status, many of those countries had immense space and flexibility to grow in an uninhibited environment. further, when the present day rich countries were growing, ( from per capita income of us dollars 1, 000 to us dollars 10, 000 ), they faced very few obstacles in the movement of capital and labour. they did not have to be overly concerned about human or labour rights. they were free to impose trade quotas and grant very visible and obvious subsidies to their local entrepreneurs and farmers. they were not subjected to stringent global standards for copyrights. they were not desperately worried about safeguarding the ozone layer or the environment. they did not have to make too much of a fuss about money laundering. they did not spend expensive professional time and money on compliance tests. they did not have to deal with 24 x 7 media reports. the list goes on. some even had ready access to the natural and human resources of other countries, which they ruled. but today, many low - income countries, despite their potential to grow are functioning in an “ international environment ” that is “ controlling ” almost all economic activities. accordingly, they are seriously constrained by these stringent benchmarks, however wonderful they may be, which from a rapid development point of view, poses serious and continuous challenges. for example, at a time when these countries are desperately attempting to break free from the poverty trap, the allocation of resources to them by way of aid inflows by wealthy nations have been reducing. in fact, the net official resource inflows to developing countries were negative in 2005 and projected to remain negative in the next few years as well. in the meantime, although the commonwealth group supported the doha declaration of wto and were moving towards the direction of freest possible flow of multilateral trade on terms fair and equitable to all, while taking account of the special requirements of developing countries, the current multilateral trade negotiations have not been moving in the right direction. hence, it is clear that not only are the present day poor nations struggling in the emerging, highly complex and controlled economic environment, they are also facing reduced resource transfers, and not being accorded special treatment they should be afforded in order to propel them out of poverty. some may however argue that the tremendous benefits of globalization has levelled the playing field and that advantages are available to any and all who care to access, and it is just unfortunate if some persons are unable to take advantage of these conditions. nevertheless, i

believe we are all aware that weaker communities have lesser chances of access and that situation leads to widening even further, the ever - widening gap. therefore, it is timely and appropriate that this forum addresses the need to impress upon the more wealthy nations to increase aid flows, open out greater trading opportunities, and move towards higher investment and resource build - up in the lower income countries. lest i be misunderstood, let me add that, not for a moment am i suggesting that the progressive steps the world and the international community have taken over the past few decades in developing new standards and norms are in any way, inappropriate or unwelcome. those initiatives were certainly necessary and have been beneficial for the overall advancement of society. but, we must, at the same time, collectively address the ever growing constraints arising out of the inflexibilities and restrictions imposed in the transfer of capital, wealth, skills, knowledge and the imposition of new standards, which may consciously or unconsciously act as subtle barriers to poverty alleviation. your excellencies, honorable ministers, distinguished guests, in order for all of us to appreciate the fact that what i am saying is not something new, let me now quote a principle as set out in the singapore declaration, and affirmed in harare. “ our aim is to achieve the freest possible flow of international trade on terms fair and equitable to all, taking into account the special requirements of the developing countries, and to encourage the flow of adequate resources, including governmental and private resources, to the developing countries, bearing in mind the importance of doing this in true spirit of partnership, and of establishing for this purpose in the developing countries, conditions which are conducive to sustained investment and growth ”. while this principle enunciates a very laudable and noble philosophy the unfortunate reality may be that the plethora of what we may call “ worthy restrictions ”, ( albeit they may be for the greater good of mankind ), may be actually but unwittingly assisting to keep the same developing countries in a tighter trap of poverty. the powerful message that emerges from this situation is clear. the present lowincome countries, when they have to struggle in this unsympathetic environment, need more understanding ; greater allocations for funding and investment ; increased direct aid flows ; and tangible support and direct concessions to recognize satisfactory “ compliance ”. at this stage, i would like to acknowledge a step in the right direction that has been followed