EU Speaking Points - Informal Consultations on ECOSOC Reform

Informal Consultations of the Plenary of the United Nations General Assembly on ECOSOC Reform; Statement by Minister Alexander Marschik, Deputy Permanent Representative of Austria to the UN, 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, as you know, great importance to revitalising ECOSOC along the lines set out in the Summit Outcome Document.
  
  
• I would also like to thank the two co-Chairs for their excellent work over the last two months and the transparent manner in which you have conducted their consultations. We welcome their draft resolution. We believe it reflects our discussions and comments in a carefully balanced manner. Though not all of them have been taken on board, we recognize and appreciate efforts made by you to reach consensus.
  
  
• We also attach great importance to 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.
  
  
• As we outlined previously, we consider the following as important and guiding elements for ECOSOC reform:
  • ECOSOC has a vital system-wide co-ordinating role for UN-work on economic, social, environmental, humanitarian and related issues including the mainstreaming of human rights in the UN. This coordination role includes ensuring that there are no overlaps or gaps within the UN system as well as promoting the consistency of UN policies in these areas.
    
  • ECOSOC should make full use of its comparative advantage as a multi-stakeholder-forum in order to foster substantive debates among high-level representatives including those from the private sector and civil society.
• The EU hence believes that we should now be close to an agreement acceptable for all. We recognize that discussions on development follow-up, though distinct on many aspects, should continue to be followed in parallel.
  
  
• I realize, Mr. co-chair, that not all changes of the delegations could be accommodated but the EU believes and encourages you that the format of this process should be continued.
  
  
• In line with the request in your letter to be specific:
  • The preambular part is acceptable to us. We appreciate the fact that it is focused, balanced and faithful to the role that the Charter and the General Assembly have vested in ECOSOC. However, to be coherent with language throughout the texts, we should reaffirm the World Summit Outcome in preambular par. 1.
    
    
  • On the operational part of the draft resolution, we think it is wise to consider each of the five functions identified for ECOSOC in the World Summit Outcome document.
    
    
  • As regards the global dialogue (OP 1-4)
    • The EU agrees that global dialogue addressing the economic, social, environmental and humanitarian fields should continue to be promoted with a focus on the substantive session of ECOSOC. In that context, it is fundamental to make full use of the high-level dialogue alternatively with the Development Cooperation Forum (DCF).
      
    • We support the suggestion for OP 4 and see merit in ministerial declarations as means to reflect consensus on pertinent questions. Still we believe that the substantive session of ECOSOC should normally not comprise more than one Ministerial Declaration but we can envisage other forms of negotiated outcomes. We should also streamline, as much as possible, the number of reporting requests to the Secretariat.
    
    
  • The EU welcomes the biennial Development Cooperation Forum (DCF) (OP 5-8) as described in OP 5 and 6. Through it we can make best use of ECOSOC's development expertise and build on the current practice as a forum for all stakeholders including civil society.
    • The reference to UNCTAD in OP 6d should be clarified in our opinion since in our understanding UNCTAD is part of the United Nations.
    
    
  • The EU supports an annual Ministerial-level review (AMR) (OP 9 -7) to assess progress in the implementation of the outcomes of the major UN Conferences and Summits. Let me make a few observations.
    • It does not seem feasible to address all conferences in one session. Also it seems inappropriate to concentrate on conference-outcomes one by one. A thematic approach, as foreseen in OP10, seems to be the best solution. This, however, should not rule out the possibility of a comprehensive review of the Millennium Development Goals.
      
    • As for national presentations and/or voluntary reviews of the MDGs the EU remains open to this potentially interesting concept but believes that the feasibility of this idea should be subject to practical arrangements made by ECOSOC.
      
    • In OP 11 the timely establishment of a multiyear program of work through ECOSOC will be essential in order to facilitate the contribution by its subsidiary bodies, functional commissions and other organizations and bodies.
      
    • We can accept OP 12 and wish to recall that, in our understanding, the annual Ministerial-level review (AMR) should be also considered in the light of resolution 57/270B, since it is a way to upgrade the follow-up of the conferences and summits, a task therein assigned currently to the coordination segment. We should therefore consider the coordination segment in that context and see how, together, the Development Cooperation Forum (DCF), global dialogue and annual Ministerial-level review (AMR) can be organized within the high-level segment (HLS) and articulated with the coordination segment.
    
    
  • Mr. co-chair, we welcome the rephrasing of the section regarding ECOSOC's efforts in supporting and complementing international efforts aimed at addressing humanitarian emergencies (OP 18-21) with the understanding that the humanitarian segment will retain its responsibilities. It clarifies the nature of possible ad-hoc meetings (focus on raising awareness and mobilizing attention, OP 19) and ensures that there will be no duplication with the work undertaken by OCHA. A review in the humanitarian segment (OP 21) of ECOSOC could provide a useful contribution on lessons learnt.
    
  • As regards the coordination of funds, programmes and agencies (OP 22-24) the EU sees this as an important task of ECOSOC, as currently performed, and welcomes the suggestions made by you.
• A few last remarks:
  • 
    
  • As regards OP 25, the EU believes that ECOSOC reform should take place within existing resources.
    
    
  • In OP 26 the EU considers vital both for ECOSOC and the General Assembly to respect the complementarity of their respective competences.
    
    
  • As we already stated previously, the EU supports a strong linkage between ECOSOC and the Peace-building Commission as decided in and within the scope of General Assembly 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 should continue to address the question of transition from relief to development according to its existing practice.
    
    
  • Finally, let me also stress that the EU appreciates the work of the ad hoc advisory groups on Guinea, Bissau, Burundi and Haiti.

| Haut |

• EU Speaking Points - Mandate Review, ECOSOC  (23/5/2006)
• EU Detailed Speaking Points - ECOSOC Reform  (20/2/2006)
• EU Speaking Points - ECOSOC Reform (9/2/2006)
• EU Speaking Points - UN Secretariat and Management 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)