6th Session of Intergovernmental Negotiations on Post-2015 Development Agenda
Statement delivered by Mr. Amit Narang, Counsellor, Permanent Mission of India
on Means of Implementation
June 25, 2015
Thank you Mr. Co-Facilitator,
We fully subscribe to the views expressed by South Africa on behalf of the Group of 77 on this section. Indeed, we always do!
We are happy that you have placed all the means of implementation targets of SDGs including Goal 17 in the means of implementation section. They do belong here, but not merely as a placeholder. We expect these targets to form the core of this section going forward. We expect the FfD outcome to supplement and add-to these targets.
The draft FfD outcome document, which we hope will be agreed shortly, speaks of ‘inter-linkages’ between the MOI and the FfD outcome, which in our view is a helpful way to frame this relationship, rather than saying one is the pillar of another or will replace it.
This section will eventually be comprised of the SDG MOI targets together with the FfD outcome, and also the decision on Technology Facilitation Mechanism.
We are not very sure we need the introductory framing paras that you have provided in this section, which in any case should be fully consistent with the substance of SDG MOI targets and the Addis Ababa outcome.
Mr. Co-Facilitator,
We are flexible in how to integrate the FfD outcome into this outcome document. We are conscious that integrating the full Addis outcome may make this document overly cumbersome, while re-negotiating the FfD outcome into a lite version, as some had suggested, would also be difficult. We could therefore simply refer to the Addis Ababa outcome in the form of a single paragraph which also speaks to its interlinkages with the SDG MOI component. The full Addis document can then be annexed to the Summit outcome document. This would also preserve its inter-linked but independent status as a document agreed to by Ministers.
In response to the statement made by EU, our view is that if this relationship is handled well – and there is no reason why it wouldn’t be – while we would not discount it altogether, we do not foresee that there will be a need for substantive negotiation or re-negotiation of this section going forward.
Mr. Co-Facilitator,
As we conclude this session today and look forward to seeing you again after the Addis Ababa Conference, I just wanted to signal that our preference would be that we remain strategic in our approach to the outcome document. Drastic changes and wholesale amendments to this zero draft, which was received well by the membership, would be avoidable.
We have a precious two weeks left to conclude and timely conclusion on July 31st would itself be a powerful signal of our common purpose and resolve to work together to change the world through the new agenda.
Delay, like failure, should not be an option.
Finally Mr. Co-Facilitator,
Even though we have had our say on common but differentiated responsibilities, just in case it wasn’t clear, we strongly support this principle!
Thank you.
*****
