World Bank and IMF reform plan 'too timid'
By Alan Beattie in Washington, February 12, 2003

Proposals from the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund to give more of a say to poor countries are under fire by development campaigners for their narrowness and timidity.

The draft suggestions - seen by the Financial Times - follow years of demands from developing countries for a bigger voice in IMF and World Bank decision-making. More consultation of poor countries was also promised in the "Monterrey consensus" on global economic governance adopted at the United Nations conference in Mexico last year.

The report from IMF and World Bank staff, which is likely to be considered by the bank's executive directors on Thursday, will be put to the joint IMF-World Bank ministerial steering committee at the institutions' spring meetings in April.
The report, which even some staff from the two institutions privately say does not go far enough, suggests narrow technocratic changes such as increasing the voting power of poorer countries, changing the majorities needed for certain types of decisions, and increasing the staffing and technical support available to executive directors from poor countries.

One suggestion is to expand the 24-member executive boards by one member to spread the representation of developing countries less thinly. Currently, two executive board members represent all sub-Saharan Africa while five of the rich Group of Seven countries - the UK, US, Germany, Japan and France - have a director each.
Development campaigners were incredulous. Oliver Buston, senior advocacy officer at the international development agency Oxfam, said: "Proposing a modest reshuffling of the votes and some capacity-building is inadequate. The report does not begin to address the most serious problems of governance of the two institutions, including the fact that their heads are chosen by political patronage on grounds of nationality."
Traditionally, the president of the World Bank is in effect chosen by the US administration, while European governments choose the managing director of the IMF from among themselves.

The IMF has recently reviewed voting allocations, without recommending that shares between different countries be amended.