EU Speaking Points - ECOSOC Reform

Informal Consultations of the Plenary of United Nations General Assembly on ECOSOC Reform; Statement by Ambassador Gerhard Pfanzelter, Permanent Representative of Austria to the United Nations, on behalf of the European Union, New York

• On behalf of the European Union I would like to thank you for convening this further round of consultations on ECOSOC reform. The European Union attaches great importance to revitalising ECOSOC along the lines set out in the Summit Outcome Document.
  
  
• We need to substantiate the balance found in transposing the decisions made during the World Summit on ECOSOC's five functions while letting ECOSOC itself decide on detailed modalities.
  
  
• The EU is prepared to engage in the discussion along the main clusters of the draft resolution. We will also try to react to the proposals made by other delegations, recently circulated by the Secretariat.

• PP1: The EU believes that "reaffirming" instead of "recalling" the World Summit Outcome in PP 1 would be more appropriate.
  
  
• PP2: The EU can accept reference to GA resolution 59/250. Some delegations have proposed a reference to GA resolution 52/12B. The EU believes that this gives too much focus on the developmental aspect. If we include additional language, then the EU would propose to include a reference to GA resolution 57/300 with a focus on mainstreaming human rights into development.

• OP1: We believe that OP1 should be retained since it outlines the main tasks of global dialogue as contained in para. 155a of the WSO.
  
  
• OP2: The EU remains committed to a revitalized High-Level-Segment of the substantive session of ECOSOC which should be at the centre of reform. A High-Level-Dialogue (and in alternate years the Development Cooperation Forum (DCF)) should subsume the current policy dialogue and the thematic discussion of the HLS. Otherwise we would limit our reform efforts to re-labelling the current HLS.
  
  
• The High-Level-Dialogue (HLD) should not only focus on economic/financial aspects but embrace also social and environmental aspects. In this context the EU would like to emphasise that the HLD should serve the understanding that themes such as sustainable development, human rights and gender are taken into account in decision-making across the UN.
  
  
• The HLD and the DCF should each be held in alternate years. The EU believes that the number of reporting requests to the Secretariat should be kept to a reasonable minimum. With the aim of reducing duplications we could also envisage a consolidated report of the SG as a basis for the whole HLS thus comprising, whenever themes match, the HLD or the Development Cooperation Forum (DCF) (according to the year) and possibly the Annual-Ministerial-level-Review (AMR). Key stakeholders including civil society and the private sector should have the possibility to contribute to this report.
  
  
• OP3: The HLD should allow active participation of key stakeholders including civil society and the private sector. The EU believes that in line 3 reference should be made to "rules of procedure and practices" since on certain themes also other stakeholders engaged in processes like the Monterry-follow-up should be associated with the dialogue. This could enrich the dialogue with new ideas.
  
  
• OP4: The EU aims at a single Ministerial Declaration during the substantive session but other negotiated outcomes within the substantive session (such as currently in the coordination segment) are conceivable. The EU would argue for a negotiated outcome of the HLD. We could also consider one ministerial declaration built upon several chapters reflecting the different segment.

• OP5: The EU remains committed to the text of the WSO and does not deem it appropriate to enrich para. 155b with selective references.
  
  
• OP6a: The DCF should focus on dialogue and review trends - but not progress - in international development cooperation. In our understanding progress reviews should be undertaken during the Annual-Ministerial-level-Review (AMR).
  
  
• OP6b: The EU supports the co-chair's text. Recommendations for policy options and practical measures could be included under OP6e (President's summary)
  
  
• OP6c: The EU would prefer to see in OP6c language used in the co-chair's text of 9 January which foresees the exchange of experiences "in formulating, supporting and implementing national development strategies".
  
  
• OP6d: In the first line the EU would prefer "rules of procedure and practices" since on certain themes also other stakeholders engaged in processes like the Monterry-follow-up could be associated with the dialogue. The EU would like to see the reference to UNCTAD deleted since in our understanding UNCTAD is part of the UN organizations.
  
  
• OP7: The EU welcomes the biennal DCF as part of the renewed HLS. The DCF should take place in alternate years to the HLD of the High-Level Segment. Additionally, it should not duplicate themes already dealt with in other relevant meetings, such as the GA High Level Dialogue on Financing for Development (FfD).
  
  
• OP8: The EU can accept the co-chair's text but believes that the number of reporting requests to the Secretariat should be kept to a reasonable minimum. With the aim of reducing duplications we could also envisage a consolidated report of the SG as a basis for the whole HLS thus comprising the HLD, DCF and possibly, whenever themes match, the AMR. Key stakeholders including civil society and the private sector should have the possibility to contribute to this consolidated report.

• OP10a: The EU supports thematic clusters. The AMR should not examine the major UN conferences and summits all at once and also not examine them individually one after another. A comprehensive review of all MDGs in the context of the AMR could be foreseen. The EU believes that thematic cluster discussions do not rule out cross-sectoral approaches. They rather open the possibility to explore new approaches, similar but broader, as it has previously appeared difficult to find a consensus on cross-sectoral approaches.
  
  
• OP10b: ECOSOC needs to define the modalities for voluntary reviews which should be based on the AMR's thematic clusters but not cross-sectoral approaches as these approaches proved difficult to realize since they were first established three years ago.
  
  
• The EU supports the Swiss proposal of a timely establishment of a multiyear program so that subsidiary and other implementing bodies can better contribute to the AMR.
  
  
• OP12: The AMR should be also considered in the light of GA resolution 57/270B, since the AMR is a way to upgrade (ministerial level) the follow-up of the conferences and summits (currently assigned to the coordination segment). We should consider how the DCF, HLD and AMR can be organized within the HLS and integrate the coordination segment in order to avoid redundancies. The EU sees no added value in a "reduced" coordination segment since conferences follow-up (assigned by resolution 57/270B) will be reviewed through the renewed HLS and its negotiated outcome.
  
  
• OP13: The EU supports the idea that ECOSOC subsidiary bodies should organize their work so as to contribute to the preparation for the AMR.
  
  
• OP14: Given the primary responsibility of subsidiary bodies for the review and assessment of progress in the implementation of the major UN summits in the economic, social and related fields, the EU puts emphasis on ECOSOC's overall added value of undertaking thematic-cluster-focussed reviews as outlined above. Therefore we suggest to refer to a "thematic-cluster-focussed assessment" in line 3 of this paragraph.
  
  
• OP16: The EU can accept the co-chair's text but believes that the number of reporting requests to the Secretariat should be kept to a reasonable minimum. With the aim of reducing duplications we could also envisage a consolidated report of the SG as a basis for the whole HLS thus comprising the HLD, DCF and possibly, in the context exposed earlier, the AMR. Key stakeholders including civil society and the private sector should have the possibility to contribute to this consolidated report.
  
  
• OP17: The EU aims at a single Ministerial Declaration during the substantive session but other negotiated outcomes within the substantive session (such as currently in the coordination segment) are conceivable. The EU would argue for a negotiated outcome of the HLD.

• OP19: The EU can support the co-chair's text as a compromise. The EU wants to keep the humanitarian segment with its current responsibilities. Ad-hoc meetings should not duplicate the work of OCHA and should be limited to raising awareness and promoting engagement.
  
  
• OP21: The EU believes that a follow-up to ad hoc meetings on humanitarian emergencies within the humanitarian segment can be beneficial.

• OP23: The EU supports the retention of this paragraph which is based on par. 168 indent 4 of the WSO.
  
  
• Proposal of G77 as to a minimum total meeting time of ECOSOC: The EU does not believe that there is a need for prescribing a minimum meeting time for ECOSOC. Practice will show how much time is needed for the renewed segments and ECOSOC could adapt its modalities accordingly.

• OP25: Resource allocation should take into account all priorities within the UN. The EU wishes to stress that ECOSOC reform should also take place within existing resources. If need be, reallocation of resources could focus on the exercise of the five functions.
  
  
• OP26: The EU strongly supports a review of the current distribution of work between the GA, its Second and Third Committee and ECOSOC. This, however, must be undertaken with due regard to the respective competences of both principal organs.

• The EU supports a strong link between ECOSOC and the PBC in accordance with GA resolution 60/180. ECOSOC should highlight in particular the medium and long-term economic, social and environmental dimensions of post-conflict/peace-building situations and address the question of transition from relief to development according to its existing practice.

| Arriba |

• EU Speaking Points - Mandate Review, ECOSOC  (23/5/2006)
• EU Presidency Statement - ECOSOC Spring Meeting (24/4/2006)
• EU Speaking Points - General Assembly Revitalization  (16/2/2006)
• EU Presidency Statement - Commission for Social Development: Agenda Item 3b  (10/2/2006)
• EU Speaking Points - Informal Consultations on ECOSOC Reform  (30/1/2006)
• EU Speaking Points - ECOSOC Reform (13/1/2006)
• EU Presidency Statement - ECOSOC Reform (20/12/2005)
• EU Presidency Statement - ECOSOC reform (8/12/2005)
• EU Presidency Statement - Follow up to Summit Outcome on Development and ECOSOC reform (22/11/2005)
• EU Paper on ECOSOC Reform (24/10/2005)