PLANS TO HELP WORLD"S POOREST NATIONS "LIKE THUNDER WITH LITTLE RAIN", CHINA TELLS ASSEMBLY"S ECONOMIC COMMITTEE

Press Release
GA/EF/2894

PLANS TO HELP WORLD’S POOREST NATIONS ‘LIKE THUNDER WITH LITTLE RAIN’, CHINA TELLS ASSEMBLY’S ECONOMIC COMMITTEE

Debate Begins on Situation of Least Developed Countries; Delegates Urge New Push Towards International Cooperation

Although the international community, particularly the United Nations, had held a number of special meetings on the least-developed countries and had put forth a series of programmes of actions, they were always “like loud thunder with little rain”, the representative of China told the Second Committee (Economic and Financial) this afternoon, as it began consideration on the implementation of the Programme of Action for the Least Developed Countries for the 1990s.

He said, failure in the comprehensive implementation of the Programme of Action was almost a certainty. It was to be hoped the Third Conference on Least Developed Countries would produce a programme that was politically high-powered and operational, thus giving a new push to international cooperation to assist those countries.

Speaking to the European Union and associated States, the representative of Finland said a major challenge was to ensure that globalization and liberalization did not further marginalize the least- developed countries, but instead promoted their full integration into the global economy and the international trading system. That demanded coherence in trade and development policies, by both the recipient and donor countries and by international organizations.

The representative of Maldives said his country feared premature “graduation” from the least-developed category. That would throttle access to preferential treatment in international trade, concessional finance, and foreign aid. If those involved in assessing least- developed countries and preparing vulnerability profiles worked with greater transparency and absorbed the wealth of experience of small island developing states, the controversies now associated with the issue of graduation could be avoided.

Zambia’s representative said there needed to be a policy shift on the part of developed countries and aid agencies to make official

Second Committee - 1a - Press Release GA/EF/2894 38th Meeting (PM) 11 November 1999

development assistance (ODA), even at current levels, more responsive to the particular needs of recipient least-developed countries. Ultimately, the challenge was to improve the allocation of scarce ODA resources through more innovative and flexible approaches.

The representative of Nepal said that international awareness of collective responsibility for problems of a global nature was perhaps one of the greater achievements of the post-cold war era. Various international conventions under the aegis of the United Nations had brought hope to developing countries, a clear result of the collective efforts of the world community to face its complex socio-economic problems.

Also this afternoon, introductory remarks were made by the Secretary-General of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD).

In addition, statements were made by the representatives of Guyana (on behalf of the Group of 77 developing countries and China), Bangladesh, Togo, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, United States, United Republic of Tanzania, Republic of Korea, Ethiopia, Cambodia, Burkina Faso, Japan, Benin, Norway, Haiti, Russian Federation, Uganda and Nigeria.

The Committee will meet again at 11 a.m. tomorrow to consider trade and development.

Committee Work Programme

The Second Committee (Economic and Financial) met this afternoon to consider implementation of the Programme of Action for the Least Developed Countries (LDCs) for the 1990s.

It had before it the report of the Secretary-General on the state of preparations for the Third United Nations Conference on the Least Developed Countries, which is to be held at Brussels at a date to be decided on between April and June 2001 (document A/54/271 and Add.1). The Secretary-General of the Conference, who is also the Secretary-General of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), convened the first meeting of the Consultative Forum on the preparatory process at Geneva on 21 and 22 July. The main objective of the Forum is to serve as a medium of interfacing and consensus-building between the United Nations system and other stakeholders, discussing and exchanging views on the conceptual framework of the Conference's objectives, as well as on the intergovernmental preparatory process. The meeting emphasized the importance of comprehensive country-based preparations for the Conference, where the LDCs themselves will have a central role in the process.

The meeting stressed the importance of the involvement of civil society, including non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and the private sector, at both the country and international levels. It underlined the importance of the Conference resulting in feasible, tangible, measurable and action-oriented outcomes, as well as the importance of linking the preparatory process with other major forthcoming conferences/events, including the World Trade Organization (WTO) Ministerial Conference at Seattle and UNCTAD X. The report also describes other related activities at the regional level as well as the involvement of civil society.

In accordance with the mandate of the Conference, the Senior Advisers to the Ministers of Trade in LDCs met in a coordinating workshop from 21 to 25 June at Sun City, South Africa, to prepare for the Third WTO Ministerial Conference. The meeting requested LDCs development partners, both bilateral and multilateral, to provide adequate financial and technical resources to the Conference Secretariat to ensure an efficient and effective preparatory process. It emphasized the importance of a comprehensive and participatory process at the country level, and requested the Administrator of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) to fully mobilize United Nations resident coordinators in support of the process at the country level.

Such an approach should lead to the formulation of a relevant and legitimate national-level comprehensive programme of action for each LDC, according to the report. Those programmes would become the basis for formulating an umbrella global programme of action to be agreed at the Conference. In addition, the Secretariat of the Conference has initiated discussions with the Department of Public Information (DPI) on the formulation of an information strategy and a joint work programme during the preparatory process.

Also before the Committee is the report of the Secretary-General on implementation of the Programme of Action for the LDCs for the 1990s (document A/54/269), which updates the last report submitted to the Assembly (A/52/279). Section II provides an overview of the recent economic performance of the LDCs, and the policies and measures adopted by them in line with the recommendations of the Programme and those of the Mid-term Global Review of Progress towards the Programme's implementation, conducted in 1995. Section III reviews the overall arrangements made for implementation, follow-up and monitoring of the Programme at the national, regional and global levels. Section IV describes the measures taken by organs, organizations and bodies of the United Nations system, and Section V provides available information on international support measures in the fields of external resources, debt and trade.

According to the report, requisite progress has not been made in most of the LDCs during the 1990s in realizing the overall objectives of the Programme of Action. The precarious socio-economic situation in the LDCs and the structural weaknesses inherent in their economies continue unabated, and have relegated these countries to a weak competitive position in the current global economic environment. The Coordinating Workshop for Senior Advisers to Ministers of Trade in the LDCs, which met in June, called on the international community to honour its commitments to its weakest members and provide concrete support commensurate with the development needs of the LDCs. It further emphasized that the meaningful and beneficial integration of the LDCs into the global economy and multilateral trading system required concrete actions by the LDCs and their development partners to strengthen supply capacities of the LDCs through, such measures as, increased official development assistance (ODA) flows and debt relief.

In the area of trade, the report states that the LDCs themselves will have to continue and deepen their efforts to create an enabling environment for promoting trade, investment and private sector growth. This will require domestic policy reforms in several areas, including macroeconomic and trade policy, human resource development, technology and a modernized agricultural system, to increase output for domestic consumption and diversify export production.

The Secretary-General of UNCTAD is making elaborate arrangements for a comprehensive and participatory process for the Conference at the national and global levels, the report continues. This would provide the LDCs and their development partners with an opportunity to identify the critical constraints impeding the development of those countries and the required policies and measures, both at the national and international levels, to overcome those constraints. It was imperative that the concern of the LDCs should figure prominently in the events preceding the Conference, including the Third WTO Ministerial Conference and UNCTAD X.

The challenges facing the LDCs are beyond their capacity to overcome on their own, states the report. International support measures -- financial, technical and commercial -- are of critical importance in continuing to influence their future growth and development. Therefore, there is an urgent need to reverse the current decline in ODA flows and continue to give the LDCs priority in aid allocations. Decisive and early debt relief measures would help release scarce resources to boost social and human development expenditure and to finance investment in critical economic sectors.

Introduction of Report

In his introductory statement, RUBENS RICUPERO, UNCTAD Secretary-General, drew attention to the Secretary-General’s report on the state of preparations for the Third Conference on LDCs, to be convened in 2001 and hosted by the European Union in Brussels. Presently, the exact dates and other logistical issues were being discussed. Preparations were now in full swing. On 20 July he had launched the preparatory process. It addressed several issues, including the envisaged activities for the Conference, the level of resources needed and the frequency and scope of inter-agency consultations. Most United Nations agencies had already designated senior officials as focal points for the Conference. A Consultative Forum had been established, which included representatives from the United Nations system, international organizations and the private sector. Its first meeting was held in conjunction with the launch of the preparatory process.

To be meaningful and effective, he said, a global programme of action needed to be based on country-level assessments and involve an extensive preparatory process. The UNCTAD staff was presently visiting LDC capitals to discuss proper arrangements. By the end of November, 25 countries would have been covered. They had also initiated consultations with NGOs to determine their role in the process, and were planning on convening an NGO forum. In addition to country-level preparations, the convening of three international expert-level preparatory meetings was being planned. When UNCTAD had organized the last conference in 1990, it had almost double its present level of resources. It would be hard to manage the preparatory process without additional resources.

In conclusion, he reiterated that the Conference was not only an UNCTAD conference but a United Nations conference in the broadest sense. As such, it should involve the participation of the Bretton Woods institutions, United Nations specialized agencies, and all entities which had something to contribute. Even though two conferences had already been held it could not be said that the plight of the LDCs had improved. Despite some successes, the general picture was not encouraging. The situation of LDCs was a particularly acute expression of underdevelopment. With regard to his organization, he said that it was determined to increase the level of resources and its treatment of LDC issues. It was necessary to look at examples of success and to build on them. It was his intention, following UNCTAD X, to devote most of his attention and energy to making the Third Conference on LDCs more modern, pragmatic and effective than it had been in the past.

GEORGE TALBOT (Guyana), speaking on behalf of the Group of 77 developing countries and China, said that today’s debate took place against the background of continuing marginalization of LDCs. Economic and social conditions had worsened in many instances. The heightened pace of globalization had brought about fundamental changes in the external climate facing LDCs. On a domestic level, a significant number of LDCs were embroiled in armed conflicts. However, despite serious difficulties, most LDCs had registered improvements in social and economic reforms. Governments of many LDCs had continued to cooperate with civil society and the private sector.

Those successes offered the hope that, with adequate support, growth and development could be rejuvenated and accelerated. However, many challenges remained. Too many donors provided ODA at levels well below their capacity. External debt and declining commodity prices had wrought havoc. Some donors, however, had indicated their willingness to improve their performance. In the area of market access, ongoing initiatives to provide LDCs with duty and quota-free access, if fully implemented, could bring about tangible improvements in trade performance and diversification. Effective implementation of current initiatives to strengthen supply capacity could enable LDCs to take better advantage of market access conditions.

With regard to the Third Conference on LDCs, the Group of 77 wished to emphasize the importance of ensuring that the Conference Secretariat was endowed with the requisite capacity and resources, and had the necessary visibility to undertake its challenging mission successfully. His call for international support for the LDCs was not made in the interest of charity but in the spirit of the collective, economic and social interests, of the entire human family.

MATTI KAARIAINEN (Finland), speaking on behalf of the European Union, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Cyprus and Malta, said that a major challenge was to ensure that globalization and liberalization did not cause further marginalization of the LDCs, but instead promoted their full integration into the global economy and the international trading system. That demanded coherence in trade and development policies, by both the recipient and donor countries and by international organizations. The interests and specific needs of LDCs must be incorporated into the agendas of the forthcoming events where global trade issues were discussed, most notably in Seattle and in Bangkok. With regard to the accession process to the membership of the WTO, the European Union called for a streamlined approach to apply to all LDCs, thus speeding up the process.

While reduction of trade barriers and improvement of access to markets were important, development depended first and foremost on domestic policies, he said. A sufficient level of political and economic stability must be reached, with reasonably efficient markets and a well functioning State. In LDCs those conditions must be drastically enhanced to attract foreign direct investment, to promote local investment and to make free trade become a source of prosperity. Reforms must be politically and socially sustainable, which meant that the approach in each case had to be matched to each country’s potential and its constraints.

The Union strongly supported the emphasis on country-level preparations for the Third Conference on the LDCs, he added. Although the Programme of Action had acted as a catalyst for numerous activities at national, regional and international levels, most of its objectives had simply not been met. The Union was convinced that the Third Conference, which it will host in 2001, would provide a forum for practically-oriented policy formulation, building on the specific characteristics of each LDC.

F.A.SHAMIM AHMED (Bangladesh) said the stark reality remained that marginalization of the LDCs had not been arrested, nor had underdevelopment been reversed. There had been limited progress in the area of trade diversification, with most LDCs remaining commodity-dependent. As a group, they had become further marginalized in the global economy in terms of their share in world exports and imports. There was a decline in the overall flow of ODA, and a persistent and exceptionally heavy debt burden. Improved market access and capacity building were essential if the LDCs were to become integrated into the world economy.

He said that foreign assistance was needed for the domestic growth and long- term economic development of those countries, and for their transformation to a stage of lower aid dependency. Achieving development was always a national responsibility, but given the need for external support measures for the poorest members of the world, the international community had a decisive role to play in the effective implementation of the Programme of Action of LDCs.

SIMBAWA AWESSO (Togo) said that representatives of the LDCs had gathered at Headquarters a month ago and had observed that, at a time when some countries were moving forward, the LDCs were clearly lagging behind. Most LDCs had not made progress in achieving their objectives under the Programme of Action. As the Secretary-General had highlighted in his report, their fragile economies continued to bear the brunt of austerity measures. At the end of 1997, the outstanding debt of LDCs had exceeded $127.5 billion. The socio-economic condition of LDCs had been exacerbated by globalization and liberalization. Considering the fragility of their economies, LDCs did not have the capacity to overcome their difficulties on their own. Togo continued to go through a difficult time, following its transition to democracy. It was seeking external resources to implement its development programmes. He appealed to all donor partners to contribute to the success of upcoming donor conferences and to increase their cooperation with Togo.

The report indicated that preparations for the Conference were underway, he said. He urged all institutions involved in that process, including the UNDP and the European Union, to continue efforts to ensure the Conference’s success. The Conference offered valuable opportunities for the international community to show a spirit of shared responsibility and true solidarity in promoting the sustainable development of developing countries. One of the recommendations of the World Summit for Social Development (Copenhagen, 1995) was the reduction of poverty by half by the year 2015. In view of current trends, Togo believed that it was a matter of urgency for all development partners to increase their assistance, reverse the declining trend of ODA and cancel all outstanding debt of the LDCs. He wanted to see the development problems of LDCs receive special attention from the international community.

MANOROM PHONSEYA (Lao People’s Democratic Republic) said that the ongoing processes of globalization and liberalization had exposed manifold problems and challenges to the LDCs. Like many other LDCs, her country, being both landlocked and least developed, had not been spared those challenges. The Government had pursued a policy of economic reform by focusing on the implementation of eight priority programmes, namely food production, commercial production, shifting cultivation stabilization, rural development, external economic relations expansion, and human resources and services development. To solve the country’s current economic difficulties, it had undertaken several measures such as budget reduction and credit line control.

Despite those measures, the country continued to enjoy political stability and social harmony, she continued, although 1999 was a year of financial and economic hardship. Nevertheless, owing to its heavy investment in irrigation system throughout the country, her country had been able for the first time to attain self-sufficiency in rice production with even some surplus. The Government would continue to attach great importance to poverty eradication, and would intensify its efforts to accelerate the implementation of rural development programmes. Due to the economic and financial constraints it was facing, her country would welcome appropriate assistance from the world community.

VICTOR TOMSETH (United States) said the international community had a clear and vital interest in assisting LDCs in their efforts to develop their national economies and improve their citizens’ living conditions. Assistance to LDCs must focus on creating conditions in which people could take the political and economic initiative to better their lives. It should seek to build individual human capacity, allowing citizens greater control over their lives and giving them the opportunities and choices that better economic conditions delivered. Developing countries had to support their citizens with stable economic and social structures; they needed help in building capacities for social investment, good governance, and the establishment of democratic institutions.

Open and liberal economic policies were instrumental in the creation of a favourable environment for domestic and foreign private investment, he said. Expanded and improved basic education contributed to sustainable development in many ways: faster and more equitable economic growth; reduction in the incidence of poverty; and growth of democracy and civil liberties. The education of girls and women warranted special emphasis. The debt burden continued to jeopardize fragile growth in many of the LDCs. That was why the United States President was seeking to forgive 100 per cent of the official bilateral debt owed by the poorest, most heavily-indebted countries to the United States. “It has never been clearer than now -- a time when our world is increasingly interdependent and interconnected -- that one nation’s prosperity depends on the economic and social well-being of the entire world”, he said.

HUSSAIN SHIHAB (Maldives) said that his country feared premature graduation from the LDC category. That fear stemmed from the conviction that the assessment criteria and methodology behind the Committee on Development Policy’s decision to recommend the graduation of the Maldives trivialized the economic and ecological vulnerabilities of the country, and were inappropriate for the purpose. Premature graduation would throttle access to preferential treatment in international trade, concessional finance, and foreign aid. To be credible, the vulnerability profiles must be undertaken in a transparent manner, with all concerned parties able to view the methodology and data employed. His country was also extremely concerned about the accuracy of the information being used, as some reports had been inaccurate.

He called on the Committee for Development Policy and UNCTAD to initiate consultation with the countries recommended for graduation from the LDC category following another review, and to continue that process with other countries that were perceived to be near or above the threshold for graduation. If those involved in assessing LDCs and preparing vulnerability profiles worked with greater transparency and absorbed the wealth of experience of small island developing states (SIDS), the controversies now associated with the issue of graduation could be avoided.

RICHARD T. DOGANI (United Republic of Tanzania) said that as the twin processes of globalization and liberalization continued to take hold, the LDCs found themselves being further marginalized in the global economy. Worse still, the hope stirred by the commitments made during creation of the Programme of Action had since been evaporating. While ODA levels had declined, private capital flows to LDCs had not been forthcoming. It was a sad situation when one recognized that the capacity of those countries to generate more income through export earnings was already weakened by declining world commodity prices. It was equally sad that all that was happening when those countries were painfully pursuing structural adjustment reforms, requiring infusion of massive amounts of financial resources. The results of such actions had been to worsen the economic growth and sustainability of the LDCs. Therefore, it was imperative that concerted action by the international community, aimed at addressing and reversing that trend, be finalized soon.

His country welcomed the various initiatives aimed at extracting the LDCs from underdevelopment, he said. At the same time, much more needed to be done to make the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) Debt Initiative accommodate more qualifying countries. In the area of trade, he wished to see measures taken to increase the participation of LDCs in global trade to avoid further marginalization. As the LDCs continued to initiate development programmes through their own efforts, it was only fitting that the international donor community should assist. The United Nations should continue to play a lead role in coordinating development activities of developing countries, and especially LDCs.

OH YOUNG-JU (Republic of Korea) said that sustainable development in the world’s least developed countries remained a top priority in the pursuit of truly global long-term growth. Difficulties facing LDCs were multidimensional in nature, and often had insufficient economic, institutional and human resource capacity at their root. Vulnerability to external shocks, political instability and natural disasters could compound those difficulties. In many cases, globalization’s challenges for LDCs surpassed their capacity to deal with them, and demanded a response from the international community.

She said that the principles of shared responsibility and strengthened partnership embodied in the Programme of Action for LDCs for the 1990s were still valid. The LDCs should continue to do their part for their own development by undertaking macroeconomic and structural reforms. The recent improvement in the economic performance of many LDCs owed much to such efforts at reform. It remained the responsibility of the international community, however, to integrate LDCs into the global economy by supporting those domestic efforts. Continued dialogue between developed and developing countries would lead to a common understanding on issues that had relevance for all parts of the world.

BERHANU KEBEDE (Ethiopia) said that the precarious socio-economic situation in the LDCs and the structural weaknesses inherent in their economies continued, putting them in a feeble competitive position in the globalized world economy. That unacceptable trend was not due to lack of commitment on the part of LDCs. Most LDCs had embarked on the process of structural adjustment and wide-ranging reforms, often in partnership with the international financial institutions and within internationally agreed frameworks. Objective assessment of the implementation of the Paris Declaration and Programme of Action attributed that weakness mostly to the failure of the international community to meet its commitments in the area of ODA, effective solution to the debt crisis, lack of investment flows and unfavourable trading arrangements. He therefore called on development partners who had not honoured their commitments to raise their assistance the agreed target. He also called for fulfillment of commitments for additional resources, so as to give LDCs a realistic opportunity to integrate into the global economy.

It was of great concern that the benefits of the new international trade system continued to elude the LDCs, he said. He called on preference granting countries to expand their product coverage and remove quotas, ceilings and all forms of non-tariff barriers for all export commodities from LDCs. More transparent schemes and long-term commitments were also needed in order to remove the uncertainties that had contributed to the marginalization of LDCs. In addition, he underscored the importance of providing expanded technical cooperation, capacity building programmes, and consistent support for overcoming supply side constraints, as well as improving the trade infrastructure of the LDCs. The commitments undertaken at the Third Conference should promote the positive integration of LDCs into the world economy in a measurable and time-bound manner.

SUN SUON (Cambodia) said that many developing countries had continued to register a poor economic growth despite the initiatives they had undertaken to reform their economy. The LDCs were facing numerous problems in addition to their own domestic, geographical and other difficulties -- such as the devastating impacts of diseases like HIV/AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis, the decline in ODA and the burden of external debt. It was imperative that the world community, in particular the developed countries, assist the LDCs.

His country, he said, had taken great strides toward defining and implementing its vision and programmed policy of development. It was now firmly back on track for energetic growth, with a well-articulated agenda for action. Along with the economic sector, efforts were equally concentrated on other reforms, especially in the social, public and administrative sectors, vital for sustaining development. The reforms had helped spur 4 per cent growth this year, with lower inflation and a stable exchange rate, compared with 1 per cent GDP growth last year.

TAPAS ADHIKARI (Nepal) said that international awareness of collective responsibility for problems of a global nature was perhaps one of the greater achievements of the post cold war era. Various international conventions under the aegis of the United Nations had brought hope to developing countries, a clear result of the collective efforts of the world community to face its complex socio- economic problems. Globalization and liberalization had brought opportunities for trade, investment and prosperity for some countries. It was painful to note, however, that half of the world population was entering the new millennium in abject poverty.

Nepal was pursuing its current Five-Year Plan with the sole objective of poverty eradication through decentralization, institutional capacity-building, empowerment of women, agricultural development and rural industrialization. However, challenges stood in the way -- the difficult high Himalayan topography, thinly scattered population, no access to the sea, monsoon, floods and erosion. Those were areas where development partners could fit their expertise and cooperative efforts into the development process.

PAUL ROBERT TIENDREBEOGO (Burkina Faso) said that the world was on the threshold of the third millenium, which would be one of unprecedented technological revolution. Yet throughout the world there were places where words such as computer and Internet were not found in the daily vocabulary. In sub-Saharan Africa, Internet access represented 0.1 per cent of total world access. Basic needs such as education, water and health care were of greater concern in such areas. The picture was more somber in the poorest countries, the LDCs. Today, the problem of developing countries was worse than ever, exacerbated by globalization and liberalization. However, it was not because they had not tried. The process had been hindered by factors such as ODA decline, the debt burden and low prices for commodities. Trade had not been diversified, leading to the acceleration of the marginalization of those countries.

Could the international community take wing into the next century and into the third millenium without the 48 LDCs? he asked. If not, then it must weigh the consequences of the present situation. It was necessary to translate commitments into real actions. The elimination of extreme poverty in the LDCs in the next ten years should be a primary objective. He appealed to development partners to fulfil their commitments undertaken at the beginning of the 1990s. He also appealed to the United Nations to persevere, despite its human and financial difficulties, in supporting the LDCs.

PETER L. KASANDA (Zambia) said that the advent of globalization and liberalization had brought with it complex social and economic challenges for LDCs. The persistence of widespread poverty had demonstrated the continued fragility and vulnerability of the economic structures of those countries. Among other factors, the short-term prospects for the LDCs would be influenced by the level of ODA and debt relief measures. ODA, which had a catalytic role to play in helping LDCs revive their economies and achieve significant poverty reduction, had been in steady decline.

There was a need, he said, for a shift in policy on the part of developed countries and aid agencies to make ODA, even at current levels, more responsive to the particular needs of recipient LDCs. Ultimately, the challenge was to improve the allocation of scarce ODA resources through more innovative and flexible approaches. Its LDC status implied that Zambia received mainly non-reimbursable grants. Such assistance was normally intended to address basic needs in the social sectors, and could not be used to supplement the capital requirements of the private sector. It was ironic that the very private sector expected to become the engine of growth should be denied direct access to ODA.

TETSUO KONDO (Japan) said his country would continue to enhance its efforts to create opportunities for LDCs and assist in their integration into the multilateral trading system. However, the LDCs themselves also had a responsibility to eliminate or reduce supply-side constraints. Harmonizing those two sets of efforts should be stressed in the process of preparing for the third Conference.

He said that Japan was prepared to collaborate closely with the Office of the Special Coordinator for LDCs, Landlocked Developing Countries and small island developing states. Enhancing and improving trade-related technical cooperation was a key element in supporting LDC efforts to integrate into the multilateral trading system. There was also a continued need to upgrade coordination and coherence among the agencies, programme countries, and the donor community involved in implementation of the Integrated Framework for Trade-Related Technical Assistance.

EDOUARD AHO-GLELE (Benin) said that poverty was a structural and multi- dimensional problem in the LDCs. In that connection, the Programme of Action had set out to reverse the deteriorating situation of LDCs to allow them to move towards lasting development. The Programme included strategies both national and international in scope. If those strategies were carefully implemented, they should correct the endemic situation of poverty in those countries. Despite the sacrifices made by LDCs in undertaking structural adjustment programmes, the situation had scarcely improved. The number of LDCs had now increased to 48. That focused one to wonder about the effectiveness of the measures adopted.

The international community, particularly developed countries, had made the commitment to increase aid and to support LDCs in the recovery of their economies. The reality was that international aid did not correspond to the specific needs of the countries concerned. What good was done if donor countries opened up their markets to LDCs, when the LDCs did not have production capacities?. Bold measures should be taken to strengthen the production capacities of those countries and to strengthen factors underlying production, such as land, capital and know-how. He would like to see ODA go to the priority programmes of the LDCs. He also hoped that the Third Conference would take into account the concerns of LDCs and find new, bold ways to meet the challenges they faced.

ARNE B. HONNINGSTAD (Norway) said that measures aimed at improving conditions in the poorest countries needed to be carefully identified. A more vigorous partnership must commit both the LDCs and the international community. LDCs would continue to need ODA. It was therefore regrettable that so few donor countries had reached the ODA target of allocating more than 0.2 per cent of their Gross National Product to LDCs. ODA from North to South must be increased. Moreover, the available development resources could be used in a more efficient manner, for instance by untying development assistance.

It was imperative to proceed more vigorously with debt relief, he said. All actors, including the highly industrialized countries, must contribute on the basis of a reasonable and transparent burden-sharing formula towards funding the debt initiative. Trade was an important engine for growth, but although market access was important, it was far from the only challenge. The ever-changing trade environment and rapid technological developments, the era of Internet and e-commerce, and the role of new actors were all elements that made it even more difficult to keep track. Trade-related technical assistance was therefore of great importance.

JEAN MARIE MURAT (Haiti) said that his country looked forward to the Third Conference, but there was some concern as to whether the resolutions of that Conference would attain the given objectives. For the conference to succeed, it was important that all bodies and organizations of the United Nations system be mobilized to support the preparatory meetings. Also, the participation of LDCs in all preparatory activities was extremely important.

He expressed concern about the grave problems of regression in LDCs. ODA had slowed down considerably. He reiterated that the frequent LDC calls for assistance were not a sign of weakness, but rather expressed an act of faith in international solidarity. The efforts of certain LDCs to mobilize new resources in order to reduce their dependence on external aid was hampered by the heavy debt burden. Therefore, his country appealed for lightening of the criteria to qualify for debt- relief.

Mr. AVRAMENKO (Russian Federation) said that the process of economic and structural reforms in the LDCs, begun in the 1980s, had continued in the 1990s and had served to increase economic growth in many of them. However, that had not been enough to reverse the economic lag of some LDCs. The shortcomings in their economies, low commodity prices and the difficult international situation had all contributed to their further marginalization. Globalization had shed a new light on the difficulties prevalent in LDCs, which required external assistance for their development. As stated in the Secretary-General’s report, the many declarations and commitments made in the interest of LDCs had on the whole just remained words on paper. As a result, the reforms undertaken by LDCs had not been fully realized, and in some cases had produced a negative effect.

His country supported the full integration of LDCs into the global economy and the international trade system, he said. LDCs must consolidate their export potential and be provided with wider and easier access to international markets. He supported the Assembly’s decision to convene a Third Conference to evaluate progress in the implementation of the Programme of Action at the country level, as well as to develop recommendations at the national and international levels to sustain LCD development.

ZHU GUANGYAO (China) said that although the international community, and the United Nations in particular, had held a number of special meetings on the LDCs and issued a series of programmes of action, they were always like loud thunder with little rain, and faced difficulties in their actual implementation. Failure in the comprehensive implementation of the Programme of Action was almost a certainty. He hoped that the Third Conference would produce a programme of action that was politically high-powered and operational, thus giving a new push to international cooperation to assist the LDCs. The international community, particularly the developed countries, should re-evaluate its policies in view of globalization and the present conditions of LDCs, duly fulfil its responsibilities, and turn its concern for the problems of LDCs into powerful and effective action.

In the field of trade, the international community should first support LDC trade capacity-building through technical cooperation. That should include supporting reform of their import-export administration, establishment of trade information networks, enhancement of capacity on export supply, and diversification of commodities. Secondly, the LDCs should be given better market access. The present situation -- lack of a transparent, effective price-setting mechanism in the commodity market, the erosion of the scope of trade preferences, and the existence of numerous tariff and non-tariff barriers -- must be changed. In the new round of multilateral trade negotiations, progress should be made in liberalizing trade in agricultural products of vital importance to the LDCs. Efforts should also be made to promote the implementation of the Textiles and Garment Agreement. He also appealed to the developed countries to increase their technical and financial assistance to the LDCs and to refrain from attaching political conditions to such assistance.

SEMAKULA KIWANUKA (Uganda) said that over the year, the LDCs had undertaken bold economic and political reforms aimed at accelerating their growth and development and improving their social and economic well-being. Without a supportive external environment, however, those changes could only expose them to negative external shocks, increasing poverty and major social and political dislocations. The economic transformation of LDCs had been too slow to allow for a decisive turnaround in their situation and facilitate beneficial integration in the world economy. And yet many LDCs were richly endowed with abundant natural resources, and in some cases offered more cost-effective opportunities for investments.

All that notwithstanding, he said, the LDCs as a group approached the new millennium with optimism. The show of solidarity by major development partners was cause for gratitude. He urged the third WTO Ministerial Meeting in Seattle to take concrete action aimed at guaranteeing duty-free market access, full and effective implementation of the Marrakesh Declaration and Ministerial Decisions on Measures in Favour of LDCs, and special and differential treatment as an integral part of the multilateral trading system. With regard to the forthcoming Third United Nations Conference on the LDCs, he attached great importance to country-level preparations. The Conference should result in feasible, tangible, measurable and action-oriented outcomes.

LILIAN ONOH (Nigeria) said that in the years since the Paris Declaration, it had become disturbingly clear that all the laudable intentions and promises and anticipated gains to the LDCs in particular, and to the international community in general, were yet to materialize. The LDCs had embarked on the structural adjustment programmes required of them, but without adequate funds no amount of structural adjustment would yield the necessary results. Human resource development, a very necessary prerequisite for development, had suffered. The training of any single generation took at least 20 years, and all policies aimed at improving human resource development must take cognizance of that. The high turnover of policy requirements in order to qualify for loans and aid had to be addressed if there was to be continuity in at least that one sector.

Everyone knew the steps necessary to achieve poverty eradication, she said. However, instead of approaching the United Nations’ set target of poverty eradication by the year 2006, there were in fact more poor people in the world today than when the Programme of Action was first adopted. Instead of attempting to correct the situation, the target date for poverty eradication had been changed to 2015. That was a sad reflection of the collective will to help the most helpless among us.

* *** *