Minister of International Development and Human Rights Hilde Frafjord Johnson

Statement to the Storting on Development Cooperation Policy

Thursday 6 May 1999

The situation in the developing countries

As we stand on the threshold of a new millennium, we have cause to be both optimistic and pessimistic. Alternating feelings of power and powerlessness, hope and despair, dignity and humiliation seem to be sweeping over us with increasing force and pace. These feelings reflect the situation in far too many countries. In my statement on humanitarian assistance in January, I described the challenges posed by a political landscape characterized by new patterns of conflict and disaster. The humanitarian catastrophe currently taking place in and around Kosovo is yet another tragic manifestation of this.

In such a situation, it is difficult for me to use a word like “development”, which per definition implies optimism. Nevertheless, it is at a time like this, at what seems to be the darkest hour for the Kosovar Albanians and other suffering people in the Balkans, that it is most important for us to express our solidarity by providing resources and taking concrete action, and to plan for a future of peace. At the same time we must remember that there are people in distress elsewhere in the world who are just as badly in need of help and who are entitled to our support.

This time last year we took a much more positive view of developments in Africa, which were referred to as an “African renaissance”. But before the year was out ten serious conflicts had unfolded on the continent. Differences we thought were in the process of being settled flared up again and new conflicts broke out. And yet the will for peace and democracy is still alive. This will triumphed a few months ago in Nigeria, which is the most heavily populated country in Africa. In South Africa, people are going to the polls for the second time. Over half of the countries south of the Sahara are now governed by democratically elected leaders. This gives cause for optimism. So does the prospect that economic growth in Africa will exceed population growth in both 1998 and 1999. We can see a new dynamism in many African countries, where civil society and the private sector are playing a greater and more positive role in development. These are trends we intend to support.

The situation in Asia is complex. Development trends show that environmental problems will be at the top of the international agenda in the years ahead. At the same time the financial crisis has brought unemployment and poverty to millions of people. Indonesia has been especially hard hit. The crisis triggered social unrest in a number of countries that, paradoxically enough, had been focusing on democracy and human rights. However, the situation in the countries of East Asia is now relatively stable, and the opportunities for rehabilitation and new growth seem to be fairly good. The fact that China seems to have got through the crisis relatively unscathed is a welcome development. But the problem of poverty is a serious one in a number of countries in Central Asia and the OSCE area, and we will do our share in the international efforts to help these countries.

The challenges in the Middle East still call for our commitment. We will continue our efforts to further the peace process, improve living conditions and promote democratic development in the Palestinian areas.

In Central America our presence has yielded results, as shown by the developments in Guatemala. Our efforts in Nicaragua have also been well received. Even Hurricane Mitch was unable to destroy the results that have been achieved in the fields of peace, human rights, democracy and education of the poor.

Development means more choices

Development is basically a matter of expanding people's choices, their access to fundamental goods – in fact their right to goods such as education, health and clean drinking water. Expanding people's choices is the UN definition of “development”. Poverty means being denied the opportunity to make these choices, a situation which still applies to about half the world’s population.

Development assistance can do a great deal to remedy this situation. This is why the level of assistance is important, as reflected in the Government's desire to increase the level of our development assistance. But assistance in itself is not enough. In last year’s statement to the Storting on development cooperation policy, I spoke of the importance of the international framework conditions for debt and trade. These are conditions that directly or indirectly influence the degree to which individuals and governments have choices. This is why debt and trade are so important, and why we last year presented a debt relief plan which is now being implemented.

Last year I also spoke at length about the partners we must cooperate with in order to achieve results with our development policy. In my statement today I will focus primarily on the first and most important of these partners, the authorities of each individual partner country. And there are two issues in particular I would like to raise, issues that directly affect people’s opportunities to choose development, to choose to escape from the bonds of poverty. These are democracy and corruption.

Democracy means that people choose their leaders and that these leaders are regularly held accountable for their actions. Thus democracy in essence gives the people the opportunity to choose a better and more equitable economic policy, including a policy that involves less corruption. Corruption undermines development and always makes the rich richer and the poor poorer. In this statement I will therefore present a new and more ambitious policy in these areas.

However, fine words and good intentions are not enough unless we can put our policies into practice. I will therefore first briefly summarize the most important results of the Government’s development policy during the past year.

Priorities in development cooperation

Debt relief

Norway was the first country to launch a national debt strategy for the poorest developing countries, and this helped to set a trend. Chancellor Gerhard Schröder announced that Germany would present a new debt relief initiative at the G-8 meeting in Cologne this summer. After this the USA, Canada, the UK, France and Japan all launched their own debt relief proposals. A year ago this would have been almost unthinkable. But now a new momentum is being created. And it must be exploited.

Implementation of our strategy “Towards the Year 2000 and Beyond: the Norwegian Debt Relief Strategy” is now well under way. For example, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has recently sent a delegation to Benin to prepare for unilateral debt reduction. Senegal is next in line. If all the conditions for unilateral debt reduction are fulfilled, this will result in debt reductions amounting to about NOK 450 million. These are reductions that will attract notice internationally. We plan to sign an agreement with Benin in June. And this is just the beginning.

The initiative taken by the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to help the poorest and most heavily indebted countries, the HIPC initiative, is an important element in the Norwegian debt relief strategy. But the implementation process is going too slowly. The mechanism must be made more efficient and flexible, so that more of the indebted countries can solve their debt problems more rapidly. The IMF and the World Bank will be making an extensive review of the initiative in the course of this year. Norway is a prime mover and partner in this work.

International trade conditions

The international trade policy framework is complex. Many poor countries lack the necessary expertise and capacity to fully exploit the rules. This is why they often get the worst of it in trade disputes. The Government has taken the initiative to do something about this. We have played a proactive role in efforts to establish an independent legal advisory centre to help developing countries in trade disputes. We also support a special fund that helps the poorest countries use the rules of the World Trade Organization (WTO) to their best advantage.

The Government will seize every opportunity to form alliances that will improve trade policy conditions for the developing countries. Earlier this winter I had talks with the European Commission. The EU has concrete plans for improving trade conditions for the poorest countries, which are to be presented in connection with the WTO negotiations that will begin at the end of the year. Norway will follow this up. Our willingness to import goods from developing countries is part of this picture.

Aid coordination

In last year’s statement I emphasized how important it is that the donor community – which is the second partner in development – coordinates its efforts better. Donors are still acting too much in their own interests. The Government has put a great deal of effort into coordinating international development assistance, and a number of initiatives and restructuring efforts are under way. This means we have hopes of entering the next millennium as a more united and coordinated group than ever before. We are building alliances. Germany and the UK have become new allies. Together with the Nordic countries and the Netherlands, these two countries have become important partners in development policy and in efforts to coordinate development assistance.

The World Bank has presented an interesting proposal for a coherent framework for development cooperation in individual countries, which is known as the “Comprehensive Development Framework”. According to this arrangement, all the foreign and domestic actors should cooperate on a common long-term development strategy. The framework presupposes that the authorities of the country concerned are in charge and that the private sector and civil society are part of the process. I am in close contact with the President of the World Bank on the further development of the initiative, which will, of course, be carried out in close cooperation with the UN.

The fight against poverty

Norwegian development assistance is primarily targeted at countries that pursue an active policy to reduce poverty. According to an analysis of Norwegian development assistance made by the World Bank last year, our assistance is in fact effective in helping to reduce poverty. The analysis was conducted just after the publication of the report Assessing Aid, which sharply criticized much of the international assistance for not being effective enough in combating poverty. I am very pleased that we are on the right track. At the same time there is undoubtedly room for improvement.

The Government promised to give top priority to health and education. And we have delivered. Plans are being made and agreements entered into with our partner countries that will ensure that these sectors figure centrally in our long-term development cooperation in the years to come. Assistance to health now accounts for about 10 per cent of our bilateral assistance, and in 1998 assistance to education rose to over 11 per cent. Now our education target is 15 per cent, with priority being given to basic education. At the same time we must pay attention to all levels of education. This is why I recently submitted a strategy for promoting research and higher education in relation to the developing countries. This is a means of building the competence and capacity necessary to combat poverty.

Strategy for the support of private sector development

A viable private sector creates wealth and is the best possible guarantee for jobs, income for individuals and tax revenues for the state. From this point of view a flourishing private sector, which is the third partner in development cooperation, is a necessary condition if poverty is to be reduced, and is the best means of counteracting aid dependence and an increased debt burden. The Government's Strategy for Private Sector Development in developing countries, which has also been drawn up in close cooperation with the Norwegian private sector, is therefore an important development policy instrument. We will promote wealth creation and profitable, efficient production in the developing countries using a broad and coherent approach, in keeping with the 1999 fiscal budget and the accompanying deliberations in the Storting. I would like to draw your attention to two factors in particular:

• Better framework conditions for private sector investment.Unclear legal conditions, corruption and weak administrations mean that capital is often channelled to areas other than the poorest developing countries. An important element of the strategy involves improving these conditions both internationally and in cooperation with individual countries. We will also work to facilitate Norwegian investment. We wish, in cooperation with the private sector, to provide more incentives in this area, for example by strengthening NORFUND’s capital base.
• Strengthening the private sector through private sector development programmes.We wish to encourage greater economic cooperation. A number of consultation mechanisms are being used to involve the private sector and its organizations in the planning and formulation of private sector development programmes. This process is based on the needs of the countries of the South. In this way we can ensure that there is a connection between these countries’ own plans, our development assistance and the private sector's interest in profitable investments. We are looking forward to cooperating with the Norwegian private sector in this area.

Quality assurance

The authoritative report on the Norwegian economy issued by the IMF in February this year commends us for our high level of development assistance. I am therefore pleased to report that Norwegian development assistance reached an all-time high of NOK 10 billion in 1998. Better management led to a substantial reduction in underconsumption, and at the same time the quality of the assistance improved. This year NORAD is introducing a new financial management system, which will facilitate management, reporting and quality assurance in development assistance. This, together with strengthened, targeted evaluation activities, will provide the Storting with a better basis than ever before for evaluating how development policy priorities are being followed up and what results are being achieved.

However, one of the reasons why development assistance does not always achieve the desired results is corruption. Thus the fight against corruption must be an integral part of quality assurance. In this endeavour the first partner, the authorities, is the most important, but civil society also plays a decisive role.

The fight against corruption

In far too many developing countries the poorest inhabitants do not receive the help they are entitled to from the police and the judicial system. They lack basic necessities such as clean drinking water and have no access to information concerning decisions taken by the authorities that affect them. Some are even denied access to health services or schooling. And why? Because they cannot afford to bribe civil servants. Corruption is ruthless. And it is the weakest who suffer the most. Corruption is stealing from the poorest. It weakens confidence between large parts of the population and the authorities of the country. It undermines the rule of law. It saps the roots of democracy.

Corruption also poses a threat to economic development. It leads to the squandering of public funds and to the loss of tax revenues. It contributes to economic disparity, impedes investment, and leads to capital flight and unemployment. Again the poor are the losers. Corruption can also lead to environmental degradation. Drug trafficking and arms smuggling flourish. This is why corruption is not only politically, economically and socially irresponsible. It is morally reprehensible. The poor become poorer. Confidence is broken down and people’s sense of responsibility and morality is weakened. Corruption corrupts. Society is caught in a vicious circle. In some countries, such as Nigeria and Indonesia, corruption is so widespread that it shapes, indeed poisons, the whole of society. It permeates the entire system. Corruption is also a serious problem in many of our partner countries, making poverty reduction much more difficult than it otherwise would have been. This is unacceptable. Corruption must be fought. This applies, of course, in our part of the world as well.

In order to root out evil, we must recognize it. This means that we must know the causes. We must know how public administration in developing countries works. We must be familiar with the economic and social conditions and understand the politics, traditions and culture of the country in question. We still have a lot to learn, even though we already know a great deal about these conditions. We know, for example, that there are two main types of corruption, which I will for the sake of simplicity call “greed-driven corruption” and “need-driven corruption”.

Generally it is the politicians and the upper echelons of the public administration and the business sector that are behind corruption motivated by greed. Large sums are often involved in decisions concerning large-scale construction projects and in the customs service. In many countries there is also a great deal of gross corruption in connection with the legislative process. This type of corruption is the most serious because it sets a bad example and has a demoralizing effect on society as a whole. It is also the kind of corruption that does most to increase the gap between rich and poor.

However, it is need-driven corruption, or small-scale corruption, that most directly affects the poor. Ordinary employees take bribes for carrying out services they are supposed to provide free of charge or for ignoring breaches of the law. They pocket state revenues and sell goods for personal gain. However, although this type of corruption cannot be justified, it is easier to understand. The inadequate wages and irregular payments made to civil servants in many of our partner countries are an important reason why such practices flourish. Indeed, under such conditions bribery becomes a necessity for many people. It becomes necessary in order to feed the family, to keep a roof over one’s head. It is difficult to condemn this type of corruption as long as prominent leaders set a bad example with greed-driven corruption, and as long as the authorities do not reform the public sector so that salaries can be increased. However, it is essential to combat need-driven corruption as well as greed-driven corruption, because it undermines economic development and social cohesion. Again, it is the poorest who suffer most.

Our most important allies in the fight against corruption are the developing countries themselves. Only when the authorities in these countries themselves take responsibility for combating the problem will we succeed. A number of our partner countries are now indicating that they have the will and the courage to combat this evil. In Uganda, for example, there is an open debate going on about corruption and how to deal with it. The parliament and the media are playing a leading role in the debate, and no one is exempt from criticism. A separate ministerial post for ethics and integrity has recently been created to head the Government’s political efforts to combat corruption. Corruption was also a major topic of discussion during my recent visit to Uganda. The day I had talks with President Museveni, several ministers were dismissed, among other things because of irregularities. This is a promising start.

I would like to make it clear that there are no indications that Norwegian funds have been misused or that Norwegian-funded projects have been associated with corruption. Our control mechanisms are good.

The most effective means of combating corruption will depend on the kind of economic crime we are dealing with. The methods required to fight greed-driven corruption sometimes differ considerably from those required to fight need-driven corruption. However, if corruption is to be fought successfully, we will need to coordinate the way we deal with the two different kinds.

Today I am launching a new offensive in the battle against corruption. The following six measures will figure centrally in this offensive:

• First: NORAD will become an international front-line organization in the battle against corruption.To start with, action will be taken to raise levels of knowledge and awareness in the administration of Norwegian development assistance. Concrete plans to counter corruption will be devised. We will be drawing on the expertise of Norwegian research institutions, and on the knowledge and experience found in international organizations. The Norwegian private sector and non-governmental organizations will also be drawn into these efforts.
• Second: Corruption will be put on the agenda in our dialogues with our partner countries.Greater openness on the subject of corruption is vital. An open debate on the problem of corruption is already underway in several of our partner countries. Thus, there is no reason for us to treat it as a taboo. Openness will in itself have a preventive effect.
• Third: We will provide assistance to our partner countries in the battle against corruption.In particular we will support administrative reforms that directly attack greed-driven corruption and the conditions that make need-driven corruption necessary. In several countries the number of employees must be reduced and wages increased substantially. We will also support measures designed to promote greater transparency and accountability in public administration, improve accounting systems and organize inspection routines and arrangements for ensuring that rules and regulations are enforced. Furthermore, the ability of the individual country's auditing authorities and parliament to scrutinize its public administration must be enhanced. We will support these efforts. We cooperate closely with our own Office of the Auditor General in this context.
  In the general reorganization of Norwegian development assistance to focus on programme and budget support, we will ensure that our investments are not wasted owing to financial irregularities. One means of doing this will be to induce our cooperation partners to allow the contributions they receive to be reflected in their national budgets. This also applies to debt relief. The battle against corruption must be integrated into the entire range of bilateral development cooperation, whether it is used for the construction of roads and dams, health, education, environmental protection or the strengthening of public institutions.
• Fourth: International efforts to combat corruption must be better coordinated, more systematic and more effective.We are now entering into an alliance with the World Bank. Corruption will be placed high on the agenda in the ongoing efforts to improve coordination between the donor countries. None of us can win this battle on our own. It must be fought by means of broad-based cooperation. The recently adopted OECD Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business will be a valuable instrument for combating corruption between industrial countries on the supply side. We attach great importance to the mechanisms for monitoring the implementation of the convention. The same applies to efforts in the WTO to enhance transparency in connection with public procurements.
• Fifth: NGOs must be drawn into the battle against corruption. Corruption may also occur in what are regarded as idealistic contexts, where one might not expect to find it, for example, in cooperation projects involving local churches. I urge our NGO partners, including missionary organizations, to wage an uncompromising battle against the corruption they encounter in society at large and in their dealings with their cooperation partners. Transparency International is the only NGO today whose main purpose is to fight corruption. We are cooperating with this organization.
• Sixth: Sanctions will be imposed if necessary.We will consider the level and profile of our development cooperation in cases where the authorities fail to demonstrate a will and an ability to address the problem of corruption. We will make use of sanctions in particularly grave cases. In the autumn of 1997 the International Monetary Fund withheld a loan of approximately 200 million dollars to Kenya in response to long-standing corruption problems in that country.

In the budget for the year 2000, I will give a more detailed account of the Government's overall plans for combating corruption.

Research carried out by the World Bank indicates that there is less corruption in countries with a well-developed democracy than in those that lack viable democratic institutions. Democratization is, therefore, a vital weapon in the battle against corruption, as well as an end in itself.

Revitalizing our support to democracy

Throughout the 1990s, Norwegian development assistance policy has been focused on democracy as an important dimension of social development. We have supported elections for national assemblies, presidents and local authorities in a number of developing countries. We have helped to build support functions for national assemblies. We have also supported democratization more indirectly by supporting newspapers and other forms of mass media, women's organizations and the trade union movement. Much of this support has yielded positive results. In many countries there is a clear trend towards democracy. I believe, however, that the time is ripe to make our efforts more purposeful, strategic and ambitious. We cannot build democracies, but we can enable poor countries to do so themselves.

There are two challenges in particular that I would like to focus on in our democratization efforts:

• The first is mobilizing the people in countries where participation in democratic processes is deteriorating. The institutional framework may be in place, but it does not function in a way that inspires confidence. Zambia is an example of this.
• The second has to do with building and consolidating what we might term “new, fragile” democracies, such as Cambodia and Nigeria. Here the challenge is mainly to establish an institutional framework for democracy.

In order to achieve a viable working democracy, people must believe that it is worthwhile. One of the greatest threats to democracy is apathy. The feeling of futility. Strengthening democracy is, therefore, partly a matter of enhancing people's confidence in democratic institutions and encouraging them to take part. Without this democracy will not work.

The low voter turnout in many of our partner countries is cause for concern. In the most recent local elections in Zambia, it was only about 10 per cent. We have seen correspondingly low figures in Zimbabwe and Namibia. When participation in the democratic process falls dramatically, it reflects a feeling of powerlessness, a crisis of confidence. In newly fledged democracies, the first free elections are generally characterized by great enthusiasm and voter participation. If the newly elected rulers fail to improve the lot of the majority of the population, or if there is widespread corruption, democracy loses its credibility in the eyes of many people. Experience shows that if there are no results, enthusiasm wanes and voter turnout in subsequent elections declines.

Through development assistance we can help to mobilize the people and ensure that democracy takes root:

Firstly, we can provide support for economic and social development so that people realize that democracy will give them a better life. This is the very essence of development assistance. Education also plays a major role in giving people an understanding of democratic processes and an opportunity to participate. Therefore, our efforts to promote education advance the process of democratization.

Secondly, we can support the building of viable public institutions. In other words, we can ensure good governance. Democracy is contingent on people having confidence in politicians and the public sector in general. This is why the fight against corruption is so important for democracy. Good governance presupposes the existence of an efficient public administration based on the principles of equal treatment of all citizens, transparency and accountability. Independent media and freedom of expression are fundamental to ensuring that the system functions in this way. Through development assistance we can cooperate with the country concerned on the demanding task of building up and maintaining a public service that functions in accordance with democratic principles and that has roots in and enjoys the confidence of the people of the country. This means to a large extent strengthening the various parts of the public administration, which we are already doing in many countries. But it also applies to areas where we have so far done relatively little, such as the judicial system, the national assembly, the police and the prison system. I want us to be more active in these areas. The same applies to the strengthening of local administration, which is the part of the democratic system that ordinary people have the most direct contact with.

Thirdly, we can strengthen civil society so that people can be put in a position to influence developments that affect them at the national and local level. Voters must have confidence that their votes count. Here the NGOs have a role to play.

The freedom to express different opinions is one of the cornerstones of democracy. Democracy must be a continuous process in which the various social forces interact with one another. This is why the way things are organized is so important. Many NGOs and other actors in our own civil society have long experience and broad expertise in development cooperation. Actors whose efforts have a positive effect on democratization processes, strengthen human rights and contribute to popular participation in development processes make valuable partners in the work of strengthening civil society. When organizations support measures that empower local communities to safeguard their own interests, they help to increase the benefit people derive from democratic and other political processes. This is particularly important for vulnerable groups such as indigenous peoples. Support of this kind is perhaps the most valuable support we can offer to indigenous peoples.

Fourthly, we can strengthen political structures, parties and independent media, so that we have viable, effective control mechanisms in relation to the power élite.

So far support for political parties and political work in our partner countries has received little attention in development cooperation. This kind of support is highly sensitive politically. And yet it is a paradox that, while we actively support civil society and the forces working for more democratic governance, we give so little support to the forces that are in many ways the very lifeblood of a viable democracy: the political parties. However, we wish to avoid ad-hoc solutions in this important but sensitive area. Our first priority is therefore to study how we in Norway can best support democracy through support for political parties. We need a framework and a system for such support that will fulfil the requirements of relevance and high quality and that is compatible with regular state-to-state cooperation. The experiences of Sweden and Germany indicate that it is possible to establish arrangements that work.

A study of these questions is starting immediately, and consultations with the political parties will be a key element. The findings will be presented in the Action Plan for Human Rights, which will be submitted in the autumn, and in connection with the fiscal budget for 2000.

We who live in a stable and established democracy have a special responsibility towards countries that after many years of authoritarian rule, violence and repression are taking their first courageous steps towards democracy. Norway has played an important role in South Africa. This is a familiar story to most of us. We have also made an important contribution in Guatemala and today we are contributing in the Palestinian areas. We wish to strengthen and further these vital efforts. We are currently considering Nigeria and Cambodia in this regard. It is not clear whether democracy will prevail in these countries, and whether our efforts will bear fruit. But it is our duty to do what we can to give democracy a chance in these countries, too. Support for elections is very important here; we need to ensure that elections proceed peacefully and safely and in accordance with established standards. At the same time, however, too great an emphasis on elections, and too much pressure from donor countries to hold elections as soon as possible, can have negative consequences. We have witnessed this in Sierra Leone, for example. Democratization must go hand in hand with reconciliation and efforts to strengthen the rule of law.

The Norwegian Resource Bank for Democracy and Human Rights, NORDEM, has so far mainly helped to monitor elections, but it ought to be used more systematically and purposefully for democratization purposes. It might be especially well suited for the new, fragile democracies. We must, of course, coordinate our efforts with the democracy-building efforts of other donors, but they should be based primarily on the needs of our partners in the developing countries themselves.

We need to further intensify our efforts to promote democracy, and the Action Plan for Human Rights will make an important contribution in this respect. New guidelines for efforts in the field of democracy-building will also be drawn up. Emphasis will be placed on strengthening the rule of law, ensuring freedom of expression, supporting differentiated media, and promoting education and research. Our development strategies in relation to our partner countries will include an analysis of the conditions required to strengthen democracy.

In our efforts to promote democracy we must stand firmly by our principles on the one hand and maintain a humble attitude on the other. We must not depart from the principle that democracy involves diversity and choices, equality and respect for the individual. At the same time we must bear in mind that there are different ways of organizing democracy. Unless allowance is made for local factors and culture, it is difficult for democracy to take root. We must also remember that democracy cannot be imposed from without. It must be part of a process that is nourished from within. And we must accept that this takes time. Perhaps we should look back more often at our own history in order to put in perspective what many developing countries are going through. Thus the point is not to export our own solutions, but to share experience and knowledge.

This is also in many ways the basis for our reorganization of the Norwegian Volunteer Service. We wish to create a new, more dynamic interaction between positive forces in development cooperation. Our goal is to transform the Volunteer Service into a major instrument for strengthening civil society and cooperation between Norway and developing countries.

Reorganization of the Volunteer Service

For 35 years the Volunteer Service has fostered enthusiasm, understanding, solidarity and the development of human resources in development cooperation. And I have made sure that these values continue to be the basis for the reorganization that is about to be implemented. But there is also a need for a fundamental renewal. This is why we are reorganizing the Volunteer Service.

A modern Volunteer Service must reflect and take advantage of the new breadth and diversity we are witnessing in Norwegian cooperation with developing countries. Therefore, I am inviting local and national NGOs, the private sector, church organizations, missionary societies, public institutions and municipalities to participate. The challenge facing the Government is to take young people’s global commitment seriously and draw them into development cooperation. It is to give them the opportunity to learn more and to make an active contribution. It is to give them the opportunity to impart the experience and knowledge they have gained to the Norwegian people after their service abroad. We also want to give young people from partner organizations in developing countries the opportunity to do the same here in Norway.

The goal of this cooperation will be to strengthen the forces in developing countries that are seeking to combat poverty and to promote human rights and democratization. The Government will put this before the Storting as part of the revised national budget.

Development policy with an impact

Development policy has a broad, global scope. In this statement I have emphasized two of the main partners in development cooperation: the authorities in the developing countries and civil society. I have announced our intention to further intensify our cooperation with both of these parties. I have pointed out the need for greater legitimacy and confidence in the relationship between the authorities and the general population in the developing countries. I have therefore concentrated on outlining a new strategy in the fight against corruption and a new offensive in the development of democracy. These are among our most important instruments if Norwegian development policy is to have deeper and broader impact as we enter the next millennium.