ENB:11:34 [Next] . [Previous] . [Contents]


F. Implementation and follow-up: The US placed all of 170 (function of the Commission) in mental brackets, pending the outcome of the chapeau. The EU preferred to delete (a) (develop and promote policy objectives), (b) (lead the UN system) and (c) (activities in harmony with UN conferences). He offered to accept all three with the amendments that the Commission should "continue to" develop and the reference to Habitat II in (a) be deleted, and that the Commission should "follow closely," rather than lead, the UN system in (b). The G-77/CHINA (INDIA) added reference to the Habitat Agenda in (a), called on the Commission to "follow-up and monitor" in (b), and suggested deleting (c). Delegates added "continue to" and a reference to the Habitat Agenda in (a), called on the Commission to "track progress of the activities" of the UN in (b), and called for the promotion of adequate shelter in harmony with UNCED recommendations, and taking into account relevant outcomes of other major UN conferences in (c).

In 170(c) (promote national actions), the G-77/CHINA proposed deleting the reference to promoting national actions, but the US, supported by CANADA, said national focus was needed for balance with international concerns. Delegates added a reference to "international" actions in (d) and amended a reference to international actions in (e).

Delegates added 170bis, based on an EU-proposed paragraph calling on the Commission to review its work programme and make recommendations to ECOSOC in the framework of its review of its subsidiary bodies’ activities. The G-77/CHINA proposed that, rather than reviewing its working methods to involve civil society, such action should be in accordance with its rules of procedures. A new 170ter, which was bracketed, notes that the mandate of the Commission will be strengthened and expanded to incorporate and implement the Habitat Agenda. The US proposed that the mandate be reoriented and strengthened, in the context of UN reforms.

In 171 (the Centre), the EU proposed a chapeau on the role of the Centre. The US proposed changing "shall" to "should" continue to service the Commission. The G- 77/CHINA said this implied that the Centre would not continue in this capacity. The Chair proposed language that invites ECOSOC to review the role and function of the Centre, to acknowledge the ongoing UN review, but the G-77/CHINA objected to mentioning the ECOSOC review in this section. The G-77/CHINA also objected to "within its present mandate" and said Habitat II will add responsibilities, thereby expanding the mandate. The EU said that the GA and ECOSOC, not the Conference, have the authority to change the mandate.

The US, supported by the EU, proposed deleting a reference designating the Executive Director for the Centre as Under-Secretary-General. The EU noted it was not the decision of the Conference. The G-77/CHINA objected and bracketed the reference. The US proposed changing "entrusted with" to "should have" in reference to the Centre’s responsibilities. The G-77/CHINA proposed "shall have."

Prior to considering the list of the Centre’s responsibilities, the RUSSIAN FEDERATION, the US and the EU noted that the existing text cites the responsibilities in GA Resolution 32/162 and the text should not repeat the entire list. The G-77/CHINA noted that the list in the existing text has been updated. The US noted that the ECOSOC review process will update the list, and the existing list should be used. The G-77/CHINA said that all these recommendation will go to the GA, which will accept or reject, therefore the group can seek to make changes as needed.

In 171(a) (harmonization of development programmes), the US proposed changing "to ensure" to "monitoring" harmonization. The EU proposed "at the inter- secretariat level" and the PHILIPPINES proposed "inter-agency." Both references were bracketed. In 171(c) (executing human settlements programmes), the US proposed references to "where appropriate" and "in accordance with the legal framework of each country." CANADA proposed "promote, facilitate and execute" programmes. The RUSSIAN FEDERATION proposed a reference to social housing reform programmes. Delegates continued negotiations during an evening session.

[Return to start of article]