Hungary
Statement of Hungary
on Coherence between respective outcome documents, outstanding issues and way forward
H.E. Amb. Zsolt Hetesy, Deputy Permanent Representative
Joint Session of the FfD and Post-2015 processes
24 April, 2015
Hungary supports the statement of the European Union, and adds the following comments in its national capacity.
The processes are at their most important cross-roads. We have left Rio with the Future We Want Document, that is, with a common vision.
Based on the proposal of the OWG on SDGs, consensus is emerging with regard to exactly WHAT we want to achieve. We have a Plan.
To agree on the Future we Build, now we need a blueprint. More precisely, we need a single blueprint in the New York Summit outcome, to which the OWG-proposal is part and parcel as is the Addis Outcome.
To create a single development agenda we need to weave the tracks together, take care of unfinished business in the IGN process, answer all the “HOW” questions including financing, implementation, monitoring and follow-up. How can it be done? How can coherence be achieved?
The ambition of the OWG proposals must be matched when it comes to implementation. No doubt about it. However, for successful implementation, we also have to match the logic of the OWG package.
First, if the OWG package is about a paradigm change at all levels, the same paradigm change should also be embraced when working on implementation.
Second, if a universal development package assigns tasks to all MSs, the implementation package must cater to Member States. The goals and targets, the cross-cutting issues of equality, inclusivity, the “leave no one behind” principle create tasks at the national level for the developed countries too. This also has to be recognized.
Third, if the OWG package is integrated and interrelated in its nature, plans of implementation must also avoid silo thinking. The same logic of acknowledging drivers, enablers and bottlenecks will have to be applied. As we clearly heard yesterday morning, this goes much beyond issues related to how much money is available.
Since it is a joint FFD-IGN session, let’s talk about financing. If the SGD package prescribes tasks that require more resources than governments, and “old money” can provide, we have to find ways and means that bring additional resources to the table, including new forms of financing, and new sources of financing.
More importantly, the paradigm change in the SDG package requires that money, regardless its source, (ODA, FDI, or other), is to be spent on sustainable development with all its three pillars taken into consideration. Development that is not sustainable is by definition not development either, for it will be only temporary improvement. Development that is not sustainable will negate the intergenerational compact, deny the future, and betray the people.
In that regards, we have heard some negative opinions on the role of the private sector, and these opinions could be well-founded time to time.
But here come the bad news: Because of its share in world economy, if the private sector does not move towards the path of sustainability, we will have major problems with implementation. Government resources, ODA, FDI private sector, all will have to pull in the right direction.
So instead of criticizing sectors or methods like PPPs we simply say that the overarching principle of “do it sustainably” must be valid for all actions. The OWG package needs transformation, changes of behavior at the levels of parliaments, governments, local governments, in societies, financing, the private sector, volunteer and philanthropic involvement. True, some of these stakeholders do not usually read or respond to GA resolutions, but they respond to regulation, opportunities and incentives even at national level. We would like to see the enhancement of these elements in the outcome document.
Mr. Co-facilitators,
In our view, it is coherent logic and matching ambition that will create coherence between the two tracks. This is what will enable the co-facilitators to “align the stars for us”.
On outstanding issues: The way forward on implementation
As yesterday’s morning session bears witness to this, if the OWG package gives tasks to all stakeholders, those players must retain certain ownership in the implementation. Furthermore, as we have stated, stakeholders must pool resources and pull in the same direction.
For this we also have to make sure that adequate platform is created for their involvement, and coordination. Partnerships initiated by the Secretary-General and others on important MDG topics have clearly proven their usefulness. This needs scaling up and new additions as the Secretary-General has proposed for years. Therefore, we would look forward to receiving new and concrete suggestions from the SG on the framework of Global Partnerships. Here, we sign up to the proposed Canadian definition of Global Partnership and Global Partnerships.
Related to this we believe that for a successful implementation of a new agenda the UN will also have to undergo a fit for purpose exercise.
As relying on agreed language cannot create a new development paradigm, old mandates will not be sufficient to implement it. For some of the goals and targets, it is hard to pinpoint an institutional home within the UN.
For the success of the Post 2015 agenda, it is extremely important that the UN retains the same central role in implementation that the organization currently enjoys in the case of stage-setting.
---
on Coherence between respective outcome documents, outstanding issues and way forward
H.E. Amb. Zsolt Hetesy, Deputy Permanent Representative
Joint Session of the FfD and Post-2015 processes
24 April, 2015
Hungary supports the statement of the European Union, and adds the following comments in its national capacity.
The processes are at their most important cross-roads. We have left Rio with the Future We Want Document, that is, with a common vision.
Based on the proposal of the OWG on SDGs, consensus is emerging with regard to exactly WHAT we want to achieve. We have a Plan.
To agree on the Future we Build, now we need a blueprint. More precisely, we need a single blueprint in the New York Summit outcome, to which the OWG-proposal is part and parcel as is the Addis Outcome.
To create a single development agenda we need to weave the tracks together, take care of unfinished business in the IGN process, answer all the “HOW” questions including financing, implementation, monitoring and follow-up. How can it be done? How can coherence be achieved?
The ambition of the OWG proposals must be matched when it comes to implementation. No doubt about it. However, for successful implementation, we also have to match the logic of the OWG package.
First, if the OWG package is about a paradigm change at all levels, the same paradigm change should also be embraced when working on implementation.
Second, if a universal development package assigns tasks to all MSs, the implementation package must cater to Member States. The goals and targets, the cross-cutting issues of equality, inclusivity, the “leave no one behind” principle create tasks at the national level for the developed countries too. This also has to be recognized.
Third, if the OWG package is integrated and interrelated in its nature, plans of implementation must also avoid silo thinking. The same logic of acknowledging drivers, enablers and bottlenecks will have to be applied. As we clearly heard yesterday morning, this goes much beyond issues related to how much money is available.
Since it is a joint FFD-IGN session, let’s talk about financing. If the SGD package prescribes tasks that require more resources than governments, and “old money” can provide, we have to find ways and means that bring additional resources to the table, including new forms of financing, and new sources of financing.
More importantly, the paradigm change in the SDG package requires that money, regardless its source, (ODA, FDI, or other), is to be spent on sustainable development with all its three pillars taken into consideration. Development that is not sustainable is by definition not development either, for it will be only temporary improvement. Development that is not sustainable will negate the intergenerational compact, deny the future, and betray the people.
In that regards, we have heard some negative opinions on the role of the private sector, and these opinions could be well-founded time to time.
But here come the bad news: Because of its share in world economy, if the private sector does not move towards the path of sustainability, we will have major problems with implementation. Government resources, ODA, FDI private sector, all will have to pull in the right direction.
So instead of criticizing sectors or methods like PPPs we simply say that the overarching principle of “do it sustainably” must be valid for all actions. The OWG package needs transformation, changes of behavior at the levels of parliaments, governments, local governments, in societies, financing, the private sector, volunteer and philanthropic involvement. True, some of these stakeholders do not usually read or respond to GA resolutions, but they respond to regulation, opportunities and incentives even at national level. We would like to see the enhancement of these elements in the outcome document.
Mr. Co-facilitators,
In our view, it is coherent logic and matching ambition that will create coherence between the two tracks. This is what will enable the co-facilitators to “align the stars for us”.
On outstanding issues: The way forward on implementation
As yesterday’s morning session bears witness to this, if the OWG package gives tasks to all stakeholders, those players must retain certain ownership in the implementation. Furthermore, as we have stated, stakeholders must pool resources and pull in the same direction.
For this we also have to make sure that adequate platform is created for their involvement, and coordination. Partnerships initiated by the Secretary-General and others on important MDG topics have clearly proven their usefulness. This needs scaling up and new additions as the Secretary-General has proposed for years. Therefore, we would look forward to receiving new and concrete suggestions from the SG on the framework of Global Partnerships. Here, we sign up to the proposed Canadian definition of Global Partnership and Global Partnerships.
Related to this we believe that for a successful implementation of a new agenda the UN will also have to undergo a fit for purpose exercise.
As relying on agreed language cannot create a new development paradigm, old mandates will not be sufficient to implement it. For some of the goals and targets, it is hard to pinpoint an institutional home within the UN.
For the success of the Post 2015 agenda, it is extremely important that the UN retains the same central role in implementation that the organization currently enjoys in the case of stage-setting.
---
Stakeholders