Southern Voices in the international system 15th November 2005 Cecilia Alemany Social Watch

Contents: 1) Introduction 2) IFIS: Which part is more permeable to southern voices? 3) UN: What should reform of the UNs development role require as a minimum? 4) Concluding remarks

1) Introduction From LA (Skeptical) LA is not a cooperation priority LA is not in the neighborhood LA is not the poorest continent… But it is the most unequal…and this inequality is higher each year…

- If we look at the donors: Source: Freres, Christian (2005).

So, which voices? From the South: B-R-ICS? Governments? Regions? Or regional institutions? CSOs?

2) IFIS: Which part is more permeable to southern voices? a) IMF b) WB c) IADB (regional banks) d) A key actor: the EU

a) IMF We cannot talk about a CS agenda Informal dialogues Selected CSOs Without operative guidelines on CS Lack of transparency and accountability

b) WB, CS participation « CS participation as a conditionality » 1982: Com. WB - NGOs 1990: Working Group NGOs WB (GTONG-WB) Participation as an obligation: environmental risks, indigenous people, people mobilizations National dialogues, SC Unit, consultations, etc. Good governance and stakeholders framework

WB and IADB internal governance Decision making processes: LAC countries 50 % participation in IADB And only 10 % in the WB… So, the IADB is more relevant to LAC countries and CSO…

c) IADB Dialogues and consultations Conditionality Project oriented and good governance framework « Comite Asesor »

d) EU as a key actor Non state actors approach EESC SC Fora: EU-Mexico, EU-CAN, etc. DG Trade Dialogue with CS Bi-regional committees New Perspectives (CSP and RSP)

3) UN: What should reform of the UNs development role require as a minimum? A) UNDP B) ECOSOC C) « Reform » and Cardoso Report D) MDGs are not enough

UNDP: legitimacy to have a stronger position Democracy Report (LAC) Human Development Reports ECOSOC: limitations Reform: Security Council (decision making process) Council for Global Development and Environ. (CGDE) german proposal ?

Cardoso Report Partenariat Group SC and CS National CS consultative groups Liaison Groups: NGOs, Congress, private sector Bureau: permanent autochthones issues Public auditions etc. Expanded trust fund to support CS participation (regional or UN headq.)

4) Concluding remarks: Regional banks are new actors and has to be reinforced, in these spaces the CS participation has to be re- df. CS participation in regional integration processes is crucial and has to be supported effectively (formal and informal participation).

UNDP can play a major role, has to be strengthen and has to strengthen the relations with CSOs ECOSOC is not effective so we have to revisit the Cardoso Proposals

We need a constructive debate on how CS participation can be more effectively at the global and national level. Nobody knows how to deal with CS heterogeneity, diversity and challenges…even if IFIS ask to the governments to do it.

MDGs can be a pretext to promote national dialogues (and consensus) on development between all the development actors (because PRSP werent generally). MDGs are the new aid framework, so they can be a pretext to develop real participation

For that it will be necessary to establish mechanisms (UN, banks and regional level) that give: Transparency: information, access to agendas, papers, reports, etc. Access to the debates: consultation Systematic participation in all the phases of the decision making process: planning, execution, monitoring and evaluation = Accountability=Watchdog = Ownership