International Development CommitteeWritten evidence submitted by the TUC

1. The TUC values the engagement in the current debate over successor arrangements for the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), welcomes this opportunity to put forward its views and hopes that its views and suggestions will be taken into consideration and reflected in the recommendations of the IDC.

Lessons learned from the adoption of the International Development Targets and the Millennium Development Goals: in particular how effective has the MDG process been to date?

2. In our view, the failure to integrate the Decent Work Agenda1 in its entirety into the MDGs, despite its belated inclusion as an indicator, deprived the global development agenda from the inception of a potent anchor upon which a viable strategy to achieve them could have been successfully built. In this regard, the TUC welcomes the dedication of the 2013 World Development Report2 to employment and the acknowledgement of its impact on economic growth and social welfare. Productive and decent work3 is pivotal to the fulfilment of individual aspirations as well as to the collective achievement of social and economic goals at all levels and plays a determining role in sustaining economic activity and growth, reducing poverty and enhancing social cohesion and integration. The lack of a clear, effective strategy aimed at job creation based on a set of coherent policies and practices made the achievement of employment targets difficult,4 retarded progress towards the attainment of some other interrelated targets5 and severely restricted the usefulness of MDGs as a development paradigm. Moreover, donors do not seem to have paid sufficient attention to the creation of decent employment6 opportunities through their interventions due to the non-prioritization of employment dimension.

3. MDGs made it possible to focus attention on the need for poverty reduction, became a welcome departure from the focus on structural adjustment programmes (SAPs) and the Washington Consensus and provided a common platform for debate among governments, multilateral financial institutions and international NGOs and other interested parties. They crystallised an international consensus on the need to end global poverty, have dominated the development discourse in the past two decades and been instrumental in influencing international, national and sectoral development policies. Many nations have accepted and incorporated them in their national development policies7 and strategies, often without timelines or action plans to reach the targets. Bilateral and multilateral donors have increased the allocation of funds to the sectors8—social infrastructure and services—covered by MDGs. Indeed, the commitment to MDGs was a significant factor in reversing the declining trend in international aid flows at the turn of the new century.

4. There has been progress9 towards achieving the targets10 despite some confusion over whether they should be applicable to the world as a whole or at country level and uncertainty over the magnitude of the achievements.11 It is hard to establish a definite causal link and attribute all progress in the areas concerned to the adoption of MDGs alone, as there have been a multitude of other factors at play since their acceptance which may have impacted on them.

How should the “Sustainable Development Goals” be established following Rio +20 relate to the “Development Goals” being considered by the High-Level Panel?

5. Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)12 seek to reconcile the imperatives of economic growth and development with those of environmental protection and just transition,13 bring into sharp focus the need to take account of the impact of economic activity and current consumption patterns on the environment and, are worthy of careful consideration and full integration into the new framework. The concept should underpin the post-2015 agenda so that the satisfaction of the needs of the present generation will not compromise the ability of future generations to meet their own needs and provide a basis on which future development strategies, policies and practices can be solidly anchored in it and a variety of complex and multifaceted challenges can be effectively addressed.

6. We agree14 that the formulation of SDGs should be fully integrated into the process of developing a successor to the MDGs at an early stage and be part and parcel of the post-2015 development agenda. The incorporation of SDGs in the new framework will make it possible to rectify some of the shortcomings in MDG 7, promote green jobs and ensure poverty eradication with minimal impact on the environment.

The coverage of future goals: should they be for developing countries only or should progress be monitored in all countries?

7. The coverage of future goals will partly depend on their contents, structures, targets and indicators, as the inclusion of goals and targets largely irrelevant to the context of developed countries15 serves no purpose. On the other hand, there are issues of global relevance and concern for which developed countries bear the bulk of responsibility. The rapid depletion of non-renewable energy, the loss of biodiversity, the destruction of the ozone layer, for example, affect all nations and any targets and indicators relating to such goals should be applicable to all developed and developing nations. Moreover, externalities from the achievement of a particular goal will extend to all. A lessening of morbidity16 across the globe is beneficial to all and constitutes a goal worthy of pursuit by all nations. Any goals concerning decent work, reforms of global institutions empowering developing nations17 and strengthening their voice and voting rights should necessarily apply to all nations.

The process: are the right voices being heard? What are the opportunities for and constraints to global consensus?

8. So far, the debate seems to be taking place within the confines of the academia, interested INGOs in developed countries, to some extent, their governments and civil society and various agencies within the UN system. There is little evidence of interest in the majority of developing countries on the post-2015 agenda. In this regard, the TUC welcomes the appointment of the High Level Panel by the UN Secretary-General,18 hopes that the HLP will induce meaningful consultations at all levels19 and expects the HLP to encourage governments in developed, developing and emerging countries to engage their citizens in the process. Moreover, there should be close collaboration between the HLP and the intergovernmental working group on Sustainable Development Goals set up following Rio +20. The TUC believes that the active involvement of trade unions20 in the consultation process will facilitate consensus building at all levels and that trade unions and other civil society actors will be given the opportunity to contribute to the debate.21 There is a good opportunity to get feedback at grass roots level for the development of the new framework, in contrast to the MDGs formulated by UN technocrats based on the Millennium Declaration.

9. Progress on global consensus could be hampered by a number of factors, depending on the nature of goals and targets. Developing countries are likely to resist attempts by the UN or donors to impose solutions which may appear to them “too prescriptive”, assert their sovereignty and independence and insist on ownership of, and accountability for, their development strategies. It is possible that developed countries, on the other hand, oppose meaningful targets on reforms of global institutions, significant changes to the international trading system,22 new mechanisms23 of raising funds for development as well as those on the adoption of measures to deal with the consequences of climate change. Agreement on the processes involved in the development of a post 2015 development framework should be transparent, participatory and inclusive and engage people living in poverty, particularly marginalised groups such as women, people with disabilities and indigenous people.

Targets: was the MDG “target-based” approach a success? Should it be retained? How should progress be measured?

10. In our view, it has been only a partial success, as not all targets and indicators have been properly and rigorously defined and/or are of equal validity or lend themselves to easy measurement. While it is possible to count the number of maternal deaths24 or the number of children in primary education with reasonable accuracy, it is hard to verify the attainment of “a significant improvement in the lives of at least 100 million25 slum dwellers”26 or the proportion of the population without sustainable access to safe drinking water27 and sanitation28 without proper estimates for slum dwellers or any information on water quality. There was no consistency in the measurement of targets in that, while most targets were set in relative terms, few were set in absolute terms.29 In addition, more care should have been taken in the choice and definition of goals30 and targets, at least, to avoid overlap and superfluity.31 While agreeing with the usefulness and the need to retain targets and indicators, we would welcome greater clarity in the definition of targets, more care in the choice of indicators and diligence in the search of relevant and robust data. Progress needs to be monitored at regular intervals which will depend on the timescale agreed for the attainment of targets. It would be useful to establish interim targets or milestones which could be monitored, for instance, every five years or so.

Financing global goals: are new mechanisms needed?

11. The TUC is of the view that the mobilisation and allocation of adequate resources should be an integral part of the new framework, if shared responsibility and mutual accountability for sustainable development is to be translated into reality. While supporting the establishment of new mechanisms such as a financial transactions tax with, at least, part of its proceeds allocated to development, we believe that the existing arrangements such as the Official Development Assistance (ODA) need to be strengthened and placed on a firmer legal footing. The TUC supports proposals for a legally-binding commitment to spend 0.7% of GNI on ODA and believes that, once such legislation is in place, the UK Government will be in a strong position to urge other countries to follow the same path. Moreover, the TUC strongly advocates32 the improvements of tax collection capacity and the introduction of effective measures to eliminate tax fraud, evasion and avoidance applicable to all nations.33

The role of the private sector and other non-state organisations?

12. Development is a dynamic process in which all stakeholders including business need to take part. The private sector has an important role to play in development in a number of ways, notably, in investment, employment generation, training and skills development, transfer of technology as well as the delivery of goods and services. In addition, the private sector’s contribution in terms of tax proceeds is a vital source of revenue for governments in need of funds for development. The long-term sustainability of business activity hinges on the purchasing power of households, which, in turn, is determined by economic prosperity and social wellbeing of citizens. Moreover, business benefits from improvements in vital public services such as education, health and water and sanitation.

13. The TUC takes the view that all businesses—MNCs,34 local companies, SMEs including social enterprises—should strictly adhere to the observance of internationally agreed employment rights and entitlements enshrined in ILO conventions35 and national laws and regulations adopted to give effect to them. It is imperative that the activities in the private sector including MNCs contribute to the realisation of the objectives of the DWA and not undermine them. In this regard, the indicators developed by the UNCTAD36 and other agencies in order to gauge the economic value added, job creation, sustainable development impact of development of investment etc could be used in the new framework. MNCs should also comply with the requirements of international agreements, conventions, and protocols37 governing their activities in the sectors in which they operate, ensure that best practice is followed in the transfers of technology and technical knowhow and that they fulfil all their tax obligations to host nations.

14. There should be close collaboration between the private sector, NGOs and donors in a partnership in which the expertise and knowledge of one partner can complement those of the other to the benefit of the community. As pointed out above, social dialogue is integral to a well-functioning industrial relations system, needs to extend beyond mere compliance with formalities and should form the basis for active collaboration with trade unions and other social partners in order to enhance the development impact of their action. Social partners are well placed to advise governments on the most effective ways to develop and implement job creation strategies with optimal impact on inclusive economic growth, fair income distribution and sustainable development in line with the DWA. Consultations with business coalitions on their role and responsibility in the new framework need to take place in due course.

Timescale: what period should the new framework cover? Was the 15-year timescale for the MDGs right?

15. The timescale, too, should be dependent on the composition of goals, targets and indicators, for the improvements in social and economic welfare take time.38 Moreover, while it is relatively easy to measure inputs- enrolments in primary education or the number of people graduating in a year, the outcomes—improvements in life expectancy at birth or a drop in prevalence rate of HIV can be meaningfully quantified only on a longer timescale. The impact of the implementation of measures adopted to ensure environmental sustainability is likely to be felt only after a lapse of considerable time. Therefore, 25 years is an appropriate timescale. However, it is essential to have interim targets which can be monitored at regular intervals. It is to be noted that the MDGs are to be attained, not over a 15-year period, but over a 25-year period and that the progress has been measured with 1990 as the base year.39

The content of future goals: what would be a good set of global goals? What continuity should there be with the MDGs, and how should the unfulfilled MDGs be taken forward?

16. The TUC favours a set of goals articulated around four key pillars—economic, social, environmental and institutional.

Ensure the implementation of the Decent Work Agenda in its entirety paving the way for a well-functioning industrial relations system. Priority should be given to the creation of decent and productive employment opportunities enabling all to afford basic necessities and comforts of life and enjoy their rights and entitlements. Social protection needs to extend to all and include safe working conditions, sufficient free time and rest, adequate compensation in case of loss of income or reduced income and access to affordable health care and retirement benefits. Social dialogue through strong, representative and independent workers’ and employers’ organisations should be an integral part of the institutional arrangements governing industrial relations. Economic goals should encapsulate the two concepts of poverty—absolute40 and relative,41 as well as the impact of growth and other factors on distribution. Goals, targets and indicators for the reduction of absolute poverty should dovetail with the parameters of a social protection floor forming part of the DWA. The reduction of inequalities in income and wealth should be one of the goals and progress towards it could be measured over time through appropriate indicators.

Ensure adequate social infrastructure underpinning human development and welfare. The social pillar should concentrate on the outcomes, where appropriate, rather than inputs, of vital public services such as health, education, water and sanitation and access to information. The achievement of universal literacy and a reasonable level of numeracy should be given priority in line with the objectives of Education For All.42 A similar outcomes-based approach should guide the attainment of the best possible level of physical and mental health and nutrition to be monitored by WHO indicators43 measuring morbidity and mortality across nations. Access to safer water and proper sanitation should be a goal in itself, although its impact is likely to be reflected in the indicators measuring progress towards other goals. Universal connectivity offering affordable, reliable and secure access to all means of communications including the internet should also be a goal.

Ensure environmental sustainability paving the way for the satisfaction of the needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet theirs. Progress towards the implementation of internationally agreed measures to counter the effects of climate change, preserve biodiversity, reduce pollution and slow down the depletion of non-renewable resources should be monitored. A set of indicators on the requirements for the implementation of programmes of green jobs could be used in this regard.

Ensure institutional stability, functional integrity, efficiency and effectiveness and fairness in the long-term at global, regional and national level. The institutional pillar should encompass the fair and transparent application of agreed norms governing economic relations between nations at global and regional level and the respect for the rule of law including good governance and human rights at national and local level. The compliance with the provisions of relevant international treaties,44 conventions, and agreements by each state should form the basis of goals, targets and indicators at global and regional level while, at national level, strict adherence to a country’s constitutional and other legal provisions45 could guide the setting of appropriate goals, targets and indicators.

17. We advocate continuity with some46 of the current MDGs, targets and indicators and appreciate the need to carry forward unfulfilled MDGs with re-defined goals, refined indicators, and extended targets.

October 2012