ECOSOC CONTINUES CONSIDERATION OF FOLLOW-UP TO MAJOR UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCES, SUMMITS

ECOSOC CONTINUES CONSIDERATION OF FOLLOW-UP TO MAJOR

UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCES, SUMMITS

Speakers Stress Need for Monitoring Mechanisms, Political

Will, Harmonization, and Increased Dialogue with Bretton Woods Institutions

(Reissued as received.)

GENEVA, 16 July (UN Information Service) -- The Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) continued this afternoon its consideration of the implementation of and follow-up to major United Nations conferences and summits with particular attention to the follow-up to the International Conference on Financing for Development, and the review and coordination of the implementation of the Programme of Action for the Least Developed Countries for the Decade 2001-2010.

Referring to the International Conference on Financing for Development, also referred to as the Monterrey Consensus, the representative of the Russian Federation said that it had demonstrated the readiness of all partners –- developed and developing countries –- to work jointly with international financial and trade institutions in order to eradicate poverty.  However, he stressed the importance of the Monterrey Consensus reflecting the views of all actors and partners, including the interests of those countries with economies in transition.

Addressing the follow-up process to the Monterrey Conference, the representative of Chile highlighted the importance of dialogue between the United Nations and the Bretton Woods institutions.  ECOSOC was the most appropriate body to ensure the full implementation of the commitments made, but it must establish a mechanism to promote cooperation between the Bretton Woods institutions and the United Nations to achieve effective implementation.  The representative of Jamaica said that his country had supported the establishment of a new monitoring mechanism to ensure implementation.  Since this had not happened, he hoped that ECOSOC would fulfil this role.

The representative of the United States expressed concern about implementation efforts to date, and said that far too much time had been spent debating what the Monterrey Consensus really meant, and the relative importance of various sources of development finance.  In fact, within the Secretariat, movements to establish follow-up mechanisms and build the Financing for Development Secretariat had been far too slow.  A substantial shift was needed within the technical cooperation activities of the United Nations, including the mobilization of financing for development at the national level.

Concerning the Programme of Action for the Least Development Countries (LDCs) for the Decade 2001-2010, also referred to as the Brussels Programme of Action, the representative of Morocco, speaking on behalf of the "Group of 77" developing countries and China, said the objectives of the previous two decade-long programmes of action for LDCs had remained basically unattained. Thus, the international community must ensure that it honoured the commitments made in Brussels. 

There had been only slow progress in the implementation of the objectives set out in the Brussels Programme of Action, the representative of Morocco continued.  This was partly due to the regrettable stagnation and decline in official development assistance.  External debt also continued to be a major domestic stumbling block to development since debt and debt servicing drained away development resources.  Since this harmed the capacity of LDCs to concentrate on development and poverty eradication, a drastic solution was required.

In the same vein, the representative of Cape Verde said LDCs’ participation in the global hyper-competitive economy required appropriate conditions, including a favourable environment for investments, the development of infrastructure, improvement of competitiveness, and capacity-building.  In order to provide LDCs with the minimum opportunity to compete, it was necessary that preferential and differential treatments be granted to them and to small island developing States in international negotiations, particularly those with the World Trade Organization.

Participating in today’s discussion were representatives of Ukraine, Switzerland, China, Peru, Republic of Korea, Guinea, Japan, Mexico, Senegal, Indonesia, Pakistan, Italy (on behalf of the European Union), Mali, Afghanistan, and Bangladesh.

Representatives of the World Trade Organization, the Common Fund for Commodities and of CIDSE-CARITAS International also offered statements.

ECOSOC will reconvene tomorrow at 10 a.m. to hold a dialogue with the Chairpersons of its Functional Commissions and to continue consideration of its general segment.

Statements on Follow-up to International Conference on Financing for Development

CLAUDIA SERWER (United States) said the United States was concerned about implementation efforts to date.  In intergovernmental bodies, far too much time had been spent debating what Monterrey really meant, and the relative importance of various sources of development finance.  Within the United Nations Secretariat, movement had been far too little and too slow to establish follow-up mechanisms, build the Financing for Development Secretariat and resource it adequately for new programmes.  One might wonder whether Monterrey should have established a new intergovernmental body.  The United States’ answer would be “no”, however, there was every reason to expect and insist that supporting and servicing ECOSOC and the General Assembly in their respective follow-up roles would be a priority for the Department of Economic and Social Affairs.  If one was serious about implementation, one had to ask what activities the subsidiary machinery would employ to this end.  The agreements of Monterrey could only be implemented at the national level.  The United States believed that UNCTAD, the Regional Economic Commissions, and the United Nations Development Programme all had crucial jobs in front of them to support developing countries’ efforts to mobilize resources for development.  A substantial shift in the technical cooperation activities of the United Nations toward support for mobilizing financing for development at the national level was a key issue.

The United States Government was deeply committed to this process and sustainable development was a major goal of its national security strategy.  February had seen the introduction of the Millennium Challenge Account initiative to Congress.  The key concepts of the Monterrey Consensus were at the centre of this dramatic new development tool.  It recognized that development must primarily come from within, not be conferred from the outside, and that no one could develop a country except its own people.  It, thus, proposed a true partnership in which the developing country with full participation of its citizens proposed its own development priorities and plans.

MYKHAILO SKURATOVSKYI (Ukraine) said that in the present unstable economic environment, the advanced implementation of the Monterrey Consensus –- aimed at mobilizing financial resources to increase living standards and social development -– was one of the most pressing issues in the socio-economic sphere.  In this regard, the main challenge was to translate the spirit of Monterrey into a pragmatic programme of actions and to assess major stakeholders’ engagement for the implementation of the follow-up agenda to the Conference.  Given that policy coherence at all levels was the underlying theme of Monterrey, the United Nations, in concert with other major stakeholders including the Bretton Woods institutions and the World Trade Organisation (WTO), should take a leadership role therein.  Moreover, there should also be enhanced coherence, coordination and cooperation at the intergovernmental and management levels between the Economic and Social Council and international organisations, particularly WTO.

Furthermore, inconsistency at the national level was being exported to the multilateral system, he said.  For the Monterrey process to move forward smoothly it was critical to strengthen horizontal partnerships at the national level, although vertical partnerships were equally important in connecting relevant local, national, and international stakeholders.  The Monterrey Consensus defined ways and mechanisms for fostering international economic cooperation for sustainable development; in this regard, the international community must take a proactive approach to supporting transformation processes and democratic institutions in countries with economies in transition to ensure their achievement of sustainable development goals.  Increasing the membership of WTO was necessary to enhance the universality of the multilateral trading system.  Finally, the Monterrey Consensus should be viewed as an integral part of a broader process aimed at achieving the goals enshrined in the Millennium Declaration.

ANDREY SERGEEV (Russian Federation) said that the readiness of all partners, including both developed and developing countries, to work jointly with international financial and trade institutions to step up the war on poverty had been demonstrated.  The political impetus of Monterrey was felt everywhere.  It was important that the Monterrey Consensus reflected the views of many States, including the interests of those countries with economies in transition.  In accordance with the Monterrey Consensus, the Russian Federation had been engaged in serious work.  Russia had become a donor of food aid to the World Food Programme (WFP) and had contributed to the work of the High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and to the Global Fund for HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria.  Moreover, the total volume of professional imports to Russia from developing countries, including Least Developed Countries (LDCs), was approximately $5 billion annually.  Once the calculation of official development assistance (ODA) had been completed, he felt sure that the magnitude of his country’s contribution would become more apparent.

On the issue of debt cancellation, he said that $35 billion had been written off in conjunction with the Highly Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) initiative.  The ratio of Russian assistance under HIPC to gross domestic product (GDP) was the highest among donors.  However, it must be noted that simply writing off indebtedness without ensuring the adoption of proper management and serious economic policies would not solve the problem of indebtedness.  Innovative mechanisms should also be sought to address the indebtedness of medium-level income States and those with economies in transition.  Finally, in the context of implementing the Action Programme for LDCs, the situation of African States was of priority.  The Russian Federation had already resolved most African countries indebtedness via-à-vis the former Soviet Union; it also provided broad trade preferences to LDCs.  The unimpeded development of international trade would be the most importance force for the development of LDCs.

JEAN-MARC BOULGARIS (Switzerland) attached great importance to the implementation of the Monterrey consensus, whose components were essential in order to achieve the Millennium Development Goals.  The challenge faced was that of ensuring both consistency and coherency in the policies implemented.  Switzerland expected that further steps in the right direction would be taken over the next few years.  All actors, governments, and multilateral agencies must ensure that implementation was undertaken in a cooperative spirit.  In this connection, Switzerland welcomed the strengthening of the Secretariat of the Economic and Social Council.  The Secretariat must distribute and disseminate the results of the high-level segment and support and promote the private sector to take part in the implementation of the Millennium Development Goals.  In this connection, he suggested further cooperation with the World Economic Forum.

With regards to least developed countries and the private sector, he added that the mobilization of resources was needed in order to attract Foreign Direct Investment.  In terms of agriculture, he regretted the consistent food insecurity and lack of rural development which limited the possibilities for trade in developing countries.  Switzerland welcomed any effort, however modest, aimed at improving the effectiveness of aid.  Coordination, transparency and harmonization were necessary in order to bring down transaction costs of development aid.  He had taken note of the progress achieved in the Highly Indebted Poor Countries initiative; however, many of these countries were still not in a position to achieve the Millennium Development Goals.  A framework must be established to examine the viability of the poorest countries’ debt and to ensure sound economic policies.

HUA LIU (China) said that the implementation of the Monterrey Consensus was highly valued; it was an important document for international cooperation and development, which would serve to ensure sustainable development in the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs).  Supportive of enhanced collaboration between the Council, the Bretton Woods institutions and the World Trade Organization, she said that the topics covered in the spring meeting of these bodies had included debt, trade reform, the MDGs and official development assistance (ODA), among others.  It was to be hoped that the Council would continue to explore the international community’s consensus and differences in this regard.

The Council could also help to establish a more favourable international economic environment she said, through supporting initiatives for the transfer of technology, capacity-building and increased market access.  The Council should further enhance the United Nations system’s cooperation with other relevant development agencies and specialized agencies to promote the coordination, coherence, and consistency of international development policies.  Of particular importance to the success of the Cancun Conference was the real participation of developing countries in international decision-making and cooperation, so that Cancun truly reflected their interests and needs in trade.  This round should be promoted as a round of development and substantial progress.

MARCO BALAREZO (Peru) said that suggestions had been made about establishing a framework to mobilize resources for development, as well as proposals for highly indebted countries.  In Peru, the Government had been working energetically to propose a number of initiatives to launch projects for the implementation and follow-up of major United Nations conferences and summits, particularly in terms of good governance and democracy.  In Peru, sound macroeconomic policies were in place, yet commerce as an engine of growth was not automatic or necessarily enough.  A re-engineering of approaches was, therefore, required based on innovative ideas.  This was what the Monterrey Consensus had really been about.  He proposed the increased availability of resources and to ensure greater coverage of existing resources.  Mechanisms such as regional partnerships to promote investment were suggested.  Greater flexibility was also needed with regard to expenditures, while maintaining macroeconomic stability.  Coordination with international mechanisms and other States was also required in order to achieve the Millennium Development Goals.  These mechanisms must be seen as possible choices and be adaptable to the individualities of each country.  It was important to mobilize support so that growth and employment were achieved.

KYUNG-WHA KANG (Republic of Korea), reviewing progress made in implementing the Monterrey Consensus, commended the success of the 2003 special high-level meeting held in April that had reassembled the major stakeholders of Monterrey to discuss increased coherence, coordination and cooperation for the implementation of the Monterrey Consensus.  Of particular note was the employment of a thematic approach during the round table sessions.  The further high-level participation of all relevant stakeholders which represented the international community’s sustained commitment to the financing for developing process was also welcomed.

Market access for developing countries was a sine qua non for their development, she added.  Thus, the Cancun Conference would provide an important opportunity to take stock of progress made and remaining in the implementation of the Doha Development Agenda.  The concerns to be addressed there should include the elimination of trade-distorting subsidies and the removal of tariff peaks.  Moreover, as debt had become a hindrance to the development process of many developing countries, significant effort should be made to solve the debt problems of the Highly Indebted Poor Countries (HIPCs) through the exploration of options including debt restructuring and debt relief.  The Republic of Korea would contribute $10 million to the HIPC Trust Fund this year.  The voice and representation of developing countries should also be strengthened within the Bretton Woods institutions, to which end the United Nations system should help generate impetus to improve transparency and accountability in the decision-making process of these institutions.

NYANKOYE FASSOU SAGNO (Guinea) informed ECOSOC about the implementation of the Brussels Programme of Action in Guinea.  Under commitment one concerning population questions, the Government had enacted policies on women, children, including health policies.  A health and nutrition survey had been undertaken in order to examine questions related to household incomes, migration, HIV/AIDS, as well as other variables.  In addition, the Government had ratified the Convention on the Rights of the Child, as well as the Convention on the Elimination of Violence against Women.  Efforts had also been undertaken as to commitment six on the environment.  A fund for the environment had been established which aimed to protect the environment in all public and private activities.  Concerning commitment seven on the mobilization of resources, he said that micro financing for rural credit schemes had been established.  These were some of the actions that the Government had been involved with in order to implement the Programme of Action, but much remained to be done.

KIYOSHI WADA (Japan) said that the Monterrey Consensus was of particular importance as it comprehensively addressed international financing issues for development.  However, the international community should bear in mind the necessity of implementing this agreement on financing for development, though it would take time to see concrete outcomes of implementation as the Monterrey Consensus covered a broad set of issues.  The international community also needed to take pragmatic and concrete actions, which would have measurable impacts, as human and budgetary resources were limited.

Expressing Japan’s appreciation for the work of the High Representative for Least Developed Countries (LDCs), he said that the report of the Secretary-General could be of considerable help in grasping the issue and seeking further steps for development of LDCs.  The vulnerability suffered by LDCs should be adequately and promptly addressed from various aspects.

JOSE RAMON LORENZO (Mexico) stressed Mexico’s commitment to the Conference on Financing for Development.  The meeting held in April between the Council and the Bretton Woods institutions had been an important contribution to the implementation of the Monterrey Consensus and the Millennium Development Goals.  It was hoped that new impetus and momentum could be given to the implementation of the commitments made.  In this connection, all States were urged to participate to the fullest during the General Assembly this October.  He welcomed the establishment of an office to deal with issues of financing for development within the Council.  Mexico would be hosting the fifth ministerial meeting of the World Trade Organization in Cancun, which would be a prime opportunity to move from words to deeds.

OUSMANE CAMARA (Senegal) said that the Millennium Development Goals provided a useful framework within which the United Nations could increase solidarity for development, particularly in terms of poverty reduction.  The Monterrey Consensus, and the commitments contained therein, should encourage the international community to examine carefully the commitments made in regard of international trade –- to open their markets to developing countries.  Despite the substantial and positive results that had been achieved, the application and integrated follow-up to all relevant decisions within the Consensus was of utmost importance.  This would require coordination between all United Nations organizations and agencies.

On the issue of the Least Developed Countries (LDCs), he said that within the two years of implementation of the Brussels Programme of Action, there had been a limited number of countries able to provide information for the Secretary-General’s report.  Many countries had undertaken difficult measures to implement the Programme of Action, specifically in relation to commitments one through six, yet the data provided in the Secretary-General’s report showed that their already heavy constraints had become even heavier as a result.  This vicious circle had both domestic and international dimensions.  Thus, the major actors within the Brussels Programme of Action needed to work urgently in two areas.  First, the LDCs must take the first six commitments and make them the underpinning of national poverty reduction strategies and invest in combating HIV/AIDS.  Second, developed countries must show solidarity with LDCs, provide increased official development assistance (ODA) and cancel or lighten their debt burden.  The requirements of debt servicing prevented countries from devoting the required resources to social services such as education and health.

CLAUDIO ROJAS (Chile) addressed follow-up to the Monterrey Conference and the Monterrey consensus and welcomed the work of the President of the Economic and Social Council in formulating the conclusions of discussions between ECOSOC and Bretton Woods institutions.  This document would contribute greatly to the deliberations to be held during the General Assembly in October.  He believed the stage of implementation must be further coordinated and harmonized in order to ensure the follow-up to Monterrey.  ECOSOC was indeed the most appropriate body to ensure the full implementation of the commitments made.  He suggested that three elements be included in the thinking of Member States when considering follow-up and implementation.  ECOSOC must have the political will to define the framework for dialogue between Bretton Woods institutions and the United Nations; establish a mechanism within the mandate of the Consensus on promoting cooperation between the Bretton Woods institutions and the United Nations to identify sub-themes to achieve commitments set up; and establish a substantive dialogue targeting these issues.  The General Assembly needed to focus further attention on macroeconomic policies and new mechanisms that would lead to achieving the Millennium Development Goals, the ultimate goal of the Monterrey Consensus.

ESTI ANDAYANI (Indonesia) said that, unfortunately, few visible, concrete steps had been taken thus far to effect the positive changes demanded by global conferences and summits; it was important to act promptly in order to bring about their outcomes.  For the breath of life to be given to the Monterrey Consensus, international cooperation must be invigorated through genuine partnerships between developed and developing countries, while follow-up mechanisms must be strengthened and put into effect, in which regard the spring meeting of the Council with the Bretton Woods institutions and the World Trade Organization was of great importance.

Developed countries should be reminded of their commitment to increase levels of official development assistance (ODA), she said, which was meant to stimulate and sustain the development process in the developing world.  It must be concluded that while the Monterrey Conference laid the essential groundwork to take the development agenda forward by setting attainable targets and commitments on a wide range of issues, the necessary follow-up action for full implementation of its outcomes had yet to take place.  Given this slow pace of implementation, all viable, vibrant mechanisms to bring about positive action quickly should be explored and the commitments made must be acted upon if the global development agenda was not to turn into a sham.

STAFFORD O.NEIL (Jamaica) said ECOSOC must focus its follow-up on implementation and the monitoring of steps taken.  Jamaica had supported the establishment of a monitoring mechanism, but since this had not happened, it was hoped that the ECOSOC would fulfil this role.  The Department of Economic and Social Affairs and the Secretary-General were encouraged to inform ECOSOC of progress and lack thereof in relation to concrete commitments made in Monterrey.  With regard to the transfer of resources, he welcomed that some States had committed to increase their assistance level.  However, this must not be seen as an end in itself, but part of a timetable in reaching the level of 0.7 per cent of GNP.  Concerning trade, he hoped that the follow-up to Doha and Cancun would be development oriented.  The overall framework for development cooperation and partnerships were also stressed.  Patterns of selectivity and political conditionalities destroyed the spirit of partnerships.  Concerning systemic issues, he said that the questions of governance were for everyone, not only developing countries.  Governance must also cover developed countries and international institutions.  This element in the system itself needed to be corrected in order to inspire confidence, he said.

AIZAZ CHAUDHRY (Pakistan) said that the Monterrey Consensus had provided a remarkable framework for international development and held out the promise that gainful global partnerships could be formed.  The fulfilment of its outcomes, however, would be accomplished only through sustained commitment to full implementation by all Member States and other stakeholders.  Yet an obvious shortcoming to the Monterrey Consensus was that there was no expert-level mechanism to monitor the progress of implementation on Member States’ commitments, which had been recognized in the recommendation of the Ad Hoc Working Group of the General Assembly on implementing the outcomes of major international conferences.  The Ad Hoc Working Group had agreed to assess the implementation of the Monterrey Consensus during the General Assembly’s next session.  Pakistan felt that an appropriate expert-level mechanism would make a useful contribution to the implementation of the Monterrey Consensus.  Finally, he said he did not wish to contribute any substantive comments on the subject of financing for development at this time, as this subject would be discussed during a later high-level segment of the General Assembly.

MARKUS BRUN (CIDSE-CARITAS International) suggested that a Commission be set up under ECOSOC with a reduced number of members to discuss policy questions and make recommendations for concrete action.  In his view, ECOSOC could add coherence to the international debate on debt workout mechanisms and could develop concrete alternative proposals, in collaboration with the Bretton Woods Institutions.  The primary instrument for review mandated by the Monterrey Consensus was the annual spring meeting between ECOSOC, the Bretton Woods institutions and the World Trade Organisation.  Building on these annual meetings, an effective mechanism must be established for substantive engagement among these organisations to reach better coherence and collaboration.  It was added that specific issues must be identified for deeper and more focused discussions with the participation of civil society.

Statements on Review and Coordination of Implementation

Of Programme of Action for Least Developed Countries for Decade 2001-2010

HASSAN ABOUTAHIR (Morocco), speaking on behalf of the Group of 77 and China, said that the Brussels Programme of Action had recognized that the objectives of the previous two decade-long programmes of action for least developed countries (LDCs) had remained basically unattained.  LDCs were unable to participate in and take advantage of globalisation, which left them marginalized and vulnerable to effects undermining their reform efforts.  Thus, the major challenge for the entire international community in this context was to honour its commitments made in Brussels.  In recent years, many LDCs had redoubled efforts to improve their investment environments to attract more substantial foreign direct investment flows.  Yet, there had been only slow implementation and a lack of progress in the achievement of the objectives set out in the Brussels Programme of Action.

The stagnation and decline of official development assistance (ODA) flows to LDCs, he said, had further delayed the attainment of the Programme of Action.  Furthermore, trade constituted one of the most important engines for development, growth and the mobilization of resources for LDCs.  In this regard, the international community had a responsibility to work for enhanced market access for the products of LDCs.  Economic diversification was another crucial component of trade policy for LDCs to increase their exports.  LDCs needed to enhance their capabilities in international trade and overcome their supply-side constraints with the support of the international community.

Finally, he concluded, debt continued to be a major domestic stumbling block to development.  High levels of debt and debt servicing drained away development resources and harmed the capacity of LDCs to concentrate on development and poverty eradication.  Without a drastic solution to their debt problems, LDCs would continue to participate in the capital export process.

VALENTINO SIMONETTI (Italy), speaking on behalf of the European Union, reassured ECOSOC that even though the European Union did not recognize LDCs as an official ad hoc category in the European Union development framework, this did not mean that their needs were not duly taken into account.  In fact, special attention was being paid to the specific needs of the LDCs, who must be the primary beneficiaries of the poverty reduction strategy.  After all, fundamental efforts were needed to achieve the international development goals including those contained in the Millennium Declaration, especially in LDCs.  Issues of primary importance in the implementation of the Brussels Plan of Action were accountability, good governance, rule of law and capacity building in LDCs.

With regard to accountability, he said that the participatory approach was of the utmost importance in fostering the adoption of a pro-poor strategy.  However, the participatory approach must be reinforced by ensuring access to the decision-making process to all the components of civil society, particularly the poor, women and minorities.  A participatory approach could only produce the expected results if it was carried out in a conducive environment where democracy, respect for human rights and the rule of law and governance were leading principles.  The European Union supported the LDCs request that poverty reduction strategies and priorities be identified through a single nationally driven analytical process.

Concerning the integration of LDCs into the world economy, he said that for the European Union it was a priority to proceed smoothly and gradually in this direction, showing due regard for the LDCs’ political choices and development priorities.  Turning to financing, he recalled that in Barcelona, the European Union had made a formal commitment, reconfirmed in Monterrey, to collectively raise the Official Development Assistance level to 0.39 of GNI by 2006 as a first significant step toward the United Nations goal of 0.7 per cent of GNI contributing to official development assistance.

SINALY COULIBALY (Mali) said that his Government had made the war on poverty the central aspect of its development strategy.  The general objective was to reduce poverty by 3.8 per cent and to achieve an annual growth of 6.7 per cent.  Detailing Mali’s progress in investing in social services, he emphasized that this was accompanied by attempts to assure greater economic stability.  Among the objectives undertaken with the poverty reduction strategy was the reduction of the gap between rural and urban zones and the empowerment and improvement of living standards of women.  Among others, this strategy involved reducing female illiteracy.

Recalling the submission made to the World Trade Organization on developed countries cotton subsidies, he also listed measures undertaken to support secondary and tertiary sector development.  Debt relief was an essential element of development for the Highly Indebted Poor Countries (HIPCs); mobilized domestic resources could then be used for education and health initiatives.  In this regard and one the general subjects of financing for development, a meeting between Mali and its bilateral partners had been arranged.

ROLF W. BOEHNKE, Managing Director of the Common Fund for Commodities, said the Fund was an intergovernmental financial institution established by the United Nations with the mandate to finance commodity development projects in developing countries.  Their projects addressed general commodity problems affecting several countries.  The focus was on Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and on the poorer strata of the population in other developing countries.  The commodities sector, mainly agriculture but also mining, forestry and fisheries, was central to the economies of LDCs.  About 80 percent of the export earned of LDCs depended on three or fewer leading commodities.  The improvement and diversification of the commodity sector was a sine qua non for the development of LDCs.  The viability and sustainability of the commodities sector was, therefore, inextricably linked to the development prospects and poverty reduction in LDCs.  One could not address the economic problems of least developed countries without taking the commodity sector into account.

The Fund was ready to respond to the challenges facing LDCs and to provide assistance.  Through its commodity-focused measures, the Fund was committed to poverty reduction and sustainable development.  In this, the Fund looked forward to a fruitful cooperation with other multilateral institutions, bilateral donors, civil society, and last but not least, the High Representative of the Least Developed Countries, Landlocked Developing Countries and Small Island Development States.

WU DEZHONG (China) said that while some progress had been made in implementing the Brussels Programme of Action for Least Developed Countries (LDCs), large challenges yet remained in terms of lack of autonomous decision-making power and other advantages.  LDCs still faced stagnant economies, lack of production resources and difficulties in exporting their products.  Thus, prospects for implementing the Brussels Programme of Action were not bright, particularly given the hurdles faced by LDCs such as declining official development assistance (ODA), growing debt and deteriorating terms of trade.

All countries should be allowed to formulate their own strategies for development and poverty reduction, he said, while the international community should make serious efforts to break the vicious cycle of stagnation and poverty affecting LDCs.  In this context, the efforts of LDCs alone would not be sufficient.  It was essential that the debt burden of LDCs be relieved.  Also, in view of their heavy dependence on primary products, the international community should help to arrest the declining price of primary products.  It should also act to implement vigorously the Brussels Programme of Action.

LUIS DE MATOS MONTEIRO DA FONSECA (Cape Verde) said the goals and recommendations of the Brussels Programme of Action had been internalized and appropriated in the national development policies and strategies.  The Government placed poverty reduction as the main priority of development.  Strategies were based on growth and competitiveness of the economy; enhancing social ascension; and promoting capacity-building and empowerment of the poor.  Unfortunately, poverty still affected about 30 per cent of the population.  ECOSOC was also informed about initiatives undertaken in the areas of gender equality, good governance, education, and agriculture.

The improvement of LDCs participation in the global hyper-competitive economy required that appropriate conditions be created.  This included a favourable environment for investments, the development of infrastructure, improvement of competitiveness, capacity-building, important financial resources, and the diversification of the economy.  In order to provide LDCs with the minimum opportunity to compete in the international market, it was necessary that preferential and differential treatments be granted to LDCs and small island developing States in the framework of the international negotiations and, particularly, those with the World Trade Organization.  Cape Verde also shared the concern on the urgency of debt alleviation and the need for specific measures for the reduction of LDCs debt.  Despite the country’s achievements, Cape Verde remained dependent on external resources and must, therefore, not be graduated from the category of LDCs.  If Cape Verde lost its LDC status it would be unable to maintain, much less improve, its human development levels.

ANNET BLANK (World Trade Organization) said that the integrated framework for trade-related technical assistance to least developed countries (LDCs) was of direct relevance to the issue under discussion today.  It had been launched in October 1997 and restructured in 2000 as partnership between six multilateral core agencies –- IMF, ITC, UNCTAD, UNDP, World Bank and WTO –- who together with bilateral donors and LDCs themselves addressed both the technical assistance and policy sides of the trade agenda.  It had two objectives:  to integrate trade priorities into LDC national development plans and poverty reduction strategies; and to assist in the coordinated delivery of trade assistance.  It sought to ensure country ownership, partnership and coordination in the mainstreaming process and comprised three phases, including:  an analysis of the country’s economic competitiveness and constraints thereon; developing an action matrix to spell out policy recommendations and priority technical assistance needs to overcome constraints identified in the study; and incorporating trade policy priorities into the country’s national development plan.  The integrated framework had two bodies that served its management structure:  the Integrated Framework Steering Committee, which oversaw the process; and the Integrated Framework Working Group, which handled the day to day work.

The integrated framework had been endorsed at Doha, he said, as an important mechanism for LDCs to integrate priority national trade policy objectives and related assistance needs into national development plans.  It served as a catalyst for the coordinated delivery of trade assistance and a facilitating mechanism to identify necessary funding.  Effective participation in the multilateral trading system required action on several fronts including sustained policy reform supported by targeted technical assistance and capacity-building to address physical supply-side constraints; legal reform; human and institutional capacity building; trade negotiations capacity-building; support for the private sector; and market access.

SHAMSUZZAKIR KAZEMI (Afghanistan) said he had examined the report of the Secretary-General with keen interest.  The fact that only nine out of 49 LDCs had supplied information to the report of the Secretary-General was a clear indication of the urgent need to assist these countries in creating their national institutional facilities with capabilities to monitor implementation at the national level, analyse and evaluate achievements, and prepare policy-oriented reports.  Moreover, while comprehensive annual reports were necessary to examine, analyse and evaluate overall achievements under the Programme of Action at the global level, more serious attention needed to be focused on performance at the national level.

He emphasized the total destruction of Afghanistan’s economy as a result of the destruction of the primitive ways of land use, lack of shelter, severe shortage of water and energy, and above all the presence of anti-personnel mines.  As a landlocked and least developed country, Afghanistan had always relied on road transport.  However, the limited road network and transport facilities, destroyed through the conflict, were heavily damaged.  The revival of the Afghan economy would largely depend on the active role of the private sector as the prime mover of growth dynamics in the economy.  It was, therefore, essential to promote this vital role through the creation of an enabling environment that encouraged resource mobilization and allocation, including foreign direct investment.

TOUFIQ ALI (Bangladesh) said actions to address the challenges to the LDCs were being implemented at national, regional and global levels.  In addition, at numerous gatherings at regional and global levels, there was articulation of LDC interest.  While the international community and the United Nations system were working on their implementation, there were the time-bound set of the Millennium Development Goals.  It was, therefore, important that there was coherence in the policies directed at assisting the LDCs.  The issue of proper synergy applied particularly to the support the international community extended to the LDCs at the level of national governments.  He felt however that LDCs required increased UNCTAD support in this post-Doha time, and indeed beyond.  It was added that one important role of the Office of the High Representative remained advocacy, so that the attention of the world’s people and governments could be drawn to the concerns and needs of the LDCs.

LDCs were struggling to cope with the overarching span of globalization, he continued.  Falls in commodity prices, coupled with restricted access to markets, had resulted in the decline of LDC share of global trade.  It was stressed that LDCs must be enabled to integrate into the multilateral trading system.  It was also stressed that LDCs needed support to address their vulnerability and to protect the environment.  LDCs were particularly susceptible to natural disasters, and least able to cope with their consequences in view of resource constraints.  Sometimes, the issues had a trans-boundary dimension, involving massive capital investment.  In assessing graduation of LDCs, environmental vulnerability must be taken into account.

* *** *