Post-2015 development agenda session on follow-up and review, 18 -22 May – No 6: Co-facilitators opening remarks

Opening the fifth session of the intergovernmental negotiations (IGN), Ambassador Macharia Kamau, Co-facilitator reminded delegates that this was the last of the ‘scripted’ sessions and hoped that it will be possible to adopt the post-2015 development agenda by the end of July.  

In referring to this conversation on follow-up and review, he said that it might be ‘tricky’ insofar as some elements of the agenda have yet to be tied down, while more clarity is needed in other areas. It is necessary to think beyond the negotiations to see where things will be in 2016 and beyond up to 2030. Everything that is being discussed now would require consideration as to how the process will be unfolding from 2016 to 2030.

There should be an early clear commitment for future collaboration. Coherence and collective commitment can only be realized through a universal, integrated collaborative framework. Early action by March, or maybe June, that operationalized the framework will be of paramount important. Implementation must commence as early and as swiftly as possible. A time lag might undermine confidence. He reminded delegates that the first years of the MDGs were the most difficult in trying to get popular and collective action around them. Key aspiration areas for universal action, on which there appeared to be agreement, include ending extreme poverty and leave no one behind; end hunger and leave no one behind; end preventable child death and preventable diseases everywhere; achieve gender equality for all women and girls, etc. The IGN must find a follow up framework that speaks to these aspirations. They are however unattainable without the necessary enabling environment which requires all 17 goals and 169 targets. Governments will not be able to pick and choose which ones to achieve and which ones not to, as together, cumulatively and synergistically they will achieve formative and rapid success. The framework must be the point at which this is all brought together systematically.

Historically this had not been done before. All the goals together will be necessary to get the job done in 15 years. The framework must speak to people, planet, prosperity and partnerships. And the reporting process will ask, for example, whether it is having right impact and building the right partnerships. It must also keep a focus on the 3 pillars. Indeed, there is considerable experience out there, while the challenge is very different this time.

He asked for concrete suggestions, possible vertical linkages, taking into account coherence between the national, regional and global levels. Horizontal linkages are also required for the interplay between governments and other stakeholders. While governments might have certain expectations, others do too. Four sessions have been allocated for this process instead of just one and a half. He therefore hoped that there would be a thorough conversation.

Other areas to be discussed during the week include revisiting the targets and indicators, on which they needed to conclude precisely how to see the process moving forward; the themes for interactive dialogue for the Summit in September that would have to be presented to Member States very soon; as well as how to move forward in next three sessions and how to engage with the High-level Political Forum (HLPF).

Ambassador David Donoghue, Co-facilitator, said that implementation is a crucial part of forthcoming agenda, for which follow up and review is integral. He therefore hoped for a constructive and concise proposals. The Co-faciltators approach was to take nothing for granted in this debate. They have not sought to subdivided the debate. There is, however, a need for a structure that will have several levels and multiple actors. The Agenda is far-reaching so that the follow up and review should be up to the same standard. He did not see the Agenda as being a pretty picture to hang on the wall, but one for action to begin work on as soon as it has been adopted. They therefore need to get clarity on its elements and delegations should therefore indicate as clearly as possible what they wished to see. The framework is voluntary and the follow up and review is meant to be an aid to Member States, not to punish them for falling below expectation. The reporting requirements therefore have to be kept in proportion.