Australia
Australian Mission to the United Nations E-mail australia@un.int
150 East 42nd Street, New York NY 10017-5612 Ph 212 - 351 6600 Fax 212 - 351 6610 www.AustraliaUN.org
AUSTRALIA
AUSTRALIA
31 July 2015
United Nations Headquarters, New York
Post-2015 Development Agenda Revised Draft Outcome Document
Statement by Kushla Munro, Assistant Secretary, Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade
Thank you Mr Co-facilitators for your efforts and hard work in bringing us to this point.
We would note the revised document still takes us out of our comfort zone on a number of key areas and a number of our suggestions have not been taken on board. However we believe the revised draft is a step in the right direction.
We are committed to working constructively to conclude negotiations, and have therefore focused on our most pressing concerns.
Mr Co-facilitators,
We are open to the second preamble and agree with the points raised by Timor Leste that the important link with peace has been severed by creating two sentences rather than one in the opening paragraph, and we support their proposed text.
In paragraph 12, we continue to oppose the elevation of one Rio+20 principle over others.
We should work on the basis of paragraph 31alt but note it needs to align with the Lima language in calling for an ambitious agreement.
In paragraph 36, we should insert the principle of ‘shared responsibility’.
In paragraph 38, we should delete reference to the ‘wide range of other supporting policies and measures on favourable terms, including preferential terms for developing countries’.
In paragraph 46, we support the comments from United Arab Emirates on behalf of the Arab Group that the last sentence appears to be overly melodramatic and support their suggested text change.
- 2 -
In the footnote of para 50, a simple reference to the SDG OWG resolution is all that is required.
On follow-up and review, we support the call from the US to delete the word ‘official’ from 74a. Global review will be much enriched by the use of data from multiple sources.
Lastly, Mr Co-facilitators, we all foresaw the dangers of covering old debates on means of implementation and the Global Partnership.
This revised draft upsets the balance from Addis. It is not appropriate to selectively pick and blend sentences together, to draw out individual concepts from Addis for special attention or to re-elaborate on the fine balance of language agreed just two weeks ago.
Last night we heard a number of examples of how the Addis package has been unravelled.
New language has been introduced — for example in paragraph 64.
Agreed language has been amended and concepts conflated — for example the first sentence of paragraph 63 refers to ‘official development assistance’ which is not in the equivalent paragraph from Addis. This same paragraph combines language from four different paragraphs of Addis, removing valuable context and conceptual clarity.
And important concepts are missing – for example, as raised by Benin yesterday evening, language around countries commitments to LDCs is missing. Similarly the text does not include paragraph 58 of Addis which deals with development effectiveness and the key role of the Global Partnership for Effective Development Cooperation.
In conclusion, we consider this is a high risk strategy that we do not see paying off in the time available. As we and others such as India called for earlier this week, a safer consensus based path could be achieved through a concise three paragraph section. This section should affirm our collective political commitment to implementation; recognise that the full implementation of the Addis Agenda its policies and actions is critical to the realisation of the SDGs; and outline the vision for the Global Partnership.
150 East 42nd Street, New York NY 10017-5612 Ph 212 - 351 6600 Fax 212 - 351 6610 www.AustraliaUN.org
AUSTRALIA
AUSTRALIA
31 July 2015
United Nations Headquarters, New York
Post-2015 Development Agenda Revised Draft Outcome Document
Statement by Kushla Munro, Assistant Secretary, Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade
Thank you Mr Co-facilitators for your efforts and hard work in bringing us to this point.
We would note the revised document still takes us out of our comfort zone on a number of key areas and a number of our suggestions have not been taken on board. However we believe the revised draft is a step in the right direction.
We are committed to working constructively to conclude negotiations, and have therefore focused on our most pressing concerns.
Mr Co-facilitators,
We are open to the second preamble and agree with the points raised by Timor Leste that the important link with peace has been severed by creating two sentences rather than one in the opening paragraph, and we support their proposed text.
In paragraph 12, we continue to oppose the elevation of one Rio+20 principle over others.
We should work on the basis of paragraph 31alt but note it needs to align with the Lima language in calling for an ambitious agreement.
In paragraph 36, we should insert the principle of ‘shared responsibility’.
In paragraph 38, we should delete reference to the ‘wide range of other supporting policies and measures on favourable terms, including preferential terms for developing countries’.
In paragraph 46, we support the comments from United Arab Emirates on behalf of the Arab Group that the last sentence appears to be overly melodramatic and support their suggested text change.
- 2 -
In the footnote of para 50, a simple reference to the SDG OWG resolution is all that is required.
On follow-up and review, we support the call from the US to delete the word ‘official’ from 74a. Global review will be much enriched by the use of data from multiple sources.
Lastly, Mr Co-facilitators, we all foresaw the dangers of covering old debates on means of implementation and the Global Partnership.
This revised draft upsets the balance from Addis. It is not appropriate to selectively pick and blend sentences together, to draw out individual concepts from Addis for special attention or to re-elaborate on the fine balance of language agreed just two weeks ago.
Last night we heard a number of examples of how the Addis package has been unravelled.
New language has been introduced — for example in paragraph 64.
Agreed language has been amended and concepts conflated — for example the first sentence of paragraph 63 refers to ‘official development assistance’ which is not in the equivalent paragraph from Addis. This same paragraph combines language from four different paragraphs of Addis, removing valuable context and conceptual clarity.
And important concepts are missing – for example, as raised by Benin yesterday evening, language around countries commitments to LDCs is missing. Similarly the text does not include paragraph 58 of Addis which deals with development effectiveness and the key role of the Global Partnership for Effective Development Cooperation.
In conclusion, we consider this is a high risk strategy that we do not see paying off in the time available. As we and others such as India called for earlier this week, a safer consensus based path could be achieved through a concise three paragraph section. This section should affirm our collective political commitment to implementation; recognise that the full implementation of the Addis Agenda its policies and actions is critical to the realisation of the SDGs; and outline the vision for the Global Partnership.
Stakeholders