European Union

Post-2015 intergovernmental negotiations - 24 July, New York - Speaking points
Co-facilitators,
On behalf of the EU and its Member States, let me thank you warmly for your leadership and the way you have conducted our discussions this week. Let me also thank all Member States and stakeholders for their constructive engagement. We have tried to share our views in the same constructive spirit and will continue to do so. Looking towards next week, I would like to share a few reflections on some key points for us:
1. A key measure of our collective success so far has been to bring together the post MDGs and the post Rio processes, into an integrated effort that will bring much more than the sum of these processes taken individually. We believe that there is a lot of common ground in the room to continue to reflect better this transformative approach and added value in the outcome document. This is why we have proposed comments and drafting suggestions to make the Declaration set out more clearly the transformative features of the agenda (universality, integration, balance, participatory and inclusive nature) as well as the overarching objectives of poverty eradication and sustainable development. In this context, we also welcome the references to human rights and gender equality and believe that these could be reinforced.
For the same reason, we support the preamble as currently structured and the proposed 5 "Ps" which provide a compelling, communicable and action-oriented narrative. It is important to strengthen the integration and interlinkages and to avoid any form of prioritization. All five "P" are equally important, interrelated and should be articulated at an equal level. These messages remain a key for the future implementation of our transformative agenda and its ownership by all, leaders, civil society and the private sector.
We believe we need also a better narrative of what the new Global Partnership means and the principles that underpin it. This is why some sections of the Declaration – particularly 'Our shared principles', 'The new agenda' and 'Implementation’ must still be improved.
There are a number of other issues in the text where we still have concerns. These include, among others: the problematic references to CBDR, policy space, cultural values, the family and right to development. We have also heard some references to divisive issues like unilateral economic measures and we would like to say very clearly that in our view we should not bring these divisive issues to our Agenda.
Co-facilitators,
It is crucial for us to reaffirm the principles of the Millennium Declaration. The Millenium Declaration which has been at the origin of the MDGs, is, alongside the Rio Declaration, one of the main basis of our work. This must be fully reflected.
On CBDR, we all know that this will be a delicate issue in our discussions. We think we all agree that our agenda must combine i) the recognition that each country has the primary responsibility for and ownership of its own development and ii) the articulation of the necessary differentiation of countries that have different capabilities. We are fully ready to discuss how to reflect this. However, CBDR is a concept which reflects differentiation only in the context of global environmental degradation issues and cannot cover our whole agenda. This is why we are opposed to singling it out among all the Rio principles.
We have also heard calls to integrate the "chapeau" of the OWG report in the outcome document. However, the current draft declaration already outlines the various elements of the outcome, including the goals and targets, in a short and communicable way. Therefore, as we have consistently stated, we fail to see the usefulness of adding this "chapeau" which in any case had a more limited scope. On the contrary, we believe that including the chapeau would create duplications, incoherence and redundancies and would only complicate the document. We would rather encourage partners to engage on the draft Declaration.
2. On the issue of goals and targets, we have come a long way together in the last 2 years. We have overall an integrated and transformative set of coherent goals and targets. We need now to finalize the last details. On this, our position is clear. We welcome the integration of the technical proofing to the targets as proposed by you, including adjusting target 14(c), for which we are encouraged by ongoing contacts.
Co-facilitators, we have heard your question concerning the possible modification on target 17.2 as well as the possible inclusion of references to LLDCs. It would be useful for us to better understand the actual scope of the change proposed before we can provide our detailed views. However, from what we understood, the proposed changes do not follow the criteria set for the technical review exercise and therefore should not be integrated in it. In addition, we think that the technical review exercise should be limited to the 20 targets that you have recommended. This list was made in a careful manner that preserves the content and balance of the OWG proposal, which is also a priority for the EU.
3. In the same spirit of bringing together processes to best support the new agenda, we welcome the Addis Ababa Action Agenda, and its full integration is now fundamental. The Addis Ababa Action Agenda, to be annexed to the September outcome, is an integral part of the post-2015 agenda and, together with Goal 17 and the goal specific means of implementation targets set out under the individual goals, is fundamental to its effective delivery. Bringing all means together to support our new endeavour will serve us best. Annexing the AAAA to the September outcome to be endorsed by Heads of States and Government will give it the visibility and political support it deserves. The Global Partnership and Means of Implementation section of the text must describe this integration more fully. As for Goal 17 and the goal-specific means of implementation, as we have already said, these elements are crucial for the agenda but should appear only once in the document. We have listened carefully to the various arguments this week. Our preference is for them to be reflected in chapter 3 since this would give more prominence and substance to the MoI section of the new agenda.
4. Finally, if we are serious about delivering on what our Heads of States and Government will endorse in September, and building on our experience with the MDGs, we need to be in a position to track our collective progress regularly. This is why, as regards the critical section on monitoring and review, we are looking forward to strengthened language on vision, ambition and purpose. It is not about being prescriptive. It is about having a useful tool to measure if we are making progress in the implementation. We are convinced we all should commit to regularly conduct reviews and voluntarily participate on global level. Our agenda will only be implemented effectively if the Follow Up and Review framework monitors progress against goals and targets and against the Addis agenda in a fully integrated way.

Co-facilitators, we look forward to the negotiations next week. We still have difficult issues to solve but we believe that if we all engage in the negotiations in a constructive spirit, we can finalize our work.
We trust and appreciate your continued leadership and are confident that we can conclude by 31st July. Thank you.