Turkey
Statement by Turkey
Intergovernmental Negotiations on Post 2015 Development Agenda
(23 July 2015)
Goals and Targets
• We are pleased that the 17 goals and 169 targets proposed by the open working group are fully incorporated into the zero draft.
• As we have stated in our interventions in previous sessions, we support the ambition level of SDGs. At the same time we are not against in principle to “tweaking” of the targets, as long as the process is transparent and sufficient clarification and reasoning for proposals are provided.
• It is a fact that humanitarian emergencies erode the well-being of societies and undermine development efforts of countries.
• That is why we see value in bringing focus to the needs of people affected by complex humanitarian emergencies as well as the importance of humanitarian assistance in disaster response.
• In this respect we note the references to humanitarian crises and to complex humanitarian emergencies in the Declaration and also agree with the proposed changes on the targets 1.5 and 11.5.
• Targets 4.4 and 4.b on ensuring inclusive and quality education for qualified human resources are vitally important. We find the proposed changes acceptable.
• On target 6.6, the proposed change stems from the desire to make the target stronger than the Aichi Target 14 to justify the extended timeframe.
• We believe that this approach is not compatible with other targets where changes are proposed to ensure rather conformity with the Aichi targets.
• Hence, for a more appropriate, realistic and consistent approach, we believe, if there will be a change in this target, we should use the word `substantially` to replace the word `fully.`
• On target 14.c, proposed change is to delete the phrase “for States parties thereto” when referring to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).
• Since not all UN members are party to this instrument, we believe that the existing language in target 14.c needs to be preserved.
• Lastly, we welcome the proposed change on target 17.2 regarding ODA commitments to the LDCs.
Intergovernmental Negotiations on Post 2015 Development Agenda
(23 July 2015)
Goals and Targets
• We are pleased that the 17 goals and 169 targets proposed by the open working group are fully incorporated into the zero draft.
• As we have stated in our interventions in previous sessions, we support the ambition level of SDGs. At the same time we are not against in principle to “tweaking” of the targets, as long as the process is transparent and sufficient clarification and reasoning for proposals are provided.
• It is a fact that humanitarian emergencies erode the well-being of societies and undermine development efforts of countries.
• That is why we see value in bringing focus to the needs of people affected by complex humanitarian emergencies as well as the importance of humanitarian assistance in disaster response.
• In this respect we note the references to humanitarian crises and to complex humanitarian emergencies in the Declaration and also agree with the proposed changes on the targets 1.5 and 11.5.
• Targets 4.4 and 4.b on ensuring inclusive and quality education for qualified human resources are vitally important. We find the proposed changes acceptable.
• On target 6.6, the proposed change stems from the desire to make the target stronger than the Aichi Target 14 to justify the extended timeframe.
• We believe that this approach is not compatible with other targets where changes are proposed to ensure rather conformity with the Aichi targets.
• Hence, for a more appropriate, realistic and consistent approach, we believe, if there will be a change in this target, we should use the word `substantially` to replace the word `fully.`
• On target 14.c, proposed change is to delete the phrase “for States parties thereto” when referring to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).
• Since not all UN members are party to this instrument, we believe that the existing language in target 14.c needs to be preserved.
• Lastly, we welcome the proposed change on target 17.2 regarding ODA commitments to the LDCs.
Stakeholders