+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
BRETTON WOODS UPDATE
A bi-monthly digest of information and action on the World Bank & IMF
Number 45, September/October 2005
Published by BRETTON WOODS PROJECT
Working with NGOs and researchers to monitor the World Bank and IMF
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
1. World Bank support for extractives:
complicity in human rights violations?
2. IMF accused of exacerbating famine in Niger
3. IMF blocks achievement of goals in education, health
4. Haiti - "year of progress" or whitewash?
5. Global Health Watch: BWIs bigger than WHO
6. Controversy surrounds Bank role in India water
7. WB parliamentary network meeting
8. The World Bank and the apartheid wall
9. UK cuts through World Bank spin on conditionality
10. Fund economists whistle different trade tune
11. Inside the institutions: Decision-making at the IMF
12. UK reports on its activities at the World Bank and IMF
13. Climate change and the World Bank: dubious green credentials
14. Pick and choose: Bank on extractives
15. Dam review five years on: lessons not learned
16. Indigenous policy undermines rights
17. IEO new head, new work programme
18. More white guys to top posts at IFC, finance
19. Wolfowitz appoints accountability guru
20. Wolfowitz watch
21. Giant taming
22. World Bank-IMF annual meetings 2005
23. Parliamentarians return to Washington
24. Transparency charter for IFIs
=====================================================================
1. World Bank support for extractives:
complicity in human rights violations?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Bank-supported projects in the Democratic Republic of Congo,
Guatemala and Chad poignantly illustrate how natural resource
exploitation can contribute to a deteriorating cycle of human rights
abuses, civil conflict and corruption.
As the social and environmental consequences of World Bank
activities come under increased scrutiny, the tactics it employs to
avoid addressing universal human rights in its policies are becoming
untenable. This, despite the growing pool of institutional, academic
and civil society analysis on the question of development finance
and human rights, and recent demands to comprehensively integrate
the issue into the Bank management response to the Extractive
Industries Review (EIR) and on-going IFC safeguard policy review.
Congo mine questions due diligence
----------------------------------
A recent letter from a coalition of Congolese and international NGOs
to President Wolfowitz states that Anvil Mining's Dikulushi
copper-silver mine has become a symbol of the Bank's failure to
"uphold its commitments to protect the rights of people affected by
extractive industry projects". The Dikulushi project is the first
mine in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) to enjoy World Bank
Group backing, and has been touted as a means of post-conflict
recovery. However, the post- war peace agreement in the country
remains unstable, fighting continues in many areas, and rebels still
finance themselves from the plunder of natural resources.
In September 2004 the board of the Multilateral Investment Guarantee
Agency (MIGA) approved plans for a political risk guarantee for the
stage II expansion of the mine. MIGA completed negotiations with
Anvil in May 2005 and issued a guarantee for $13.3 million. MIGA
assured its board that there were no serious security risks and the
project would provide benefits to the community.
Since June 2004 civil society has raised concerns about MIGA's
failure to fully assess the human rights and security dimensions of
the project. The most recent letter says that MIGA did not take
appropriate steps to ensure that Anvil Mining was complying with the
voluntary principles on the use of security forces, and the UN norms
for transnational corporations. Anvil is now facing serious
allegations regarding the company's role in a brutal massacre that
took place in Kilwa in October 2004, approximately 50 kilometres
south of the mine, and questions regarding the propriety of its
relationships with senior Congolese politicians.
At Wolfowitz's request, the Compliance Advisor Ombudsman (CAO) is
now conducting a compliance audit of MIGA's due diligence on the
project. "A genuine commitment to human rights should be a
precondition of World Bank financial backing" said Mr Meeran, a
Melbourne lawyer who is representing several human rights groups
that have raised concerns about Anvil's role.
On 13 October the World Bank's board is due to consider the next
economic recovery credit for the DRC, which would include more
funding for both the mining and forestry sectors.
Guatemala: no policy on human rights and security forces
--------------------------------------------------------
A report by the CAO has identified significant deficiencies in the
IFC's due diligence in the case of Guatemala's Marlin mine in
relation to human rights and security forces. Controversy
surrounding the project, operated by a subsidiary of Glamis Gold
Ltd, pre-dates the approval of $45 million in support for the
project by the IFC in June 2004 (see Updates 44, 45). Since then, a
protestor was killed following clashes between security forces and
demonstrators in January; a villager was shot dead by an off-duty
employee of Glamis' local security company in March; and both
opponents and proponents of the mine have received death threats. In
May the Guatemalan human rights ombudsman argued that the license
for the Glamis mine should be revoked because of the government's
violation of International Labour Organisation convention 169 on
indigenous and tribal peoples. The CAO investigation was carried out
in response to a complaint by Guatemalan NGO Madre Selva, regarding
the project's environmental and social impacts, and claims that it
was not developed with adequate local consultation.
This is the first major mining project approved by the Bank
following its response to the EIR in September 2004. Local and
international civil society allege that the IFC has failed to comply
with the Bank's commitments. This is reflected in the CAO report,
particularly in relation to security forces and human rights, and
the evaluation of the project's risks and benefits. The CAO
attributes much of the tension and violence to the IFC's
"significant oversight" to develop a clear policy to address human
rights and the use of security forces in light of Guatemala's
fragile peace accords and the legacy of its bloody civil war. It
goes on to recommend that the IFC require project proponents adopt
the US/UK voluntary principles on the use of security forces.
Chad-Cameroon: human rights "contracted out"
--------------------------------------------
A ground-breaking report by Amnesty International (AI) warns that
the Chad-Cameroon oil pipeline "risks freezing human rights
protection for decades to come for the thousands of people who live
in its path". It argues that the IBRD and IFC must share
responsibility for the danger the project's agreements pose to human
rights and points out that the Bank's pre-lending assessment did not
take into account the potential human rights impact of the legal
agreements. It calls on the Bank and other project stakeholders to
revise the project agreements to include an explicit guarantee that
nothing can be used to undermine either the human rights obligations
of the states or the responsibilities of the companies.
The report focuses on the framework of legal agreements, known as
'host government agreements' (HGAs) signed between the
ExxonMobil-led consortium and the governments of Chad and Cameroon.
These agreements - designed to reduce financial and political risks
posed to foreign investors by sudden changes in national law - may
require the countries to pay large penalties if they interrupt the
operation of the pipeline, even if making an intervention to protect
rights and enforce national laws that apply elsewhere in their
countries. The agreements could serve as a strong disincentive to
the governments of Chad and Cameroon to implement their human rights
obligations.
The Chad-Cameroon pipeline is trumpeted by the Bank as a test case
that will bring about economic development and poverty alleviation
in both countries. Over 1,000 kilometres long, the pipeline
transports oil from the Doba oil fields in southern Chad to the
Cameroonian Atlantic port of Kribi and is one of the largest
private-sector investment projects in Africa. The legal agreements
were shrouded in secrecy until passed by law, with companies and
governments claiming commercially confidentiality. The investment
agreements are enforceable only through international arbitration:
under the International Chamber of Commerce in the case of Chad, and
the International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes
(ICSID) (see Update 46) in the case of Cameroon.
Chad and Cameroon are in the bottom quartile of UNDP's Human
Development Index. Both countries have a poor human rights track
record, in addition to ineffective judicial systems and
under-resourced police forces, which are ill-equipped to uphold the
human rights of the population from the adverse effects of
large-scale projects for economic development.
Civil society resource on Guatemala
CAO assessment
World Bank in the DRC, EDF
Contracting out of human rights
=====================================================================
2. IMF accused of exacerbating famine in Niger
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The IMF's external relations department has spent the last two
months furiously rebuffing charges that the Fund has exacerbated
famine in Niger. The debate centres around the impact of structural
adjustment measures and accusations that donors initially refused to
allow the government to distribute free food to affected areas.
Johanne Sekkenes, who leads Medecins sans Frontires in Niger,
believes that the IMF and EU pressed Niger too hard to implement a
structural adjustment programme: "No sooner had the government been
re-elected [this year] than it was obliged to introduce 19 percent
value-added tax (VAT) on basic foodstuffs. At the same time,
emergency grain reserves were abolished." Under the letter of intent
signed between the IMF and the Nigerien government in January to
receive funding under a Poverty Reduction and Growth Facility
(PRGF), Niger agreed to extend VAT to milk, sugar and wheat flour,
and reduce VAT exemptions on water and electricity consumption.
Thomas Dawson, the IMF's director of external relations, protested
that "IMF staff specifically recommended that a poverty-impact
assessment of the proposed measures be carried out [which was not
carried out]. At any rate, the VAT extension was soon rescinded
because of public protests and could have had little effect on the
crisis." Month-long mass mobilisations forced the government to
withdraw the VAT from milk and flour, and only reduce VAT exemptions
to large-scale consumption of water and electricity.
Dawson also said that the "IMF has never supported or encouraged the
abolition of government grain reserves. In fact, the grain reserve
is in place and has been used, to the best of our knowledge, to
relieve the current food shortage."
Unclear is the cumulative role of tight IMF macroeconomic strictures
on the government's ability to cope with the crisis. Under the
agreement with the IMF, an increasingly tight rein has been kept on
inflation levels and fiscal deficits. Niger has seen its debt
service rise from 16 per cent of GDP in 2001 to 24 per cent in 2003,
before falling back to 15 per cent in 2005 (after receiving debt
relief upon reaching HIPC completion point in April 2004). The debt
campaign group CADTM has argued that debt repayments have crippled
health sector spending: "the degradation of Nigerien health services
is a major factor in the incapacity of authorities to respond to the
health crisis provoked by the famine."
The second controversy centres around the distribution of free food
to famine-affected areas. In August, UK weekly The Observer stated
that the "the Niger government, under instruction from the IMF and
EU, at first refused to distribute free food to those most in need",
saying that "the powers that be did not want to depress the market
prices that benefited wholesalers and speculators." Abdoulaye
Bio-Tchan, IMF African department director defended the Fund:
"there is absolutely no truth to the suggestion that IMF policy
advice has impeded free food distribution".
The controversy opens old wounds for the Fund which has faced
similar accusations about its role in recent famines in Malawi and
other southern African countries (see Updates 30, 29).
Urgent measures to save Niger, CADTM
Niger and the IMF
=====================================================================
3. IMF blocks achievement of goals in education, health
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Two papers by ActionAid International, released at the UN Millennium
Review Summit in New York in September, point the finger at the IMF
for blocking achievement of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs).
The first paper, Changing course: Alternative approaches to achieve
the MDGs and fight HIV/AIDS, blames Fund macroeconomic conditions
for developing countries' inability to deliver economic growth and
therefore the social spending required to meet the MDGs:
* the report challenges the IMF's demands for deficit reduction,
arguing that Fund austerity fails to allow for sufficient
investment, or spending during economic downturns;
* fund requirements for "excessively low" inflation levels
ignore both evidence that successful growth and poverty
reduction can occur at moderate inflation levels and economic
wisdom which says that the benefits of lower inflation must be
weighed off against "sacrificed economic output"; and
* conditions requiring rapid trade liberalisation have seen a
"whithering away" of domestic manufacturing capacity.
The report asks why developing countries do not "rebel" against Fund
prescriptions. Interviews with officials in the central banks,
finance ministries, health and education ministries in Bangladesh,
Ghana, Malawi, Uganda and Zambia revealed two difficulties. Firstly,
most officials have internalised Fund economics and do not
"acknowledge the possibility of more expansionary fiscal and
monetary policies". Secondly, health and education ministry
officials are locked out of the process and have no say in
determining spending ceilings.
The second paper, Contradicting commitments: How the achievement of
education for all is being undermined by the IMF, cites case studies
from several African countries to drive home the case against Fund
economics. A consequence of which is that governments are forced to
reallocate funds from within the education budget to priority areas
such as primary schooling. Another corollary is the mushrooming of
private providers which ActionAid says "is progressively eroding the
capacity of the state to provide free, universal education for all
children."
Both papers urge the IMF to rethink its definition of macroeconomic
stability, replacing inflation targeting with targets based on human
welfare.
Changing course: ActionAid International
Contradicting commitments, ActionAid International
=====================================================================
4. Haiti - "year of progress" or whitewash?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
A letter from Haitian solidarity NGOs, faith groups and academics,
was sent to president Wolfowitz in August to protest the Bank's
mis-portrayal of the situation in the country. In late July, the
Bank posted a banner headline on its website boasting that "new
schools, roads, and jobs are among the achievements of the interim
cooperation framework, Haiti's economic, social and political
recovery programme." The letter's authors pointed out that Haitian
GDP declined in the year ending September 2004, living standards
have plummeted and human rights violations by the state and police
continue.
=====================================================================
5. Global Health Watch: BWIs bigger than WHO
---------------------------------------------------------------------
In July the Global Health Watch 2005 was released, targeting the
BWIs for their role in weakening public health care. The report,
meant as an alternative to the World Health Organisation's World
Health Report was spearheaded by The People's Health Movement,
Medact and The Global Equity Gauge Alliance. The report assesses the
state of health care systems; the health of vulnerable communities
such as indigenous peoples; the wider health context including
climate change and war; and the role of global institutions,
corporations and rich countries. The section on the BWIs says that
the Bank "has become a much bigger influence than the WHO in the
health sector."
=====================================================================
6. Controversy surrounds Bank role in India water
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Accusations emerged in late July that the World Bank had pressured
the Indian government to select Price Waterhouse Coopers (PwC) for
advisory work undertaken as part of the Delhi Water Sector Project.
Indian anti-corruption group Parivartan used national freedom of
information laws to gain access to the correspondence between the
Delhi Jal Board, which oversees water supply in the Indian capital,
and World Bank officials. World Bank country director for India
Michael Carter said "the insinuation that the Bank attempted to
favour PwC is completely unfounded."
=====================================================================
7. WB parliamentary network meeting
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The sixth annual conference of the Parliamentary Network on the
World Bank (PNoWB) will be held 21-23 October in Helsinki, Finland.
The conference is titled Beyond the 2005 year of development: What
now? and looks to include sessions on climate change, health, trade,
inequality and IFI accountability, as well as question and answer
sessions with heads of the Bank and Fund. The conference is open to
civil society participation. The PNoWB is a non-profit association,
based in the World Bank's offices in Paris, which gathers together
over 140 parliamentarains from 60 countries.
=====================================================================
8. The World Bank and the apartheid wall
---------------------------- Comment --------------------------------
By Jamal Juma, campaign coordinator, StoptheWall
---------------------------------------------------------------------
After the facade of 'disengagement', 1.4 million Gazans continue
life in the world's largest open-air prison. Denied access to the
outside world, they lack sovereignty over water, borders and air
space. In the West Bank, the 700 km long apartheid wall and its
gates strip Palestinians of 47 per cent of their lands, sealing them
inside disparate ghettos.
Israeli settlements and road systems expand on Palestinian land in a
new wave of the Zionist colonisation that began in 1948.
The World Bank has been placed in charge of co-ordinating
"development and growth" efforts within the Bantustans that Israel
is carving out for the Palestinian people. Renewing the work begun
in the aftermath of the Oslo peace accord, the Bank's plans ensure
the economic 'viability' of an illusory Palestinian 'state'. This
'state' of miserable ghettos, imprisoned by walls and settlements,
totals 12 per cent of mandate Palestine. It forms the focus of
ex-Bank president Wolfensohn, chosen to oversee 'disengagement' and
liaise the initial round of the Bank's projects.
Against the Palestinian communities, steadfast in their grassroots
resistance, the Bank's latest report, Stagnation or revival? Israeli
disengagement and Palestinian economic prospects, cites Israeli
"facts on the ground" as given and permanent scenarios, using them
as the foundations for its projects. It evades any discussion of the
illegal apartheid wall, the occupation, its expanding colonies, or
the right of return for Palestinian refugees. It shuns numerous UN
resolutions, the Geneva Convention and the recent ruling of the
International Court of Justice which declared the wall illegal and
to be torn down, and instructed all nations "not to render any aid
or assistance in maintaining the situation created by it". The Bank
believes it can circumvent international law and the rights of the
Palestinians as if justified by some kind of divine 'humanitarian
project'.
Key to this project is the creation of 'free markets' and
export-oriented production, hinged upon primarily Israeli, but also
international investments. In the Palestinian context, economic
colonisation is combined with the complete control and imprisonment
of a people. The Bank has begun the process of funding for
Israeli-controlled high-tech military gates in the apartheid wall
and checkpoints, through which Palestinians and their exports can be
conveniently transported. This will be supplemented with a 'transfer
system' of walled roads and tunnels to funnel Palestinian workers to
their jobs while denying them access to their stolen lands around
them.
Central to the success of these 'free' markets is the construction
of industrial zones. These are being financed by the Bank and the
donors and agencies it controls. Previous initiatives in the Gaza
Strip are being used as the model for the way in which Palestinians
imprisoned by the wall can be ferried from their ghettos to
industrial zones and sustain the economy of the occupation. In the
case of Irtah in Tulkarem, land for the zone is confiscated and
located behind the wall, on fields which used to provide for over 50
families. These sweatshops will provide the only possibility to earn
a living for the landless Palestinian population. The Bank openly
celebrates how Palestinians can be put to work for a fraction of the
cost of Israelis, elaborating a devastating system of racial capital
not seen since the days of apartheid South Africa.
The Palestinian people and their popular movements remain unswerving
in their opposition to external interference from agencies such as
the World Bank. NGOs and 'development' agencies may be tempted to
get involved in the schemes and machinations of the international
financial institutions. To them we send a stark warning of our total
rejection of such work and our right to assert resistance to any
outside organisation which serves to strengthen the occupation.
If our Palestinian Authority is to be representative of
Palestinians, including the refugees, it must distance itself from
the schemes of the Bank immediately. We ask civil society worldwide
to follow the lead of our daily grassroots resistance to the wall
and occupation, and support our struggle for genuine freedom and
liberation.
Do-it-yourself apartheid in Palestine
=====================================================================
9. UK cuts through World Bank spin on conditionality
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The business-as-usual findings emerging from a Bank review of
conditionality released late July have been challenged by the
British government and are contradicted by the findings of a study
by NGO Debt and Development Coalition Ireland.
The Bank's review finds that "the average number of conditions fell
from 35 in the late 80s to about 12 in 2005", conceding however that
"benchmarks have increased from about 15 in the early 90s to 24 in
the last two years". The World Bank's conditionality zoo includes
three different animals. 'Prior actions' are reforms which must be
completed before any money is handed over. 'Triggers' include
reforms which must be undertaken during the course of a lending
programme to qualify for a subsequent programme. The Bank only
considers these two as 'conditions'. However, 'benchmarks', while
not directly tied to the release of funds, can lead to a suspension
of payments if 'satisfactory progress' is not being made in
implementing them. In practice, even the Bank admits that its
"distinction in the role of conditions and benchmarks is sometimes
lost on borrowers". Seventy-five per cent of authorities responding
to a Bank survey on conditionality did not make any distinction
between the different types of conditions.
A study by Debt and Development Coalition Ireland (DDCI) on the
World Bank's loans to low-income countries finds that the
distinction between these different conditions is further blurred by
the process by which governments move from 'base-case' to
'high-case' lending scenarios. The World Bank links completion of
all types of conditions - including benchmarks - to access to
increased grants or loans, "giving additional incentive to the
government to implement the conditions".
DDCI argues that the Bank's distinction between different conditions
has made a mockery of the notion of 'criticality' - a recent
commitment on the part of the Bank that "conditions should be
confined to those actions that are critical for implementing the
country's programme to achieve the expected results." The more
benchmarks that are applied argues DDCI, "the less clarity there is
and the more subjective become disbursement decisions".
This critique is reinforced by the British government in its
response to the conditionality review. UK secretary of state for
international development, Hilary Benn, calls on the Bank to
"clarify how it intends to reverse the trend of increasingly large
and complex sets of policy actions", adding that there should be a
"clear statement setting out the strict limited circumstances when
the Bank might use sensitive policy actions as triggers or
benchmarks".
In its review, the Bank defines ownership as "a high probability
that the policy will be adopted and implemented, even if there is
internal opposition." The UK responded that countries need space to
formulate policy, consider the options, and build broad-based
support for the path they will take. Bank survey results confirm the
UK's conclusion that the Bank's definition of ownership is
insufficient: "50 per cent of respondents felt that the Bank
introduced elements that were not part of the country's programme".
The Bank review argues that the content of conditions have "shifted
from short-term economic adjustment to medium-term governance and
social sector reforms." The study by DDCI is less sanguine about
this shift. It finds that only two out of thirteen Bank programmes
studied did not include conditions requiring privatisation despite
the fact that "there was no explicit mention of privatisation" in
the national development strategy.
Both DDCI and the British government argue that the Bank needs to
greatly improve its use of poverty and social impact assessments
(PSIA). Repeating what has been found in earlier studies by the
Bank's Operations Evaluation Department, the DDCI study finds that
"in most cases, PSIA is being conducted once a reform has been
decided upon, rather than facilitating debate and decision-making
between various reforms."
Review of World Bank conditionality
UK response to Bank conditionality review
World Bank's PRSC: Continuity or change?
=====================================================================
10. Fund economists whistle different trade tune
---------------------------------------------------------------------
In two recent papers, Fund economists have questioned the
institution's strict adherence to the free trade doctrine.
In a paper co-authored by Nancy Birdsall of the Center for Global
Development and Dani Rodrik of Harvard University, Fund research
department head Arvind Subramanian concedes the failure of IFI
policies for the poorest countries: "Much of sub-Saharan Africa has
been under IMF and World Bank programmes during the last three
decades, and while a modicum of macroeconomic stability has been
achieved, progress has been spotty at best."
The key to development, say the authors, lies in providing "economic
policy-making space". The paper argues for the use of creative
"heterodox policy innovations"; therefore, it asks why
"international rule-making still operates as if we have a good fix
on what kind of policies developing countries need", specifically
censuring IMF conditionality which "often goes beyond narrow
monetary and fiscal matters to prescribe policies on privatisation,
trade and industrial policy."
Trade liberalisation cripples governments
-----------------------------------------
A working paper released in June from Fund economists in the fiscal
affairs department, Thomas Baunsgaard and Michael Keen, asks a
simple question: for each $1 of trade tax revenue that governments
lose as a result of trade liberalisation, how many dollars have they
recovered from other sources (usually through increased taxes). The
worrying answer is not very much.
The authors find that low-income countries, whose social programmes
are most dependent on trade tax revenues, have "very largely failed
to recover from domestic sources such revenue as they have lost from
trade reform". Middle-income countries do better, though still only
recovering in the range of 45 to 65 cents per dollar lost.
In the face of this evidence, Fund economists conclude that the
"auspices for further trade liberalisation are troubling." The
researchers temper their results by stressing that this does not
imply that trade liberalisation was "unwise". "It is possible that
indirect effects have more than offset the direct loss of revenue".
A paper from Alex Cobham at Oxford University questions the
conjecture that unknown "indirect effects" might outweigh the known
losses resulting from trade liberalisation: "The burden of proof -
that growth benefits will outweigh the total damage - must be
shouldered by those who would encourage poorer countries to
liberalise." Cobham recommends that liberalisation should be pushed
only where benefits from trade reform can be clearly established,
and in these cases "poorer countries should be provided with
guarantees of long-term replacement revenues". The paper is part of
a growing research and advocacy focus on tax justice that is
examining the key role played by tax policy in development. The Tax
Justice Network will publish a book in September, Tax us if you can,
looking at the culpability of the IMF in establishing conditions
conducive to the erosion of developing country tax bases.
The key question remains whether these encouraging signs from
'unofficial' Fund research portend a shift in the institution's
economic paradigm. Fund watchers will remember a paper by former
chief economist Kenneth Rogoff recanting Fund faith in capital
account liberalisation that presaged his departure (see Update 33).
If rich countries really cared about development, Bridsall et al
Tax revenue and (or?) trade liberalisation
Taxation policy and development
Tax us if you can, Tax Justice Network
=====================================================================
11. Inside the institutions: Decision-making at the IMF
---------------------------------------------------------------------
IMF staff and management are accountable to the IMF's managing
director - currently Rodrigo de Rato - who is appointed by and
accountable to the executive board. By 'gentleman's agreement', the
managing director is chosen by the IMF's European members, whilst
the first deputy managing director, currently Anne Krueger, by the
US government.
Board of governors
------------------
The IMF's supreme decision-making body, consisting of one governor
and one alternate governor from each of the IMF's 184 member
countries. The governor is appointed by the member country and is
usually the minister of finance or the governor of the central bank.
In practice the board of governors delegates day-to-day oversight to
the executive board but retains responsibility for major decisions
concerning the institution itself, such as changes to the Fund's
structure, and accepting new members. The board of governors
normally meets twice a year at the IMF-World Bank spring and annual
meetings.
International monetary and financial committee
----------------------------------------------
A committee of the board of governors. Membership is based on the
same constituency system as the executive board (see below), and is
made up of 24 members from the board of governors. The IMFC normally
meets twice a year, at the spring and annual meetings of the IMF.
Executive board
---------------
Carries out the day-to-day work of the IMF at its headquarters in
Washington, DC. It is chaired by the managing director of the IMF,
who is assisted by three deputy managing directors. It consists of
24 executive directors (EDs), who are appointed or elected by member
countries or by groups of countries on a bi-annual basis.
The board usually meets for three days per week.
At the board level most countries are grouped into constituencies,
with the exception of the five largest shareholders of the IMF-US,
Japan, Germany, France and the UK - who have one chair each. Russia,
Saudi Arabia and China are currently single country constituencies.
In some constituencies the appointment of the executive director
(ED) is rotated amongst the country members and in others the
country with the largest number of votes appoints the ED.
Ten of the available 24 board seats are currently occupied by
developing countries, who collectively hold 26 per cent of the
voting share. The number of developing country board seats rises to
eleven when the constituency currently headed by Spain is chaired by
Mexico or Venezuela. Eight constituencies contain both debtor and
creditor members, in seven of which the majority of voting power
resides with creditors. For developing countries to be able to carry
a decision in their favour they must build alliances with creditor
members. There are currently 45 Sub-Saharan African member countries
in the IMF, who hold a combined voting share of 4.4 per cent.
Decision-making at the board
----------------------------
The board makes decisions by consensus. However, often there are
important differences of view among the membership. The IMF's rules
and regulations prescribe that "the chair shall ordinarily ascertain
the sense of the meeting, in lieu of a formal vote", effectively
seeking to obtain the broadest spectrum of support in terms of
numbers of EDs and voting share, provided that if put to a vote
there would be the needed majority. Where no consensus can be
reached, a simple majority of the voting power can quickly be
achieved by collective agreement among the G-7 chairs and a few
other directors.
EDs representing more than one country can not split their votes, or
cast separate votes for each of the members they represent and must
cast a single block vote for all of the member countries that they
represent. EDs rarely object - abstention is the strongest form of
protest.
Since 1999 the introduction of chairman's summaries and public
information notices summarising board discussions on country
programmes, surveillance reports and broad policy issue papers have
been made public. Board minutes which record all interventions are
released to the public after 10 years.
Standing committees
-------------------
These include: Committee on administrative policies; Committee on
the budget; Committee on liaison with the World Trade Organisation;
and Committee to the annual report.The IMF does not make available
information on the members, workplan or meeting minutes of the
committees. With a few exceptions they are not decision-making
bodies, but serve in an advisory capacity and prepare decisions to
be taken by the executive board. Most have a membership of eight and
their attendance is open to the whole board.
IMF executive board calendar
IMF executive directors and voting power
=====================================================================
12. UK reports on its activities at the World Bank and IMF
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The UK's Department for International Development (DFID) quietly
published its first annual report on the UK's involvement with the
World Bank in March. The lack of depth of analysis of DFID's report
suggests that the government did not see this as a priority. DFID
calls for:
* Greater predictability of financing and matching to national
budget cycles;
* An increase in the proportion of support delivered through
programmatic loans;
* Greater management accountability for "performance against
results"; and
* More progress on disclosure, including the publication of
board documents, and executive directors' statements.
The report does not mention major Bank policy developments during
the period or discuss the UK position on key investment projects.
There is only a very limited discussion of whether DFID achieved its
institutional objectives for the Bank, and none of whether UK
objectives for spring and annual meetings were achieved. There is no
summary of DFID's progress in improving transparency and
accountability to UK citizens in its dealings with the Bank, nor
anything on follow-up to questions raised by the international
development committee at their annual hearings on the World Bank and
IMF. Absent are any references to the work of the Bank's watchdog
groups, the Operations Evaluation Department and the Inspection
Panel.
Treasury to IMF: More flexibility
---------------------------------
Treasury published its annual report on UK activities at the IMF in
late July. The UK has been banging the drum for improved independent
surveillance efforts for several years. This year's report notes
some limited progress but the Treasury is "concerned that a truly
fresh perspective" is still missing. Accordingly, there are calls
for a clear methodology for assessing the effectiveness of
surveillance to be in place by the next biennial surveillance review
in 2006, including an "assessment of the accuracy of assessments
made by the IMF".
The Treasury admonished the IMF to be "flexible enough to
accommodate the extra investment needed in infrastructure, education
and tackling disease". However, there is no guidance on what to do
if the IMF is found to be inflexible. The report restates the new UK
government position on conditionality, questioning the use of
conditions in "sensitive policy areas such as privatisation and
trade liberalisation". The report's authors say that the UK will
work within planned evaluations of conditionality "and in individual
country discussions to promote the new approach proposed by the UK".
The Fund is encouraged to enhance its capacity to conduct poverty
and social impact assessments. There are also calls for a Fund
review of their lending vehicle to low-income countries, to include
an "assessment of how effective programmes are in reducing poverty
and supporting countries' own poverty reduction strategies."
The UK government would "like to see more progress on the crucial
structural issues that play a key role in giving countries an
effective voice." In a future quota increase, the UK would support a
general increase with a relatively large selective element allocated
by a new quota formula; ad hoc increases to address the clearest
out-of-line cases; and an increase in the basic vote to correct the
erosion of voting power of the smallest members."
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Treasury commmittee investigation
---------------------------------
The UK's treasury select committee announced in August that it would
be initiating an investigation in October of the structure and
performance of the World Bank, the IMF and the WTO. Reform of the
IMF and the World Bank will also be on the agenda when finance
ministers and central bank chiefs from the Group of 20 meet in China
in October. Food for thought for both processes comes from a new
book entitled Accountability of the IMF published by the
International Development Resource Centre, edited by Carin and Wood.
UK Treasury select committee
Accountability of the IMF, IDRC
---------------------------------------------------------------------
UK and the World Bank 2004
UK and the IMF 2004
=====================================================================
13. Climate change and the World Bank: dubious green credentials
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The G8 communiqu in July bestowed the World Bank with a leadership
role "in creating a new framework for clean energy and development,
including investment and financing". Such a role could be considered
ironic: one year on from the Extractive Industries Review (EIR),
Bank support for renewable energy is a mere 6 per cent of its total
energy-related lending; and its lead role in the Clean Development
Mechanism (CDM) has been subject to severe scrutiny.
The Bank wants to bring together nations split over the Kyoto
Protocol to work out a new plan that would remain effective after
Kyoto expires in 2012. Ian Johnson, vice president of the Bank's
environmentally and socially sustainable development department,
said the Bank will serve as a "global mediator on climate change",
bridging the differences in approach between developed and emerging
countries, including India and China. The UK appears set to play a
key role: at the annual meetings, UK secretary for international
development Hilary Benn invited the Bank to host a side-event to
discuss follow-up work on G8 climate change initiatives, with Bank
president Wolfowitz to co-chair. A meeting on climate change in
London to be headed by prime minister Tony Blair is planned for
November.
A letter to the G8 leaders signed by 120 civil society organisations
pointed out that the Bank has financed over $25 billion in oil, gas
and coal contracts since the UN framework convention on climate
change was signed in 1992. Eighty per cent of all World Bank oil
projects are for petroleum production for wealthy countries, rather
than to meet the energy needs of the world's poor. Strong civil
society criticism of this perpetuation of fossil-fuelled economic
expansion was reflected in a number of reports:
Drilling into debt, Oil Change International
--------------------------------------------
Oil exporting countries have fallen into "a nightmare of crushing
debt, civil conflict and stagnant economies", as compared to the
expectation of economic plenty that oil production would bring
perpetuated by the Bank in the 1970s and 80s. Bank programmes
designed to increase northern private investment in southern oil
production have drastically increased debt, as explored in case
studies from Nigeria, Ecuador and Congo-Brazzaville.
Hoodwinked in the hothouse, Carbon Trade Watch
----------------------------------------------
The Bank has played a major role in developing carbon-intensive
projects in the developing world. The report challenges the "carbon
offset culture", and the assumption that the market's "invisible
hand" rather than radical reductions at source will contribute to a
genuine reduction of emissions. It criticises the Bank's involvement
in carbon trading emissions schemes, in particular the prototype
carbon fund, which merely allows northern governments and industry
to postpone making the desperately needed cuts at home.
Mainstreaming climate change considerations,
World Resources Institute
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Bank's response to climate change over the past five years has
been inadequate. Country assistance strategies have failed to
comprehensively address climate change, and over 80 per cent of the
Bank's publicly disclosed lending in the energy sector 2000-2004 did
not consider climate change issues in project appraisals. The report
recommends that Bank country sector strategies explicitly integrate
climate change considerations, and that developed countries support
the additional costs of green house gas accounting as part of their
obligations under the UN climate convention and Kyoto protocol.
Carbon broker
-------------
The UN climate change convention and the Kyoto protocol envisage an
important role for the World Bank with respect to financing
technology transfers to mitigate green house gas emissions. A recent
report by the Sustainable Energy and Economy Network reveals the
Bank's plans to operate as a self-appointed broker - from which it
would reap profits of between 8 and 10 per cent of each transaction
between northern and southern parties on carbon transactions,
through such schemes as the Prototype Carbon Fund and the Clean
Development Mechanism (CDM). The Bank leads other multilateral
development banks in the CDM, which assists industrialised countries
to comply with Kyoto emission limits and "developing countries to
achieve sustainable development". However, its genuine contribution
to renewable energy development is doubtful, given its financing for
projects such as monoculture tree plantations in the case of the
Plantar project in Brazil (see Update 35).
West Africa gas pipeline: spurious claims
-----------------------------------------
The World Bank-funded West Africa Gas Pipeline (WAGP) has been
presented as a clean energy project which should qualify for credit
under the CDM. Management of the pipeline is split between the
members of a consortium lead by Chevron Texaco, and includes the
Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NPCC) and Shell. The
request for the CDM credit is predicated on the claim that the
pipeline project would contribute to the reduction of gas flaring in
the Niger Delta. However, Chevron, the World Bank and the Nigerian
government have failed to demonstrate how gas flaring will be
reduced as a result of the pipeline. Moreover Chevron was part of
the Global Climate Coalition, an oil industry lobby group opposed to
the Kyoto Protocol. In May 2005 Shell announced that it would not
meet its commitment to eliminate routine flaring of associated gas
from its oil fields in 2008.
The "Enron" of global carbon trading
------------------------------------
An analysis by NGO International Rivers Network (IRN) has exposed as
fictional World Bank claims that it is helping China reduce its
green house gas emissions by three million tons through buying
carbon credits from the Xiaogushan dam. The Bank has applied for the
credits to be certified by the CDM. IRN states that the large dam is
due to be completed in 2006 regardless of whether or not it receives
carbon credits. The CDM is only supposed to issue credits for
projects that would not be built if they did not receive them. IRN's
Patrick McCully called the World Bank the "Enron of global carbon
trading, shamelessly manipulating the market behind the scenes
whilst painting itself as the good guy".
Drilling into debt, Oil Change International
Hoodwinked in the hothouse, Carbon Trade Watch
Mainstreaming climate change, WRI
A carbon rush at the World Bank
FoE Nigeria: No carbon credits for WAGP
WB blowing hot air on carbon credits
=====================================================================
14. Pick and choose: Bank on extractives
---------------------------------------------------------------------
In July a response to the letter submitted by over 60 civil society
organisations(see Update 46) regarding the Bank's implementation of
its response to the Extractive Industries Review (EIR) was received
from Rashad Kaldany, director of the IFC's oil, mining, gas and
chemicals department. Selected highlights include:
* IFC will develop non-binding guidance notes on broad community
support;
* there will not be any "no-go zones";
* revenue transparency commitments currently only apply to
"significant projects", defined as accounting for 10 per cent or
more of government revenues. Kaldany will propose that the EIR
transparency commitments be included in the revised IFC
safeguard policies;
* IFC will modify its poverty impact assessment to reflect both
positive and negative project impacts. IFC has made no
commitment regarding independent or local community monitoring;
and
* Consideration of governance risks should now be stated in the
IFC's summary of project information.
In December 2005 CEE Bankwatch and Bank Information Center will host
a conference to highlight Bank performance on the implementation of
EIR recommendations. The primary purpose of the conference is to
present EIR project case studies and an overall status report.
For further information contact Heike Mainhardt-Gibbs
Slow progress on WB's oil, gas and mining commitments
WB response to CSO EIR follow-up letter
=====================================================================
15. Dam review five years on: lessons not learned
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Five years on from the widely acclaimed World Commission on Dams
report, Dams and development: A new framework for decision-making,
and after a decade during which big dam building has been in steady
decline, the World Bank and the dam industry are now pushing for a
revitalisation of large hydropower projects and the side-lining of
the report.
This has been accompanied by a number of contentious Bank-supported
dam projects such as Nam Theun 2 in Lao PDR (see Update 46); Allain
Duhangan in India (see Update 43); and renewed interest in dams in
Uganda and Pakistan. Meanwhile, the legacies of earlier dam projects
are still being felt, such as the Chixoy dam in Guatemala; and the
Lesotho Highlands project (see Update 41).
The Bank is currently considering a request by Pakistan for $10
billion in assistance for hydropower projects. Pakistani civil
society is concerned about the planned Kala Bagh dam on the Indus
Delta. The Indus Delta has already suffered significant livelihood
and biodiversity loss as a result of previous dam construction.
According to NGO Participatory Development Initiatives (PDI), two
controversial studies are being carried out under the supervision of
the World Bank. A workshop organised by PDI and ActionAid Pakistan
in Karachi identified serious flaws in the draft reports of both
studies, in particular with regards to the intrusion of sea water,
and environmental degradation of the Indus Delta that would result.
In April the Ugandan government announced its approval for Aga Khan
Industrial Promotion Services to build the Bujagali Dam. The dam has
been a source of embarrassment for the Bank since it removed its
support for the project in 2003 following a corruption investigation
and the withdrawal of the main sponsor, US-based AES Corporation.
The IFC was to be the major lender for the project. It is not clear
if it will now give its support to the new sponsor. Local groups
working on Bujagali have raised questions about resettlement,
environmental impacts and cultural resources, pointing out that this
project will do nothing to help the 95 per cent of Uganda's
population who are not connected to the national grid.
A new report on Guatemala's Chixoy dam documents the full extent of
social injustices and human rights violations resulting from the
World Bank/Inter-American Development Bank-funded project. The
report recommends legally binding reparations for the 4,000 people
affected by the 22-year-old dam. In 1982 more than four hundred Maya
Ach men, women and children were tortured, raped and killed by the
Guatemalan army after they opposed relocation (see Update 43). The
report was commissioned by the Peasant Association Ro Negro 13 of
March Maya Ach, and international NGOs.
Thayer Scudder, one of the 12 commissioners of the WCD and a
consultant on resettlement projects to the World Bank since 1964,
explores the failures of large dams in his book The future of large
dams: dealing with social, environmental, institutional and
political costs. He argues that, despite the Bank's role as a
standard-setter for large hydro projects, its ability to deal
seriously with resettlement is insufficient. He states that the WCD
recommendations are superior to the Bank's environmental and social
safeguard policies, and criticises the Bank for failing to require
an overarching policy for large hydropower projects.
A conference to mark the fifth anniversary of the release of the WCD
report will take place in Berlin in November, organised by
International Rivers Network, Urgewald and the Heinrich Boell
Foundation. It aims to showcase the broad public support for the WCD
report, and highlight models for the implementation of the WCD
guidelines.
$10 billion sought for hydropower and dams in Pakistan
Chixoy dam legacy issues study
The future of large dams, Thayer Scudder
WCD fifth anniversary conference
=====================================================================
16. Indigenous policy undermines rights
---------------------------------------------------------------------
A report by NGO Forest Peoples Programme provides a historical
summary of indigenous peoples' experiences with participation in
World Bank policy processes and programmes. It finds that the Bank
has failed to address demands that indigenous peoples have made,
particularly in relation to human rights, international standards
and free, prior and informed consent (FPIC). It provides a critical
analysis of indigenous experiences of the World Commission on Dams,
the Extractive Industries Review and the seven-year-long revision
process of the Bank's operational policy on indigenous peoples.
The new IBRD and IDA policy on indigenous peoples (OP/BP 4.10) came
into force in August. It was subject to heavy criticism at the UN
permanent forum on indigenous issues in May, largely in relation to
the weakening of FPIC as an international standard. A joint
statement, signed by 24 indigenous organisations said: "Of specific
concern is the Bank's recent decision to require a process of free,
prior and informed consultation with affected indigenous peoples'
communities to ascertain their broad community support for a
project, rather than requiring their free prior and informed
consent. [This] stands to severely threaten their lands, territories
and natural resources, and to undermine their internationally
recognised human rights".
Indigenous peoples and the WB
United Nations permanent forum on indigenous peoples
=====================================================================
17. IEO new head, new work programme
---------------------------------------------------------------------
In June, Thomas Bernes was appointed as the new head of the
Independent Evaluation Office (IEO) of the IMF. Bernes previously
served as the secretary of the joint IMF-WB development committee,
and IMF executive director for Canada from 1996 to 2001.
The IEO confirmed that its evaluations for fiscal year 2006 will
include: IMF advice on exchange rate policy, IMF role in selected
African countries (aid predictability and debt sustainability), and
the effectiveness of bilateral surveillance.
IEO work programme FY06
=====================================================================
18. More white guys to top posts at IFC, finance
---------------------------------------------------------------------
President Paul Wolfowitz named two Europeans to senior posts in
early September. Vincenzo La Via, former Italian Treasury official
and Banca Intesa executive, was appointed chief financial officer.
From 1985 to 1991 he worked at the World Bank, spending a year as
advisor to the Italian executive director, and then working as
senior investment officer in the treasury department. Lars Thunell,
who served as chief executive of Sweden's SEB banking group, was
named the IFC's executive vice president. Thunell was also recently
appointed board member of Statoil, and is a board member of SLA, an
international forestry and paper product company.
=====================================================================
19. Wolfowitz appoints accountability guru
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Bank president Paul Wolfowitz initiated an external review of Bank
systems of transparency, accountability, ethics and integrity at the
end of July. The man chosen for the job is Robert Pozen, current
chair of MFS investment and previously a visiting professor of
economics at Harvard University. He will review the Bank's systems
in this area and advise Wolfowitz whether he believes any changes
are needed to "improve effectiveness and ensure proper
coordination". The purpose of the review is to "clarify roles,
ensure an efficient use of resources, and ascertain that there are
no gaps". Bank watchers worry that new gaps may be exactly what
results after Pozen presents his report end September.
=====================================================================
20. Wolfowitz watch
---------------------------------------------------------------------
A new initiative from US NGO Bank Information Center will provide
information on the appointments made by president Wolfowitz, as well
as his speeches and travel schedule. Bank watchers believe that,
rather than asserting his authority over the institution in head-on
John Bolton style, Wolfowitz will signal his intentions through the
people he places in key positions of influence. Such appointments
already include Kevin Kellims, former spokesperson for US
vice-president Dick Cheney, as senior advisor; and Robin Cleveland,
formerly in the office of the president of the United States, as
counsellor.
=====================================================================
21. Giant taming
Ten years of the Bretton Woods Project
---------------------------- Comment --------------------------------
By Alex Wilks Coordinator, European Network on Debt and Development;
Coordinator, Bretton Woods Project, 1995-2004
---------------------------------------------------------------------
It has often seemed crazy that a tiny UK-based NGO should try to
monitor and influence two giant global institutions. The Bretton
Woods Project has never been a David versus Goliath operation,
however, but an effort to help coordinate and inform many civil
society Lilliputians to tie down two tall Gullivers. How well have
the Lilliputians done in preventing the giants causing damage across
the south?
There have been many gains in terms of increasing transparency,
raising awareness and creating public debate. Many national and
international processes have considered the impacts of Bank and Fund
activities and suggested changes to what they do. Some of these
suggestions have been adopted, in part or in full. Many, however,
have proved to be little more than face-lifts for the giants, with
their thinking and main actions remaining as they were.
Those of us working in northern capital cities often need to be
reminded by our southern colleagues that we should not be taken in
by announcements featured on websites, or fine presidential speeches
at annual meetings. The reality in the vast majority of southern
countries is that poverty and environmental problems are worsening
and that citizens and governments feel powerless to shape their
destinies.
The World Bank and IMF are still playing multiple roles of
researching, proposing and financing projects and policy reforms.
Some of the advice and projects may well be sensible in theory, but
they are often proposed and delivered in a manner which alienates
people on the ground rather than wins them over, making them
inoperable in practice.
The institutions have been forced to recognise some of the
short-comings of the traditional Washington Consensus and have
developed new lines of work on issues such as corruption, disability
and inter-faith dialogue. Combined with the vast range of other
initiatives that Wolfensohn initiated, this can mean that the
institutions play an influencing role across an increased range of
southern institutions and policy areas. There is little logic to
many of these themes being handled primarily by the IFIs. And the
institutions certainly still find it hard to collaborate rather than
dominate.
A major question at the moment is what will happen to the Bank under
Wolfowitz. Could it be that those of us who contested the nomination
process and outcome will be found to have cried wolf for nothing? I
doubt it. Much more likely is a dismantling of the more progressive
elements in the institutions, and an increasing conformity to US
foreign policy. However the Bank staff machinery has in the past
often resisted changes announced by their president (including many
Wolfensohn ones). And any changes will be done under a smokescreen
of PR activities and announcements. Wolfowitz seems keen to make
statements on almost everything that is in the public eye - from the
death of King Fahd, to hurricane Katrina. And he has not been shy to
find photo opportunities with African choirs and similar photogenic
groups.
So if Wolf II is part of a Bush II plan to get his people into
multilateral institutions to dismantle them from inside, the Bank
president is going about it in a much more sheepish and subtle
manner than John Bolton, who has rapidly caused major upheaval at
the UN.
There is some turbulence among civil society groups, however, on how
to treat the new president. Some reacted with glee to the
appointment, arguing that things need to get worse and more visible
before they can get better. But even those who do not follow this
logic are discussing whether the multitude of Bank consultations and
dialogues make much difference or whether civil society is strongest
when it develops clear independent positions and organises outside
official processes.
The Bretton Woods Project, with its broad-church convening power,
insider contacts and wide-ranging overview of IFI activities,
clearly has a major role to play in keeping people up to date and
shaping thinking and actions on what roles the IFIs should play and
how they can be persuaded to do so. It has a more vital role now
than ever to stop the giants erupting out of their restraints and
causing further damage.
Alex Wilks
European Network on Debt and Development
=====================================================================
22. World Bank-IMF annual meetings 2005
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Members of staff of the Bank and Fund, board members, development
and finance ministers are gathered in Washington 23-25 September.
The formal agenda includes:
23 Sept: G24 ministers' meeting and G7 finance ministers meeting
24 Sept: Opening plenary session
International Monetary and Financial Committee:
Global economy and financial markets;
IMF support for low-income countries including
discussion of the G8 debt deal;
IMF strategic review
25 Sept: Development Committee:
Africa action plan and debt relief;
aid for trade;
progress reports on aid effectiveness, infrastructure,
conditionality review, governance roadmap, PRS review,
HIPC implementation and climate change
Closing plenary session
Development committee and IMFC documents
Civil society dialogues organised by NGOs include:
* Launch of Eurodad PSIA advocacy report
* Trade-finance linkages in the lead up to Hong Kong
* What future for World Bank conditionality
* Democratic Republic of Congo:
Post-conflict development and the Bank
* User fees and health financing
* Alternative macroeconomic policies for fighting HIV/AIDS
A comprehensive calendar of events, contact information for groups
in Washington, and links to documents released by civil society are
available on IFIwatchnet.
=====================================================================
23. Parliamentarians return to Washington
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Elected representatives from Indonesia, Ghana, Malawi and Mexico
will be travelling to Washington for the annual meetings to press
the points raised by the International Parliamentarians' Petition
(IPP), signed by over 1000 MPs in 50 countries worldwide. The
representatives will meet with the G24 and southern executive
directors of the Bank and Fund.
Parliamentarians go to Washington to demand greater oversight
Malawian parliamentary coalition on the IFIs
=====================================================================
24. Transparency charter for IFIs
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Global Transparency Initiative (GTI) will be holding a
three-month consultation starting 28 September (international
right-to-know day), on a draft charter of transparency principles
which the international financial institutions should uphold. The
GTI brings together civil society IFI monitors with campaigners on
freedom of information. For more information visit the website or
contact the charter's lead author directly.
Toby Mendel
Global Transparency Initiative
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Published by Bretton Woods Project
Critical voices on the World Bank and IMF
No permission needed to reproduce articles. Please pass to
colleagues interested in the Bank and Fund, and let us know of
other groups interested in getting the Update.
The Update is available in print, on the web and by e-mail.
Bretton Woods Project
c/o Action Aid, Hamlyn House, Macdonald Road, London N19 5PG, UK
Tel: +44 (0)20 7561 7610
Fax: +44 (0)20 7272 0899
Subscribe at
or
An independent non-governmental organisation
supported by a network of UK NGOs, the C.S. Mott Foundation and
the Swedish Society for Nature Conservation.
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
END+++