PRESS CONFERENCE BY BANGLADESH LAUNCHING REPORT ON MILLENNIUM GOALS

PRESS CONFERENCE BY BANGLADESH LAUNCHING REPORT ON MILLENNIUM GOALS

Although the world had witnessed some progress in the socio-economic fields since the 2000 Millennium Declaration, a billion people still lived on less than a dollar a day, Iftekhar Ahmed Chowdhury, Permanent Representative of Bangladesh to the United Nations, told correspondents this morning at Headquarters at the launch of the report “Whose Freedom? Millennium Development Goals:  As if People Matter”.

Also participating in the press conference were:  Ramesh Singh, CEO, ActionAid International; and John Samuel, International Director, ActionAid International.

Mr. Chowdhury said that inequality remained paramount among and within nations and that, in some cases, the gap was widening.  Even in the most rapidly progressing nations and in developed countries, millions were still deprived of the benefits of growth and development.  “At the end of the day, more than 800 million people go to bed without food, and 30,000 children die from poverty, malnutrition and diseases.  They are devoid of basic social and economic rights -- the rights to food, shelter, water, health and education.  It is time to voice our concerns about these global challenges.”

The report, a noble initiative of ActionAid International, reflected the collective voice of more than 300,000 people from 5,000 villages across 18 countries, he said.  The people’s charter in that report was a pragmatic agenda, reflecting what needed to be done to attain the Millennium Goals.  Turning to the situation in his own country, he added that progress in achieving the Goals had demonstrated that low income was not a barrier to progress.  Microcredit and non-formal education in Bangladesh were contributing to awareness-building among the poor.

Mr. Singh said he did not only speak on behalf of ActionAid International (AAI), but also on behalf of people in developing countries, landlocked countries and small island developing States.  ActionAid International worked in many countries.  Today, it brought the voices of the real people, the poor and excluded people into a place where decisions were being made by the powerful leaders and nations, particularly now that negotiations in the Organization were reaching a climax. 

ActionAid International worked with thousands of local partners and communities in understanding, learning from and helping in the fight for justice and eradication of poverty in many countries, he said.  It was important to listen to the voices of real people, including those who were suffering in New Orleans, United States.  They were people who were perpetually threatened by disasters that could be prevented and overcome. 

Mr. Samuel said the report was an “expression of agony, sorrow and discontent” of almost 350,000 people in more than 18 countries of Africa, Asia and Latin America, representing 9 million people.  As the Secretary-General released his report “In larger Freedom”, AAI had asked the question:  “Whose freedom is it all about?”  As AAI listened to the voices of the poor, it learned that poverty was not merely the lack of one dollar a day income, but that it was the denial of rights every day.  “Poverty is like a wound that refuses to be healed.”  In 64 per cent of the villages AAI had visited, people regularly went hungry.  Nearly half the villages had no access to any social services.  Four out of five school-age girls had never been inside a classroom.  The Summit was a litmus test for the world leaders to take stock of the Millennium Goals. 

The report also contained a “way out” in its “People’s Charter”, which clearly told that poverty was not merely a matter of statistics, but a story of the daily denial of human rights -- the right to live in dignity, the right to food and to health -- for more than 1 billion people.  Women’s rights and empowerment were a prerequisite for poverty eradication.  Also, without trade justice, poverty could not be addressed.  The big question to be asked at the Summit was:  had the objective of 0.7 per cent of national income dedicated to aid been met? 

Was the question “whose freedom?” a question of the freedom of unbridled multinational corporations and monopolies to invade markets and undermine governments, or was it the freedom from want and fear of more than 1 billion people who were suffering from poverty? he asked.  The report would be presented to the world leaders to ensure that the poor were not brushed under the carpet when security reform and the process of development were discussed. 

Answering a correspondent’s question about the impact the Summit would have on the people represented in the report, Mr. Samuel said the poor people across the world were looking towards the Summit to see if:  the rich countries were keeping their promise of 0.7 per cent contribution towards development; unconditional cancellation of unjust and illicit debt of least developed countries would take place; and the United Nations would accelerate attainment of the Millennium Goals.  He was deeply worried about the unprecedented effort to delay the purpose of the Summit by rich and powerful countries. 

Asked about a “Plan B” if the Summit failed, Mr. Samuel said the United Nations was one of the most important multilateral political organizations, based on the premise “We the People”.  The majority of the countries, including the “Group of 77” developing countries, were committed to the Summit.  He hoped that leaders from across Asia, Africa, Latin America and Europe, and hopefully also the leaders from the United States, would stand up.  He also hoped that the leaders from developing and least developed countries would not permit the purpose of the Summit to be undermined and diluted.  If the basic purpose was not being met, the Summit would fail the poor people.

Mr. Singh said it was important that developing countries and others not be held hostage by one country.  World leaders in the multilateral “playing field” had an equal voice.  They should exercise their rights.

Mr. Chowdhury added that there was not a single purpose for the Summit.  The Summit was about rethinking the world, about how States would relate to one another.  To achieve a rule of law internationally, to achieve development, to create a sense whereby governments in the world learned to live with inconvenient facts, rather than to suppress them -- those were important values and those values were always furthered when such gatherings took place.  There would be forward movement.

In answer to another question, Mr. Samuel said the challenge for civil society was to prevent the world being put in one bag and handed over to the super-Powers, as had happened before.

Mr. Chowdhury added that ever so slowly, civil society and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) were getting involved in international relations.  Bangladesh, with 20,000 civil society organizations, was famous for its NGOs.  They worked well with the Government.  The Government also tried to help them, including AAI, with non-financial support. 

Asked about the impact of the images from the devastation in Louisiana being beamed into millions of American homes, Mr. Singh said the images were very important.  They proved that what was happening had an impact on poor people.  He hoped it would have a long-term impact on the social injustice in the country.  It was not a matter of resources but of political will. 

Mr. Chowdhury drew attention to the global solidarity being displayed.  Even his own country had sent $1 million for relief.  All recognized that everybody was subject to such problems and that all must work together to confront them.

Addressing a Nepalese correspondent’s question, Mr. Singh said that without democracy, poverty could not be eradicated, and justice could not be achieved.  ActionAid International was concerned about the state of democracy, or the absence of it, in Nepal.  There was a need to ensure that Nepal would not become a failed State.

* *** *

For information media • not an official record