Daily report for 30 August 1994

2nd Session of the 1995 WSSD Preparatory Committee



PARAGRAPH 6 (globalization): Indonesia suggestedincorporating actions into this paragraph. The G-77 called forreference to African countries and LDCs in meeting the challenge ofglobalization.

PARAGRAPH 7 (technology): Brazil and the EU proposedlanguage on the natural environment. Morocco and the EU emphasizedaccess to training.

PARAGRAPH 8 (migration): Canada called for increasedrecognition of human rights as a way to reduce migration. The G-77,Croatia, Kuwait and others noted that socio-economic conditions indeveloping countries are not the only cause of migration. The EU,Morocco, Croatia and Switzerland called for recognition of theright to leave and to return to one's country.

PARAGRAPH 9 (problems requiring a global response):The G-77, the EU and the Holy See supported adding terrorism to thelist. Regarding the reference to trafficking in females andchildren, the G-77 recommended the term "women," and the EUpreferred "persons." The Holy See called for reference totrafficking in human body parts. Guatemala emphasized traffickingin armaments as well as drugs.

PARAGRAPH 10 (international cooperation): Canada andothers emphasized more goal-oriented language to provide a clearrationale for sustainable human development.

PARAGRAPH 11 (introduction): Ecuador and Uruguay called forthe elimination of trade barriers. Norway noted that not alleconomic policies are conducive to social development.

PARAGRAPH 12 (national policies): Canada called for theimplemention of the four human rights treaties.The G-77 called forpopular participation in policy implementation and for removal ofglobal trade inequities.

PARAGRAPH 13 (trade liberalization): Japan called fora reference to GATT and regional trade agreements and for removalof reference to the World Trade Organization (WTO). The EU proposedwording to reflect the role of the WTO and UNCTAD. The G-77 didn'tshare the EU's emphasis on UNCTAD and WTO.

PARAGRAPH 14 (international assistance): The G-77 deletedreference to assisting developing countries in reshaping policies.The EU emphasized continued development assistance.

PARAGRAPH 15 (external debt): The EU said debt relief isimportant for the poorest countries. The G-77 called for retaininga variety of solutions to debt problems. Japan called for debtreduction rather than cancellation.

PARAGRAPH 16 (structural adjustment): Poland called formacro-economic stability, in combination with mechanisms to aid thepoor. Sudan and Norway commented on the need to mitigate theadverse social implications of structural adjustment programmes.Norway also noted the importance of investment in human resources.

PARAGRAPH 17 (social dimensions of structuraladjustment): The G-77 underscored the poor's inability to enterthe market and the temporary nature of social safety nets.

PARAGRAPH 18 (situation in Africa): The G-77 objected to theEU's call for improved flows of official and private resourcesrather than increased flow of development assistance. Japan'sproposal to delete the reference to debt reduction was opposed.

PARAGRAPH 19 (development assistance): The EU and the USproposed a reference to the private sector as the primary source offinancial resources.

PARAGRAPH 20 (private investment): The EU, the G-77 andCanada agreed that social stability affects private investmentlevels. Tanzania recommended that governments provide adequate andefficient infrastructures.

PARAGRAPH 21 (introduction): The EU and Finland proposedrevised text to better convey the relationship between the Stateand social development.

PARAGRAPH 22 (social role of Government and diversity): TheEU and the G-77 called for governments to promote human rights.Sweden suggested reviving the original L.13 language on humansecurity. The G-77 proposed a reference to the adversesocio-economic effects of denying self-determination.

PARAGRAPH 23 (gender equality): The EU called for empoweringwomen to exercise their human rights. C“te d'Ivoire urgedgovernments to ratify the "Convention on all Forms ofDiscrimination Against Women." The US noted the burden of poverty,unemployment and violence on women.

PARAGRAPH 24 (education and communication): The EUemphasized the importance of a free press. India called forrecognition of state-controlled media in education.

PARAGRAPH 25 (limitations of market mechanisms): Mexicounderscored the need to balance unequal market forces.

PARAGRAPH 26 (right to freedom of association): The EUcalled for a broader reference to include "institutions, NGOs andall other forms of association."

PARAGRAPH 27 (military expenditures): The Holy See calledfor a reduction and redirection of military expenditures. Indiacalled for reference to national security requirements.

PARAGRAPH 28 (conditions for human security): Sweden calledfor democratic, accountable, transparent and participatoryinstitutions as pre-conditions to human security. The US noted theavailability of conflict resolution mechanisms.


PARAGRAPH 29 (global approach): Sweden referred to poverty inall countries and all forms. The G-77 called for the eradication ofpoverty. The EU suggested that poverty reduction mechanisms takeinto account the different causes of poverty.

PARAGRAPH 30 (responsibility for poverty elimination):Finland noted that efforts to reduce poverty are an investment inhuman capital.

PARAGRAPH 31 (national programmes): Brazil cautioned againstunrealistic targets and imprecise concepts. India recommendednational-level monitoring. Pakistan called for financial andinstitutional commitments. The Holy See noted the ambiguity oftargets in family planning. Finland suggested a call for universalaccess to basic social services.

PARAGRAPH 32 (necessity for economic growth anddevelopment): The EU stated that slow growth should not preventaddressing the causes and manifestations of poverty.

PARAGRAPH 33 (population growth): The EU noted the need forprecise figures. He also referred to the role of men.

PARAGRAPH 34 (poverty in low-income countries): The G-77stated that Africa should be addressed in a new paragraph.

PARAGRAPH 35 (various types of poverty): The US called forthe reversal of macro-economic and investment policies thatdiscriminate against rural areas.

PARAGRAPH 36 (women): The EU proposed language on violenceagainst women and the full participation of women and girls indecision-making. He also emphasized the role of women as producers,as carers of families and as managers of community resources. TheG-77 called for reference to the "feminization of poverty." Canadaproposed equal access to economic opportunities and work at a"living wage." The Holy See called for the elimination of femaleinfanticide and selective abortion.

PARAGRAPH 37 (children): The EU proposed a new openingsentence: "the single major cause of poverty is the misfortune ofbeing born into poverty."

PARAGRAPH 38 (youth): Mexico and Ecuador called for a newparagraph on indigenous groups. Uruguay proposed a more integratedapproach to youth programmes.

PARAGRAPH 39 (people in poverty): The EU encouraged theparticipation of poor people in solving their problems.

PARAGRAPH 40 (monitoring): Brazil expressed concernregarding the EU's reference to monitoring. India cautioned againstrelying on human development indicators to monitor the situation.

PARAGRAPH 42 (productive opportunities): Finland emphasizedthe rural poor's need for sustainable livelihoods.

PARAGRAPH 43 (actions to assist the rural poor): The G-77called on international financial agencies to provide resources tomeet credit needs. Tanzania urged against too much focus onagricultural livelihoods for the rural poor.

PARAGRAPH 44 (NGOs and land reform): The G-77 clarified thatonly those NGOs interested in the field of land reform shouldparticipate.

PARAGRAPH 45 (rural cooperatives): The EU and Pakistanproposed language to broaden the paragraph beyond ruralcooperatives. The G-77 emphasized that rural cooperatives typicallyoperate at the local level.

PARAGRAPH 46 (agriculture): The EU added language on thedevelopment of effective marketing systems for small farmers.

PARAGRAPH 47 (availability of credit): Proposals includedadding reference to: creation of self-sustaining financial networks(EU); private enterprises (Indonesia); fishery workers (Canada andEcuador); informal banking services (Guatemala); and thedevelopment of non-agricultural products in rural areas (Iran).

PARAGRAPH 48 (urban areas): Delegates disagreed on the useof the term "informal sector." The EU added reference tocooperatives and other organizations in the informal sector.Pakistan and Canada said education and training programmes areimportant for rural areas.

PARAGRAPH 49 (affordable housing): Many thought thisparagraph should be relocated. The EU added reference to homelesspeople. Canada noted rural housing is also a problem.

NGO STATEMENTS: The African Caucus noted the problemof social disintegration in Africa and called for the Programme ofAction to recognize this situation. The Rights of the ChildCaucus called for: more explicit interventions aimed atcommunities with large numbers of working children; greaterparticipation of children and youth; and specific resources andtimetables to meet the goal of universal education. The SouthAsian Caucus identified specific gaps: lack of protection forthe vulnerable under structural adjustment programmes; the conceptof people-centered development; and gender equity. The YouthCaucus stated that the draft Programme of Action lacks visionand called for delegates to recognize the potential of people.


The Working Group considered newly distributed texts on the Rulesof Procedure and the preparations for the Summit.

RULES OF PROCEDURE: Most amendments concern theparticipation of the European Community. The only outstanding itemis the number of vice presidents in Rule 6. Egypt has proposed twoadditional seats for Africa on the Bureau. China, supported byEgypt, India, Algeria and Tunisia, expressed concern with Rule 62(NGOs) and requested use of the language from Rule 65 of the Rulesof Procedure from the Cairo Conference.

PREPARATIONS FOR THE SUMMIT: The Secretariat's paperproposed that the Main Committee and a Plenary take place from 6-8March. On 9 March, special representatives of Heads of State orGovernment and executive heads of UN organizations and programmeswill present statements. On 10-11 March, the Heads of State orGovernment will deliver statements. The closing ceremony will takeplace on the morning of 12 March.

The UK, supported by Germany, Uruguay and Japan, proposed thathigh-level representatives deliver statements on 10-11 Marchalongside Heads of State or Government. Denmark proposed that on9-12 March 1995, the Summit will be addressed by speakers in thefollowing order: 1) executive heads of organizations and programmesof the UN system; 2) special representatives of Heads of State orGovernment; and 3) Heads of State or Government.


PrepCom Chair Juan Somava continued his consultations on theDeclaration in the corridors on Tuesday. Meanwhile, the Secretariatdistributed a paper on elements for a draft Declaration mentionedduring the debate last week. The list of common elements includes:greater international cooperation; strengthening the moral, ethicaland spiritual basis for social progress; the components andobjectives of social development; the priorities and resources forsocial progress and development in the coming decades; and supportfrom the UN system. It will be interesting to see how a "concise"Declaration with "specific commitments" will result from this listand Somava's consultations.


COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE: The Committee may resume itsparagraph-by-paragraph discussion of CRP.2 beginning with paragraph50. As a result of delegates' dissatisfaction with the presentprocedure, look for a possible announcement or discussion on a newstrategy. An evening session is more than likely.

OPEN-ENDED WORKING GROUP: The Working Group may meet thisafternoon to continue discussion on the organization of work forthe Summit. Discussion will likely focus on the Secretariat'sdocument distributed on Tuesday and Denmark's proposal.