Switzerland
Seul le texte prononcé fait foi
Check against delivery
Intergovernmental ntergovernmental ntergovernmental ntergovernmental Negotiations Negotiations Negotiations on the
Post Post-2015 Development Development Development Development Agenda Agenda
Seventh Session
New York, 22 July 2015
Goals & Targets
Statement by Switzerland
Distinguished Co-facilitators,
Regarding the chapter on SDGs and targets, we strongly support the paragraphs that underline the integrated and universal nature of the SDGs.
Concerning the proposed changes to targets as reflected now in the SDGs:
We support the Co-Facilitator’s suggestions and urge us all to take a pragmatic approach and to caution against risking the political consensus we found last year. For us, the criteria for changes, if they are acceptable to the membership, have always been the following two: Firstly, we see merit in specifying the “x” values and secondly, targets should be in line with existing international agreements and, if amended, not lower but rather increase levels of ambition.
This position leads us to fully support the amendments that specify the “x” values, for example proposed for goal 4 on education or the proposed amendments to target 6.3 or 9.5. We are also supportive to all changes to bring targets in line with international agreements such as the Sendai Framework proposed for 11 b).
However, with regard to target 6.6 we would still prefer to stick to the timeline 2020, in line with the timeframe indicated in the water-related Aichi Target 14. These discussions on this in the
2
Open Working Group last year were challenging and thorough, and we consider we should keep the level of ambition as agreed then.
I would like to reiterate again that in any case the fallback option would be the Open Working Group proposal. Changes should, in any case, not re-open the discussion on substance.
Co-Facilitators,
On this occasion, we would also like to repeat a concern for us (and we believe many others) going forward: Switzerland does not consider that the reservations made to the OWG proposal should be reflected in the Agenda. We cannot expect our Heads of State to adopt reservations by other member states and we cannot create such a precedent.
In conclusion, please allow me a remark on indicators: We reiterate our call that the Inter Agency and Expert Group on SDG Indicators should, in accordance with its mandate, develop a global indicator framework to guide the selection of indicators by March 2016. The selection of indicators should reflect the full breadth and depth of the political will behind the different targets. We also reiterate that we consider that the list of indicators may need to be improved over the years under the leadership of the UN Statistical Commission.
Thank you.
Check against delivery
Intergovernmental ntergovernmental ntergovernmental ntergovernmental Negotiations Negotiations Negotiations on the
Post Post-2015 Development Development Development Development Agenda Agenda
Seventh Session
New York, 22 July 2015
Goals & Targets
Statement by Switzerland
Distinguished Co-facilitators,
Regarding the chapter on SDGs and targets, we strongly support the paragraphs that underline the integrated and universal nature of the SDGs.
Concerning the proposed changes to targets as reflected now in the SDGs:
We support the Co-Facilitator’s suggestions and urge us all to take a pragmatic approach and to caution against risking the political consensus we found last year. For us, the criteria for changes, if they are acceptable to the membership, have always been the following two: Firstly, we see merit in specifying the “x” values and secondly, targets should be in line with existing international agreements and, if amended, not lower but rather increase levels of ambition.
This position leads us to fully support the amendments that specify the “x” values, for example proposed for goal 4 on education or the proposed amendments to target 6.3 or 9.5. We are also supportive to all changes to bring targets in line with international agreements such as the Sendai Framework proposed for 11 b).
However, with regard to target 6.6 we would still prefer to stick to the timeline 2020, in line with the timeframe indicated in the water-related Aichi Target 14. These discussions on this in the
2
Open Working Group last year were challenging and thorough, and we consider we should keep the level of ambition as agreed then.
I would like to reiterate again that in any case the fallback option would be the Open Working Group proposal. Changes should, in any case, not re-open the discussion on substance.
Co-Facilitators,
On this occasion, we would also like to repeat a concern for us (and we believe many others) going forward: Switzerland does not consider that the reservations made to the OWG proposal should be reflected in the Agenda. We cannot expect our Heads of State to adopt reservations by other member states and we cannot create such a precedent.
In conclusion, please allow me a remark on indicators: We reiterate our call that the Inter Agency and Expert Group on SDG Indicators should, in accordance with its mandate, develop a global indicator framework to guide the selection of indicators by March 2016. The selection of indicators should reflect the full breadth and depth of the political will behind the different targets. We also reiterate that we consider that the list of indicators may need to be improved over the years under the leadership of the UN Statistical Commission.
Thank you.
Stakeholders