Japan
Intergovernmental Negotiations on the post-2015 development agenda
Second meeting on the “Declaration”
20 February 2015
Statement by Mr. Takeshi Osuga, Ambassador,
Deputy Director-General for International Cooperation and Global Issues
Thank you very much for sharing the new discussion paper. I think it is a well-balanced text, capturing the views expressed by the majority of Member States this week, although I personally expected to see a more ambitious and visionary text.
The main reason why it doesn’t appeal to me as ambitious and visionary as expected is because we, the delegates, were not ambitious and visionary enough to appeal to the co-facilitators from the floor. I will do my best to provide inputs that are ambitious and visionary in writing and expect others to do the same.
Having said that, let me share my preliminary comments that are not so ambitious nor visionary.
First, Japan strongly support the limit of three pages. Of course, as was pointed out in the G77+China statement, all depends on the substance, but we should make utmost effort to achieve this three pages target. What we should avoid is to make the Declaration a Christmas tree of agreed languages.
Second, on the structure, I have one comment.
As I said on the first day, paragraph 14 on principles of the Charter etc. should be merged into paragraph 4 on fundamental values of the UN and placed just after para 6 on the New vision. This paragraph on the principles and values should only refer to those that have universal and overarching nature.
Third, on the substance, I have a few comments.
1) Japan welcomes the focus and emphasis on people-centered agenda and perspectives. We see them in paragraphs 3, 5, 6, 7 and 15. Since the post-2015 development agenda is described as being “people-centered” in the Rio+20 outcome and the outcome of 2013 MDGs Special Event and moreover, since the term “people-centered” has been mentioned by so many delegates from the floor, it would be better to make direct reference to the term and clearly articulate and further elaborate this concept as part of the “New vision” in paragraph 6.
2) With regard to the six elements, we should adopt the “six essential elements” as suggested in the SG’s Synthesis Report. Cherry picking part of them, re-organizing or reshuffling them would undermine the integral nature of SDGs and would lead to a reopening of the controversial issues which no one in this room would consider productive nor constructive.
3) I support mentioning somewhere in the Declaration the issues of peace and security, conflict prevention and their relevance to sustainable development, as was pointed out by the distinguished representative of Mozambique on behalf of the African Group. It would certainly enhance the political caliber of the Declaration to be issued by the heads of States and Governments.
4) The remaining comments regards the paragraphs we support and wish that they will be kept in the final text.
a) I welcome paragraph 8, which underscores the needs of countries in special situations, including LDCs, LLDCs, SIDS, Africa, and those facing special challenges including conflict-affected countries and MICs.
b) I welcome paragraph 9 which strikes the good balance between the universality of the agenda and the differences in capacities to cope with the challenges according to country. Our life would have been much, much easier, if CBDR meant this, which is not the case.
c) Finally, I welcome ample reference on the multi-stakeholder global partnership in para 12 and 15.
Thank you very much.
Second meeting on the “Declaration”
20 February 2015
Statement by Mr. Takeshi Osuga, Ambassador,
Deputy Director-General for International Cooperation and Global Issues
Thank you very much for sharing the new discussion paper. I think it is a well-balanced text, capturing the views expressed by the majority of Member States this week, although I personally expected to see a more ambitious and visionary text.
The main reason why it doesn’t appeal to me as ambitious and visionary as expected is because we, the delegates, were not ambitious and visionary enough to appeal to the co-facilitators from the floor. I will do my best to provide inputs that are ambitious and visionary in writing and expect others to do the same.
Having said that, let me share my preliminary comments that are not so ambitious nor visionary.
First, Japan strongly support the limit of three pages. Of course, as was pointed out in the G77+China statement, all depends on the substance, but we should make utmost effort to achieve this three pages target. What we should avoid is to make the Declaration a Christmas tree of agreed languages.
Second, on the structure, I have one comment.
As I said on the first day, paragraph 14 on principles of the Charter etc. should be merged into paragraph 4 on fundamental values of the UN and placed just after para 6 on the New vision. This paragraph on the principles and values should only refer to those that have universal and overarching nature.
Third, on the substance, I have a few comments.
1) Japan welcomes the focus and emphasis on people-centered agenda and perspectives. We see them in paragraphs 3, 5, 6, 7 and 15. Since the post-2015 development agenda is described as being “people-centered” in the Rio+20 outcome and the outcome of 2013 MDGs Special Event and moreover, since the term “people-centered” has been mentioned by so many delegates from the floor, it would be better to make direct reference to the term and clearly articulate and further elaborate this concept as part of the “New vision” in paragraph 6.
2) With regard to the six elements, we should adopt the “six essential elements” as suggested in the SG’s Synthesis Report. Cherry picking part of them, re-organizing or reshuffling them would undermine the integral nature of SDGs and would lead to a reopening of the controversial issues which no one in this room would consider productive nor constructive.
3) I support mentioning somewhere in the Declaration the issues of peace and security, conflict prevention and their relevance to sustainable development, as was pointed out by the distinguished representative of Mozambique on behalf of the African Group. It would certainly enhance the political caliber of the Declaration to be issued by the heads of States and Governments.
4) The remaining comments regards the paragraphs we support and wish that they will be kept in the final text.
a) I welcome paragraph 8, which underscores the needs of countries in special situations, including LDCs, LLDCs, SIDS, Africa, and those facing special challenges including conflict-affected countries and MICs.
b) I welcome paragraph 9 which strikes the good balance between the universality of the agenda and the differences in capacities to cope with the challenges according to country. Our life would have been much, much easier, if CBDR meant this, which is not the case.
c) Finally, I welcome ample reference on the multi-stakeholder global partnership in para 12 and 15.
Thank you very much.
Stakeholders