Translation from the Norwegian
Checked against delivery

Minister of International Development Anne Kristin Sydnes

Statement to the Storting

24 April 2001

The challenge of poverty reduction: Our goals, our choices and our political signals

Currently, in the year 2001, around a quarter of the world’s population are living in extreme poverty. By the year 2015, the aim is to reduce this proportion by half.

This is the most important development target agreed on by the international community. It has been adopted by the UN. And by the OECD. If we are to achieve this goal, it will call for a national effort on the part of the developing countries themselves. Supported by a favourable international framework. And supported by assistance from the rich countries of the world.

Now, more than ever before, we are aware of the realities of life for the poor people of the world. We know more about the conditions necessary for sustainable development and equitable distribution. We know more about the connection between poverty and conflict. We know more about the importance of proper nutrition for children’s development. We know more about the possibilities, and the dangers, that are inherent in globalization.

Norway is a small country, but an influential player in the area of development cooperation policy. And now we are richer than ever. Now it has become even more important for us to look beyond ourselves and our own particular interests.

Our resources, our knowledge and our values give us a moral responsibility. We must share our wealth in order to promote growth and development in poorer countries. And if our own consciences do not spur us to action, someday our children will ask us, How much did you know? What did you do? Why didn’t you do more?

The decline in development assistance provided by the wealthy countries during the 1990s coincided with the most ambitious reform movement ever launched by the developing countries. Countries that initiated reforms in their governments and economies in accordance with our recommendations were rewarded, if we can call it that, with less assistance than before. According to the newspaper Vårt Land, on 2 April, the President of the World Bank stated that the donor countries are giving entirely the wrong signal. I fully agree with this. As one of the wealthiest countries in the world, Norway has a clear responsibility to increase its development assistance and to encourage other wealthy countries to do the same.

Development cooperation: More than aid!

At the same time we must not forget that this responsibility goes far beyond development assistance alone. Development cooperation policy is also concerned with debt, financial transactions and investment. And, not least, with private sector development, trade and market access.

In order to create growth, and thereby establish a foundation for poverty reduction, the developing countries, like all other countries, are dependent on a robust private sector. Development and private sector development are two sides of the same coin. This is why the Government has given support for private sector development such high priority in its development cooperation policy.

As a result of last year’s reorganization and simplification of the instruments for development cooperation and the increased allocations to NORFUND, the Government believes it has found a formula that is beneficial for both development assistance and business. NORFUND’s expanded cooperation with its British counterpart, the Commonwealth Development Corporation Capital Partners (CDC), which facilitates broad and active participation in the administration of local investment funds, is a significant step forward in this context.

Promoting private sector development is of little value if developing countries are unable to find markets for their exports. Therefore the Government proposes giving the least developed countries duty-free and quota-free market access for all products except weapons. The EU has done the same, but it has introduced transitional arrangements for the period up to 2009. Our system will be fully operational as from 1 July 2002.

Here I would like to mention that in the field of development cooperation policy the EU is a very important player with whom we have a fruitful dialogue, among other things on the quality of development assistance. Yesterday and today I have had talks with the European Commissioner for Development and Humanitarian Aid, Poul Nielson, who is also here today.

By promoting private sector development and market access for the poorest countries, the Government is strengthening two major pillars of Norwegian development cooperation policy. This enables us to coordinate the various parts of this policy more closely, thus making it more efficient. We are already at the forefront internationally as regards debt relief. We were the first to implement 100 per cent unilateral debt relief to the poorest countries. Other creditors like Britain and the USA have since followed suit. Recently, Norway has been a driving force behind the negotiations on binding arrangements for financing of the Debt Initiative for Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC), launched by the World Bank and the IMF. Norway has for many years been among the top donor countries with regard to development assistance.

And we intend to stay there. The Government aims to increase Norwegian development assistance to one per cent of the gross national product. In addition, the Government is considering the possibility of establishing a Development Fund.

But the debate on development assistance must not be about volume and percentages alone. The political debate on Norwegian assistance is too often reduced to a question of how large a percentage of our gross national product we are willing to spend.

We must place greater emphasis on quality and effectiveness. It is true that Norwegian development assistance is very effective as regards poverty alleviation. According to the World Bank, we are significantly better than the OECD average. We should certainly not be ashamed of our record. But we must not rest on our laurels. We must be even more effective. We must help rescue even more people from poverty.

Foundations on which to build:
Genuine cooperation, equal partnerships and legitimate demands

I would like to describe some of the fundamental premises of the Government’s development assistance policy:

First, development assistance is about cooperation. Development assistance should support a country’s own fight against poverty.

Second, development cooperation means active partnerships, based as far as possible on equality. In a larger perspective, development cooperation is a major chapter in the "global contract" for poverty alleviation, which was discussed at the UN Millennium Assembly last year: through good governance, the countries themselves must lay the groundwork for effective poverty reduction, supported by favourable international conditions and significant transfers of development assistance.

Third, partnership means making demands. Demands on ourselves, but also demands on our cooperation partners, both in Norway and abroad. In some circles we are still criticized for making demands, both as regards development cooperation in general and debt relief in particular. However, I feel that this criticism is most often unwarranted.

Fourth, development policy means wanting to accomplish a great deal, but not too much all at once. I would venture to say that Norwegian development assistance policy has, to a certain extent, been spread too thin. We have become too eager to do everything, all the time, everywhere. We have had a tendency to pile too many political goals on top of each other. Our actual political priorities are not always easy to identify.

Everyone involved in development assistance efforts in Norway should be willing to engage in a certain amount of self-criticism in this day and age. As the minister in charge, I want to show that we can take this criticism. Because we can and will do something about it.

Therefore the Government will carry out a critical review of the following:

which countries we should cooperate with, and how many,

what we should cooperate with them on, and

how we can improve some of our key instruments.

The overarching aim:
More focussed, concentrated and effective development assistance

Development assistance has little positive effect in countries with poor governance. Last year the Government took this into account when it withdrew Zimbabwe’s status as priority partner country.

When Ethiopia and Eritrea were at war during the spring and summer of last year, we discontinued our government-to-government cooperation with both countries. In the light of the subsequent peace process, we have redefined our cooperation with these two countries, with a sharp focus on peace and reconciliation, democracy, human rights and good governance.

What does "good governance" mean? It means among other things democratization, equitable distribution, respect for human rights, combating corruption and sound resource management. And it means gender equality. All these things are necessary in order to bring about lasting poverty reduction. We can hardly expect our partner countries to achieve all this at once; we know from our own experience that these processes take time. But we must definitely expect them to try to reach these goals.

In the Budget for 2001 the Government has indicated that in connection with its efforts to further improve the efficiency of bilateral development assistance, it will review the priority partner countries and the countries that are given support through regional allocations. The Government will present its proposals in the Budget for 2002. The aim is to provide more focused, concentrated and effective bilateral assistance. I would like to emphasize that the principle of poverty-orientation will remain firm.

The need to concentrate our resources: Fewer main partner countries

At present, we have 11 priority partner countries. In addition there are 30-odd countries that receive support through the regional allocations. We will concentrate on a smaller group of countries with which Norway can engage in long-term, comprehensive cooperation. In this context the Government wants to bring the designation "main partner country" back into use.

The process of defining the main partner countries has begun. The Government will emphasize the following factors when choosing which countries to include in this category:

• The countries must be among the world’s least developed countries (LDCs). In other words, we are talking about a high degree of poverty, and about cooperation with those who need it most.
• The countries must demonstrate a clear political will to solve major national problems themselves. We wish to cooperate with countries that are making active efforts to promote good governance.
• As a development cooperation partner, we must emphasize the needs of the recipient country. Cooperation with Norway must give the country in question added value in relation to multilateral assistance or bilateral cooperation with other donor countries.

Most of the poor countries in the world today have fragile social structures. They are vulnerable to international economic fluctuations, political unrest and conflict. Our main partner countries must feel secure that Norway, through its development cooperation efforts, is also willing to stand by them in times of adversity.

While our long-term development cooperation should be robust, predictable and based on mutual trust, we must also be prepared to adjust our efforts if the basis for cooperation changes substantially.

In this government-to-government cooperation with our main partner countries, Norwegian development assistance funds should be allocated on the basis of these countries’ needs and their own strategies for reducing poverty.

Other partner countries: Thematically leaner and less extensive cooperation

We must also have a category designated "other cooperation partners". Our cooperation with these countries should, as a general rule, cover a narrower range of fields and be less extensive than our cooperation with our main partner countries, and it will not necessarily have the same long-term perspective.

• In several countries and regions the most important contribution we can make is to support peace processes, directly or indirectly. In this type of situation, supplying additional short-term and long-term assistance will often have a beneficial effect.

• Many countries are able to play an influential and constructive role in their regions. I am firmly convinced that regional cooperation between the countries of the South has great potential. We must help to realize this potential to an even greater degree than before. We must also take this into consideration when choosing our cooperation partners.

• In some countries or regions it may be fruitful for Norway to focus more closely on selected areas, such as improving the situation of children, health, education, the environment, energy, good governance, or combating corruption.

The efforts to achieve more focused, concentrated and effective bilateral assistance will have consequences for the structure of the development assistance budget. The Government will alter its performance reporting to the Storting so that it is based primarily on the international development targets and the development of the countries in accordance with these targets, rather than specifically Norwegian "priority areas". Reporting will of course continue to be done in accordance with the existing guidelines in order to ensure that the allocations are used as intended.

Multilateral development cooperation: Stronger focus on effectiveness

The Government will continue its efforts to strengthen the UN, and will, to an increasing degree, draw on the UN and the competence of the multilateral system in practical development assistance work. And it is quite clear that with Kofi Annan at the helm, the UN is on the right track. The Secretary-General deserves high praise for his ongoing reform efforts, including major organizational changes and systematic efforts to ensure high levels of quality and competence in the organization.

We can now see the contours of a closer cooperation between the UN and the development banks. We must intensify our support for this cooperation, both that between the multilateral institutions themselves and that between their "owners", i.e. the member countries. We must also seek to improve coordination by means of our own priorities at country level.

This means that we will also target our multilateral assistance more precisely. Norway will continue to make substantial contributions to the basic financing of key international institutions. This money will be followed up by a more active and deliberate political strategy for our cooperation with these institutions, in which we will increasingly focus on their effectiveness.

In addition, we will channel our cooperation with the multilateral organizations towards certain priority areas. The main priorities in Norwegian development policy, which are health, education, good governance and sustainable development, will also be given a more prominent place in multilateral assistance. We intend to ensure that our efforts have more impact, for example by improving coordination between bilateral and multilateral efforts at country level.

The voluntary organizations: Better coordination and reporting

About one quarter of our development assistance budget has in recent years been used in cooperation with NGOs, most of them Norwegian. In this respect Norway is one of the world’s leaders. The reason is that Norway has a number of highly competent organizations that have shown their ability to produce results. Nowadays, we require greater efficiency from all the parties we work with: more development for every krone invested, less bureaucracy and higher quality. This is something we have discussed with the NGOs themselves.

Much has been achieved by better coordination of state and multilateral efforts at country level. However, NGO activities still often consist of isolated, uncoordinated interventions. Despite the generally good results obtained for each project, the broader effect on development is thus limited. In some cases, this makes it more difficult for national authorities to carry out their tasks in a rational manner.

It is very important that the NGOs themselves get to grips with these challenges. Our grant schemes must also be designed to ensure that we make optimal use of the advantages and potential of each NGO in a coordinated effort to achieve our development targets.

The NGOs need predictable conditions to work under. And the authorities that allocate funding need to have some way of controlling that the funds are used as intended. We have discussed these matters with a wide range of Norwegian organizations.

To ensure predictability and give the NGOs freedom of action, we now intend to narrow the scope of the traditional allocation to NGOs so that the funding is reserved for measures that strengthen civil society. Within these limits, the support will be allocated on the NGOs’ own terms and based on what they can contribute in this area. In countries with good governance, NGOs can be a useful supplement to other efforts. In countries with poor governance, on the other hand, they may be a useful corrective.

The NGOs will also be able to apply for further grants for their activities in priority geographical and subject areas for Norwegian development assistance. These may include the production of services, institution-building and peace-building activities, where the NGOs have expertise and can provide added value in the implementation of development cooperation. In such cases, we will set special requirements as regards coordination and conformity with Norwegian development policy guidelines and development cooperation standards.

We have produced new guidelines in which the grant schemes have been simplified as far as possible, and which also clarify the requirements for reporting on relations and results.

The Storting has requested an evaluation of the effect of the development cooperation channelled through NGOs. This will have a forward-looking approach and will be based on the roles and guidelines for cooperation that we have now presented. The purpose is to identify the extent to which the organizations actually contribute to capacity-building in civil society, and the effect and added value of the NGOs’ contribution to development efforts financed through regional and thematic allocations.

The political parties: A budgetary allocation for democracy-building measures

I also wish to draw the political parties in the Storting into development cooperation. The parties provide a sound grass-roots basis for development policy, and they possess expertise in democracy-building. The parties that are represented in the Storting can make a greater contribution to the development of properly functioning, pluralistic party systems and democratic conditions in developing countries. By cooperating on long-term, democratic organizational development through knowledge transfers, advice and international exchanges, we will improve the opportunities for reducing poverty.

In connection with next year’s government budget, I will therefore include a specific proposal for an allocation for supporting democracy-building measures.

First things first: Children’s welfare and rights

This brings me to our priority areas. And children – their welfare and their rights – must come first.

Some investments are absolutely crucial to any country’s development and future. The world’s poorest countries cannot even manage to make the minimum investments required to safeguard children’s most elementary rights. When welfare benefits are as inequitably distributed as they are in the world today, children in poor countries are robbed of the right to choose their future. The expansion of people’s opportunities for choice is the very essence of the concept of development.

The UN Special Session on children in September will give us an opportunity to see how far we have come since the World Summit for Children in 1990. But more importantly, the Special Session must be used to formulate goals and strategies for the next ten years. Norway will give priority to children’s right to participate in processes and decisions that affect them and to children who are the victims of exploitation and war, who are suffering from HIV/AIDS, or who are disabled. We will give special priority to improving the situation of girls.

Children have a right to basic health services. Through the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization (GAVI), the Government has shown that taking the lead in new initiatives can give results. We have persuaded others to join us, and are focusing on how the results of vaccination efforts can be maintained over time. GAVI has given new impetus to international vaccination programmes. With the funds allocated so far, we estimate that one and a half million children’s lives will be saved every year. This is an efficient use of development assistance funding. Norway is allocating NOK 1 billion to GAVI over a five-year period.

Basic education for all, especially for women and girls, is one of the Government’s priorities. Few efforts can be more important than investment in human capital if we are to create societies characterized by growth.

The Government wishes to contribute even more to the protection and rehabilitation of children traumatized by war. We raise the issue of children in armed conflict in the UN Security Council, in connection for example with our focus on Africa. Norway has signed the optional protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child that deals with the minimum age for participation in armed forces. The process of ratification is under way, and we hope it will be completed by the time of the Special Session, as UNICEF recommends.

Six months ago Norway ratified the ILO convention on the worst forms of child labour. This convention establishes a binding framework for our cooperation with a number of developing countries. In the Government’s view, efforts to combat child labour should continue to be high on the agenda. In this endeavour we will form broad alliances with research institutions, NGOs and the private sector.

The genital mutilation of women and young girls has been much publicized in the media recently. The Government’s plan of action to combat genital mutilation, which was presented last December, will make an important contribution to our efforts in this respect, both at national and at international level. The issue needs to be handled with a good deal of sensitivity, but there must be no doubt about our attitude to this form of abuse of young girls.

One of the first political moves of the Bush administration was to revive the "Mexico City Policy" from Ronald Reagan’s time. This policy decrees that none of the taxpayers’ money is to be spent for purposes that promote free abortion. This is a great setback for gender equality and may also be a setback for the international efforts to promote sexual and reproductive health.

Combating hiv/aids: A formidable challenge to all of us

The global HIV/AIDS catastrophe that has overtaken us threatens to undermine the results of many years of development cooperation. And it is our investment in human capital that is being affected. Thirty-six million people are infected by the virus. Over 13 million children have lost their parents. Six thousand Africans die of AIDS every day. The effects in Asia are worsening by the day. This is why the struggle to combat this pandemic is such a central part of Norwegian development cooperation policy. This is why HIV/AIDS is regularly on the agenda of the multilateral finance institutions, of the UN and of the World Trade Organization.

AIDS is an exceptional disease, and it requires exceptional answers. But above all, it requires cooperation, and it requires it now.

Senior officials in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Agency for Development Cooperation (NORAD) meet regularly as an "AIDS team" responsible for coordination on a broad front. Through "Aidsforum", which consists of representatives of the business community, trade unions, NGOs, the church, sports clubs, cultural life and the media, key players in Norwegian society are providing leadership, adding creativity and giving visibility to the efforts to combat the disease. The participants are mobilizing their own networks in Norway and abroad, with an emphasis on the particular challenges they face and the particular instruments they have at their disposal. A good example of this is the statement about the global AIDS catastrophe at the Bishops’ Conference this spring, which emphasized the church’s responsibility in this area.

Around 50 different Norwegian NGOs and groups of experts involved in the fight against HIV/AIDS have agreed to participate together with NORAD and the Foreign Ministry in a joint effort through "Aidsnett". This has resulted in a large number of new ideas, more cooperation across organizational boundaries, deeper insight into the complex challenges we are facing and fresh substance in our development cooperation dialogue in various arenas.

The main focus of the Government’s AIDS efforts is on prevention, especially with regard to children and young people and measures that reduce risk behaviour, particularly among men. We have also made active efforts in two fields, medicines and peacekeeping operations.

Great progress has been made in the treatment of AIDS in recent years. But the price of such treatment is still far beyond what most people in developing countries can afford. In addition to the price problem, health services in such countries are also often inadequate and lacking in funds. Earlier this month Norway hosted an international workshop under the auspices of the WHO and the WTO on the pricing of and access to important drugs. The various interest groups together made important progress in identifying key issues. Now the results of the workshop need to be digested. The issues will be discussed at the World Health Assembly of the WHO and in the TRIPS Council in the WTO before the summer.

Norway has assumed responsibility for arranging the next meeting of the steering committee for the follow-up to the Security Council resolution on HIV/AIDS in peace operations. HIV/AIDS will be one of the themes of the military exercise Nordic Peace 2001. We are also actively involved in the work of the UNHCR on refugees and HIV/AIDS.

This year the Government has doubled the amount of multilateral development assistance allocated to HIV/AIDS – to NOK 130 million. The cross-sectoral cooperation in UNAIDS is the cornerstone of this work, while WHO occupies a central position as regards the health aspects. The UN Special Session on AIDS this summer will provide a good opportunity to analyse the situation and if necessary adapt our measures even further.

Cultural cooperation helps to promote engagement and provides encouragement in the fight against poverty. Cultural forms of expression are often the best way of communicating when we are dealing with sensitive issues. There are many examples of this, especially in our African partner countries. We will also make use of this in the fight against AIDS.

Fighting tuberculosis: A new priority

We are investing in the fight against AIDS and we are investing in vaccination. Both through substantial additional allocations in the development assistance budget and through active international participation, at political and expert level. This is yielding good results and is proving to be an effective use of development funds.

Now we want to go a step further and intensify our efforts in the fight against tuberculosis. This disease is closely linked with poverty. It is closely linked with AIDS. The older generation in Norway still remembers the ravages wreaked by tuberculosis. Now the disease is increasing all over the world. It is spreading through the developing countries as well as in Russia. Norway has experience that can prove useful. The international Stop TB Initiative has gathered together many different bodies and organizations. We wish to make the point that the Norwegian people are contributing their efforts to this important movement. We will propose an increase in our allocations next year of NOK 100 million.

Access to energy: A prerequisite for development

Access to energy is fundamental to development and poverty reduction. Sustainable economic growth requires access to energy at acceptable prices, based on sound resource management.

All the major challenges in development cooperation are associated with energy. It is a source of heat and essential to food preparation. We need energy for field hospitals, for schools and for private sector development. Inadequate or polluting energy supplies are a source of all kinds of problems, from disease, environmental degradation and desertification to climate problems and conflicts. We must continue to emphasize the links between energy, development and the environment.

Norway is an important energy producer , both regionally and globally. This means that we are expected to pursue a focused and consistent energy policy in all areas, including development.

I intend to intensify our efforts in the fields of energy, development and the environment, and will seek to substantially increase the funds for this purpose next year. An environmentally sound energy policy vis-à-vis the least developed countries allows us to apply our best technical skills to a key challenge in dealing with poverty. High environmental standards, advanced technology and development assistance funds must be combined in a concerted effort to ensure more sustainable energy supplies.

This was one of the main messages conveyed by the Prime Minister on his visit to India, where it was agreed to set up a Norwegian-Indian commission for closer cooperation. India is the only country in the world with a separate minister for alternative energy sources. The country is the fifth largest supplier of wind power in the world. India has a good deal of expertise on bioenergy, which is the most important source of energy for many people in the poorest countries. Here we want to learn from their experience and expertise. As the Prime Minister emphasized, cooperation on bioenergy and renewable energy sources would be a logical extension of the environmental cooperation Norway already has with India. This could involve the business sector, research institutions and NGOs. India could become a strategic partner in the efforts to develop sustainable energy supplies in other developing countries.

I have appointed a working group to draw up a plan for how Norway should intensify its efforts with regard to sustainable energy sources in development assistance. One of the aims is to identify areas where Norwegian expertise can benefit developing countries. We must engage in a dialogue with our partner countries that focuses on sustainable energy sources for the least developed countries. Renewable sources will be a key element in such a dialogue. We will also seek to ensure that energy and environmental issues occupy a central place on the agenda for the World Summit on Sustainable Development (Rio+10 conference) to be held in Johannesburg in 2002.

I have noted the views of the Bush administration on international climate cooperation under the Kyoto Protocol. If this really is future US policy, it is nothing less than dramatic. We ourselves, however, must choose a different path. Norway must choose binding international cooperation based on the Kyoto Protocol. In our national policy, in international environmental cooperation and in our cooperation with the least developed countries, the Government has chosen to intensify its policy of sustainable development.

Development in the form of peace-building: A budgetary "GAP" allocation

Development is closely linked with peace. For our partner countries such as Uganda, Tanzania and Zambia, the conflicts in neighbouring countries represent a threat to their stability and development. One of the main challenges facing us is to ensure long-term development and stability in these countries while at the same time engaging in conflict resolution and targeted humanitarian interventions in neighbouring countries.

The UN Security Council spends more than half its time on conflicts in Africa. The UN has only succeeded to a limited extent in dealing with these conflicts. Peace-building and rehabilitation in conflict-ridden societies are emphasized in the follow-up to the Brahimi Report.

This has important consequences for Norwegian development cooperation policy. Development efforts must be part of a coordinated political effort. Our policy must not be hampered by any gaps between the humanitarian activities, the political follow-up and more long-term development assistance. In conflict areas it is essential to start reconciliation, democracy-building and economic and social development as rapidly as possible.

We therefore intend to strengthen and clarify the link between, on the one hand, the targeted and often short-term support Norway allocates to conflict-ridden countries and areas and, on the other, long-term development assistance. In next year’s budget we will propose a "gap allocation" for the purpose of intensifying these efforts. We call this development in the form of peace-building.

Good marks notwithstanding: Strengthened policy evaluation

It is not enough to report that our development assistance usually receives good marks from the World Bank and the OECD. I intend to set up an external committee to strengthen the policy evaluation function of the Foreign Ministry, which is to include representatives of young people’s organizations, business and industry, experts and NGOs. The committee will assist the Ministry in evaluating the results of Norwegian development cooperation policy in selected areas. The objective is to promote transparency and dialogue with regard to development policy in order to encourage more innovation and make our assistance more effective.

Development cooperation: A choice of values – thus political

Development assistance is a political issue. This was one of the main points in my statement to the Storting last year, and it is still one this year.

Development assistance is a political issue because some political parties wish to reduce it. Every year, the Conservative Party and the Progress Party propose dramatic cuts in our support for the poorest countries. Development assistance involves a choice of values – and it is not something we can take for granted.

Development assistance is a political issue because it requires policy choices at the national level. Poor governance, corruption and lack of democracy undermine the effects of development assistance and maintain poverty. This means that development cooperation involves a choice of values for our partner countries as well.

Development assistance is a political issue because it depends on binding international cooperation on an equal basis. Preparations are currently being made for a number of important international conferences. These include the Third United Nations Conference on the Least Developed Countries, to be held in Brussels next month, a High-level International Conference on Financing for Development, to be held in Mexico in March 2002, and the previously mentioned Rio+10 Conference, which will take place in Johannesburg in September 2002. At the same time, efforts are under way to set up a new round of negotiations in the WTO.

We will make use of these processes and conferences to build partnerships between North and South. All countries, and especially the developing countries, must raise their voices and make sure they are heard internationally. We need more cooperation partners and allies from the South in key international processes and in our development policy. For too long, all the mutual cooperation has been taking place in the North, while the focus of assistance has been one-sidedly directed at the South. This is something we must and will change.

* * *

We must target our long-term cooperation more directly towards those countries that show the political will and ability to do something about poverty and inequity.

We must intensify our efforts in order to stimulate their ability.

This is why we are giving priority to children and their social environment.

This is why we are giving priority to health and education.

And this is why we are giving priority to the fight against corruption, to good governance, and to democracy-building.

Norwegian