ENB:06:35
[Next] .
[Previous] .
[Contents]
MAIN COMMITTEE
XIII. NATIONAL ACTION: The bracketed text in paragraph 13.16 (implementation costs), "and up to one third from external sources," was considered. Algeria, on behalf of the G-77, proposed deleting the brackets. Germany, on behalf of the EU, and supported by Japan, concurred. Brazil, supported by the US, Argentina and others, pointed out that the French text was different from the English and suggested "in the order of" rather than "up to." Guyana, supported by others, proposed adding, "at least one-third." Finally, the G-77 and the EU agreed that "in the order of" was acceptable, with the understanding that it would also be reflected in 14.11.
In paragraph 13.22, the Secretariat noted that the bracketed text, "taking into account the rights and responsibilities of parents and the need for adolescents," was not bracketed in paragraph 11.9. There was no further discussion.
In paragraph 13.23, Senegal, supported by Zimbabwe, Mali and others, proposed an amendment where Governments would devote at least 20% of public sector expenditures to the social sectors stressing poverty eradication. Algeria, on behalf of the G-77, noted that it could not endorse this concept until the outcome of discussions at the Social Summit. Sweden highlighted its commitment to social development assistance, but pointed out that adoption of the 20/20 Initiative would require increased understanding. Germany, on behalf of the EU, supported by Japan and others, preferred to use the phrase "an increased proportion" rather than endorsing the 20/20 Initiative. The Chair encouraged Senegal and the EU to consult. In the afternoon, delegates agreed to a compromise text, which was part of a package deal with paragraph 14.11: "In this regard, Governments are urged to devote an increased proportion of public sector expenditures to the social sectors, as well as an increased proportion of official development assistance...."
The EU later presented compromise text on paragraph 13.15, "These are indicative cost estimates prepared by experts based on experience to date of the four components referred to above. These estimates should be reviewed and updated on the basis of the comprehensive approach reflected in paragraph 13.14 of this Programme of Action, particularly with respect to the costs of implementing reproductive health service delivery." In addition, in sub-paragraph (b), "cost" is deleted as are the brackets in sub-paragraphs (a)-(d).
XIV. INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION: Delegates reached agreement to remove the brackets around paragraph 14.3(b) and it was amended: "To urge that the international community adopt favourable macroeconomic policies for promoting sustained economic growth and development in developing countries." Austria then proposed another amendment to change "development" to "in the context of sustainable development." When no other delegates supported this amendment, Austria agreed to withdraw it. The EU later supported Austria's amendment. The Chair insisted that this paragraph was closed to further discussion.
Delegates were not able to reach agreement on paragraph 14.3(f) (human rights). China called for its deletion, since it is covered in the Principles. The G-77, supported by China, proposed a new formulation: "To ensure that all population and development programmes adhere to basic human rights recognized by the international community and the present Programme of Action in accordance with the specific conditions of each country." The EU, supported by the US, also proposed an alternative: "To ensure that all population and development programmes, while recognizing the specific conditions of each country, adhere to basic human rights recognized by the international community and recalled in the present Programme of Action." Nothing was resolved.
In 14.10(b) (objectives), delegates agreed to remove the brackets around "while striving to avoid as far as possible a reduction in the resources for other development areas." The brackets were also removed from paragraph 14.11, as a result of compromises with 13.23 and 13.15. The phrase "in the order of" was inserted before $5.7 billion. The last sentence was replaced with: "The international community takes note of the initiative to mobilize resources to give all people access to basic social services, known as the 20/20 Initiative, which will be studied further within the World Summit for Social Development."
Paragraphs 14.13, 14.15 and 14.16 all contained reference to countries with economies in transition. Delegates agreed to: retain the reference to this group of countries in 14.13 (donor coordination); delete the reference in 14.14 (allocation of external financial resources); and remove the brackets from 14.15, which was amended to read "...receive temporary assistance for population and development activities..."
In paragraph 14.17 (innovative financing), the brackets were removed and the text reads: "Innovative financing, including new ways of generating public and private financing resources, inter alia, various forms of debt relief, including greater use of debt forgiveness for government investment in population and development programmes, should be explored."
XVI. FOLLOW-UP TO THE CONFERENCE: There were three options for paragraph 16.3 on indicators and the respect for national law, cultural, and religious beliefs. The US, supported by Ethiopia, suggested an amendment to the third draft so that reference would be made to human rights and ethical principles, while Mexico offered to retain the second version as a compromise. Despite their concerns, delegates accepted the retention of the third draft.
III. INTERRELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN POPULATION, SUSTAINED ECONOMIC GROWTH AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: The G-77 suggested retaining the part of paragraph 3.16 that recalls the right to development, but wanted to delete the reference to discrimination against women. The EU suggested deleting the reference to the right to development, but maintaining the part that dealt with discrimination against women. Some delegates highlighted that the right to development was recognized at the beginning of this Conference. The US suggested a compromise amendment, which was accepted, whereby the right to development is retained as part of all other human rights and particular attention is granted to women in developed and developing countries.
The Holy See asked about paragraph 3.19, which calls for special attention to underserved members of society. This category includes children and the paragraph mentions that they should be provided with jobs, skill development and reproductive health. The Chair agreed that the paragraph does not make sense and asked the Holy See to consult with others.
In paragraph 3.21 (job creation), the G-77 wanted to delete a part of the paragraph that calls for an end to corruption, good governance, democratic institutions, and the reorientation of budget priorities toward social sectors and resource development. Mexico agreed that the paragraph deals with internal matters and should be deleted. The EU wanted to retain the text. Malaysia agreed to retain the text if the reference to an "environmentally sound basis" was dropped, while Libya said that this was the only part of the text that should be retained. The US once more provided compromise language by suggesting that the paragraph refer to "investment on an environmentally sound basis, greater investment in human resources development and the development of democratic institutions and good governance." Algeria said that this was acceptable to the G-77 but, despite his best efforts, a number of G-77 members disagreed and suggested keeping the old text. The participants finally agreed to the compromise text.
IV. GENDER EQUALITY, EQUITY AND EMPOWERMENT OF WOMEN: The EU agreed to delete the brackets in paragraph 4.18 (universal primary education) and this was accepted. Egypt, supported by Jordan, Tunisia and others, implored the Chair to amend paragraph 4.17 because the word "equitable" in the English text has been translated differently in Arabic. She also sought to delete "inheritance rights" in the English version and the phrase "in particular by providing alternatives to early marriage" in paragraph 4.21. The Chair restated that unbracketed text could not be reopened. Zimbabwe and the British Virgin Islands supported the Chair's suggestion. Algeria stated that the Islamic countries would need time to consult.
Pakistan and Iran proposed amendments to unbracketed text. Algeria and Iran stated that at some point it would be a choice whether to save the Conference or save the rules of procedure.
V. THE FAMILY, ITS ROLES, COMPOSITION AND STRUCTURE: In paragraph 5.1, Iran wanted to replace "concepts of the family" with "forms of the family," to be consistent with the discussion on principles. Once again the Chair said that unbracketed text could not be reopened. Canada suggested adjusting this paragraph, if necessary, after reaching agreement on principles.
In paragraph 5.5 (elimination of discrimination), Egypt, Pakistan and Morocco had difficulties with the reference to "other unions." Yet again other delegates and the Chair argued that this could not be reopened. A number of counties also wanted clarification on the meaning of this phrase.
VI. POPULATION GROWTH AND STRUCTURE: In addition to "sexual and reproductive health care," the only brackets in this chapter were around indigenous people[s]. This matter is currently being discussed in the chapter on principles. A series of countries then asked that unbracketed text be amended. Argentina, supported by Brazil, asked that the reference to "territories" be replaced with "land." Bolivia argued that these are two different concepts that should not be confused. Brazil added that land ownership should not be substituted for tenure. Swaziland said that unbracketed text should not be re-opened and this was reiterated by the Chair.
The Chair noted that he would respond on Friday to the amendments to unbracketed text in Chapters IV, V and VI.
XII. TECHNOLOGY, RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT: The footnote attached to paragraph 12.20, which lists underserved groups, contained brackets around the entire footnote and "indigenous people[s]." Australia commented that the decision to "s" or not to "s" is being addressed in the discussion on principles. Germany thought that the footnote included too many groups. Canada proposed adding language at the beginning of the footnote to read "which could include." This amendment was accepted.
XV. PARTNERSHIP WITH THE NON- GOVERNMENTAL SECTOR: The Chair noted that the only brackets in this chapter are around "family planning" and "reproductive health." The Holy See objected the language in 15.13, which addresses human rights. She requested that the language used in paragraph 14.3(f), which is still under negotiation, also apply here.