A/49/PV.62 General Assembly

I should like to thank the Secretary-General for his well-considered report on “An Agenda for Development”, which contains a number of important and constructive proposals for our consideration. The Secretary-General has placed before us a document that reflects the lively discussions held during the World Hearings on Development and the consensus reached during the substantive session of the Economic and Social Council. My delegation hopes that this process to forge an agenda for development will result in a concrete programme of action acceptable to all Member States. Development is now known to be a complex process involving complex problems that cannot be solved through a piecemeal approach or only through institutional and policy change. It is a process that takes place when a number of elements or imperatives of development interlock. It requires an integrated approach that puts in place all the imperatives of development, taking into account the specificities of each country. These elements include: an international and national policy environment that is conducive to development; a supportive multilateral system, including an effective United Nations; a free and fair trading system; technology and financing; enhanced international cooperation; effective participation of the people; efficient national institutions and organizations; human resource capacity; efficient administrative systems; growth-oriented cultural and political processes; and a supportive natural environment. To generate the development process and maintain its momentum, all these component elements must interlock. It is imperative that the Agenda for Development should include action by all parties involved in order to bring these elements into play for the purpose of fostering the development process. Such an Agenda should have goals, objectives and targets derived by synthesizing the goals and commitments endorsed by past conferences and declarations. In some sectors, targets could be identified in quantitative terms and with a time-frame for their achievement. We agree with the Secretary-General that “development should be recognized as the foremost and most far-reaching task of our time” (A/49/665, para. 4) and that new approaches to development not only should generate growth but should also distribute its benefits equitably, be human-centred and provide job-led growth. In view of the increasing interdependence of nations and the globalization of economic activity, an approach that does not imply a North-South confrontation is needed to establish a new framework for international cooperation. In such a framework, the United Nations must play a major role in policy leadership and in operational activity. This premise necessarily means that the United Nations system should be strengthened to become more effective and coherent as an agent for inducing development and not merely as a monitor to trigger an alarm system to activate mechanisms for intervention. The Secretary-General has pointed out, quite rightly, that the United Nations cannot be a strong force for peace unless it is a strong force for development. The United Nations can become a strong force for development by being the agent of change in the sphere of development. It should be the highest forum in which to debate economic and social issues in an integrated manner, and should also be in a position to give effective policy guidance to the other multilateral bodies involved in development. In the view of my delegation, this can be done not by concentrating the decision-making process in smaller bodies, such as the proposed extended Bureau of the Economic and Social Council, or through centralizing decision-making and adding more layers of bureaucracy, but by removing the factors that constrain the United Nations role in development. In our view, two important factors that reduce the role of the United Nations in development are the absence of an effective institutional relationship between the Organization and other multilateral bodies and the inadequacy of financial resources to meet the emerging challenges. A more vibrant and mutually supportive relationship is needed between the United Nations, as the universal, transparent and democratic policy-making political body at the global level, and the other multilateral institutions involved in development, such as the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and the World Trade Organization. This relationship should enable the United Nations to give these bodies broad policy guidance for operational activities and to review the implementation of these policies periodically. Mechanisms for these bodies to provide information to the United Nations to facilitate policy-making at the global level in the economic and social sectors should be an essential element in this relationship. My delegation does not believe that adding more bureaucratic layers to the decision-making process or limiting the debate on development issues will improve the impact of the United Nations on the development process. On the contrary, such tendencies could result in misguided and ill-conceived attempts at development which would fail to meet the needs of developing countries. Informed debate will facilitate enlightened policy-making, correct prioritization of goals and induce customization of approach. To maintain the trust that the international community has placed in the United Nations, its democratic and universal character should be preserved. The Second and Third Committees have an important role to play in this regard. The importance of the United Nations as a force for development ultimately rests on the availability of resources at its command. The tendency now is to emphasize cost-efficiency measures as a solution to the financial crisis rather than to provide the new and additional resources necessary to meet the challenges faced by the Organization. Cost efficiency is important but not at the price of sapping the vitality of the Organization and perpetuating its financial crisis. An action programme is necessary to reach the agreed official-development-assistance target of 0.7 per cent of the gross national product within a specific time frame. The imperatives of development are a function of both international and national systems. At the international level the means of implementing development programmes, namely finance and technology, must be addressed adequately. We support fully the Secretary-General’s proposal for an international conference on financing to discuss ways and means of mobilizing the urgently needed resources for development. If they do not address the problems of external debt, trade restrictions and commodity prices, international programmes of action will be confined to painstakingly negotiated documents but the case of development will be lost. An Agenda for Development must contain focused action to address these issues within an appropriate time frame, in particular the external-debt problem of developing countries. “For most people and most countries, economic growth is the sine qua non of development. Economic growth is not an option; it is an imperative.” (A/49/665, para. 5) Regional goals for human development and economic growth should be identified in the Agenda for Development on the basis of the potential for development and a correct assessment of the base level of economic growth. We believe that there cannot be a homogenized approach to solving development issues because nation States are different in their problems, their perspectives, their cultures, their social and economic structures and their stages of development. While it is important to look at models which provide the different actors to give impulses for growth, a particular model cannot be prescribed for all countries. The dimensions of good governance, democracy and social mobilization are important. Their exact forms and mechanisms, however, have to be adapted by Member States to suit the specificities of each. In conclusion, my delegation reiterates the view that an Agenda for Development should include concrete proposals for action to be taken by all concerned to achieve identified objectives and specified targets within a given time frame. Such action should cover the imperatives to development, priority being given to the means of implementation of programmes, namely finance and technology. Only then will an Agenda for Development be meaningful and meet the needs and aspirations of people and contribute to their economic and social advancement.

At the outset, I wish to express my delegation’s appreciation to His Excellency Mr. Samuel Insanally, President of the General Assembly at its forty- Since the adoption of General Assembly resolution 47/181, the international community has been galvanized into refocusing its attention on the economic and social advancement of all peoples, one of the ultimate objectives of the United Nations. From the discussions held at the World Hearings on Development, the subsequent high- level segment of the Economic and Social Council and the general debate in the current session of the General Assembly, we have had a wealth of views and analysis on the question of development. Taking into account all these views, as well as comments from other sources, the Secretary-General has provided us with recommendations to make the United Nations system an effective instrument of development. My delegation wishes to make some observations on the three key objectives which the Secretary-General has addressed in his latest report. In the wake of the tremendous changes we have been witnessing in the world, the previous framework for international development has become inadequate. The need for a favourable international economic environment has become more urgent for development. Although each State is primarily responsible for its own development, this task has proved to be monumental in the face of an adverse international setting. This is even truer in the case of developing countries whose dependence on trade and foreign assistance continues to persist. If one adds to this situation the acute debt problem and other uncertainties in external macroeconomic forces, the prognosis for many developing countries becomes even more dismal. The Secretary-General has submitted various recommendations to strengthen and revitalize international development cooperation. My delegation particularly supports the recommendations for bringing development assistance closer to the agreed targets for an adequate and permanent reduction in the stock of debt for reforming countries in debt crisis and for equitable access for developing countries to expanding global opportunities in trade, technology, investment and information. My delegation believes that unless we can make headway in My delegation welcomes the Secretary-General’s recommendation that the holding of an international conference on the financing of development should be considered. Brazil’s proposal for a United Nations conference on development is also welcome, particularly because of its objective of synthesizing into a coherent whole all the problems and initiatives of the sectoral conferences that have been held and are yet to be held. My delegation hopes that these ideas will be further pursued in greater detail. The Charter of the United Nations pledges the economic and social advancement of all peoples, and the Organization is given a central role in achieving that aim. Despite this mandate and the various capacities of the United Nations in the economic and social fields and other relevant funds and programmes, the laudable ends of economic and social advancement for all peoples remain unfulfilled even after almost five decades. Its failure to deliver on one of its primary mandates notwithstanding, the United Nations remains the only Organization with a universal membership and the capacity to meet the daunting challenge of development. In addition, it is the sole body with the necessary institutional base to work for the cause of development. Because of its unique character and capability, it is imperative to enhance the role of the United Nations in order to create an effective multilateral development system. It is therefore heartening to note that the Secretary-General has recommended additional policy-level functions for the General Assembly. In this connection, the idea of having plenary meetings with higher representation to discuss issues of international cooperation for development is an interesting one. The Secretary-General has recognized that the revitalization of the Economic and Social Council is the key element in strengthening the United Nations as the centre of an effective international development system and has therefore recommended new functions to revitalize the primordial role of the Economic and Social Council. It may here be recalled that the founding fathers of the United Nations intended the role of formulating and coordinating global macroeconomic policy for the Economic and Social The enhanced role of the United Nations will be far from effective unless underpinned with increased links and cooperation with the Bretton Woods institutions. The Secretary-General has identified areas where these links and cooperation could be strengthened and has suggested channels and possible mechanisms to achieve these objectives. My delegation sincerely hopes that there will be increased and improved coordination between the United Nations and the international financial institutions in fields identified in the report of the Secretary-General. Nevertheless, we realize that many previous attempts to improve the relationship between the United Nations and these institutions met with obstacles because of the different principles and modus operandi of each. We are of the view that there should be more transparency on the part of the international financial institutions. My delegation also subscribes to the view that new bodies like the World Trade Organization should not be left outside the new framework for international cooperation. Ways and means of translating this idea into reality need to be explored. It is well known that the development activities of the United Nations are multidimensional. It is also accepted that since they were launched in the early years of the United Nations, these activities have rendered valuable service to the developing countries. However, lack of coherence resulting from the fact that funds and programmes have followed separate programmes and procedures tends to weaken the impact of the activities. Therefore, the Assembly adopted resolution 44/211 in 1989 and resolution 47/199 in 1992 to have coherence in the entire system of operational activities and to benefit effectively the Governments concerned. The decades-long cold war diverted our attention and resources from one of the principal objectives of the United Nations and left in its wake a widening gap between North and South. Without prejudice to the maintenance of international peace and security, we are of the view that both the Agenda for Peace and the Agenda for Development are priority tasks for the United Nations and deserve equal attention and equal resources. My delegation considers that, without a guaranteed resource base, even an impeccable agenda for development will be pointless. We cannot afford to repeat the mistakes that we have made in the past and pass up the renewed opportunity to complete the unfinished task of economic and social development. We are convinced that an international consensus has been generated with regard to this task. The report of the Secretary-General is an initial step in the right direction. Although it is short on specific action in certain areas of concern for many developing countries, it contains many positive and valuable recommendations. The General Assembly has adopted the Declaration on International Economic Cooperation, in particular the Revitalization of Economic Growth and Development of the Developing Countries; the International Development Strategy for the Fourth United Nations Decade; the New Agenda for the Development of Africa in the 1990s; and the Programme of Action for the Least Developed Countries for the 1990s. In addition, we have Agenda 21 along with other, related documents and the Cartagena Commitment. Earlier this year the International Conference on Population and Development adopted its historic Programme of Action. My delegation believes that the Agenda for Development and all these agreements will together serve as the basis for further discussions. In the view of my delegation, certain recommendations — for instance, those concerning debt and official development assistance — undoubtedly require immediate and urgent consideration; hence the need to prioritize the recommendations contained in the report of the Secretary-General. Bearing in mind the precedents set

I should like to take this opportunity to thank the Secretary-General for his important report on the Agenda for Development. This topic will probably determine the fate of the world: shall we descend deeper in a spiral of world disorder, wars, genocide and human suffering, or shall we shape a better future for all people? Many factors will contribute. Religious and tribal fanaticism, national psyches scarred by past traumas, totalitarian regimes, selfish interests, and more — all these may play a negative part in determining the future of human society in the next century. But a decisive, positive role can be played by economic, social, scientific and technological progress. Current trends give cause for concern. World population is expanding at a dramatic pace, especially in developing areas. Demographers expect that the world’s population — currently 5.7 billion — will soar to between 7.6 billion and 9.4 billion by the year 2025. Almost 95 per cent of this growth will take place in developing countries, where it is already difficult to meet the needs of the existing populations with the limited resources at hand. Disparities between different parts of the world continue to grow, disparities between North and South, between democratic countries and non-democratic countries, between more educated societies and less educated ones. Hunger, shortages and economic depression cause enormous human suffering. They are starving people of hope, while feeding conflicts and radicalism — religious, national, tribal and military. The price is paid, first and foremost, by the people in the afflicted countries, but these conditions also take a toll on the entire international community. The roots of the problem are already clear. Low levels of education prevent too many societies from realizing their full potential. Billions of dollars that could be spent on development are wasted on armies and weapons. The excessive nature of these expenditures becomes even more clear when we consider per capita spending. The historian Paul Kennedy described the probable outcome in his book, The Rise and Fall of the Most States still do not enjoy democratic systems and the benefits they bring. The standard of living in democratic societies is the highest in the world, because they produce pluralistic, open and enterprising economies. In recent years, some progress has been made towards greater democratization throughout the world, but most countries and peoples still do not enjoy democracy. Corruption and the abuse of excessive power by the few prevent an improvement in the human condition for the many. Throughout much of the world, infrastructure remains underdeveloped. This includes communications, transportation, energy, electricity and water. Finally, too many countries suffer from a lack of integration in the regional and global economies. Analysis of the roots of the problem points clearly to the necessary solutions: raise the level of education and professional training; reduce military expenditures by working to achieve peace and understanding; encourage democratization; open up economies to all forms of entrepreneurship; work for regional and international cooperation for integration in the global economy and for the elimination of all forms of boycotts. Leadership is crucial to achieving these goals. The principal responsibility will fall to individual States, rulers and public opinion leaders. This has been proved in the Middle East — the peace treaty between Egypt and Israel, the agreements between Israel and the PLO, the peace treaty with Jordan, the establishment of formal relations with Morocco and Tunisia and the establishment of a framework for multilateral cooperation — all these were brought about by the courage and wisdom of leaders. Although we still face hardships and obstacles, the direction is clear — peace, regional cooperation, economic and commercial development, integrated infrastructures and the exchange of knowledge and information. In this way, the societies of the Middle East will stop wasting resources on conflicts, and instead invest them in people. Their energies will be directed towards the creation of a better, more secure and more prosperous future. The main responsibility lies with the parties involved. But the international community also has an important role in assisting in the achievement of these goals. So it is in the Middle East, and so it is in other regions of the world. The democratic countries, in encouraging a gradual transition to participatory societies, are aware that this should be done without coercion through the influence of the mass media, intellectuals and business leaders. The world is undergoing painful changes. Some of these are producing deep concerns, but this should not be a cause for despair. There is a chance for advancement. There are countries and regions which prove that positive change is possible, that the future can hold more promise instead of less. The key is held by the people and their leaders, by the international community, by all of us.

Four years ago, a little over one year after the world was freed from the strictures and dangers of the cold war, the United Nations and the international community began a cycle of great global conferences and actions designed to shape a new world. The World Summit for Children, the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, the World Conference on Human Rights and the International Conference on Population and Development were held, and each achieved truly significant results. Two years ago “An Agenda for Peace” was published, and today we begin our debate on an agenda for development. Next year the cycle will conclude with the holding of the World Summit for Social Development and the Fourth World Conference on Women. The issues that have been and will be addressed by those means are simply the building blocks of a new world. They are of crucial concern to people all over the world. They are central to the health of the United Nations and to international cooperation. The main task we face is that of coherency and direction. It is clear that we have identified relevant global concerns and analysed them, largely accurately. In good measure, we have also listed priorities for action in ways which seem consistent with taking effective action. But the scope of the problems we face as an international community is simply daunting. For this reason, as well as While there is a great deal in the Secretary-General’s documents, in Australia’s view, central to the debate starting today is the Secretary-General’s assertion that “It is time for the United Nations to realize its original mandate in the social and economic fields, to make the comprehensive pursuit of development the centre of its action, and, in this new context, to assist Member States in their efforts to realize their diverse development goals.” (A/49/665, para. 10) If we do less than that we will have lost the opportunity afforded us by the end of 40 years of frozen politics and, perhaps even more importantly, we would turn our backs on the Charter and its promise to the peoples of the world. The questions we face can be put into three simple categories — what must we do, how should we act, and what resources can we marshall in support of our actions? On the first question — what must we do? — the list of concrete tasks is potentially very long. In addition, it is a well-known list and does not need to be recited in this statement. But the cycle of global conferences and recent debates in the General Assembly, the Economic and Social Council and other relevant forums have highlighted great areas of concern which must be addressed because of their impact upon whole populations. These include the need to take concerted action on world poverty, stabilize population growth, dramatically revise the situation of women and female children, ensure that sustainable development becomes embedded in the economic thinking of developed and developing countries alike, and address the special problems of Africa. Action to address these areas of concern should be accompanied by a serious focus on the scandalous and wasteful business of excessive expenditure on arms. There are also major issues of income distribution On the second question — how should we act? — Australia’s view is that we must, as the Secretary-General has pointed out, implement the Charter in full, not just selectively, and by such action reintegrate the United Nations. This will involve not only developing further the new consensus which is emerging amongst Member States about the key features and priorities of development, as already suggested in this statement, but also a deliberate decision to elevate development within the priorities of the United Nations itself. This would mean, as the Secretary-General has recommended, further reform in the work of the General Assembly. The agenda of the Assembly should be thoroughly revised to ensure that much greater attention is given to development issues and actions. This should have the flow-on effect of a review of the committee structure of the Assembly. We would support any proposal designed to achieve these reforms in time for the fiftieth anniversary of the United Nations. The Charter organ which is given unrivalled responsibility in the fields of human, economic and social development and which has had an unrivalled history of neglect is the Economic and Social Council. The Council has been undergoing reform, but this has been within yesterday’s parameters. It must be further reformed, and there is a clear-cut case for the Council’s meeting more frequently and possibly expanding its Bureau as a means by which it can receive enhanced political direction. A logical extension of such arrangements would be the establishment of a mechanism through which the Council and the Bretton Woods institutions and United Nations operational and development agencies would meet at a high level to ensure the elemental coherence and direction that should characterize the actions of the overall system and of its individual parts. Again, Australia would support any proposal designed to forge political consensus on such arrangements and would hope that such work could also be completed in time for the fiftieth anniversary. Any such new arrangements at the political level must be matched by bureaucratic or secretariat arrangements. Accordingly, immediate action to consult upon and bring about the political changes of the kind we have just described should also look at the changes in resource allocations within relevant secretariats that should accompany and support those political changes. An example of such a change, one which the Australian Minister for Foreign Affairs has proposed, is that the Another approach could be to ask the Administrator of the United Nations Development Programme to convene a high-level committee of the heads of the major relevant operating programmes, funds, agencies and departments to prepare for consideration by the General Assembly a proposal for a more coordinated organizational structure for those entities. The third question, that of resources, must be addressed afresh even though there are some glaringly obvious answers. In particular, new sources of financing and support to development activities must be found. New and innovative approaches to funding can be identified. This must be accompanied, however, by a more effective use of existing resources. That should be one of the outcomes of greater coherence. Specifically, components of the United Nations system should be able to work to a greater extent than in the past on the basis of their comparative advantage. There is also the private sector, the sector of the global economy which commands the overwhelmingly largest portion of resources. There are encouraging signs of increased private-sector cooperation with programmes and priorities established by Governments either individually or acting collectively in the United Nations. But much more of this is needed. As already mentioned, the central meaning of globality is that no sector can deal effectively with today’s and tomorrow’s problems acting alone. The comparative advantage of the United Nations is that it has an unequalled ability to bring about political consensus on what needs to be done. The comparative advantage of the private sector is its ability to allocate resources. A major challenge for the future will be to ensure that these two sectors, to borrow from the words of the Charter, harmonize their actions. The possibility of this being achieved will be the greater to the extent that the United Nations analyses contemporary problems accurately, designs programmes of action on those problems which are credible And this is possibly our greatest challenge — to change ourselves. As we hold this great debate on the Agenda for Development and then reach agreement on the steps that must be taken to implement it, together with the outcomes of the great global conferences, we will need to deal with each other in a fresh way. Yesterday’s divisions will defeat us. Australia is prepared to take part in this debate and the hard work which must follow it. It will do so with all possible energy and with an open mind. It hopes others will do the same.

Mr. President, I would like to begin by thanking you, and adding a word of appreciation, for the visionary views you expressed this morning. I am aware of your status in the national and political life of your country and the African community. Coming from India and having made my own humble contribution to national and political life for nearly half a century, I say with satisfaction that your views find an echo in our minds. This is particularly so because we have for decades been engaged in the task of the development of our nations and have achieved a creditable measure of success in raising the standard of living of our people. The post-cold war era should generate an overriding commitment to the development of those whose growth has been impeded by the ironies of history. While appreciating the Secretary-General’s initiative in this regard, I submit that the widely articulated need for an Agenda for Development arose from the perception and the reality that the emphasis and priority within the United Nations had shifted away from development. My delegation is therefore relieved to find it expressly stated in the recently released report of the Secretary-General on “Agenda for Development” that “development should be recognized as the foremost and most far-reaching task of our time.” (A/49/665, para. 4) Indeed, development has to be defined and pursued in its comprehensive, pristine and integral sense. It has to aim at the improvement of human well-being; at the removal of hunger, disease and ignorance; at the provision of social infrastructure and public services; and at productive employment for all. Its first objective must be to end poverty and satisfy the basic needs of all the It bears reiteration that international cooperation for development must be anchored on the Charter principle of the sovereign equality of all States, and must proceed on the premise that it is for each Member State to choose for itself the appropriate strategies for development and development cooperation. The role of the United Nations lies in promoting awareness, seeking to build consensus and catalysing action. In doing so, however, it must scrupulously respect the principle of consent, and avoid intrusiveness and conditionality. Flowing from this approach to development and development cooperation, I believe that the report still falls short of the expectations of developing countries regarding the message that should emanate from the United Nations. It does not make any concrete proposals in the areas of financing, technology, trade, official development assistance, debt and so on, which would take the current dialogue and agreements one step, or several steps, forward in the context of international cooperation. It is time now, therefore, for the international political process to take over and place the firm imprint of its political will and commitment on a far-reaching and visionary Agenda for Development. The substantive aspects of long-term development and international cooperation will be determined not so much by the structures and format of multilateral cooperation, but by the political will of Member States to generate development, in the interests of peace, social equity, stability and improvement of the human condition, and by States’ social environment. Before making our own concrete suggestions regarding the issues that should constitute the substantive aspects of discussions between Member States for furthering this process, I shall briefly comment on some of the suggestions and assumptions made in the Secretary-General’s report. I support the statement that development has to be driven by national priorities and through the involvement of all sectors of society, with special measures for marginalized groups. However, the analysis under the heading “National policies for development” refers only to The report also refers to five dimensions of development. It has to be recognized that development is a comprehensive and multifaceted process. Any classification into one, two or five dimensions may not capture the comprehensive nature of the process. In addition to the dimensions mentioned in the report, social development, human development, resource availability, access to technology and empowerment of the people are all among the dimensions of development. We should avoid such fragmentation of the concept of the development process, which might result in imbalances. We would also be concerned at suggestions of an across-the-board linkage at the operational level between peace-keeping, humanitarian assistance and development. The development arm of the United Nations has usually been free from controversies, and it may suffer if it is seen as being closely identified with the peace-keeping dimension of the United Nations. We would also be supportive of a coordinated functioning of United Nations agencies, funds and programmes, but the unique and distinctive capabilities of each have to be maintained. I am unable to understand the suggestion that Governments should ensure that social and environmental costs are accurately reflected in prices. On the one hand, these costs are difficult to measure and there would always be an element of arbitrariness involved in the measurement. And on the other hand, at a time when the market-oriented approach is being promoted, it is difficult to visualize how one can argue for distortions to be introduced through arbitrary and “shadow” pricing of ill- defined social and environmental costs. We support the recommendation that peace-keeping, humanitarian emergencies and the global environment should be funded from new and additional resources, and not at the expense of development assistance. We agree that, in some circumstances, military expenditure infringes on development, but it is also a fact of life that sometimes nations have to tighten their belt to defend their territorial security, which, in turn, ensures a stable framework for developmental activity. The report correctly states the need for effective follow-up to consensus decisions reached at conferences. There is a need to clearly identify the bottlenecks that have hindered the translation into reality of past commitments. This is especially critical in the area of flows of finance and technology. We would be supportive of the Economic and Social Council’s playing its due role in promoting awareness, generating consensus and giving policy guidance in the area of development cooperation. However, at a time when the trend is towards democratization and universalization of participation, it is the Economic and Social Council as a whole which must be entrusted with this task. Arbitrarily created expanded bureaux cannot command legitimacy or claim any representative character. We must recognize that neither the United Nations nor its institutions can function as boards of private companies geared towards greater efficiency or the profit motive. The real success of the United Nations lies in consensus-building, in political acceptability and in the political management of the processes. Universality, transparency and democratic decision-making are essential. We would also be wary of suggestions that potential humanitarian or economic crises would lend themselves to bureaucratic or technocratic predictions. We would not like to foster a new speculative market in trying to predict emerging crisis situations. The political dimensions of problems have to be handled in terms of sustained processes and not in a fire-fighting mode. We also support an enhanced role for the United Nations in multilateral development cooperation. For this purpose, focus has to shift from the question of governance to the question of funding of the operational activities for development. Radical measures are necessary for reducing in the debt and debt-servicing burden of developing countries. While we welcome the formulation and implementation of various debt-reduction schemes, there is still a pressing need for a concerted effort on the part of creditors to find an early and durable solution to the debt problems of all developing countries, while being sensitive to the specific problems and requirements of individual countries. Particular recognition should be given to those debtor countries which have honoured their commitments despite difficulties, and special measures should be adopted to alleviate their burden. Low-income countries and those tackling the problem of widespread poverty also need special attention. With the increased focus on the environment and social development, schemes such as debt-for-environment and debt-for-social-development swaps should be considered. The debt burden and the load of servicing these debts is proving so burdensome that this single factor retards development more than any other. These efforts should be supplemented by measures to accelerate the flow of private investment to developing countries and to ensure its wider distribution across regions and sectors. We also have to find ways, including through the International Monetary Fund (IMF), to tackle problems arising from the potential volatility of some private-capital flows. International safety nets should be Speaking at the recent Madrid Conference marking the fiftieth anniversary of the Bretton Woods institutions, the Finance Minister of India stated that the world community would gain by using the IMF as the principal forum for multilateral surveillance and coordination of national fiscal and monetary policies. Attempts at coordination through exclusive groupings of major industrialized countries have achieved only limited success, if any. Similarly, in the area of trade we would need a further look at the questions of the terms of trade for products of developing countries; market-access barriers; commodity prices and markets; avoidance of unilateral actions in violation of multilaterally agreed measures; continued and enhanced provision of preferential market access through non-reciprocal concessions, such as those of the generalized system of preferences; and so forth. We should also send a very clear message against overburdening the agenda of the World Trade Organization and against attempts to use environmental and social concerns for protectionist purposes. Regarding technology, the Agenda must devise measures for facilitating access by developing countries to new and high technologies of critical importance for an interdependent rather than a subsidiary pattern of development. The international community should work towards making these technologies, as well as environmentally friendly technologies, available on preferential and concessional terms to developing countries. Barriers to access to technology must be removed. To sum up, the intergovernmental process must now guide the Agenda for Development towards concrete measures of international cooperation targeted at the eradication of poverty and the improvement of human well- being in a people-centred political and social context — that context being autonomously evolved. It must be based on a greater recognition that long-term peace and security are predicated on development. Sustained and accelerated economic growth in developing countries would make for global ecological sustainability and should be central to development efforts at the national and international levels.

I have the honour to speak on behalf of the Nordic countries. A prominent person has said that the other name for peace is development. In other words, without development there would be no lasting peace. But the reverse is also true, that without peace there will be no development. The third necessary cornerstone of civilized society is democracy. All the parts of this triad are equally important and mutually reinforcing. The founders of the United Nations had a vision of peace, security and development. We should build upon this vision, making it relevant for today, thereby making true development possible. The role of the United Nations in development has to be strengthened. The foundation has been laid. In Agenda 21 sustainable development was established as a global objective. The Agenda for Peace focused on peace and security. The process is now continued with the Agenda for Development. In his first report the Secretary-General identified five dimensions of development: peace, the economy, environmental protection, social justice and democracy and human rights. The Nordic countries recognize these five dimensions as crucial to an evolutionary concept of development. External assistance, reform and restructuring of international cooperation alone are not sufficient for development to take place. Development is first and foremost a national responsibility. There is no substitute for sound national policy. However, development is also a common global responsibility. More and more we can see how nations are joined in a common fate. During recent years the financial resources of the United Nations for long-term development have decreased at an alarming rate, while increasing demands have been put on the Organization. This does not add up. The Agenda for Development therefore gives us an important platform for discussing priorities and a sensible division of labour in the international system. The world is now going through profound changes. New countries have been born. Democracy is gaining ground all over the world. We see more and more The Nordic countries are among the most active advocates of a reformed, revitalized and restructured United Nations. The reason is our deep conviction that the United Nations, this unique and indispensable Organization, has a vital role to play in the economic and social fields. The advantages of the United Nations as a universal meeting place, as well as its normative and operational roles, should be made clear. Step by step we have to strengthen the United Nations in order to enable it fully to play its intended role in the economic and social fields. We also have to make it more attractive as an agent for development. The reforms have to create a strong financial basis. They have to focus the tasks of the United Nations, and they have to improve the governance of the system. There is an obvious link between these three. The decrease of the relative share of the United Nations as a channel for development aid is a reflection of political choices made by Member States. These choices are shaped by such factors as national economic conditions, competing needs for international support in other areas and Governments’ assessments of the relative efficiency and effectiveness of the United Nations funds and programmes. As the Secretary-General points out in his report, more resources are needed. But voluntary contributions alone are not sufficient as a basis. The Nordic countries attach the greatest importance to an improved financing system which is stable, predictable and assured. We also urge other countries substantially to increase their contributions. The financing of the United Nations should be based upon the principle of burden-sharing. By concentrating United Nations activities on areas where the different organs, funds and programmes have their strengths, we can reverse the marginalization of the social and economic activities of the United Nations. The problem of land-mines as the cause of death and human suffering, especially for children, and as a hindrance to development, needs to be addressed urgently. The Secretary-General’s proposals in this context should be supported in deeds as well as in words. Indeed, as the representative of India said, more needs to be done to identify the peace dividend and transfer it to development assistance. We support the Secretary-General in his efforts to create a more integrated and coordinated United Nations response to country priorities, thereby strengthening the United Nations role as a competent and effective adviser in long-term development, assisting in capacity-building and in national priority setting. This process of specifying priorities as well as defining mandates and roles should be an important part of continued work on the Agenda. The needs at the country level must always serve as the basis. The Nordic countries share the view of the European Union and of other delegations that continued work on the Agenda should be carried out in a working group under the General Assembly. The work in this group should be run parallel to other reform activities — for example, the negotiations on a new financing system. Another aspect of the reforms is that international organizations have to find ways to reach their goals with increasing efficiency and effectiveness. An international organization should be selective in its work and focus on what it does best. We believe such an organization seeks partnership with other multilateral and bilateral organizations, as well as with non-governmental organizations and the private sector. It is result-oriented, with a clear link between normative and operational activities. It is flexible and has a willingness to respond rapidly to change. It is cost-effective in administrative and operational activities. And it is transparent in administrative and budgetary matters. The present series of summits and conferences is an expression of the international community’s understanding of and commitment to various important and mutually reinforcing aspects of development. Further, these conferences create an indispensable opportunity for the formation and strengthening of public opinion on these important issues. We now need to build a bridge from Rio, passing Vienna and Cairo, to Copenhagen, Beijing and Istanbul. The Agenda for Development might very well be that bridge. In all these conferences the well-being and security of the human being is put at the centre of development. The importance of socially oriented policies is emphasized. The crucial role of women in development is recognized. This is not something unique to the United Nations system. A broader view of development issues has also gained ground within the World Bank, as shown in its report, “Embracing the Future.” In the International Monetary Fund, social policy has become a complement to economic priorities. Building on this new human-centred perspective, the United Nations is in unique position to play a leading role. The social Summit in Copenhagen will be an opportunity to confirm this. In order to respond to the new challenges and to ensure an effective follow-up, it is necessary to bring the results of the conferences back into the United Nations system itself. In this context, the Nordic countries support the idea of developing a common framework for the follow-up of the major conferences. The role of the General Assembly should be enhanced and substantive discussion brought back to the Assembly. We therefore welcome the thinking in the Secretary- General’s report on the role and function of the General Assembly. The further strengthening of the role that the Economic and Social Council is meant to play in international development cooperation is equally important. One crucial function is to provide an opportunity for both In conclusion, international cooperation and commitments must be taken seriously. No matter what we decide at global conferences, if words are not translated into deeds, then we have failed. Security and solidarity are two sides of the same coin, and action begins at home. Real progress can only be measured by real change. The message is clear. National responsibility is vital for success. There has to be consistency between our international commitments and our domestic actions, and without respect for our common goals our efforts will be in vain. We in this Assembly come from different nations and cultures, and we adhere to different religions, but we have to make a joint effort to overcome differences and take on our common challenge. Mankind’s quest for peace, development and solidarity is timeless. In the thirteenth century the Persian poet Muslih-uh- Din Sa’di wrote: “All people are members of the same family They have a common origin in creation. If one limb is struck by pain all the others are gripped by anxiety. If the suffering of other people does not hurt you You do not deserve to be called human.”

It is my distinct pleasure to speak on agenda item 92, “Agenda for Development,” possibly our greatest challenge, not only at this session of the General Assembly, but for many years to come. I should like to express my delegation’s sincere appreciation to the Secretary-General for his specific recommendations, as set forth in his follow-up report (A/49/665) on the Agenda. We should also like to thank the President for his lucid introductory remarks on both the report of the Secretary-General and the note With the entire report now before us, albeit a belated second part, my delegation is of the opinion that the Secretary-General has to a large extent complied with the two General Assembly resolutions, 47/181 and 48/166. This second part of the report is indeed more focused on the core issues of development than the initial part, and I believe it represents a sincere effort to reflect the requests of Member States, not only in the relevant resolutions, but also during the high-level segment of the substantive session of the Economic and Social Council and in the views expressed at the World Hearings conducted by the President of the forty-eighth session of the General Assembly. Given the great importance we attach to the promotion of development and the acute need for revitalizing international cooperation to that end, my remarks at this stage will be of a preliminary nature only. With these two reports, the Member States of the United Nations once again have an opportunity fully to address this paramount initiative, an Agenda for Development. If we can be successful in this endeavour, we will have come a long way towards fulfilling the Charter of the United Nations and particularly, in the aftermath of the cold war, towards ensuring that the United Nations will be not only a strong force for peace, but also a strong force for development, the two ideals that represent the two great challenges of our time. To this end, I believe that the Agenda should not only seek to revitalize the United Nations for the promotion of development, but should also strive to ensure that the Organization is recognized as the authoritative forum for dealing with global socio-economic issues and development cooperation. The Agenda for Peace having been launched, the second great contemporary task facing the United Nations is, I strongly believe, that of promoting development. Landmark global changes, newly emerging opportunities and the need to further promote development, to eradicate poverty and hunger and to close the prosperity gap between developed and developing countries have made the elaboration of an Agenda for Development more compelling than ever. The Agenda therefore should not only be seen as a complement to the Agenda for Peace, but should also be viewed essentially on its own merits as the fulfilment of the United Nations Charter in the economic and social fields, Against this backdrop we can agree with the general thrust and thinking outlined in the introductory section of the report, in particular the proposition that development, which has many dimensions, should be recognized as the foremost and most far-reaching task of our time and that the emerging consensus on the priorities and dimensions of development should find expression in a new framework for international cooperation in order to contribute fully to the realization of our development goals. In this regard, there is no denying that sustained economic growth is not an option; it is an imperative and the mainspring of development. We also fully agree that, within this new framework, the United Nations must play a major role in both policy leadership and operations. Recognizing that development is the primary responsibility of each country concerned, my delegation fully concurs with the recommendation of the report that development is first and foremost driven by national priorities and is best pursued through the partnership between Governments and the private sector. At the same time, in today’s world of growing interdependence and rapid globalization, the external environment is decidedly important. In this context, it is pertinent to point out the dire need to continue to promote an external economic environment that is conducive to the achievement of sustained economic growth and sustainable development. To this end, we cannot but fully agree that equitable access to expanding global opportunities in trade, technology, investment and information must be provided, particularly for developing countries. Accordingly, we strongly consider that it is important, as recommended in the annex of the report, that the agenda should seek an adequate and permanent reduction in the stock of debt, as well as its cancellation for the least developed countries, particularly in Africa. My delegation wishes to emphasize in this connection that in pursuing these objectives, innovative measures are required. As already pointed out in the Secretary-General’s report on the debt situation as of mid- 1994, despite some progress, as demonstrated by recent debt indicators, there is still something basically lacking in current approaches. For this reason, I believe that the proposal emanating from the ministerial meeting of the non-aligned countries on debt and development, held last August in Jakarta, for a once-and-for-all arrangement to We are convinced that, while the agenda should be comprehensive, it should not be seen as a substitute for the numerous United Nations agreements and instruments already in place; rather, it should pave the way for their full implementation. The agenda should also, as pointed out in the report, forge a new framework for development cooperation between the developed and the developing countries in which common interests and mutual needs would provide the basic rationale for a new partnership to implement the goals already established at various United Nations conferences. Within this framework, we could consider, as recommended in paragraph 35 of the report, that the commitments to the goals and targets of past conferences be synthesized, costed, prioritized and placed in a reasonable time perspective for implementation. To this end, the fiftieth session of the General Assembly should focus on the need to forge such a framework for development cooperation. Furthermore, since the availability of resources to implement the outcomes of those conferences is of the utmost urgency, it is critically important that the initiative to convene an international conference on financing for development also should be given top priority for consideration by the Assembly. We also note that the Secretary-General has recommended that the General Assembly identify the critical issues for deliberation. However, to implement this recommendation, it is essential that the Secretary-General provide assistance, as called for in General Assembly resolution 47/181. The reference in the report to the various issues of importance for achieving sustained economic growth and sustainable development, such as international trade, technology, investment, information, the empowerment of women, poverty eradication, food security, full employment and the special initiative to support African development, without any clear-cut proposal for action does not adequately meet these requirements. In that light, we believe that effective deliberations on such substantive themes could be served only through a constructive dialogue and partnership, as called for in General Assembly resolution 48/165 on the renewal of the As to the recommendations for an effective multilateral development system, we fully concur that the United Nations has a unique role in promoting development — including in policy leadership and operations — given its universality, its unparalleled network and its capacity to build consensus on various issues critical to development. Therefore, my delegation concurs with the report on the need to enhance the role of the General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council, as well as to strengthen the links between the Organization and the Bretton Woods institutions on the one hand and the sectoral and technical agencies on the other. We also agree that such cooperation between the United Nations and the Bretton Woods institutions should be pursued through joint initiatives on, inter alia, poverty- reduction strategies, capacity-building and improved public sector management. In this context, there is also a need to develop appropriate working relationships with such new organizations as the World Trade Organization so as to enable the United Nations to ensure that its approach to development is fully comprehensive. We believe that, before considering the establishment of a council of international development advisers to support the work of the General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council in providing effective leadership in development, as proposed in paragraph 48 of the report, further clarification and thorough study would first be required. As to the proposal for an expanded bureau of the Council, meeting inter-sessionally, we are of the view that we should not promote any idea or proposal that might impart executive powers to such a bureau, as we consider that it would serve only to further curtail broad-based participation in the decision-making process in the already limited membership of the Council. For these reasons, we would rather have the Assembly consider the feasibility of the Council bureau’s conducting inter-sessional consultations to facilitate the work of the Council and garner broader input, instead of advancing Since we believe that the reports on an agenda for development warrant thorough and ongoing study and analysis, we support the proposal to create an open-ended ad-hoc working group under the purview of the General Assembly. Among its functions would be to thoroughly analyse the report and to reach consensus on specified relevant actions. In conclusion, we hope and trust that the agenda for development will succeed in arresting the erosion of the United Nations role as well as help avert its being eclipsed by other institutions, especially with regard to the critical core issues of development, and that the Organization will resume its rightful role as defined in its Charter.

It is an honour for me to be addressing you, Sir, and this Assembly of representatives from all parts of our world and, on behalf of my country and my Government, to refer to the subject of development from an alternative perspective. The President of the General Assembly has affirmed that “Many profound changes in the world call for rethinking of development” (A/49/320, para. 14) and we are gathered here in the broadest forum in our world to seek possible grounds for agreement through a dialogue among peoples of different cultures, languages, religious creeds, and from different social and political systems. We are here, so to speak, in an antechamber of the World Summit for Social Development to chart a course together in the delicate, complex and urgent field of development. We recognize that the United Nations fulfils a unique role because of its universality, its capacity to create a world consensus on policies and the means to implement them. The United Nations has progressed a great deal in reasserting the development issue and in building an agreement. It has done this in spite of profound difficulties in communicating, in spite of prejudices and the clash of special interests, and, above all, in spite of the invisible nets in which language itself traps us: as Jameson terms it. Also working against agreement are the different ideologies about development, about progress and the means to achieve it. The very word “development” has been changing in meaning. It has been enriched by a multidisciplinary critical approach; by confrontation between the rigidity and tight structures of theories and the infinite complexities of social life. We have moved from an approach that aimed at economic progress per se without taking into account the human factor to contemporary thought, which considers development to be more than a mere by-product of economic factors and which rightly focuses its attention on the human person as the priority objective of our plans and as the initiator of the changes that can lead to continued development. We have also arrived at the conviction that at the national and international levels alike the success of our plans cannot be founded on a monologue written at the desks of technicians; in the daily lives of peoples unforeseeable logic is at play which has an impact on whether the well-intentioned plans addressed to them succeed or fail. It is necessary to promote dialogue among the protagonists of development, among the different institutions and social categories; among Governments, civil society and the private sector established as valid interlocutors and participants in a social covenant that rallies together the will of the community in order to overcome poverty, injustice and discrimination. The approach that has considered the human being as the undisputed master of his environment free to exploit it and plunder it with impunity has caused irreparable damage and has impoverished our Earth. The approach which surely will hold sway in the twenty-first century is that of a subject conscious of his almost symbiotic relationship with an environment which is affected by his actions and which, in turn, affects him by its reactions. This change in contemporary thinking about the subject/object relationship goes hand in hand with an awareness of the natural world as finite and of the inevitable need to preserve natural resources, to rationalize their use in order to achieve sustainable development. As this century draws to a close, we have become aware of the interrelationship of the different peoples of the world. It is not possible to keep development as the privilege of the few. That is true not only on ethical or humanitarian grounds but also because for their very survival, given the globalization of economic, ecological, migration-related and health phenomena, those who have the most must cooperate within a framework of respect for national sovereignty with those who have not achieved basic levels of well-being and of quality of life. We have understood that our civilizations are mortal. The echo of the famous sentence pronounced by Paul Valery before the League of Nations, “We the civilizations are mortal”, is resounding in a deeply moving way and all the more dramatically as we confront the most catastrophic destruction of our environment because we have torn the delicate fabric, destroyed the fragile balance through the arrogance and short-sightedness of traditional science. While it is true that on the one hand this science has prolonged human life and made it easier, on the other hand it has also unleashed the factors that place the survival of the human race at risk. As is pointed out in the “Agenda for development” submitted by the Secretary-General, peace, economy, justice, democracy and the environment are various dimensions of development. My country adheres to this dynamic and changing vision of models of development, while also suggesting that some other dimensions that we have mentioned here be considered. In addition, we are aware of our responsibility as a member of the Economic and Social Council, as we are aware also of the need to revitalize it so that it can carry out the function envisaged for it in the Charter of the United Nations and so that it can serve as the governing and unifying body for development programmes. We have the satisfaction of knowing that on the national level the Colombian Government, under the leadership of President Ernesto Samper, has committed itself to an alternative development plan that is moving forward in step with the principles and goals outlined here and expressed in the most recent documents on the subject produced by the United Nations. Ours is the Government of the social leap forward, because, as the President has said, economic growth without social growth is not worth while. This social growth is the foundation for achieving internal peace. Ours is also the Government of the era of the people, one that bases its plans on dialogue, the promotion and defence of human rights and the establishment of a new social pact in which women, the young, ethnic minorities, organized civil society and the private sector play a leading role. It is a Government in which the State attends to the urgent problems of abject poverty with a well-financed network of social solidarity and intervenes to redress failings and injustices caused by the process of adjustment and modernization. As our President says, the economic opening has to have a heart. “development should be recognized as the foremost and most far-reaching task of our time”. (A/49/665, para. 4)

My delegation would like first of all to thank the Secretary-General for preparing the follow-up report setting out his recommendations on “An agenda for development”, contained in document A/49/665. This 19-page report is compact, succinct and straight to the point. We also welcome the annex, which gives the key recommendations in a clear, readable way. We hope the report will be widely disseminated and stimulate thoughtful and informed discussions that will lead to agreement on an agenda for development. Two years ago the Secretary-General presented his report “An Agenda for Peace”, in which he made suggestions for enabling the United Nations to respond quickly and effectively to threats to international peace and security in the post-cold-war world. Increasingly, the threats to international peace and security are coming from intra- State rather than inter-State conflicts. The 1994 United Nations Development Programme “Human Development Report” index indicates that 79 out of 82 global military conflicts since 1991 have been intra-State in nature. In many cases, it was hunger, illiteracy, deprivation, unemployment and poverty which prompted these civil wars. If we are to get to the root of the problems and conflicts that the post-cold-war world is faced with, we must tackle the problems of development. Without economic and social progress, which gives all individuals in a society a stake not only in its preservation but also in its greater prosperity, there can be no lasting peace. On the other hand, development can come about only with peace and security. I would like to take the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) countries as an example. The peace and security in our region came about through the determination of ASEAN leaders to put aside their differences and build on areas of common interest. Trade and investment flows into the region have escalated. This has resulted in the ASEAN region’s achieving some of the highest growth rates in the world. Singapore is now considered a country with a newly industrialized economy. Malaysia and Thailand are poised to achieve that same status, followed by Indonesia, the Philippines and Brunei Darussalam. “Excessive military spending and its consequences are deeply inimical to development goals”, (A/49/665, para. 33) such spending comes about because there is no peace and stability in the first place. With peace and security there will be no need for excessive military spending. The resulting savings can go towards development. In sum, when there is development and security, there will not be a need for excessive military spending. Without peace, the attempts to curb military spending and arms transfers will fail miserably. Thus, “An agenda for development”, if it is to be successful, must be considered in conjunction with “An Agenda for Peace”. A second point which my delegation finds difficult to accept is the assertion that “Land-mines are a major obstacle to development“ (ibid.). Yes, they are, once a conflict has broken out and land-mines are used indiscriminately. However, we will all have noted in a recent civil war that the machete is as effective a weapon for killing civilians as any of the modern weapons available today. As we have pointed out above, the major obstacle to development is the existence of conflict situations. Ways and means must be found to achieve global, or even regional, peace and stability so that development may flower, thereby further reinforcing the foundation for peace and security. The Secretary- General’s call for “An outright world-wide ban on the production and transfer of land-mines and their components” (ibid.) puts the cart before the horse. Let me stress that my delegation is not objecting to reductions in military spending or discussions on the use of land-mines. Rather, we are pointing out that such actions will be futile without peace and stability, a condition now absent in many parts of the world. My delegation also hopes that international conferences, properly conceived, prepared and followed up, can have a real impact on the lives of ordinary people everywhere. It is not sufficient to create new bureaucracies in New York, Geneva or other world capitals. In this context, we commend the Secretary- General for his suggestion that It has been noted by many that after each major United Nations conference there has been no proper follow-up and coordination. The proposal for a framework to coordinate the various conferences will allow for the effective implementation of the programmes of action adopted in these United Nations conferences. The United Nations has a vital role to play at the multilateral level as a catalyst for international cooperation. As the Secretary-General states, “The United Nations cannot be a strong force for peace unless it is also a strong force for development,” (A/49/665, para. 9) A more integrated effort and more coordination of the different components of the United Nations system will be required if the objectives of social and economic development are to be attained. Clearly, more resources for development are also required. The developed countries that have not yet done so should strive to reach the agreed target of 0.7 per cent of their gross national product for official development assistance. However, more coordination and integration within the United Nations system should also go a long way towards reducing unnecessary and duplicative expenditures, which divert scarce resources from the really urgent tasks of people-centred development. As the Secretary-General points out in his report, the task of development is primarily the responsibility of each State. In this respect, good governance, education and basic infrastructure-building are the essential ingredients for the foundation of a civil society. However, for development to take place at the national level, it is necessary to have a supportive international environment for development. The Secretary-General has rightly pointed out that external macroeconomic forces — trade, debt management, direct investment, capital flows and access to technology — must support development objectives. National endeavours and international efforts are complementary and must go hand in hand. However, it is not enough to simply speak of trade liberalization. Specific trade policies should be agreed upon to help the least-developed countries to benefit from a more open trading environment. Some thought should be given to more local processing of raw materials so that the least-developed countries will be able to benefit from greater value-added exports. The developed countries must remove tariff escalation for such processed exports from the least-developed countries. The Agenda for Development should also make concrete proposals on how to bring about increased investment flows and other forms of resource flows to developing countries, especially the least developed among them. In this context, my delegation is pleased to note that the Secretary-General has recognized the urgent need to give added momentum to development efforts in Africa. That continent contains the majority of least-developed countries in the world — 33 out of 47. Apart from the problems of drought and desertification, the greatest impact on these countries has come from the reduction in external resource flows. Singapore is already helping African countries bilaterally within the limits of its resources, through technical assistance. We therefore support the efforts of the international community to give urgent attention to Africa’s economic recovery and development. My delegation feels that there should also be more support for the United Nations system’s activities and programmes for economic and technical cooperation between developing countries. It is timely and appropriate that this report on an Agenda for Development is being considered just as the United Nations is on the threshold of commemorating its fiftieth anniversary in 1995. We hope that the occasion will be an opportunity for the international community to rededicate itself to one of the primary objectives of the United Nations, as set out in its Charter:

We live in a shrinking global community where our interests are increasingly interwoven and our hopes for the future are more and more dependent on one another. For this reason, Canada has from the outset welcomed the idea of an ambitious Agenda for Development. We agree with the Secretary-General that development is the most pressing challenge of our time. We need a fresh framework for international cooperation for economic and social development, one that puts aside past rivalries and builds on shared values. If we are to be successful in developing this new vision, one of those shared values must be respect for human rights. We can support much of the two parts of the Agenda presented by the Secretary-General. We agree that peace, the economy, social justice, environmental protection and democracy constitute central pillars of development. Solid building blocks for this new view of development are emerging from a series of important global conferences. The vision is a human-centred one, which sees development as being about the sustainable improvement of human well- being through the removal of hunger, disease and ignorance and through the productive participation in society by all. On the threshold of the twenty-first century, we have come to understand that social and economic development are two sides of the same coin, that our real purpose is not simply economic growth, but human well-being. The United Nations has a particular role to play in fostering the integration of social and economic considerations, just as it does in underscoring the interconnection between development and peace. The eradication of mass poverty must be a central goal of a renewed framework for international cooperation. As is suggested by the Secretary-General, this framework would recognize the centrality of appropriate national policies to foster development. These include respect for human rights, systems of democratic and accountable governance, the full participation of women, and an enabling environment for civil society and the private sector. I refer not only to values, but even more to the economic impulse that the full participation of people can bring to the development process. We therefore welcome the recognition, within the United Nations, not only of the A supportive international environment is clearly also required. It must pay particular attention to the needs of the poorest, while also recognizing the diversity among developing countries. An open and rules-based trading system is one of the key features of a supportive international environment. This is why we firmly believe in the need for the full and effective implementation of the agreements reached through the Uruguay Round. This is the best way to ensure the access to global market opportunities that the Secretary-General rightly calls for. Some of the poorest countries continue to struggle with unmanageable debt burdens. Canada fully agrees with the Secretary-General that more substantial measures need to be taken to reduce the debt load of severely indebted countries that adopt appropriate policy reforms. We also need to ensure that development programmes reach people who need them. For its part, Canada is committed to providing 25 per cent of its official development assistance for basic human needs. The report of the Secretary-General makes important suggestions on broad approaches. There is also a need to be specific on priorities for the United Nations itself and on internal reorientation. The Agenda for Development is a vehicle to provide inspiration and a framework for the international community as a whole, as well as a blueprint for the role of the United Nations. The United Nations cannot successfully tackle every important issue. The challenge is to ensure that the value of the Organization’s contribution represents more than its small share of financial flows. Last month the Canadian Prime Minister, Jean Chrétien, described Canada’s commitment to the United Nations as a cornerstone of our foreign policy. It is because we attach such importance to the United Nations that we stress the need for accelerated reform of its economic and social sectors. The Canadian Government is itself currently conducting a foreign-policy review. The touchstones for that review are affordability, the relevance of the actions envisaged, and effectiveness in serving the interests of Canadians. What this means is that in future we will undoubtedly need to be more selective in the choices we make. Our resources are limited, as are those of the This is not to suggest that we are oblivious to the progress that has been made in recent years in promoting stronger coherence and direction. It is true that useful steps have been taken, but it is becoming increasingly clear to us that the core functions and comparative advantages of the United Nations must be fully understood before specific reforms are undertaken. Drawing on its universality, neutrality and physical presence in many parts of the world, the comparative advantages of the United Nations are: global objective- setting; advocacy and monitoring in areas such as human rights, population and the environment; the provision of neutral policy advice; the collection and dissemination of information; the provision of access to the world for some of the poorest countries; and the provision of a framework for international humanitarian activities. These are not rigid categories, but rather are suggestive of a framework for channelling the energies of the United Nations towards areas of real value. One important step is to eliminate duplication and ensure complementarity with other institutions, such as the Bretton Woods group. We believe there is a need to re- examine how the trade and development function is handled in the United Nations in the light of the emerging mandates of the World Trade Organization. The role and contribution of the United Nations regional economic commissions also merit close attention. Canada will wish to be certain that the vast array of intergovernmental machinery that has developed over time adjusts to future needs. We advocate strengthening the human rights and environmental functions within the United Nations. Dealing more effectively with humanitarian needs is also important, through improved early warning arrangements, preventive development and a more seamless continuum between relief, rehabilitation and resumed development. This is Strengthening the coherence and impact of the General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council in the economic and social fields is essential. The Council must fulfil its coordination role within the United Nations system and play a key role in the follow-up to international conferences. We are open to the idea of an enlarged Bureau of the Economic and Social Council, but that is no substitute for improved coordination with the agencies. It is time to consider how better to reflect the greater integration of social and economic issues in the work of the Second and Third Committees of the General Assembly. The deliberative role on global economic issues of both bodies can be improved, but they should not try to compete with more specialized bodies. Their value lies in bringing moral and political force to global objectives, not in designing specific mechanisms. A further opening of the General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council to a wider range of views, such as in the World Hearings on Development, should be encouraged. Assistance programmes can be improved. Consolidation and integration should be considered to impart critical mass and focus and reduce unnecessary overheads. We should also ask ourselves whether assistance programmes of the scale on which the United Nations operates should not be geared even more to the needs of the poorest countries. Coordination with specialized agencies remains a vital concern. This debate marks the beginning of a new phase in our work on an Agenda for Development. I have sought here to set out the Canadian view on some of the key issues that need to be addressed. In terms of next steps, we should look to the early establishment of a working group that would build on the good base offered by the Secretary-General. It could sharpen the expression of priorities within the United Nations and make suggestions on the changes required to act on them effectively. As we near the fiftieth anniversary of the United Nations, the Agenda for Development presents us with an opportunity to revitalize our approach to development and to reposition the United Nations in the centre of the development debate. This is an opportunity that we cannot afford to let go. The President of the General Assembly at its forty- eighth session carried the banner further in defining the Agenda by organizing the World Hearings on Development, which assembled a wide range of leading personalities in a span of one week to exchange views on this important topic. The Note by the President summarizing this debate has proved very useful in the elaboration of the subject. Once again, may I extend my congratulations to Mr. Samuel R. Insanally, Permanent Representative of Guyana, for his initiative and stewardship. At this point, I should like to thank the President of the Assembly at this session for the concise and pertinent summary he made of the Agenda for Development. Last but not least, my delegation would like to record our agreement with and support for the statement that the Chairman of the Group of 77 made on behalf of the members of the Group and China. The high-level segment of this year’s session of the Economic and Social Council provided us with the opportunity for the first time to discuss among ourselves our views on “An Agenda for Development”, and last week we were happy to receive the recommendations of the Secretary-General which were derived from this extensive debate. It is the view of my delegation that a consensus is emerging on the direction the Agenda for Development should take after its imperative nature has been recognized. My delegation would like to underscore the Secretary- General’s conclusion that development is a far-reaching imperative effective action on which is crucial for the well- being of humanity as a whole. Needless to say, global peace and security will be jeopardized unless we create a world that is more balanced, both socially and economically. The role of the United Nations in this changing world is crucial, as never before. While individual States bear the primary responsibility for their own development, the United Nations, according to the Charter, promotes solutions to international social, economic and related problems. It is my delegation’s view that for the Agenda for Development to achieve its purpose and the process of globalization to be complete, all economies have to become players in the world market system. As long as the poorest 20 per cent of the world’s population receives only 0.2 per cent of global commercial bank lending, 1.3 per cent of global investment, 1 per cent of global trade and 1.4 per cent of global income, and continues to rely on exports of primary commodities, the globalization process will entail further marginalization of those countries into the periphery of the world economy. Within the domestic environment the poor have limited access to credit, capital, technology and other production inputs in their countries. In sub-Saharan Africa the informal sector increased by 6.7 per cent a year between 1980 and 1989, substantially faster than the modern sector. Between 1980 and 1985, while the modern sector added only 500,000 jobs to the urban labour market, the informal sector created some 6 million new jobs. By 1990, the informal sector employed more than 60 per cent of the urban work force, more than twice the share employed by the modern sector. The poor are disproportionately threatened by the environmental hazards and health risks posed by pollution, inadequate housing, poor sanitation, lack of water and shortage of other basic services. The process of marginalization which begins at the domestic environment manifests itself in the international arena. Most developing countries adopted market-oriented policies in the 1980s and early 1990s, offering greater incentives to the private sector through structural- adjustment programmes and economic reforms. The record in the past five years has shown that those reforms have not brought a significant increase in investment. First, profit or net- income expectations have been low, because of a generally weak economy and declining export commodity prices. Secondly, the poor and deteriorating state of infrastructure in many countries has driven up the costs of private investment. Present levels of public investment in many countries are insufficient to The lofty ideals of the United Nations New Agenda for the Development of Africa in the 1990s have since the beginning of the present decade fallen far short in implementation, in that the net aggregate resource flows to Africa have declined, and were 22 per cent lower in 1992 than in 1990. The declines in the net aggregate resources flow to Africa in the 1990s further compound the problems of underdevelopment and poverty in the continent. Africa participated in the Uruguay Round negotiations and urged its conclusion, but in terms of its implications I cannot do better than to quote the statement made by my President during his address to the forty-ninth session of the General Assembly on 4 October 1994, when he said: The role of the United Nations system is pivotal in bringing all nations into the globalization process. Without a central authority, even of a moral force, international relations will remain relations of conquest and subjugation. An Agenda for Development should clearly specify the role of the United Nations, and especially its relationship with the specialized agencies and the Bretton Woods Institutions, which should be an integral part of the United Nations system. It should also clearly identify the division of labour with regard to policies and activities in order to enhance effective action in the economic, social and related fields within the United Nations system and the regional commissions, taking into account the need for effective coordination between them. May I conclude by extending the full support of my delegation to the suggestion made by the Chairman of the Group of 77 that a committee of the Assembly should be constituted and entrusted with the task of elaborating on an Agenda for Development, including the role of the United Nations system, and giving impetus to renewing the efforts already made. Allow me also to take this opportunity to express our appreciation to the President of the forty-eighth session of the General Assembly for his useful note on the open-ended and broad-based consultations on an Agenda for Development as well as his summary on the World Hearings on Development, which contains a wealth of views and proposals generated at those consultations and Hearings. I should be remiss if I failed to express our thanks to the President of the Economic and Social Council for his summary of the high-level segment, held on 28-29 June 1994, devoted to the theme “An Agenda for Development”, in which he skilfully identified the priority issues to be addressed. While supporting fully the statement made on this item this morning by the Permanent Representative of Algeria, Mr. Lamamra, on behalf of the Group of 77, I wish to focus in this debate on some points which are of great interest and concern to us. In his report of 6 May 1994 on “An Agenda for Development” the Secretary-General emphasized that “Development is in crisis” (A/48/935, para. 5). Furthermore, he has pointed out, very rightly, in his present report of 11 November 1994 that “The United Nations cannot be a strong force for peace unless it is also a strong force for development” (A/49/665, para. 9) In our view, there is a need for the international community to make a real political commitment to the United Nations in determining policies, evolving measures and taking decisions on development issues, in much the same way as it acts on issues of peace and security, taking into account the present world’s dynamic, complex and changing realities. The issues of peace, security and development, indeed, are mutually reinforcing and are increasingly recognized as indivisible. As we all know, there can be no development without peace and certainly no peace without development. Given that the Agenda for Peace has already been put in place, my delegation appreciates highly the ongoing The concept of development, as we understand it, is evolving. There is a view that its many dimensions have been expanded to include political, social, economic, humanitarian and environmental fields. While we concur that development must be seen in its many dimensions, it is our considered view that these dimensions should be addressed in an integrated and simultaneous manner and implemented in accordance with each country’s set priorities taking into account the diversity of its culture, traditions and stage of development. All peoples the world over have the sovereign right to choose freely their path of development without any outside pressure or interference and they must be given a chance to opt for whatever system they deem appropriate both for themselves and for their future. A strong and efficient Agenda for Development should be clear and action-oriented and focus on economic growth, sustainable development and the eradication of poverty. It should also seek to ensure the effective implementation of the existing international agreements and commitments in the field of development. Along the same lines, the Secretary-General stresses in his present report that “at its core, development must be about improvement of human well-being, removal of hunger, disease and ignorance, and productive employment for all. Its first goal must be to end poverty and satisfy the priority needs of all people in a way that can be productively sustained over future generations“ (A/49/665, para. 6) To translate these objectives into reality, the international community is invited to take innovative concrete measures by allocating the new financial resources necessary to respond to the global needs for socio-economic development. It is also important to note that for an Agenda for Development to be meaningful, it should encompass, among others, the core issues facing developing countries, such as: trade, capital flows, debt burdens, the impact of structural and adjustment policies, human-resource development and the transfer of technology. In this context, we think that it is necessary to create a favourable, growth-oriented international environment for development to complement and support the national efforts of developing countries to find a solution on these issues. To achieve these objectives, In the world today, the interdependence of States is an objective reality. In line with this growing tendency, we are of the view that our Agenda for Development should highlight the need for establishing the required framework for development cooperation between developed and developing countries through partnership based on mutual interests and benefits and equitably shared responsibility. Together, hand in hand, the North and the South should strive to achieve the development goals and to implement the agreements already reached at related United Nations conferences. If we succeed in this undertaking, the whole world will benefit greatly in its noble quest for peace and development. Last but not least, we agree fully with the opinion that the United Nations, as the world’s only universal and broadly based democratic organization, should have the opportunity to act on global development issues. From that perspective, we support the ongoing efforts of the world community aimed at restructuring and revitalizing the work of the United Nations in the economic, social and related fields to render it more effective in its endeavours. At the same time, we believe that other parties, such as Governments, international institutions and non-governmental organizations at the national, regional and global levels, should also take an active part in the development arena. Most important, the key players, such as the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and the World Trade Organization, should be brought together and work more closely with the United Nations to achieve common development goals for the benefit of humankind. The present timely initiative for an Agenda for Development, to complement the Agenda for Peace, is

What brings us together today is what the Secretary-General calls in his report “the foremost and most far-reaching task of our time” (A/49/665, para. 4): development. The time has come for us to carry out an endeavour long delayed by the international community, one on which there has been intensive debate in the United Nations over the past two years at least. The proposals in the Secretary-General’s document reflect many of the concerns and suggestions that delegations have voiced in that debate. In view of the paramount importance of this initiative, we would have liked the report of the Secretary-General to be issued earlier, which would have enabled us to engage in a more detailed analysis of the document, whose very nature demands in-depth consideration. The wealth of ideas on development reflects the international community’s interest in the subject and the priority it attaches to this sphere of the activities of the United Nations. Before us lies an intense exercise of coming to agreement on the content and form of the Agenda. We hope that constructive political will and realistic optimism will prevail. Fortunately, we have made progress in that direction. The convergence of views on the main chapters the Agenda for Development should contain constitutes a sound point of departure. We want therefore to stress the importance of recognizing economic growth as vital for overall development. As the Secretary-General observes in his report, it is “the sine qua non of development”. (A/49/665, para. 5) While we acknowledge the close links between peace, security and economic development, we prefer not to establish a hierarchy that could lead to development being viewed as subsidiary to the maintenance of international peace and security. Development and We consider that the Agenda for Development must address factors that are specific and central to the international economy. Without those elements the text will be a dead letter. It is virtually impossible to conceive of an Agenda for Development that does not respond properly to the vital problems facing developing countries, such as international trade, development financing and scientific and technological progress. The United Nations and the international community must go beyond an assistance-oriented view of development. Present-day realities and needs demand this of us. Hence, we reaffirm the primary responsibility of each country with respect to its own development. In recent years, the great majority have carried out economic reforms aimed at increasing productive efficiency and competitiveness, and at expanding the role of the private sector. These changes have included measures like those adopted in Mexico with a view to improving our people’s standard of living and promoting greater participation by our citizens. These are difficult goals, but we are committed to achieving them. The social — indeed, cultural — dimension of development is another basic element the Agenda must address. Economic growth alone guarantees nothing: also needed are State efforts to devise distribution policies that protect the most vulnerable groups of society. In that connection, the eradication of poverty is the central task. No less important for development are education and cultural, scientific and technical training. On the other hand, present and future generations cannot conceive of a kind of development that ignores the environment. To do so would compromise the most precious and vital of our legacies. We consider that the Agenda must approach development from a sustainable and rational standpoint, and not view it as a set of ecologistic axioms that could denature the objective of environmental protection. Rio provided the framework for our future action in this sphere. Globalization has replaced former visions of autarky. International cooperation based on solidarity must play a decisive role, not only in the elaboration but essentially in the implementation of an Agenda for Development. Each The agenda to be defined must be all-encompassing and therefore must embrace both traditional and new development themes, thus contributing to the promotion of multilateral cooperation, avoiding unnecessary duplication and overlap. The document must promote a universal dialogue that will commit all those involved to the attainment of the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations. Throughout the process of thinking about these issues we have all agreed that the United Nations is in a special position to play a decisive role in the promotion of development. Strengthening the work of the General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council in this regard is the key to the success of the Agenda. Since economic and financial matters are central to development, the Bretton Woods institutions must play an active part in these efforts. The new atmosphere in these bodies is and augurs well for greater cooperation on development, without prejudice to the authority of the United Nations. We believe that, as the Secretary-General points out in his report, the next stage of our work is to establish a common framework for the attainment of goals already spelt out at conferences sponsored by the United Nations. A sound approach is to examine agreed objectives, establish their respective costs and define priorities, with a timetable acceptable to all. My delegation therefore favours the establishment of an open-ended working group to make a detailed analysis of the Secretary-General’s report.

Finally, we have today begun our formal consideration of the Agenda for Development, following the release of the report (A/49/665) of the Secretary-General last Monday. The report is supposed to recommend remedies for the problems identified in his first report (A/48/935) in May this year. Overall, the report of the Secretary-General on an Agenda for Development pales in comparison with his report, “An Agenda for Peace” (A/47/277), which many of us found to be intellectually provocative and to possess a sense of vision. The so-called leaked copy of an earlier draft of the Agenda for Development created considerable interest, and also disquiet in some quarters. The current report makes for good reading, but breaks no new ground in the debate over a global development agenda. Some of us suspect that efforts were expended by certain bodies to take out some of the more novel ideas that were in the We are aware of the observation by some that, while the Charter provides for an enforcement role for the United Nations on international peace and security issues, the Charter is merely recommendatory when it relates to development matters. My delegation disagrees. We would like to emphasize that an important thrust of the new development agenda is to make the United Nations central to the intergovernmental process, to be in a position to have influence on decisions taken elsewhere, be it in the Bretton Woods institutions or in the Group of Seven. As our economies become more intimately linked by trade, information, investment flows and multinational operations, and as our national borders become more porous, our well-being becomes even more inseparable and indivisible. My delegation supports the point made by Under-Secretary-General Desai in the Second Committee, when he emphasized that it was in the direct interest of the developed economies, in terms of markets, to ensure sustained development in the developing countries. There is no prosperity without development, and there is no peace without development. An Agenda for Development should be our collective tool to achieve this objective. Paragraph 3 of Article 1 of the Charter cannot be read selectively for the promotion of human rights and freedoms, without recognizing the need for international cooperation in solving international problems of a socio- economic character. Indeed the Agenda for Development must base its premise on the 1986 United Nations Declaration on the Right to Development which states: The root causes of many of the conflicts and humanitarian crises throughout the world relate to underdevelopment and inequitable economic growth, which exacerbate social tensions and disorders. The Agenda for Development must thus adopt a holistic approach, while resisting the temptation to over-stress the linkage with the Agenda for Peace through terms such as “preventive” or “curative” development. Economic progress is meaningful if it comprehends at the same time progress in the social and political spheres. With economic development must come the development of social and moral values, intellectual progress and the building of a united and caring society essential to peace and security. There must be growth with equity for social progress and integration. In devising an Agenda for Development, we must be guided by a pragmatic development approach and strategy, which will have to be fashioned through multiple policies and programmes, fine-tuned to local requirements, and appropriately affected by diverse traditions and institutional responses. It must take into account the realities of the limitations of sovereign States over global economic interaction as well as the important role of non-state actors, especially the private sector, be it multinational, or medium-scale or small-scale in scope and character. How Governments and peoples, international organizations and the private sector interact and interrelate will have a major bearing on the efforts of humanity to improve the standard and quality of life for current and future generations. I wish to make the following specific observations on the report of the Secretary-General. First, while we welcome the emphasis on the importance of national policies for development, it should not be prescriptive or draw a distinction between the government and the people. For Malaysia, macroeconomic stabilization, deregulation, “right-sizing” the public sector and privatization are policy decisions which have Second, given the importance of resolving the debt issue which has been a major impediment to the economic growth of many developing countries, we fully support the proposal for debt write-off, especially for the least developed countries. Third, we fully agree that special attention should be given to the problems of Africa; to the issues pertaining to women, particularly rural women; to the problems of the least developed countries; and to the larger issue of poverty eradication itself. Fourth, a global agenda designed to promote development must highlight the importance of a supportive international economic environment, as reflected in paragraph 22 of the report (A/49/665). The asymmetries in the international economic system, involving, inter alia, trade in goods and services, require urgent attention if development is to be truly universal and durable. Fifth, as for the resources for international development cooperation, we must underline the importance of fulfilling the 0.7 per cent commitment. The problem of the lack of resources, including additional financial resources, must be addressed. The Commission on Sustainable Development is at this moment seriously examining a situation in which additional resources are not available to finance Agenda 21. My delegation is aware of the domestic situation in major donor countries, but we must be wary not to allow our debate on an Agenda for Development to serve as an occasion to rewrite commitments, including those made at summit level, such as the Rio United Nations Conference on Environment and Development. Furthermore, in the examination of additional resources, the derivatives of the peace dividend cannot be excluded. Sixth, we welcome consideration of the convening of an international conference on financing for development to create a new financial framework that will enable the international community to fulfil its commitment to international development cooperation. Such a conference should include all Member countries and the representatives of all multilateral financial institutions, including, especially, the Bretton Woods institutions.There is need for a commitment to creating a new international financial framework which will ensure that developing countries will not be held hostage to development Seventh, with regard to trade, the report, while recognizing its significance, has not spelt out specific ways in which trade as a tool of development could promote our collective interests. It should also elaborate on the linkages between the United Nations and the World Trade Organization, while taking into account the fact that the World Trade Organization is a contractual entity. This is clearly an area where the captains of trade, industry, finance and technology from both North and South may be better placed to provide implementable inputs. Eighth, the recommendations on strengthening the links between the United Nations and the Bretton Woods institutions need elaboration. There is an urgent need to enhance coordination, given the expanding role of international financial institutions vis-a-vis the social sector and the implications of structural- adjustment programmes for developing countries. The Bretton Woods institutions and international financial institutions, with their financial clout and expertise, could contribute to the activities of the United Nations. For instance, in light of the forthcoming Summit on social development, the international financial institutions could have devoted substantial consideration to the three themes of that Summit and explained their own role and success in promoting social development. Ninth, with regard to the recommendations for an effective multilateral development system, our observations are as follows: First, the unique character of the General Assembly should be retained and strengthened. In the definition of the role of the General Assembly in identifying critical issues and developing policies, norms, standards and rules of the game in managing global interdependence, our concern is for its depth and commitment. It will be useful only if it involves all Member States, including the G-7 countries. The General Assembly must establish a framework by which all actors will be brought into play and bound by the same rules and commitments. Secondly, with regard to the Economic and Social Council, we should review immediately the reforms we have instituted, with a view to making it the effective and efficient intergovernmental apex of both economic and social issues. The Economic and Social Council should not by default become the intergovernmental structure for coordinating humanitarian and human-rights issues, to the exclusion of economic issues. In respect of strengthening Tenth, as for the financing of United Nations development activities, we fully agree with the last paragraph of the report — that is, that more resources are needed; mandates and the resources provided for them must be in a sound relationship and there must be predictability in funding. The devising of new approaches should not be exploited to relieve the burden on the largest contributors at the expense of equity. As rightly noted in the report, the United Nations has a comprehensive mandate spanning social, economic and political issues. There is an increasing perception among a vast majority of Member States that the United Nations is preoccupied with politico-security issues. We cannot ignore the view prevalent among developing countries that the United Nations large-scale foray into peace-keeping has been at the expense of development, in terms both of attention and of resources. As noted by some, development is the silent crisis of our times. The United Nations has an ideal and timely opportunity to act now through the proposed Agenda for Development. Failure to adopt an Agenda for Development would expose the United Nations to the risk of limited relevance, The Malaysian delegation fully supports the view that there is a need to establish an open-ended working group of the General Assembly for immediate follow-up action on drafting an Agenda for Development for our adoption and for early implementation. We suggest that, taking a leaf from the formal Open-Ended Working Group on the reform of the Security Council, the working group be under the President’s chairmanship. We agree, too, that this working group should be asked to submit a comprehensive draft resolution prior to the fiftieth anniversary of the United Nations.

I should like at the outset to reiterate the Egyptian delegation’s support for the statement made by the representative of Algeria on behalf of the Group of 77 and China under agenda item 92, on the Agenda for Development. We also wish to welcome the Secretary- General’s report (A/48/935) and its complement, A/49/665, as well as the additional information we have heard this morning when we began our consideration of this item which is one of the most important items on the General Assembly’s agenda at its present session. The delegation of Egypt has followed with great interest from the very beginning, the call for the Secretary- General in resolution 47/181 to prepare a report on an agenda for development that would complement his “Agenda for Peace”, so that the two reports may become the two wings on which the international community and the United Nations system could soar to the horizons of the twenty-first century. The delegation of Egypt participated, from 6 to 10 June 1994, in the Hearings on the Secretary- General’s report, as outlined in General Assembly resolution 48/166. The deliberations and results of those hearings have been summarized by Ambassador Insanally in document A/49/320. We also called for the agenda to include specific measures to narrow the gap between the developing and the developed countries through the promotion of all elements of economic growth both internally and externally, and to include a clear definition of the role of the United Nations with special focus on the areas of high priority for the developing countries such as free trade in the light of the conclusions of the Uruguay Round; financing, as the core and the driving force of development; the role of science and technology; the promotion of economic and technical cooperation between developing countries; and economic and regional integration as the principal means of integration into the world economy, through equitable and balanced growth by the countries of a region so that it may become an active partner at the international level. A key question here arises: has the report of the Secretary-General on the agenda for development and its complementary recommendations realized the aspirations of the international community in general and of the developing countries in particular? This question raises others in the context of an association of ideas. Has the report containing the recommendations taken into account the views voiced by the developing countries in the course of the last session of the General Assembly, at the Hearings, at the session of the Economic and Social Council and in the general debate in the early part of the current session of the Assembly? Has the voice of the poor of the world been heard and have the views of the majority of the Organization’s membership been clear in the minds of those who drew up the report? The answer is this: the agenda for development has realized some but not all aspirations. It has dealt positively with some of but not all the views and concerns of the developing countries. We find in the agenda many positive elements which amount to a concrete and constructive step towards crystallizing a more effective role for the United Nations in promoting However, we should recall in this respect that the Secretary-General, in his introductory statement before the high-level segment of the recent session of the Economic and Social Council, said that the age of miracles is over and warned us not to expect too much from the report on an agenda for development. We should recall also that the Secretary-General, in his inaugural statement at the Hearings last June, pointed out that his report is not a final text but rather a plan that includes a number of issues that need to be discussed and developed further. Proceeding from this, we support the setting up of an open-ended working group of the General Assembly in which consultations on an agenda for development would take place, with the utmost transparency in a manner that would ensure that the discussion and development of the ideas set forth in the report may yield a development manual. Such a manual would embody a framework that defines the roles and responsibilities of developed and developing countries alike, as well as the role of the United Nations in promoting international cooperation towards the achievement of the objectives of sustainable development within a specific time frame. We wish to underscore the statements in the Secretary- General’s report on the need of commitment to the right to development, on the recognition of development as the overriding objective in the forefront of the international agenda and on the indissoluble organic link between development and international peace and security. Peace and development are the two faces of the same coin. We also agree with the broad outlines of the report, especially in terms of the recommendations that have made full use of the conclusions of the Hearings and deliberations of the Economic and Social Council on the importance of revitalizing international cooperation for development by focusing on national priorities, promoting the developing countries’ capabilities, devoting sufficient attention to the eradication of poverty, bringing about social development and working towards a better international environment through a commitment by developed countries to allocate 0.7 per cent of their gross domestic product to official development assistance, to enhance direct foreign investment and the transfer of advanced technology to We also agree with the proposal in the report to hold an international conference on the financing of development and to set up an effective multilateral development regime through expanded joint activities of the General Assembly, the Economic and Social Council, the Bretton Woods institutions, the specialized agencies and the executive programmes and funds, with emphasis on following up on the results of United Nations conferences and according priority and specific attention to the needs of Africa within that multilateral development regime. While we agree with these broad outlines, we have a few primary remarks which we summarize as follows: First, attempts to redefine development must not lead to the dilution of the notion of economic growth in its simplest form and as the most important driving force behind development. We should not try to pre-empt events by using definitions and concepts that have not been agreed on at the intergovernmental level. This would pave the way for using such concepts to impose new terms and restrictions that are not acceptable to us. For example, the report refers to the need to reflect the social and environmental costs of development in the “pricing” process, while the concepts involved are yet to take shape. Second, most of the report’s recommendations relate to institutional arrangements, of a purely organizational nature, which give rise to serious reservations, such as the recommendation calling for the establishment of a limited-membership expanded bureau in the Economic and Social Council. This, as we see it, will tend to redouble the tendency towards less and less transparency, especially after limiting the membership of the executive boards of various programmes and funds. Another example is the recommendation that the Special Representative should command and direct all elements of the United Nations system at all levels undertaking development activities as part of the mission. This, as we see it, is contrary to resolution 47/199 and to the necessary separation of the United Nations development and peace-keeping activities. Third, the distinction between prevention and cure in the area of development is ambiguous. The report does We support the Secretary-General’s recommendation that an international conference be held on development financing. We are convinced that it is important to hold such a conference in 1996 with the aim of mobilizing the resources needed to finance development. Fourth, the agenda for development recognizes the special needs of Africa and makes African development a priority objective. The agenda refers in particular to the problems of debt, commodity prices and desertification. We would refer here to the hopes we pin on the International Convention to Combat Desertification in Those Countries Experiencing Serious Drought and/or Desertification, particularly in Africa. We should refer also to another problem, namely the lack of diversity in Africa’s products and exports and to Africa’s need for the establishment of a fund for the diversification of its goods, within the framework of the African Development Bank. Fifth, we welcome the Secretary-General’s comments on the fears of developing countries with respect to the implications of the Uruguay Round; the fear is that some developed countries may tend to impose protectionist measures under environmental pretexts. We welcome the Secretary-General’s call for establishing a relationship between the United Nations and the World Trade Organization. We take note of the three options he put forth in Ohio, last October, regarding the shape that relationship might take. We firmly believe that, at this session, the General Assembly should clearly call on the parties to the convention establishing the World Trade Organization to look into the establishment of an active and effective relationship between that organization and the United Nations. Sixth, we welcome the report’s comments on enhancing the role of the Bretton Woods institutions, on reviving the liaison committee between those institutions and the United Nations, and on the need to take fully into account the important social dimension of all economic reform and structural adjustment programmes. Having been engaged in putting in place an ambitious programme of economic reform and structural adjustment since May 1990, Egypt underscores the need to take into account the fact that economic and social conditions, and Seventh, the Secretary-General’s recommendations on the reduction of military expenditures and the elimination of all forms of military assistance and subsidies to arms exporters could give rise to controversy. Also, the recommendations on increased transparency in the area of military expenditure and the call for detailed comparative analyses of military and social budgets are highly sensitive and touch upon matters that have to do with the sovereign right of protecting territorial integrity. This is a right or rather an obligation whose importance and sanctity are beyond question. Such a call should apply to the developed and the developing countries alike and must encompass military expenditures of all kinds, including military outlays on the production and stockpiling of all categories of weapons, including weapons of mass destruction, in every region of the world. Eighth, we support the Secretary-General’s call for a follow-up on the results of the International Conference on Population and Development, held in Cairo, and of other United Nations conferences, through the unified structure of a follow-up mechanism within the United Nations system. Ninth, a number of questions remain regarding the establishment of an international board of consultants on development to report to the General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council. What would be the point of such a board, and what would be its relationship with the Commission on Sustainable Development? And what about the role of the Committee for Development Planning? We also look forward to further clarifications regarding the proposal that the General Assembly, with high-level representatives present, could focus dialogue on development issues during the early part of the plenary sessions, and regarding the proposal that the convening of special sessions, every few years, on major aspects of development problems should be considered. We believe that the convening of such sessions is needed per se. What is needed is active follow-up of the results of such sessions. The world economy is just emerging from a state of recession that has lasted far too long, and yet there is a great lack of balance between the rates of growth, to such an extent that the gap between the rich and the poor is The unprecedented increase in United Nations peace- keeping operations under Chapter VII of the Charter, which followed the end of the cold war, has involved the allocation of huge sums of money to those operations: $3.5 billion this year (1994) alone. We are fully convinced that increasing the resources earmarked for development — in the context of the preventive development concept — would lead, in the medium and the long term, to substantial reductions in the exorbitant expenditure on peace-keeping operations. An agenda for development could be a major weapon in the battle against poverty and underdevelopment and the means of bringing about social development, the empowerment of women, the raising of health care and education standards, the achievement of food security, and the mitigation of the suffering endured by the poor and deprived. Also, the agenda could be a shield against the state of chaos the world may slide to if these important issues are not addressed and if the gap between rich and poor continues to widen. An Agenda for Peace and an agenda for development could provide a framework for movement by the international community forward into the next century, with a true partnership that would go beyond words to action and that would bring about the end of the monopoly by a handful of developed countries on the making of decisions that affect the international economic situation. The two agendas would consolidate the role of the United Nations

At the outset I should like to pay tribute to several individuals who have made noteworthy contributions to the agenda item before us. First, my delegation thanks Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali for presenting “An Agenda for Development”, which has been acknowledged as a timely and vital document. We would also like to express our appreciation to the General Assembly’s President, Amara Essy, for his introductory remarks, which will provide useful guidelines for our deliberations. We also acknowledge the excellent work of his predecessor, Ambassador Insanally, particularly in organizing the World Hearings on Development last June. We are grateful to the Chairman of the Group of 77 for his statement. Despite the spirit of cooperation and reconciliation which has accompanied the end of the cold war, the world continues to witness an increasing number of conflicts. The proliferation of such tensions serves as a sobering reminder that development is one of the most critical tasks facing the international community as it seeks to address socio-economic difficulties and establish a foundation for peace. Next year will mark the fiftieth anniversary of the United Nations. With the advent of this auspicious occasion my delegation hopes that the aspiration of global peace and human well-being will come that much closer to becoming a reality. Although the primary responsibility of the United Nations is to maintain international peace and security, it has become all too evident that development and peace go hand in hand and that development is one of the best ways to achieve preventive diplomacy and a stable world order. In this regard, my delegation welcomes the fact that the report of the Secretary-General confirms that development is the foremost task on the international agenda. The complexity and far-reaching implications of development require that it be regarded as the collective task of the entire international community. Indeed, socio- economic goals, such as the alleviation of poverty and enhancement of social infrastructures, are universally My delegation notes with appreciation the Secretary- General’s effort to formulate feasible and action-oriented recommendations in his report (A/49/665). My delegation hopes to see further suggestions on ways in which the United Nations may assume a more prominent and strengthened role in development. Although my delegation feels that a much more in-depth review of the recommendations of the report is needed, we would like to make some general preliminary comments at this time. As the concept of development is broad based and multifaceted, my delegation fully supports a comprehensive approach. The global community has come to recognize that the concept of development no longer relates strictly to economic development, but encompasses a multitude of issues relating to the environment, the alleviation of poverty and the empowerment of women, among others. Therefore, we believe that the five dimensions of peace, economy, environment, justice and democracy, identified in the Secretary-General’s report, are well chosen and interlinked. My delegation attaches particular significance to the concept of sustainable human development based on a human-centred perspective that focuses on health, education, gender and the environment. It goes without saying that, while economic growth alone cannot guarantee development, it is the most crucial element of the development process. While the market can play an important role in economic growth, governmental action, particularly in the early stages of development, is essential. Each State must shoulder the primary responsibility for development and should set up its own policy priorities and goals. Development entails more than a mere increase in production. In this regard, the participation of all actors within that State, such as the private sector, non-governmental organizations and the grass-roots movement, should be strongly encouraged. It has also become clear that the involvement of women in the development process can neither be over-emphasized nor overlooked. At the same time, the success and sustainability of development relies heavily on a global partnership. Each State’s developmental effort must be reinforced by the support and cooperation of the international community. With rapidly growing trends of globalization and interdependence, international cooperation for development is needed more than ever before. My delegation shares the view that the Agenda for Development should pay special Securing adequate financial resources is a constant requirement for development efforts. History has shown us that aid alone will not suffice. Private investment can play a pivotal role in building the economic capabilities of developing countries. Ways to create a favourable environment to attract more private investment in developing countries should be examined. However, earning financial resources through trade remains the most desirable option. Resources and technology are two vital tools for development. In this regard, the international community should try to further formulate feasible and action-oriented recommendations in the field of investment, trade and the transfer of technology. These recommendations should include strengthening South- South cooperation, with a special focus on building economic and technical cooperation between developing countries. With its universality, neutrality, vast global network and 50 years of experience in development, as well as the mandate and legitimacy provided by the Charter, the United Nations is well qualified to handle development. We agree that the United Nations is the most appropriate Organization to handle this profound and multifaceted issue. Indeed, we need only to look at its past achievements in this area to see evidence of its capability. None the less, the demands for heightened action and response by the United Nations continue to grow, creating the need for a revitalized role for the United Nations to ensure its viability in dealing with development challenges. The proposal at the World Hearings to establish a high-level body on development and economic policy may deserve consideration. However, before a decision is made to create an entirely new entity we must use existing mechanisms and mandates to the fullest extent without altering the Charter. In advocacy of organizational efficiency, my delegation supports in principle the strengthening of the role of the General Assembly in the economic and social area. One of the best contributions that the General Assembly could make in this context is to heighten public awareness of and consensus building At the same time, we must not forget that the General Assembly is essentially a political forum and that, if the United Nations is to assume a principal role in the long term, the revitalization of the Economic and Social Council should come first. After all, the Council is the primary forum in which global socio-economic issues are meant to be addressed. Since the late 1970s, many efforts have been made to reinforce the Economic and Social Council and there have been many achievements. But there is always room for improvement. In this regard, we consider the recommendation that the role of the Council be enhanced to be one of the practical options available. The mandates and functions of the proposed expanded Bureau of the Council should be further studied. Due consideration should also be given to the reform and restructuring of the multilateral development system. This is particularly essential for the efficient utilization of limited development resources. My delegation feels that, above all, securing closer relations between the United Nations and the Bretton Woods institutions should be an integral part of development efforts. So far, the work of each of those two entities has had a distinct character, but my delegation is confident that through the consolidation and coordination of their activities each will benefit from the experience and expertise of the other. At the same time, extreme discretion must be exercised and consideration given to the ways to link the United Nations and the Bretton Woods institutions. My delegation notes with interest the Secretary-General’s proposal to conduct joint cooperative activities in distinct areas of development, including poverty-alleviation strategies, sustainable energy development and post-conflict building and reconstruction. This proposal seems to be based upon a gradual approach. We also feel that the reinstatement of the Liaison Committee between the United Nations and the Bretton Woods institutions would be a step forward in strengthening the link between these two entities. The Secretary-General has pointed out that increasing efficiency in the operational coordination of the United Nations system would require a few critical steps, on which my delegation agrees, including the elimination of duplication, the implementation of the development continuum from emergency relief to development, and the strengthening of the Resident Coordinator system. My Since the Secretary-General’s recommendations on development were issued only recently, my delegation is of the view that an appropriate forum should be established to give the fullest consideration to the critical question of development and to facilitate the deliberations. In this regard, my delegation supports the proposed establishment of an open-ended working group of the General Assembly.

We have all looked forward to the report of the Secretary-General on an Agenda for Development and the recommendations related to it. We are very glad to see it before us today. The Chinese delegation is now carefully studying the questions and recommendations in the report. Here, we wish to share with other delegations some of our preliminary views. First, the work of the United Nations should fully reflect the international community’s consensus on the key issues of development. The report contains many positive elements that have our support. For instance, in the introductory segment of the report, the Secretary- General emphasizes that economic growth is an imperative for development and that the economic and social development of the developing countries depends on a favourable international economic environment. In our view, the promotion of the economic growth and sustainable development of the developing countries lies at the very heart of international development cooperation. Reinforcing the consensus on this matter in an Agenda for Development is of great importance to the strengthening of international development cooperation and the work of the United Nations in economic and social areas. However, efforts to promote economic growth should not stop at abstract principles. An Agenda for Development should build on the conceptual consensus on the key issues of development, setting forth concrete objectives and tasks in helping the developing countries with their economic growth. In other words, consensus on The establishment of favourable external conditions for the economic development of the developing countries is one of the primary objectives and tasks of the United Nations, which should help them in particular to overcome constraints in such areas as trade, financial resources and technology. Only strengthened international cooperation in these key areas can achieve noticeable results in the promotion of economic growth and development. Moreover, we must bear in mind that the central aim of international development cooperation is to help the developing countries achieve long-term economic growth and development. Such cooperation should by no means be driven by short-term and fragmentary considerations. The United Nations operational activities for development need to contribute to crisis prevention, emergency humanitarian assistance and post-conflict reconstruction. But this should in no way weaken or even replace the Organization’s primary mandate for multilateral technical cooperation or subordinate it to peace-keeping operations. That would undercut the strength of the United Nations in resolving the silent crises in the developing world. In this connection, we think that the proposal to place operational activities for development under the leadership of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General in charge of peace- keeping operations needs further reflection. Secondly, practical results should be stressed and the outcome of international conferences translated into concrete development cooperation. The report of the Secretary-General touches upon the implementation of the outcome of international conferences on development cooperation. This is a point that merits our attention. In recent years, there have indeed been many conferences on development convened within the framework of the United Nations system, and many documents have been adopted at these conferences on the objectives, principles and tasks of international development cooperation. However, their follow-up processes have hardly been satisfactory. Turning solemn commitments into solid action is of increasingly urgent concern. The outright failure to implement follow-up actions in some cases and the slow progress on them in others can be attributed mainly to a lack of political will on the part of the countries concerned, particularly the developed countries, and to their refusal to fulfil their commitments to implementation through the provision of financial resources The competing demands of conferences on the United Nations system have also, to a certain extent, added to the difficulties of acting on their results. Therefore, the relevant departments and agencies of the United Nations system should adopt an integrated approach towards implementing the decisions of the relevant conferences. They should stick to promoting the economic growth and development of the developing countries as their central task while taking into consideration such areas as social development and environmental protection. This would ensure continuity and systemic integrity and would thus have the optimal overall impact in implementing the objectives, strategies and tasks of international development cooperation for the 1990s. In this regard, transparency and extensive and full consultation with Member States need to be emphasized to ensure the full and comprehensive implementation of the agreements reached at the various conferences to satisfy the needs of the developing countries. Thirdly, we must digest the achievements made in reinvigorating the United Nations system in the economic and social fields, overcome the shortage of resources and improve the United Nations efficiency in multilateral economic cooperation. In the economic and social fields the United Nations system has seen a host of major reforms, the most recent of which are provided for in General Assembly resolutions 45/264, 46/235 and 48/162 regarding the functioning of the Economic and Social Council and the functions and composition of the governing bodies of United Nations development funds and programmes. At present, efforts should be concentrated on digesting and testing these reform measures in practice, rather than hastily introducing new ones. Prudence should be applied with regard to recommendations that involve such fundamental principles as universal representation and the possible revision of the Charter. The long-standing shortfalls in funding for operational activities for development are the principal constraint on the United Nations in its efforts to play an effective role in the economic and social areas. Relevant Regrettably, resources for operational activities for development, especially the core fund, have decreased, and this has been exacerbated by the advancing proportion of non-core funding in overall funding. The key to better resource-mobilization has proved to lie not so much in changing the modalities as in the political will and the commitment to maintaining universality, neutrality and the grant nature of multilateral technical cooperation. Only by properly resolving this fundamental problem can funds for multilateral technical cooperation be properly raised, arranged and utilized. There is now an international trend to give priority to economic problems. The common prosperity and development of the whole world, including the developing countries, is one of the key issues of worldwide concern, one that bears on the national economy and the peoples’ livelihood as well as on each country’s long-term stability and on the peace and security of the world as a whole. Extensive and in-depth international cooperation is the contemporary watchword and the ardent hope of all countries, particularly the developing countries. It is against this broad background that the Agenda for Development was initiated. We sincerely hope that Member States will evaluate the situation and, in the course of formulating an Agenda for Development, expand the common understanding by seeking common ground while putting aside differences, with a view to instilling new vitality into international development cooperation and the United Nations economic and social system and to making contributions to the development of the developing countries. The Chinese delegation is ready to work together with other delegations to this end.

My delegation would like to thank the Secretary-General for his report on an Agenda for Development, which offers recommendations for revitalizing the activities of the United Nations in the area of development. My delegation finds this report containing his recommendations quite useful as a basis for our discussion on this important subject. Since the report came out only recently, I am afraid that we have not had enough time to study its contents as carefully as we would have liked. I shall therefore confine With the end of the cold war, a new international situation has arisen in which problems of an economic and social nature, such as poverty and environmental degradation, are increasingly recognized as new threats to world peace and stability. Thus, we are entering a new era in which we must seriously concern ourselves with formulating a new comprehensive strategy for development. In this context, my delegation fully supports the basic approach of the report, whose first section is devoted to national policies for development. It is noteworthy, in particular, that the report in its recommendations makes reference to the importance of such factors as the need for each country to take primary responsibility for its own development; the need for a partnership between Government and civil society; the need for special attention to be given to poor and marginalized peoples; the need for non-State actors, such as non-governmental organizations, to be strengthened; and the need for the importance of private business to be recognized. It goes without saying that any meaningful attempt to achieve a degree of progress which can enable a nation to reach the stage of economic take-off will have to begin at home. In this sense, of paramount importance to development, in the view of my delegation, are the self-help efforts of developing countries and their peoples, which development assistance can only complement. Regarding international cooperation to promote development, my delegation would like to make the following two points. Let me start with the need for a new development strategy. Given the opportunity that has now opened up before us to tackle the issue of development on the basis of cooperation — rather than confrontation — between the developing and the developed countries as a result of the demise of the ideological context of the cold- war period, our efforts should be addressed more seriously to formulating a new strategy for development. In this context, Japan proposed at the 1993 Tokyo Summit to First, in order for our development assistance to succeed, as I explained in my general statement to the Second Committee, assistance would have to be considered from a comprehensive perspective that encompassed not only official development assistance and debt relief, both of which have traditionally been the core of assistance strategy, but also such factors as the promotion of trade, direct investment, the transfer of technology and the building of the basic social infrastructure of the country involved. Secondly, in order to provide truly effective support for national self-help efforts, this comprehensive approach will have to be carried out in a differentiated manner, under which a concrete prescription for a development programme for each particular country will be based on the best policy mix of relevant factors, including loans, grant aid, technical assistance and all the other ingredients that I have just mentioned, that best suits the particular needs and the stage of development of the recipient country. It is also appropriate to strike a proper and timely balance between large-scale and small-scale assistance, such as that provided by non-governmental organizations; between conventional areas of assistance such as economic infrastructure, and new areas of assistance, such as HIV/AIDS and the environment; and between assistance that takes the form of hardware, such as loan or grant aid, and assistance that takes the form of software, such as technical assistance. This differentiated approach should be pursued in formulating each developing country’s long- and medium- term development plans, on the basis of such programmes as the Country Strategy Note (CSN) and the country programmes of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). It is in this same context that my delegation has been emphasizing the importance of promoting so-called South- South cooperation. In the view of my delegation, this is an area in which we can apply the comprehensive and differentiated approaches most efficiently. To illustrate the point, the International Conference on African Development, held last October in Tokyo, was a remarkable achievement in this direction. It opened up a new vista for the future to the participants, demonstrating that while no model of development can simply be transferred automatically from one region to another, there is a fertile ground from which to draw lessons from the experiences of the East Asian countries on their efforts to achieve economic take-off. In this sense, South-South cooperation In this connection, permit me to recall that Foreign Minister Kono, in his address to the General Assembly last September, expressed the intention of Japan In cooperation with the Group of 77, and with other developed countries, we are now taking the first steps towards the formulation of such plans. My delegation thus proposes that at the current session of the General Assembly an ad-hoc group of experts be established to study ways to promote South-South cooperation through the United Nations, taking into account the experience, both multilateral and bilateral, that has been gained in this area. I sincerely hope that we shall be able to arrive at agreement on some initial measures of this kind. One key issue raised in the Secretary-General’s recommendations on an Agenda for Development is the relationship between military spending and development. My delegation shares the view expressed in the report that excessive military spending and its consequences are deeply inimical to development goals. There certainly is a need to address the question of how to channel resources into the area of development that until now have flowed into the military sector. This angle also calls for the strengthening of the United Nations Register of Conventional Arms, which Japan, together with the European Community, took the initiative in launching. Given the fact that land-mines constitute a major obstacle to development, my delegation believes that the General Assembly should give priority consideration to this issue so that an ultimate ban may be realized on their use and transfer, in particular anti-personnel devices. My Let me now turn to the recommendations for an effective multilateral development system. The revitalization of the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) has been and will continue to be a key to our efforts in this area. In principle my delegation concurs with the observations contained in paragraphs 44 to 46 of the report, including the need for a closer working relationship with the specialized agencies, the need for the Council to serve as an international development assistance review committee, and the need for it to identify potential humanitarian emergencies and provide policy guidelines for addressing them. The real question, however, is how to apply these observations. It seems to me that the report would have been more useful if it had elaborated on these ideas by offering concrete proposals on actions that might be taken. In this context, my delegation is in favour of the idea of an expanded bureau of ECOSOC. A concrete modality for achieving this should be explored on an urgent basis. Discussion of devices for strengthening the cooperative relationship between the United Nations and the Bretton Woods institutions at both headquarters and field levels would also be extremely opportune. I wish now to deal with some of the recommendations of the report for more efficient and effective United Nations development activities. First, Japan fully supports the activities of the United Nations in the field of humanitarian assistance and believes that they should be coordinated closely with development activities at the post-emergency stage in order to create a continuum of the Organization’s humanitarian assistance efforts at the emergency stage and its reconstruction and rehabilitation efforts at the post-emergency stage. Secondly, my delegation supports the recommendations in the Secretary-General’s report on such common development goals and priorities as empowerment of women, eradication of poverty, and development in Africa. Thirdly, while understanding the rationale behind the proposed global compact on the elimination of poverty, my Fourthly, my delegation agrees that the recommendations regarding preventive development and establishment of a global watch system deserve our careful attention and should be further elaborated. Lastly, I wish to touch upon the problem of the financing mechanism and offer some of my delegation’s views thereon. The report states that reliance on voluntary contributions alone is no longer feasible. While accepting the urgent need for increased financial resources at present, my delegation would hesitate to adopt such an extreme position. In my view, voluntary contributions based upon the political will of Governments and the support of their people should continue to be the basic funding mechanism. Other, more forcible devices, such as assessed or negotiated contributions, cannot and should not be imposed on a country against its will. I am not offering this view because my country is less than willing to continue to contribute as much as it has in the past. In fact, Japan has been steadily expanding its official development assistance. While the total amount in dollars of official development assistance from all donor countries of the Development Assistance Committee decreased by more than 10 per cent from 1992 to 1993, Japan is one of the very few donors that actually increased its official development assistance contribution. In accordance with its new Fifth Medium-Term Target, Japan plans to disburse $70 to $75 billion of official development assistance over the five-year period from 1993 to 1997, which is a 40 to 50 per cent increase over the Medium-Term Target for 1987 to 1992. This will enable it to expand its activities to a wider range of fields. None the less, I am convinced that simply to switch from the system of voluntary contributions to that of assessed allocations will not solve the problem, in the absence of political will. In my delegation’s view, it is of cardinal importance in the consideration of the financing mechanism that the development agencies of the United Nations system demonstrate to donors, through efforts to improve the Let me conclude my statement, which as I said at the beginning is of a preliminary nature, by proposing that an open-ended working group be established at this session of the General Assembly to enable us to continue the consideration of this all-important subject so that we may reach some concrete agreement on the report’s salient points at the substantive session of the Economic and Social Council and at the fiftieth session of the General Assembly. My delegation, for its part, looks forward to working closely with other delegations towards that end.

Several months ago we commended the Secretary-General for his report on the Agenda for Development, which is a thoughtful reflection on various dimensions of development and the role of the United Nations in this context. Today we note with appreciation the recommendations offered on this basis. The Agenda for Development is an ambitious project. That has been the case from the inception of the idea to its present stage. To implement such a project requires intellectual power, political will and the mobilization of considerable resources. Let us make several substantive observations on some aspects of the Agenda for Development, starting with something that comes directly from my country’s own experience. One central question in development is the ever- present one of the relationship between economic growth and social development. This question has been analysed in the Agenda for Development with due regard to the experience gained or confirmed in recent years. Let me add in passing that recent changes in many countries, including those in transition, have shown that the cold war will really be over only when it is generally accepted that profound transformation is needed on both sides of the dividing line that formerly ran through the globe. We are engaged in a historic attempt at transition, an attempt that has never been carried through. We in Slovenia are pretty far down the road of the transition process. We have tamed inflation and established general macroeconomic stability, our economy is growing again at more than 5 per cent a year, we are a stable and vigorous democracy, and we have found our own answers to the transition issues. We consider this an important experience: it demonstrates that the process of transition is country-specific and can be successful in a relatively short period of time, without large mobilization of outside resources. Transition is not a selfish project and does not mean that the needs of the neediest and disinherited must be callously disregarded; that is why we are eager to participate in a search for better, more modern ways to enact development. There is no doubt in our minds that much of the old thinking should be left by the wayside and many of the old vocabularies and systems should be relinquished. The era of models and countermodels is past. This is a time for pragmatic, flexible approaches and for a diminishing role of the State, which in the recent past often nearly suffocated growth and devalued work. Many steps are easy to conceive and difficult to take. The United Nations is a good place to convince ourselves that difficult steps are to be taken and that the old ones are not to be taken again. This is also a time of renewed importance for global change and global approaches. The collapse of the former ideologically based divisions has produced new challenges that affect us all. We hope that the world social Summit will shed more light on the issues of transformation and transition. It may prove useful to consider stories of individual successes or failures. Transition and transformation have the same aim, but their pitfalls can be avoided in different ways. In an era of growing interdependence, the United Nations system ought to work in an integrated fashion. Social policies and good governance, understood in terms of universally agreed human-rights standards, are The recommendations prepared by the Secretary- General represent an invitation to further discussion that will enable specific decisions to be adopted. It is useful that the recommendations are structured in a manner that provides an opportunity for refinement of their content and for additional, complementary ideas. One interesting notion among the recommendations is that of empowerment. In the recommendations it is postulated as a specific policy orientation with respect to the status of women. In addition, it is recognized that efforts towards development and the eradication of poverty require a bottom-up, participatory approach. Empowerment is very relevant here as well. One of the most widely shared definitions of participation by the people insists that participation, in order to be meaningful, must include an opportunity and an effective framework for participation in decision-making for those who have been hitherto excluded from decision-making. Poverty most often means exclusion. Policies intended to eradicate poverty should be developed in a manner that coordinates the aspects focusing on expanding the resources necessary for the eradication of poverty and those providing realistic opportunities for the empowerment of people. Seen from both the national and the international perspectives, these policies require a coordinated approach. An essential element in such an approach is the strengthening, protection and implementation of human rights. The right to an adequate standard of living is a universally recognized human right and should serve as a basis from which national and international policies are developed. Furthermore, the principle of the indivisibility, interdependence and interrelatedness of all human rights — by now a universally accepted principle of human-rights law and policy — dictates that full appreciation be given to the requirements of personal safety, freedom of expression and political freedom in the effort to realize the right to an adequate standard of living. The United Nations can help in this process. The existing mechanisms represent a minimum instrument that can be developed further and become substantially more effective. Strengthening of the human rights component of development would also make several specific tasks — for example, the task of combating corruption — more effective. And last but not least, the process of development In this connection, it might be useful to reflect also on the question of the use of terms and on the development of new terminologies. Terminological innovation is not always necessary or appropriate. We appreciate the intentions behind the use of such terms as “preventive and curative development”; however, we would prefer greater clarity, especially in the context of the role of development as a means of preventing conflicts. It is also necessary to consider that development is a value in itself and that management of social and political tensions is a necessary ingredient. Prevention of conflicts is a natural consequence rather than the purpose of development. Let us in closing make a few remarks on the future action at the level of the United Nations. We support the Secretary-General in his effort to help the General Assembly develop its capacity for comprehensive and coherent policy guidance and to strengthen the Economic and Social Council, which should be empowered for genuine policy coordination. We also support the idea of an international conference on development. Such a conference could take advantage of the results achieved at the four major conferences convened by the United Nations since 1993, starting with the Vienna World Conference on Human Rights. We noted with interest the proposal for a world conference on development made by Brazil during the general debate at this session of the General Assembly. The recommendations offered by the Secretary-General suggest that the focus of such a conference should be on forging a new framework for development cooperation and on the financing of development. The search in this direction should be supported and the pertinent ideas further discussed, both at the General Assembly and by the Economic and Social Council. Slovenia supports the proposal to create an open- ended working group to elaborate on these questions in the coming months, and we hope that this process will lead to success. For the first time in the 50-year history of the United Nations, the world community, having freed itself from bloc short-sightedness, has been able to respond to the challenges of world development in a truly global, holistic vein. No less important is the fact that we are beginning to evaluate development problems through the prism of human beings in all the diversity of their interests and requirements. In our view, taking as our departure point these two basic premises, we should make the Agenda for Development a reality. The first important steps in this direction have been taken. The Secretary-General’s report (A/48/935), which was taken up during the World Hearings on Development and at the high-level meetings of the regular session of the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), and his recent report (A/49/665) on recommendations, which took into account the results of these discussions, are significant. We believe that this is a good basis on which to continue the complex process of developing generally acceptable approaches to development that might in the future form a basis for agreed intergovernmental recommendations. We commend the personal efforts made by the President of the General Assembly at its forty-eighth session, Mr. Insanally, and the President of ECOSOC, Ambassador Butler, in pursuing a constructive dialogue on various aspects of an Agenda for Development. It is broadly acknowledged that the Agenda should include a concise but exhaustive analysis of the complex interrelations in modern development and at the same time define the basic parameters for interaction between all the actors in this process: the subjects of development on a national level, sovereign States, regional and other international bodies and of course the United Nations. In this chain, organic niches or spots should be provided for non-governmental organizations, social groups, and scientific and trade union groups, not to mention that dynamic and influential force — the private sector — and they should be included as fully fledged actors and not mere supernumeraries. It is indisputable that we must have a comprehensive approach to development that takes into account all five of its cardinal components: maintenance of peace, economic growth, protection of the environment, social justice and democracy. The thesis of the Secretary- General is also true: the comprehensive recommendations of the most recent major forums of the United Nations have outlined the broad framework for action in these areas, and the search is now on for mechanisms by which to implement them. In our view, we should put greater force into the idea of setting up a new partnership for the participants in modern development at all levels and in all stages, in initiating and taking decisions before they are implemented. That idea, in our view, should be the linchpin of the appropriate section of the Agenda. We feel the Secretary-General has produced an interesting framework and methods for interaction between the organizations in the United Nations system and the Bretton Woods institutions, taking account of the relative advantages of each organization to “integrate their complementary mandates into coherent and coordinated support for countries’ aspirations”. (A/49/665, para.11) I believe it would also be useful to take an inventory of the potential for that interaction, both in terms of sectors and on a country level, in executing specific programmes and projects. Over and above the proposal made by the Secretary-General for setting up a liaison committee, we could give thought to the advisability of setting up other permanent and ad hoc mechanisms for coordinating joint action. There is no doubt as to the importance of strengthening the system of operational activities of the United Nations, primarily by enhancing coordination, by more effective execution of programmes and projects and by improving system-wide management of this area. As for financing operational activities, we agree with the delegation of Japan that it is not advisable to go beyond the framework of the principle of voluntary contributions by States for that purpose. Here, as in other sectors, it is exceptionally important that we proceed on Another important sphere that requires adequate reflection in the Agenda is the conversion of military production, not only in nuclear countries, but in others which have accumulated enormous stockpiles of conventional weapons and the infrastructures for their production. Structural adjustment is needed to find useful applications for these considerable material and intellectual resources and could give a powerful additional impetus to development. We also need careful thinking through of the new forms and methods proposed by the Secretary-General for organizing the work of the General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council in the social and economic spheres, including strengthening the preventive functions of the United Nations and monitoring emerging problems in the economic field, as well as the conservation and humanitarian fields. A number of such ideas could be put into circulation now in the context of the ongoing reform of the social and economic sectors. The Russian delegation is prepared to continue work on the Agenda for Development. Of course, serious negotiations lie before us, but, given a constructive and realistic approach on the part of all States, we believe that this work can be successfully completed by the fiftieth session of the General Assembly.

General Assembly resolution 47/181, “An agenda for development”, adopted nearly two years ago, set in motion a process of comprehensive re-evaluation of the established patterns and the traditional philosophy of development. We expect that My delegation expresses its high appreciation of the Secretary-General for presenting his reports (A/48/935 and A/49/665) on an Agenda for Development, containing his views and recommendations on the main substantive and institutional aspects of the issue, in compliance with the relevant General Assembly resolutions. Our deliberations today rest upon valuable input by the high-level segment of the Economic and Social Council during its substantive session this year, as well as on ideas and views presented during the general debate at the current session of the General Assembly. The World Hearings on Development conducted under the presidency of Ambassador Samuel Insanally produced a plethora of thought-provoking ideas that will undoubtedly enrich our deliberations. As a member of the Group of 77, my delegation cannot fail to refer here to the importance of the special Ministerial Declaration on an Agenda for Development, adopted by the Group of 77 on 24 June 1994, in which the views of the developing countries on critical areas of action were articulated. Thus a great deal of work has already been done that, hopefully, will facilitate a more focused and productive discussion of the agenda item with a view to forging a new framework for development cooperation. My delegation sees these deliberations as a logical continuation of the Agenda for Peace. The essence of the work done to date boils down, in our view, to the following three main conclusions. First, development should be seen as a multidimensional notion. There seems to be a growing awareness and general acceptance of the fact that development is not confined to economic aspects, but, rather, encompasses such interlinked components as peace, social justice, democracy and protection of the environment. Secondly, the end result of the entire exercise should be a specific and action-oriented programme. This programme, as we see it, should define and prioritize its objectives and clearly articulate the responsibilities of all actors at the national, regional and international levels. Thirdly, the ultimate objective resides in the betterment of the human condition — in other words, in Let me now deal with some of the essential topics that my delegation believes should be reflected in an Agenda for Development. In the formulation of such an Agenda, the root causes of the prevailing complex economic situation must be addressed in order to find an adequate response to the persistent inequalities and imbalances that negatively affect the developing countries. Abject poverty and social disintegration are the two formidable impediments to sustained economic growth and sustainable development. Various reports and studies of the issue of poverty make it amply evident that this problem, complex and multidisciplinary in nature, requires a cross-sectoral and coordinated approach. In this regard, we share the view of the Secretary-General: “All countries should agree on a global compact to eliminate poverty over a specified period of time.” (A/49/665, para. 77) The efforts of the developing countries to improve their economic and social situation are being undermined by, among other factors, the growing external debt burden. What is needed now is a political commitment and resolve on the part of creditors to reduce and, where possible, to cancel debt. Innovative forms of debt relief, including debt- for-equity swaps, debt-for-social-development swaps, and debt-for-environment swaps, could be widely utilized. To give an added political impetus to resolving this intractable problem, consideration could be given to convening a special session of the General Assembly, or an international conference at the highest political level, with a view to formulating an effective international debt strategy. We are fully cognizant of the fact that receiving aid is not an end in itself. Nevertheless, for the developing countries, especially the poorest ones and those making the painful transition to a market economy, increased aid remains essential. Commitments made by the developed nations to reach the official development assistance target of 0.7 per cent of gross national product must be honoured and implemented in practice. We wish to see this commitment reaffirmed in Although we do not wish to appear to be diminishing the importance of aid for so-called fire- fighting, it should be emphasized time and again that if sustained economic growth is to be feasible investment flows in the form of concessional loans, foreign direct investment and technology transfers on a preferential basis are crucial. We should have preferred to see in the Secretary-General’s report his specific ideas as to how those flows could be ensured. In this connection, my delegation wishes to note the importance of convening an international conference on the financing of development. A fair trading system based upon non-discriminatory and non-restrictive arrangements and practices is a most effective way of promoting the goals of development. In this regard, we fully share the view, expressed in the Ministerial Declaration of the Group of 77 on the Agenda for Development, that there should be, above all, consistency and coherence between proclaimed adherence to trade liberalization and implementation of specific trade policies. We are also of the view that mechanisms should be devised to provide adequate compensation to those developing countries that are adversely affected by the new multilateral trade regime. We see merit in the suggestion that, in order to maintain the integrity and comprehensive nature of the United Nations system, the World Trade Organization should be brought into close relationship with the United Nations. An important issue that we believe should find proper reflection in the Agenda for Development is that of the peace dividend, which, according to the 1994 report on human development, reached $935 billion between 1987 and 1994. The report rightly points to the fact that it is difficult to track where these funds went and that there was no clear link between reduced military spending and enhanced expenditure on human development. The Agenda for Development will be substantially enriched if the outcomes of the major international conferences, past and future — especially the World Summit for Social Development and the Fourth World Conference on Women — are synthesized and reflected in it. In our view, an Agenda for Development should be I wish to turn briefly to the institutional aspects of the Agenda for Development. We regard the United Nations as an irreplaceable and indispensable focal point for the promotion of international development cooperation. That being the case, the Organization must have its role strengthened so that it will not be sidelined and become a mere observer while the major decisions are taken elsewhere. As the field of activity of the United Nations and its development funds and specialized agencies is constantly expanding, the need for the Organization to have a greater coordinating role becomes ever more evident. In this context, it should be emphasized that the Charter provides possibilities for upgrading of the role of the Economic and Social Council to enable it effectively to assume these coordinating functions. To this end, the idea of more frequent sessions of the Economic and Social Council could be considered. Various other ideas and proposals designed to revitalize that body could be given serious attention. My delegation shares the view that there is a need to strengthen the links between the United Nations and the Bretton Woods institutions. In our considered opinion, the development policies and activities of these bodies should complement each other. We note with interest the areas of cooperation proposed in the Secretary-General’s report — poverty-reduction strategies; improvements in the productivity of the resources sector and sustainable-energy development; preventive development and post-conflict peace-building and reconstruction; socially and environmentally responsible structural-adjustment programmes; and capacity-building and improved public sector management. It is our view that, if this cooperation is to work, continuous dialogue and coordination at various levels between these bodies must be ensured. My delegation wishes, in conclusion, to endorse the proposal to set up, at this session of the General Assembly, a high-level working group to formulate and finalize an Agenda for Development. It would be advisable for such a group to carry out its mandate within a specified time — preferably by the fiftieth anniversary session of the General Assembly.

I should like to take this opportunity to thank the Secretary-General for We have studied the report thoroughly, and we expressed our views on its first part during the high-level segment of the Economic and Social Council. We also participated in the World Hearings on Development, where we presented our ideas on the subject. I believe that the General Assembly, at its current session, can make a significant contribution to the dialogue on the report’s proposals. The report rightly addresses the national conditions that are necessary for development. However, without a supportive international economic environment, the chances of change in the prevailing situation are slim. Therefore, special priority should be accorded to the creation of the external conditions that are essential for development. We share the Secretary-General’s view that there are numerous important agreements on international cooperation for development — for example, the International Development Strategy for the Fourth United Nations Development Decade, the Declaration adopted at the eighteenth special session of the General Assembly, the final document of the eighth session of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, and Agenda 21. Had these agreements been implemented, the international economic environment would be much more favourable for economic growth and development in the developing countries. That is why we have to focus on practical recommendations with regard to effective follow-up mechanisms for the implementation of international agreements. As is noted by the Secretary-General, a common framework should be developed for the purpose of following up major United Nations conferences. In this regard, we strongly support the idea of convening an international conference on the financing of development. In view of the important role of the Bretton Woods institutions and of regional banks, such a conference should be convened in close consultation with them. At present, most decisions on crucial international fiscal and trade policies are made by a small number of In this respect, the follow-up discussions on an Agenda for Development should explore ways and means of promoting fair participation by developing countries in these negotiations. Meanwhile, the United Nations, because of its universal character, is the most appropriate forum for economic-policy coordination, provided that there is close cooperation between the Bretton Wood institutions and the Organization. If the United Nations is to play an effective role in the promotion of international development cooperation, its overall functions, particularly in the economic and social fields, will have to be revitalized in such a way that the promotion of development is its foremost and vital task. In this regard, the concept of development should be considered in its own right and as an inevitable element in the process of securing peace and security at the national and international levels. Effective implementation of the agenda for development and other agreed documents requires coordination among all concerned organizations. In this context, as stated in resolution 47/181, concrete recommendations on enhancing the relationship between the United Nations and the Bretton Woods institutions — and now the World Trade Organization as well — is needed. The Secretary-General has proposed another reform in the Economic and Social Council. He contends that expanding the bureau of the Council and its meeting inter- sessionally would facilitate agreement on important issues to be endorsed by the Council. On this point, my delegation would like to emphasize that the organizational arrangement has little bearing on the existing situation. At present the Economic and Social Council, which is undergoing many reforms, is the most appropriate body for policy coordination and follow-up in that it provides the high-level segment. We should try to strengthen the present format, through, inter alia, higher levels of participation as well as the promotion of coordination and the establishment of monitoring and responsive mechanisms within the Council. At the same time, we should not lose sight of the fact that the decisive element for full and expeditious implementation of the resolutions and decisions of the General Assembly and those of the Economic and Social In conclusion, given the importance of the report, we should make sure that it will not be forgotten, as the previous relevant resolutions or recommendations of the General Assembly or the Secretary-General have been. In this context, my delegation supports the idea of establishing an open-ended working group of the General Assembly. The mandate of such a working group should be the comprehensive consideration of the report, taking into account all the views expressed during the high-level segment of the Economic and Social Council and other forums, as well as numerous important agreements on international cooperation for development, in order to arrive at a resolution containing action-oriented recommendations for attaining development.

I wish to thank the Secretary-General for his report “An Agenda for development”. This report is particularly welcome as it goes beyond the preliminary report issued by the Secretary-General earlier this year in that it not only spells out the rationale for an agenda for development and identifies the various dimensions of development and the actors involved but also makes recommendations for revitalizing the enterprise of international cooperation for development. Since the adoption by the General Assembly of resolution 47/181 in December 1992, the elaboration of an agenda for development has received widespread attention, particularly within the United Nations. The subject was the focus of debate during the World Hearings on Development organized by the President of the General Assembly at its forty-eighth session and constituted the theme of the high-level segment of the substantive session of the Economic and Social Council this year. The developing countries made their views and expectations on an agenda for development known in the Ministerial Declaration issued by the Group of 77 on the occasion of its thirtieth anniversary. In this respect, Zimbabwe fully associates itself with the statement by the Chairman of the Group of 77 on this important subject this morning. The founding fathers of the United Nations recognized that enduring peace could be secured only on a foundation of social and economic development and prosperity. Thus, the Charter of the United Nations gives equal weight to the maintenance of international peace While we accept that it is the responsibility of each country to define its national goals, objectives and priorities in its development process, we however believe that for economic and social development to be achieved, there is an imperative need to narrow the widening disparities between the developed and developing countries. In the last three decades we have witnessed the rapid development of science and technology and the phenomenal growth of the wealth of nations. Yet such great strides are taking place against a backdrop in which such basic human needs as food, shelter and health go unmet in many parts of the world, and over a billion people continue to live in poverty. As the world is brought closer together by commerce and trade and other economic links, the power of decision- making on vital global economic issues remains the preserve of a handful of industrialized countries. Developing countries continue to have little control over such external economic factors as terms of trade, commodity prices, the transfer of financial resources and technology and management of the external debt problem. The removal of these imbalances should be one of the prime objectives of an agenda for development. For these fundamental imbalances to be redressed, added political will and greater responsiveness on the part of the developed countries to the needs of the developing countries is greatly needed. It is in this context that we have noted with dismay the sharp decline in official financial resource flows from the developed countries over the last few years. We share the Secretary-General’s concern that only four countries have so far achieved the official development assistance target of 0.7 per cent of gross national product, and hope that this target has not been lost sight of by the rest of the international community. We believe that the issue of resource flows is inextricably linked to that of the external debt crisis in many developing countries. We would wish to reiterate the view that the international community has to adopt a unified and coordinated approach to the debt problem of developing countries. The fragmented approach whereby bilateral commercial and multilateral debt are treated in different, uncoordinated forums and the various categories We fully support the Secretary-General’s call for the outright cancellation of debts for the least-developed countries and the poorest countries, particularly those in Africa. An Agenda for Development should attach the highest priority to the implementation of international agreements in the economic and social fields in an action- oriented manner. The States Members of the United Nations have, over the years, adopted a series of international decisions — for instance, the establishment of the Fourth United Nations Development Decade and the Declaration of the eighteenth special session providing cardinal guiding principles on development. Even more recently, specific targets and commitments have been agreed to at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, in 1992, and at the International Conference on Population and Development, last September. As we speak, the attention of the international community is focused on preparations for the World Summit for Social Development, the Fourth World Conference on Women and the second United Nations Conference on Human Settlements (Habitat II) — all to take place within the next two years. The agreements and commitments arising from these conferences will constitute a solid framework for international cooperation for economic and social development. As the Secretary-General correctly points out in his report, “a powerful international development agenda is emerging on an ongoing basis through the work of a continuum of United Nations conferences and summits”. (A/49/665, para. 34) An Agenda for Development should seek not to renegotiate these instruments but to put forward specific action-oriented measures for their implementation in an integrated and coordinated manner. It is in this connection that we continue to support the call for an international conference on the financing of development, which developing countries have advocated for several years now. We applaud the Secretary-General for including this recommendation in his report. “should become more accountable to the United Nations and not to the major Powers to avoid manipulation of their policies and activities in pursuit of narrow national and regional interests”. An Agenda for Development must not allow the role of the United Nations in the field of multilateral technical cooperation to be marginalized. The record of the United Nations in development assistance, particularly through its unmatched network of field offices, is impressive and should be built upon. As the development needs of the developing countries are increasing, we believe that the United Nations should live up to the tasks entrusted to it by reacting promptly to these needs. This will be possible only on a firm financial base. The need to find improved and more reliable mechanisms for funding multilateral development activities should be one of the central objectives of an Agenda for Development. An Agenda for Development should give the highest priority to the critical economic situation in Africa. The problems of the African continent, including the debt burden, which is a major obstacle to private investment, and the continued decline in official financial flows, are well documented. The international community has to recognize the enormous potential that Africa has in its resources. The international community must commit itself to the social and economic development of the continent. An important vehicle exists towards this end in the United Nations New Agenda for the Development of Africa in the 1990s. The New Agenda has to be focused and We pointed out at the beginning of this statement that the Secretary-General’s report is a positive step forward. His proposals on revitalizing international development cooperation, particularly the need for a more favourable, growth-oriented international setting for development, are welcomed. We also welcome the proposal to synthesize, cost, prioritize and place in an implementable time-frame the goals and targets agreed to by the international community in the economic and social development fields. I should like to conclude by reiterating that, while the United Nations is uniquely placed as the universal forum for forging international agreements and understandings, an Agenda for Development must ensure that these agreements are in fact implemented.

The importance we attach to the item on an Agenda for Development can hardly be overemphasized. We have followed closely and have actively participated in the World Hearings on Development, as well as in the high-level segment of the Economic and Social Council, which addressed this issue. The latest report and recommendations of the Secretary- General are now before us and deserve our careful consideration. We would like to pay a warm tribute to Ambassador Samuel Insanally for his initiative in conducting the World Hearings. We also deeply appreciate the concerted efforts of the Secretary-General in firming up his report in the midst of widely varying opinions and interpretations of what it should contain. We believe that it is a positive step forward. The Chairman of the Group of 77 has aptly articulated the position of the Group in his statement today. I should like to supplement this by highlighting a few specific concerns. The unprecedented transition in world affairs on all fronts — political, socio-economic, humanitarian and ideological — has engendered far-reaching expectations, not the least of which was the need for a concentrated push to revive the cause of development as an issue that deserved pre-eminence on the United Nations agenda. An overriding and continuing concern was the silent crisis which saw development issues being marginalized in favour of resolving immediate peace and security issues or short-term crisis management relating to socio- Although deeper understanding of the development dimension is crucial, the need for concrete remedial measures and specific action orientation deserved much greater urgency and emphasis in the report, particularly with regard to such critical issues as enhanced resource flows, debt reduction, technology transfer and increased market access for the products of developing countries. The section in the report on the international setting covers important issues which have been highlighted time and again by the developing countries. The Secretary- General has recommended the convening of an international conference on the financing of development. As we all know, this proposal has been on the table for quite some time, but it has never got off the ground. We fully support this recommendation and call for the early convening of the conference. On the question of resolving the debt crisis, we feel more attention should be given to the substantial reduction of official bilateral and multilateral debts of developing countries, particularly the least developed countries. Concrete measures are essential on this issue. The report has referred to the concepts of preventive and curative development without enlarging on how necessary resources can be mobilized to implement them. Preventive development is what the developing countries have talked about for more than 30 years so that they do not suddenly plunge into crisis. They have long been urging the creation of a favourable international economic environment so that they could effectively fight against poverty and achieve sustained economic growth and development. However, there has not been much progress achieved in this area and if the trend continues, preventive development will remain a pious wish. Development is a comprehensive, interrelated and long-term process. There are no short-term solutions for it. When a crisis is detected, a sudden onrush of assistance cannot prevent it. Therefore, long-term measures must be adopted to support, especially, the poorest countries of the world. The relationship between the United Nations and the Bretton Woods institutions is, of course, crucial in the field of development. We feel that this relationship should be viewed in terms of the democratization and greater The report outlines four common goals of United Nations development activities: poverty, empowerment of women, preventive and curative development and development of Africa. We feel that one important goal has been omitted: that of the development of the least developed countries, which are the most vulnerable and whose socio-economic situation is deteriorating every day. The plight of the least developed countries has been outlined in various recent United Nations documents, and this was also underscored during the World Hearings on Development. No significant headway has been made in implementing the Programme of Action for the least developed countries for the l990s. The special situation and vulnerability of the least developed countries must receive focused attention in any agenda for development. On the subject of eradicating poverty, my delegation fully supports the Secretary-General’s suggestion for a global compact to eliminate poverty over a specific period of time. We agree with the Secretary General’s suggestion to expand the role of United Nations operational activities taking into account the global-network, neutrality and grant nature of these activities. However, this cannot materialize if resources for United Nations operational activities continue to dwindle. These activities must be assured adequate resources on a guaranteed and predictable basis if we want to make them more effective and expand their scope. In the past few years we have adopted a number of important documents, such as the International Development Strategy, the Programme of Action for the least developed countries, the Cartagena Commitment, Agenda 21 and other United Nations Conference on Environment and Development related documents and the Programme of Action of the International Conference on Population and Development. At the same time we are preparing for the World Summit on Social Development, the Beijing Conference on Women and Habitat II. Full and timely implementation of these consensus documents has to be ensured, and we need to organize our work in a way that will facilitate the process. The report, while placing much emphasis on non- economic factors, has not elaborated on economic issues at the national level. In the last couple of years most of the developing countries have implemented drastic economic reform measures, the impact of which on society needs to be analysed in more detail. In spite of measures to deregulate the economy and open up national markets, most of the developing countries have not been able to attract significant amounts of foreign direct investment. This aspect should receive our special attention, taking into account the role of such investment in economic growth. The report has suggested that Governments ensure that social and environmental costs are reflected in the prices of products. This needs to be studied carefully, as it may have negative socio-economic consequences for the developing countries. The developing countries have time and again urged the international community to refrain from attempts to attach social and environmental conditionalities to their exports since this will result in a substantial decline in export earnings and an increase in unemployment, thereby severely affect the poor and vulnerable sections of society. The issue should be examined taking into account this special concern of the developing countries. In conclusion, I would like to fully support the proposal of the Chairman of the Group of 77 to establish an open-ended ad hoc working group of the General Assembly in order to formulate a substantive and action-oriented agenda for the sustained economic growth and development of the developing countries. We are ready to actively participate and contribute in this regard.

My delegation joins previous speakers in welcoming the Secretary-General’s report on “An agenda for development”, contained in document A/49/665, and we wish to commend him for the substantial improvement, lucid presentation of content and reduced length, compared to his previous report. At the outset, we support and commend his three key objectives in the report, which were to strengthen and revitalize We appreciate and acknowledge the Secretary- General’s attempts to incorporate the wide-ranging views of Member States on the Agenda for Development. Papua New Guinea concurs with international consensus and the Secretary-General’s own belief that before any form of development can take place nations must strive to secure and maintain peace and security for their peoples to live harmoniously within secure boundaries. Therefore, peace is an essential prerequisite and a foundation on which all forms of development, including economic development and environmental protection, social justice and democracy, should build. In that regard, I reiterate Papua New Guinea’s concern that the end of the cold war has brought about a more alarming era in human history. This concern relates to the current unprecedented escalation of internal civil strife in many countries resulting in the eruption of civil wars, and the marginalization of one group by another within countries based largely on ill-conceived perceptions of superiority and ethnicity, religions and a widening social stratification in the population of nations. Sadly, there seems to be little or no sign of improvement in the immediate future. Therefore, unless urgent attention is given by the international community to address the perpetual internal security problems faced by many countries on all continents of the world, the Agenda for Development is doomed to failure for most of the world’s population. As Papua New Guinea also strongly shares the belief that the Agenda for Development must be juxtaposed with “An Agenda for Peace”, we welcome the Secretary- General’s recommendation in his current report to call for world hearings on disarmament and development, similar to the World Hearings on Development held in June this year, in whose proceedings my delegation actively participated. The proposed hearings should also address the underlying causes of the internal insecurity and instability of States which consequently affect the development programmes of Governments and force millions of people worldwide to live in absolute poverty, therefore deny them their basic human right to live in conditions of peace and harmony and to be full Papua New Guinea, among other recommendations, welcomes the Secretary-General’s call for the outright cancellation of debts owed by the poorest of the poor countries. In that regard, we also agree that external macroeconomic forces must support the development objectives of all developing countries through the provision of equitable access to trade, development cooperation, technology, investment and information. We therefore encourage our developed partner countries to re-examine and further liberalize and/or expedite their reforms of institutionalized discrimination that inhibits access to markets and other goods and services, in order to minimize the alarming disparity in development between the developed and developing countries. Papua New Guinea is of the strong view that global development must be sustainable in the use of natural resources. At the same time the international community must take urgent measures to control and prevent further environmental, including atmospheric, pollution if we are to promote and preserve conditions conducive to the continued survival of our global village. Equally important is equity in patterns of production and consumption which, we believe, is intrinsically linked to the productive activities of peoples in developed and developing countries. Without efforts adequately to address production and consumption patterns there is bound to be increased civil strife in the world though immigration and other civil disorders in many countries, especially the developing countries as people search for better lives in the twenty-first century. It is on the basis of this perception that Papua New Guinea supported the United Nations initiative on opportunity and participation that led to the adoption by consensus of resolution A/48/60, in which the General Assembly decided to set up a panel of experts to study and make recommendations on how peoples all over the world, in particular in developing countries, can meaningfully participate in and benefit from the national and international economy. On this note, we welcome the Secretary- General’s interim report on the United Nations initiative on opportunity and participation presented to the Second Committee for its consideration over the last two weeks. My Government will follow with keen interest the timetable Papua New Guinea shares the view that the relationship between the Bretton Woods institutions and the United Nations system remains somewhat tenuous, ambiguous and controversial, and therefore we support the call by some of the Members of the United Nations to address this relationship in order clearly to define their relations with the United Nations system in harmonizing a more cohesive international development agenda. Papua New Guinea believes and acknowledges that the Bretton Woods institutions have made significant contributions to international development, and we congratulate them on this. However, we are aware that in the process of providing development assistance in expert personnel and financial resources they have at times often imposed conditionalities to force Governments to adopt development policies that in some instances have contributed to the current development crisis in many countries. Papua New Guinea welcomes the suggestion by many delegations and also by participants in the World Hearings in June this year that the General Assembly should seriously consider and deliberate further on the proposal to establish an economic security council as part of the ongoing discussions on the reform of the United Nations system, including the questions of equitable representation on and increase in the membership of the Security Council and of the revitalization of the General Assembly. One of the proposed responsibilities of such a council should be to address questions of economic insecurity as a result of internal and external factors, including natural disasters, leading to declining living standards in many countries. Papua New Guinea supports the Secretary-General’s recommendation and the initiatives that have been put in place thus far to revitalize the United Nations system to make it more effective in the delivery and coordination of development cooperation and assistance to the Members of the United Nations. In that regard, Papua New Guinea will cooperate closely with the various United Nations agencies to maximize the effectiveness of the delivery of development assistance to the members of this world body. Finally, the Secretary-General’s report on the Agenda for Development now before us has provided an adequate basis on which the international community should now build and forge partnerships with the United

It is no easy task to speak on a subject, after more than 30 speakers have already done so, without creating the impression that one is simply parroting what has already been so well enunciated. I will try as best I can not to succumb to pointless repetition. I should like first of all to offer my delegation’s support for the statement made on behalf of the Group of 77 and China by my friend and brother, Ambassador Lamamra, of Algeria. Allow me, on the one hand, to thank the Secretary-General, Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali, for the new report before us which is a useful supplement to the report contained in A/48/935 of 6 May 1994, and on the other hand to congratulate the President of the General Assembly at its forty-eighth session, Ambassador Insanally, for the masterful skill with which he guided the World Hearings, held from 6 to 10 June this year. I would be remiss if I failed to mention the personal contribution of Ambassador Richard Butler as President of the Economic and Social Council during the meetings of the high-level segment that took place from 27 to 29 July 1994. This debate on the Agenda for Development is launching the States Members of the United Nations into the orbit of the twenty-first century, and clears the way to the baptismal font for the new United Nations that has been in gestation since the end of the cold war and that will be born as we approach the fiftieth anniversary of the Organization. The formulation, conclusion, adoption and effective implementation of an Agenda for Development will enable the United Nations at last to fulfil one of its original mandates: moving the overall endeavour of development to the forefront of its activities and, in that new context, helping Member States attain their development goals on the basis of their own priorities. This is an appropriate moment to recall Article 55 of the United Nations Charter, which states that the United Nations shall promote “solutions of international economic, social, health, and related problems; and international cultural and educational cooperation; and “universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion”. My delegation welcomes the praiseworthy efforts of the Secretary-General and his associates in the preparation of the two reports, which are complemented by the note by the President of the General Assembly (A/49/320). These documents thrust us directly into the structure of an Agenda for Development. The clarity and precision of the reports and the note have enabled me to formulate some observations with respect to document A/49/665. By and large, the delegation of Benin appreciates the ideas set forth by the Secretary-General but would have liked certain priorities to be more clearly emphasized in a form separate from the report. To be sure, the report acknowledges that the Agenda for Development being formulated would emphasize the current development problems of Africa and of the least-developed countries. But these problems were not dealt with in separate sections or chapters, which would have given greater stress to these clear priorities of the international community. My delegation understands that it was the desire for conciseness that relegated to one paragraph — paragraph 84 — a summary of the major problems of Africa and of the least-developed countries, namely external debt, declining flows of external resources, rapid deterioration of terms of trade, barriers to market access, desertification, poverty and joblessness. But we are less able to understand why there is only a single reference, in paragraph 85, to the United Nations New Agenda for the Development of Africa in the 1990s, which is now in its third year of implementation, and why that reference concerns only the need to establish a task force “to identify major inter-agency initiatives to be taken in support of Africa” (A/49/665, para. 85). Such a task force would be useful, but it is not enough. We must not create the impression that Africa’s problems We wish also to refer to the question of the eradication of poverty, which is addressed only in two brief paragraphs, paragraphs 77 and 79, and in a few other scattered places in the report. With respect to paragraph 77, my delegation supports the Secretary-General’s idea of formulating a global compact to eliminate poverty over a specified period of time. That global compact should be devised in the context of the International Year for the Eradication of Poverty — 1996. The United Nations system is a promising arena for the creation of new concepts and philosophies, particularly on development. Two of the concepts to have emerged over the past year are reflected in paragraphs 80 to 83 of the report of the Secretary-General, although there is no clear, official definition of their exact meaning. As members will have guessed, I am referring to the concepts of preventive development and curative development. Before these can be used as a benchmark or a tool in formulating an Agenda for Development, they must be the subject of serious discussion in the proper forum. Our final comments relate to part III of the report, “Recommendations for an effective multilateral development system”. Development must be seen in its many dimensions and as a major responsibility of the United Nations, which is a world-wide political entity and moral force. Devising a new framework for development cooperation is a task incumbent upon a number of bodies, as is clearly stated in the report of the Secretary-General. But there are a number of grey areas in the allocation of responsibilities for development among the bodies of the United Nations system, despite the adoption of resolution 48/162. Indeed, the role proposed for the Economic and Social Council in paragraphs 46 and 47 of the report of the Secretary-General is significantly different from the role defined in that resolution. Without having given those reforms time to work, we are already initiating fresh reforms — which were opposed by many delegations from developing and developed countries during the difficult negotiations in 1992 and 1993 that resulted in resolution 48/162. Unless I am mistaken or extremely naive, under paragraph 47 of the report of the Secretary-General, the expanded Bureau of the Economic and Social Council On the question of strengthening the ties between the United Nations system and the Bretton Woods institutions, my delegation supports the proposal in paragraph 56 to revive the United Nations/Bretton Woods Liaison Committee with the aim of enhancing substantive consultation. But we must go beyond that to include issues involving the financing of effective implementation of the various programmes of action that have been adopted or are being prepared for the major conferences and summit meetings to be held soon. On sectoral and technical agencies, my delegation supports such joint initiatives as the new inter-agency programme on HIV/AIDS, which “should similarly be expanded to other areas” (A/49/665, para. 58). The first area that comes to our mind is intensification of preventive action and the fight against malaria and diarrhoeic diseases, particularly cholera. Here, Benin hails the action taken by many institutions ever since the question was included in the agenda of the Economic and Social Council; these include the World Health Organization, the United Nations Children’s Fund, the United Nations Development Programme, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Beyond that, my delegation joins those calling for new organizations such as the World Trade Organization, to which major responsibilities have been assigned in the realm of international economic and social cooperation, to be linked to the United Nations, under conditions, yet to be defined, which avoid the current “fuzzy” relationship between the United Nations system and the Bretton Woods institutions. The Secretary-General’s report has said it, many previous speakers here have recalled it, and it has been recalled in many other international forums, but I wish to repeat it, because it can never be said enough: peace and development are part of the same concept. That is why the adoption of an Agenda for Peace should mean ipso facto the adoption of an Agenda for Development. Thus my delegation supports the key concepts embodied in paragraphs 7 to 11 of the report (A/49/665). The developing international situation, marked by continued hotbeds of tension in certain parts of the world, That means that the Organization must come to grips with the issues of peace and development in an integrated fashion. Without wanting to go into the calculations of economists or planning experts, I would wager that one third of the money already swallowed up in Somalia, for example, would have been enough to prevent that country’s experiencing its current rending conflict, if the money had been spent before the outbreak of the crisis to ensure for that country an economic take-off that would have averted the disaster we are now witnessing. This prompts me to pose a very simple question: “Why not make our watchword that old folk saying An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure'?” We could paraphrase it to say “Better an ounce of development than a pound of costly efforts to restore peace.” That is why it is so important to have an Agenda for Development, which as said last year, already exists. What should now be done is to issue it. It already exists because, as a result of the international consensus achieved in the past several years under the aegis of the Organization and in the context of action plans or other instruments being devised in the framework of important forthcoming world conferences, we have enough material to draw up a timetable for the effective implementation of measures and actions already agreed or yet to be agreed. What is missing — we are aware of it, and it must be acknowledged and admitted — is adequate financial resources. Only the political will of all States, Members of our Organization or Observers, would make it possible, with the support of intergovernmental organizations and non-governmental organizations, to issue an Agenda for Development worthy of the name, a programme for the realization of sustainable development. The Agenda for Development will not be just another instrument. It will be an integrated approach, a combination of all the agreements achieved, or yet to be achieved, with a precise deadline that would commit the international community. In conclusion, I should like to reaffirm that one of the basic mandates of the United Nations is to promote action in the economic and social fields, putting development at the forefront of its concerns so as to achieve or maintain international peace and security. My delegation stands ready to work with the President of the General Assembly and all delegations to carry out this important mission — drawing up an Agenda for Development.

First I should like to thank the President of the General Assembly for his introduction to the debate on the Agenda for Development, which was to the point. I should also like to lend the support of my delegation to the statement made by the Ambassador of Algeria, Mr. Lamamra, on behalf of the Group of 77 and China. My delegation wishes to congratulate the Secretary- General on the high quality of the report submitted under agenda item 92, entitled “Agenda for development”. Our congratulations also go the President of the forty-eighth session of the General Assembly and to the President of the Economic and Social Council on their important contributions to the preparation of the Agenda for Development, in particular through the organization of the World Hearings on Development and the holding of the high-level debate in the Economic and Social Council on this subject. With the submission of the outline of an Agenda for Development for our consideration, and the exercise of drafting it, we have been given an opportunity to analyse development questions and propose appropriate action to meet the challenges facing all the peoples and nations of the world. An evaluation of development policies and programmes has led us to recognize that the action so far taken has come nowhere near meeting the needs of sustainable human development based on the fundamental needs of man. There are more and more signs of an emerging consensus that new development policies are An important step towards establishing new international economic relations was taken with the holding of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro in 1992 and of the International Conference on Population and Development in Cairo last September. Despite these few positive signs of progress towards real partnership, major obstacles remain, including questions linked to coordination of macroeconomic policies, world trade, financial resources, the external debt, revitalization of growth and development and the transfer of technology. The lack of progress in implementing the various development Decades and Programmes graphically illustrates the need for political will on the part of the international community to implement effectively the commitments we have all made. The Agenda for Development must promote more effective international cooperation, capable of remedying all shortcomings. In that context, the recommendations made by the Secretary-General in his report (A/49/665) deserve particular attention. This proposed international conference on the financing of development should provide an appropriate framework within which to find a solution to these problems. A firm political commitment by the international community is essential for the United Nations to play the central role in development and international cooperation given it by the Charter and relevant General Assembly resolutions. Adequate, substantial and predictable financing for the various United Nations programmes and funds is one of the essential preconditions for the success of actions undertaken within the context both of humanitarian assistance and of development activities. We must therefore mobilize the necessary additional financial resources if the process of the revitalization of the United Nations in its economic and social fields is to lead to the desired results, in particular with respect to the Organization’s development activities. Similarly, strengthened ties between the United Nations and the international financial institutions are a prerequisite for harmonizing actions related to multilateral cooperation. Among today’s major concerns, the question of the development of Africa deserves our particular attention. All the economic indicators reflect a state of stagnation or negative growth in the African economies since the early 1980s. Africa is falling ever deeper into an unprecedented economic crisis. A major consequence of this crisis is the proliferation of conflicts, one of whose serious repercussions is the mass migration of populations. Africa is today seen by some as a continent with a seriously compromised economic future. It is given negligible attention in discussions of major economic concerns, and the investments devoted to it are not proportionate to its needs. And yet Africa is a continent of hope, with an enormous human and natural potential which should be recognized in the search for a solution to its many problems. Africa, today more than ever, needs the international community’s solidarity to consolidate its democratic achievements and the economic reform processes under way. In that context, the implementation of the United Nations New Agenda for the Development of Africa in the 1990s must be among the highest priorities. An urgent solution must be found to the external-debt problem, a major handicap to the development programmes of African countries. Any solution to this problem must take into account the joint African position on the issue and the particularly critical economic situation of Africa. The African countries rely heavily on the export of their commodities and remain vulnerable to the fluctuations of the international market outside their control. This alarming situation may persist if energetic measures are not adopted by the international community to assist African countries In that regard, a diversification fund for Africa’s commodities must be established within the framework of the implementation of the New Agenda. The mobilization of sufficient financial, technical and technological resources to implement the international community’s commitments to Africa remains a major concern of that continent. My delegation remains convinced that appropriate measures must be taken urgently to put into effect the recommendations in paragraphs 84 and 85 of the Secretary- General’s report in document A/49/655. On the eve of the commemoration of the fiftieth anniversary of our Organization, we face many challenges in the fields of economic and social development. The Agenda for Development must be prepared in such a way as to serve as a guide to our Organization in its action to meet these challenges and to bring about a better future. It must be translated into a consistent, effective and pragmatic plan of action. The basic objective of the Agenda for Development must be the enhancement of mankind’s well- being, the eradication of poverty, disease and ignorance, and the creation of productive work for all. In conclusion, we venture to express our hope that the World Summit for Social Development, to be held in Copenhagen in 1995, will also contribute to the attainment of these objectives.