India
7th Session of the Intergovernmental Negotiations on Post-2015 Development Agenda
Intervention by Mr. Amit Narang, Counsellor, Permanent Mission of India on ‘Means of Implementation/Global Partnership’
July 23, 2015
Thank you Mr. Co-Facilitator for the opportunity to share some comments on Means of Implementation.
At the outset, we would like to offer our sincere condolences on the passing away of the Dean of the Diplomatic Corps the Permanent Representative of Djibouti.
We fully support the intervention of G77 made earlier today. We also support the thoughtful comments made by AOSIS and CARICOM on this issue.
Mr. Co-Facilitator,
We believe that the debate today has been very constructive and useful.
It revealed a high degree of convergence as far as the substance of global partnership/means of implementation is concerned. What remains to be done is to get the packaging right – To annex or not to annex, that is the question!
Mr. Co-Facilitator,
We support the suggestion made by AoSIS that the outcome document must as a start, reaffirm the high political commitment of our leaders to implement the agenda and to mobilize the means of implementation for doing so.
There is clearly consensus in the room, well almost, that the revitalized global partnership for the new agenda consists of the SDG MOIs (goal 17 and the goal-specific MOIs) and the outcome of the Addis Ababa Conference, taken together, as we believe the EU said.
We are also happy that we have a broad agreement, well almost, that the Addis outcome does not replace or substitute the SDG MOIs. It was never meant to.
My delegation has been consistent in taking this view. We have consistently maintained, long before the Addis Ababa Conference took place that the global partnership is contained, first and foremost, in the SDGs and that this will be supported and complemented by the outcome of the Addis Ababa Conference. This position is the same as contained in the modalities resolution for the Addis Conference and has been validated in paragraph 19 of the Addis outcome itself. The section on follow up and review of the Addis outcome also attests that both the FfD outcome and the SDG MOIs are to be followed-up.
The text of the agenda, both the sub-section under the Declaration as well as the section on MOI itself, must therefore articulate this relationship correctly. It must also get the sequencing right. As we said earlier this week, the reference to the Addis outcome in para 33 of the Declaration should be preceded by an affirmation of the centrality of the SDG MOI as the core of the revitalized global partnership.
In so far as the section 3 is concerned, we would prefer the title: “Revitalized global partnership for sustainable development”.
It should have a strong introductory paragraph. For this, we strongly commend the paragraph proposed by the G77. This should affirm that the goal 17 and MOI targets of SDGs are an integral part and core of the revitalized global partnership to be supported by the concrete policies and actions as outlined in the Addis outcome.
There could then be another simple and straightforward paragraph welcoming the Addis Ababa Action Agenda. In our view, welcoming a document is also to endorse it. Besides, we do not understand the import of ‘fully’ endorse. Is there something called ‘partially’ endorse?
We would also recommend that the square brackets around the paragraph on TFM be removed. We also expect the full text of the agreement on TFM contained in paragraph 123 of the Addis outcome to be reproduced in this section. This was the gentlemen’s agreement reached during informals.
Mr. Co-Facilitator,
I would now like to provide some reflections on the two questions asked by Amb. Kamau earlier today.
As regards the placement of the MOI targets, we see no problem with repeating them in both sections 2 and 3. The success and failure of the agenda will depend on the implementation of these MOI targets and as the delegation of Cameroon said yesterday, repetition is the mother of education.
However, if only one of the two places is to be chosen, we would prefer clearly that the MOI targets be kept integrated within the SDGs, which constitute, as everyone agrees, an indivisible set.
I must add that this choice of course would depend upon a correct reference to the MOI targets in section 3. If this reference is not right, we would prefer to reproduce the MOI targets in this section as well.
Secondly, precisely because we welcome the outcome of the Addis Conference, which in our view presents a useful contribution to the revitalized global partnership, we would not support annexing the document to this text.
Annexing it would connote that somehow it is of subsidiary nature and would detract from its independent and stand-alone significance. We also concur with Switzerland that annexing would mean taking into account the issue of reservations.
Besides, I would also note that in case the Addis outcome is annexed, that would make a strong case for annexing the full report of the OWG on SDGs, including its reservations.
Finally, we do not support the notion that we are crafting a ‘new’ global partnership, nor do we agree with the several putative principles that were mentioned by the EU for the partnership. In fact, if at all any such principles are listed, we would request the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities be also unequivocally reaffirmed.
I thank you Mr. Co-Facilitator. We are confident that after the useful discussion today, we should not need to spend too much time on this issue next week.
*****
Intervention by Mr. Amit Narang, Counsellor, Permanent Mission of India on ‘Means of Implementation/Global Partnership’
July 23, 2015
Thank you Mr. Co-Facilitator for the opportunity to share some comments on Means of Implementation.
At the outset, we would like to offer our sincere condolences on the passing away of the Dean of the Diplomatic Corps the Permanent Representative of Djibouti.
We fully support the intervention of G77 made earlier today. We also support the thoughtful comments made by AOSIS and CARICOM on this issue.
Mr. Co-Facilitator,
We believe that the debate today has been very constructive and useful.
It revealed a high degree of convergence as far as the substance of global partnership/means of implementation is concerned. What remains to be done is to get the packaging right – To annex or not to annex, that is the question!
Mr. Co-Facilitator,
We support the suggestion made by AoSIS that the outcome document must as a start, reaffirm the high political commitment of our leaders to implement the agenda and to mobilize the means of implementation for doing so.
There is clearly consensus in the room, well almost, that the revitalized global partnership for the new agenda consists of the SDG MOIs (goal 17 and the goal-specific MOIs) and the outcome of the Addis Ababa Conference, taken together, as we believe the EU said.
We are also happy that we have a broad agreement, well almost, that the Addis outcome does not replace or substitute the SDG MOIs. It was never meant to.
My delegation has been consistent in taking this view. We have consistently maintained, long before the Addis Ababa Conference took place that the global partnership is contained, first and foremost, in the SDGs and that this will be supported and complemented by the outcome of the Addis Ababa Conference. This position is the same as contained in the modalities resolution for the Addis Conference and has been validated in paragraph 19 of the Addis outcome itself. The section on follow up and review of the Addis outcome also attests that both the FfD outcome and the SDG MOIs are to be followed-up.
The text of the agenda, both the sub-section under the Declaration as well as the section on MOI itself, must therefore articulate this relationship correctly. It must also get the sequencing right. As we said earlier this week, the reference to the Addis outcome in para 33 of the Declaration should be preceded by an affirmation of the centrality of the SDG MOI as the core of the revitalized global partnership.
In so far as the section 3 is concerned, we would prefer the title: “Revitalized global partnership for sustainable development”.
It should have a strong introductory paragraph. For this, we strongly commend the paragraph proposed by the G77. This should affirm that the goal 17 and MOI targets of SDGs are an integral part and core of the revitalized global partnership to be supported by the concrete policies and actions as outlined in the Addis outcome.
There could then be another simple and straightforward paragraph welcoming the Addis Ababa Action Agenda. In our view, welcoming a document is also to endorse it. Besides, we do not understand the import of ‘fully’ endorse. Is there something called ‘partially’ endorse?
We would also recommend that the square brackets around the paragraph on TFM be removed. We also expect the full text of the agreement on TFM contained in paragraph 123 of the Addis outcome to be reproduced in this section. This was the gentlemen’s agreement reached during informals.
Mr. Co-Facilitator,
I would now like to provide some reflections on the two questions asked by Amb. Kamau earlier today.
As regards the placement of the MOI targets, we see no problem with repeating them in both sections 2 and 3. The success and failure of the agenda will depend on the implementation of these MOI targets and as the delegation of Cameroon said yesterday, repetition is the mother of education.
However, if only one of the two places is to be chosen, we would prefer clearly that the MOI targets be kept integrated within the SDGs, which constitute, as everyone agrees, an indivisible set.
I must add that this choice of course would depend upon a correct reference to the MOI targets in section 3. If this reference is not right, we would prefer to reproduce the MOI targets in this section as well.
Secondly, precisely because we welcome the outcome of the Addis Conference, which in our view presents a useful contribution to the revitalized global partnership, we would not support annexing the document to this text.
Annexing it would connote that somehow it is of subsidiary nature and would detract from its independent and stand-alone significance. We also concur with Switzerland that annexing would mean taking into account the issue of reservations.
Besides, I would also note that in case the Addis outcome is annexed, that would make a strong case for annexing the full report of the OWG on SDGs, including its reservations.
Finally, we do not support the notion that we are crafting a ‘new’ global partnership, nor do we agree with the several putative principles that were mentioned by the EU for the partnership. In fact, if at all any such principles are listed, we would request the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities be also unequivocally reaffirmed.
I thank you Mr. Co-Facilitator. We are confident that after the useful discussion today, we should not need to spend too much time on this issue next week.
*****
Stakeholders