The international structures that govern the global financial and trade systems were developed for the most part at the end of the Second World War. A comprehensive global governance system was designed at the 1944 Bretton Woods Conference and at subsequent deliberations to set up an International Trade Organization (ITO), but even at that time the structure remained incomplete as the proposed ITO never came into being. Enhancing the coherence and consistency of these international structures in support of development was a key issue during the Preparatory Committee for the International Intergovernmental High-level Event on Financing for Development in New York, February 2001.

Pakistan
Ambassador Shamshad Ahmad

“Reform of world financial architecture has been a concern for the international community for a long time. Since the decisions and policies of the Bretton Woods Institutions (BWIs) impact every country of the world, the global financial institutions need to be more participatory, transparent and development friendly.

While fully respecting the mandates and functions of each institution, we will have to rise to a higher plane of consensus-building in support of development. The UN and BWIs are global policy making bodies. Together with the WTO, private sector and civil society, these global institutions should be able to evolve a flexible cooperative intergovernmental arrangement with the sole purpose of enhancing coherence and consistency in their respective policies and activities in the wider field of development.

European Union
Ambassador Ruth Jacoby,
Head of Delegation of Sweden on behalf of the EU

The EU supports the goals of strengthened co-operation and enhanced coherence between the United Nations, the WTO and the Bretton Woods Institutions.

Enhanced regional and sub-regional co-operation on finance, development and trade, should complement this effort. The EU welcomes the ongoing reform efforts by the governing bodies of the international financial institutions to help make these institutions more responsive to the challenges of globalization and development, more accountable and transparent. Equally welcome are the important steps by the World Bank and the Regional Development Banks to strengthen co-operation among themselves and with other international institutions. The EU believes that the UN, in collaboration with other international institutions, provides a useful forum for a dialogue on monetary, financial, and trade issues from a development perspective. It promotes mutual understanding between international organisations of their respective policies and mandates, without interfering in their respective decision making processes, and can ultimately lead to greater complementarity in the development effort. The EU also believes that key to progress lies not in setting up new mechanisms or fora, but rather in ensuring the improved functioning and coherence of existing mechanisms.

Islamic Republic of Iran
Ambassador Bagher Asadi
Chairman of the Group of 77

Addressing systemic issues including enhancing the coherence and consistency of the international monetary, financial and trading systems in support of development should find a paramount place in our agenda. The Group of 77 and China believe that the existing institutional arrangements and international cooperation in this field are lagging far behind the process of economic and financial integration at the global level. A broader and effective participation of developing countries in the international decision-making and norm setting processes is imperative... From our point of view the crux of the substance of this agenda item is that the international financial architecture, whether to be considered new or otherwise, should be made responsive to the priorities of growth and development on a global level, especially in developing countries, and to the promotion of economic and social equity. We simply cannot shirk our responsibility to such noble objectives and towards their achievement.

Denmark
Ambassador Ellen Margre Løj

I see it as one of the preconditions for a successful outcome of the Financing for Development that the UN be given its right place – no more, but no less – in this evolving framework of international, multilateral development co-operation. In important areas of policy co-ordination and in the operational field, the Bretton Woods Institutions and the WTO have important responsibilities within their given mandates. We therefore welcome their ongoing efforts to increase transparency and strengthen their approach to poverty reduction as well as their participation and contribution to this process.

Malaysia
Ambassador Hasmy Agam

Effort to ensure orderly and stable conditions in the international financial system must also include measures for substantive and meaningful reform in the operations of International Financial Institutions (IFIs). No one is challenging the legitimacy of the Bretton Woods Institutions or their continued relevance. What has been raised is the need to enhance their transparency and accountability, just as member countries are required to be transparent and accountable for their policies.

The recent Asian financial crisis highlighted the dangers and implications of inappropriate IMF policy recommendations. The failure of the IMF to make correct and sound prescriptions led to the collapse of domestic economies in some countries and set back decades of development efforts and progress. Malaysia has emphasized repeatedly that the IMF needs to strengthen its diagnostic capabilities and resist the tendency to adopt a “one-size fits all” approach or its “parent-knows-best” attitude. We continue to believe that the reform of the international financial architecture in the context of a reform and restructuring of the global economic system is imperative. It should continue to be pursued in spite of the fact that the Asian financial crises has been overcome because unless there is structural reform there is always the risk of its recurrence in our region or in other regions of the developing world.

Nigeria
Ambassador Chief Arthur C.I. Mbanefo

There is a fine thread that links all sources for development finance, which we must not lose sight of. In one way or the other, that thread also knits inextricably together the fortunes or the lack there-of, the well-being or poverty of nations, developed and developing alike. For instance, an unstable international financial system has severe adverse impacts on the domestic resources of all countries, and it is these domestic resources which constitute their primary source for development finance. Thus, the strengthening of the national management of domestic resources through increased participation of the citizens in the decision-making and disbursement of such resources would benefit tremendously from increased and effective participation of such citizen’s representatives in the decision-making of the relevant international institution dealing with the systemic issue, be it on finance, monetary or trade matters. Indeed, that is exactly the reason why the continued demand of developing countries for equitable participation in decision-making processes of the BWIs needs to be met. The panacea of good and democratic governance of resources would flow from the international level through the national down to the local levels for the benefit of all, who need development.

United States
John Davison
Deputy Representative to ECOSOC

Mr. Chairman, so far we believe that the UN has benefited from the expertise of the Bretton Woods Institutions and WTO in preparing for the High-level Financing for Development event. By working with these organizations the UN has gained new understanding and insight into the realities of sustainable development financing. We welcome their participation and appreciate their increasing contributions to the preparatory process.

To ensure that the World Bank, IMF and the WTO continue to play a meaningful role in this process, their independent mandates must be fully respected.
We are concerned that the Financing for Development process may be used as a vehicle for the UN to interfere in the governance and decision-making mechanisms of the Bretton Woods Institutions and the WTO. Any such attempt, if made, will seriously undermine not only the credibility of these institutions, but also the UN’s work in development generally. We will oppose any such attempt.