EARTH NEGOTIATIONS BULLETIN <enb@igc.apc.org>
PUBLISHED BY THE INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR SUSTAINABLE
DEVELOPMENT (IISD)
WRITTEN AND EDITED BY:
JOHANNAH BERNSTEIN
LANGSTON JAMES GOREE VI "KIMO" <kimo@iisd.org>
LYNN WAGNER <grund@chaph.usc.edu>
STEVE WISE <swise@igc.apc.org>
French translation by MONGI GADHOUM < gad@Tunisia.EU.net>
A DAILY REPORT ON THE WORLD SUMMIT FOR SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT
Vol. 10 No. 38
6 March 1995
THE WORLD SUMMIT FOR SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT HIGHLIGHTS
MONDAY 6 MARCH 1995
PLENARY
UN Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali opened the
Plenary and called on delegates to send a clear message that
the international community is taking a stand against social
injustice, exclusion and poverty. He noted the necessity of
a new social contract at the global level. In recent
conferences, the international community has considered the
needs of the individual human being. Now it is incumbent on
the UN to provide specific responses to those needs.
Boutros-Ghali outlined three priority objectives: providing
social protection, assisting social integration and
maintaining social peace.
Delegates then unanimously elected Danish Prime Minister
Poul Nyrup Rasmussen as President of the WSSD. Rasmussen
noted that the security of the State has been more important
than security of the people; however security of the people
is now the main topic on the international agenda. He urged
delegates to use the Summit to turn the analysis of problems
and possibilities into concrete commitments and actions, as
was done in Rio. The true significance of the Social Summit
will be measured by what happens after the Summit.
Delegates then dealt with a number of procedural matters,
including the rules of procedure (A/CONF.166/2), adoption of
the agenda (A/CONF.166/1), and information for participants
(A/CONF.166/INF.1). As recommended in A/CONF.166/3,
delegates elected 27 vice-presidents and an ex-officio vice-
president (Denmark). H.E. Mr. Sadok Rabah (Tunisia) was
elected Rapporteur General, and Amb. Juan Somavi'a (Chile)
was elected Chair of the Main Committee.
The recommendation in A/CONF.166/3 (General Exchange of
Views) for suggested themes during the Plenary was adopted.
The March 11 and 12 schedules in the Annex to A/CONF.166/3,
proposed timetable, were extended to provide time for the
more than 140 speakers: Saturday 9:30 am to 1:00 pm and 3:00
pm to 6:30 pm, and Sunday 9:00 am to 2:00 pm and 3:00 pm
until the conclusion of speakers' list. Delegates adopted
documents A/CONF.166/6 and A/CONF.166/4 regarding
accreditation of NGOs. The Credentials Committee
(A/CONF.166/3) will consist of representatives from China,
Fiji, Honduras, Namibia, Portugal, Suriname, Togo, the US,
and the Russian Federation.
Rasmussen then turned to Agenda Item 8, general exchange of
views. Dr. Cielito Habito (Philippines) opened this five-day
exchange, speaking on behalf of the G-77. He welcomed
delegates' agreement on the priority target of poverty
eradication. Habito called for greater emphasis on the
participation of women, the needs of the disadvantaged, and
the role of the family as the nuclear unit of society. He
also called for an International Fund for Social
Development, adoption of the 20:20 formula, and adequate,
predictable, new, and additional sources of funding for
sustainable development.
Simone Veil (France) then spoke on behalf of the EU. She
noted the important role of women in development, outlined
essential elements of an educational programme, and stated
that the family is the basis of society. She also identified
the essential role of the ILO.
MAIN COMMITTEE
Amb. Somavi'a opened the Main Committee and announced its
programme of work. He announced that Amb. Shah (India) will
chair a Working Group of the Main Committee to negotiate the
new commitment on education. Amb. Koos Richelle
(Netherlands) will conduct informal negotiations on
outstanding issues in Chapters II (Eradication of Poverty),
III (Expansion of Productive Employment) and IV (Social
Integration) of the draft Programme of Action. The Main
Committee will consider the bracketed text in the draft
Declaration and Chapters I (An Enabling Environment for
Social Development) and V (Implementation and Follow-up).
Somavi'a then asked delegates to begin negotiating the
outstanding issues in the draft Declaration, beginning with
paragraph 16(c) (countries with economies in transition).
The G-77 objected to inclusion of the paragraph, stating
that it was adequate that paragraphs 18 and 19 refer
exclusively to those nations. Hungary and the Russian
Federation noted that paragraph 16(c) was different than the
others because it distinguished between the vague group of
countries in Eastern Europe. The EU and the US supported
retaining the paragraph. The Chair asked that delegates from
the G-77 and the countries with economies in transition
consult further on this issue.
The US reported that it was conducting informal
consultations on paragraph 26(k) (right to self-
determination), and stated that a solution might be reached
by Tuesday. The EU proposed language from the Vienna
Conference. In paragraph 26(s) (participation of women),
delegates agreed to delete the brackets around "ensure" in
the first line. The sentence now refers to strengthening
policies and programmes that "ensure and broaden the
participation of women in all spheres of political,
economic, social and cultural life...." In paragraph
27(narrowing the inequality gap), delegates agreed to
postpone consideration of the bracketed text on countries
with economies in transition, pending the outcome of the
discussion of paragraph 16(c) (social problems in countries
with economies in transition). In paragraph 28 (global drive
for social development), delegates agreed to remove the
brackets around the phrase "and territorial integrity" in
the chapeau to the commitments section, which addresses the
global drive for social development in "full respect for
national sovereignty [and territorial integrity]." The US
originally suggested that this paragraph be dealt with
alongside Commitment 1(a) (stable legal framework). After
appeals from Nigeria and Egypt, who pointed out that the
language reflects recognized principles in UN resolutions,
delegates agreed to remove the second set of brackets in the
Declaration.
In Commitment 1 (enabling environment), delegates could not
agree on whether a stable framework should be provided "in
accordance with our constitutions, national laws and
procedures" or "in accordance with international obligations
and constitutional laws and procedures." The G-77/China
preferred the former, while the EU opted for the latter. The
US suggested merging the two formulations, but no agreement
was reached. In Commitment 1(i) (supportive external
environment), Somavi'a noted that consultations were
underway on the financial resource issues, and suggested
that negotiations on all related bracketed language be
postponed, pending the outcome of these consultations. In
Commitment 3 (ILO conventions), no agreement was reached on
the two proposed formulations. The first one refers to the
goal of ensuring quality jobs and respect for relevant ILO
conventions. The second formulation enumerates several of
the relevant ILO conventions. Some countries, such as
Norway, felt that the first formulation was too vague, while
others noted the potential problem of binding governments to
specific conventions, which they have not yet signed or
ratified. The EU suggested an alternative text that
simplified the second variant, which also referred to "other
instruments." New Zealand highlighted the importance of
referring to human rights conventions. No agreement was
reached.
In Commitment 4(n) (ratification of human rights
instruments), the EU called for deletion of the bracketed
reference to "with full respect for the sovereignty of
States." The G-77/China objected.
Iran added a reference to "territorial integrity." In
Commitment 5(d) (universal access to health care), delegates
agreed that the relevant language from the Cairo document
should be used.
Discussion on bracketed resource language in Commitments 6
(Africa and LDCs) and 8 (increase in human development
resources) was postponed pending the outcome of the resource
consultations. No agreement was reached on Commitment 9(d)
(coercive measures which obstruct economic and social
development of States).
In Chapter I (An Enabling Environment for Social
Development), disputed language in paragraph 8 (people-
centered approach to development) was deferred to the
Richelle group. The US suggested retaining paragraph 9(f)
(reorienting agricultural policies in accordance with the
Uruguay Round), while Benin and others challenged the
reference to the "new opportunities" created by the Uruguay
Round, citing the problems for African countries.
In paragraph 9 (promotion of mutually reinforcing broad-
based economic growth), delegates could not agree on whether
the promotion of sustained economic growth "requires"
specific actions, as enumerated in paragraph 9.
WORKING GROUP OF THE MAIN COMMITTEE
The working group met Monday afternoon under the chair of
Amb. Shah (India) to consider the new commitment on
education. Delegates worked from document A/CONF.166/L.2,
which included draft commitments from the G-77 and the EU.
The EU withdrew its proposal and agreed to use the G-
77/China proposal as the basis for negotiations. The EU
suggested that the preamble commit countries to promoting
and attaining goals in education and health, but not those
related to culture. He recommended dividing the preamble
into three bullets: education, health services, and
sustainable development. He also suggested adding the
present paragraph (m) (requesting greater UN emphasis on
Summit goals) to the preamble. The US recommended including
disability as a criteria for consideration. Indonesia
offered a text that combined the EU and G-77/China
proposals, separating language on education and health.
Canada proposed "the highest standard of mental and physical
health" to balance stronger language on education.
In paragraph (a) (national strategies), France recommended
deleting national languages and non-formal education. In
paragraph (b) (lifelong learning), the Holy See suggested
"knowledge and skills which foster ethical values and
attitudes." France suggested deleting values and attitudes.
The US recommended changing "ensure" to "encourage" and
adding environmental values to those considered. Benin and
Egypt suggested that the group use a UNESCO revision of the
G-77/China proposal. Several delegates said the amendments
could not be considered unless they were written, and that
the lack of translation prohibited effective discussion.
IN THE CORRIDORS
Despite the fact that this Summit has been billed as "The
People's Summit" and that delegates and high-ranking UN
officials often refer to the important role that civil
society will play in its implementation, many NGO delegates
felt excluded from Monday's proceedings. NGO access was
limited for both the Plenary and Main Committee activities.
Other meetings were held in areas accessible to delegates
only. The explanation offered by conference spokespeople was
that space was limited and that delegates needed areas in
which they could conduct uninterrupted informal
consultations. NGO delegates, however, have expressed
concern about issues of transparency. Conference officials
promised that on Tuesday, tickets would be distributed for
250 seats in both the Plenary and the Main Committee
sessions. Tickets will be available at the NGO Information
Desk beginning at 9:00 am for the morning session and 1:00
pm for the afternoon session.
THINGS TO LOOK FOR TODAY
PLENARY: The exchange of views will continue in the Plenary.
Statements during the afternoon are suggested to focus on
the theme of eradication of poverty.
MAIN COMMITTEE: The Committee will continue its
consideration of the draft Programme of Action. It will
resume its work on Chapter I.
WORKING GROUP OF THE MAIN COMMITTEE: Delegates will present
amendments to the education commitment in the morning
session, which is scheduled to begin at 10:00 am in Room 1.
The afternoon session is expected to review a compilation
document of suggested amendments from Monday and Tuesday
morning.
This issue of the Earth Negotiations Bulletin (C)
<enb@igc.apc.org> is written and edited by Johannah
Bernstein, Langston James Goree VI "Kimo"
<kimo@iisd.org>, Lynn Wagner <grund@chaph.usc.edu>
and Steve Wise <swise@igc.apc.org> with French translation
by Mongi Gadhoum <gad@Tunisia.EU.net>. The Sustaining Donors
of the Bulletin are the International Institute for
Sustainable Development (iisd@web.apc.org), the United
Nations Environment Programme and the Pew Charitable Trusts.
General support for the Bulletin during 1995 is provided by
the United Kingdom, Denmark, Switzerland and the World Bank.
Funding for the Bulletin at the Social Summit has been
provided by UNDP and UNICEF and ACCT. Special thanks to
macKeenzie Copy Center for photocopying services and Dknet
for our Internet feed. The authors can be contacted at their
electronic mail addresses and by cellular phone during this
meeting at +45 401 38818 or 331 47797. The opinions
expressed in Earth Negotiations Bulletin are those of the
authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of IISD and
other funders. Excerpts from the Earth Negotiations Bulletin
may be used in other publications with appropriate citation
only. Electronic versions of the Bulletin can be found on
the Internet at <gopher://gopher.igc.apc.org> and in through
the Linkages World Wide Web server at
<http://www.iisd.ca/linkages/>. This volume of the Bulletin
is uploaded into the APC conferences <enb.library> and
<un.socsummit>.
The Earth Negotiations Bulletin may not be reproduced,
reprinted or posted to any system or service outside of the
APC networks and the ENB listserver, without specific
permission from the International Institute for Sustainable
Development. This limitation includes distribution via
Usenet News, bulletin board systems, mailing lists, print
media and broadcast. For more information, send a message to
<enb@igc.apc.org>.