DECLARATION ON REFORM, PROGRAMME OF ACTION ADOPTED AT 50TH SESSION OF ECONOMIC COMMISSION FOR EUROPE
22 April 1997
A declaration on strengthening cooperation and a programme of action incorporating
reforms were approved today by member States of the Economic Commission for Europe
during the Commission's 50th anniversary session.
The declaration notes in part that "it is essential to foster forms of cooperation that
promote economic prosperity for all member countries and respond to the needs of an
increasingly interdependent world economy". It vows to keep the Commission -- or ECE --
relevant and flexible as the next century begins.
Reforms detailed in the Plan of Action include a reduction in programmes of some
60 per cent, and a cut in Principal Subsidiary Bodies of the Commission from fourteen to
seven. The resources thus liberated are to be dedicated to core areas of work considered
to be the ECE's strengths: environment, transport, statistics, trade, industry and enterprise
development, economic analysis, timber, and human settlements.
Also included in the plan is a "consultative mechanism" under which some activities
may be discontinued and new ones introduced. In addition there is a structure "for
organizing activities to meet specific requests from sub-groups of member countries, in
particular countries in transition and the Mediterranean countries of the ECE".
The overall aims of the reform package are described as focus, flexibility, and
efficiency.
The Commission also heard this morning from a long list of speakers representing
member countries as it concluded its general debate for the year.
Delivering addresses were representatives of Lithuania, the United States, Tajikistan,
Cyprus, France, Romania, Ukraine, Turkey, Kazakstan, Slovenia, European Union, European
Free Trade Union, Slovakia, Albania, Belarus, Georgia, Canada, The former Yugoslav
Republic of Macedonia, Republic of Moldova, Poland, Holy See, and Central European
Initiative.
The Commission will reconvene at 3 p.m. to hold a round-table discussion on the topic
of "The ECE: forging partnerships between Governments, enterprises, and NGOs".
Statements
VINCAS KESTUTIS BABILIUS, Minister of the Economy of Lithuania, said Lithuania was
well-embarked on a rapid reform process towards a market economy; introduction of
economic reforms had been complicated and difficult, and economic recession had been one
unavoidable result; however, strict fiscal and monetary policies had brought inflation down
recently, and foreign capital investment in the country was increasing. Problems in some
areas still had to be further addressed, and Lithuania hoped for and would appreciate the
contribution of the ECE in helping to solve these problems; abatement of air and water
pollution, and industrial and household waste management were some areas of concern.
LESLIE E. GERSON, Chargé d'Affaires of the Mission of the United States to the
United Nations Office at Geneva, said the reform exercise launched by the ECE had been
ambitious, but because of spirited cooperation what had emerged was a process notable for
its commitment to achieving results. The package might not give every nation everything
it wanted, but certainly it addressed the high-priority needs of member States. In that
sense, the ECE reflected the UN's unique potential for finding realistic solutions through
open and honest dialogue despite often strongly held differences of opinion and focus. The
reform package would give members and the secretariat a new and effective tool for
responding quickly and efficiently to the changing needs of members.
E.R. RAKHMATULLAEV, First Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs of Tajikistan, said
that without the ECE there hardly would have been proper prospects for equitable pan-European cooperation. After the Cold War the Commission had played an essential role in
helping countries in transition to market economies. Not all products of the work of the
Commission had reached all countries of the ECE; Tajikistan was not fully familiar with all
ECE publications and projects; the country hoped for greater engagement with the ECE and
greater participation in its activities in future; to date, it had benefitted from ECE standard-setting programmes and from ECE efforts to attract foreign investment to the country.
ALECOS SHAMBOS, Permanent Secretary of the Republic of Cyprus, said Cyprus
supported the Commission's stand towards the Mediterranean region, as outlined in its
"Mediterranean mandate"; the objective was to see a prosperous and peaceful
Mediterranean region working in unison for economic integration and social development.
Standing along with other activities such as the Euro-Mediterranean partnership, the ECE
mandate had the potential to contribute to peace in this sensitive area of the world. Cyprus
was ready to share its experience and expertise in various areas, because, in spite of the
consequences of foreign aggression and continuing occupation, it had emerged as a
successful case study in development.
DANIEL BERNARD, Permanent Representative of France to the United Nations Office
at Geneva, said France expressed congratulations to the ECE on its 50 years of useful
service to Europe, and on its flexibility and dynamism in adapting to the circumstances of
the coming century. Increased competition between international organizations vying to
stake out territory for the future work in Europe had led to a need for efficiency and rapprochement between them, and the ECE's reform package met those needs. It was
important for the ECE to continue its work of promoting economic cooperation between the
countries of the region and of fostering the development of market economies.
L. COMANESCU, Secretary of State, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Romania, said the
ECE had occupied a unique place in Europe for years because of its pan-European character;
its future challenge was to help countries of the region to achieve a coherent and
progressive form of cooperation. New momentum and greater vigour was needed for its
activities to meet the obstacles posed by the coming century; for the first time there was
a possibility of shaping together the objectives and policies of the region, based on the
establishment of democratic systems and market economies throughout Europe.
V. D. KHANDOGII, Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs of Ukraine, said the ECE had
taken effective steps to place itself in the new context of Europe, which featured
establishment of market economies throughout the region. It needed to focus not only on
pan-European cooperation, but on transatlantic cooperation. The process of deciding on
reforms had not been painless or easy, and as with most compromises the results did not
satisfy everyone or solve all problems. Of vital importance to the Ukraine was continued
help and advice from the ECE on economic transition, and it was to be hoped the basic
principles of the reform package would in fact be implemented, and that the needs of all
countries in Europe would be taken into account.
TUGAY ULUCEVIK, Ambassador and Permanent Representative of Turkey to the
United Nations Office at Geneva, said it would not be correct to assert that all of the
55 countries of the ECE enjoyed the same level of prosperity and development. Moreover,
their cultural identities, languages, and beliefs differed. It was vital to see such diversity as
a richness, and one of the biggest challenges facing the ECE was to convert this diversity
into dynamism and comparative advantages for growth, development, and prosperity for all.
One of the sub-regional groupings which collaborated with the ECE was the Black Sea
Economic Cooperation group, and as initiator and current chairman of this organization,
Turkey hoped for an enhanced interaction between it and the ECE.
BOLAT D. UTEMURATOV, Permanent Representative of Kazakstan to the United
Nations Office at Geneva, said the ECE, in enacting its reform package, had ensured that
it would remain a unique forum for addressing the economic affairs of European countries
on a footing of equality. The goals of focus, flexibility, and efficiency were well-chosen,
and it was a wise decision to set up a mechanism under which some activities could be
given up to allocate greater resources and attention to others, which represented the ECE's
strengths. Issues of assistance to transition countries, and the development of small- and
medium-sized businesses, were vital, as was cooperation with other pan-European
organizations.
MARJAN SENJUR, Minister for Economic Relations and Development of Slovenia, said
what was missing from the Plan of Action, which had a number of useful elements, was the
subject of economic development. With the enormous changes taking place in central and
southern Europe, gaps were growing between those regions and the developed economies
of western Europe. There were some countries in Europe with per capital incomes below
US$2,000, while in western Europe such incomes were around US$20,000. Such wide
disparities, if left unaddressed, could affect cohesion in Europe. Hence, matters of
economic development needed greater attention, and perhaps the ECE was the best-placed
organization to deal with the issue.
VASCO RAMOS, Deputy Director for External Relations of the European Commission,
said the evolution of the transition process, which was a major preoccupation of the ECE
session, was, inevitably, uneven. Nevertheless, there were signs of consolidation of
progress already achieved in many parts of the ECE region. In the European Union,
economic activity had accelerated during 1996, and against this positive background,
convergence was expected to improve. The EC had continued its large-scale political,
economic, and technical support for European countries in transition; and in southeast
Europe, it had adopted a regional approach to developing bilateral relations with countries
not yet having association agreements with the EC: Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina,
Croatia, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia
(Serbia and Montenegro).
K. JOHANNSSON, Secretary-General of the European Free Trade Association, said the
EFTA and ECE had basic objectives in common, but pursued them by different means; they
were not in competition and there was no overlap between their activities. EFTA had
expanded from liberalization of trade in industrial goods among its own members to linking
its market with that of the EEC, to reaching agreement on full integration of the EFTA
countries into the internal market of the EU. The phrase about "networks in the context of
European integration" had been used several times yesterday, but it was important that such
networks be connected. Establishment of parallel networks of EFTA and the EC with the
CEEC's had revealed technical problems of compatibility with regard to product origin, for
example -- a problem that had been resolved as of this year.
J. FOLTIN, State Secretary of the Ministry of the Economy of Slovakia, said Slovakia
had a great desire to cooperate with the ECE in the ECE's stated core areas. Those included
such matters as the environment and transport; Slovakia highly valued the work of the
Inland Transport Committee, for example. It also praised the supplementary allocation of
resources for ECE advisory services, especially as they facilitated trade and the UN/EDIFACT
system. Energy and industry also were areas of interest to the country, for which it looked
to the ECE for expertise. The reform process undertaken by the ECE boded well for the
Organization's future activities.
PAVLI ZERI, Secretary of State of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Albania, said the
Plan of Action transparently negotiated within the ECE met the overall needs of member
States; the situation in Albania indicated how delicate transition to a market economy could
be. The situation remained serious in the country; order still had to be restored in some
areas of the country. The Government of national reconciliation was doing its best to
resolve the difficulties faced by the country, but needed as well continued support from the
international community; that support, added to the longing of the Albanian people for
peace and stability had already begun to achieve results. But political will and international
support were not enough in themselves; substantive economic development also was vital;
future international aid in the area was sought and appealed for by Albania.
V.N. SHOMOV, Minister of Economy of Belarus, said the ECE had worked in complex
conditions during the Cold War and had continued to work effectively as times changed; it
had undoubtedly contributed to the prosperity of Europe; it was unique as it provided a
forum to European States on an equal basis. The new Plan of Action was well-conceived
and took effective advantage of the ECE's strengths and of the needs of its member States.
Continued assistance to transition countries was welcomed, although further enhancement
of this aid would be useful, such as further involvement of business circles in the
Commission's work. Development of medium- and small enterprises was another area of
priority concern for transition countries. Eleven years after the Chernobyl accident, a major
tragedy for Belarus, environmental matters also remained a primary concern of the country,
as did ECE development of macro statistics.
MIKHEIL UKLEBA, First Deputy Minister of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Georgia,
said that after the collapse of the former Socialist camp and the end of confrontation, it had
seemed that a new era of universal revival and development was coming, but that goal had
proved more elusive than expected; would the world community be able to achieve the
objectives of the transition period? In fact, the problems of transition countries should be
among the primary concerns of the ECE. It also should initiate discussion of the issues
involved in bringing the transition countries into the world economic system. Transport
problems deserved greater emphasis, as did provision of advice on regional matters.
Coordination between the ECE and other agencies should be improved as well.
John WEEKES, Permanent Representative of Canada to the United Nations Office at
Geneva, said that given the experience of other regional commissions with respect to
biennialization, and given the secretariat's frank assessment of the resources involved,
biennialization appeared to be a pragmatic and useful move which would free the secretariat
to attend further to the needs of member States. Similar attention should be given to
shifting of the timing of the meeting. Canada had in the past expressed serious concern
about the utility of the economic-analysis function of the Commission, and the Plan of
Action represented a considerable shift; Canada looked forward to assessing the revised
format of the Economic Survey of Europe over the coming year, and hoped the annual
seminar of the Commission on the subject would remain an informal mechanism and would
not "creep" back as a meeting of senior economic advisers.
L. FRCKOSKI, Minister for Foreign Affairs of The former Yugoslav Republic of
Macedonia, said the Republic was firmly committed to building an economy based on
entrepreneurship and market principles, and creation of an open market economy was the
basis of its economic reforms. The process of privatization was expected to be completed
by the end of the year; and foreign trade was expected to increase. Macroeconomic
stability had been evident, particularly in the monetary sphere. The role of the ECE in the
South East European Cooperation Initiative was of great significance and was a good
indicator of its flexibility and ability to meet the needs of that region.
ION CAPATINA, Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Moldova, said
the ECE had a history of active participation in the economic recovery of European nations;
for a lengthy period it had been a mediator between two antagonistic economic and political
systems; then it had been the first UN agency to support the reforms undertaken by
transition countries. Those countries now faced problems on the scale faced by western
European countries at the end of the Second World War; the ECE's focus on these weaker
countries and their many and varied needs was welcome and deserved continued emphasis.
The Republic of Moldova had begun wide-ranging reforms five years ago, and continued to
count on the support of the ECE in pursuing its economic transition.
LUDWIK DEMBINSKI, Permanent Representative of Poland to the United Nations Office
at Geneva, said the challenges Poland faced in such matters as environment and transport --
important domains of the ECE's work -- often went far beyond its technological and financial
capabilities, and the ECE's contribution in meeting those challenges was of great value for
the country. The ECE's experience in such areas could well serve the needs of other less-advanced countries, benefitting not only them but all of Europe. The programme of work
adopted by the ECE was well-focused and flexible enough to respond to unpredictable
developments; and Poland welcomed the undertaking of innovative methods of work in
trade and related areas which could meet the needs of many transition countries, especially
those from the Commonwealth of Independent States.
MONSEIGNEUR CELESTINO MIGLIORE, Under-Secretary for State Relations of the Holy See, said the ECE had played a major role in establishing democratic Governments and
market economies; however, the Organization could not rest on its laurels, as the world and
region was changing too quickly; the job had not yet been done, although the road taken
over the last half century of the ECE had been a laudable one. The Organization's
programme for future work was realistic and effective, and reflected the goal of Europe,
which was to achieve progress while respecting diversity. The role of such regional
organizations of the UN remained important, as they provided a way of integrating countries
of various parts of the globe into the overall world economy. It was necessary, meanwhile,
to pay attention to social concerns and not to focus solely on economic and commercial
progress.
P. HARTIG, Director-General of the Central European Initiative, said ECE cooperation
with other institutions and sub-regional groupings, including the CEI, was an important
matter, and the ECE's declaration and Plan of Action was a viable attempt to involve all
European countries in harmonious economic relations. The future challenges of the region
lay in the way of achieving that goal -- fragmentation and economic conflict were to be
avoided, and yet the region's cultural diversity must be protected; cohesion did not mean
the end of diversity, but required acceptance of some common standards and major efforts
to avoid new rifts, let alone the building up of new economic blocs. The CEI was a sub-regional organization with serious interest in economic matters, and carried out training and
cooperation programmes in economic areas of concern to its member States.