PRESS CONFERENCE ON ‘BUILDING ON GLENEAGLES’

PRESS CONFERENCE ON ‘BUILDING ON GLENEAGLES’

While the commitments entered into at the Group of Eight Summit in Gleneagles had been essentially safeguarded at the United Nations World Summit, everyone wanted to see the process go further, British Prime Minister Tony Blair told correspondents at a Headquarters press conference today.

Mr. Blair, who was joined by Nigerian President Olusegun Obasanjo, European Commission President Jose Barroso and artist Bob Geldof, said the purpose of the press conference was to provide an assessment of what was happening in the campaign to make poverty history since the historic meeting of G-8 leaders in July at Gleneagles, Scotland.  At that meeting, leaders of the world’s industrial powers agreed on a package doubling aid by 2010 -– an extra $50 billion worldwide.  Leaders also agreed to write off immediately the debts of the world’s 18 poorest countries.

A series of “major decision points” would be taking place over the next few months, Mr. Blair said.  They included the World Trade Organization (WTO) meeting in December in Hong Kong, discussions on debt relief at the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank, and the building up of the African Peacekeeping Force.  In short, there was a series of things that needed to be carried through over a period of time.  It was important to ensure that the pressure was kept up and that the insistence was there.  Events in places such as Niger underscored the urgency of that need, he said.

Providing his assessment of the World Summit, Mr. Obasanjo said that, in all, the outcome of the United Nations meeting had been a “qualified success”.  Some had expected more, however, particularly after the “great leap forward” at Gleneagles.  In some cases, there had not been enough movement forward, while in others, there had even been a little stepping back.  Yet, there were wonderful opportunities coming up to move forward on such issues as trade and the elimination of agricultural subsidies.

Regarding the issue of debt, he said it was a matter of where the money would come from to carry out the promise to cancel the debt of the 18 poorest countries.  The World Bank and the IMF would be talking.  He understood that the IMF had something they could put on the ground.  The African Union, immediately following the Gleneagles Summit, had decided that organizations within the Union needed to come together.  The African Development Bank, the Secretariat of the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD), the African Union Commission and the regional economic communities were coming together to move things forward, particularly in terms of infrastructure.

Mr. Barroso also said that the Summit could have done more.  The G-8 meeting had been important, as was the World Summit.  It was essential, however, not to think in terms of one-off events but in terms of a process to make poverty history.  That would require sustained efforts not only in terms of leadership at the global level, but also in terms of public opinion.  Europe was the biggest aid donor in the world and the most open market.  Yet, it could and should do more.  This fall, the Commission would produce its Africa Strategy.  He had invited the African Union Commission to come to Brussels to see what both Commissions could do on a daily basis to turn commitments into reality.

Gleneagles was not a single occasion, he stressed.  Hong Kong would provide another opportunity to turn commitments into reality and to make the Doha development agenda a “development friendly” agenda.  It was now a question of not losing momentum.

Mr. Geldof said it was important to remember the main reason for convening the World Summit, namely to review the 2000 Millennium Development Goals.  If that was the benchmark for the Summit, he felt a sense of disappointment that it had been overshadowed by other factors that could not have been predicted.  While those factors also needed to be discussed, the reality was that unless the commitments entered into at Gleneagles were implemented, the Millennium Development Goals did not have a single chance of success.

At best, the World Summit had reinforced the “great leap forward” of Gleneagles, he said.  That was not a bad thing.  But that process should have been accelerated at the United Nations.  He was disappointed with the language on the issue of trade.  In fact, there had been a pulling back from the language of Gleneagles, which was not even supposed to have discussed trade.  While there had been a little step forward on trade, it was not enough for the World Summit and in the lead-up to the upcoming trade round, which was, without question, the single most important event to reduce poverty in Africa.  The “great leap forward” must be implemented in the next few weeks at the IMF and World Bank round.  If not, the world would potentially be looking at disaster.

Noting that President Bush said the United States supported the Millennium Development Goals, a correspondent asked Mr. Geldof what kind of real world impact that would that have in terms of implementing the Goals.

Responding, he said many had been pleasantly surprised by some of the “radicalism” in President Bush’s statement, including language on subsidies.  That sort of language was needed.  While President Bush had committed to the Goals before, to hear him forcefully say that the United States pledged total support for them made it a very good speech.

Asked to “name and shame” Member States that were dragging their heels, Mr. Geldof said it was not a question of naming and shaming.  The entire planet had to do more.  All the greatest problems of the young century stemmed from a chronic condition of poverty.  The Dutch and Belgians needed to come along at the IMF and push through the great package achieved on debt relief.  While they might have valid reasons not to agree, in terms of the “pornography of poverty paraded across screens every night”, everyone could put more in the pot.  “The shame is ours, the name is the world”, he said.

As early as yesterday, a correspondent noted, Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin had refused to commit to the 0.7 per cent target for official development assistance (ODA).  How did that reflect on Canada on the world stage?

Mr. Geldof noted that “poor old Paul” was “getting it in the neck from Bono”, who was currently touring in Canada.  “ Canada is weird”, he added, recalling that it was Canada that had invented the whole great notion of 0.7 per cent.  Canada was a wholly responsible nation and would do it.  The success of “Live 8” had been revolutionary in Canada.  He believed the Prime Minister wanted to bide his time before throwing out an actual date for achieving the target.  It would happen.  “Join the club, dude.  It’s not that hard”, he said.

Asked to grade the Summit, Mr. Geldof said Gleneagles had scored “10 out of 10” on the issue of aid.  While it was crude to mark in bold strokes, when appealing to vast constituencies, it was better that they understood what they had achieved.  He was not thrilled with the Summit outcome and would give it a “4”.

Asked to elaborate on the African Peacekeeping Force, Mr. Blair said the idea was to have a standing force and to build up the capacity of that force by 2006.  It was also a question of working on the structural problems that caused problems in Africa, including the inability in the midst of conflict to have a force to keep peace.  Nearly 1,000 African Union peacekeepers were in the Sudan.  While the problem there was still critical, it would have been worse without them.  A capable African force allowed the political space for a process to work.

To test the implementation of the Gleneagles commitments, he suggested looking at it as a journey with a series of milestones that needed to be passed.  The IMF and World Bank meetings in the next couple of weeks had to go the right way, and a strong deal was needed out of Hong Kong.  The African Peacekeeping Force must be in place by next year.  As to the African side of the commitments, a whole series of meetings were coming up to put in place the continent’s part of the bargain.  The partnership between civil society and some key governments had been remarkable.  Delivering on the commitments entered into at Gleneagles would make a massive difference in the world.

The WTO round in Hong Kong was the test, he said.  The entire international community had to live up to the demands of today’s interdependent world.  If it seemed that Hong Kong was a failure, he would do whatever possible to get the process back on track.  The fact was that everyone around the world was trying to “call each other’s bluff” on world trade.  It was now a matter of calling those bluffs.

Asked what Africa was willing to give up in terms of assets, Mr. Obasanjo said some African countries had nothing to give up.  The only thing they could give up was life, and that would be committing genocide.  African countries were doing what they should be doing -- accepting responsibility for their own situation.  African countries were admitting where they had gone wrong and where they had underperformed.  They were sanctioning themselves, but they needed peace and stability to make progress.  The creation of a standby force would not happen overnight.  It was simplistic to think that all of Africa’s problems would vanish overnight because of Gleneagles, he said.

* *** *

For information media • not an official record