WSSD: Facing Highest-Ever Summit Bill, Host Looks to Profit

By Thalif Deen Reprint | | Print |

Thalif Deen and Farah Khan

JOHANNESBURG, Aug 28 2002 (IPS) - The World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) will cost more than three times the price of the 1992 Earth Summit, a figure that has revived the chorus of voices opposed to massive U.N. gatherings.

The Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, described as the largest meeting of world leaders at the time, cost about 15 million U.S. dollars. But the price for the WSSD is being pegged at 50-55 million dollars, and counting, with the biggest chunk of the bill being paid by a developing country – host South Africa.

The nation has already paid 20 million dollars worth of bills, but the figure grows beyond half the total tally if one accounts for the cash raised by para-state companies.

The electricity utility, Eskom, the telecommunications company, Telkom, and the national carrier, South African Airways are key sponsors, with firms like De Beers and Standard Bank coming to the party as well.

The increased cost of the World Summit is far above the inflationary factor that is used to assess the real costs of U.N. conferences.

Since 1992, the United Nations has hosted a series of mega conferences on key issues: human rights (Vienna, 1993), population (Cairo, 1994), social development (Copenhagen, 1995), women (Beijing 1995), habitat (Istanbul, 1996), food (Rome, 1996), and financing for development (Monterrey, 2001). The United Nations also hosted the Millennium Summit in 2000 in New York.

According to the U.N.’s department of public information, most conferences cost about 1.8 million to 3.4 million dollars. The only exception was Rio.

The original WSSD budget was about 46.3 million dollars, according to Crispin Olver, director-general of South Africa’s department of environmental affairs and tourism.

But since last year’s Sep. 11 terrorist attacks on the United States, more security was factored into the budget. “We want to make sure that our security planning is absolutely water-tight,” Olver said.

At a U.N. press conference in February, Olver said that the South African government contributed about 17 million dollars. The rest came mostly from donor nations and corporations.

But the host government is not complaining. South Africa has calculated that it can make billions of dollars in the long run thanks to the exposure of the capital Johannesburg and the entire nation to the tens of thousands of delegates – many high-ranking diplomats – visiting for a fortnight.

The WSSD has again opened up the debate on the usefulness of international talk-fests. In a recent op-ed piece in the New York Times, U.N. Under-Secretary-General Shashi Tharoor argued that it is silence that isolates people.

He agreed that many international gatherings are consumed by what T.S. Eliot called “the intolerable wrestle with words and meanings”.

But such talk, says Tharoor, “lays down markers, articulates aspirations, identifies common approaches, reveals gaps and helps bridge them. Without talk, there would never be agreement; without agreement, there would be no action”.

A former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Richard Holbrooke, disagrees. “Thousands of people gather, spending millions, even tens of millions of dollars. They preach to the converted, hash over longstanding differences, and pass empty and grandiose resolutions.”

Holbrooke also points out that the money for conferences could be better spent directly on the problem being discussed.

Madeleine Albright, a former U.S. envoy to the United Nations and later secretary of state, even called for a moratorium on all U.N. conferences “until we have absorbed and acted upon the results of the most recent series”.

Conscious of this criticism, the U.N. Secretariat last month warned all senior officials to avoid extravagance and splurging in Johannesburg.

“We must keep in mind that this conference (WSSD) is taking place in the midst of a major food crisis in southern Africa, affecting 13 million people,” Iqbal Riza, chef de cabinet to U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan, told U.N. staffers before they flew into Johannesburg last week.

Riza also warned division heads to avoid fielding large numbers of U.N. staff “which could be perceived as an obvious waste of personnel and financial resources”.

It would be wise, said Riza, “to refrain from excessive levels of hospitality, and any event sponsored by the United Nations should be of modest, even frugal, dimensions”.

Last week, in a widely circulated email, a former Latin American ambassador to the United Nations and currently a senior government official in his country, complained of price gouging and “unsatisfactory arrangements for WSSD”.

“Prices for all services are higher than normal, particularly hotels and local transportation. Delegates attending the three-day, high-level segment only are being requested to pay for all 10 days of the summit, with no exceptions,” he added.

The former envoy said his country, currently going through a severe cash crisis, could not afford to field a big delegation at prevailing prices in Johannesburg.

Speculation is the order of the day in the capital. Hotel prices have more than doubled and homes are being rented out at exorbitant rates, prompting a warning from South African Tourism chief, Cheryl Carolus that locals should not bite the hand that feeds them.

South Africa won a bid to host WSSD against strong competition from Indonesia. As a consolation, the Indonesians were given the privilege of hosting the last preparatory committee meeting in Bali in June.