the international community to work out concrete programmes with a reasonable timeframe for its eradication. The world has enough resources and the organizational capability to achieve that goal. What is lacking is the political will. No legislation can propel the political will of the powers that be. It is a question of conscience.

The main message of the conferences which was: reorganize and restructure to join the global economy. Many developing countries have undertaken structural adjustments and the process is very much underway. The undertaking has been very costly in human and material terms. But there will be no turning back. Globalization is here to stay and conditions the way we do business. The support of the international community is vital to the efforts of the developing countries especially the negative impact on the least developed countries of Asia and Africa.

In short an enabling external environment is crucial to the sustainability of development efforts of the developing countries. Studies have shown that every year between thirteen and eighteen million people mainly women and children perish from hunger and poverty related causes. That development is unacceptable. There is a need to take urgent measures to improve the external economic environment which will allow the developing countries to restore economic growth in a sustained basis. Economic policy coordination at the global level is also essential in order to promote macroeconomic stability. The focus there is particularly monetary and financial stability.

The pace of development can never be achieved without the provision of adequate financial resources. We are aware of the need to mobilize domestic resources a factor that had not been given much prominence in the past. The supporting role and in some cases the critical role of external resources cannot be overemphasized. Yet it is a fact that over the last few years the contribution of developing countries to the world economy has been significant and rising. Even developing countries of Africa have been registering net contribution although from a very low base. The implication of that phenomenon is that a more proactive international stance can make a difference to many of the economies of the developing countries.

A lot has been said about the role of the private sector. Indeed where sound macro-policies have been put in place significant achievements have and are being recorded. But it is also true that private sector involvement is selective and discriminatory. For poor countries, the governments have still a critical role to play especially in infrastructure development. To rule out governments in favour of the private sector is to commit millions of people to perpetual poverty. What is needed is a sound balance – between the free play of markets and the regulatory prerogative of the state that includes the putting in place of sound infrastructure and policies.

Economic cooperation in the new era of globalisation has to be on new terms and conditions. This realisation is widespread among the developing countries. When all is said and done the fact remains there must be a flow of resources from the developed towards the developing countries. Recycling of existing resources is not the answer. The demands of development are such that there must be injection of new resources through such mechanism as ODA and soft window of the Bretton Woods Institutions. The scourge of poverty is real. To fight it requires resources.

The decline in resources for multilateral development makes it difficult to respond decisively to the massive challenge of poverty eradication. The continued cut-back in resources for development, therefore, threatens to undermine the efforts for meeting the targets and objectives of poverty eradication agreed upon at the major conferences.

 

INSTITUTION CHANGE

Given the primacy of development to addressing the needs of the developing countries, it is axiomatic that institutions need to be restructured to meet the challenge. Therefore, it is pertinent to ask ourselves the content and direction of reforms we are undertaking. The programmes and policies of the 50’s and 70’s, which focussed on import substitution did contribute to the laying down of an infrastructure for industrial development. But its very narrow scope has proved conclusively it could not be sustained. Hence the new demands of globalization and liberalization. The new climate opens the borders for technology and capital to move.

For developing countries an added push is a prerequisite. Governments have to create the necessary conditions for capital to flow in and to protect investments while safeguarding the interests of the most vulnerable in society.

In conclusion, therefore, one can assert that the major conferences set the tone for a new global partnership for development. Concretely the developing countries have responded positively although through forceful means. It is now up to the development partners to come up with solid answers to the challenge they undertook to fulfill.

The playing field has to be leveled so that all the players can participate in decency. That is the goal of the Group of 77. Enhanced collaboration between the United Nations system and the Bretton Woods Institutions is one of the most cost-effective means of translating the decision to eradicate poverty into reality. But these are not the only players. The world has seen significant rise of non-governmental organizations and the private sector as active partners in development. The United Nations being the only universal body, remains the one institution that can provide the coordinating role.

The case for multilateralism cannot be put too strongly. For many years to come governments and multilateral institutions will have a greater role in development in developing countries especially the least developed of Asia and particularly of Africa.

The quest for a new global partnership for development is real and requires all the support it must have. The time is now.

I thank you.

Mr. Co-Chairman,
The Group of 77 and China has examined the co-chairmen’s text and would like to make general comments on the draft circulated. However, we are of the view that for our discussions here to be meaningful, inputs from our capitals are imperative. It is therefore the view of the G-77 and China that while we are prepared to look at the text, we would not be in a position to really go into some agreements with degree of finality because we would like our governments to have a close look at what we are producing as an outcome of UNGASS.

Mr. Co-Chairman,

The text before us, is quite a useful piece of work. Significant efforts have been made as reflected in this draft and maybe it can provide a basis for our discussions. In this context, we would like to express our appreciation to the two co-chairmen for their effort in coming up with this text. However, it needs some improvements to bring the text in line with the interests of developing countries.

On the content, we think that the concept of sustainable development which becomes the dominant concept in the co-chairmen’s text, all the components of sustainable development should be treated on equal footing, including social, economic and environmental aspects. Rio was called “United Nations Conference on Environment and Development” and not “sustainable development”. Therefore, development and environment should be treated in a balanced manner. In this regard, the Group of 77 and China notes with concern that there is weakness on the way economic development, particularly with respect to developing countries has been treated in this text. Our view is that when it comes to actions, we need to highlight the fundamentals of economic development and economic growth in developing countries. After all the Rio document highlighted that economic development is the engine that would provide impetus to environmental protection.

Mr. Co-Chairman,

The concept of common but differentiated responsibilities has not been reflected adequately in the text. This concept is of course important to our Group. On the basis of this concept, the question of responsibility for environmental degradation in general and in some specific areas, for both developing and developed countries are treated equally. But according to this principle that I mentioned above, they have differentiated responsibilities and should play their respective roles as mentioned in the Rio outcome. We would, therefore, like to see the co-chairmen’s text coming out clearly on this issue.

Mr. Co-Chairman,

In section B wehre the Co-chair’s text identifies urgent action, the G-77 is grateful that the issue of poverty has been given ample prominence. The G-77 expected the critical issues of the mobilization of financial resources including new and additional resources, as well as the transfer of environmentally sound technologies, needed in the developing countries would have been listed among the areas requiring urgent action. The Group sees merit in treating these issues under the section of Means of Implementation, but this section should focus only on actual mechanisms and the modalities as well problems of implementation, while Section B should underscore the critical importance of these issues in the implementation of Agenda 21 process. These issues of finance and technology transfer should appear in both Section B and C.

Mr. Co-Chairman,

The G-77 notes that the Co-Chairmen’s text covers adequately the Conventions of UNFCCC, Biodiversity, Convention on the Transboundary Movement of Chemical and Toxic Wastes, and follow-up measures that need to be undertaken. However, it is felt that the measures relative to the implementation of the Convention on Desertification and Drought need to be elaborated further to reflect the urgency of addressing this problem in the affected countries.

Mr. Co-Chairmen,

Regarding the outcome of UNGASS, the text has highlighted general principles and proposals, but does not come out clearly how are we going to implement Agenda 21 in the post UNGASS period. The G-77 and China would like to see the text coming out clearly with more concrete proposals on how the objectives of Agenda 21 would be achieved. In addition, we would like a direct and clear reference to international cooperation and the role of such cooperation in achieving the objectives of Rio.

Mr. Co-Chairman,

Most of the mix-up appearing in the co-chairmen’s text is due to the fact that the structure adopted did not follow the pattern of issues as presented in Agenda 21. The Group of 77 would like to stress that the final report of the Working Group should preserve the structure of the Agenda 21.

Thank you.

Mr. Chairman,

The Group of 77 and China took note of the proposal of the United States and the statement of the European Union that were delivered yesterday. As the programme of work for this week does not include consideration of the scales of assessment, the G-77 and China will consider and respond to the US and European proposals at the appropriate occasion. However, the G-77 and China maintains that the scale of assessment is not the cause of the financial crisis, which is caused by the non-payment of assessed contributions by member states.

In keeping with the agreed programme of work, the G-77 and China would like to request those member states most indebted to the United Nations to explain in detail to the Working Group how and when they intend to repay their arrears to the United Nations.

The G-77 and China further invites the Co-Vice Chairmen to return to consideration of the draft decisions on payment of outstanding contributions and incentive and disincentive measures with the intention of recommending at the end of the year decisions on these two issues for adoption by the General Assembly.

Thank you.

Mr. Chairman,

I am pleased to inform the Working Group that the G-77 agreed on a common framework, on which the issues to be raised at the UNGASS should be considered. This framework will be the basis for consultations with the other groups. It is the hope of the Group of 77 that its framework will be acceptable to the Working Group.

The Group also discussed part III A of the Co-Chair’s text, paragraphs 18 and 19.

Concerning para 18, the Group made the following observations:

• The para should be recast to encompass all aspects of economic, social and environmental considerations.
• This para should he harmonized in the final draft, with the paras to be introduced under international cooperation to accelerate sustainable development, in the proposed G-77 framework.
• A balance needs to be drawn between the needs for development and those for environment.

• Concerning para 18(a), the G-77 felt that it was not proper to set a time frame of the year 2005 during which all countries should adopt national strategies for sustainable development. It was further felt that such a proposal, coming from an international forum, like this one, constituted interference in the affairs of governments.

• As for 18(c) it was also felt that the suggestion to the effect that governments should acknowledge additional social actors and groups, had implication for interference in the government actions. It was further suggested that the reference to trade-offs among economic, environmental and social objectives, should be replaced by the notion of complementarity.

Concerning para 19 on changing consumption and production patterns, the G-77 made the following comments:

• It must be recognized that the North was mainly responsible for unsustainable production means as well as pollution and overconsumption. It is hence necessary to invoke the principle s of common but differentiated responsibilities and the polluter pays principle, when apportioning responsibility between the North and the Third World countries.

• In addressing the issues of consumption and production patterns, it is important for the North to pay attention to the special needs of developing countries, particularly providing the South with sufficient “development space” and meeting the basic needs of the poor in the developing countries.
• It is important that the North reduces wasteful consumption patterns.

Thank you.

Mr. Co-Chairman,

Thank you for giving me the floor. The Group of 77 and China met this morning to discuss the cross-sectoral issues in the Co-Chairmen’s text. The Group covered a number of paragraphs dealing with poverty eradication, freshwater, oceans, energy and transport, atmosphere, population, toxic chemicals and wastes and biodiversity.

Concerning poverty eradication, the G-77 stressed that the eradication of poverty is one of the fundamental goals of the entire Untied Nations System. Policies to combat poverty, in particular, provision of basic social services enable and promote broader socio-economic development, since enhancing the capacity of the poor to produce increases both the well-being of individuals and national wealth. In this context, priority actions could include:

Improving access to sustainable employment, entrepreneurial opportunities and productive resources, including land, water, credit, technical and administrative training and appropriate technology, particularly for the rural poor and the urban informal sector, including the support to microenterprises, the microcredit programs and rural employment.Providing universal access to basic social services, including basic education, health care, nutrition, clear water and sanitation;
Progressive development, in accordance with the financial and administrative capacities of each society, of social protection systems to support those who cannot support themselves, either temporarily or permanently;
The promotion of the involvement of NGOs, women’s groups, and other local and community organizations, in projects aiming at the eradication of poverty and social development.
Freshwater

From the developing countries’ perspective, freshwater is a priority and a basic need, especially taking into account that in many developing countries freshwater is not readily available for all segments of the population, inter alia, due to water scarcity and technical and financial constraints.

Hence, from the developing countries’ perspective, it is premature to discuss the view of water as an economic good, particularly referred to the pricing of water as a means to recover costs.

Unless there is a proven commitment by the international community for the provision of new and additional financial resources for the attainment of sustainable development, intergovernmental processes on freshwater resources are not going to be fruitful.

Indeed, given the high costs involved in sustainable freshwater management, particularly with regard to the infrastructure that is required for the supply and sanitation of water, financial and technical support from the international community for the developing countries is indispensable.

On para. 23 there are specific comments to be made:

Firstly, consensus on water management principles is yet debatable given varying geographical and socio-economic conditions in different countries.

Secondly, it needs to be underscored that increasing stress on water supplies is mainly caused by developing countries’ unsustainable use patterns, particularly regarding industrial processes that require vast amounts of water that then cannot be used for other purposes.

Regarding subpara. “a”, it is up to Governments, according to their own policies and needs, to decide what priority they are to accord to issues such as water management, land degradation and desertification. Developing countries often find themselves at odds when trying to address each one of these issues. Thus, integrated land and water management goes beyond most of the developing countries capacities and capabilities. For this reason, addressing this concept from an international perspective may be premature.

On subpara “b”, as was mentioned before, the high costs involved in water supply and sanitation render it difficult for Governments of developing countries, and even the private sector, to provide these services on their own. For this reason, financial assistance from the international community concessional and preferential terms cannot be substituted as a means to enable countries to provide basic services for all.

With respect to subparas “e” and “f”, intergovernmental processes that are not driven by the political will to support developing countries in their efforts, are doomed to be partially, if at all successful.

Thus, for the time being, bilateral and regional agreements may prove to more effective towards the achievement of sustainable water management, than a Global Water Partnership.

Oceans

Regarding para 24, what is understood by the concept of “ocean governance” is not clear. Clarification from the co-chairs in this respect would be useful.

With respect to subpara “a”, though an integrated approach for the follow-up of international legal instruments relative to ocean matters could prove useful, the institutional arrangements required for this purpose – which may prove to be of a substantive nature – have not been specified. Indeed, a number of UN bodies are currently serving as secretariats for the array of legal instruments that relate to ocean matters.

Furthermore, follow-up and monitoring of actions at a national level is, by definition, up to Governments and not to the international community at large.

Regarding sub-para “b”, implementation of the Global Programme of Action for the Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-Based Activities, by developing countries is to be based on the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities. Accordingly, developing countries should be provided with all the international technical and financial assistance which they require for the implementation of the GPA.
Energy and Transport

Energy and transport should be dealt with in separate paragraphs. Though in the long run both matters pose adverse effects on the global atmosphere, these two subjects have different dynamics and different ways to be tackled.

The provision of public services in all rural and urban areas should be ensured. This is the first priority that needs to be taken into account while considering energy as an emerging issue.

Relevant outcomes of the CSD sessions regarding this matter should be considered. In the case of energy, transport and atmosphere, important elements such as natural gas, developmental needs of developing countries, particularly economic and social ones, as well as the impacts of proposed measures relating to the elimination of subsidies must be adequately addressed.

It is necessary to underscore the main role of technology transfer and respective know-how from developed to developing countries in order to assure the achievement of sustainable development of developing countries.

The wasteful consumption and production patterns of developed countries, that include unsustainable use of energy resources should be also underlined.

The international community should commit seriously to the study and development of new and renewable sources of energy. In this context, financial efforts in this regard should be doubled or at least increase substantially. Development countries should have access to the technologies and correspondent know-how that allows the use of these new and renewable resources of energy on concessional basis, while cooperation potential in this matter between developing countries could be strengthened.

The private sector and governments as owners of these technologies should consider active cooperation with developing countries in this matter.

Incremental costs regarding sustainable use of renewable and non-renewable energy resources in developing countries should be supported by the international community.

Subsidies to energy production and consumption are in some cases a policy response to the provision of services to urban or rural populations. In this context, references to a time-frame and targets for the elimination of subsidies, must take into account differences between developed and developing countries in order to consider them a feasible possibility.

In relation to the Common Strategy for better coordination of energy activities in the UN system, further elaboration on this matter is necessary so as to identify the scope of this approach.

The transport issue leads to the consideration of infrastructure for development. In this context, the promotion f transport policies that consider alternative approaches to meeting commercial and private mobility needs, should consider alternative means of transportation and be more specific.

At the same time, the transport sector should be addressed, among other sectors that are identified as high polluters.

Identification of issues and areas to be considered within this item should be pointed out in a more specific and clear manner.

Atmosphere

The following concerns of developing countries have not been addressed in this para:

It needs to be recognized that activities undertaken in pursuit of the objectives of protection of the atmosphere take into full account the legitimate priority needs of the developing countries for the achievement of sustained economic growth and the eradication of poverty.Notwithstanding the efforts to implement the provisions of chapter 9 of Agenda 21, there are still several objectives which remain to be unfulfilled. Most industrialized countries CO2 emissions continue to rise and very few of these countries are likely to reach their current UNFCCC targets of stabilization of GHG emission at 1990 level by the year 2000. These countries must continue their efforts to reduce and abate their level of GHG emissions and to provide support and assistance to the developing countries to meet international objectives as stipulated in the UNFCCC.
Although several countries have reported marked progress in curbing environmental pollution and slowing the rate of resource degradation, as well as reducing the intensity of resource use, actions and initiatives taken by developing countries at the national level should be acknowledged.In the supply sector, GHG emission can be reduced by adopting more efficient fossil fuel technologies; decarbonization of fuels; and increasing the use of renewable sources of energy. However, these initiatives require the necessary financial assistance and the appropriate transfer of technology to developing countries.
Additionally, terrestrial and marine resources are important sources and sinks of atmospheric gases, they should be managed sustainably and conserved. As called for by the CSD during its Fourth Session, integration of protective measures is needed to address effectively the problems of adverse impacts of human activity on the atmosphere and the oceans. Notwithstanding efforts made by the developed countries to reduce their levels of GHG emissions by adopting cleaner technologies and also to assist developing countries in the sustainable management and conservation of terrestrial and marine resources as sinks for atmospheric and ozone depleting gases, development and management of sinks should not give developed countries the license to maintain the status quo of unsustainable production and consumption patterns.
A more committed spirit of cooperation is needed to accomplish the global partnership to conserve, protect and restore the health and integrity of the Earth’s ecosystem and climate system. There is a need for renewed efforts on the part of industrialized countries towards the implementation of their obligations with respect to the stabilization of GHG emissions.
Population

Regarding para 27, the Group of 77 would agree, in general, with the ideas contained in paragraph 27 of the Co-Chairmen’s text. The population issue is cross-sectoral because it is closely related to economic growth, poverty, employment further expansion of basic education and health care. However, it would be useful to include some additional relevant information. While it is true that poverty eradication and further expansion of basic education and health care would contribute to the current slowdown in population growth rates, the Co-Chairmen’s text should reflect that this must be accomplished within the expansion of economic growth.

As to the specific reference to expanding basic education, it is important to reflect the particular needs of women and the girl child. It is in this context that there is an urgent need for an integrated, comprehensive approach to the implementation of the several major UN conferences. Similarly, reference to the expansion of health care should give more emphasis to “universal access to primary health care.” In this regard, there is a need to obtain technical and financial development to the developing countries for the implementation of the ICPD recommendations.

With regard to the inclusion of assistance to environmental refugees at the end of paragraph 27, it would be useful to provide further clarification on this reference.

Environmentally sound management of toxic chemicals, radiocative material and wastes

Progress has been made through the establishment of the Intergovernmental Forum on Chemical Safety (IFCS) and the Intergovernmental Programme for Sound Management of Chemicals (IOCM). The early conclusion of an effective convention on Prior Informed Consent (PIC) is a matter of priority.

Whilst recognising the work being done on a Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs), developing countries affirm that a comprehensive approach to the elimination of such pollutants is essential and includes necessary international, regional and national legal mechanisms. Developing countries call upon developed countries to assure that the international objective of minimizing effects on the environment by POPs be fully supported by the early availability of environmentally safe substitutes that are affordable, scientifically sound and accessible to developing countries and assistance to develop national capabilities for production of such substitutes.

Management of toxic substances, such as pesticides, PCBs, waste oil and heavy metals, and radioactive material, their transboundary movement, as well as pollution from ships, is a concern to developing countries. The lack of trained staff, infrastructure and legislation to deal with these problems is a significant constraint to sustainable development. In relation to movement by sea, preparedness for marine pollution emergencies will be essential and require trained personnel, legislation and infrastructure to allow contingency plans to be implemented in the event of an emergency.

As highlighted in the Secretary General’s report an area of special need includes Small Island Developing States (SIDS) and Coastal States in which special methods need to be developed where the risk of health and environmental impacts may be more significant.

Substantial progress has been made to implement the Basel Convention and several regional conventions including the Bamako and Waigani Conventions. Storage, transportation, transboundary movement and disposal of radioactive wastes must be in conformity with these and other relevant international agreements and important principles of the Rio Declaration, notably Principles 14, 15 and 19.

Further action includes:

Need for enhancing awareness of the importance of the safety and management of toxic chemicals, radiation and wastes;
Preventing incidents and accidents involving the uncontrolled release of toxic chemicals, radiation and wastes.
Completion, before the end of 1997, the drafting of the Convention on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management;
Completion of a protocol under the Basel Convention on liability and compensation for damages resulting from transboundary movements or disposal of hazardous wastes.

In relation to these issues the international community should:

Discourage the dumping of toxic chemicals, radioactive material and wastes at sea;
Urgently support clean-up of contaminated sites as a result of the utilisation of radium, production and testing of nuclear weapons and the uranium mining industry.
Pursue efforts towards a global approach by establishing regional cooperation agreements relating to radioactive waste management such as the Bamako and Waigani Conventions;
Ban the illegal movement of hazardous and toxic wastes and make available reports on non-compliance.
Biodiversity

On the issue of biodiversity, the Group of 77 raised the following issues:

Establishment of a clearing-house mechanism;

The role of women in sustainable use of biological resources;

Integration of biodiversity into national, sectoral policies and plans;

Incentive measures at national, regional, sub-regional and global levels;

Intellectual Property Rights in line with UNCTAD BIOTRADE Initiative and “the users pay principle”;

Implementation of EIA’s and Capacity-building and enhancement public awareness at national, sub-regional, regional and global levels be given practical attention.

Legislation at national level.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Madame Chairperson,

I have the honour to speak on behalf of the Group of 77 and China.

Allow me to congratulate you and the members of the Bureau on the excellent way you have conducted the business of the Commission on the Status of Women since your election last year. We would also like to thank the Secretary General for the various reports before the Commission.

We would also like to take this opportunity to congratulate Ms. Angela King on her recent appointment to the post of Special Adviser to the Secretary General on Gender Issues and Advancement of Women. We hope the appointment of Ms. King will allow the Division for the Advancement of Women to refocus its activities toward an integrated and coordinated approach in the endeavor to further advancement of women. The Group of 77 and China is committed to work with the Division for the Advancement of Women toward this end.

Madame Chairperson,

The Charter of the United Nations was the first international agreement to proclaim gender equality as a fundamental human right in 1946 when the Commission on the Status of Women was established one year after its inception. The Commission was established to advise the Economic and Social Council on the promotion of women’s rights in the political, economic, social and educational fields and to make recommendations to the Council on problems requiring immediate attention in the field of women’s rights. As the Commission celebrates its fiftieth anniversary, it is appropriate to take stock of the achievements registered and to set targets to meet the challenges in the years to come.

During the period, it has been possible to put the issue of the advancement of women at the top of the world agenda. The entering into force of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women in 1979 is an important landmark. The Convention, often described as the Bill of Rights for Women, has now been ratified by l54 countries. It is through the elimination of all form of discrimination that women can get equal access to economic, social and political benefits in their societies.

During the last fifty years, four international conferences on women have been organized. The most recent one – The Fourth World Conference on Women held in Beijing in 1995, marked the unprecedented commitment of the international community for a five-year plan to enhance the social, economic and political empowerment of women.

Madame Chairperson,

The unanimous adoption of the Beijing document is not an end but marks the beginning of a long journey toward the advancement of the status of women. The success of the Beijing agreement depends, first and foremost, on the implementation process and that is the challenge facing our Commission.

Madame Chairperson,

The important task before this session of the Commission is not to rewrite or paraphrase the Beijing Declaration of Action, but to make specific, concrete and action-orientated recommendations which would enhance the implementation of the Beijing Conference at all levels. The implementation of the Beijing agreement leaves no spectators. It is therefore incumbent upon the Commission, the body assigned to monitor the implementation process, to map out some clear strategies which enhance coordinated implementation and follow up process within the United Nations system and the member states and other actors.

Madame Chairperson,

While progress has been achieved with the enactment of a number of conventions on the women’s rights including the 1979 Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Women and agreements reached in Beijing, statistics and reality indicate that more work remains to be done. Of the worlds 1.3 billion poor, it is established that nearly 70% are women. Most of these live in developing countries. Two-thirds of the world’s one billion illiterate are women, while only half of the school-age girls are in school. Over half a million women die every year from causes related to pregnancy and childbirth.

Madame Chairperson,

Fifty years after, women have not taken an equal place at the decision-making level. Women hold only 10.5% of the seats in the world legislative bodies (parliaments). Thee United Nations Secretariat has fared a little better than member states with only 17.9% in senior management posts as opposed to only 6.8% of female cabinet ministers. In both cases, the levels are unacceptably low. Economically women have not fared well either. In work place majority of women earn an average of three-fourth of pay men earn for the same work. While in the rural area women, produce 55% of all food grown in developing countries with very limited access land ownership or access to credit.

In addressing the four critical areas, namely;

women and the environment;

women in power and decision-making;

women and the economy;

education and training of women.

The Group of 77 and China urges the Commission to come up with specific recommendations which would include:

The provision of new and additional resources for implementation;

The need to improve institutional capacity through, inter alia, round tables, seminars, workshops and training;

The creation of an enabling environment which enables governments to expand access:

– to education with special emphasis on girls;
– to credit and ownership of property;

The need to take legislative measures through capacity building and training.

Madame Chairperson,

In our endeavour to achieve the advancement on the status of women, we should accord adequately focus on general mainstreaming. There is a tendency, Mardame Chair, to look at the issue of the advancement of women as an island. The advancement of women is about development of societies, countries and the world at large. If more than half of the world population lags behind, the other half will never achieve its full potential advance. Therefore, the implementation of the Beijing agreement should be taken up in the context of the implementation of major international conferences in a holistic manner.

In conclusion, Madame Chairperson, the Group of 77 and China will spare no effort to ensure the successful outcome of our deliberations. We pledge our full cooperation to ensure that this session comes out with concise, action-oriented recommendations which would enhance the implementation of the Beijing Declaration and Program of Action.

Thank you.

Mr. Chairman,

I am greatly pleased to be accorded this opportunity to submit the views and perspective of the Group of 77 and China at this Executive Board meeting which will basically be deliberating on the medium-term development frameworks at country and regional levels.

Mr. Chairman,

This meeting offers a golden opportunity to countries individually and collectively to exchange ideas on the best approaches of accelerating economic growth and development of developing countries. It is our sincere hope that this meeting will seriously take on board many of the salient elements of the orientation of our Group to make development more effective and meaningful.

Mr. Chairman,

The Group of 77 and China recognize the efforts of the UNDP and UNFPA in assisting developing countries to design more innovative approaches which will engender effectiveness and efficiency in the implementation of their development programmes and projects. Indeed, the country and regional cooperation frameworks before this meeting reflect those endeavours.

We also note with encouragement that regional cooperation frameworks presented before this Board have signals of improvement towards more integrated and effective approach in complementing and supplementing national development efforts. The inputs and suggestions from countries and institutions of regions are really useful in designing a credible and feasible regional programme.

The Group of 77 and China, fully supports these trends in improvement in the country and regional programming of development. It is thus, our expectation that the Board will endorse the country and the two regional cooperation frameworks – of Africa and Asia. These frameworks are but the beginning of a new regime in designing cooperation modalities which would be more durable and realistic.

Mr. Chairman,

Prioritization remains a sticky issue mainly because the requirements of meeting even the basic human needs of many developing countries are overwhelming. Both country and regional cooperation frameworks have not succeeded to come up with priority of priorities. Implementation of development programmes is still very problematic to many countries.

The main stumbling block in operationalizing and implementing country and regional programmes remains that of lack of resources, in particular, technical and financial resources. In this regard, we have witnessed drastic cuts in funds in agreed programmes and thus leaving them unimplemented. For instance, while the total programmed resources for the first Regional Cooperation Framework for Africa are set at US$300 million for 1997-2001, to date only $91 million have been made available! We thus call upon the donor and international community to make more efforts in providing the needed resources for the TCDC programmes. If these resources are not made available, the objectives of the regional framework shall not be attained.
Mr. Chairman,

I would like now to focus on the overriding importance that the Group of 77 and China attach to TCDC in the context of South-South Cooperation in general both as a strategy in support of the development efforts of the developing countries and as a means of ensuring their effective participation in the emerging global economy. I believe that South-South cooperation is important in ensuring that the countries of the South intensify cooperation among themselves in those areas they have a comparative advantage.

In this regard, I wish to restate the commitment and resolve expressed by the 20th Ministerial Meeting of the Group 77 held last September in New York. The final Ministerial Declaration stated strongly the firm commitment of the developing countries to make TCDC and South-South Cooperation an important cornerstone of the overall economic philosophy of the Group of 77 and to promote this concept in the future as an increasingly strategic dimension of international development cooperation. We intend to pursue this objective in the context of the policy discussion that will take place in the forthcoming tenth session of the High Level Committee to be held in May and during the debate on operational activities that will take place during the substantive session of ECOSOC for 1997 and the 52nd Session of the United Nations General Assembly.

We recognize the tremendous potential of South-South cooperation in tapping the vast resources and experiences available in the developing world. This does not mean, however, that South-South cooperation should be seen as a substitute for North-South cooperation. As an integral part of international development cooperation and a catalyst for promoting international economic growth and development, South-South cooperation should thus complement North-South cooperation.

I wish to remind members of the Executive Board that South-South cooperation constitutes an important cornerstone of the economic philosophy of the developing countries and that the Buenos Aires Plan of Action which was adopted in 1978 by a United Nations sponsored Conference and the work being done by the South Centre under the leadership of the former President of Tanzania, H.E. Mwalimu Julius K. Nyerere continue to provide a solid conceptual basis and operational framework for guiding action in this field.

Mr. Chairman,

TCDC is an important vehicle through which the objectives of South-South cooperation could be pursued. At its ninth session held in May/June 1995, the High Level Committee on the Review of TCDC adopted the recommendations contained in the New Directions report which outlined a series of measures for ensuring that TCDC serve as a dynamic instrument in the service of development, by adopting a strategic orientation and focusing on a number of high priority issues such as trade and investment, macroeconomic policy and management, production and employment, poverty eradication and the environment which are likely to have a major impact on a wide range of developing countries. It is significant that these recommendations were unequivocally endorsed by the UNDP Executive Board and by ECOSOC and the UN General Assembly.

At the United Nations institutional level, there is a need for a co-ordination of the ECDC process and the TCDC work in New York. While ECDC elaborates on the broad policy issues, TCDC translates them into concrete programmes at country levels.

Mr. Chairman,

It should also be noted that the recent San Jose, Costa Rica, Conference on Trade, Finance and Investment as well as the Sectoral Meetings on Food and Agriculture and Energy adopted a series of measures designed to promote an intensified pattern of economic cooperation among developing countries. We, therefore, look to the Special Unit for TCDC and other parts of the UN development system as well as donor community in helping to advance these objectives. Let me also say that we are grateful to the Government of Japan for its continued support in this regard and for the generous contribution it has so far made to this effort. It is hoped that other donors will emulate this example.

We were of course very pleased that the Executive Board agreed in 1996 to make a special allocation for TCDC which we feel recognizes the increasing importance of this form of cooperation. Let me, at this juncture, reiterate the importance of maintaining a separate conceptual and pragramatic framework for the promotion of TCDC and South-South Cooperation in general in order to enable the UN system to respond to a consistent set of goals and objectives and also to provide a catalyst to correct the North-South bias in traditional multilateral development cooperation.

In this context, we would like to express our full support for the 1997 TCDC Cooperation Framework which we feel will enable the Special Unit for TCDC as a separate entity within UNDP to promote the objectives of the strategy outlined in the report on New Directions for TCDC, which, as it were, provides a philosophical compass for the implementation of TCDC.

Apart from urging the donor community to provide adequate funding for TCDC programmes, we also urge governments and financial institutions to respond positively to the request for contributions to the Trust Fund on South-South Cooperation which has been established by UNDP in accordance with the provisions of General Assembly resolution 50/119.

Mr. Chairman,

I would like to conclude my remarks by stressing the following aspects:

Strengthening TCDC as an important instrument for implementing country-based programmes in the developing countries is essential. Any attempts to reduce TCDC’s current mandate and structure will weaken rather than strengthen TCDC.
The realisation of TCDC objectives requires the provision of an adequate level of resources by the donor community. The Board should thus seriously discuss the issue of substantive funding for TCDC activities.
I thank you.

Mr. Chairman,

I have the honour to speak on behalf of the G-77 and China on the subject of loaned personnel. I would like to express our appreciation to the Controller for the presentation of the Secretary-General=s report and to Ambassador Mselle for the presentation of the ACABQ report. However, we regret the late submission of the Secretary-General=s report.

In the first place, the Group of 77 and China would like to make it clear that the purpose of this intervention is not to question the integrity of the numerous men and women who have offered their services to the United Nations. Nor is it our intention to question the motives of governments which came forward and offered personnel to assist the United Nations.

At this stage it is not against individuals that our attention should be directed. Rather, priority should be directed at the present system. It is a system that has gradually been imposed on the United Nations; a system which, if not corrected quickly, may start, in combination with other developments, a process for dismantling the international character and culture of the United Nations that has been carefully nurtured over the last fifty years. The Group of 77 and China is also concerned about incurring of expenditure from regular budget for the use of gratis personnel without approval of the General Assembly. This is a very serious development.

The Group of 77 and China does not object to the use of the Type I personnel. Here we agree with the Secretariat and with the Advisory Committee that loaned personnel traditionally assigned to technical cooperation and extrabudgetary activities do not appear to have caused much concern. As stated by the Secretariat, Apolicies and practices concerning those personnel are well defined and need not be questioned in the context of this report”. Here the approach to continue to examine this type of personnel, in the context of reviewing regular and other budgets where such personnel are assigned, as proposed in the report of the ACABQ, should be supported.

The large number of Type II personnel has given rise to a lot of concern. This type of personnel has increased in recent years for the reasons that are indicated in the report of the Secretary General. The reason for the increase include the need to secure special expertise not available in the Secretariat. Most importantly, however, the increase is due to lack of adequate resources to implement operations that the Security Council and the General Assembly have authorised. Lack of proper operational planning and the haste with which some activities were approved led also to this development.

The issue of resources is critical. It is alarming to read the statement in the report of the Secretariat that unless adequate resources are provided there is no option but to seek gratis personnel. If we as Member States agree on operations whether to be funded on a voluntary or assessed basis, then it is incumbent on all of us to pay in the manner that we have agreed upon. It is really unfortunate to approve mandates without providing adequate resources. Of more concern is the attitude of some countries which are exerting the strongest pressure to reduce resources and programmes of the United Nations and at the same time support recourse to gratis personnel and find little wrong with this system.

The report from the Secretariat, has however confirmed our worst fears. Developing countries have virtually been shut out from participating in the exercise of offering gratis personnel because the system is set against them. It is a system that implies that those with adequate resources to fund expenses of gratis personnel in New York, for example, can bring whoever they wish to bring. It is ironic that the impression is being given that developing countries which, as a whole, have contributed thousands of troops to peace keeping operations, that are owed millions of dollars by the United Nations, are incapable of producing individuals to perform, for example, such services as investigation and military planning.

Just a few examples. Of the 63 gratis positions for the Yugoslavia and Rwanda Tribunals as shown on page 9 of the report of the Advisory Committee, only a single P-3 comes from one country of the 132 Members of the Group of 77 and China. Of the total of 34 countries providing gratis personnel to the Department of Peace Keeping Operations as shown on page 11 of the report of the Advisory Committee, only thirteen countries come from the 132 Members of the Group of 77 and China. But these thirteen countries offer only 32 positions out of the 125 positions reported and of the 32 positions, only 2 of them have contracts beyond two years.

Mr. Chairman, it is not the fault of those countries that are over represented nor that of those that are under represented. The system must be changed and changed quickly. In order to change it we must level the playing field. To do so, we must consider going the way proposed recently in the Committee on Peace Keeping Operations as referred to in the report of the ACABQ, paragraph 11, and also along the lines suggested by the Advisory Committee in its current report. The Group of 77 and China strongly believes that the use of gratis personnel must be approved by the General Assembly in all situations.

There are those countries which will object to a system of funding positions now occupied by gratis personnel, but their arguments may not be all that convincing. How can these countries explain the fact that the United Nations at one time budgeted for United Nations troops of more than 70,000 in number. In former Yugoslavia, the United Nations budgeted for slightly less then 60,000 troops and for civilian personnel numbering more than 5,000. In 1997 the projection is for a peace-keeping budget of about 1.2 billion dollars. Is it too much to demand that the cost and the manner of procuring the services of about 443 gratis personnel be more transparent and fair? I do not think so.

The report from the Secretary-General raises the question of accountability of gratis personnel and the need to abide by Charter requirements concerning high standards of integrity in the performance of duties. A legitimate question to be asked is this: why did the Secretariat not insist on the observation of the requirements for accountability? The gratis personnel in question work in the Secretariat and, as indicated in its report, many perform ordinary functions which, but for the lack of adequate resources, should be performed by staff members. And yet we have this peculiar situation of individuals who work under the Secretary-General, are often in charge of Secretariat Units, but are not clearly and fully accountable to the Secretary General.

It is not clear why the Secretariat has not insisted, just as it did on the question of payment of support costs, that each gratis personnel must sign an individual contract with the Secretary General. The behaviour of the Secretariat has contributed to the further erosion of the international character of the Organisation. We have individuals who are working for the Secretariat, a principal organ of the United Nations, but the Secretariat cannot hold them accountable. This is but further evidence of what takes place when senior officials of the Secretariat, perhaps driven by necessity or expediency, have either proposed or taken measures which compromise the unique international character of the Organisation=s civil service.

A side issue is the role given to some gratis personnel in the United Nations Secretariat which the Group of 77 and China finds objectionable. We have instances of some gratis personnel representing the Secretary General and consulting with Member States as if they were ordinary staff members. Now, if they are not accountable to the Secretary General, on what basis are some of these individuals being asked to represent the Chief Executive in relations with Member States. Indeed some of them do not even know the proper procedures to follow.

More disturbing are instances of giving United Nations employment to those who first came to the United Nations as gratis personnel. Again we see developments, often with the support of certain United Nations officials and the countries of which they are nationals, of subverting the proper recruitment procedures of the United Nations. If these were ordinary times, a few gratis personnel employed as staff members would perhaps cause less concern. But these are not ordinary times.

It is unacceptable to employ gratis personnel as staff members when many staff of the United Nations are being told there is nothing for them to do any more. Some of them have worked with distinguished dedication over the years. It is an injustice for these men and women to be involuntarily separated while pressure is being exerted to take on gratis personnel as staff members.

The Group of 77 and China is deeply concerned with the pressure to reduce considerably the number of personnel with long contracts with the United Nations and replace them with individuals who come for short periods. It surely will lead to a system not much different from that of the present gratis personnel; a system with individuals who owe no allegiance to the United Nations but to their own Governments. There are operations of the United Nations where short term contracting is very suitable and wherever appropriate short term contracts help to enrich the organisation with new talent.

However, the extensive almost indiscriminate out sourcing of United Nations operations advocated by certain quarters will certainly lead to the same kind of unacceptable practices as those of the present gratis personnel system. Such a system is obviously undemocratic for it favours those countries with the capacity to release for a short period of time certain of their citizens for limited service with the United Nations before returning to their home countries to pursue their careers.

Mr. Chairman, before concluding, let me emphasize once again an important point. The Group of 77 and China insists that a fair, equitable, and transparent system must be established so that all countries should have the opportunity to consider participating in the provision of much of the expertise now provided by gratis personnel.

The Group of 77 and China should like to emphasize that the debate on gratis personnel has generated so much concern and intensity because of issues far beyond the mere question of getting 443 personnel on loan. There is deep concern amongst a large number of Member States regarding what is perceived as an attempt to destroy the unique international character of the Organisation. Suspicion arises and deepens when, for example, decisions of the General Assembly are not implemented in the manner agreed upon after long period of negotiation amongst all Member States. Long standing established procedures adopted by the General Assembly, often by consensus, are ignored or distorted by certain high officials of the Secretariat in a fog of ambiguous explanations simply because powerful countries have pressured these officials to act differently.

Finally, if the present system of gratis personnel is regarded as yet another way to reform the way the United Nations conducts its affairs, then let it be known that this system has no legitimacy and must be changed. It is unacceptable to argue that gratis personnel have been requested by the General Assembly. The request by the General Assembly will not be nullified if a proper system is established to implement that request. The Group of 77 and China will engage actively in the negotiations concerning the question of gratis personnel during the informals.

Mr. Chairman, I thank you.

Madam Chairperson,

Having followed the deliberations of this meeting as an Observer, my delegation, speaking on behalf of the Group of 77, would like to make a short comment, particularly on UNICEF’s activities.

We should like to start by congratulating the Legal Assistance Centre of Namibia for its nomination to receive the 1997 Maurice Pate Award, in recognition of its significant contribution in the field of human rights including child rights and welfare.

The Group of 77 is very appreciative of the work being done by UNICEF, especially in the developing countries.

We further commend the Executive Director for her very comprehensive report on the UNICEF activities. We fully support the measures being taken to improve efficiency in the implementation of the programmes, including the introduction of the Operational Activities, Reference Manual, support for national capacity building and execution measures, monitoring and evaluation activities and the mobilization of resources for UNICEF programmes.

Concerning the mid-term reviews and major evaluations of country programmes, we are pleased with the outcome of the initial work done in some countries in Eastern and Southern Africa, Americas and the Caribbean region, East Asia and the Pacific, South Asia and Middle East and North Africa. These evaluations have been focussed on the important areas of health, particularly child welfare and immunization, education, water, nutrition, sanitation and poverty eradication in general. By addressing these issues, UNICEF activities are more comprehensive and supportive of national efforts in solving development problems generally.

What comes out clearly in the country reviews made are the needs to intensify capacity building measures, provision of adequate resources for the existing programmes as well as the need to expand the coverage of UNICEF programmes particularly in the most needy countries, particularly LDCs and countries experiencing conflicts in Africa and elsewhere.

Madam Chairperson,

For the long term efficient management and sustainability of these programmes, it is important that UNICEF enables the countries and particularly the communities involved, to ultimately own and run the programmes on their own, after the take off stage. It is also important that the successful projects in one country are emulated in other countries.

Furthermore, in view of the limited resources, donor support is critical in ensuring that UNICEF has sufficient resources to undertake all its priority programmes. In this context, the 20/20 initiative should be examined carefully, with a view to overcoming the practical problems towards its operationalization. In particular there is a need to clarify the modality through which donors financial contributions under this scheme would be channeled to developing countries. We further look forward to the UNCEF report on new and innovative funding sources and modalities for operational activities aimed at generating additional resources for UNICEF programmes.

Thank you, Madam Chairperson.

Mr. Chairman,

On behalf of the Group of 77, I should like to extend a warm welcome to you and all the distinguished participants to this important Roundtable. We are in particular grateful that the Third World Network responded at a short notice to our request for this Roundtable. We are further confident that this Roundtable will be conducted efficiently and reach useful conclusions. We hope everybody will participate fully in the deliberations of this Roundtable.

I should like to take this opportunity to express the appreciation of the Group of 77 to the Third World Network, for its outstanding contribution to the process of South-South cooperation. In particular, TWN has made excellent analysis of the issues which are pertinent to the developing countries in various fora, including the important negotiations such as the Uruguay Round, UNCED, Global economic issues etc. The TWN has also made extensive contributions through its reputable publications, such as “SUNS”, “The Third World Economics”, “Resurgence”, etc. It was because of its eminence that TWN was deservedly awarded the prestigious G-77/UNDP annual prize for TCDC/ECDC last year.

We are thus very pleased that TWN is once again at hand in offering its contribution to the preparatory process leading to the UNGASS which will review the implementation of UNCED – five years after Rio. The participants will also benefit from presentation on issues related to globalization and development and WTO.

Concerning the preparation for both CSD-V and the Special Session of UNGA scheduled for April and June, respectively, the participants expect to hear an in depth analysis of the progress made since UNCED, particularly how to overcome the obstacles to implementation in both the cross-cutting and sectoral issues.

In this regard, during the intersessional consultations held in New York in February 1997, it became apparent that although notable progress has been made in the implementation of Agenda 21, much more progress could have been made had critical factors such as adequate financial resources and environmentally sound technologies been made available to developing countries.

It is our hope, therefore, that this Roundtable will make useful suggestions on how to mobilize new and additional resources and how to transfer the needed technologies to the South in the post-UNGASS period. Other cross-cutting issues like trade and investments and poverty eradication should also be given adequate attention. We are convinced that unless these issues are resolved urgently, the goal of attaining sustainable development will be difficult to realize.

It is also important that the Roundtable addresses other important sectoral issues such as desertification and drought, forests, biodiversity, freshwater, production and consumption patterns, control of excessive emissions which are responsible for, Greenhouse gases, toxic chemicals and wastes and their disposals, etc., as important inputs in the CSD-V and UNGASS process.

It is our hope that this Roundtable will make significant contribution to widening the horizon of the participants in the critical areas of the interface between Globalization and Sustainable development generally.

Thank you.

Mr. Chairman,

On behalf of the Group of 77 and China, I should like to congratulate you on your election to preside over this important meeting. We are convinced that under your able leadership, the proceedings of this meeting will be conducted efficiently and reach useful conclusions. In the same vein, we should also like to congratulate the members of the bureau for their well deserved election.

The main purpose of this Ministerial Session of CSD-V is to prepare for the UNGASS scheduled for June 1997, on overall review and appraisal of Agenda 21 implementation – five years after Rio. Being the main outcome of UNCED, Agenda 21 was defined as a programme of action for sustainable development worldwide. It is thus clear that UNGASS is a unique opportunity to renew our commitments towards environment and development.

The General Assembly resolutions on the convening of a Special Session for the review of UNCED and Agenda 21 (Resolutions 47/190, 50/113 and 51/181) stressed the scope in which this exercise shall be carried out. In particular these resolutions made it clear that there should be no negotiation of the outcome of UNCED or other intergovernmental agreements in the field of sustainable development. The Group of 77 fully upholds the guideline given by the General Assembly on the mandate of UNGASS.

Five years ago at Rio, there was an upsurge of optimism about a new era of global partnership, where the developed countries and the international community would help the developing countries to move towards sustainable development by providing financial resources and enabling easier technology transfer. The developed countries would also put their environmental house in order through more sustainable production and consumption patterns. In this context, the developing countries would have more development space with which to improve their people’s living standards, and simultaneously attempt to have more environmentally sustainable practices.

On the above basis, the developing countries hoped that UNCED would lead to practical actions and significant results in sustainable development given the integrated approach and conceptual recognition of the environment development link implicit in the Rio package.

The main issues negotiated at Rio were financial resources and technology transfer. The commitment in Rio by developed countries to move as quickly as possible to augmenting aid levels to 0.7% of their GNP became the embodiment of the Spirit of Rio and global North-South partnership.

Despite the pledges of aid increases at UNCED, the OECD countries’ aid to developing countries fell both in volume real terms and aid as a ratio of GNP. The aid decline is inevitably seen as a lack of commitment and sincerity of the governments of developed countries to implement the Rio Agreement. In this regard, at the UNGASS, developed countries should reaffirm their commitments to reach the accepted UN target of 0.7 per cent of their GNP to increase their aid programmes in order to reach that target by the year 2000.

Furthermore, there are moves by some countries to downgrade the need for aid, by stating that an increase in private financial flows and investments will take care of the problem of financial resources. This is a fallacious argument. Firstly, although a small minority of developing countries, mainly those already growing fast, are able to attract FDI, very little FDI or none at all is going to the poorer countries which need resources the most. Secondly, a large portion of the private financial flows are short term and speculative in nature, and thus cannot be relied on for financing sustainable development. Thirdly, FDI focuses on money-making projects, and there is still a need for public funds for sustainable development programmes such as environmental protection, low cost housing and health care provision.

An increase of FDI flows to developing countries is important but there is a need to ensure that FDI flows reach as many countries as possible including marginalized regions such Africa and other LDCs. Furthermore, it should be ensured that FDI funds are invested on a long terms basis. In this regard, short-term speculative FDI’s should be penalized and incentive be given to long term FDIs. The relationship between FDI and sustainable development should also be defined with a view to establishing provisions for a multilateral regime for FDI to assist the pursuit of environmentally sustainable development, in particular in the developing countries.

Concerning financial mechanisms to provide additional resources for environmental programmes and projects, the Group of 77 feels that the capital of 2 billion dollars provided to GEF over a three year period is insufficient given the challenge of placing future global development on a sustainable path. There is thus a need to increase GEF’s capital as well as improvement in its disbursement terms for developing countries. In addition UNGASS should consider the establishment of funding mechanisms for each environmental convention. This would ensure the equitable implementation of all environmental conventions without selectivity.

The Group of 77 argued at Rio that there should be a more equitable economic order through better terms of trade for developing countries’ commodity and other exports, through a resolution of the debt crisis and through reforms to trade and financial institutions. If these measures are taken, developing countries would be enabled to increase earnings and reduce the need for aid. The UNGASS should thus revive the debate on these issues, together with undertaking measures to reverse the outflow of resources from developing countries to developed countries. In particular much more needs to be done to resolve the external debt problem, especially in the LDCs, low income and heavily indebted middle-income developing counties.

On technology transfer, we are also disappointed by the lack of real progress in this area. In fact, since Rio, there has been much greater emphasis on the rights of holders of intellectual property, mainly as a result of Uruguay Round’s TRIPs Agreement. The stress of IPR protection at the expense of technology transfer has, like the decline of aid, denied the post-UNCED process of its key factor, since technology transfer was the second plank of what was seen as developed countries’ commitment to facilitating sustainable development.

The Group of 77 is of the view that responsibility for technology development cannot be confined to market forces alone, nor can market approach be relied on to assure that such technologies become widely available and used. We reiterate our suggestions that publicly funded technology R&D projects be initiated, including establishment of regional technology centres, to develop new or adapt existing technologies in developing countries. Furthermore, a clearing house should be created for ESTs. Patent rights and licences should be acquired and paid for by the international community so that these can be made available for transfer to developing countries on concessional and non-commercial basis.

The eradication of poverty and hunger, greater equity in income distribution and human resource development remain major challenges especially in developing countries. An effective strategy for tackling the problems of poverty should be incorporated in all environmental projects and should inter alia be aimed at enhanced health care and education, the rights of women, the role of youth and local communities. Solving the basic needs of these groups, particularly food and their energy needs, would reduce problems such as deforestation, land degradation, water resources etc. Hence it is important to ensure that more assistance is directed towards poverty eradication programmes, in the developing countries.

The new global economic regimes within WTO, have major implications for developing countries. The Uruguay Round Agreements of 1993, and the paradigm they represented turned out to be more powerful than UNCED agreements of 1992 and the partnership approach which they promised. Indeed, in the past five years, the liberalization free-market paradigm, that gained prominence and pre-eminence, has overshadowed the sustainable development partnership paradigm.

The UNGASS should re-emphasize the UNCED approach which represents a proper paradigm for international cooperation; that of consensus-seeking, incorporating the needs of all countries, partnership in which the strong would help the weak, integration of environment and development concerns, the intervention of the state and the international community on behalf of public interest so as to attain greater social equity and bring about sustainable development.

Developing countries are convinced of the importance of pursuing policies of sustainable development and of managing their natural resource base on a sustainable basis. What needs to be discussed is what can developing countries do, first, on their own individually and via South-South cooperation and second, what can the international community, the developed countries and the multilateral institutions offer in the context of North-South relations.

We should like to conclude by stressing that a solution needs to be urgently found for the cross-cutting issues raised in our statement, in particular those of financial resources, transfer of technology, the creation of a favourable international economic climate, poverty eradication and enhancement of the North-South partnership and international cooperation in dealing with all environmental issues.

If it becomes universally accepted that even aid is no longer an option, then one can predict that discussions on international cooperation will collapse, and what will remain is the call for each country to find its own resources, if it can, and do whatever it can or wants. This will surely kill the dream of “sustainable development” especially in the developing countries.

I thank you.