Statement by the Kingdom of the Netherlands
Tuesday 19 May 2015
Post-2015 Intergovernmental Negotiation Session on Monitoring, Accountability and Review
I have the honor to speak on behalf of the Kingdom of the Netherlands.
We align ourselves with the EU statements of yesterday and this morning, and would like to add a few points in our national capacity.
We would like to reiterate our commitment to a single monitoring accountability and review framework, the foundation of the post-2015 agenda, that will support the 'what' and 'how' pillars. We look forward to having further discussions on monitoring the means of implementation. We note that while we have a clear process for developing indicators for the SDG targets, we will receive further clarity on the specific actions and initiatives we will review on MoI, and look forward to progress in the FfD track in this respect.
In all stages of national, regional and global monitoring, inclusion and participation of non-governmental actors is of great importance, most notably including civil society, youth, business, philanthropists and knowledge institutions. An enabling and safe environment must be ensured for them to meaningfully participate. Particular focus should be given to including the poorest, most vulnerable and marginalized groups, based on the principles of non-discrimination, gender equality, participation and transparency. We highlight in this respect the importance of data disaggregation by income, gender, age, race, ethnicity, disability, geographic location and relevant characteristics as agreed in the Open Working Group on SDGs.
On monitoring & accountability at the national level:
As we illustrated in our national presentation last March, the implementation of this universal agenda includes three elements for the Netherlands: firstly, continuing our cooperation through development cooperation. Secondly, working on policy coherence for sustainable development. Thirdly, implementing the goals and targets in the Netherlands. We will seek to monitor progress on all three elements.
To this end, we are conducting a mapping exercise at the national level, with our planning agencies, national statistical office and line ministries to identify the existing mechanisms and gaps, and set up a national reporting system. We are also looking into the possibilities for additional inputs and reports by civil society actors. After all, community and grassroots organizations are in the best position to assess whether or not the post 2015 commitments reach them and meet their needs. Hence their involvement in monitoring is crucial. There are many innovative examples of their role in accountability, especially when it comes to service delivery.
The regional level is important in terms of learning. There are already multiple existing regional level accountability mechanisms in place which can be built upon.
At the global level we recognize the role of the HLPF, as noted by many, to coordinate reporting from different levels and different actors. In this regard we would welcome, as suggested by the Group of 7 and others, to undertake a mapping of existing mechanisms.
At the international level the Global Partnership for Effective Development Cooperation Monitoring Framework, the International Aid Transparency Initiative and OECD DAC reporting frameworks can be usefully built on for the post-2015 agenda, especially where it concerns implementation.
Similarly for accountability by the private sector the OECD Guidelines on Multinational Enterprises provide a helpful initiative that can be built on. This initiative provides the unique international dispute resolution procedure based on a comprehensive code of conduct for international business, ensuring compliance with universal human rights standards and ‘due diligence’ in supply chain responsibility. This could helpfully be linked to the SDGs.
Next to this, thematic sessions of the HLPF could be considered, focusing on areas where progress is lagging, and on cross cutting issues such as gender, inclusiveness, inequalities and a human rights based approach to implementation.
Finally, distinguished co-facilitators, the purpose of monitoring and accountability is not limited to collecting data and knowing where progress has been made and where not. It is crucial that this information is used for the benefit of improving delivery of the SDGs, enabling us to adjust efforts where needed to be more effective and realize the maximum impact. In other words we need a feedback mechanism from monitoring and review to implementation, enabling progress on delivery. We recognize the importance of capacity building to ensure this.
Thank you.
