Environment and development groups in London will boycott a consultation organised by the World Bank today (Monday 1^st November 2004), in protest at the way the consultation on relaxing environmental and social standards is being carried out.

The London boycott is part of an international protest which has seen boycotts in Toyko, Washington, Rio de Janeiro and Manila, following the Bank's refusal to accept a request from more than 180 environment, development and indigenous groups, including Friends of the Earth, to make the consultation meaningful [1]. The World Bank launched the consultation on abandoning its current 10 Safeguards Policies currently imposed by the International Finance Corporation (IFC) in favour of "performance standards" which are seen as a more flexible approach [2].

The consultation process has also been criticized by insiders at the Bank, with a leaked document from the World Bank's legal department and environmentally and socially sustainable development

council, stating that the new guidelines "deviated from the clarity attached to the decade-long

effort to distinguish mandatory from discretionary action" [3]. It also suggested the proposals would result in inconsistent policies being applied to the World Bank's public and private sector clients.

Friends of the Earth's International Financial Institutions Campaigner Hannah Ellis said:

"The International Finance Corporation is more concerned about getting it done than getting it right. We cannot take part in consultations that are effectively no more than World Bank public relations exercises. These new plans will weaken already inadequate safeguards and must be abandoned. The new safeguards seriously undermine the World Bank's duty to protect the environment and affected communities. It must ensure that any money it lends to private sector projects meets internationally recognized standards."

As the IFC itself acknowledges, its proposals could become a global benchmark for international investment for both public and private financiers. Non-governmental organisations around the world are alarmed that the first drafts of the consultation (dated 12 August 2004) suggest a major shift from a mandatory and compliance-based approach to a mainly discretionary approach. Such a shift would dilute the responsibilities and undermine accountability.

The substantial proposed revisions to the policies largely ignore the priorities and concerns raised by organisations and indigenous people's groups in previous World Bank consultations on its safeguard policies; the lessons emerging from a safeguard policy review undertaken by the Compliance Advisor and Ombudsman (CAO); and the recent Extractive Industries Review (EIR).

Tim Peat, Trade Campaigner at War on Want said:

"The IFC has de-facto become the leading environmental and social standard-setter for international project finance. IFC's draft standards are far too vague and allow for subjective judgment to determine the prevailing standard for any given project. As a public institution, it needs clearly articulated and enforceable rules and standards. The IFC's proposed new policies would result in double standards for the World Bank Group: one set of standards for the public sector, and a weaker, more discretionary approach for the private sector. As a public institution with poverty alleviation and sustainable development at its core mandate, the World Bank should not give the private sector special treatment."

Notes

[1] Friends of the Earth, War on Want, World Development Movement, Forest Peoples Programme, Indigenous Peoples Links, The Cornerhouse and the Bretton Woods Project are boycotting the London Consultations. A copy of the letter sent to the IFC in Sept is available from Friends of the Earth's media team.

[2] Common Concerns:

1. Concerns with the Public Consultation Process include:

just four months. The timeline appears to be driven by an arbitrary internal desire to complete the

process before next February when the current Executive Vice President, Peter Woicke, is expected to leave.

consultation process has already formally begun. For instance, many of the details of the policy revision will be taken up in what the IFC is calling implementation guides. None of these guides are in the public domain.

[3] FT September 3^rd 2004