HE Ms. Hilde F. Johnson, Norwegian Minister of International Development

Intervention at WSSD, Prep.Com. IV, Denpasar, Indonesia, 6 June 2002

Mr. Chairman,

- Why are we here?

- Why on earth are we here?

It is relevant to ask this question, Mr.Chairman, if our primary preoccupation in the negotiations here is to reopen and renegotiate old commitments, - from 1992, 1993, 1997 and onwards. And not to build on them, and bring us forward.

It is relevant, Mr. Chairman, – if the only commitments, targets and timetables we will be able to agree on in the Plan of Implementation, are the ones already agreed at the Millennium Summit. They should not limit us from moving forward.

It is relevant, Mr. Chairman, - if the only reference we can make in financing their implementation, - is the Monterey Consensus, and not the substantial steps in ODA made at the Monterrey Conference itself.

It is relevant, Mr Chairman, - if the only tangible results from the Johannesburg-process will be Type-2 partnership initiatives financed from existing ODA-flows, with no additionality, putting "green paint" on old projects, or launching new ones primarily directed towards show-offs and flags for donor governments, undermining national ownership and coordination in the poor countries.

Why are we here – if this is the case ? What are we here for?

Mr. Chairman, we should be here for one reason and one reason only: to bring action in sustainable development forward – to the benefit of the poor and the environment.

This means a Plan of Implementation that does exactly that, and delivers in terms of concrete targets and timetables, - and in terms of financial resources and monitoring of ODA-flows. Type 2 should not substitute Type 1.

This means a Political Declaration from our world leaders which includes new commitments to do more and deliver more.

This means Partnerships and type 2- initiatives that imply quantum leaps in a few sectors, building on national ownership and based on poverty reduction strategies and "greening" of them, rather than creating new ones.

And it is not too late, Mr. Chairman! We can still make it happen. But I am very concerned.

We need Type 2 "Frameworks for delivery" in coherence with development frameworks

and -policies, not a big "donor circus" with stand-alone donor driven projects and new financial mechanisms, undermining everything we have achieved in development the last years. Very few, if any, Type 2 initiatives have up to now been presented by developing countries. To get delivery, national ownership is essential.

We have to concentrate on substantial deliveries in the WEHAB areas and ensure there is a common structure to achieve them.

The Frameworks of delivery in Type 2 have to build on the commitments in the Plan of Implementation, with additional commitments and concrete targets and timetables for the sector. This should be negotiated by donor-countries, partner-countries and possibly the private sector and other stakeholders. It has to have a geographical scope, measures of

implementation, linked also to implementing agencies, resource commitments, or procedures for such commitments, within a certain timeframe, and monitoring mechanisms. There has to be preconditions, ensuring that they meet a set of quality-criteria, national ownership and anchorage in countries’ PRSPs.

Such a structuring-process for Type 2 has to be established urgently. There has to be full-time teams working on this between Bali and Johannesburg. The team should include experts from the relevant UN agencies and the IFIs, with the World Bank in a crucial role. On the basis of a framework set out for every WEHAB sector, donors, partner countries and other stakeholders should be invited to participate.

If we can get such Frameworks of delivery agreed in time for Johannesburg, in the WEHAB sectors, these commitments can be included in the Political Declaration, this may imply one of the few deliverables on action we will get.

Why are we here, Mr. Chairman?

As a development minister, my answer is this: Because what we are faced with is grave injustice, injustice toward the world’s poor and injustice towards our grandchildren and future generations. What kind of world is today’s poor 5 years-olds faced with. And what kind of world will today’s 5 year-olds be faced with at 50?

We know the answer!

The decisions we make today will determine whether the injustices we experience will be even greater tomorrow , - or whether we will be able to make a difference. Mr. Chairman, history is full of missed opportunities. Let us not miss yet another one.

Let us get the Type 2 to work, and let us do it here.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.