Reuters/Bdnews24.com . L’aquila, Italy

G8 leaders pledged $20 billion in farm aid to help poor nations feed themselves, surpassing expectations on the final day of a summit that has yielded little progress on climate change and trade.
   The United States used the meeting of world leaders to push for a shift toward farm investment aid from food aid and will make $3.5 billion available to the 3-year programme. But African nations reminded the rich of a need to honour past commitments.
   ‘Working with the G8, African and European countries and multinational bodies, we had the satisfaction of increasing the $15 billion to $20 billion over three years,’ said Italian prime minister Silvio Berlsuconi.
   The United Nations says the number of malnourished people has risen over the past two years and is expected to top 1.02 billion this year, reversing a four-decade trend of declines.
   ‘$20 billion was a last-minute agreement and it was greeted with great happiness by all of us in the conference room. While we are rebuilding agriculture we need to continue supporting food assistance because the financial crisis is pushing another 103 million people into hunger this year,’ said Staffan de Mistura, vice-executive director of the World Food Programme.
   After two days of talks focused on the economic crisis, trade and global warming, the final day of the meeting in Italy looked at problems facing the poorest nations.
   G8 leaders promised in Gleneagles in 2005 to increase annual aid by $50 billion by 2010, half of which was meant for African countries. But aid bodies say some G8 countries have gone back on their word, especially this year’s G8 host, Italy.
   African leaders said they would voice their concerns, with Ethiopian premier Meles Zenawi telling Reuters: ‘The key message for us is to ask the G8 to live up to their commitments.’
   Besides Meles, the leaders of Algeria, Angola, Egypt, Libya, Nigeria, Senegal and South Africa joined their G8 counterparts to discuss food security and farming, and to push their demand for compensation for the ravages of climate change.
   It was not clear how much of the $20 billion was new funding and how much each country would give.
   The focus on agricultural investments reflects a US-led shift away from emergency aid assistance toward longer-term strategies to try to make communities more self-sufficient.
   Senegal’s president Abdoulaye Wade told Reuters that Barack Obama, who will make his first visit to Africa as US president after the G8, brought a welcome new focus on African farming.
   Wade, who has championed efforts to increase agriculture in his West African country, which relies heavily on food imports, said Obama ‘really has the will to focus on food in Africa.’
   ‘The United States produces maize and some crops and sends it to people in famine, but the new conception is to produce these crops in Africa and not in the United States,’ Wade said.
   The $20 billion over three years may compare unfavourably with the $13.4 billion the G8 says it has already disbursed between January 2008 and July 2009, but aid groups said the funds pledged on Friday were more clearly focused.
   British charity ActionAid has warned that, with one billion hungry, decisions at the G8 could ‘literally make the difference between life and death for millions in the developing world.’
   Japan and the European Union were championing a code of conduct for responsible investment in the face of growing farmland acquisition or ‘land grabs’ in emerging nations.
   The l’Aquila summit has produced chequered results on other issues, making only limited progress in crucial climate talks following the refusal by major developing nations to sign up to the goal of halving world greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.
   ‘There is a bit of frustration because one would like to convince everyone about everything and obtain all the results straight way, but things are progressing,’ French president Nicolas Sarkozy told reporters late on Thursday.
   G8 leaders said the global financial crisis still posed serious risks to the world economy. Further stimulus packages for growth might still be required and it was dangerous to implement ‘exit strategies’ from emergency measures too early.
   ‘Reaching the bottom of the slump is not when you start with exit strategies. We need to choose a point where we’ve already got some way out of the trough,’ German chancellor Angela Merkel said on Friday.
   She dismissed a Chinese proposal, aired at the summit, for debate on seeking an alternative global reserve currency to the dollar in the long term as something that was not of ‘practical relevance’ for the time being.

Reuters/Bdnews24.com . L’aquila, Italy

G8 leaders pledged $20 billion in farm aid to help poor nations feed themselves, surpassing expectations on the final day of a summit that has yielded little progress on climate change and trade.
   The United States used the meeting of world leaders to push for a shift toward farm investment aid from food aid and will make $3.5 billion available to the 3-year programme. But African nations reminded the rich of a need to honour past commitments.
   ‘Working with the G8, African and European countries and multinational bodies, we had the satisfaction of increasing the $15 billion to $20 billion over three years,’ said Italian prime minister Silvio Berlsuconi.
   The United Nations says the number of malnourished people has risen over the past two years and is expected to top 1.02 billion this year, reversing a four-decade trend of declines.
   ‘$20 billion was a last-minute agreement and it was greeted with great happiness by all of us in the conference room. While we are rebuilding agriculture we need to continue supporting food assistance because the financial crisis is pushing another 103 million people into hunger this year,’ said Staffan de Mistura, vice-executive director of the World Food Programme.
   After two days of talks focused on the economic crisis, trade and global warming, the final day of the meeting in Italy looked at problems facing the poorest nations.
   G8 leaders promised in Gleneagles in 2005 to increase annual aid by $50 billion by 2010, half of which was meant for African countries. But aid bodies say some G8 countries have gone back on their word, especially this year’s G8 host, Italy.
   African leaders said they would voice their concerns, with Ethiopian premier Meles Zenawi telling Reuters: ‘The key message for us is to ask the G8 to live up to their commitments.’
   Besides Meles, the leaders of Algeria, Angola, Egypt, Libya, Nigeria, Senegal and South Africa joined their G8 counterparts to discuss food security and farming, and to push their demand for compensation for the ravages of climate change.
   It was not clear how much of the $20 billion was new funding and how much each country would give.
   The focus on agricultural investments reflects a US-led shift away from emergency aid assistance toward longer-term strategies to try to make communities more self-sufficient.
   Senegal’s president Abdoulaye Wade told Reuters that Barack Obama, who will make his first visit to Africa as US president after the G8, brought a welcome new focus on African farming.
   Wade, who has championed efforts to increase agriculture in his West African country, which relies heavily on food imports, said Obama ‘really has the will to focus on food in Africa.’
   ‘The United States produces maize and some crops and sends it to people in famine, but the new conception is to produce these crops in Africa and not in the United States,’ Wade said.
   The $20 billion over three years may compare unfavourably with the $13.4 billion the G8 says it has already disbursed between January 2008 and July 2009, but aid groups said the funds pledged on Friday were more clearly focused.
   British charity ActionAid has warned that, with one billion hungry, decisions at the G8 could ‘literally make the difference between life and death for millions in the developing world.’
   Japan and the European Union were championing a code of conduct for responsible investment in the face of growing farmland acquisition or ‘land grabs’ in emerging nations.
   The l’Aquila summit has produced chequered results on other issues, making only limited progress in crucial climate talks following the refusal by major developing nations to sign up to the goal of halving world greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.
   ‘There is a bit of frustration because one would like to convince everyone about everything and obtain all the results straight way, but things are progressing,’ French president Nicolas Sarkozy told reporters late on Thursday.
   G8 leaders said the global financial crisis still posed serious risks to the world economy. Further stimulus packages for growth might still be required and it was dangerous to implement ‘exit strategies’ from emergency measures too early.
   ‘Reaching the bottom of the slump is not when you start with exit strategies. We need to choose a point where we’ve already got some way out of the trough,’ German chancellor Angela Merkel said on Friday.
   She dismissed a Chinese proposal, aired at the summit, for debate on seeking an alternative global reserve currency to the dollar in the long term as something that was not of ‘practical relevance’ for the time being.

Source: The Daily New Age, 11 July 2009

More News:

oxfam, choike, actionaid.

MANILA, Philippines – Members of the Freedom from Debt Coalition (FDC) staged a protest action in front of the World Bank office here today to demand the total and unconditional cancellation of all debts it is claiming from the Philippines and developing nations. The protest action coincided with the opening of the Group of Eight Nations’ (G8) 35th Summit in Italy which sets among its agenda the development of a comprehensive response to the global economic crisis. In a statement, FDC Vice President Lidy Nacpil said the longstanding demand of the peoples of the south for debt cancellation is the best economic stimulus program developing nations can use to address the crisis. “For this reason, we chose the World Bank office as the venue of our protest action as it is one of the most prominent international financial institutions financed by G8 governments,” Nacpil said. Nacpil who is also the regional coordinator of Jubilee South-Asia Pacific Movement on Debt and Development (JS-APMDD) said the G8 through its governments, commercial banks and international financial institutions like the World Bank have saddled many developing nations to a life of forced indebtedness. She said as of 2007, the total external debt stock of all developing countries amounted to $3.360 trillion. The said debt stock consists of multilateral, bilateral and commercial loans as well as bonds and securities claimed by northern governments, commercial banks and international financial institutions many of which are controlled by the G8. “The Philippines is all too familiar with this story,” Nacpil said. Citing government data, she said as of March 2009, the national government’s total debt stock is P4.229 trillion with $2.54 billion or P122 billion being claimed by the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) also known as the World Bank. Nacpil said the Bank is 45.67% controlled by the G8 countries with Japan and the United States having 16.38% and 7.86% voting powers, respectively. “For this year, the government is scheduled to allot $299 million or P14.15 billion to World Bank for interest payments alone,” Nacpil said. “Instead of prioritizing World Bank debts many of which are challenged as illegitimate, our resources should instead be used to augment spending on social services, funding of strategic state development projects, financing of programs to strengthen our domestic economy and generate more jobs especially in this time of a worldwide economic crisis,” Nacpil said. FDC said illegitimate debts are debts and/or “obligations” pushed by lending countries and institutions to developing nations which have largely funded flawed development projects and programs; debts incurred by illegitimate regimes and/or loans which have been the result of questionable, undemocratic, illegitimate means in order to perpetuate unequal economic and political domination. The anti-debt watchdog said in the 2008 and 2009 national government budgets, the $100 million Second Social Expenditure Management Program (SEMP2) and the $121.8 million Small Coconut Farms Development Project (SCFDP) were some of the illegitimate World Bank loans identified by Congress and FDC as illegitimate. It was reported that SEMP2 was intended to procure 17.5 million Social Studies textbooks and teachers’ manuals for public elementary and high schools. However, the project allegedly underwent a rigged bidding process involving a monopoly and was reported to have produced at least 600,000 defective textbooks. On the other hand, SCFDP, which was exposed by FDC as “the original fertilizer scam,” was a World Bank credit facility loan agreement entered by the Philippine government on June 4, 1990. An estimated 40% of the funds intended for the project’s fertilizer deliveries had reportedly been malversed, with the Commission on Audit (COA) raising questions concerning insufficient documentation pertaining to the distribution of fertilizers. “There is no more reason for the country to pay for these debts. A large part of these debts have contributed to our impoverishment, aggravated the impacts of the economic crisis, and makes recovery from the crisis extremely difficult and complicated.” Nacpil said. In a letter handed over to the World Bank, FDC and JS-APMDD demanded the following: 1. Total and unconditional cancellation of all illegitimate debts claimed by the World Bank from the people of the south. 2. Discontinuation of World Bank financing of projects and policies that contribute to climate change. 3. Respect of south countries’ right to reverse harmful policies such as privatization of public utilities, liberalization of trade and deregulation as assertion of national sovereignty. 4. End the practice of using loans and debt cancellation to impose conditionalities. 5. Restitution and reparations for the ecological and climate debts owed by the World Bank to peoples of the South   6. End support for the illegitimate leadership and government of Gloria Macapagal Arroyo. According to FDC, as of 2007, out of the top six foreign bilateral outstanding debts claimed from the Philippine national government, four are loans from members of the G8, namely Japan (US$5.3 billion, Top 1), United States (US$354 million, Top 2), France (US$115 billion, Top 4), and Canada (US$60 billion, Top 6). The multilateral debts claimed from the Philippines include US$2.93 billion loans from the Asian Development Bank (ADB). The ADB is controlled by seven of the G8 countries (except Russia) representing 39.6% of voting rights, with Japan and the United States having the largest stake at 12.756% voting power each. As for commercial loans, loans from the Deutsche Bank of Germany, another G8 member, tops the list, at US$347 million. -30-

Last Updated ( Wednesday, 08 July 2009 17:47 )

Source: Freedom from Debt Coalition Website

7 July 2009

AID FOR TRADE

Director-General Pascal Lamy, at the closing session of the second global review of Aid for Trade on 7 July 2009, said “we have to maintain momentum and ensure that commitments are met.” Underlining the need to actively mobilize additional resources, he welcomed announcements of substantial commitments from Japan ($12 billion for 2009-11), the United Kingdom (£1 billion per year), the Netherlands (550 million euros per year) and France (850 million euros per year).

DG closing remarks

Thank you, Ambassador Servansing.

This has been an extremely useful session and I am very happy that I could be with all of you, not only to listen to your experiences about how Aid for Trade is working in your countries, but also to listen to your suggestions about the way forward.

One key aspect of the dialogue which we have had is that it has helped bring the trade practitioners and the development professionals closer to jointly move the Aid for Trade initiative.

If you work on agricultural development, you aim to increase the productivity of farmers so they sell more food products, both domestically and across borders. If you are involved in infrastructure development, you want those food products to travel along the roads and railways or through the ports and airports which you have built. And so on. Clearly, trade impinges on all sectors of the economy; it’s not a sector on its own — and it is this realisation that is important.

This fact also strengthens the case for mainstreaming trade into national development strategies. In the discussion over these two days, we heard how economic and social benefits can accrue from trade opening provided trade is mainstreamed. The reality is that trade pervades the fabric of global society. As the UN Secretary General said yesterday, “building more trade capacity is essential because trade can and must be part of our efforts to stimulate a recovery.” As one of you said today: Aid for Trade is now firmly established in the agenda for integrating developing countries into the trading system.

The centrepiece of this Second Review has been the joint OECD-WTO Aid for Trade at a Glance 2009. This publication shows trade is being prioritized by partner countries in national development strategies; donors are offering more and better Aid for Trade and new partners are becoming engaged in South-South cooperation. Furthermore, the increase in allocation to Aid for Trade has been achieved without reducing resources to other development priorities such as health, education or environment.

Aid for Trade grew by 10 per cent per year between 2005 and 2007; if you add non-concessional aid from international financial institutions, the figures nearly double in value.

A message which comes from these meetings is that we need to refine our monitoring in understanding how Aid for Trade is working in tandem with other financial instruments, in particular those offered by the international financial institutions. Not all supply side or economic infrastructure constraints can or will be addressed through an Aid for Trade response. For example, we have heard of various examples of how grant financing has been blended with other financing instruments.

As I said at the opening, if Aid for Trade was urgent in 2007, it is essential today. We have to maintain momentum and ensure that commitments are met. This implies an on-going role for the monitoring framework which our colleagues at the OECD are constantly refining. It also means refining the methodology and reporting. It is a fact that the activities of South-South partners, of which we have heard so much today, and which are growing in volume and importance, are not captured in the Aid for Trade numbers generated by the OECD. We need to give some attention to this as better coordination, which we are trying to achieve, is difficult without better information.

The three break-out sessions of this morning have highlighted the indispensable role of our regional partners. Through the work of the bilateral donors, regional development banks, regional economic commissions and regional economic communities, we have been able to make significant progress on implementation. I remain convinced that we need to build upon the progress we have achieved in strengthening the regional dimension of Aid for Trade.

This morning we also learnt that Aid for Trade needs to factor in specificities; for example, those of middle-income countries and the types of financing available to them; or those of landlocked countries, small economies, remote islands or countries emerging out of conflict.

Numerous interventions from the floor have further reinforced the message which we received during the monitoring exercise when we received 88 replies from our developing country members. Developing countries are taking ownership of their own initiative. Indeed, there seems to be a pent-up demand which is being finally released. This means that Aid for Trade is maturing. But at the same time Aid for Trade is a long-term endeavour which needs to be sustained over a long time. Our partners have reacted well to the lead taken by the WTO. We must allow them now to define their own roles in this process and participate further.

This is coherence in global economic policymaking in action. And it must happen at three levels. At national level through constructive dialogue between governments and their development partners; at regional level between regional economic commissions and their member governments, with international financial institutions and donors; and at multilateral level by keeping the spotlight on Aid for Trade in the G8, which I will attend tomorrow, the G20, the annual meetings of the Bank and Fund, the annual meetings of the regional development banks and so on. Now that we have generated this momentum, we must keep our foot on the gas and agree on a common destination.

So what next ?

At the 11 June meeting of the Committee on Trade and Development, I noted that we need to develop a framework that will allow us to better coordinate our efforts, mobilize additional resources, enhance political ownership and better prepare the way forward. In my view there are four very clear objectives which should inform our work going forward.

First, I believe that we need to build upon the progress we have achieved in strengthening the regional dimension of Aid for Trade. We will rely mainly on our regional partners including the development banks and bilateral donors to take the lead in evolving clear and focused regional Aid for Trade projects. We have an opportunity to advance this agenda by holding an ECOWAS Aid for Trade event in the Fall. I will be looking for similar opportunities in other regions. I would note that the Islamic Development Bank, UNECE and UNDP have already agreed on a roadmap with the economies of Central Asia.

Second, I believe we need also to enhance the role and contribution of the private sector in this initiative. Yesterday’s private sector session gave us much food for thought, particularly as regards the particular challenges of bringing SMEs into the picture is concerned. It also underlined how the imperative to respond to the pressing challenge of climate change, which can at once be a challenge but also an opportunity to unleash investment opportunity. The same can be said for helping meet international standards as well as increasing access to energy. One suggestion which particularly resonated was that of building partnerships with private foundations to tap into their resources and capacities to deliver effective and adequate Aid for Trade. Another suggestion was to focus business involvement in a specific sector such as logistics which cuts across a wide range of Aid for Trade activities.

Third, we should continue our evaluation work with specific focus on evaluating the impact of Aid for Trade. Aid for Trade should develop as a community of best practice. A first step in this direction is to inventory what is out there. The second is to look at common frameworks. We need to ensure also that we are not just measuring inputs and outputs, but tangible outcomes. I hold strongly the view that as national budgets come under increasing pressure, so we need to step up our efforts to show the value of what we are doing with evidence-based reporting on outcomes. As was mentioned by Mr Kuroda of the Asian Development Bank yesterday, in 1997 it took three days to pass goods from China to Thailand via Lao PD; in 2009, it takes four hours. If this is not a positive example of Aid for Trade, what is? In order to move further on this, we will as usual rely heavily on our partners. The WTO itself neither has the mandate, nor the capacity, to undertake its own evaluation of Aid for Trade.

Lastly, I believe we need to continue to actively mobilize additional resources and in particular, start looking beyond 2010. We have had reasonably clear commitments by donors up to 2010; we now need more clarity about the post 2010 horizon. Japan has given us cause for optimism. The commitment they offered of $12 billion over the period 2009-11 is up $2 billion in comparison with the commitment made for 2006-2008. The announcement made yesterday afternoon by Minister Thomas that the UK will spend around £1 billion sterling a year over the next three years to enhance growth and trade in poorer countries is also satisfying. The Netherlands indicated its commitment to spend at least €550 million per year on all categories of Aid for Trade. I just heard the French delegation announce a minimum of €850 million per year from 2010 that is + 50 per cent as compared with the 2002/2005 benchmark. This, of course, over and above fulfilment of their existing commitments. I would encourage other members to follow their lead. Mobilizing Aid for Trade resources will remain essential to help developing countries be prepared to better exit the crises, including by encouraging South-South Aid for Trade partnerships.

These are some ideas which come from these two days of discussions. They are not entirely new but what is more important is to now discuss them and turn them into your own work plan. I see a critical role for the CTD in ensuring our continued success. But we also need to ensure that we hear the views of the development partners.

I believe that we should reflect on what has been said at this Global Review and try to come up with a work plan which will give us direction and consistency, and which can also be fed into the Ministerial Conference, for its possible consideration in early December.

In so doing, we will have given ourselves clarity in approach and commonality in purpose — necessary ingredients to maintaining momentum on Aid for Trade.

I would like to finish by mentioning the context in which this Conference takes place: our efforts to conclude the Doha Round. As Cambodian Trade Minister Cham Prasidh said yesterday: “Aid for Trade and the Doha Round are Siamese twins. They cannot be separated because they share one heart.”

Thank you.

G8 world leaders are meeting in the Italian city of L’Aquila, the epicentre of a powerful and deadly earthquake three months ago, to discuss the teetering global financial system, climate change and unrest in Iran.

Wednesday 08 July 2009

G8 leaders meet for a three day summit starting Wednesday in the Italian city of L’Aquila, where over 300 people were killed in a powerful earthquake three months ago.

Shockwaves from the ethnic violence in western China’s Xinjiang region have called Chinese leader Hu Jintao back to Beijing.

But the remaining 24 heads of state will see L’Aquila’s devastation at first hand, before discussing the global financial system, climate change, and unrest in Iran and China.
The G8 – comprising Japan, United States, Russia, Britain, Germany, France, Italy and Canada – was once regarded as the world’s premier talking shop, but has found itself overshadowed by the G20 group which includes emerging powers.

Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi has invited the leaders of China, India and Brazil for talks on world affairs to address this shift of balance.

Lurid media coverage

Berlusconi also hopes that in broadening the guest list and choosing the site of a natural disaster for the meeting he will deflect some of the focus away from his private life, which has been subject to increasingly lurid media coverage.

Sorbonne political analyst Professor Philippe Ryfman told FRANCE 24 that L’Aquila was a politically charged choice of venue: “It’s obviously politically motivated,” he said. “It is a political manipulation of the catastrophe’s aftermath. Natural disasters have an intrinsic and strong political dimension.”

While the state of the global economy will dominate proceedings, efforts to combat global warming will also feature prominently on Wednesday’s agenda.

The G8 has prepared a draft communiqué calling on global emissions to peak by 2020 and then be “substantially reduced” to peg the rise in global temperatures to two degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) over pre-industrial levels.
  

The Italian premier said he hoped the summit would see the launch of an initiative to raise between 10 and 15 billion dollars to boost food security in poor countries and said a thaw in relations between Washington and Moscow following a trip by US President Barack Obama to Moscow augured well.
   
Britain and France want the summit to focus on bringing greater stability to the oil market, which has fluctuated wildly over the last 12 monts, with highs of 147 dollars and lows of just 32.
 
Around 15,000 police have been deployed to prevent a repeat of the violence which marred the last time Italy hosted a G8 summit in 2001, when a protester was shot dead in Genoa.

Evacuation plans are also in place in the event of any major aftershock, which would bring about an immediate cancellation of the gathering.

Hu Jintao goes home

Chinese President Hu Jintao cut short his visit to Italy and left for home early on Wednesday “due to the situation in north-west China’s Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region” the Xinhua news agency reported.
   
In Rome, the ANSA news agency quoted Tang Heng, the first political counsellor at the Chinese embassy in the Italian capital, as saying Hu decided to curtail his trip “given the worsening of the disorder in Xinjiang.”

FRANCE 24’s China correspondent, Joris Zylberman, said Hu was sending out a strong message to the Chinese domestic audience.

“The situation in the Xinjiang region is considered by Beijing to be extremely serious,” he said. “The message is clear – Hu Jintao and the central Chinese government want to get the situation in hand quickly.”
   
State Councillor Dai Bingguo will take part in the summit on Hu’s behalf, Xinhua reported.

Source: www.france24.com

An Australian town is set to ban bottled water over concerns about its environmental impact, in what is believed to be

An Australian town is set to ban bottled water over concerns about its environmental impact, in what is believed to be a world first. Bundanoon, a picturesque rural town with a population of just 2,000, was expected to vote heavily in favour of the move with a show of hands at a public meeting later.

a world first.

Bundanoon, a picturesque rural town with a population of just 2,000, was expected to vote heavily in favour of the move with a show of hands at a public meeting later.

“At the moment we’ve got a lot of community support behind it. We’re confident the town is going to back it,” said activist John Dee.

“We believe Bundanoon is the world’s first town that has got its retailers to ban bottled water. We haven’t found it anywhere else.”

Local opinion was incensed when beverage company Norlex Holdings announced plans to tap an underground reservoir in the town, truck the water up to Sydney and then send it back in bottled form.

“The company has been looking to extract water locally, bottle it in Sydney and bring it back here to sell it again,” said Dee.

“It made people look at the environmental impact of bottled water and the community has been quite vocal about it.”

Dee, whose Do Something group was instrumental in a plastic bags ban in Coles Bay, Tasmania, said he hoped the ban would make people think twice about buying bottled water.

“It’s possible it will extend to other places. The main idea is to get people thinking about their usage of bottled water — we’re spending about half a billion dollars on it here in Australia,” he said.

Retailers in the New South Wales town, south of Sydney, have already agreed to stop stocking bottled water.

Activists say bottling water causes unnecessary use of plastics and fuel for transport. A New South Wales study found that in 2006, the industry was responsible for releasing 60,000 tonnes of gases blamed for global warming.

Partha Pratim Bhattacharjee

Many Awami League lawmakers and cabinet ministers believe that the proposed dam at Tipaimukh across the Barak River might cause ecological disaster in downstream Bangladesh.
   A number of lawmakers and ministers of the Awami League-led coalition government said on Friday that the government would uphold the country’s interest in any bilateral dialogue on the dam and equitable sharing of the common rivers’ waters.
   A parliamentary delegation, which will be assisted by leading water experts of the country, is expected to leave for India to assess the ecological impact of the Indian project, conceived in 2003, by visiting the site.
   The finance minister, Abul Maal Abdul Muhith, opined that the project, if implemented, would be harmful for the lower riparian country.
   ‘The proposed dam is not good for our nation as it is against the environment and nature,’ said the minister, adding that when they were in opposition they launched a movement, but the then Bangladesh Nationalist Party-led government ignored their protest despite the fact that India had completed the design of the dam and floated an international tender during the BNP-Jamaat regime.
   Muhith, however, urged all concerned to wait until the Bangladesh delegation submits its report after visiting the project site.
   ‘As India has invited us to send a delegation to visit the site, we should make our decision after it submits its report,’ he added.
   The agriculture minister, Matia Chowdhury, told New Age that the problems raised by the Tipaimukh dam should be resolved through consultation. ‘The government will take a decision in the highest interest of the country,’ she said reassuringly.
   Textile and jute minister Abdul Latif Siddiqui, who a week ago expressed ignorance of the project at a discussion, said the proposed Tipaimukh dam would destroy the environmental balance in the region.
   ‘The dam is being constructed in an earthquake-prone area and after its completion millions of cusecs of water will be kept in reserve at the site, so if there is an earthquake the whole eastern part of Bangladesh will go under water,’ he said.
   ‘It won’t be good neighbourly behaviour if India constructs the dam without consulting Bangladesh,’ said Latif.
   The water resources minister, Ramesh Chandra Sen, on April 14 said that India had assured Bangladesh that the Tipaimukh dam project was not aimed at diverting water from the Barak River.
   ‘We have come to know from diplomatic sources that the proposed dam is a hydro-electricity generation project. The Indian authorities have assured us that they will not divert water elsewhere through the dam,’ the minister told a number of lawmakers who had questioned him.
   Commerce minister Faruk Khan on May 26 said the government would not oppose construction of the Tipaimukh dam by India if Bangladesh gets certain benefits, such as the chance to import some of the electricity produced by the dam.
   ‘I think those who are talking too much against construction of the dam are talking without knowing anything about the dam,’ said Faruk.
   Foreign minister Dipu Moni said that Bangladesh had demanded a meeting of the Joint Rivers Commission, which was formed to discuss water issues between Bangladesh and India. ‘We will raise the issue at the next JRC meeting,’ she said.
   Dipu said the government would send the parliamentary standing committee on the water resources ministry to visit the dam’s site for analysing its effects on Bangladesh. ‘If the data on the Tipaimukh dam show that it will be harmful to Bangladesh, we will do whatever is needed to protect our interest,’ she said.
   Industries minister Dilip Barua on Wednesday said Tipaimukh will cause environmental disaster not only in Bangladesh but also in the north-eastern states of India. ‘The dam is being constructed in an earthquake-prone area. If there is an earthquake after construction of the Tipaimukh dam, the whole of Bangladesh will disappear,’ he claimed.
   The government has already decided that the all-party parliamentary standing committee on the water resources ministry led by chairman Abdur Razzak, along with experts, will visit the project site and submit their report to the parliament after due assessment.
   Razzak blamed the BNP for ‘agreeing’ to let India construct the Tipaimukh dam. ‘We have come to know that the hydro-electric project went ahead as per the discussion and the resolutions of a meeting of the Joint Rivers Commission in New Delhi in 2003,’ he said on June 16.
   Razzak, former water resources minister of the last AL government, observed that Bangladeshi experts who have been holding forth in the talk shows in television channels have little knowledge of the project, but still talk a lot about it. ‘I request all to refrain from talking on the issue without studying it thoroughly,’ he added.
   Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina on June 24 called on the opposition Bangladesh Nationalist Party to take an initiative on their own to send a separate delegation of water experts to India’s Tipaimukh dam site and submit a report, and the government would go through the two reports and take a decision in the best interest of the country.
   Responding to Hasina’s call, BNP chairperson Khaleda Zia on June 29 sent a letter to her, seeking official help to enable a seven-member team of experts, nominated by the BNP, to visit the site of the dam.
   Workers Party’s president Rashed Khan Menon said India must stop construction of the dam because it will bring about disaster in both the countries. However, he favoured solving the problem by holding bilateral talks instead of resorting to international negotiations.
   Jatiya Samajtantrik Dal’s president Hasanul Haque Inu, also a lawmaker of the ruling alliance, said the government must take political measures to stop construction of the dam right at this moment. It is a national issue therefore it must be solved in a national manner.
   AL lawmaker Mahmud-Us Samad Chowdhury termed the Tipaimukh dam a ‘death trap’ for Bangladesh and said that its construction cannot be allowed. ‘The Surma and Kushiyara will dry up if the dam is built.’
   Abu Zahir, ruling alliance lawmaker from Habiganj-3, told New Age that the problem should be solved through bilateral talks and the government should not take any decision against of the country’s interest.
   AL lawmaker MA Mannan from Sunamganj expressed concern over the proposed Tipaimukh dam, saying that it would create many problems for the country. ‘But I think the issue should be resolved through bilateral talks with India,’ he said.

Source: The Daily New Age, 04 July 2009

Refayet Ullah Mirdha

Many local knitwear manufacturers and exporters have complained that Malu NV, a Belgian buyer of readymade garment (RMG) from Bangladesh, is allegedly cheating them with charging heavy discount by conducting frequent inspections of the shipped goods.

Following such non-cooperation from Malu, some local manufacturers are losing their competitiveness in international trade, the exporters said.

However Malu NV has denied the allegation.

“I have sold my personal car to pay my workers”, said Mansoor Hamid, managing director of Marshall Knittex Ltd, which was supplying knitwear products to Malu NV.

He said the victims have already submitted their complaints officially to Malu NV and the local associations concerned demanding immediate solution to the problem as they are incurring losses from such anti-business attitudes from the Belgian buyer.

In the written complaint, Hamid said he was facing problems with his bank due to the Malu’s cancellation of shipment of 25,000 pieces knitwear products.

He alleged that all other buyers are doing fair business with them following the norms, but Malu is the only buyer, which has put the manufacturers under pressure of discount and other threats.

Hamid said after an order is finalised and once goods are ready for shipment, Malu takes the products to Chittagong Port and keep those at the port for 20-25 days unnecessarily.

When the goods reach Rotterdam port or Antwerp port in Belgium, Malu sends message to the suppliers that a pre-shipment test will be conducted for the final delivery, he said.

Aminur Rahman, managing director of GC Fashion Wear Ltd, another victim, alleged that Malu NV has deducted more than 20 percent from the value of its each delivery.

The buyer has taken away 40 percent from JR Knit Fashion’ delivery, 10 percent from Oaishe Composite Knit Garment Ltd, 10 percent from Tex Bay Ltd, 50 percent from Rising Sun Knit Ltd and 10 percent from Fourthway Knittex Ltd, officials of the companies alleged.

When contacted, Roger Van Craen, managing director of Malu NV, told The Daily Star that the claim made by the Bangladeshi suppliers was not true as the dispute was resolved through discussion.

He said Malu demanded discount from the factory owners due to delayed shipment and poor quality of goods of some suppliers.

“I have been doing business with Bangladesh for the last 10 years and I import garment items worth $35 million a year,” said Craen, the owner of Malu NV that has an annual turnover of $70 million.

“I am expanding the volume of business in Bangladesh as the country produces quality knitwear at cheaper price,” the Malu chief said.

Fazlul Hoque, president of Bangladesh Knitwear Manufacturers and Exporters Association, said he was formally apprised of the situation.

“We will try to solve the problem through discussion,” Hoque said.

reefat@thedailystar.net

Source: The Daily Star, 30 June 2009

IF the World Bank wants to help the country survive the global economic recession, it should “walk the talk” and begin the process of debt cancellation, according to the Freedom from Debt Coalition (FDC).

In a statement, the FDC said on Monday that due to the automatic debt-service law, and the government underspending amid low revenues and unabashed borrowings to fill in the deficit, the possibility the country will sink into a recession is becoming clearer.

The FDC said that of the country’s total debt stock, $2.54 billion or P122 billion is owed to the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD), or the World Bank.

“We are scheduled to pay $299 million to World Bank this year, or about P14.15 billion, of which P9.8 billion will go to interest payments alone. Imagine the results our country can achieve if the P122-billion WB debt is canceled
and used to fund development programs and projects,” said FDC secretary-general Milo Tanchuling.

“International financial institutions like the World Bank can help highly-indebted countries like the Philippines by starting to act like a development institution rather than a commercial bank and by canceling loans it is claiming from us,” continued Tanchuling.

The FDC said if the WB would indeed start the process of debt cancellation, it can also start with auditing its own loan-financed projects. The group said one loan that should be audited is the loan for the Second Social Expenditure Management Program (SEMP2) and the Small Coconut Farms Development Project (SCFDP).

The SEMP2 was funded by a $100-million World Bank loan, around $40 million of which was earmarked for the procurement of 17.5 million Social Studies textbooks and teachers’ manuals for public elementary and high schools.

“The project allegedly underwent a rigged bidding process involving a monopoly and was reported to have produced at least 600,000 defective textbooks,” said the FDC.

The group said officials from both the administration and the opposition already called for an inquiry into the SEMP2, of which the Philippines is scheduled to pay $5.5 million or P260 million as interest payment. The SEMP2 loan payments run until April 15, 2019.

The group referred to the SCFDP as “the original fertilizer scam,” and it was financed by a $121.8-million by the World Bank on June 4, 1990.

The group said around 40 percent of the funds intended for the project’s fertilizer deliveries had been reported to be malversed, with the Commission on Audit raising questions on insufficient documentation on the distribution of fertilizers.

The FDC said the Philippines is scheduled to pay a total of $11.46 million or P540 million, both for interest and principal, for the SCFDP loan this year. The loan will be paid until September 15, 2010.

“If it was able to investigate the case of NRIMP [National Roads Improvement and Management Project] 1 and 2, then it can also do so for SEMP2 and SCFDP,” said the FDC.

With the country’s debt totalling P4.229 trillion as of March this year, and with the deficit soaring 556.2 percent year-on-year from January to May, the economy will be in a more precarious situation should government increase its deficit further, according to the group. 

The Bureau of Treasury reported that from January to April, the government paid P320.19 billion in debt service—P122.16 billion in interest and P198.03 billion for the principal.

The group pointed out that interest payments alone already ate up 26.3 percent of government disbursements over the same period.   

Source: The Business Mirror, 30 June 2009

Refayet Ullah Mridha

Sacking of about 1,000 workers of a sick garment factory was at the root of yesterday’s mayhem in Ashulia. But it fanned at a stunning speed the festering anger of workers of a large number of sick garment factories. Ultimately, some 50,000 workers took part in the wholesale vandalising and damaging of about 50 garment units in Ashulia.

The current global meltdown had a background part to play in the whole thing as scores of factories turned sick due to reduced orders.

Low and delayed wage payments following the recession also helped trigger the unrest that took at least two lives and left hundreds injured in three consecutive days of violence.

Ha-Meem Group in Ashulia was the latest factory to become a major victim.

Many factory owners had truncated their workforce to be more competitive against their international competitors, industry insiders said.

Retrenched workers of different garment factories were lobbying Bangladesh Garment Manufacturers and Exporters Association (BGMEA) over the last few months to have their jobs back, get their arrear wages, and get their pays hiked. But the association could do little for them.

“Due to declining orders from international buyers I sold S Suhi Industrial Park [six garment production units] to Pretty Group in February and all of the units were closed in October last year,” said Sirajul Islam, former managing director of S Suhi Industrial Park.

Sirajul said he could not run all six of his units as the number of orders from the recession-hit international buyers was declining. He said the units had 1,700 workers when it was handed over to the new owner.

The closure of the units of S Suhi Industrial Park Ltd was mainly responsible for the latest labour unrest in garment factories in Ashulia and Savar areas, a number of garment workers claimed.

Pretty Group in March started production only with the sweater-manufacturing unit and kept the five other units of the former S Suhi Industrial Park closed. Around 1,000 out-of-work workers of the five units were mounting pressure on the new management to restart those units soon, said garment workers.

The workers of the closed units along with other ill-paid workers of some nearby factories, which are not doing so well, started a movement to reopen the units and raise salary of workers, they said.

Failing to get their jobs back, they started to unite and threaten to halt production in other factories unless the former S Suhi units are reopened, a worker of Ha-Meem Group said requesting anonymity.

The agitating workers started vandalising the factories that were still in production and the units of Ha-Meem Group bore the brunt of their wrath, the worker said.

Manjur Rahman, manager and company secretary of Pretty Group, claimed that this labour unrest had neither anything to do with his factory nor was it triggered from his factory.

He, however, said that three workers behaved badly with a production manager of S Suhi Sweater Unit (of Pretty Group) on June 27.

He said there was an altercation between the three workers and the production manager over the workers’ getting to work late. “The production manager did not allow the three to enter the factory that day and they were kept outside the gate,” he said.

He said the three workers called others and tried to force their way into the factory and the management tried to obstruct them with the help of Ansar members.

At one stage, the workers entered the factory premises and snatched the weapons of Ansar members. “Other Ansar members opened fire on the workers to disperse them when Al-Amin, a worker, was seriously injured and he died in Dhaka Medical College Hospital [DMCH],” Manjur said.

“I do not believe that the latest labour unrest erupted due to the incident in former S Suhi Industrial Park Ltd…it is a deliberate attempt to destroy the readymade garment sector in Bangladesh,” he said.

He said he would open the sweater factory on July 1, as this is the peak season for sweater production. The other units would be reopened in phases in the near future, he added.

Source: The Daily Star, 30 June 2009

WTO: 2009 PRESS RELEASES

PRESS/559

26 June 2009

TRADE AND ENVIRONMENT

The world cannot continue with “business as usual” and there is a profound need for a successful conclusion to the current negotiations on both climate change and trade opening.

The WTO/UNEP report on “Trade and Climate Change” published today examines the intersections between trade and climate change from four perspectives: the science of climate change; economics; multilateral efforts to tackle climate change; and national climate change policies and their effect on trade.

The WTO and UNEP are partners in the pursuit of sustainable development and this report is the outcome of collaborative research between the WTO and UNEP.

“With a challenge of this magnitude, multilateral cooperation is crucial and a successful conclusion to the ongoing climate change negotiations is the first step to achieving sustainable development for future generations,” said WTO Director General Pascal Lamy and UNEP’s Executive Director Achim Steiner.

Both Steiner and Lamy urge the international community to seal an equitable and decisive deal at the crucial UN climate convention meeting in Copenhagen, Denmark in December 2009. They also urge nations to conclude the Doha trade round which includes opening trade in environmental goods and services, a complementary track towards reducing greenhouse gas emissions to scientifically-defensible levels.

The scientific evidence is now clear that the Earth’s climate system is warming as a result of greenhouse gas emissions which are still increasing worldwide, and will continue to increase over the coming decades unless there are significant changes to current laws, policies and actions. Although freer trade could lead to increased CO2 emissions as a result of raising economic activity. It can also help alleviate climate change, for instance by increasing the diffusion of mitigation technologies.

The global economy is expected to be affected by climate change. Sectors such as agriculture, forestry, fisheries, tourism and transport infrastructure which are critical for developing countries are more specifically affected. These impacts will often have implications for trade.

Opening up trade and combating climate change can be mutually supportive towards realizing a low carbon economy the new report says. Contrary to some claims, trade and trade opening can have a positive impact on emissions of greenhouse gases in a variety of ways including accelerating the transfer of clean technology and the opportunity for developing economies to adapt those technologies to local circumstances. Rising incomes, linked with trade opening can also change social dynamics and aspirations with wealthier societies having the opportunity to demand higher environmental standards including ones on greenhouse gas emissions. In addition there is evidence that more open trade together with actions to combat climate change can catalyze global innovation including new products and processes that can stimulate new clean tech businesses.

National policies, from traditional regulatory instruments to economic incentives and financial measures, have been used in a number of countries to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to increase energy efficiency. The report highlights the effects that this complex web of measures might have on international trade and the multilateral trading system. In recent years, there has been a proliferation of technical requirements (voluntary standards and labelling) related to climate-friendly goods and energy efficiency. Likewise, financial support programmes for the use of renewable energies have also increased recently.

The report also reviews extensively two particular types of pricing mechanisms that have been used to reduce greenhouse gas emissions: taxes and emissions trading systems. Incidentally, the report reflects the debate that is taking place on policies aimed at preventing carbon leakage and protecting competitiveness, including on border measures.

Overall, the report highlights that there is scope under WTO rules for addressing climate change at the national level. However, the relevance of WTO rules to climate change mitigation policies, as well as the implications for trade and the environmental effectiveness of these measures, will very much depend on how these policies are designed and the specific conditions for implementing them.