General Assembly Session 55 meeting 45

The President

Last summer we completed the five-year review of the World Summit for Social Development. The political declaration and the five-year review document (A/S-24/8/Rev.1) of the special session of the General Assembly underline the need to focus our attention and efforts to achieve more equitable, socially just and people-centred societies.

There are about 40 substantial initiatives or new international agreements for action in the document. One of the most important is the call for rigorous analysis of advantages, disadvantages and other implications of proposals for developing new and innovative sources of funding, both public and private, for social development and poverty eradication programmes. A study of new sources of revenue, including a currency transaction tax and a Tobin tax, might lead the way to better and more effective global public management of the international financial system.

In the decisions made by the five-year review of the World Summit for Social Development, there was a strong call for reducing the volatility of international finances and managing crises better to protect the social services during crises. This topic may also be further elaborated in the financing for development event next year.

Another initiative called for all United Nations agencies to integrate health policies more effectively into their programmes, including action through trade agreements and increased incentives for research to improve access of developing countries to affordable and effective pharmaceutical agents, as well as action to strengthen workers' rights and the social protection of the most vulnerable in our society.

There was agreement to the target of access to basic education for all by 2015 and agreement on the importance of positive and affirmative action to achieve gender equality.

The concept of corporate social responsibility was added to the international agenda for the first time in the five-year review of the World Social Summit last summer. Furthermore, there was agreement on the global target for poverty reduction of halving by 2015 the proportion of people living in extreme poverty. There are about 1.2 billion people among us today living on less than $1 a day. A decision to start a more integrated global campaign to reduce poverty was taken. Subsequently, preparations for an international employment strategy, with the International Labour Organization in the lead, are being made, with plans to hold a global employment forum next year.

My short introductory note to this agenda item cannot encompass the entire debate and all the results of the special session. I may say only that in the follow-up to the five-year review there are urgent actions to be taken for all constituencies of our society, at the international, regional and national levels and for all players, including Governments and civil society actors.

Finally, I would like to quote from paragraph 12 of the political declaration of Geneva, as follows:

"At the dawn of the new millennium, aware of our responsibilities towards future generations, we are strongly committed to social development, including social justice, for all in a globalizing world. We invite all people in all countries and in all walks of life, as well as the international community, to join in renewed dedication to our shared vision for a more just and equitable world."

May those words guide our debate today.

I should like to inform members that, in a letter dated 21 September 2000 addressed to the President of the General Assembly. the Permanent Representative of Sweden to the United Nations, in his capacity as Chairman of the Group of Western European and Other States for the month of September, requests that the General Assembly hear in plenary meeting a statement by the Observer of the Holy See in the debate on agenda item 37.

Taking into account the importance attached to the issue under discussion, it is proposed that the General Assembly should take a decision on that request.

May I take it that there is no objection to the proposal to hear the Observer of the Holy See in the debate on agenda item 37?

The President

I should also like to inform members that, in a letter dated 6 October 2000 addressed to the President of the General Assembly, by the Permanent Representative of Turkey to the United Nations, in his capacity as Chairman of the Group of Western European and Other States for the month of October, requests that the General Assembly hear in plenary meeting a statement by the Observer of Switzerland on agenda item 37.

Taking into account the importance attached to the issue under discussion, it is proposed that the General Assembly should take a decision on that request.

May I take it that there is no objection to the proposal to hear a statement by the Observer of Switzerland on this item?

Mr. Maquieira (Chile)

After a successful special session held in Geneva we are now back in New York to continue our work on social development.

Before making a brief statement about the Special Session, may I first of all express my gratitude for the generosity and the hospitality of the Swiss Government. They were really essential for the success of the Special Session. In addition may I say that the continuous concern of Mr. Theo-Ben Gurirab with regard to this process and his continued willingness to cooperate has been a source of support and peace of mind for the Chair of the Preparatory Committee for the Special Session. And, finally, the dedication and the commitment of the Under-Secretary-General, Mr. Nitin Desai, and the Director of the Division for Social Policy and Development, Mr. John Langmore, and his efficient team were key for the smooth operation of the meetings and the results obtained. May I also express my thanks to the members of the Bureau for their help.

The review and evaluation of the results of the Social Summit that took place in Geneva last June led to very substantive results that far exceeded the expectations that were held before the meeting took place. The short amount of time since the Summit, a certain negotiating fatigue because of the continuous succession of special sessions, the loss of the mystique underlying the Social Summit, the little time that was given to the Preparatory Committee to complete its work and other factors did not lead us to expect good results for Copenhagen Plus Five.

Despite that, however, we can now see results that will make clear that the Special Session was an important step forward in developing the social development agenda.

The international community has now reaffirmed its determination to launch and to apply the Copenhagen agreements and also to agree to a number of new initiatives to achieve them. On the one hand, it approved a political declaration, which basically defines future responsibilities and our commitment and support of social development and improving society as whole.

Given current events and trends in the international discourse, the degree of specificity in this political declaration is no minor achievement and another not minor achievement is the text under review and the evaluation of the outcome of the Summit. The text indicates very clearly the progress that has been achieved, the problems that exist and the unforeseen circumstances in areas where there have been failings at both the national and international level, as well as the need to redouble our efforts domestically to face the situation.

At the end of the agreements, we see the new initiatives that were approved during the Geneva 2000 process, which undoubtedly include a surprising gamut of decisions and options that countries and the international community have adopted in order to deal with these issues, together with the conclusions of the world Summit in facing current issues.

I should highlight the goal of achieving, by 2015, a reduction by half of the extreme poverty that persists in the world. In other forums there are discussions at the United Nations on the possibility of reaching goals that appear to be utopian and for which no resources are being allocated to really achieve those goals. Let it not be forgotten, however, that goals are a problematic way of lining up political will with technical resources and technical solutions. For this they are important.

A second important aspect is the series of initiatives agreed in the field of employment. They cover almost the entire range of the international labour agenda, as well as the national labour agendas, going from the informal market to the social responsibility of corporations -- a topic included for the first time in the international agenda.

It also includes the need to develop a global employment generation strategy, as well as the issue of the rights of workers and the social net when workers are fired. The first meeting, the Summit and the Special Session have really brought the matter and the issue of employment to the fore, which is in itself very important.

Other initiatives that were agreed concerned health and the need for this sector to be seen as a factor of development and not simply as a service to be provided.

One area that received special attention during Copenhagen plus Five has to do with national and international resources, in terms of such important issues as taxation, tax shelters, tax havens and agreements that make it possible for transnational corporations to pay taxes in countries where they are operational.

All this is new and significant and it really broadens the scope of the international agenda in this field.

Of special interest is the paragraph of the Declaration requesting that a careful study be carried out of proposals to develop new and innovative sources of financing for social development. The topic of resources for development is so urgent that the Secretary-General might consider setting up a high-level committee to make specific recommendations for the conference on financing for development similar to the Panel headed by Mr. Brahimi, the former Foreign Minister of Algeria, on peace operations. As has been indicated, there are more than 40 new international initiatives or agreements in the special session political declaration that are important, innovative and action-oriented.

Given that the actual duration of the negotiations was slightly more than a month, this result can only be considered a great success. This is explained not only by delegations' high intellectual level, good knowledge of the topics and clear willingness to negotiate, but also by the significant, substantive contribution of the United Nations system. The Preparatory Committee requested the system's agencies, funds and programmes, including the Bretton Woods institutions, to submit proposals and initiatives for action. That led to 27 excellent reports that were fundamental in helping the delegations in examining problems and negotiating solutions.

This is a development with unique modalities. The requests on specific topics, rather than a broad-based mandate, should serve as a precedent for future negotiations in the economic and social field. We have said repeatedly that no sector has a monopoly on solutions to complex economic and social problems. To the contrary, there will be progress only as a result of joint action on the basis of cooperation. What happened at Copenhagen+5 between the Governments, civil society and the United Nations system is a good example.

If there is something to regret about the results, it concerns what I personally regard as the social consequences of globalization and the establishment of sound principles and good practices for social development. Much has been said about the tyranny of the market, the reduced role of the State and the need to seek rules to limit these phenomena and to share the benefits of globalization more equitably. The Copenhagen+5 process seemed to be the natural setting for at least examining these matters, viewing their relationship with world events and devising proposals to initiate a process for discussion. The proposals and the opportunity were there, but, unfortunately, the will was not. The fact that it was not possible to even define this issue in a balanced way and establish a procedure to deal with it, from the point of view of the Chair of the Preparatory Committee detracted somewhat from the important agreements reached in Geneva.

Somewhat differently but no less importantly, the Copenhagen process has been criticized for running counter to globalization, because, according to some people, it was a platform to level criticism against this phenomenon, rather than a forum to talk about its advantages. One must be careful with these broad generalizations, because they are misleading. The United Nations has a duty to search for solutions to problems, and because that applies with regard to globalization does not mean that it will be against the process -- far from it. Reducing its negative effects and more equitably distributing its benefits strengthen globalization rather than weaken it.

We have satisfactorily done our work of charting a course to face the problems and challenges of social development. What remains to be done is to implement our agreements. It is paradoxical that, while the negotiating scenarios are well structured, the implementation scenarios, which are as important or more important, are left to the initiative and free choice of the parties. There are clearly objective reasons for that: autonomy of countries and agencies, various differences and so forth. Nevertheless, implementing the agreements, which is difficult, is as important as negotiating them and may require a more systematic review of analysis and study of mechanisms. For instance, at the end of the Social Summit the Secretariat organized a number of task forces on different topics. It might be desirable to do the same on the basis of the Geneva agreement, but with a more specific and focused mandate. It would also be desirable for the Economic and Social Council to resume discussion of comprehensive follow-up action, perhaps accompanied by a report to the Secretary-General with recommendations and suggestions. Furthermore, there could be consultations between its members and recommendations could be made over time for consideration by the General Assembly.

It is a matter of exploring new modalities on this item, modalities with which countries can be comfortable and that will raise the low percentages of implementation of the agreements. Without an effective implementation system, it is of little use to achieve important results like the ones we achieved in Geneva. Therefore, my delegation would be interested in carrying out exploratory consultations with the Secretariat and other interested delegations to decide whether more formal action needs to be taken by the Organization.

Mr. Maquieira (Chile)

The special session of the General Assembly entitled "Copenhagen+5" had political importance and technical efficiency, and, based on current standards, it will have great weight because of the level of the agreements reached. The rest is our responsibility and rests on our commitments to those who will be the greatest beneficiaries of these agreements. The work has been very significant, but it has not ended.

I end on a personal note. I am very proud to have been closely linked to this process. My pride is comparable only to my gratitude to all those who made my responsibilities easier and more pleasant.

Mr. Doutriaux (France)

I have the honour to speak on behalf of the European Union on agenda item 37, "Implementation of the outcome of the World Summit for Social Development and of the special session of the General Assembly in this regard". The Central and Eastern European countries associated with the European Union -- Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia -- and the associated countries Cyprus, Malta and Turkey, as well as Liechtenstein, align themselves with this statement.

The World Summit for Social Development, held in March 1995 in Copenhagen, was a decisive stage in making the international community aware of the vital importance of social progress. The 10 solemn commitments made at that Summit represented significant progress in their various fields, allowing the concrete and practical realization of the will of the international community and States to redirect their actions towards social development to attain three main goals: the eradication of poverty, increased productive employment and the improvement of social integration.

Five years later the Member States met again, in June 2000, to reiterate their will to implement the Copenhagen commitments. To this end, they identified several further initiatives.

In addition, the Millennium Summit provided an opportunity to recall once again, solemnly and at the highest level, the critical importance of progress based on social development and the need to pursue the goal of poverty eradication with determination.

Finally, the European Union has noted with attention and interest the report of the Secretary-General, which gives an accurate, concise account of the complex results of the special session.

The European Union believes that the appraisal of the implementation of the Copenhagen commitments, which was carried out in Geneva during the special session five years after the holding of the Summit, seems to reflect reality and provides cause for both satisfaction and disappointment. That appraisal made it possible to see that despite the progress made in such areas as access to education and the reduction of the debt of poorest countries, major efforts must still be made to combat widening inequalities and to achieve the quantified objectives set at Copenhagen. Moreover, the dynamics of the reciprocal strengthening of social and economic development were also highlighted.

The appraisal led to the adoption of what the European Union believes is a substantial declaration. Beyond reaffirming the primary role of States for social development, that declaration constitutes an additional step, demonstrating willingness to go further in the implementation of the commitments made. The Geneva declaration in essence complements the Copenhagen documents in several ways; for example, by referring to human rights and fundamental freedoms and to fundamental principles and rights at work -- which are prerequisites for social development. It also reaffirms the need for specific measures to be taken on behalf of persons in need; the need to improve the situation of children and the education of girls; the need for comprehensive follow-up to major United Nations conferences; and the need for close coordination of economic, social and environmental policies.

The European Union also welcomes the consensus achieved on further measures to better implement the Copenhagen commitments. Several of those initiatives represent genuine progress and should be welcomed. This is particularly the case with regard to the objectives set to reduce the number of people living in extreme poverty by half by the year 2015; the reference to the need to ratify the basic conventions of the International Labour Organization (ILO) and to strengthen its role in accordance with its mandate; the recognition of the responsibility of businesses for social development; the need for better exchanges of good practices; and the necessity to establish participatory mechanisms to evaluate the social impact of structural adjustment programmes.

We must also welcome the acknowledgement of the importance of access by the poorest to health care and essential medicines, in particular in the framework of the campaign against HIV/AIDS. These initiatives fall under the commitment to focus greater attention on the least developed countries and on Africa, in order to underscore the priority nature of efforts made in that part of the world.

Moreover, the European Union welcomes the fact that the Geneva declaration took into account the outcome of the twenty-third special session of the General Assembly, which was held in New York last June under the theme "Women 2000", in particular with regard to acknowledging the feminization of poverty and the multiplier effect of policies for the advancement of women in terms of their effect on strategies to reduce poverty, create productive jobs and increase social integration.

The European Union believes it is important that the topic of financing for development, which will be taken up in greater detail shortly, was debated frankly at Geneva in its various aspects, and that the international community reiterated its commitment to continue the 20/20 initiative, to implement the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries Debt Initiative (HIPC) and to attain the objectives agreed with regard to official development assistance. The European Union attaches great importance to the coming high-level international intergovernmental event on financing for development. The Union believes that the objective of that meeting is to facilitate better mobilization of national and international resources and to improve adherence to policies aimed at achieving the commitments set by the international community during United Nations conferences, in particular those aimed at reducing poverty by half by the year 2015. The European Union also welcomes the holding in Brussels in 2001 of the third Conference on the Least Developed Countries. Nevertheless, the European Union regrets the fact that only limited results were achieved during the special session in areas which have great significance for the future.

Similarly, a review of the social aspects of globalization was the subject of lengthy discussions by delegations, without resulting in an agreement to establish a forum that would include all multilateral organizations concerned and that would have made it possible to set up an appropriate framework to continue discussion of this issue. Nevertheless, the main topic of discussion at the thirty-ninth meeting of the Commission for Social Development in 2001 will be strengthening social protection and reducing vulnerability in an increasingly globalized world. No doubt, that meeting will provide an opportunity for additional discussions on the social aspects of globalization. The Economic and Social Council has been invited to undertake a dialogue on best practices in the field of social development. We hope that dialogue will take into account the implications of globalization on social development.

Similarly, there is a need to develop social indicators to provide a better gauge of the progress achieved in carrying out international development objectives. A more accurate comparison of the various actors involved deserves closer study. Negotiations did not make it possible to go beyond simply inviting the Statistical Commission to continue its work and to identify a limited number of common indicators already being used by Member States. We also regret that there was no substantial progress in the discussion of principles of good governance.

The future of the partnership with civil society and the corporate world, which is one of the keys to social development, was neither fully nor sufficiently discussed, in particular with regard to non-governmental organizations, which are frequently the ones who speak on behalf of the poorest people, provide them with assistance and play a significant social role. In this regard, specific reference should also have been made to the Global Compact launched by the Secretary-General in Davos in 1999. Nevertheless, the European Union welcomes the inclusion in the agenda of this session of the General Assembly of the new item entitled "Towards global partnerships".

With regard to gender equality and the advancement and participation of women, it is necessary to take better account of the economic links between the struggle against poverty and gender equality. The feminization of poverty is a fact that is essentially due to the rigidity of the roles assigned to men and women and to women's limited access to positions of responsibility, education, training and productive resources. Women represent the vast majority of the approximately 1.2 billion poor people in the world. The inability to deal with the structural causes of poverty and develop a comprehensive approach to gender equality in economic studies and planning also contribute to the feminization of poverty.

The European Union regrets the fact that although the elements of good governance were defined at the special session, the session was unable to come up with the necessary consensus to make it possible to explicitly refer to this idea.

The European Union believes that the Geneva meeting is not the end of the Copenhagen progress but that, rather, it is a stage in a long-term process that needs to continue. The Union attaches special importance to the provisions agreed at Geneva on follow-up to that process. Those provisions should be strengthened, especially with regard to the mandates given to the Commission for Social Development and the Economic and Social Council.

The European Union welcomes the discussions within the United Nations to launch a global campaign to eradicate poverty.

Finally, the Union believes that a number of issues discussed as part of the post-Copenhagen progress need to be examined in greater depth at meetings scheduled for upcoming years. Those issues include the process of financing for development, the third Conference on the Least Developed Countries, the World Conference against Racism and Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, the second World Assembly on Ageing and the corresponding European conference, and the special sessions of the General Assembly on human settlements and children. In this regard, the European Union welcomes the holding at Strasbourg in October 2000 of the European regional preparatory conference for the World Conference against Racism.

The importance the European Union attaches to eradicating poverty, strengthening social cohesion and integrating all groups of society has led the Union to develop a strategic plan of action against social exclusion for its member States. This is an example of the determination of the European Union to translate the results of Copenhagen and Geneva in direct and specific ways.

The European Union will continue to act resolutely to promote social justice, the reduction of inequality and the eradication of poverty, which are prerequisites for building a better world, our common purpose.