Intervention delivered by Ambassador Michael Grant, Deputy Permanent Representative, Permanent Mission of Canada
Friday, 22 May
We have made steady progress since January, and we thank the co-facilitators for guiding our efforts. We have benefited greatly from the open and inclusive process that you have encouraged from the start.
Canada believes that a multiplicity of voices will continue to be very important as we move forward, and we would strongly encourage that our future discussions maintain the same spirit. We also feel that a continued partnership with civil society and the private sector is essential.
It is encouraging that many of the components of the agenda are already well developed. As we move into the next phase, it will be important not to lose sight of the progress we have made. As we do so, Canada believes that we will all be best served if we empower the co-chairs to continue to hold the pen on subsequent drafts.
We trust that you will strive to include content that can enjoy the broadest agreement possible, and we count on your strong guidance as we work towards a successful outcome.
On the Declaration, we had a rich exchange in February, and already have a solid foundation to build upon. The discussion document you circulated during that session reflects the many points of convergence among member states, and we believe it should serve as your foundation as you prepare the Zero Draft. We appreciated its concise nature, and the fact that it had a clear focus on poverty eradication and on the poorest and most vulnerable. We also strongly support references to the rule of law, strengthening governance and institutions and peaceful societies.
In line with some thoughts we have put forward on Global Partnership, we believe the Declaration would be the ideal place to highlight Global Partnership as an overarching principle that embodies the core values we must all champion. These include solidarity, cooperation, human rights, equality, mutual accountability, effectiveness and sustainability. We see the concept of a renewed Global Partnership as the foundation for all our efforts over the next 15 years, and believe it merits being highlighted right up front.
As we have outlined previously, we see a real opportunity to break from past UN traditions, especially when it comes to the Declaration. We would strongly favor a tight and concise document that inspires and resonates with people around the world. We believe our next discussion on the Declaration should focus on how it can most effectively communicate the goals and targets to as broad an audience as possible, possibly using the Secretary General’s six essential elements as a means of highlighting key themes and telling a simple yet compelling narrative. The declaration should also be clear on the need for the UN system to be ready to implement our ambitious agenda.
On the goals and targets, some countries, including Canada, have come a long way from their original positions, and have made significant compromises in an effort to be constructive.
As we said yesterday, we believe the TST document is a constructive way forward and would urge the co-facilitators to heed the different voices on this issue and find a middle ground in a fair and objective manner.
This is a critical issues, at the very heart of our agenda, that needs to be confronted head on.
On the issue of the reservations, we have difficulty accepting the notion that they would be included in our outcome document, as we do not see them as an intrinsic part of the OWG report. Simply put, we do not consider it reasonable to ask our leader to sign off on reservations made by other governments.
On Means of Implementation, Canada strongly believes that the focus going forward should be on how we can effectively incorporate the FfD outcome, as agreed in Addis, into the post-2015 agenda, to ensure that this key element is given the prominence it deserves. We believe this could be easily addressed through an endorsement of the Addis outcome in our Declaration. At the very least, this chapter should serve as a placeholder in early drafts pending adoption of the Addis Accord. In terms of coordination between post-2015 and FfD, Canada believes technology and all other MoI would be better dealt with in our discussions on financing for development. We would encourage the co-facilitators to continue to work with their FfD colleagues to ensure there is no duplication.
On Follow-up and Review, we need to determine how much detail we wish to include in the outcome document of the Summit. From Canada’s perspective, our focus should be on laying out the main principles, identifying key mechanisms through a meaningful mapping exercise, establishing important milestones, and agreeing on where decisions will be made with respect to follow-up and review post-Summit.
We should strive for an agenda that is inspirational, and that motivates citizens and governments, as well as civil society and the private sector, to take action. The way in which we communicate our agenda will be critical towards this goal. We need to develop a compelling narrative that is simple and accessible enough to allow citizens of the world, particularly the poorest and the most vulnerable, to use the agenda as a mechanism by which they can hold their governments accountable.
Finally, we would reiterate a suggestion we made at the beginning of our deliberations regarding the title of the agenda. While this may seem like a small issue, we believe that at some point down the line, it should be subject to an exchange of views. We definitely think that we can do better than the “Post-2015 Development Agenda”, and would strongly encourage engaging our civil society partners and young people around the world to help us come up with a title that fully reflects the ambition and spirit of our agenda.
