A/71/PV.97 General Assembly

I now give the floor to the representative of Swaziland to introduce draft resolution A/71/L.89.

It is an honour to introduce, on behalf of the Group of African States and in our capacity as current Chair of the African Leaders Malaria Alliance, draft resolution A/71/L.89, entitled “Consolidating gains and accelerating efforts to control and eliminate malaria in developing countries, particularly in Africa, by 2030”. Over the past two years, the world has seen tremendous progress in malaria control, including an estimated 60 per cent decline in malaria mortality rates among all age groups and a 65 per cent decline among children under five, with 6.2 million lives saved. In Africa alone, which carries the highest malaria burden, we have witnessed a 42 per cent decline in cases of malaria and a 66 per cent decline in malaria death rates. Even with such remarkable gains, every year there are still over 200 million malaria cases and more than 300,000 malaria deaths worldwide. In addition, drug and insecticide resistance has emerged as a new threat to recent progress. In order to end the terrible scourge, there is a need to redouble our global efforts to eliminate the disease once and for all. In pursuit of our goal to eliminate malaria by 2030, there is a need to strengthen weak health systems, ramp up domestic and international financing and deal with insecticide resistance. African countries and partners have mobilized hundreds of millions of dollars to scale up malaria-control interventions, including long- lasting insecticidal nets, indoor residual spraying, rapid diagnostic tests and artemisinin-based combination therapies. The importance of the resolution cannot be overemphasized. It sends a rallying message to key partners — such as the African Development Bank, the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, the World Bank, the United Kingdom Department for International Development, and the United States President’s Malaria Initiative — to ensure that we build sustainable funding plans and ensure quality financial management, including priority-setting and accountability for results. The draft resolution maintains last year’s language (see resolution 70/300), with the exception of a few technical updates and new developments, including welcoming the launch of the African Centres for Disease Control and Prevention to bring much-needed capacity to the African region by building surveillance systems, responding and addressing health emergencies. In addition, the draft resolution includes data from the World Malaria Report 2016. Our gratitude goes to all the partners who took part in the consultations and to all those who have joined as sponsors of this draft resolution. As in previous years, we trust that the General Assembly will again adopt this draft resolution by consensus.

We shall now proceed to consider draft resolution A/71/L.89. Before giving the floor for explanations of position, may I remind delegations that explanations position are limited to 10 minutes and should be made by delegations from their seats.

Malaria has devastated the health of millions of people throughout the developing world and created dire economic consequences that undermine the efforts of nations seeking to provide health access to their populations. The United States Government remains firmly committed to ending the scourge of malaria. For over a decade it has been the largest source of bilateral support, through the United States President’s Malaria Initiative (PMI), and it is the largest contributor to the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria. PMI is a United States Government initiative, established in 2005, to reduce malaria-related mortality by 50 per cent across high-burden countries in sub-Saharan Africa through a rapid scale-up of four proven and highly effective malaria prevention and treatment measures: insecticide-treated mosquito nets, indoor residual spraying, accurate diagnosis and prompt treatment with artemisinin combination therapies, and intermittent preventive treatment of pregnant women. PMI currently works in 19 sub-Saharan Africa countries, where malaria exacts its greatest human toll, and the Greater Mekong subregion, where resistance to the most effective malaria treatment drugs has unfortunately already appeared. PMI’s strategy for the period from 2015 to 2020 takes into account the progress over the past decade and the new challenges that have arisen. As such, a major United States foreign assistance objective is to work with PMI-supported countries and partners to further reduce malaria deaths, substantially decrease malaria morbidity and end extreme poverty. As acknowledged in the thirty-first preambular paragraph of draft resolution A/71/L.89, “the expansion of malaria interventions can be used as an entry point for strengthening health systems more broadly, including maternal and child health services and laboratory services, and for building stronger health information and disease surveillance systems”. That also aligns with the goals articulated in the Roll Back Malaria Partnership Action and Investment to Defeat Malaria 2016‑2030 — For a Malaria-Free World and the World Health Organization (WHO) Global Technical Strategy for Malaria 2016-2030. The emergence and potential spread of multi-drug resistant malaria and insecticide-resistant malaria vectors are a threat to global health security requiring immediate action, which includes strengthening capacity for the effective use of existing drugs and insecticides, as well as public-private partnerships and innovation to develop the next generation of malaria drugs and insecticides and other vector- control approaches. Meeting the WHO Strategy’s 2020 milestones will require a tripling of existing funding, amounting to $6.4 billion annually. While the United States remains committed to providing support for countries to reach those milestones through both bilateral PMI and multilateral Global Fund funding, the need for additional major funding will require significant external and in-country resource mobilization. We encourage affected countries to increase their financial and human-resource commitment to the general health sector, as well as to malaria-specific activities. The United States shares many of the goals expressed in the draft resolution and has therefore joined the consensus in its adoption. The United States Government shares the aspiration of increasing access to health care, and we believe countries should do that by reducing costs and expanding health-care choices. We applaud efforts to encourage universal health access but, in line with previous United Nations resolutions, we understand that each country would develop a system within its own cultural, economic, political and structural contexts and priorities. We recognize that the private sector is the cornerstone of many health- care systems around the world, particularly in the area of innovation, and therefore our efforts to expand access should not imply primarily Government-centric solutions or mandates. Universal health coverage, as referenced in the draft resolution, is often interpreted as supporting Government-centric solutions and mandates, which the United States Government does not support. Concerning the right-to-health language contained in paragraph 21 of the draft resolution, in light of article 2.1 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights, the United States interprets references to the obligations of States as applicable only to the extent that they have assumed such obligations. We note that countries have a wide array of policies and actions that may be appropriate in promoting the progressive realization of the right to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health. Therefore, we believe that these resolutions should not try to define the content of the right. Lastly, as we have stated in the past and continue to state, it is not appropriate for a United Nations document to speak to the ongoing or future work of the World Trade Organization (WTO) or to undermine the independent mandate and processes of that organization, which is an independent institution with a different membership, mandate and rules of procedure from those of the United Nations. Discussion of the amendment to article 31 of the Organization Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights in paragraph 33 of the draft resolution is inaccurate, and it is inappropriate for the United Nations to call on WTO members to take action on that issue. Therefore, the United States must disassociate itself from paragraph 33, and the inclusion of this language here does not serve as a basis for future negotiations.

We have heard the last speaker in explanation of position. The Assembly will now take a decision on draft resolution A/71/L.89, entitled “Consolidating gains and accelerating efforts to control and eliminate malaria in developing countries, particularly in Africa, by 2030”. I now give the floor to the representative of the Secretariat.

I should like to announce that, since the submission of the draft resolution, in addition to those delegations listed in document A/71/L.89, the following countries have also become sponsors of the draft resolution: Australia, Austria, Brazil, Canada, Croatia, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Djibouti, Ecuador, Estonia, Finland, Greece, Guyana, Haiti, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Latvia, Lithuania, Maldives, Malta, Monaco, Norway, Portugal, the Republic of Korea, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, the Sudan, Switzerland, Thailand, Uganda, the United Kingdom, Viet Nam and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.

May I take it that the Assembly decides to adopt draft resolution A/71/L.89.

May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 12?

The General Assembly will now take action on the draft resolution issued as document A/71/L.88. I give the floor to the representative of Gabon to introduce draft resolution A/71/L.88.

The consideration of draft resolution A/71/L.88, on tackling illicit trafficking in wildlife, is an excellent opportunity for Gabon and Germany, the sponsors of the text, to raise awareness within the international community of this issue, which is crucial not only for the preservation of wildlife but also for the stability of many States. Poaching is currently the fourth most dangerous form of trafficking in the world after drug trafficking, counterfeiting and trafficking in persons, generating almost $20 billion a year. That money contributes, inter alia, to the fuelling of extremist groups and armed rebel groups that are destabilizing many States, especially in Africa. In my country, Gabon, poaching has in 10 years caused the loss of almost 25,000 elephants, nearly 80 per cent of the pachyderm population, and numerous studies have established that the Central African subregion is the epicentre of the ivory supply in many markets of the world. This sobering and alarming fact underpins our commitment to the fight against poaching. It has led us, since July 2015, to play a key role in international advocacy against illicit trafficking in wildlife. Significant progress has been made, specifically the strengthening of legislation in many States, with more binding measures and bold political measures in States of origin, transit and destination. Nevertheless, much remains to be done, as poaching networks are increasingly well organized and better equipped and continue to funnel resources not only to warlords but also to the dangerous, uncontrollable extremist networks that are operating in several regions. Thus, poaching is today not only illicit predation against fauna and biodiversity; it is also increasingly becoming a transnational threat to the human race. Faced with the magnitude of the threat, it is clear that no nation can overcome this phenomenon alone. It is important to undertake concerted action that includes the entire international community. That is the goal of the actions initiated by Gabon and Germany, which have been endorsed by the Group of Friends. In keeping with the momentum created by this commitment on the part of Gabon, President Ali Bongo Ondimba has made combating poaching a major pillar of his political agenda. Increased financing, the training of environmental guards, the establishment of a rapid-intervention force in national parks and the signing of many bilateral and multilateral partnerships are reflections of Gabon’s firm commitment to combatting poaching. The draft resolution, sponsored by numerous States from diverse geographic areas, offers an opportunity to strengthen the mutuality of our actions and to establish a comprehensive mechanism that takes into account all of the dimensions of this phenomenon. Draft resolution A/71/L.88, which I hope we will adopt today, underscores, inter alia, the need for Member States to take decisive measures to prevent, combat and eventually eradicate illicit trafficking in wildlife, in both supply and demand countries. Member States are, moreover, invited to establish and strengthen existing partnerships in order to increase support for local communities at the national, regional and international levels for the conservation and sustainable management of wildlife. Finally, allow me to welcome the commitment of the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany, which is sparing no effort to support the noble fight against poaching and illicit trafficking in wildlife. I should like also to commend the tireless efforts of the Group of Friends, and I thank all States that have agreed to sponsor the draft, as well as all United Nations delegations, specialized agencies and relevant bodies for their contributions and support. To conclude, I would like to underscore the importance of young people, who will be the true beneficiaries of the fight that we are waging today in their name and in that of future generations. I hope that the General Assembly will adopt this draft resolution by consensus.

The Assembly will now take a decision on draft resolution A/71/L.88, entitled “Tackling illicit trafficking in wildlife”. I give the floor to the representative of the Secretariat.

I should like to announce that since the submission of the draft resolution and in addition to those delegations listed in the document, the following countries have also become sponsors of A/71/L.88: Albania, Austria, Bangladesh, Brazil, Canada, the Congo, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Equatorial Guinea, Estonia, Finland, Gabon, Greece, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Madagascar, Malaysia, Mexico, Monaco, Mongolia, Morocco, Myanmar, Peru, the Philippines, San Marino, Slovenia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Thailand, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, the United Republic of Tanzania and the United States of America. Since the publication of the document, Cameroon, Haiti, Botswana, Norway, Brunei Darussalam, Poland, Namibia, Uganda, Mauritania, Nepal, Ukraine, the Russian Federation, Antigua and Barbuda, the Niger and Burkina Faso have indicated their intention to become sponsors of the draft resolution.

May I take it that the Assembly decides to adopt draft resolution A/71/L.88?

I shall now give the floor to the representative of Germany, who wishes to make a statement following the adoption of the resolution.

It is a great pleasure to address the General Assembly today on the occasion of the adoption of resolution 71/326, the third United Nations resolution on tackling illicit trafficking in wildlife. Let me start by thanking Ambassador Michel Xavier Biang of Gabon, our fellow co-chair of the United Nations Group of Friends on Poaching and Illicit Wildlife Trafficking, for the excellent cooperation throughout the process. I would also like to thank all members of the Group of Friends and all other supporters for their strong commitment to this important issue and for their constructive engagement in preparing this resolution. The General Assembly’s first resolution on tackling illicit trafficking in wildlife — resolution 69/314, of 30 July 2015 — was a milestone and a clear sign from the international community that it will not tolerate the extinction of whole species. Since then, we have not only raised global awareness remarkably but have achieved progress in many areas, such as resource protection and seizures along the main illegal trade routes on the ground. But poaching and illegal wildlife trafficking continue to cause irreversible damage to biodiversity and threaten local economic development. It was therefore consequential to revisit this issue to further enhance our efforts, specifically in areas that we jointly identified as requiring more attention from the international community during discussions on World Wildlife Day last spring. Let me briefly highlight three points. First of all, the link between corruption and illicit wildlife trafficking has proven a major challenge in recent years. Corruption is a primary enabling factor for the illegal wildlife trade in range, transit and destination countries. Also, corruption allows black markets to develop and illegal products to mix with legal products. We believe that this third resolution highlights this link and will lead to enhanced efforts against corruption by the international community. Also, Germany is very grateful for the appreciation of the work of the Group of 20 under German and Chinese presidencies in developing the high-level principles on combatting corruption related to illegal trade in wildlife. Secondly, we believe that the recognition of cybercrime’s growing role in facilitating illegal trade in wildlife and the call for innovative strategies to counter this phenomenon are exemplary for the new and forward-looking approach needed to tackle current and future challenges. Thirdly, the resolution considerably strengthens the aspects of the sustainable development of local communities in range countries and promotes ways to achieve sustainable and legal livelihoods for members of these communities. Owing to their proximity, local communities are well situated to become involved in the process to find lasting solutions. Their rights and responsibilities related to managing wildlife must be strengthened and real economic opportunities for them must be developed to create stability and resilience. We believe that this third resolution paves the way in this direction. I am proud to say that Germany has been and will continue to be an active supporter in the fight against illicit trafficking in wildlife. Currently, we have committed €624 million to projects combating poaching and illegal trade in wildlife, €243 million of which support specific measures to fight wildlife crime. But we are aware that no country can win this fight on its own. It is crucial that all parties, including donors, continue to work together closely. It is therefore of great importance that this resolution strongly encourages donor coordination in order to collectively maximize investment effectiveness and engage new partners. Also, for our common fight against illicit wildlife trafficking to be successful, it is crucial that we as States Members of the United Nations keep on working together closely. I believe the work leading to the resolution we adopted by consensus today was the perfect example of this spirit across all Member States and regional groups. I want to thank all our colleagues very much for this cooperation.

May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration agenda item 13?

As indicated in document A/71/1018, the General Assembly is required, during its current session, to appoint one member of the Joint Inspection Unit to fill the vacancy that resulted from the resignation of Rajab Sukayri of Jordan for a term of office beginning on 1 January 2018 and expiring on 31 December 2019. In accordance with the procedures described in article 3, paragraph 1, of the statute of the Joint Inspection Unit, and having consulted the regional group concerned, I requested Japan to propose a candidate to fill the vacancy. I would like to remind members that, in accordance with resolution 59/267 of 23 December 2004, the candidate should have experience in at least one of the following fields: oversight, audit, inspection, investigation, evaluation, finance, project evaluation, programme evaluation, human resources management, management, public administration, monitoring and/or programme performance, as well as knowledge of the United Nations system and its role in international relations. As also indicated in document A/71/1018, as a result of the consultations held in accordance with article 3, paragraph 2, of the statute of the Joint Inspection Unit, including consultations with the President of the Economic and Social Council and with the Secretary-General, in his capacity as Chair of the United Nations System Chief Executives Board for Coordination, I submit to the Assembly the candidature of Ms. Keiko Kamioka of Japan for appointment as a member of the Joint Inspection Unit for a two-year term of office beginning on 1 January 2018 and expiring on 31 December 2019. May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to appoint the candidate? May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of sub-item (h) of agenda item 115?

I give the floor to the representative of Ecuador to introduce draft resolution A/71/L.90.

I have the honour to introduce to the General Assembly, on behalf of the Group of 77 (G-77) and China, the draft resolution entitled “The United Nations in global economic governance”, as contained in document A/71/L.90. The G-77 and China reiterate the need for inclusive, transparent and effective multilateral approaches in order to address global challenges. That is why today we are introducing this draft resolution, which reaffirms the United Nations system’s central role in this area as an intergovernmental forum for universal dialogue and consensus on global challenges. The draft resolution also reaffirms the importance of multilateralism for the global trading system and of a commitment to achieving a universal, rules-based, open, non-discriminatory and equitable multilateral trading system under the World Trade Organization (WTO) that contributes to growth, sustainable development and job creation in every sector. It looks forward to the WTO’s eleventh Ministerial Conference, to be held in Buenos Aires from 10 to 13 December, and its outcome. It also recognizes the importance of expanding and strengthening developing countries’ participation in decision-making and norm-setting processes in the international economic arena, as well as the importance of interaction within the United Nations, particularly the General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council. It welcomes the practice of informal engagement between the United Nations and intergovernmental groupings, including the Group of 20, that make policy recommendations or take policy decisions with global implications, through informal briefings organized at the initiative of the President of the General Assembly, and invites the President to continue the practice. Lastly, under the agenda item entitled “Strengthening of the United Nations system”, the draft resolution decides to include a sub-item entitled “Central role of the United Nations system in global governance”, to be considered thereafter on a biennial basis, in the provisional agenda of the General Assembly at its seventy-third session. On behalf of the Group of 77 and China, I would like to thank the delegation of Argentina for its outstanding efforts as coordinator for the Group, and the delegation of Chile for facilitating the consultations on the draft resolution, which it initially submitted. And I thank all delegations for their commitment and constructive participation. Finally, we call on the General Assembly to support the text of this draft resolution, which reaffirms our Organization’s central role in global economic governance and the Assembly’s central position as the principal United Nations organ for deliberations, policy adoption and representation.

Before giving the floor to those who wish to speak in explanation of vote before the voting, I would like to remind delegations that explanations of vote are limited to 10 minutes and should be made by delegations from their seats.

We would like to take this opportunity to explain our vote on draft resolution A/71/L.90, on the United Nations in global economic governance. We would like to emphasize the importance of the Secretary-General’s call for reform of the United Nations and specifically for the elimination of duplication and overlap. As the negotiations began on this draft resolution, we expressed our concern that it was duplicative and not a productive use of the time and resources of the United Nations, especially since the issues it treats are addressed in other United Nations forums. From the outset, we worked to achieve a short, concise text free of clearly communicated redlines. We are disappointed with the outcome, and hope that all Member States will consider and support the Secretary- General’s call for these processes to be rationalized so as to focus on substance and eliminate duplication and redundancy. We are unable to accept the language in the document in which the United Nations opines on the World Trade Organization (WTO), which is independent of the United Nations and has a different membership, mandate and rules of procedure. As we have stated on numerous occasions, it is unacceptable for the United States when United Nations documents speak to the ongoing or future work of the WTO in order to reinterpret its agreements or rules, or to otherwise engage on matters that fall within the WTO’s independent mandate and processes. With regard to paragraph 4, the United Nations is not the appropriate venue for discussions of reform of the Bretton Woods institutions. Reform of their governance structures, quotas and voting rights is a matter for the internal governing bodies of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. We encourage countries to participate in that reform dialogue through membership and representation in the international financial institutions. We are unable to accept the language in the draft resolution that calls for strengthening the role of the United Nations in global economic governance, including with independent institutions and forums. We do not support any changes designed to strengthen or increase the mission or role of the United Nations in that regard as it relates to economic governance. In addition, we do not believe that the United Nations has the expertise to evaluate the degree of coherence and consistency among the international monetary, financial and trading systems, and see no role for it in opining further on the matter. The United States supports the current practice of engagement between the United Nations and the Group of 20 (G-20). We would like to clarify the fact that the United Nations has had regular opportunities to participate in G-20 discussions as a partner organization invited by G-20 host countries. We oppose efforts that would call for United Nations participation in the G-20 beyond its current engagement. Finally, the call for a report that would replicate other ongoing United Nations efforts is unacceptable. The United States and other Member States have repeatedly argued against the inclusion of that language, and we are extremely disappointed to see that the final text of the draft resolution reinstates it. We emphasize that United Nations resources would be much better spent on programmes that have an impact on operations on the ground and address the needs of people on the ground rather than on reports that gather dust on the shelf. As a result of the numerous concerns that I have detailed about this draft resolution, we will not be able to support its adoption.

We are grateful for the opportunity to speak in explanation of vote before the voting. We would like to thank the delegations of Argentina and Chile for their roles in coordinating and facilitating draft resolution A/71/L.90, entitled “The United Nations in global economic governance”. South Africa supports all initiatives aimed at strengthening the United Nations system and its central role in multilateralism. It is the principal vehicle for advancing the global development agenda and for addressing underdevelopment and the eradication of poverty in all its forms and dimensions. The draft resolution succinctly highlights all of those issues in its enunciation of the importance of the United Nations in global economic governance, particularly in the context of the General Assembly. It should also be borne in mind that what is being outlined in this draft resolution is in alignment with the Charter of the United Nations. Moreover, it is part of an important global dialogue that seeks to ensure that all countries are afforded unfettered access to this multilateral discourse in order to share ideas and information on how to democratize global economic governance. That is very much crucial as Member States pool their efforts to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals, which will need strengthened means of implementation and revitalized global partnership for sustainable development. That includes the call by the President of the General Assembly for momentum in the implementation of the 17 Sustainable Development 17 Goals, on which we had a chance to deliberate during the High-level Sustainable Development Goal Financing Lab earlier this year. The draft resolution before us today captures key areas between global economic governance in the spirit of the global solidarity, which is beneficial to all countries. The text, inter alia, reaffirms the central position of the General Assembly as the chief deliberative policymaking and representative organ of the United Nations, as well as the role of the Assembly in matters of concern for the international community, as set out in the Charter, and the importance of broadening and strengthening the participation of developing countries in international economic decision-making, which remains very critical. Furthermore, the draft resolution points to a need for policy space and reflection on issues of economic governance and underlines the need to continue addressing the effects of the 2008 global financial crisis in order to avoid its reoccurrence. By committing to the ideals of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, Member States have ipso facto pledged their support to ensure sustained, inclusive and equitable global economic growth for the benefit of all countries. In conclusion, South Africa would like to ask all Member States to support the global mandate and aspirations of this draft resolution. This is an important step in assessing progress in terms of bridging the development gap between the global North and the global South.

We have heard the last speaker in explanation of vote before the voting. The Assembly will now take a decision on draft resolution A/71/L.90, entitled “The United Nations in global economic governance”. I now give the floor to the representative of the Secretariat.

I should like to inform members that since the submission of draft resolution A/71/L.90, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea has indicated that it wishes to become a sponsor of the draft resolution.

A recorded vote has been requested. [Subsequently, the delegations of the Plurinational State of Bolivia and Malaysia informed the Secretariat that they had intended to vote in favour.]

Before giving the floor to delegations for explanations of vote, may I remind delegations that explanations of vote are limited to 10 minutes and should be made by delegations from their seats.

I have the honour to speak on behalf of the European Union (EU) and its member States. Australia and Canada associate themselves with this statement. The EU is committed to a global order based on international law, including the principles of the Charter of the United Nations, which ensures peace, human rights, sustainable development and lasting access to the global commons. The EU will strive for a strong United Nations as the bedrock of multilateral, rules-based order and will develop globally coordinated responses with international and regional organizations, States and non-State actors. The EU deeply regrets the process through which the text before us today was elaborated. Not only was the first draft of the resolution, “The United Nations in global economic governance”, submitted during the session, there was a reluctance by some delegations to adequately reflect the adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, the Addis Ababa Action Agenda and the Paris Agreement, which were adopted since the last resolution (resolution 67/289) was agreed. The EU was nevertheless willing to compromise on the facilitator’s final draft and to accommodate the concerns of certain delegations. We regret that one delegation was not in a position to join consensus on that text. While we respect the facilitator’s decision not to table his text in the absence of consensus, we strongly protest the submission of a text that reflects the views of one group of countries, that did not enjoy consensus during the facilitation period and on which the EU had expressed a number of concerns, including on non-consensus language and repetition with other texts adopted by the General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council. Moreover, this text was brought forward without prior clarifications on possible budgetary impact. In view of our commitment to effective global governance, the EU member States decided to abstain in spite of our strong reservations regarding the process. The EU and its member States will continue to reserve all our options regarding proposals on which we have not joined consensus. I would ask that this statement be included in the record of the meeting.

We have heard the last speaker in explanation of vote. We will now hear statements after the adoption of the resolution.

Singapore is deeply disappointed that consensus was not reached on resolution 71/327, entitled “The United Nations in global economic governance” this year. This resolution has enjoyed strong cross-regional sponsorship and consensus adoption since it was first introduced by Chile during the sixty-fifth session of the General Assembly. Today’s departure from tradition should be of great concern to us all. Global problems require global solutions. The United Nations is the only global body with universal participation and unquestioned legitimacy. Actions by the Group of 20 (G-20) and other relevant international institutions and informal groupings must complement and strengthen the United Nations system, particularly as we aim to achieve to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Sustainable Development Goals. Strengthening the relationship between the United Nations and the G-20 is key to enhancing global economic governance. Although the G-20 comprises the largest developed and emerging economies in the world, the G-20 outcomes must have the support of non G-20 members if they are to be implemented globally and effectively. It is therefore important that the G-20 engages the United Nations through more institutionalized, predictable and regular channels. In that regard, Singapore welcomes the attention the G-20 has given to the 2030 Agenda and the practices adopted by G-20 presidents, which are aimed at strengthening their engagement with the United Nations. Those practices include the invitation to the United Nations Secretary-General to attend G-20 summits, and the holding of briefings and consultations with the United Nations membership. There is a need to build on those good practices. The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development sets out ambitious goals. If we want to succeed and achieve those goals, we need all relevant actors in global economic governance, including the Bretton Woods Institutions, regional commissions and financial institutions, other informal groupings, as well as the G-20, to work together in a coherent way with the United Nations to address the needs of all countries, including developing countries. The resolution we have adopted today underscores that vital point. We have therefore joined other countries in support of the resolution and its objectives.

Liechtenstein voted in favour of resolution 71/327, entitled “The United Nations in global economic governance”, for the same reasons just expressed eloquently by the representative of Singapore. Liechtenstein has a long-standing commitment to strengthening the United Nations as an inclusive and transparent multilateral forum with the necessary legitimacy to make decisions with global implications. In order to effectively implement our collective goals, in particular those included in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, cooperation between all relevant actors is essential. While the United Nations is best placed to channel and integrate these different efforts into coherent action, helping to galvanize such cooperation and to strengthen the United Nations as the most important multilateral forum is the mission of the Global Governance Group, of which Lichtenstein is a proud member. Liechtenstein will continue to advocate for the role of the United Nations in global governance through the Global Governance Group and beyond. Finally, let me also express Liechtenstein’s hope that the consensus from the past on this important issue can be restored in future.

At the outset, Japan would like to express its gratitude to the representative of Chile, the facilitator of resolution 71/327, for his tireless efforts to seek a consensus. However, we have to point out a few elements that led to the non-consensus situation and to our abstention in the voting. First, the timing of the negotiation was truly problematic. We had thorough negotiations on the outcome of the Financing for Development Forum in May and had already started very tense negotiations on the ministerial declaration of the high-level political forum from mid-May. It was under those circumstances that this negotiation was started. It could have been started much earlier, even as early as January or February, but that did not happen. Therefore, we had to negotiate this resolution under great pressure. Secondly, from our point of view, this negotiation was really duplicative. Most of the elements of the resolution were already under negotiation in the Financing for Development Forum. In order to better streamline our work, we could have chosen to discuss all elements of this resolution in the negotiation of the Financing for Development Forum, which would have allowed us to withdraw this resolution from the agenda entirely. Also, we did not hear any convincing reasons to biannualize this resolution. Without proper consideration, we are not in a position to accept the biennialization of this resolution. Thirdly, since we could not reach a consensus, we proposed that the facilitator postpone the negotiation to the next session of the General Assembly. It is quite a pity that this option was not considered at all. It is regrettable that we have received no programme budget-related information. We cannot accept programme budget implications without going through the established process. In order to strongly push the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, we should align and streamline our work with a view to the betterment of its implementation in the field. To that end, Japan will promise to constructively contribute.

We have heard the last speaker for this item. May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of sub-item (b) of agenda item 123 and of agenda item 123 as a whole?

I give the floor to the representative of Burkina Faso to introduce draft resolution A/71/L.86.

Exactly two years after the adoption of resolution 69/324, on multilingualism, I have the honour to introduce, on behalf of its sponsors, draft resolution A/71/L.86, of the same title, under agenda item 125 at the seventy-first session of the General Assembly. Access to information has always been a part of the strategic choices made in societies and institutions. It is therefore no accident that the United Nations has made this one of the fundamental pillars of its activities. In fact, for an organization of the size of the United Nations, taking into account linguistic diversity is imperative in order to enable the ideals and messages conveyed to be well received and understood by all peoples of the world. As such, the draft resolution before us reminds us of the role of multilingualism in the construction of a world that is in harmony with the ideals for which the Organization was created — a world with a resolute focus on peace, justice and liberty. To echo those ideals, we must consistently focus on the promotion and strengthening of the equality of the six official languages, as well as the recognition of the importance of non-official languages. The text of this year’s draft resolution welcomes the initiatives undertaken by the Secretariat under the leadership of the Coordinator for Multilingualism, with a view to raising awareness in all the offices and departments of the Secretariat of the importance of multilingualism in their daily activities, and of their adherence to the efforts under way in this area. To make it possible to continue those initiatives, the text proposes that new terms for the Coordinator for Multilingualism be adopted. The draft resolution also notes the important role of the Department of Public Information and underlines the importance of ensuring that all United Nations documents be published and accessible in all six official languages, particularly on the United Nations website. The text also recalls that in certain areas of United Nations activity, such as the matter of procurement and tenders, limited availability of documentation in certain languages makes greater participation by actors and service providers impossible, particularly in field missions. Moreover, this year’s text revisits the mobility mechanism and welcomes in that regard the invitation made by the Secretary-General to all bodies within the Secretariat to take stock of the linguistic competencies of personnel. The text also notes with concern that certain recruitment manuals, in particular the applicant’s manual, remains available in one single language, and takes note of the reforms under way to ensure that language-related expectations are taken into account in the personnel-recruitment process. Finally, as this draft resolution on multilingualism is the first after the adoption on the Sustainable Development Goals, the text welcomes the Secretary- General’s efforts to make information, technical assistance and documents for capacity-building accessible, in the framework of the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. It urges him to pursue those goals. I would like to conclude by expressing the sincere gratitude of Burkina Faso to all delegations that actively participated in crafting this draft resolution. I hope that the spirit of solidarity and consensus will lead to its adoption without a vote.

The Assembly will now take a decision on draft resolution A/71/L.86, entitled “Multilingualism”. I give the floor to the representative of the Secretariat.

I should like to announce that, since the submission of the draft resolution, and in addition to those delegations listed in the document, the following countries have become sponsors of A/71/L.86: Andorra, Argentina, Armenia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Cameroon, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Cyprus, Djibouti, Ecuador, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Estonia, Gabon, Greece, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Indonesia, Iraq, Lebanon, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Madagascar, Malaysia, Mauritania, Mexico, Monaco, Morocco, Nicaragua, the Niger, Norway, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, the Philippines, Senegal, Slovenia, Spain, Thailand, Tunisia, Uruguay and the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela.

May I take it that the Assembly decides to adopt draft resolution A/71/L.86?

I now give the floor to the representative of Israel in explanation of position on the resolution just adopted.

As we know, a language is not merely a language. It is an essential part of our identity. It is a culture and a way of life. Martin Buber, a twentieth century Jewish philosopher, once said that it is essential “to begin with oneself but not to end with oneself”. In order to end with the other and not with oneself, we must employ the ideals of multilingualism. Now, what exactly does that mean? It means engaging in dialogue. Dialogue enables people with diverse backgrounds, perspectives and world views to collaborate and appreciate each other. Dialogue provides the opportunity to mentally step beyond the constraints of our own minds, and come closer to a fuller and deeper understanding of people. Here at the United Nations, we reflect this reality of multilingualism and dialogue. It not only enables communication between our linguistically diverse Member States, but also creates bridges between us. That is something that should be acknowledged and appreciated. The bridge that multilingualism has helped to create among our international and local communities is one that we have all welcomed at several points during our careers here at the United Nations. Most importantly, it has facilitated dialogue among us. When Egyptian author Naguib Mahfouz won the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1988, he stated: “The Arab world also won the Nobel with me. I believe that international doors have opened, and that from now on, literate people will consider Arab literature also. We deserve that recognition.” Mahfouz emphasizes that embracing multilingualism, in particular the translation of his work into different languages, including Hebrew, allows us to recognize and appreciate essential elements of different cultures. In Israel, not only do we value multilingualism, we embody it. Hebrew, Arabic and English do not even begin to cover the languages that can be heard throughout Israel. In the public sphere, all of our signs, including road signs, official publications and Government ministry websites are in all three languages. Over several decades, Israel has absorbed waves of immigrants. We have received people from Western to Eastern Europe, from North to South America, from Africa to the Middle East. We firmly believe in the promotion and preservation of the different languages that have been brought into Israel. The multicultural nature of Israeli society is embedded in our education system. The school system offers Israeli students the opportunity to study several other languages in addition to Hebrew, Arabic and English, thereby promoting multilingualism. And those are just some of the ways that Israel incorporates the ideals of multilingualism. Let us continue to do the same here at the United Nations. Let us allow incomprehensible narratives to become comprehensible. Let us make sure that we are reaching not only the heads of our colleagues, but their characters, identities and hearts.

I give the floor to the representative of Peru to make a statement after the adoption of the draft resolution.

It is my honour to speak on behalf of the Group of Friends of Spanish at the United Nations, which consists of over 20 Spanish-speaking countries on three continents and has similar groups in Geneva and Vienna, and over which Peru now presides. First of all, we would like to thank the delegation of Burkina Faso as facilitator of the resolution for its arduous efforts, as well as all delegations that participated in this complex negotiation process. We also thank the Secretariat for its ongoing support. Indeed, four months ago, during the presentation of the Secretary-General’s report under this agenda item (A/71/757), we highlighted in this Hall (see A/71/PV.82) the importance of multilingualism for our Group and for our willingness to work constructively to reach a more robust, coherent and ambitious resolution. Today, we feel that the Group has contributed to achieving that goal, and in that regard we welcome the adoption of resolution 71/328. Despite the complex negotiations, we believe that the resolution contains new and important themes for the development of an efficient, coordinated and comprehensive policy on multilingualism. In particular, we would like to highlight three elements that we were gratified to see stressed in the resolution. First is the operational character of multilingualism, which goes beyond without diminishing its cultural dimension. In line with other resolutions, it is a central value of the Organization and a tool for improving its efficiency, productivity and transparency. As such, we call on the Secretary-General to include an indicator related to multilingualism in agreements with senior management. Secondly, it also looks at the cross-cutting nature of multilingualism in the Organization, which is better reflected in the heading for section VII, “Multilingualism across the three pillars of the United Nations”, which incorporates references to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Thirdly, it also calls for the importance of ensuring that more information is provided and updated, for example through the development of a platform to facilitate the collection of information about the various languages and the establishment of an inventory of Secretariat staff language skills. This and other elements represent important steps to achieving a genuinely multilingual system of work that is integrated, logical and coherent throughout the United Nations system. We should point out that the negotiations on the resolution were complex and that we should like to have seen more concrete references in it to other topics, such as a section dedicated to issues related to sustainable development and the need for translations into all six official languages of various documents that are currently available in only one or two. Nonetheless, we would also like to emphasize that the Group always maintained a constructive spirit and a flexible attitude and worked to achieve consensus on the text. Lastly, I would like to reiterate our full commitment to multilingualism and the Secretariat’s activities in that regard. The Group of Friends of Spanish will always be available to fulfil that.

May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 125?

I now give the floor to the representative of Haiti to introduce draft resolution A/71/L.87.

On behalf of the 14 States members of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM), I have the honour to introduce draft resolution A/71/L.87, entitled “Cooperation between the United Nations and the Caribbean Community”, under sub-item (h) of item 126 of the agenda of the seventy-first session. The following countries have become sponsors of the draft resolution since it was submitted: Antigua and Barbuda, the Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Brazil, Cabo Verde, Canada, Denmark, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Equatorial Guinea, Grenada, Israel, Jamaica, Kazakhstan, Nauru, Nicaragua, Trinidad and Tobago, Saint Lucia and my own country, Haiti. Draft resolution A/71/L.87 reflects the values we share, our common understanding of the major challenges we have to overcome and CARICOM’s unfailing willingness to grapple with all major international issues. The text also reflects CARICOM’s firm commitment to pursuing and strengthening its cooperation with the United Nations in the effort to achieve the 17 Sustainable Development Goals and their 169 targets — a close, strong and deep cooperation for a better world. It emphasizes CARICOM’s commitment to clean and sustainable energy for all, to the empowerment of women and girls, to education and training, to the maintenance of peace and to capacity- building, including with regard to eradicating cholera in Haiti and combating non-communicable diseases. Lastly, it also encourages the CARICOM countries’ continued commitment to combating terrorism financing and money-laundering in the light of the threat that de-risking represents to our banking and financial systems. The draft resolution reflects the efforts of CARICOM and the United Nations to undertake better- coordinated actions that can bring ever more concrete solutions and results for our peoples. I would like to take this opportunity to express our special gratitude to the delegation of Guyana for its role as co-facilitator of the draft resolution. Its unfailing availability and commitment contributed enormously to the broad support that will strengthen the cooperation between the United Nations and CARICOM. I would also like to thank all of the delegations and States Members of the United Nations that took an active part in drafting the text, and whose spirit of solidarity and consensus will, I hope, enable us to adopt it by consensus. And I hereby affirm CARICOM’s willingness to continue to work to strengthen our cooperation.

The Assembly will now take a decision on draft resolution A/71/L.87, entitled “Cooperation between the United Nations and the Caribbean Community”. I give the floor to the representative of the Secretariat.

I should like to announce that since the submission of the draft resolution, in addition to those delegations listed in the document, the following countries have become sponsors of draft resolution A/71/L.87: Antigua and Barbuda, Austria, the Bahamas, Barbados, Belgium, Brazil, Cabo Verde, Cameroon, Canada, Denmark, Dominica, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Equatorial Guinea, Estonia, Greece, Grenada, Haiti, Indonesia, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Maldives, Mexico, the Federated States of Micronesia, Nauru, Nicaragua, Norway, Panama, Portugal, Romania, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Singapore, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkey, the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela and Zimbabwe.

May I take it that the Assembly decides to adopt draft resolution A/71/L.87?

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

First, I would like to say that our thoughts are with those Caribbean nations recently affected by the devastation caused by Hurricane Irma. The United States appreciates the good-faith efforts in the negotiation of resolution 71/329, on cooperation between the United Nations and the Caribbean Community (CARICOM). We recognize and support CARICOM’s overall mission to work with the United Nations to address the critical challenges of poverty, development and the Caribbean’s marginalization internationally. The United States remains engaged in order to enhance and expand CARICOM’s successes. While we support CARICOM in its efforts to address regular engagements, we take this opportunity to make important points of clarification on the resolution and underscore that this non-binding document does not create rights or obligations under international law. Furthermore, the outcomes and indicators referenced in the resolution are to be implemented and applied on a voluntary basis in a manner that is consistent with the rights and obligations of States under international law. Nothing in these outcomes or indicators, including anything referred to as agreed, creates or affects States’ rights or obligations under international law. The United States has consistently and publicly maintained that the issue of access to banking services, including correspondent banking and de-risking, should be addressed by the existing and ongoing dialogues in the appropriate forums, such as the Financial Action Task Force, the Financial Stability Board’s Correspondent Banking Coordination Group and the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision. The United States notes that there is a lack of evidence to indicate that changes in access to correspondent banking relationships have had an impact on global financial stability and economic performance. The United States also acknowledges the importance of continuing to monitor the situation with our Caribbean partners, in particular through the ongoing collection of better data regarding changes in access to international banking systems. Regarding concessionary development funding, the United States believes that institutions such as the multilateral development banks should target their scarce concessional financing to the poorest and least credit-worthy countries and that countries’ access to concessional financing should decrease as their incomes increase. Rather than try to preserve access to concessional finance, the multilateral development banks’ implementation of their graduation policies should aim to smooth the transition away from concessional assistance and consider how to help graduating countries in the Caribbean and elsewhere avoid a large drop in overall development finance. With these clarifications, we join the consensus on the resolution.

May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of sub-item (h) of agenda item 126 and of agenda item 126 as a whole?

I should like to remind delegations that the following agenda items, which have been considered at previous meetings, remain open for consideration during the seventy-first session of the General Assembly: items 9, 14, 19, 19 (h), 20, 29, 34, 35, 51, 61, 68, 68 (b), 69, 69 (a) through (d), 73, 110, 112, 114, 114(a), 115, 115 (a), (b), (d), (g), (j), 117, 124, 127 to 135, 137 to 154 and 156 to 164. As members are aware, these items have been included in the provisional agenda of the seventy- second session of the General Assembly with the exception of sub-item (d) of agenda item 69, entitled “Strengthening of international cooperation and coordination of efforts to study, mitigate and minimize the consequences of the Chernobyl disaster”; sub-item (j) of agenda item 115, entitled “Confirmation of the appointment of the Administrator of the United Nations Development Programme”; agenda item 142, entitled “United Nations pension system”, and agenda item 146, entitled “Financing of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Genocide and Other Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of Rwanda and Rwandan Citizens Responsible for Genocide and Other Such Violations Committed in the Territory of Neighbouring States between 1 January and 31 December 1994”. May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to include agenda items 9, 14, 19, 19 (h), 20, 29, 34, 35, 51, 61, 68, 68 (b), 69, 69 (a) to (c), 73, 110, 112, 114, 114 (a), 115, 115 (a), 115 (b), 115 (d), 115 (g), 117, 124, 127 to 130, 132 to 135, 137 to 141, 143 to 145, 147 to 154 and 156 to 164 in the draft agenda of the seventy-second session?

May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda items 9, 14, 19, 19 (h), 20, 29, 34, 35, 51, 61, 68, 68 (b), 69, 69 (a) through (d), 73, 110, 112, 114, 114 (a), 115, 115 (a), 115 (b), 115 (d), 115 (g), 115 (j), 117, 124, 127 to 135, 137 to 154 and 156 to 164 at the present session?