In the field of trade, for instance, with the extension of the "Economic Community" to envelope larger and larger number of countries, the developing countries often find themselves in a position of lesser rather than real preference. Given that developing countries deserve a special treatment over industrialised countries, the minimum to be ensured is parity with those within the Community itself with reference to exports of the former's manufactured goods. Otherwise, what does the Generalised Scheme of Preference really mean as far as vast communities like Europe are concerned?
On the question of transfer of resources, I think the time has come when we have to focus more and more on net rather than gross transfers. Countries like mine have to spend some 30 per cent and more of our export earnings to meet debt obligations on past credits. In our case, while the new aid we have received in recent years has been of the order of some S 900 million per year, debt payments already amount to S 650 million per year. Also, while aid which in most cases means credits, is tied as far as most bilateral sources are concerned, repayments have to be made in convertible currency. This is patently unfair. At any rate, when debt payments reach high proportions, the question arises whether a certain order of net transfer of resources is not better achieved by an adjustment of the debt burden rather than by continuing increases in new gross aid commitments which would be necessary in the face of continually rising debt service payments.
May I also invite your attention to another sphere of international economic participation in which more serious efforts are yet to begin. I am referring to the question of the transfer of technology from the developed to the developing countries. Technical assistance all along has been interpreted restrictively, say in agriculture or family planning and in a narrow context.