In a speech delivered at the Summit, President Lula told his colleague Heads of States:

“We need to force a new paradigm for development that combines
financial stability with economic growth and justice”.

The Brazilian President went on to point out:
“...... development must begin with profound social reforms ..... we don’t

want the rich countries to look upon us with pity. We need structural
solutions that must begin with changes in the global economy”.

President Lula took advantage of the Summit to advance some bold initiatives which had a familiar ring having regard to similarly bold ones that were proposed years earlier by Cheddi Jagan, late President of Guyana and General Secretary of the People’s Progressive Party.

In this regard, President Lula called for the creation of a:

“World Fund capable of giving food to whoever is hungry and at the
same time creating conditions to end the structural causes of hunger”

And, in anticipation of the defeatist argument by those who oppose such new and innovative ways of mobilising resources by asking “where is the money to come from?” President Lula suggested:

“There are various ways to generate resources for a fund of this nature.

I give you two examples: The first is taxation of the international arms trade which would bring advantages from an economic and ethical point of view. Another poss`ibility is to create mechanisms to stimulate the rich countries to re-invest in this Fund a percentage of the interest payments made by debtor countries”.

It is perhaps coincidental that a few weeks prior to the convening of the G8 Summit, Mr. Gordon Brown, Chancellor of the Exchequer of the United Kingdom, called for the establishment of an “International Fund to help developing countries”. He made the call at the World Bank’s Annual Conference on Development Economics held in Paris, France.

Mr. Brown proposed the establishment of a Fund-raising facility for the purpose of raising US$50 billion annually.

And President Chirac himself recently launched an initiative to try to ease trade distortions facing Sub-Sahara Africa.

The initiative which is now popularly referred to as the `Chirac Initiative’ has basically three components.

First, a temporary halt to export subsidies affecting Africa; second, enhancement of trade preferences for Africa and third, possible subsidies to make up for changes in commodity prices.

While the `Chirac Initiative’ has certain shortcomings in that it is exclusively aimed at Africa, like any Presidential initiative it is certainly worthy of consideration.

It is for this reason that the 77th Session of the ACP Council of Ministers which met in May 2003 in Brussels adopted a resolution which;

“Welcomed the initiative and the three point action plan.....

Further noted that the initiative covers areas of interest to all ACP Member States and therefore, calls for its application to be extended to the entire ACP Group of States”.

This view was conveyed to world leaders at the G8 Summit by Presidents Wade of Senegal and Abasanjo of Nigeria on behalf of the ACP States in the same way that the proposals were put by President Lula on behalf of the Rio Group involving (all Latin American and Caribbean countries).

It is important to note that Guyana is a member of both the Rio Group (where it represents CARICOM) and the ACP. Consequently, by advancing these initiatives at the highest levels Guyana’s and indeed CARICOM’s interests are taken into account.

Small wonder why at the conclusion of this Summit, leaders of the G8 countries adopted an `Action Plan for Global Trade’ and pledged to:

“Pay particular attention to these areas of interest to developing countries and to improve their preferential trade arrangements and programmes with developing countries so as to increase market opportunities and provide impetus to regional integration and trade between developing countries”.

For its part, Guyana is known to have advanced its own proposals to press for the return of development to the centre stage of the international political and economic agenda. In this regard, the call for a New Global Human Order by Cheddi Jagan is of great significance.

Among the key elements of the proposal are;

(i) institution of a system of progressive income tax on rich countries according to their income and development needs;

(ii) increasing employment by restricting the number of days or number of hours worked per week without loss of pay and reducing the pensionable age without loss of benefits.

(iii) a tax and other incentives for more research and the use of science and technology to create jobs instead of eliminating them; and;

(iv) the IMF and the World Bank to serve as a Global Central Bank and mediator between capital markets and developing countries respectively.

It was not fortuitous therefore why the 57th Session of the UN General Assembly voted to include on the agenda for its 59th Session (to be held in 2004) the item entitled: `The role of the UN in promoting a New Global Human Order’.

This means that at next year’s session of the UNGA it will be a signal honour for Guyana to have the NGHO debated at the highest level of multilateral diplomacy in the world.

In the meanwhile, the international climate for the advancement of fresh initiatives and the re-introduction of others whose time is yet to come is becoming more favourable.

Note for example, in Europe and North America a vigorous debate has flared up once again on the Tobin Tax which calls for a 0.5 per cent tax on speculative capital movements which would yield approximately US$100 billion annually.

Moreover, recently Nicolas Stern, Chief Economist at the World Bank has called on rich countries to lower trade barriers and increase foreign aid to help developing countries reduce global poverty in half by 2005.

In addition, there is considerable merit in the proposal to the effect that developing countries should have the right to “retaliate collectively” against the industrialised states as a means of enforcing compliance with their trade obligations.

And the proposal by India that industrialised economies who have dispute cases at the WTO against developing countries should be ordered to contribute towards the legal costs of the defence by the developing country is indeed a novel idea that deserves further refining.

As we approach December 2004, the date set for the creation of the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) the need to hammer out the development dimension of this hemispheric integration association is bound to assume greater urgency. In this regard, Guyana’s proposal (since 1994) for the establishment of a Regional Integration Fund (RIF) within the context of the FTAA is likely to become a pre-condition for official entry of the smaller and vulnerable economies of CARICOM into the FTAA.

The Guyana proposal for the establishment of the RIF is to raise the per capita income of the smaller economies to at least seventy-five per cent of the FTAA’s average income thus levelling the playing field to some extent among the small and large players in the hemisphere.

From all indications, it is clear that we are in the season for creative initiatives all aimed at grappling with pressing global problems confronting humanity.

Today, these initiatives might seem to be pipe dreams and wishful thinking but who knows, these pipe dreams might very well become a reality before the close of this century. It has happened before and will happen again.