Statement submitted by the following Non-governmental Organisations in Consultative Status with the UN Economic and Social Council:

 

Catholic International Cooperation for Development and Solidarity (CIDSE) and Caritas Internationalis

 

 
Brussels, May 2001

Third United Nations Conference on the Least Developed Countries
UN-LDC-III in Brussels, 14-20 May 2001

CIDSE and Caritas Internationalis monitor decision-making processes and, in line with principles of Catholic Social Teaching, promote an ethical approach to tackling socio-economic problems. Our networks aim to promote the concept of a ‘preferential option for the poor’, redistribution of wealth and power. Much more action is needed in order to achieve the 2015 international development targets as agreed at the UN Millennium Summit, particularly the goals of halving the number of people living in poverty. Special attention must be given to stimulating pro-poor growth and to the empowerment of women, who often bear the costs of inequitable development. We therefore call on governments to formulate, agree and implement concrete initiatives to prevent social exclusion and promote development. This brief statement is intended as a tool to promote debate among delegates to the Conference on the following issues:

 

1.         Promise of 0.7 % Official Development Aid

 

Social and economic development depends on a more stable and predictable system of financing. In this respect, ODA still plays an important role, for the majority of developing countries, particularly for the Least Developed Countries (LDCs). If all major donor countries fulfilled their promise of committing 0.7% ODA of their GNP, the total amount provided could contribute enough to eradicate extreme poverty. But overall efforts to fulfil this agreed target are still far from being adequate[1].

 

·        Therefore, we urge all major donor governments to make a public commitment to invest the necessary level of financial resources to - at a minimum - achieve the 2015 international development targets. Development assistance, where it is used to tackle emergencies, to invest in post-conflict reconstruction, or to combat the social devastation resulting from economic crises, should be grant-financed rather than in the form of loans. The same rule should apply where it is used to finance social and human development expenditures in the least developed countries. We call on all donors to reach the UN 0.7 % ODA of GNP target and to earmark 0.15 to 0.20 per cent for LDCs as soon as possible and to set out a specific timeframe for doing so. Our members among the OECD countries are ready to support a campaign at national level to raise public awareness on the importance of ODA.

 

·        There is an urgent need to dedicate additional official development assistance towards investment in global public goods, like clean air, safe drinking water or an AIDS vaccine. The UN should explore-in partnership with all the interested parties - new approaches to co-ordination and funding of global public goods.

 

2.         Faster and broader debt cancellation and more effective Poverty Reduction Strategies

 

Our networks are united in the view that the enhanced HIPC Initiative has failed to deliver the promised “robust exit” from poverty-inducing levels of unsustainable debt.  It is self-evident that a debt reduction policy is unjust when it requires debtor governments to come up with poverty reduction strategies whilst leaving them with continuing debt repayments greater than their health or education budgets.  Therefore, we are calling for:

 

·        A reform of the HIPC debt sustainability criteria that would include an analysis of a country’s human development deficits in assessments of how much debt it is able to repay.  Our networks have proposed one such “human development” debt sustainability analysis.  This would shift the focus of measuring the “payability” of debt away from notions of “external viability” to assessments of HIPC governments’ feasible revenue and the costs of meeting their poverty reduction targets.

·        An expansion of debt write-offs to include 100% multilateral and bilateral debts (including post cut-off dates debts). According to our calculations, if all the eligible HIPCs are to meet the 2015 international development targets to halve poverty, they will require 100% cancellation of their entire debt stock.

·        An urgent reform of the HIPC Initiative that will enable governments to mobilise the finance to pursue the international development goals. In order to avoid delay, the cancellation must be delinked from Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers.

·        Surrender of the sole power to approve or reject Poverty Reduction Strategies by the IMF and the World Bank.  Instead, both institutions should accept equal status with a broader set of official donors, including United Nations agencies and bilateral donors, in the decision whether or not to support PRSPs through finance.

·        Consideration of the quality of civil society participation in the PRSP as a criterion at least as important as the content of the strategy in the decision whether or not to support the PRSP through finance. 

·        Greater flexibility in what constitutes “sound economic policy” based upon research into patterns and types of economic growth that are most likely to benefit poor people. Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers should be driven by nationally owned policies centred on poverty reduction rather than based on the policy prescriptions of the international financial institutions and other creditors. 

·        Steps to bring the practice of structural adjustment lending in line with PRSP principles, including the immediate abandonment of cost-recovery measures in health and education provision for the poor.

·        Establishing a transparent mechanism to assess ex ante the impact of macroeconomic and structural policy positions on vulnerable groups. Such impact assessments which should particularly focus on the impacts of the policies on poverty, gender equity and the environment should be conducted as a standard part of IMF and World Bank programmes in support of Poverty Reduction Strategies.

·        The establishment of a fair and transparent debt arbitration procedure could contribute to the realisation of a permanent solution to the current debt crisis and prevent the emergence of future crises.

 

3.         Coherence and Global Governance

 

Macroeconomic policies have a differential impact on men and women, with women bearing the brunt of the socio-economic costs associated with financial crises and from policy choices which increase inequality. In order to overcome the deficiencies in the international economic and financial systems there is a pressing need for better co-operation, policy coherence and democratic control at a global level. Therefore, we ask for:

·        Adequate participation by all states, especially by least developed countries, in the decision-making bodies of the international financial institutions as well as greater transparency in the operations of these bodies;

·        The transfer of economic and finance decision-making power away from ad-hoc groups and fora with a limited membership (e.g. G-7, Financial Stability Forum) towards bodies that have clearly-defined intergovernmental mandates under the Charter of the United Nations, with universal membership and with open, participatory and accountable decision-making processes.

 

The Third UN Conference on “Least Developed Countries” could mean a breakthrough for effectively supporting development of these countries in the 21st century. But we do not need new promises. What we need, right now, is immediate action to eradicate poverty.



[1] Overall official development assistance (ODA) of all Development Assistance Committee (DAC) countries decreased from 0.33% of their gross national product (GNP) in 1992 to an average of 0.24% in 1999 (UN SC Report A/AC.257/12, para 88). For LDCs it decreased from 0.05% in 1998 to 0.09% in 1990.