Draft Lines to Take Post-2015- Opening, Declaration and Preamble.
Co-facilitators,
Let me start by aligning with the statement made by the EU on behalf of the EU and its Member States.
My country joins the large number of delegations who have expressed their support for you in producing a good revised draft. It reflects well our discussions in June and we see it as a good basis for negotiations over the next two weeks.
Turning to the declaration:
We welcome the fact that the draft Outcome Document remains clear, accessible and jargon free. We have to remind ourselves that the diplomats and delegates in this room are not the only audience for this text. We need to agree something that our heads of state and government can use to rally political effort and ordinary people can understand and support.
To this end, we very much welcome the preamble. The UK has consistently said that we need to find a way of communicating this agenda, to inspire citizens and the international community to action. Our motive here is simple: to maximise the chance of delivering on our ambitious agenda.
As many others have said, the five Ps are clear and memorable, and work well as a means for communicating this agenda. But we also hear the concerns raised by some member states about avoiding silos and the need to highlight the interlinkages across the agenda. With that in mind, we suggest two specific improvements. First, that gender equality should also be strengthened across the Ps, and second that the three dimensions of sustainable development need to be visibly integrated across the 5Ps.
Second, the agenda could be made even more powerful if the Ps could be made more concise and action oriented. One suggestion could be a short sentence summing up the headline vision for each P. This would make the communications aspect clearer, snappier and more visionary.
Co-facilitators, we are pleased to see improved balance between environmental, economic and social pillars of sustainable development throughout the declaration. We welcome the improvements made to the section on gender equality, and the prominence given to the importance of good governance and the need to build peaceful, inclusive societies. And we are pleased to see a clear commitment to ‘leave no one behind’ and that we ensure the agenda delivers for all economic and social groups with a focus on those farthest behind. This commitment will resonate long after we have reached agreement on our Outcome Document and support our efforts to deliver for the very poorest and most marginalised.
Let me touch on a few the areas in the draft that he UK believes could be strengthened.
First we note there is now a reference to extreme poverty in this draft. We have heard and understand the concerns expressed in this room that the agenda must address poverty in all its forms and must be relevant to all people. We agree. However, our agenda must also address the needs of the very poorest people in the world. We have, for the first time in history, an opportunity to end extreme poverty, currently defined as $1.25 a day. This will be a huge stretch and will only happen with a focused and determined effort. I appeal to all in the room not to forget the poorest in the world and the unfinished business of the MDGs. It is necessary, both in moral and practical terms, that our commitment to eradicate extreme poverty is given sufficient prominence in the declaration, and we would like to see much more attention to this.
Second, Climate Change – which poses the greatest threat to our efforts to eradicate poverty. This section should be strengthened, including a clear reference to the agreed global objective to limit global average temperature to between 1.5 and 2 degrees above pre-industrial levels.
Third, while we recognise the concern about bringing in too many new issues, we would like to highlight two areas that we feel should be reflected in the zero draft.
• First, anti-microbial resistance has risen up the agenda over the last year as a global health challenge – as recognised by the member states in both the WHO and FAO. A failure to act will affect our ability to achieve the goals. We believe that this should be articulated in paragraph 11. After humanitarian crises, we would add:
- Global health threats, including growing resistance to antimicrobial medicines’
• Second, the declaration should include a link to modern slavery; this is a universal challenge and a number of related issues, including exploitation, violence, trafficking and forced labour are reflected in the targets. Our declaration would be strengthened by drawing the link to modern slavery. After ‘youth unemployment is a major concern’, add:
- “People are still trafficked, held in slavery and exploited.”
Fourth, while we welcome the improvements made on gender equality – we think that this could be further improved in paragraph 19 both by referencing the role that men and boys can play in achieving gender equality and ensuring the promotion and protection of human rights including universal access to sexual and reproductive health and rights.
Finally, we welcome your efforts to use language that is acceptable to all member states and to avoid falling back on agreed UN language. That makes sense – how can old language reflect a new paradigm?! We would like to highlight a few areas where some more controversial language has emerged and where we have specific concerns.
Co-faciliators, some member states have said that CBDR is non-negotiable. Please allow me to reiterate our consistent position, which is that CBDR does not apply to the post-2015 development agenda and we do not understand why it should be singled out from other Rio principles. As the distinguished delegate for Japan said, universality does not mean uniformity. But we need to move beyond a formulation which divides rather than unites us in our common endeavour.
A number of member states do not accept the declaration on the right to development and it should not be included here next to the Declaration on Human Rights.
We are concerned about the inclusion of ‘cultural values’ in paragraph 8 and would propose to remove it.
Similarly, we don’t agree with the inclusion of the family in paragraph 38 and propose to delete it..
It is unclear to us why the right to water has been singled out from other rights; to ensure consistency with the rest of the agenda and our goals and targets, the language should focus on universal access.
Co-facilitators, with two weeks remaining before we conclude our negotiations, let me finish by emphasising our gratitude to you for your leadership and continued efforts to guide us to conclusion. We trust that, under your guidance, we will be able to complete our work by the end of July. This will send a powerful and confident message as we prepare for the Summit and look forward to implementation.
Thank you,
