Today's Date:

(...)

ZERO HUNGER PROGRAMME/POVERTY

THE PRESIDENT – I’d like to begin by expressing my gratitude to President Lula for his initiative, because he has already begun to combat hunger and starvation on the ground with the Zero Hunger Programme, which is currently being developed in Brazil. And I’d like to thank President Lagos and our United Nations Secretary-General for their presence here.

Admittedly, in a very fast-developing world, we’re seeing – particularly clearly and immediately, thanks to modern media technology – a scandal, that of poverty and hunger. Indeed, it’s estimated that around 850 to 900 million men, women and children, living on less than a dollar a day, are suffering from hunger, and that around half mankind lives on less than two dollars a day. This is less and less acceptable in a world which is at the same time growing richer as a result, among other things, of the development of trade.

MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS/HUNGER/POVERTY/SLAVERY

The World Bank estimates that if we want to honour the commitments made at the Millennium Summit, i.e. to halve the number of men, women and children suffering from hunger by 2015, ODA would have to rise by $50 billion a year, i.e. from the current $60 to 110 billion per year. A first observation here: total world trade, export trade, accounts for around $8,000 billion each year and the world’s total GNP stands at $33,000 billion. I’m quoting these two figures simply to show that $50 billion isn’t that much, but we still, of course, have to want to find it and get it.

The starvation and hunger President Lula was condemning also have another consequence which is very little talked about, except by UN experts, whom I want to pay tribute to, but affects every country on every continent – rich countries, emerging countries and poor countries –: slavery, and not just the slavery of women. The two are linked: poverty, starvation, exclusion and, quite obviously, the development of unpaid forced labour and, clearly, the buying and selling of human beings, which still exists in our time even if little is said about it. This gives you an idea of the extent of the issues being discussed today, and which President Lula has brought to the fore.

SUPPORT FOR AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT

So what do we do? I believe there are – and I took the liberty of talking about this earlier in the meeting – three priority areas in which action is required. The first is certainly –given that 80% of people suffering from malnutrition and hunger in the world are in rural areas, in Africa and southern Asia in particular, but also a number of other places and especially Latin America, the rest of Asia and eastern and central Europe – the need to speed up implementation of the policies supporting agricultural development, particularly, I repeat, in Africa and southern Asia.

COORDINATION OF ACTION

Second point: international action on the subject is far too uncoordinated. There are all sorts of bodies operating under the aegis of the UN (...), the international financial institutions, and States, NGOs, and all this isn’t coherent. We need to have a clearer idea of what they’re doing and their action needs to be more coherent: the Secretary-General is going to endeavour to come up with a proposal on this.

Finally, I was saying “$50 billion isn’t much”; it’s true, compared with the figure I was talking about earlier. But if we expect to get it from a virtual doubling of budgetary development aid, we won’t. ODA has fallen; it’s started to rise again very slightly but not fast enough – let’s have no illusions – to allow us to attain the Millennium Goals, i.e. the goals set for 2015. (...) So we have to find something else, i.e. new resources and allocate them to a fund: this is what President Lula is proposing, calling it the “Fund against Hunger” – it doesn’t matter what it’s called, but it should provide new resources.

FINANCING DEVELOPMENT/IFF

Where can we find new resources? There are currently two proposals worth considering in more detail. There’s our British friends’ proposal, they’re calling it the IFF [International Finance Facility], i.e. a system for financing development from bonds issued by the rich countries in the international capital markets and based on the growth, in the coming years, of ODA. It’s a very good idea; France wholeheartedly supports it and in April we’ll be having a meeting in Paris at ministerial level with our British friends, to which I’m of course inviting Brazil, Chile, the UN – that goes without saying – and possibly certain other countries to try and set up a system allowing the creation of a new, important resource which could be allocated to the “Lula fund”.

INTERNATIONAL TAX

Secondly, I am convinced that we shall not avoid setting up a system of international taxation. I have set up a working group to look at these proposals whose members will include representatives of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund; I have also invited Brazil and Chile to send experts to join us. This working group will have to make proposals to me – which I shall then submit to the international community – for setting up a taxation system which won't of course be the Tobin tax, since that wasn't successful, (...) but will be of the same nature. So taxation of what? I can tell you straightaway that I don't intend prejudging or answering that question since we can envisage several ways of doing this and the experts must look at them and make proposals.

G8/ENLARGED DIALOGUE/NEPAD

(...) I shall conclude by saying, since President Lula talked about this, that – in the framework of the preparation and proceedings of the G8 which this year will be held in the United States in Sea Island – France is very much hoping for two things. The first is that a number of leading figures representing major countries, particularly from the South, will be invited to attend, which is what we did in Evian. This is what we have asked President Bush, whose decision it will be, of course, as host of the next G8. Secondly, we have also asked for the inclusion of the NEPAD question – which was discussed in Genoa, Kananaskis and Evian, and which the British have already announced will be on the 2005 G8 agenda – on the 2004 agenda. But above all we are extremely keen for this year's G8 in Sea Island to pursue the Enlarged Dialogue which we initiated in Evian; we haven't yet got our American friends' reply.

(...)

AGRICULTURAL SUBSIDIES/ARMS SALES

THE PRESIDENT – On the second question: in the working group I have created, no solution is ruled out and that includes taxing arms sales. I was talking just now about official development assistance which amounts to $60 billion a year; the world's total military budget amounts to $900 billion dollars a year, nearly half of which for the United States. That shows you that the issue merits consideration. Personally, I don't want to give my views before seeing the proposals of the working group I have set up and I shall take a stand only after that, but I'm ruling nothing out.

Then, there's the great debate on farm subsidies. I don't want to go into detail, but I don't share your view at all. And on this point we have a difference of views with President Lula – I think it's the only one. I'd like nevertheless to remind you that the European Union – i.e. France and her 14 partners in today’s European Union which is soon to have 25 members – is the world’s leading importer of agricultural products from the developing countries. Secondly, the European Union imports agricultural products from developing countries duty free, and in fact their other products too, except for arms. This is an initiative taken by the European Union, which so far no one has followed. (...)

FRENCH PROPOSALS/AFRICA/MORATORIUM ON DESTABILIZING EXPORT AIDS/PREFERENCE SYSTEM

Moreover, as you know, France has proposed, it was I who did so, a special situation for Africa: a moratorium on destabilizing export aids for agricultural products – because, admittedly, there are some –, harmonization of the preference systems and a special system for commodities. That's the proposal we made and which was adopted by the Africa-France Summit a year ago, and is unfortunately coming up against – we have to be straight about this – hostility in some quarters and particularly from our American friends. And we’re waiting for the United States also to embark on this path.

EMERGING COUNTRIES' AGRICULTURAL EXPORTS

I'd also like to draw attention to the fact that eliminating hunger in the world also requires – and even does so to a large extent – increasing the growing of food-producing crops in the poorest countries and especially in arid areas. Yet, as things are at the moment, it isn't the rich countries' farm subsidies which are jeopardizing this development, but, or so it would seem, rather the agricultural exports of a number of emerging countries – they need them, I don't dispute the necessity for them of developing these sectors of their economy – but everyone who sees a bit of sun shining through his window must also make sure he’s not stopping any sun coming in through his neighbour's window. (...)./.