Co-facilitators,
The UK aligns itself with the statement made by the EU on behalf of the EU and its member states
Co-facilitators, let me start by apologising for the length of my intervention, but this reflects the importance that the UK places on securing an ambitious and transformative means of implementation package to support the post-2015 development goals and targets.
We welcome the extensive work that you have undertaken working with the co-facilitators of the Financing for Development Agenda to ensure that the Addis Ababa Action Agenda reinforces and supports the delivery of our post-2015 development goals. I would also like to welcome the positive attitude that all delegations took into the negotiations and congratulate the government of Ethiopia and the two co-chairs of the Financing for Development process for their successful leadership.
Let me reiterate the UK’s clear view that the Means of Implementation pillar of the post-2015 development agenda should comprise both the Addis Ababa Action Agenda and the Means of Implementation goal and other targets proposed by the Open Working Group. It is not a question of either Addis/ or the Open Working Group MoI targets. Neither, alone, would be sufficient. They are complementary, mutually reinforcing, integral and necessary to the successful implementation of the post-2015 development agenda.
Key parts of the Addis agreement directly speak to and complement the Means of Implementation targets, For example:
• A strong re-commitment to 0.7% and a commitment to reverse the decline in official development assistance to LDCs. On top of this, the EU has committed to a time bound commitment to meet the target of 0.2% of ODA to LDCs. Forgive me if I point out that the UK is proud to have met both the 0.7 and 0.2% targets.
• On trade, as well as addressing the issues in the Means of Implementation targets, Addis addresses access to trade finance, regional integration and commits to integrate sustainable development into trade policy at all levels
• And there is a new forum to bridge the $1 to $1.5 trillion annual infrastructure financing gap in developing countries.
Other parts of the Addis Ababa Action Agenda will contribute directly and additionally to the achievement of our goals. For example:
• The new Social Compact will ensure that completing the unfinished business of the MDGs and leaving no-one behind will remain central to the implementation of the post-2015 goals.
• And important provisions will support efforts to achieve gender equality and the empowerment of girls and women, such as equal participation in the budgeting process and the promotion of gender responsive budgeting and tracking.
None of us got everything that we wanted in Addis. Like the report of the Open Working Group, the Finance for Development outcome was a careful compromise. As the Deputy Permanent Representative from Brazil mentioned on Monday, we reached agreement on a technology facilitation mechanism. This was a difficult but important compromise. We now look forward to the launch of this new mechanism at the Summit in September.
As the distinguished Minister of Foreign Affairs of Benin said in welcoming the Finance for Development outcome last week on behalf of the LDCs, the Addis Ababa Action Agenda will dynamise inclusive economic growth that takes account of the three dimensions of sustainable development - if we all apply it in good faith.
We absolutely agree, and that is why the commitments that were made alongside the conference are so important. I would like to highlight two new concrete contributions the UK has already made:
First, under the Addis Tax Initiative, alongside other partners in this room, we committed to double our support to help developing countries strengthen their tax administrations and tackle both domestic and cross-border tax evasion and avoidance.
Second, last week the UK has announced 735 million pounds – around 1.1 billion US dollars - of new investment into our development finance institution, CDC group. This will provide businesses in the developing world with the finance they need to grow and create jobs.
Turning to the revised zero draft, we believe that the way you have addressed the means of implementation in chapter 3 is a good way of taking us forward. We have a few specific comments in this regard.
First – we concur with the statement by Benin on behalf of the LDCs that the challenges ahead are enormous. We must, therefore, leave no means of implementation behind! We believe that the opening section of chapter 3 needs to be clearer that the Addis Ababa Action Agenda is central to the implementation of our agenda and, alongside the Means of Implementation goal 17 and goal-specific targets from the Open Working Group, comprises the means of implementation for the post-2015 development agenda.
Second, we should resist attempts to re-negotiate issues concluded in Addis Ababa. Let us remember that an important rationale for holding the Addis conference on Finance for Development prior to the SDG summit was to agree on a finance and policy package to support delivery of the SDGs. The challenge is to integrate the Addis Ababa Action Agenda into our Outcome Document in a way that ensures complementarity and ambition. Hence, we support the inclusion of the full text of the Addis Ababa Action Agenda in an Annex, as you have proposed.
Third – related to my second point - we note the suggestion by the G77 to include just one paragraph from Addis in its entirety in the main text. Co facilitators, paragraph 123 is 750 words long. It would seem odd to single out that single paragraph if we are to have a concise and balanced text. We suggest that we find an alternative, much shorter, solution to welcoming this important part of the Addis Action Agenda.
Finally - we want traction and action. We need to ensure sufficient prominence of the Means of Implementation achieve this. We would be mistaken if we concluded that duplication of the means of implementation in chapters 2 and 3 was the best way to achieve this (and I would add that it would seem bizarre to those outside this room).
It seems that there are two options. First to leave the Means of Implementation targets in chapter 2. The downside is that it would leave a very thin chapter 3. We might then find it makes sense then to delete chapter 3 and include the key points in the declaration. The second option would be to include goal 17 and the other Means of Implementation targets in Section 3 alongside the political commitment to implementing this agenda and the reference to the Addis outcome. This would give the Means of Implementation greater visibility and – as the representative of Tonga said speaking on behalf of the Pacific Small Island States - ensure a strong and substantive Means of Implementation chapter. Importantly, that would seize the opportunity we now have to demonstrate equivalence between the ‘what’ and the ‘how’ of the post-2015 development agenda.
Thank you
