Mexico
MISIÓN PERMANENTE DE MÉXICO
ANTE LAS NACIONES UNIDAS
Wednesday, July 22, 2015.
SDGs and targets
The Delegation of Mexico considers that the arguments presented by Maldives and Belize deserve careful consideration, since they provide important elements we should take into account now that we are debating the possibility of adjusting certain goals.
In particular, it is important to bear in mind the experience of the MDGs which included the term "Substantially", because it was precisely in those cases where no significant progress was made. If we continue to apply the same solution for certain goals which include an "x" or “y”, we would have the risk of creating a gap that would significantly limit progress in achieving those goals.
These considerations by Mexico are presented since it is essential for us that the final document preserves the set of 17 SDGs and 169 goals inseparably, in order to ensure their complex interlinkage both in the implementation and follow up.
Furthermore, any technical review of the goals should ensure any adjustments are consistent with international commitments on human rights, non-discrimination, gender equality, environmental protection and sustainable management of natural resources.
This applies particularly to targets linked to the SDGs 14 and 15, and these must be aligned to the agreements reached in the Aichi-Nagoya biodiversity goals, that is, to fulfill the deadlines committed for 2020 and that the necessary adjustments are made when that deadline is met, through to 2030."
Nearly all of the targets in Goal 15 have been aligned with the existing international commitments on biodiversity and other relevant agreements. However, there are now two targets in Goal 15 that refer to the 2020 date, but do not include text to ensure their continued inclusion in the SDGs through to 2030: targets 15.8 and 15.9. This must be addressed in order to consistently ensure alignment with existing commitments.
This situation could either be rectified by adding to the end of each of these targets text that was added to 15.1 and 15.5, "and take further action as needed by 2030." Alternatively, we would propose that the following text be added to the end of the text of paragraph 51 in the introduction:
“In line with existing commitments, a number of targets use the date of “2020”. These targets should be reviewed at an appropriate time, taking into account discussions in relevant inter-governmental forums, with a view towards further action that may be warranted to 2030”.
As you are aware, this is not the first time that Mexico has raised this issue, and we count on your excellent leadership to ensure that these small technical changes can be addressed.
With regard to target 14 c, my delegation wishes to echo the statements of many other delegations regarding the importance of resolving this particular issue based on agreed language that adequately reflects the status that the international community has given to UNCLOS as an international instrument of great importance. We appreciate the information given on Monday by the co-facilitators regarding the criterion followed in dealing with this specific target in the final draft, and we understand that it is a pending issue in which my delegation will seek consensus in an open and constructive manner to reach an acceptable solution to all, and therefore, we are glad that the same constructive spirit is shared by other delegations.
My delegation cannot agree to maintain the original target 14c, since such text caused reservation of several countries, including Mexico.
We reiterate our position: we consider the work of the Inter-agency and Expert Group on Sustainable Development Goal Indicators as an independent technical process whose work does not require the guide of this political process or any other. It should be granted the sufficient time to complete its work, and once completed, it should be adopted through the corresponding institutional channels: Statistics Commission-ECOSOC-and finally, the General Assembly.
ANTE LAS NACIONES UNIDAS
Wednesday, July 22, 2015.
SDGs and targets
The Delegation of Mexico considers that the arguments presented by Maldives and Belize deserve careful consideration, since they provide important elements we should take into account now that we are debating the possibility of adjusting certain goals.
In particular, it is important to bear in mind the experience of the MDGs which included the term "Substantially", because it was precisely in those cases where no significant progress was made. If we continue to apply the same solution for certain goals which include an "x" or “y”, we would have the risk of creating a gap that would significantly limit progress in achieving those goals.
These considerations by Mexico are presented since it is essential for us that the final document preserves the set of 17 SDGs and 169 goals inseparably, in order to ensure their complex interlinkage both in the implementation and follow up.
Furthermore, any technical review of the goals should ensure any adjustments are consistent with international commitments on human rights, non-discrimination, gender equality, environmental protection and sustainable management of natural resources.
This applies particularly to targets linked to the SDGs 14 and 15, and these must be aligned to the agreements reached in the Aichi-Nagoya biodiversity goals, that is, to fulfill the deadlines committed for 2020 and that the necessary adjustments are made when that deadline is met, through to 2030."
Nearly all of the targets in Goal 15 have been aligned with the existing international commitments on biodiversity and other relevant agreements. However, there are now two targets in Goal 15 that refer to the 2020 date, but do not include text to ensure their continued inclusion in the SDGs through to 2030: targets 15.8 and 15.9. This must be addressed in order to consistently ensure alignment with existing commitments.
This situation could either be rectified by adding to the end of each of these targets text that was added to 15.1 and 15.5, "and take further action as needed by 2030." Alternatively, we would propose that the following text be added to the end of the text of paragraph 51 in the introduction:
“In line with existing commitments, a number of targets use the date of “2020”. These targets should be reviewed at an appropriate time, taking into account discussions in relevant inter-governmental forums, with a view towards further action that may be warranted to 2030”.
As you are aware, this is not the first time that Mexico has raised this issue, and we count on your excellent leadership to ensure that these small technical changes can be addressed.
With regard to target 14 c, my delegation wishes to echo the statements of many other delegations regarding the importance of resolving this particular issue based on agreed language that adequately reflects the status that the international community has given to UNCLOS as an international instrument of great importance. We appreciate the information given on Monday by the co-facilitators regarding the criterion followed in dealing with this specific target in the final draft, and we understand that it is a pending issue in which my delegation will seek consensus in an open and constructive manner to reach an acceptable solution to all, and therefore, we are glad that the same constructive spirit is shared by other delegations.
My delegation cannot agree to maintain the original target 14c, since such text caused reservation of several countries, including Mexico.
We reiterate our position: we consider the work of the Inter-agency and Expert Group on Sustainable Development Goal Indicators as an independent technical process whose work does not require the guide of this political process or any other. It should be granted the sufficient time to complete its work, and once completed, it should be adopted through the corresponding institutional channels: Statistics Commission-ECOSOC-and finally, the General Assembly.
Stakeholders