Intergovernmental Negotiations on the post-2015 development agenda
Follow-up and review: Comments on the “Way forward”
22 May 2015
Statement by Mr. Takeshi Osuga,
Ambassador,
Deputy Director-General for International Cooperation and Global Issues
Co-facilitators,
I have three points.
First, like other delegations, I wish to share Japan’s expectations with regard to the awaited zero draft.
1) Declaration:
- It should be short and succinct.
- There should be no copy-pasting of past agreed languages which make the Declaration appear less transformative and less visionary towards 2030.
- We should concentrate on how we can effectively communicate the main features of the post-2015 development agenda, building on the six elements of the SG’s Synthesis Report or those to be agreed as the themes of the interactive dialogue.
- There is a broad understanding on the principles or the philosophy that guide the implementation of the post-2015 development agenda at the country-level: universality, country-ownership and the concept of “leave no one behind”. However, there seems to be no common understanding about the principles for the global partnership for international cooperation: some say it is CBDR, others say no to CBDR but shared responsibility in view of different capabilities, national circumstances etc. If we could agree on the principles that will guide the international cooperation among us toward 2030, it would be truly visionary and transformative.
2) Goals and targets:
- We expect the zero draft will be the SDGs reflecting the Revised Targets Document we have, subject to further revisions reflecting the agreement in this room.
- There should be some reference to the possibility of revision of the targets in the future through the follow-up and review process.
3) MOI:
- It should be a placeholder and should not prejudge the FfD negotiation by putting some text in this section, including the elements in the “Food for thought paper” which has not been discussed, that risks to create confusion between the two processes, FfD and post-2015.
4) FUR:
- As I stated in my previous interventions this week, the text should be limited to the guiding principles and the outline of the modality at the global level
Secondly, I have some points regarding what we expect to be discussed during the June and July sessions.
The discussions in the FfD track will inevitably affect our debate not only on MOI but also on FUR and other important issues.
Therefore, in our June session, it would be wise to discuss mainly the Declaration, Goals and Targets and the FUR in the order of priority. The discussion on the principles that should figure in the Declaration should be the shared principles for the FfD and post-2015, so in our June session, we should fully take into account the FfD negotiation during the previous week.
In July, we would concentrate, hopefully, on how to reflect the outcome of Addis to the MOI pillar of the post-2015 outcome and conclude the negotiation on July 31.
I hope the four Co-facilitators will consult and coordinate as much as possible to make our negotiations efficient. More importantly, for those delegations whose lead negotiators are represented by different persons, I urge the negotiators of the two tracks to coordinate with each other to ensure the coherence and consistency of their positions so that what we agree on one track will not be reopened on the other.
Third and lastly, and most importantly, I would like to express Japan’s profound appreciation to Ambassador Donaghue and Ambassador Kamau for their hard work and for ably managing the negotiations, as always.
Thank you very much.
