Japan
Japan
27 July 2015
Thank you for your revised draft.
We are willing to discuss the draft, and determined to finish the negotiation within this week. There have been improvements, but there are several areas we have concerns and comments. I will focus only on the major points.
We believe that the preamble part is necessary for the communication, and we support the retention of this section. We especially appreciate the added emphasis on people-centeredness and resilience.
We have significant concerns over the newly added concepts in paragraphs 5 and 19. We are not aware why these new languages have been introduced without discussion. CF advised us at the end of last week that we should start agreeing on agreed languages. We do not think that these are agreed language and we are perplexed.
In para 5, second line, the notion "different national circumstances, principles and priorities" is something new to us. We do call for the deletion of the word principles.
In para 19, the last two lines are a matter of concern to us, and we should delete the phrase, "taking into account different national circumstances, capacities and priorities", because this phrase would undermine the international obligations of states under international law.
Para 4, we want to have the specific reference to the economic and social groups, as we saw in the old draft. Therefore, the second sentence should be amended as follows:
We wish to see the the goals and targets for all nations, for all people and for all social and economic groups.
We do not agree to single out only one principle from the Rio principles in para 13. Instead we support the notion of shared responsibility which appears in para 36.
As we have all agreed, we should not interfere with other mandated processes such as the UNFCCC, nor should we prejudge the outcome of COP 21. But the new language proposed in paragraph 31 goes over this limit, and also this is different from the latest agreed language in para 59 at Addis. We do call for the deletion of the sentence in the bracket.
As I commented last week, the section in the declaration about MOI or implementation should be limited to several paragraphs portraying the general overview. The document has a separate MOI chapter and therefore the declaration should not go into details of MOIs. The current language has also lost the balance achieved in Addis Ababa Action Agenda, which is supposed to support the implementation of this document. We should simplify the section by using paragraphs 38, 39 and 40 only.
To finish with a positive note, I would propose a slight change to para 28. In the end of the last sentence, I would propose to add the term quality. It will then read "quality and resilient infrastructure" which was one of the major achievements of Addis.
We support the proposal by Rok on paras 34 and 39.
27 July 2015
Thank you for your revised draft.
We are willing to discuss the draft, and determined to finish the negotiation within this week. There have been improvements, but there are several areas we have concerns and comments. I will focus only on the major points.
We believe that the preamble part is necessary for the communication, and we support the retention of this section. We especially appreciate the added emphasis on people-centeredness and resilience.
We have significant concerns over the newly added concepts in paragraphs 5 and 19. We are not aware why these new languages have been introduced without discussion. CF advised us at the end of last week that we should start agreeing on agreed languages. We do not think that these are agreed language and we are perplexed.
In para 5, second line, the notion "different national circumstances, principles and priorities" is something new to us. We do call for the deletion of the word principles.
In para 19, the last two lines are a matter of concern to us, and we should delete the phrase, "taking into account different national circumstances, capacities and priorities", because this phrase would undermine the international obligations of states under international law.
Para 4, we want to have the specific reference to the economic and social groups, as we saw in the old draft. Therefore, the second sentence should be amended as follows:
We wish to see the the goals and targets for all nations, for all people and for all social and economic groups.
We do not agree to single out only one principle from the Rio principles in para 13. Instead we support the notion of shared responsibility which appears in para 36.
As we have all agreed, we should not interfere with other mandated processes such as the UNFCCC, nor should we prejudge the outcome of COP 21. But the new language proposed in paragraph 31 goes over this limit, and also this is different from the latest agreed language in para 59 at Addis. We do call for the deletion of the sentence in the bracket.
As I commented last week, the section in the declaration about MOI or implementation should be limited to several paragraphs portraying the general overview. The document has a separate MOI chapter and therefore the declaration should not go into details of MOIs. The current language has also lost the balance achieved in Addis Ababa Action Agenda, which is supposed to support the implementation of this document. We should simplify the section by using paragraphs 38, 39 and 40 only.
To finish with a positive note, I would propose a slight change to para 28. In the end of the last sentence, I would propose to add the term quality. It will then read "quality and resilient infrastructure" which was one of the major achievements of Addis.
We support the proposal by Rok on paras 34 and 39.
Stakeholders