TRADE WITH EUROPE- GOOD OR BAD FOR DEVELOPING COUNTRIES’ : AN EDUCATIONAL PROJECT ON EU-ACP TRADE.

The project combines a paper teaching module with student pages, a teacher’s manual and an integrated educational website with texts and source materials.

The teaching module provides information on the Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs), their relationship to the millennium development goals (MDGs) and their consequences for the daily lives of (small) producers in developing countries through the analysis of five case studies: Tanzania (milk products), Ghana (tomato production), Mauritania (fisheries), Fiji (water) and Windward Islands (bananas). Every case study includes a country profile, six additional sources and an overview of the relationship of the EU with the ACP country involved Pupils, divided into groups, are requested to work on a specific case study and to draw their own conclusions by answering a set of sub-questions and a final question: ‘trade with Europe: it is good or bad for developing countries?’ Interested? On the box the link for free downloads.

The teaching module is produced by the Centre for Global Education within the framework of the Partnership for Change project and can be downloaded for free in Dutch, English and Italian.

Date of publication: The Netherlands, June 2009 Authors: Harry de Ridder and Marij Steenbeek.

We welcome feed back from users of the module.

READER AND CAMPAIGN DICTIONARY

In addition of the teaching module two more productions are available on the educational website. They target institutional decision makers, professionals who work in the fields of political awareness and international solidarity, and to those who simply would appreciate a deeper knowledge of the concepts related to world trade and development. Both Dictionary and reader are conceived within the Partnershiop for Change project, and produced by HEGOA and RISC. Interested? Click here for free downloads.

“FREE TRADE DISAGREEMENT – DOES THE MARKET REALLY CREATE DEVELOPMENT?”

A publication was edited by the Italian NGO Amici dei Popoli (ADP), within the framework of the project Partnership for Change. The publication, conceived as a tool for training and analysis, discusses all the topics related to the establishment of free trade areas and the consequences which arise when created without taking into account different interests and situations.

The book deals with economy, trade, labour market, environment, services, development assistance and governance and gathers the contributions of authors from all over the world who, from different perspectives, highlight the paradoxes and the contradictions of an economic system based on competition, open market and profit.

JOINT COUNCIL OF MINISTERS AGREE TO STRENGTHEN ACP-EU PARTNERSHIP

The agreement which was finalised in 2000, is reviewed every five years. The 2010 amendments seek to improve EU policy coherence for development, the promotion of domestic resource mobilisation, and the role of non-state actors in cooperation.

Cooperation and political dialogue is also enhanced to address the Millennium Development Goals, climate change, food security, state fragility, HIV/AIDs, organised crime and aid for trade. The revision further contains enhanced regional integration provisions and makes the African Union a partner to the agreement.

The parties also adopted joint statements on the Millennium Development Goals and on climate change which should strengthen their position in the upcoming international negotiations on these issues.

The ACP Council adopted unilateral declarations asking the EU to revisit its position on contentious issues in the Economic Partnership Agreement negotiations and on trade arrangements in bananas, sugar and cotton.

The Hon. Deputy Minister of Finance and Economic Planning Dr. Richard Konteh signed on behalf of Republic of Sierra Leone.

Other members of the Sierra Leone delegation include Mr. Ibrahim Soriba Kanu – Director, National Authorizing Office, Ambassador Umaru B. Wurie – Development Secretary, Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning and Mr. Alan E. George – First Secretary, Embassy of Sierra Leone Brussels, Belgium.

Source:

http://www.sierraexpressmedia.com/archives/10667

EU SETS NOVEMBER DEADLINE FOR NEW TRADE PACT

EU set a November deadline to conclude negotiations with East africa on EPA after the failure of the recent negotiations session held in Tanzania (Ed.)

By ALLAN ODHIAMBO

Kenya has been pushed into a tight spot after Europe set a November deadline to conclude long running negotiations with East Africa over the signing of new trade and economic partnership agreements.

The new deadline followed an unsuccessful round of talks in Dar es Salaam this week[1] aimed at unlocking a stalemate on the signing of a framework on the Economic Partnership Agreement (FEPA).

“We didn’t agree and both sides agreed to maintain the status quo as we work towards beating the new November deadline,” David Nalo, the permanent secretary at the East African Community (EAC) Affairs ministry said.

“It was agreed that signing a framework on the EPA would be an illegality at this stage because the original deadline of July 2009 had lapsed. All negotiations would now be focused on having a comprehensive EPA by November,”

Among the sticking issues ahead of the Dar es Salaam talks had been a demand by EAC states for an enhanced development budget to compensate them for revenue losses expected to result from removal of tariffs on EU imports.

The EC has argued that it already disburses a lot of budgetary allocation in development support to the region and will not make additional commitment.

Analysts said the new November deadline now leaves Kenya in a precarious position because its stands to be the biggest loser should the EAC fail to sign EPAs with Europe.

Due of its position as a non-member of the Highly Indebted Poor Country (HIPC), failing to sign the EPAs would force Kenya to trade with the EU on the less generous General System of Preferences (GSP) platform.

That means the country’s exports that currently enter the European market on zero tariffs will start attracting duty of between 8.5 per cent and 15.7 per cent.

The Trade ministry estimates that loss of tariff preferences with the shift to GSP would cost Kenya investments worth $700 million and thousands of jobs in the horticulture sector.

Tanzania, Uganda, Rwanda and Burundi on the other hand have little to worry about because they are currently categorized as members of the HIPC club and have the option of trading with Europe under the concessionary Everything-But-Arms (EBA) clause of the WTO rules.

Unfortunately for Kenya, the provisions of the EAC custom union management Act require that all the five EAC countries jointly discuss trade terms with external parties.

“It is quiet frustrating for us because of the obvious losses that we face. We must keep pushing for a deal because it is for our own good,” a senior official at the Trade ministry told Business Daily.

The deadlock at the Dar es Salaam talks was however largely expected following a build up of discontent within the East African political class and civil society amid claims that the region was likely to lose out should it accept the deal as currently proposed by Europe.

Signs that the three day talks would hit the rocks came through on Tuesday when Mr Eric van der Linden, the head of the EU delegation in Kenya, said that the possibility of landing a new deal remained unlikely and cited “negative opinion” from the political class.

Last week, EALA urged EAC member states not to sign the EPAs until all outstanding issues are resolved.

Top on the list is investment and government procurement as well as the terms of trade that EU is offering but East Africans sees as tilted in favor of Europe.

Source:

http://www.businessdailyafrica.com/Company%20Industry/EU%20sets%20November%20deadline%20for%20new%20trade%20pact/-/539550/936216/-/item/0/-/1599tnj/-/index.html

[1] The summit was concluded on 9th June (Ed.)

WEST AFRICA AND THE MITIGATION OF EPAs EFFECTS

The 64th Ordinary Session of the ECOWAS Council of Ministers, held in Abuja from 31st May to 2nd June 2010 in Abuja (Nigeria) has adopted the West African Common Industrial Policy (WACIP) and called on the ECOWAS Commission to take all necessary steps to ensure its full and prompt implementation.

WACIP is expected to diversify and broaden the region’s industrial production by supporting the creation of new industrial production capacities and the development of the already existing.

The Council also endorsed the recommendation issued by Ministerial Monitoring Committee (MMC) on the negotiation of the Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) in Bamako, Mali, early May 2010.

In Bamako ministers re-launched the perspective of balanced agreements supported by an EU-funded EPA Development Programme (EPADP) to enable the region to cope with the adjustment costs of the agreements and to maximize the benefits.

The EPADP, which consists of five strategic axes, calls for 9.54bn Euros to be provided over an initial period of five years; with two thirds earmarked for trade-related infrastructure, such as rehabilitation of energy, road and telecommunications networks

On the 10th of May, the EU ministers of development outlined their expected support to the EPADP/PAPED which is far from the amount requested by West Africa’s countries. As regards, EU estimated to make available for PAPED-related activities, from all of its financing instruments, 6.5bn Euros over the next five years.

Financial support to EPADP and the modalities for liberalising the West African market under the EPA are among the contentious issues that have slowed down the negotiations that were launched in August 2005.

Another important aspect of CCM report, endorsed by ECOWAS Council of Ministers, was represented by the integration of the region’s private sector into the negotiating process since it will be directly affected by the regional Common External Tariff (CET) that will accompany the agreement.

For more information

For more information on ECOWAS

TOWARDS FULL EPA IN SOUTHERN AFRICA

On 25th and 26th May 2010 EU and Southern African Development Community (SADC) EPA Group negotiators met in Brussels at technical and senior officials' level to discuss the way ahead in Economic Partnership Agreement's talks. They addressed outstanding issues such as the signing of the interim EPA for countries still pending and the modalities to establish comprehensive regional EPA negotiations. The compromise reached between the EU and SADC EPA negotiators in Swakopmund (Namibia) in March 2009 was addressed with the perspective to include it in the final EPA deal. The consistency and alignment between the interim EPA and the EU-South Africa Trade and Development Co-operation Agreement (TDCA) were also discussed. Further technical negotiations will take place in Brussels in July, and a Senior Officials' meeting is scheduled to take place in September in the SADC EPA Group region.

Up today, an interim EPA has been signed by Botswana, Lesotho, Swaziland and Mozambique in June 2009, with Namibia still pending.

As regards Namibia, the Country's trade minister Hage Geingob, who called on EU “to abandon bully tactics”, has recently pointed out the negative effects EPAs would cause, including the disintegration of the Southern African Customs Union (SAU) and the weakening of national development strategies including all the measures adopted in order to protect and stimulate domestic production.

Moreover, he stressed that Namibia would also be unable to stimulate the growth of its domestic industrial and agricultural sectors without the pressures of outside competition and would abandon all the achievements obtained in food security and rural development by cancelling all taxes and restrictions to import.

Critics to EPA negotiations are still arising also in Countries where interim agreements have already been signed. As reported by the Swaziland Observer, President of the Federation of Swaziland Employers and Chamber of Commerce (FSE & CC), Ambrose Dlamini, declared that there were inadequate consultations ahead of the signing. The Country realised afterwards that the survival of some industries was threatened, he said. According to this, he claimed for a strengthened involvement even into SADC integration processes.

Partnership for Change has supported Namibia’s Civil Society, within the framework of an initiative launched by the Stop EPAs Campaign, expressing concern over the undue pressure on the government of Namibia to sign the interim EPA while negotiations on the “SADC” EPA are still ongoing and contentious issues still remain outstanding.

For more information:

http://www.acp-eu-trade.org/library/files/EPA%20News_EN_010610_EC_EU-SADC%20Negotiation.pdf

http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=51565

http://www.newera.com.na/article.php?articleid=11051

http://ec.europa.eu/trade/wider-agenda/development/economic-partnerships/negotiations/#_sad

PROMISES AND COMMITMENTS FROM EU-LAC SUMMIT

Leaders reached an agreement on the creation of a joint investment agency and a foundation – the EU-LAC Foundation - to promote social development within the Caribbean and Latin America and committed to set up a new financial facility to support investment projects in the region and to re-open talks with the Mercosur trading bloc – Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay and Paraguay – which were suspended in 2004, due to disagreement over tariffs and subsidies paid to European farmers.

Commitments on strengthening regional integration, gender equality and mainstreaming; cultural diversity; fight against illicit drugs and the provision of increased funding for several projects in the area of research and development, science, innovation and technology, were also made during the summit.

As regards commercial relations and EPAs, CARIFORUM – EU Council summit was held in the margins of the Summit. “The Heads of State and Government welcomed the progress achieved to date in the CARICOM integration process and other ongoing sub-regional integration and cooperation processes, and they reaffirmed their commitment to increase progress and co-operation on this issue. They exchanged views on ongoing priorities including the establishment of a Caribbean Infrastructure Trust Fund, advancing EPA implementation and other ways to address the current trade related, economic and social challenges facing the Caribbean region, as well as opportunities for CARIFORUM-EU cooperation on the use of Innovation and Technology, including in the pursuit of Food Security in the Caribbean region” the joint final declaration stated.

This is in part the answer addressed to CARIFORUM leaders who called on the European Union to review and honour their commitment to the provisions of the Cotonou and Economic Partnership Agreements. In reaffirming these obligations, St Vincent Prime Minister Ralph Gonsalves reminded the EU the importance of ensuring that their other bilateral trade agreements were not pursued at the expense of the Caribbean region; that they facilitated the effectiveness of accompanying and support measures intended to provide relief to the Caribbean region and that they urgently undertook an assessment of the impact of trade liberalisation with Latin America on CARIFORUM countries, as reported by the Caribbean press.

For more information:

http://www.caribbean360.com/index.php/news/27028.html

http://www.caribbeannetnews.com/news-23213--39-39--.html

http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/er/114479.pdf

http://ec.europa.eu/external_relations/lac/index_en.htm

EAC, EU LOCKED IN EPA NEGOTIATIONS

The third negotiations session between the East African Community (EAC) partner states and the European Commission (EC) on the Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) ended on Wednesday[1] in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania to consider outstanding issues in the Framework Agreement.

The EAC delegation was led by Dr. Mary Nagu, Tanzania’s Minister of Industry, Trade and Marketing, while the Commissioner of Trade at the EU, Mr. Karel De Gucht, led the EC delegation.

Tanzania’s Minister for Industry, Trade and Marketing, Dr. Mary Michael Nagu, told participants attending a one-day joint EAC-EU-EPA workshop that the East African Community (EAC) partner states and the European Union (EU) initialled a Framework Economic Partnership Agreement (FEPA) on 27 November, 2007 in Kampala, Uganda and the parties undertook to continue the negotiations of the (FEPA) with a view to concluding a comprehensive EPA.

She said the Framework Agreement comprises market access on trade in goods, development cooperation issues and fisheries. In the initialled FEPA, the EAC offered to liberalize 82.6% of its trade with the EU, and retained an exclusion list accounting to 17.4% of the trade with the EU. On its part the EU has offered quota free duty and free market access with exception of ammunition; and transitional arrangement for sugar and rice. However, the main challenge in accessing the EU market has continued to be the stringent rules of origin.

As the EAC region inches closer to the finalisation of the FEPA, it was proper to conduct the workshop to provide an opportunity to disseminate and share critical information on EPA with stakeholders.

The Cotonou Agreement from which EPA bears allegiance sets out clearly that the EPA process was supposed to be “all-inclusive”. The government, members of parliament, the private sector, academia, CSOs, NGOs, the media and the public at large need to be effectively involved. It is on the basis of this understanding that the workshop had been organised to promote awareness and creating ownership of the EPA process to wider stakeholders’ forum, the organizers say.

Development co-operation is an integral part of the EPA to ensure that the EAC partner states are able to adjust to the new challenges and to maximize the benefits from the opportunities offered by the Agreement, noted Dr. Nagu.

It is in this spirit that both parties affirmed their recognition of development needs of the EAC region and their commitment to ensure that EPA is an addition to development that will promote and consolidate regional integration and fast track the integration of the EAC into the global economy. If this commitment is fulfilled, it will enable

EAC countries to address the development needs associated with the EPA and promote the sustainable growth and eventually reduce poverty, the minister observed. It is imperative that these dimensions were reflected in both FEPA and the full EPA.

The minister noted that the outstanding issues were economic and development cooperation, export taxes, and the Most Favoured Nation Treatment (MFN) clauses. Economic development issues were pertinent in addressing supply side constraints which had hampered EAC economies from benefiting from the market opportunities provided by predecessor arrangements of the Lome Conventions and EBA. Export taxes and Most Favoured Nation Treatment (MFN) clauses limit policy space to EAC partner states to take remedial measures for their economic benefits, asserted the minister.

Source:

http://www.apanews.net/apa.php?page=show_article_eng&id_article=125995

[1] Wednesday, 9th June 2010 (Ed.)

WHY POOREST AFRICAN COUNTRIES SHOULD NOT SIGN THE EPAS

GENEVA, Apr 9, 2010 (IPS) - It is a "million dollar question" why African least developed countries (LDCs) would enter into economic partnership agreements (EPAs) with the EU as what remains of especially their agricultural markets will be overrun with subsidised European produce.
Dr El Hadji Diouf made this statement in the second part of IPS’s interview with him on whether the EPA negotiations between West Africa and the EU should be suspended, as proposed by Ablassé Ouedraogo, former minister of foreign affairs of Burkina Faso and former deputy director of the World Trade Organisation (WTO).

Diouf is the manager for the EPAs and regionalism programme at the Geneva-based International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD). ICTSD is a nongovernmental organisation (NGO) seeking to empower stakeholders in trade policy and influence the international trade system to advance sustainable development.

Q: When will the EPAs enter into force?

A: The implementation period is one of the points of dispute. The EU wants to give Africa a 15 years deadline to implement accompanying measures and adapt to trade liberalisation. The WTO foresees 10 years but studies show that all regional agreements go beyond this date.
The bilateral free-trade agreement between the U.S. and Morocco had an implementation period of 24 years. On this basis, African countries want a 25 year deadline. But the EU stands firm on the 15 years, so the problem is not solved.

Q: What are these "accompanying measures"?

A: They are key to sustainable development. West Africa already has the EPA programme for development (known by its French acronym PAPED). Governments maintain that, since trade liberalisation entails adjustment costs, the continuation of PAPED is a pre-condition for the signature of any EPA.

But the EU proposes 500 million euros and West Africa asks for nine billion. For the region, if there is no PAPED, there are no EPAs.

It’s understandable to link aid and conditionalities when the relationship is unilateral. This is why the EU has invoked a non-execution clause in the past to suspend its cooperation in case of democratic troubles in the beneficiary country or region.

But when a contract foresees obligations for both parties, it is very difficult to implement extra trade conditionalities. The EU is still advocating for a non-execution clause in the EPAs but that is unacceptable to West African countries.

Q: Ablassé Ouedraogo also says that Africa needs to be given enough time.
A: Dec 31, 2007 was the deadline given by the WTO and it has been missed, except for a couple of interim EPAs. Yet, the timing of negotiations is very important. There can firstly be a minimal agreement on goods but Africa needs more time for services, intellectual property, government procurement, competition policy and investment.

These issues were successfully opposed by developing countries at the WTO but Africa could subsequently not resist the EU and they are on the agenda of the EPAs in a "rendezvous" clause. Obviously, the EU wants to go very fast but nothing obliges Africa to conclude an agreement by a given time.

From one year to the other, Africans make progress on different issues. One more article or one more conference can change a position. Why hurry up to sign an agreement that is going to commit the lives of future generations?

However, these deadlines don’t mean anything for the LDCs since they already have duty-free and quota-free market access to the EU with the "Everything but Arms" (preferential trade scheme).

Q: So what interest do LDCs have in signing the EPAs?

A: This is the million dollar question I don’t have any answer to. LDCs don’t have any interest in signing the EPAs. Worse, these agreements jeopardise regional integration.
If Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana (two of the three non-LDCs in West Africa) open up their markets to European products, these will go to other countries too because of the regional free-trade agreement.
Currently, the interim EPAs with Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana are in force but not implemented because of a "gentleman’s agreement" not to jeopardise regional integration.
Some LDCs, like Burundi and Rwanda, have initialled interim EPAs, with the promise that less strict rules of origins would be applied to them. But promises were not kept and these countries will not get any additional benefit.

If there are no duties on industrial goods, consumers can get cheaper products and may be better off. But pan-Africanists like me believe that a country cannot develop by opening up its markets completely.
The example of tomatoes and onions shows that as soon as imported products start coming in, small and medium enterprises are squeezed out of business because, in addition to not paying duties, Europe keeps subsidising its agriculture.

African countries must decide what they want. I prefer minimal protection that will allow them to have performing industries in the coming years.

(END)

Source: http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=50977

EPAS TO AFFECT TRADE AMONG ACP NATIONS

2010-05-27 Zinyama, Fridah (The Post Online, Lusaka)

The EPAs are ideally expected to promote regional integration due to expanded market coverage for both parties.
Zambia is currently negotiating an EPA under the Eastern and Southern Africa (ESA) group of countries. Among all six negotiating groups, only the Caribbean Forum had concluded a full or comprehensive EPA covering trade in goods and services, as well as a host of other trade-related areas such as competition policy and intellectual property, by 2008.

Kamayoyo, who gave his personal views on the EPAs, said the ability of the manufacturing industry to grow shall also be threatened.
EPAs are no longer a free trade arrangement because individual countries are forging ahead to sign the EPAs contrary to their regional visions of customs union agenda, he said. By so doing, the agreement would result not in a free trade pact but rather a bilateral trade agreement based on a single state and not a territorial customs union.
“ACP countries and in particular African countries must hasten regional integration processes to build and consolidate supply side capabilities before opening up to the EU,” he said.

Kamayoyo said that if the EPAs were to be supportive of development and regional integration in Africa, this would require extensive technical and financial support from the EU and other cooperating partners.
“As for the EU, they have to ensure that both EDF [European Development Fund] and EPAs development envelopes are timely disbursed and properly utilised,” he said. “Therefore some transitional protection (safeguards) for local producers should be negotiated, for longer transitional periods (30 years) beyond current proposals,” he added.
Kamayoyo said the EU should face the reality and appreciate the fact that the EPAs are not going to create a fair and enabling environment capable of buttressing flying regional integration for most ACP countries’ regional economic communities for as long as they continue to offer subsidies to their industries.

Source:

http://www.tralac.org/cgibin/giga.cgi?cmd=cause_dir_news_item&cause_id=1694&news_id=87584&cat_id=1211

MAKING TRADE PREFERENCE WORK FOR THE POOR

The US-based Center for Global Development has published a brief based on the final report of its Global Trade Preference Reform Working Group on the functioning of preferential trade arrangements. The brief highlights a number of ways in which existing preferential schemes could be improved. It notes that existing schemes ‘often fall short of their intended goals’, largely because they ‘exclude commodities that poor countries can produce competitively, such as agricultural products and clothing.’ It argues that ‘extending comprehensive, usable and predictable quota-free market access to all least developed countries could provide a critical boost to the world’s poorest people with only trivial effects on preference-giving countries.’ Five recommendations are made. These are:

· to immediately expand coverage to all exports from all least developed countries;

· to immediately relax restrictive rules or origin, by harmonising these rules across preferential schemes and making such rules more flexible via the use of ‘extended cumulation, which allows exporters to incorporate inputs from a broad group of countries, as long as the inputs are domestically transformed into a substantially new product’.

· to immediately make trade preference programmes permanent and predictable;

· to promote greater cooperation between countries giving and receiving preferences, in order to stimulate greater use of the trade preferences granted;

· to encourage advanced developing countries to implement trade preference programmes that adopt the foregoing principles (de facto building on recent initiatives by Brazil, China, India and Turkey).

In addition, an ODI policy briefing paper on ‘trading out of crises and reducing vulnerability’ has called on the EU to update its preference regime to include the adoption of innovative solutions to the challenge of preference erosion. This, it is argued, should include measures to enhance the value of the remaining preferences, including through the liberalisation of rules of origin and the extension of preferences in trade in services.

From:

http://agritrade.cta.int/en/Key-topics/EU-trade-negotiations-of-relevance-to-ACP-countries/News/Making-trade-preference-work-for-the-poor

CIVIL SOCIETY HEARINGS TOWARDS THE SUMMIT ON MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS

United Nations Headquarters, New York 14-15 June 2010

In order to provide input to the preparatory process for the ‘MDG summit’ (High-level Plenary Meeting) on 20-22 September 2010 , the UN General Assembly, in resolution A/RES/64/184 has asked the President of its 64th session, H.E. Dr. Ali Abdussalam Treki, to convene ‘Informal Interactive Hearing Hearings of the General Assembly with Non-governmental organizations, Civil society organizations and the Private sector’. The Hearings took place from 14-15 June 2010 at UN Headquarters in New York.

The Hearings were attended by representatives of non-governmental organizations in consultative status with the Economic and Social Council, civil society organizations and the private sector, Member States and observers. In addition to 46 official speakers in the meeting, 519 individuals representing 335 non-governmental, civil society and private sector organizations observed the Hearings. Of these, well over half were women.

The themes for the Hearings were based on the comprehensive report of the Secretary-General of 16 March 2010.Accordingly, four interactive sessions were held on: “Building a better tomorrow: local actions, national strategies and global structures”; “Equal and inclusive partnerships: Accountability in the fight against poverty”; “Sustaining development and withstanding crises”; “From voice to policy: 1660 days left”. More information on the themes and the list of speakers for the event can be found here.

To assist him in preparing the meeting, the GA President formed a ‘Task Force’ of representatives of civil society and the private sector to advise him on the format and participation at the Hearings. Membership of the Task Force can be viewed here.

Following an open online application process, over 760 speaking nominations were received for only 52 available speaking roles. A second online process was open for registration to attend the meeting as an observer from 6 – 23 May.

Hearings Overview

On Monday morning, 14 June 2010, the hearings were opened at a plenary meeting of the General Assembly by the President of the Assembly. His opening statement was followed by a video message from the Secretary-General.

Participants emphasized that the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) have proven to be a useful mobilization tool and an often unifying force in development. Many speakers reaffirmed the message of the Secretary-General in his report for the HLPM that the MDGs rest upon the Millennium Declaration and are an expression of basic human rights.

However, in order to fully realize and sustain the human rights of all people, the MDGs must be better rooted in a rights-based approach that emphasizes non-discrimination, participation and accountability mechanisms. In particular, the audience was reminded that over half the world’s population is composed of women; yet realizing gender equality remains one of the most difficult goals almost everywhere, with cross-cutting implications.

To ensure fulfillment of these rights, accountability must be strengthened and supported by frameworks that reinforce the mutual responsibility of developed and developing countries to meet the MDGs by 2015. Ultimately, through these frameworks, Member States, individually and collectively, must be accountable to their citizens and support the further empowerment of people and communities in their quest for development.

For many speakers, the onset of the multiple global food, financial, economic and climate crises only reinforced concerns expressed by civil society for many years that the prevailing economic development model of recent decades is unsustainable. Many participants echoed the Secretary-General’s call for strengthened national ownership of policies to pursue more inclusive, equitable and environmentally sustainable development paths. This implied greater policy space to mobilize domestic resources and align forward-looking macroeconomic and sectoral policies with development goals – currently often still restricted by inappropriate external policy conditionalities, trade rules and the constraints imposed by international financial markets. This pointed to the need for a major breakthrough at the HLPM on the “global partnership for development” under Goal 8, and requiring major reforms in international economic and development cooperation.

While non-compliance of developed countries with their commitments under Goal 8 was seen as a major obstacle, another was uneven domestic distribution of resources. It was noted that in recent years, many developing countries experienced high levels of economic growth, but poverty reduction and job creation lagged behind – so-called “jobless growth.” National ownership implies equally better using existing policy space to make genuine progress and breaking from what some described as a culture of dependency. To read more