Discussing Working Methods, Speakers in Second Committee Stress Need to Avoid Duplication
Committee also Closes General Debate, Underlining Technology Transfer
The work of the Second Committee (Economic and Financial) must be aligned with the 2030 Agenda on Sustainable Development, the Committee heard today as it conducted a discussion on its working methods after concluding its general debate.
“Apply meaningful levels of development finance, universal education, technology transfer and durable partnerships; stay true to principles of equity, inclusiveness and honesty; backed up by a whole lot of faith and hope and love, and we will get there,” the representative of Fiji said about the implementation of the Agenda.
Highlighting Sustainable Development Goal 14, he said the small island developing States of the Pacific had fought for its inclusion so that future generations could inherit healthy oceans.
The representative of the International Renewable Energy Agency also spoke today, underscoring Goal 7 on sustainable energy. Technological innovation and rising investment meant that renewable energy made economic, environmental and social sense. At least 164 countries, most of them developing, had renewable energy targets, and her Agency was supporting that momentum.
After concluding the general debate, the Committee turned to its working methods. Calling for a review of the Committee’s agenda, the Chair said it was time to improve its working methods by avoiding duplication and promoting complementarity.
The representative of South Africa, speaking on behalf of the “Group of 77” developing countries and China, said the “richness of the agenda” of the Second Committee should not be lost in favour of efficiency. The 2030 Agenda would require full participation, and it was also important to explore synergies in the work of the Committee and the High-level Political Forum.
The Committee did not exist as an island, but was part of a larger architecture, Australia’s delegate, speaking on behalf of Canada, Australia and New Zealand, said. Warning against overlap between the Committee and the Economic and Social Council, he suggested clustering the Second Committee’s resolutions into three broad agenda items, namely organizational and operational activities, thematic considerations and follow-up to United Nations conferences.
The representative of the European Union said that while time was too short to reorganize the current session, the Committee needed a comprehensive discussion on how to best avoid duplication. He also noted that missing deadlines, either when introducing resolutions or finalizing negotiations, hindered its work.
The representative of the United States called for the Committee’s agenda to be updated to address new and pressing issues while deciding that some other items could simply be “let go”. He also questioned whether the Committee needed both a general debate and an open discussion on each agenda item.
Cuba’s delegate was not in favour of initiatives that affected the prevalence of the Committee. A general debate was a way for all delegations to express their views. As for deadlines, the Group of 77 was composed of many States, and longer deadlines would be useful for debating important issues.
As a global deliberative and norm-setting body, the Second Committee was a “G-193 on development”, the representative of Guyana reminded delegates. It was necessary to tread carefully because of the intricate connection between the procedural and substantive aspects of the Committee’s work.
Also speaking during the general debate today were representatives of Palau, Tunisia, State of Palestine, Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) and the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies.
The representatives of Maldives (speaking on behalf of the Alliance of Small Island States), Mexico, Switzerland, Japan, Nigeria and Brazil also contributed to the discussion on working methods.
The Second Committee will meet again at 10 a.m. on Monday, 12 October, to consider “operational activities”.
Statements
CALEB OTTO (Palau), associating himself with the Alliance of Small Island States, welcomed the outcome of the Sendai Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction and added that the Addis Ababa Action Agenda constituted an important step in the right direction on development financing. That Agenda must progress beyond the reiteration of commitments made before and should be followed up with real initiatives to drive financial flows from developed to developing countries. Calling for developed countries which had not done so to fulfil their official development assistance (ODA) commitment to transfer 0.7 per cent of their gross national income to poor countries, he said that climate change was the “risk multiplier” for development and his country. It was essential that the Climate Change Conference in Paris reached a meaningful and legally binding agreement that recognized the special circumstances of small island developing States.
PETER THOMSON (Fiji), associating himself with the “Group of 77” developing countries and China and the Alliance of Small Island States, called on the Committee to “work smarter” and emphasized that implementation was crucial to the success of the Sustainable Development Goals. “Apply meaningful levels of development finance, universal education, technology transfer and durable partnerships; stay true to principles of equity, inclusiveness and honesty; backed up by a whole lot of faith and hope and love, and we will get there,” he said. Fiji called for an appropriate mechanism to be put in place to promote the implementation of Goal 14, which the Pacific small island developing States had fought for. Succeeding in that Goal meant that the international community could bequeath healthy oceans to the next generation. “If we fail, particularly on the score of ocean acidification, we will leave them with an ocean devoid of significant life,” he cautioned calling on delegates to support the draft resolution to mandate the proposed triennial United Nations conference on oceans and seas.
RAMZI LOUATI (Tunisia), associating himself with the Group of 77, said that the Committee had worked hard in the 2014 session to contribute to the major agreements adopted this year. Poverty and terrorism were ruining the lives of millions of people, and climate change added further negative impact, especially on developing countries. It was time for all States to take measures to face those threats. Specific commitments were needed to implement the Sustainable Development Goals successfully and, in that regard, developing countries needed to honour their development financing commitments. Debt constituted a great problem for many States, especially the heavily indebted poor countries. Technology transfer and capacity-building were other important elements that would enable developing countries to own tools for their national development.
ABDULLAH ABU SHAWESH, of the State of Palestine, associating himself with the Group of 77, said that eradicating poverty and hunger required that the international community work in a spirit of transparency. Managing public debt, promoting the philosophy of a just economy and full application of the Convention on Corruption were some ways of achieving that. Further, separating development and politics was impossible and the status of the Palestinians under Israeli occupation exemplified that. It was impossible to talk of development when terrorists and settlers were in valleys and hills and roads, spreading death, under full military protection. Palestine did not have access to external markets or a currency of its own or control over its water resources. If his State had access to its own economic resources, it would need less international aid, he concluded.
ORTIZ DE URBINA, of the International Renewable Energy Agency, noting that sustainable energy and, in particular, renewable energy had been recognized as key components of the 2030 Agenda, said it was the Committee’s task to identify pathways to move from declaration to implementation. The momentum for increased renewables deployment was moving faster than ever before, owing to rapid technological innovation, falling technology costs, appropriate support policies, steep learning curves and clear examples of success around the world. At least 164 countries had renewable energy targets, 131 of which were developing countries. Rising investment was reinforcing those ambitious national targets and as a result, for three years running, more new renewable power generation capacity had been added worldwide than in new fossil and nuclear power capacity combined. To assist countries in that endeavour, her Agency had launched REmap, a road map that, in line with Sustainable Development Goal 7, examined the realistic potential of a doubling in the renewable energy share of the global energy mix by 2030. Describing how renewable energy made economic, environmental and social sense, he said the Agency was committed to engaging Member States and other partners and to supporting the Committee’s work.
AJAY MADIWALE, of the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, said that, despite development progress, disasters and conflicts had wiped out decades of gains. The Federation welcomed the strong focus on building resilience in the 2030 Agenda with regard to eradicating hunger and malnutrition, achieving universal health coverage, providing universal education and access to water and sanitation. Still, the international community needed greater cooperation between humanitarian and development actors, traditionally separated by sectors, organizations, and indeed, even Committees of the General Assembly. Local communities must be involved at all levels, specifically in decision-making and resource allocation. Moreover, the Sustainable Development Goals must be localized if they were to be achieved. He also called for Governments to implement the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction.
CARLA MUCAVI, of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), said that despite the number of under-nourished people dropping by 216 million since 1990, 800 million people worldwide remained hungry. A comprehensive approach, including social protection, was needed to ensure food security. As 75 per cent of the world’s poor lived in rural areas of developing countries, agriculture and rural development were crucial. The critical impact of climate change should not be forgotten, putting at risk the existence of small island developing States. Turning to the cost of ending hunger, she said that according to a recent report published by FAO, the International Fund for Agricultural Development and the World Food Programme (WFP), an additional annual investment of $267 billion between 2016 and 2030 could lift every person out of hunger. That translated into $160 per year for every person living in extreme poverty. Underscoring that hunger was only one face of malnutrition, she said that obesity was also a concern worldwide, including in middle-income and developing countries.
Speaking in exercise of the right of reply, the representative of Israel congratulated the representative of Palestine for devoting one whole minute out of eight minutes to talk about development issues before moving on to political matters. He hoped that Palestinians would devote more time to the welfare of their own people. It was easier to point fingers at Israel, but that undermined the professional nature of this forum. Instead, the Palestinian leadership must stop making “false accusations” and make more efforts to improve the lives of its future generations.
Also speaking in exercise of the right of reply, the representative of the State of Palestine said that he was compelled to respond to the “lies” of the representative of the occupying Power who had said it was time for the Palestinian leadership to work for future generations. “Our future generations have no future,” he said. Despite Israel claiming to be among the most developed countries in agriculture, more than 70 per cent of the water that the occupying Power used for farming was Palestinian water extracted from the West Bank. The international community must support peace and development by closing borders to settlers and to the commodities produced by them in Palestinian territories.
Discussion on Working Methods
ANREJ LOGAR (Slovenia), Chair of the Second Committee, said the key task of the Committee was to improve its working methods and rationalize its agenda. It must avoid duplication and promote complementarity. It was also important to ensure that the future work of the Committee was fully aligned with the integrated vision of the 2030 Agenda and the Addis Ababa Action Agenda. Hence, reviewing the agenda of the Committee was now urgent and timely. “We need to move beyond business as usual,” he emphasized, pointing out that today’s meeting on working methods would focus primarily on addressing questions on whether sustainable development could become an overarching framework for the agenda of the Committee. The Committee may need time for additional consultations to review proposals and options for the future rationalization of its work.
THULANI NYEMBE (South Africa), speaking on behalf of the Group of 77, said it was important to ensure that the “richness of the agenda” of the Committee was not lost in favour of efficiency. He looked forward to the next phase of the Economic and Social Council dialogues on the longer-term plan for the United Nations development system. The quadrennial comprehensive policy review was imperative to build common understanding among Member States. It was also important to explore synergies in the work of the Committee and the development system with the High-level Political Forum. Furthermore, the Committee should study recommendations that emerged from discussions. The 2030 Agenda would need “all hands on deck” in terms of making it tangible and meaningful to all humanity.
WAYNE SWAN (Australia), speaking on behalf of Canada, Australia and New Zealand, said that one possible approach would be to cluster the Committee’s resolutions into three broad agenda items: organizational and operational activities, thematic considerations and follow-up to United Nations conferences. That structure would emphasize the Committee’s role in implementing the 2030 Agenda. “It is important to keep in mind that the Second Committee does not exist as an island, but is part of the larger UN architecture,” he said, warning against significant overlap between the work of the Second Committee and the Economic and Social Council. Undertaking a substantial revision and strengthening of the Committee was a complex matter and would require a significant effort from all.
AHMED SAREER (Maldives), speaking on behalf of the Alliance of Small Island States and associating himself with the Group of 77, said the goal of an evaluation of working methods should be the effective implementation of development priorities. It was important to ensure that the quality and substance of the Committee’s work was not lost in favour of ensuring efficiency. Needed were necessary linkages between the various agenda and programmes of action. The goal was to ensure that all processes led to the same end point: the realization of sustainable development, the eradication of poverty and the building of resilient communities. Today’s meeting must focus on a more comprehensive and wider discussion to ensure coherent and integrated support towards the implementation of the 2030 Agenda by the United Nations development system. It was critical to keep in mind that every country would implement the 2030 Agenda and measure its progress in its own way.
JAN PIROUZ POULSEN (European Union) said time was too short to reorganize the Committee for the current session. But it was critical to rethink the items so that it could “embrace the future”. That would require a comprehensive discussion on how to best avoid duplication. He looked to the Chairman and the Bureau for leadership to keep to deadlines and provide considerable savings in terms of human resources, as well as ease logistic constraints. Collective experience in past sessions had proven that missing deadlines, either when introducing resolutions or finalizing negotiations, could seriously hinder the work.
SARA LUNA CAMACHO (Mexico) said the Committee was in a position to promote agreements such as the 2030 Agenda and the Addis Ababa Action Agenda, while supplementing the discussion regarding the follow-up. In laying the basis for appropriate changes in its programme of work, it was necessary to identify emerging cross-cutting themes which would allow for proper implementation of the 2030 Agenda. In the resolution of the Committee concerning follow-up to the major summits, it was necessary to identify clear and useful connections with the 2030 Agenda. Further, with the assistance of the Secretariat, the Committee must draw up a list of actions that required the direct assistance of the Committee. The Committee must also replicate the practice of other Committees such as the Fourth, which adopted a cluster of resolutions on technical matters so as not to prolong negotiations and ensure enough time for genuine substantive discussions.
JÜRG LAUBER (Switzerland) emphasized the need for a substantial discussion on the methods of work of the Committee, and said that the General Assembly and its Committees needed to work coherently with the high-level political forum and the Economic and Social Council, with the Forum at the apex of a network of follow-up and review processes. The discussion should also take into account the agendas and methods of work of not only the Committee, but all those affected by the 2030 Agenda. His delegation expected that such a review would have consequences in reconsidering and restructuring current agenda items and related resolutions, in order to improve coherence.
MICHIKO MIYANO (Japan) said that it was time for a fresh and wide look at the working methods of the Committee. That work should continue in a transparent and inclusive manner, and her country welcomed dialogue with civil society. The Committee had not achieved the desired effectiveness, and it was important to reorganize its agenda items into an integrated one rather than a divided one. Recalling what the representative of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) had said during the general debate, she said that the Committee should not continue its silo approach. In aligning items with the 2030 Agenda, the Committee should eliminate duplication and manage the number of resolutions. The clustering approach mentioned by several delegations merited more attention. Further, many of the resolutions required the Secretary-General and the Secretariat to submit reports, and since the 2030 Agenda would also require reports, it was necessary to streamline the reporting.
RUSSEL SINGER (United States) said the Committee had much work to do in the next few months to avoid duplication. The sensitive discussion on working methods must be conducted with utmost transparency. The agenda should be updated to reflect common goals and priorities of Member States so that that any global citizen looking at the Committee’s agenda could have a full grasp of the work of the United Nations. He called for a balance of issues as outlined by the Sustainable Development Goals, particularly when it came to poverty eradication. The Committee must avoid overlap, and its name, as well as its issues, could be updated. The Committee must be dynamic and able to address new and pressing issues. It should also be able to decide that some issues can simply be let go. It would also make sense to question whether the Committee needed both a general debate and an open discussion on each agenda item.
EMMANUEL OLUWADARE OGUNTUYI (Nigeria) said that the Committee must continue to keep the “fire burning” in areas of critical importance to the global economy. He emphasized the need for focused engagement for the implementation of the 2030 Agenda. Civil society and the private sector should continue to be invited to the Committee to express their perspective so that Member States could benefit from the expertise of those groups. However, it must not burden the work of the Committee. He called for enhanced synergies, coherence and better collaboration between the Second and Third Committee.
EMILIO GONZÁLEZ SOCA (Cuba), associating himself with the Group of 77 and the Alliance of Small Island States, said he was not in favour with initiatives that “affect the prevalence” of the Committee. It was important to improve working methods so long as there was time to do so. It was important to have a general debate as it was a way for all delegations to express their views and state their priorities. It was simply a legitimate right. The Group of 77 was composed of many States, and therefore it was difficult to have a deadline when debating issues. The most important issue could have longer deadlines and consideration for issues. Resolution deliberations should be based on a case-by-case basis always bearing in mind the willingness of delegations to accept amendments. Round-table discussions contributed greatly but should not overburden the work of the Committee.
VICENTE AMARAL BEZERRA (Brazil), associating himself with the Group of 77, said that the transformative vision of the 2030 Agenda must be reflected in the working methods of the General Assembly and its resolutions. It was necessary to enhance the effect of the adopted resolutions while supporting the broader global architecture of sustainable development. The Sustainable Development Goals provided the best road map for the deliberations on the revitalization of the working methods. However, the Second Committee must not run the risk of creating further duplicities with other Committees on agenda items concerning peace, gender and access to justice. His country looked forward to continuing the discussion constructively.
TROY TORRINGTON (Guyana) said that his delegation agreed with the timeliness of the current discussion. The major outcomes that had been agreed upon in 2015 represented a paradigmatic shift in the overarching development context. The discussion must pay careful attention to the rule and status of the Committee because it was a global deliberative and norm-setting body on development. The Second Committee was the “G-193 on development”. There was a very intricate connection between the procedural and substantive aspects of the Committee’s work. Therefore, it was necessary to tread carefully and remember that at the core of the deliberation was a critical challenge. The silo approach persisted in many countries and it was important to incentivize an integrated approach.
MARIANNE LOE (Norway) said the Committee should identify its “added value” and think about how to best organize the agenda in order to enhance the quality and relevance of the resolutions while reducing their quantity. While significant changes would be possible only for the next session, some degree of prioritization was possible for the current one. Warning against duplication of agenda items, with those of the Economic and Social Council and the Third Committee, she added that the Second Committee, in line with the 2030 Agenda, needed to avoid discussing issues in silos. “We should focus on substantive issues rather than modalities,” she added agreeing with the idea put forward by the delegate of Australia to cluster items.