1C Direktør Erik Hoffs...

1C Direktør Erik Hoffs innlegg i plenumsdebatten

It is now 1998. We have discussed needs for change in the ILO for ten years. During the last five years there has been general agreement on the necessity to bring the ILO up to date. We should now be able to act upon the many obvious signals that we have received.

During the 80 years of the life of the ILO we have produced enough Conventions to cover most imaginable fields and needs. I hope that the Governing Body and its groups may have success in limiting the traditional hunt for candidate subjects for new Conventions just to fill up Conference agendas, and instead give real priority to the revision and cancellation of those which are outdated. New Conventions should be put on future agendas of this Conference only when there is real consensus.

We must show that the ILO can understand the world outside its own walls. It has to live and act relevantly in our own time. It simply has to stay in line with contemporary thinking, in line with contemporary legal views and in line with the contemporary needs of its constituents. It we cannot adjust, we shall be ignored sooner than we would like to think.

As I see it, we cannot continue to permit Government members of this Organization to vote for Conventions in Geneva, only to go home and forget about their responsibilities. We must no longer let them exercise happy-go-lucky voting in this hall without meeting their consequent obligations.

It is imperative that we now devise a link between voting «yes» in Geneva and the moral duty to follow up on one's obligations when coming back to the home country.

We could imagine that a yes vote for an instrument must be followed up by a proposal made to parliament to ratify it. If this is not the case, then a special report should be requested, to explain why.

To me and my federation the apparent lack of ratification of the 180 Conventions by so many governments is nothing less than embarrassing. I have been told that non-ratified Conventions with ambitious aims are after all quite helpful for promoting ILO standards in the field. Well, that is hard to believe. In fact it is insulting to the intelligence of some of us. We have therefore requested from the Assistant Director-General, Mr. Taqi, that research be undertaken to uncover the facts in this respect.

There is also a need to examine the working methods of the Conference committees. Normally, the committees perform well, but in situations with difficult and controversial subjects the committees are too often trapped into extensive playing of games that end in dramatic voting and the suppression of minority views. Let us be honest. This sort of work is not fruitful and it contrasts with our experience from our own labour markets.

We are here to help people, mostly workers, who live a difficult life and have a hard working day. Only when a negotiation ends in agreement will there be a faithful follow-up in practical day-to-day life. Only then do we really reach the human beings whom we wish to support.

The fifth column among us are those who seek statisfaction from confrontation instead of consensus. It is far more constructive to have an instrument that covers 80 per cent of Members' ambitions, but which attracts consensus, than it is to have a violent disagreement and only a slight majority backing the instrument.

We shall soon welcome a new Director-General to the ILO. We, the Conference and the Governing Body, expect him to prepare proposals for a management reform, and that means a modern, transparent, enthusiastic running of the Organization, and a particular concentration on consensus and the efficiency of the Active Partnership Policy. Tchnical cooperation is probably the most important field for the ILO.

Words are important, but the proof of the pudding is to be found in action.

Finally, I should like to say a short word on the Governing Body. I do not think that we are privileged with the most ideal of boards. In fact, we are not much of a board at all. The Governing Body is far too big. It is like another Conference. To be able to perform better in the future as the responsible policy- and decision-maker of the ILO between the annual sessions of the Conference, we would be well advised to elect from within our ranks some sort of executive committee with much fewer persons, say three from each group, to help enhance the quality of our work and to ensure that our relationship with the Office is correct and runs smoothly.

In closing, I would like to say good luck to the ILO. The clock is ticking!