The World [Bank-Egypt] We Want: Country Partnership Framework, 2015–2019

A group of substantive active civil society organizations took part in consultative talks held by the World Bank with various parties in Egypt, as it seeks to solicit opinions on Egypt’s Country Partnership Framework for 2015–19, which governs the Bank’s policies in Egypt.

The participating organizations represent a various fields of the human rights and development, particularly the ESC rights. They expressed their comfort with WB’s step to open a dialogue on its policies, and were especially pleased that the talks were held with organizations and experts in the governorates of Cairo, Alexandria and Aswan, rather than only the capital. However, the CSOs recurrently emphasized that the talks will not be useful for the target groups unless there is a serious dialogue with the government as well, the Bank’s main partner in drafting and implementing the framework for cooperation.

Some of the pivotal notes we can extract from the meeting, respecting the content, process and efficacy of the consultations:

• The schedule for talks was not released sufficiently in advance, and the consultations included numerous members of the private sector and representatives of business association, particularly in Cairo. The next time such talks are organized, the World Bank should make a greater effort to better represent Egyptian civil society and to announce the talks through multiple channels well in advance.

• There was no substantive discussion of the orientation or preliminary points of the Country Partnership Framework, which the World Bank Group should first present to the attendees.

• This style greatly limited the effectiveness of the talks since it did not open up a genuine space to debate and discuss the work of the World Bank, its development model or the problems with this model. In addition, using a vote as a way to organize priorities is misplaced.

• Attendees were not representative of all of society and their composition was clearly reflected in the outcome of the vote. It would have been better to open up a free discussion to allow an exchange of opinions and ideas, without a vote whose results are determined by the number of attendees and their own leanings.

• The Civil Society attendees proposed the principle of integrated development as an alternative to the logic of priorities. Integrated development is based on creating full opportunity for the community through linking education, health and jobs that guarantee workers their full rights with the nature of planning and project management in the framework of sectorial integration.

• Civil society organizations stressed the importance of this integrated outlook in guaranteeing human rights and generating equal, effective development. Projects cannot be funded without guarantees for labor rights and against environmental harm through a comprehensive assessment of the environmental map in Egypt. This requires the World Bank, in this stage of exploratory research, to engage in a comprehensive, fair review from a rights perspective, to avoid funding projects that involve the same problems seen in past projects.

• Civil society insisted that the World Bank should use the terms “clean energy-generating projects” or “renewable energy-generating project” rather than “energy-generating projects.” It also emphasized the importance of the right to social protection and the right to social security, which entails changes to the World Bank’s modus operandi. These concepts imply an end to the creation of poverty, as opposed to “Social Safety Nets,” which do no more than combat the poverty arising from a model of development characterized by structural and rights-based problems.