A/64/PV.121 General Assembly

The Assembly has thus concluded its consideration of agenda item 13.

Before giving the floor to speakers in explanation of position on the resolution just adopted, may I remind delegations that explanations of vote are limited to 10 minutes and should be made by delegations from their seats.

Since this is probably the last meeting of this session, I want to pay tribute to you, Sir, and to your presidency. It has been an excellent and productive presidency. You produced a great deal of work on behalf of all of us, and we thank you very much. As we pay tribute to you, we in the Group of 77 and China pledge our cooperation to the President of the General Assembly at its sixty-fifth session. I take the floor on this important issue, first, to thank the co-facilitators, the Ambassador of Senegal and the Ambassador of Denmark, and you for your tireless work to produce this important outcome document. We in the Group of 77 were looking for a scaling-up of the resources that will be devoted to the implementation and realization of the Millennium Development Goals. But we were conscious of the economic difficulties that the world is witnessing and therefore we settled and went along with the compromise on the proviso that the 0.7 per cent commitment would be upheld and that the developed world would step up to the plate and help developing countries in their realization of the Millennium Development Goals. It was not very easy for us. Some members of the Group of 77 and China had serious reservations on such issues as human security, but they opted to join the consensus. Here I want to single out the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, which had difficulties with the concept of human security. But Venezuela was gracious enough to give prominence to our common interests rather than to its own individual interests, and so it joined the consensus. For that, we are grateful to them and to everyone else, including our partners in the negotiation.

We wish to join in the thanks expressed by the Chairman of the Group of 77 and China to you, Sir, for your excellent leadership of the General Assembly. In that respect, we have supported the ideas that you have proposed and are working to ensure that they are fully accomplished. Venezuela joined the consensus on resolution 64/299, but we should like to state for the record some of our concerns, which were fully explained during the negotiation process that was conducted over the course of several months. The negotiation process surrounding the outcome document of the High-level Meeting of the United Nations General Assembly on the Millennium Development Goals was arduous and complicated. The Venezuelan delegation participated actively in the negotiation process and firmly and resolutely defended the positions of the G77 and China. It has also contributed to building a platform that reflects the positions of the developing countries. During the negotiations, it became evident that some countries refuse to recognize the dire consequences of capitalism’s economic and financial crisis and claim that developing countries should continue to implement neo-liberal prescriptions, whose disastrous effects are also felt by the most vulnerable sectors in developed countries. My delegation has reaffirmed that South-South cooperation, and cooperation in general, should be free of conditionalities and that countries should design and implement their own development plans in an autonomous and sovereign manner, regardless of the dictates of the Bretton Woods institutions. The draft document that has been adopted takes note, for example, of non-existent progress on the behaviour of the Bretton Woods institutions, which have failed miserably and are primarily responsible for the current crisis that is having such disruptive effects, in particular in developing countries. It also ignores the importance of implementing instruments such as special drawing rights, which can leverage the development of countries and contribute to the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals and to eliminating the monopoly over credit held by the Bretton Woods institutions, which have done such harm to peoples. Another source of disappointment for our country is the imbalanced and unambitious treatment given to official development assistance (ODA) an issue that is so sensitive for developing countries. In that regard, I would like to emphasize that very important paragraphs proposed by the Group of 77 and China during the negotiations were not included in the draft outcome document. It is important to underscore that the efforts made by developed countries with regard to official development assistance have not been sustained, as large donors have failed to meet the agreed target of allocating 0.7 per cent of their gross domestic product to ODA. In addition, it is not clear what the draft document means by quality of assistance, especially as an assessment of the improvements in the quality of assistance should be conditioned by the “quantity” that those countries provide. It is also important to point out that, for the sake of preserving the principles of multilateralism, the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela has maintained that worthwhile initiatives of the Secretary-General should not be placed above those of Member States. Member States are first and foremost responsible for formulating national policies to attain the Millennium Development Goals and for taking actions for the achievement of the agreed common goals. My country requests that the record of this meeting reflect our hope that this process, initiated by the Secretary-General along with a group of interested States to ensure that the Global Strategy for Women’s and Children’s Health, will result in a consensus multilateral policy that is open, transparent and inclusive of all Member States. Therefore, by way of compromise, we have suggested that it be explicitly reflected that that the Secretary-General’s report on the Strategy be open to comments and feedback from all Member States. Venezuela, which is a resolute supporter of multilateralism, would also like it reflected in the record that our acceptance of the paragraph to which I have referred should not be viewed as acceptance or legitimization by our country of the practices promoted through the so-called coalition of the willing, which we think can blur the principles of the Charter of the United Nations. Finally, I would like once again to emphasize the importance that our country attaches to the unity of the Group of 77 and China as a platform for the countries of the South. We are therefore grateful for the efforts made by His Excellency Ambassador Abdullah Alsaidi, Permanent Representative of Yemen, in his capacity as Chairman of the Group. We would also like to acknowledge your efforts, Mr. President, in reaching consensus on the resolution that has been adopted.

My delegation joined the consensus of resolution 64/299 in the hope that the summit outcome will send a message of hope to all those suffering from poverty, hunger, external shocks and foreign intervention. We sincerely view the summit as the last opportunity to accelerate progress towards the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) by 2015, taking into account the progress made with regard to the internationally agreed development goals through a comprehensive review of successes, best practices and lessons learned, as well as obstacles, gaps, challenges and opportunities, leading to concrete strategies for action. However, the tendency of developed partners, from the very beginning, to divert the focus of the conference to so-called cross-cutting issues and to insist on artificial red lines against the scaling up of the global partnership made the negotiation process cumbersome and seriously harmed the final draft outcome as an agenda for action. Due to that same approach taken by developed partners, the draft outcome almost totally fails to address systemic shortcomings. The Group of 77 and China took a practical yet flexible path. Unfortunately, that was not properly reciprocated. Some may have been successful in avoiding any new commitments. However, it is clear that realities do not wait to be decided on or altered just by decisions we make here. The bitter fact is that increasing poverty, hunger and inequality at all levels are preventing Governments from putting in place effective policies to attain all the MDGs at the same time. For developing countries, the current external environment is not conducive to attaining the MDGs. Another clear example of that approach was evident during the negotiations on the situation of peoples living under foreign occupation. While the Group of 77 and China took a totally developmental approach to the subject, a few countries from the other side politicized the issue and brought the whole process close to deadlock. As a result, the final draft outcome’s reflection of the situation of peoples living under foreign occupation is quite unfair, as compared to the situation of other peoples in need of special and urgent attention. Let me conclude by expressing my appreciation for the efforts made by the co-facilitators, the Permanent Representatives of Senegal and Denmark, to lead the process in an open, transparent and inclusive manner and finalize the negotiations and a consensual draft outcome.

My delegation, Mr. President, associates itself with the words of gratitude that have been expressed with regard to your efforts. I would also like to express our satisfaction with the agreements that have been reached in the General Assembly in connection with resolution 64/299. My country believes that these agreements have made it possible to adopt a balanced overall document that identifies priorities and reiterates the commitment of Member States towards attainment of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). That said, my delegation would like to clarify its position on two specific issues referred to in the draft document that the Assembly is submitting to the summit. First, we would like to mention the inclusion of the reference to the notion of human security in paragraph 25. Since the agreed wording on that theme acknowledges that there is not yet a consensus definition of the notion of human security, it is necessary to be aware that neither is there clarity on the areas in which its application may or may not be appropriate. Thus, my delegation interprets the reference to human security merely as a reference to wording agreed in resolution 64/291 and that it in no way indicates agreement on the relevance of the concept in the context of the Millennium Development Goals and of development. Secondly, we would like to mention the list of situations indiscriminately included in paragraph 49 of the document under discussion without any specific conceptual criteria. My delegation believes that how we address each situation listed in that paragraph should be understood in the light of the relevant agreements of this Assembly as well as national policies and legislation. It is up to each State to define whether particular situations that affect it have a bearing on development and whether to coordinate cooperation and assistance activities with the international community. With those comments, my delegation would like once again to express its appreciation for the spirit of cooperation shown by all countries during the negotiations on the draft document and for the commitment to a successful summit that achieves concrete results.

At the outset, the Cuban delegation would like to express its full support for the statement made by the Ambassador of Yemen on behalf of the Group of 77. We would also like to express our appreciation for the efforts of the facilitators of this process, the Permanent Representatives of Senegal and Denmark, as well as for your efforts, Mr. President. Cuba joined the consensus on resolution 64/299, bearing in mind the positive elements it contains. At the same time, we believe that the draft document which today the General Assembly is proposing for adoption at the upcoming meeting on the Millennium Development Goals does not meet the expectations of developing countries on several important issues. Despite the efforts made by the Group of 77 to substantially contribute to the draft document initially drawn up as a basis for negotiations, most of the Group’s proposals are not adequately reflected in the final version, in particular those relating to Goal 8. In the course of the analysis and review of Goal 8, the developing countries hoped that the document would factually reflect the repeated lack of implementation by developed countries of the various elements set out in that Goal. That was not possible. The most powerful nations not only prevented it, but also took it upon themselves during the negotiations to block any language that pointed to the need to grant new and additional resources to the underdeveloped world to help achieve the modest Millennium Development Goals. Thus, the document lacks sufficiently frank and critical analysis of the current situation, even though it has been clearly demonstrated that the lack of financial resources, together with the restrictions imposed by the current world order, are the real reasons for the serious danger of the modest Goals agreed upon in 2000 not being reached. Nonetheless, the document itself acknowledges the huge efforts that the South has been making to achieve the MDGs and our countries’ various initiatives in many areas in that regard. We are certain that the debate during the High- level Meeting will be much richer than its final document. The event will serve once again as a forum for our countries to again express their wishes and legitimate aspirations. The Cuban delegation will continue to work with the other nations of the South towards the attainment of those wishes and aspirations.

We have heard the last speaker in explanation of position. Members will recall that pursuant to General Assembly resolution 60/265 of 30 June 2006, the Assembly decided to dedicate a specific meeting focused on development, including an assessment of progress over the previous year, at each session of the General Assembly during the debate on the follow-up to the Millennium Declaration and the 2005 World Summit Outcome. May I therefore take it that the Assembly will continue to dedicate a specific meeting focused on development, including an assessment of progress over the previous year, at each session of the General Assembly during the debate on the follow-up to the Millennium Declaration and the 2005 World Summit Outcome? There appears to be no objection. It was so decided.

I should like to express my sincere thanks to Ambassador Carsten Staur of Denmark and Ambassador Paul Badji of Senegal, who have so ably and patiently conducted the discussions and complex negotiations in the informal consultations, and to all Member States for their valuable contributions to the successful completion of the draft outcome document. In the light of the difficult negotiations and the great effort put into this outcome, I would like to express my thanks and appreciation to all participants. May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda items 48 and 114? It was so decided.

I should like to express my sincere thanks to Ambassador Morten Wetland of Norway and Ambassador Lazarous Kapambwe of Zambia, who have so ably conducted the discussions of the Working Group. I am certain that members of the Assembly join me in extending our sincere appreciation to them. I should like to note that I have been informed by the Group of 77 and China that it is their wish to continue with the work of the Working Group at the sixty-fifth session of the General Assembly. May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 52? It was so decided.

The Assembly will now take action on draft decision A/64/L.71, entitled “Modalities for the High-level Review Meeting on the implementation of the Mauritius Strategy for the Further Implementation of the Programme of Action for the Sustainable Development of Small Island Developing States”, as orally corrected. May I take it that the Assembly decides to adopt draft decision A/64/L.71, as orally corrected?

I should like to express my sincere thanks to Ambassador Sylvie Lucas of Luxembourg and Ambassador Vanu Gopala Menon of Singapore, who so ably and patiently conducted the discussions and complex negotiations in the informal consultations, and to all Member States for their valuable contributions to the successful completion of the draft outcome document. I now give the floor to the representative of Grenada, who wishes to speak in explanation of position on the texts just adopted.

I speak on behalf of the States members of the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS). We would like to thank you, Mr. President, for your leadership throughout the sixty-fourth session, especially on the items related to the Mauritius Strategy of Implementation five-year review process. In addition, through you, Sir, we wish to extend our gratitude to the co-facilitators of the negotiating process on the concise draft political declaration. Please extend our gratitude to the delegations of Lithuania and Singapore. We believe that arriving at consensus on the text set out in the annex to resolution 64/300, although it was very difficult and required a lot of compromise by AOSIS, sends a positive message — a positive signal — that the international community remains committed to addressing the unique and particular vulnerability of small island developing States (SIDS) through the full and effective implementation of the Barbados Programme of Action and its Mauritius Strategy. It is now time to translate these words into action. While the text does not fully address all the concerns of the Group, particularly as it relates to provision of the means of implementation, we nevertheless welcome the fact that consensus was reached. We look forward to active participation now of all United Nations Member States, at the highest level, in the two-day High-level Meeting to be held on 24 and 25 September. It is our expectation that that review will result in concrete and tangible action for the advancement of the sustainable development of SIDS. Just as you have orally corrected the decision on modalities, Mr. President — even at the ninety-ninth hour — we note that we too would like to come back with one or two suggestions on the actual structure of the second day of the meeting. Once again, Mr. President, AOSIS thanks all Member States and you in particular for this effort.

May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of sub-item (b) of agenda item 53? It was so decided.

May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to conclude its consideration of sub-item (f) of agenda item 53? It was so decided.

I would like to express my sincere thanks to Ambassador Jorge Argüello of Argentina and Ambassador Sanja Štiglic of Slovenia, the two Chairs of the Ad Hoc Working Group, who so ably conducted the Working Group’s discussions and complex negotiations. I am sure members of the Assembly join me in extending our sincere appreciation to them. May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 118? It was so decided.

I would like to thank Ambassador Zahir Tanin of Afghanistan for chairing these negotiations on my behalf and for doing so in an impartial manner while facilitating progress. May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 119? It was so decided.

The Assembly has thus concluded its consideration of agenda item 122.

The Assembly has thus concluded its consideration of agenda item 151. Agenda items remaining for consideration during the sixty-fourth session of the General Assembly The President (spoke in Arabic): I should like to remind delegations that the following agenda items, on which action has been taken at previous meetings, have remained open for consideration during the sixty-fourth session of the General Assembly: items 9, 10, 15, 16, 20, 49, 53 (d), 64, 70 (a), 96, 106 to 108, 111 (a) and (e), 112 (f) and (i), 121, 123, 127 to 150, 152 to 163 and 172. As members are aware, these items have been included in the provisional agenda of the sixty-fifth session of the General Assembly with the exception of sub-item (e) of agenda item 111, entitled “Election of twenty-nine members of the Governing Council of the United Nations Environment Programme”; sub-item (i) of agenda item 112, entitled “Appointment of the Under-Secretary-General for Internal Oversight Services”; agenda item 121, entitled “United Nations reform: measures and proposals”; agenda item 131, entitled “Programme budget for the biennium 2008- 2009”; agenda item 132, entitled “Proposed programme budget for the biennium 2010-2011”; agenda item 141, entitled “Review of the implementation of General Assembly resolutions 48/218 B, 54/244 and 59/272”; agenda item 145, entitled “Scale of assessments for the apportionment of the expenses of United Nations peacekeeping operations”; and agenda item 147, entitled “Financing of the United Nations Operation in Burundi”. May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of items 9, 10, 15, 16, 20, 49, 53 (d), 64, 70 (a), 96, 106 to 108, 111 (a) and (e), 112 (f) and (i), 121, 123, 127 to 150, 152 to 163 and 172 at the present session and to include them in the draft agenda of the sixty-fifth session? It was so decided.

I would like to draw the attention of Members to the date of closure of the current session. Members will recall that, at the 2nd plenary meeting, on 18 September 2009, the General Assembly decided that the sixty-fourth session would be closed on Monday, 13 September 2010. However, in view ofthe ongoing consultations on the draft resolution contained in document A/64/L.67, I would like to propose to the Assembly that it postpone the date of the closure of the current session until tomorrow, Tuesday, 14 September 2010. Unless there is any objection, I will take it that the Assembly agrees to this proposal. It was so decided.