2. The meeting was attended by the following:

Transcription

1 - 1 - UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT MINUTES OF THE SIXTEENTH BUREAU MEETING Conference Room 23 rd Floor, Two United Nations Plaza (DC-2), New York 14 June 2011, 10 a.m. 12:30 p.m. 1. The sixteenth meeting of the Bureau of the Preparatory Process for the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (UNCSD) was held on 14 June 2011 in New York. 2. The meeting was attended by the following: Bureau Members - Amb. John Ashe, Co-Chair and Chair of the Meeting - Amb. Park In-Kook, Co-Chair (represented by Mr. Youngsoo Lee, Counsellor) - Amb. Maged A. Abdelaziz - Amb. Charles T. Ntwaagae - Ms. Ana Bianchi, by teleconference - Ms. Tania Raguž - Mr. Paolo Soprano - Mr. Bedřich Moldan, by videolink - Mr. Asad M. Khan by videolink - Mr. Keith H. Christie - Ms. Maria Teresa Mesquita Pessôa (represented by Mr. Paulo José Chiarelli Vicente de Azevedo, First Secretary) Secretariat - Amb. Sha Zukang, Conference Secretary-General (CSG) - Mr. Brice Lalonde, Executive Coordinator - Mr. Tariq Banuri, Head of the CSG Office - Cluster Leaders - Ms. Vivian Pliner, DGACM Agenda Item 1: Adoption of the agenda 3. The proposed agenda was adopted without amendments (see Annex 1). However, on a point of order, one Bureau member while emphasizing the need to make Bureau meetings more result oriented, requested the Chair to present a summary of main conclusions of the discussion and decisions made at the end of each future meeting, including date of the next Bureau meeting. Agenda Item 2: Updates by the Secretariat 4. The Secretary-General of the Conference (CSG), Mr. Sha Zukang updated the Bureau on several preparatory activities. What follows is a summary of his remarks.

2 - 2 - Visit to Brazil 5. The CSG led a delegation from the Secretariat on 3 June 2011 to Brazil upon invitation of the Mayor of Rio de Janeiro and the Government of Brazil to attend the city and the national launch ceremonies to mark the one-year count-down to Rio+20. The national launch ceremony was hosted by President H.E. Ms. Dilma Rousseff at the Palácio do Planalto in Brasilia on 7 June. During that visit, CSG also met respectively with Minister of External Relations, Mr. Antonio Patriota, Minister of Environment, Ms Izabella Teixeira, Under Secretary General for the Environment, Energy and Science and Technology, Ambassador, Mr. Luiz Alberto Figueiredo, Senator Fernando Collor de Mello (former President of Brazil at the time of 1992 Rio Conference), and several other Senators who were keen to contribute to Rio+20 and had in-depth discussions with them. All through this visit Brazil showed dedication and commitment at the highest possible level. IFSD Study 6. The Secretariat in close collaboration with EC-ESA Plus is undertaking a study on IFSD. This study should be viewed as a living document since it will be subject to revision based on the comments received from different stakeholders. The study will also encompass an analysis of the options requested by the UNEP Governing Council. The Secretariat has drafted and shared the Terms of Reference for the study with members of EC-ESA plus to seek their inputs and comments. Preliminary draft of the report will be ready by end July 2011 and the study is expected to be completed by end of September National and Regional Preparations 7. DESA through its capacity building programme is supporting 21 countries in their national preparations for Rio+20 Conference, in close cooperation with the UNDP. All information in this regard has been sent to Member States through their Permanent Missions in New York. 8. All regional meetings will take place from September to December this year, while subregional meetings that are being planned will feed into regional meetings. Similarly, regional and sub-regional preparatory meetings Small island developing States (SIDS) will take place between June -- September Support to Major Groups Activities 9. DESA has received funds from European Union for providing assistance to Major Groups in their preparations for Rio+20 Conference. In this regard, the Secretariat team is working closely with the Major Groups to organize consultative workshops and other training activities. Meeting on IFSD in Indonesia 10. A meeting is being organized jointly by UNCSD Secretariat and the Government of Indonesia from July 2011 in Solo, Indonesia. The meeting will be devoted to discussions on the institutional framework for sustainable development. Invitations together with the background note have already been sent to all Member States. Mr. Sha thanked the

3 - 3 - Government of Indonesia not only for hosting this important meeting but to fund the participation of representatives from 50 countries. 11. The Bureau members made several comments and observations on the updates provided by the CSG. A synthesis of discussion is provided below. The process adopted to support the national preparations appears to be UN driven. This may jeopardize the neutral submission of inputs and contributions from the countries. This process should be nationally owned and driven. In preparing the compilation document, national reports submitted by countries should be used; and not the inputs and contributions received through the UN driven process. The technical note sent to Member States for national preparations might cause confusion as a baseline for submission of inputs to the compilation document. During the course of supporting national preparations, the UN System/Secretariat should make an effort to mobilize and use focal points on sustainable development in the countries. It was noted that many country-led preparatory meetings on specific themes will not be attended by all Member States. Therefore, recommendations emanating from these meetings should be treated with due care. The documentation being produced as part of Rio+20 preparatory process should use language consistent with what has been described in resolution 64/236, especially when referring to objective and themes of the conference. In this regard, for example, Conference has only one objective with additional elements and not three objectives. Although the above referred resolution has mentioned two themes, but the relevant paragraph implies that inclusion of other themes could not be precluded. However, additional themes could be taken on board only if received through the national submissions towards the compilation document. It was clarified that the Bureau at its own has no mandate to add new themes. Brazil is expected to hold inclusive and transparent consultations, most likely in Rio de Janeiro, on 22 and 23 August In response to some comments, the Secretariat mentioned that it fully supports the idea of country level preparations to be nationally driven and owned. The support currently being provided is meant to facilitate countries in organizing a consultative process for preparing and discussing assessment reports, but not to interfere or influence the outcome of their national consultations. 13. Conclusions/Decisions: While taking note of the updates provided by the CSG on various preparatory activities, following suggestions emerged from the ensuing discussion: (i) ensure use of language as exactly described in resolution 64/236 with regard to objective and themes of the Conference, (ii) country-level preparatory process should be nationally driven, (iii) the preparatory process should use with due care the recommendations resulting from country-led thematic meetings. Agenda item 3: Organization of Work for the Third Prepcom and the Conference 14. The Bureau reviewed the tentative organization of work of the 3 rd PrepCom and made the following comments.

4 - 4 - It was considered a bit early to decide on the organization of work of the 3 rd PrepCom. As per mandate given by the resolution 64/236, the 3 rd PrepCom should primarily focus on negotiating the outcome document. The number of working groups to be established for negotiations will depend upon the scope of the zero draft of the outcome document which will not be ready until January Consider limiting the number of parallel activities; it will enable the smaller delegations to participate effectively in negotiations. It will be a good idea to organize multistakeholder dialogues, but not to have thematic roundtables. The presentation of voluntary national assessment reports might not yield any added value given that their findings have already been reflected in the compilation document. Alternatively, their presentations could be made part of the side events. The Conference s organization of work should not make any explicit reference to the work of the Main Committee. Otherwise it will be interpreted to mean that the negotiations will continue during the Conference, while the plan is to conclude this work during the 3 rd PrepCom. 15. While appreciating Bureau s comments made on the organization of work, the Secretariat emphasized that an early approval of the organization of work will facilitate the host country and United Nations to proceed with making appropriate logistical and organizational arrangements. 16. Conclusions/Decisions: The organization of work needs to be revised in the light of observations/comments made. Those Bureau members who would like to make further comments on the organization of work were encouraged to send those to the Secretariat in writing. The Bureau will return to this matter at an appropriate time in one of its future meetings. Agenda item 4: Discussion on the Compilation Document 17. The CSG informed the Bureau that the Secretariat had been receiving requests from Member States and other stakeholders to seek guidance concerning the submission of inputs and contributions to the compilation document. He emphasized that providing such guidance would result in better quality of submissions from stakeholders which would facilitate putting together a good quality compilation document. Discussions on this agenda item benefited from the written proposals submitted by Argentina (for the outcome document), EU (for the national contributions and compilation document) and Canada (for the national submissions). From the ensuing discussion, the following important points emerged. What material will be used in preparing the compilation document (whether it will be based on submissions to be received from stakeholders, or assessment reports to be prepared under national preparations, or reports of the preparatory meetings to be hosted by individual countries etc.)? With regard to the format of the compilation document, questions were raised whether it would take the form of a synthesis report or a simple compilation text with some kind of classification. Both approaches tend to present some practical difficulties. For example, a synthesis report entails the risk of possible omissions of

5 - 5 - elements considered important by some, while a simple compilation text could result in a document that is too long and not practical to deal with. It was noted that proposals submitted by Argentina, EU and Canada were complementary in nature, though each proposal tends to serve different purpose. The above referred proposals should not be viewed as guide to the organization of inputs for the compilation document. Instead, structure of the compilation document will emerge from the contributions received from Member States and other stakeholders. In this regard, it was also mentioned that using the list of neutral issues raised and discussed during the two PrepComs could prove helpful in deriving the structure of the compilation document. One Bureau member noted that it would be too late to start discussions on the structure of the compilation document in November, and called for an early debate on the issue. Though the resolution 64/236 provides overall guidance with regard to the structure, further guidance by the Bureau will help the stakeholders in defining the scope and contents of their submissions. However, it was emphasized that the Bureau s guidance should be neither descriptive nor prescriptive. The guidance note should ensure neutrality in terms of scope and contents, and refrain from discussing or commenting on substantive issues. It should not be seen binding in any shape or form. The stakeholders may use any part of this guidance that they find to be relevant or appropriate, and disregard it otherwise. Moreover, the guidance provided should not be construed in any way as prejudging the structure of the zero draft of the outcome document which will be based on the inputs that are actually received. 18. Conclusions/Decisions: The Bureau requested the Secretariat to prepare a draft guidance note by taking into account above points. Once reviewed and cleared by the Cochairs, it should be electronically shared with the Bureau members to seek their views and comments. After Bureau s clearance, it will be sent to Member States and other stakeholders, and posted on the UNCSD website. In case of any disagreement, the Bureau s meeting in Geneva on 7 July 2011 can be used to resolve the matter. Agenda item 5: Discussion on the Outcome Document 19. The Bureau considered discussion on this agenda item premature and decided to take it up in one of its future meetings. Agenda item 6: Bureau s Meetings with the Principals of UN System Entities and IFIs: 20. The CSG informed the Bureau that a meeting with the Principals of UN system organizations has been confirmed for the morning of 7 th July 2011 (10:00 to 13:00 hrs) in Geneva at the margin of the HLS of ECOSOC. The dialogue will mainly focus on expected outcomes of the Conference. In addition, briefing on IFSD study will be provided. It was noted that this dialogue would be very useful in prioritizing the activities and initiatives during the remaining preparatory period. 21. With regard to a meeting with the IFIs, the Secretariat is reaching out to relevant institutions. We have not yet received confirmation of participation of the senior level officials. The Secretariat will confirm next week whether or not this meeting will take place.

6 - 6 - Agenda item 7: Miscellaneous Items (a) Dates of the meetings during the preparatory process 22. A question was raised about the necessity to hold 3 rd Intersessional Meeting, given that it will be preceded by a full week meeting on informal negotiations. Justification for holding this meeting however stems from two reasons. First, this meeting will be attended by different delegations than those engaged in informal negotiations. Second, back to back meetings will provide additional opportunity to sort out differences emerged during the negotiations. 23. Conclusions/Decisions: The Bureau has endorsed the schedule of meetings for the remainder of the preparatory process. (Annex 2). (b) Current status of the UNCSD Trust Fund 24. The CSG informed the Bureau that the situation of the Trust Fund has improved, especially after receiving $500,000 from China in May this year. Moreover, the EU has provided a grant to support civil society engagement in the preparatory process. Needless to say that supporting national preparations at full scale will require additional funds. Following this information, the representative of Canada announced Canada s contribution to the Trust Fund in the amount of 60,000 Canadian dollars. This amount may be used to support the preparatory activities especially in SIDS. (c) Date of Bureau s meeting after July 25. The next Bureau meeting will take place on Monday, 12 September 2011 in New York.

7 - 7 - Annex 1 UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT BUREAU OF THE UNCSD PREPARATORY PROCESS 16 th MEETING Conference Room 23 rd Floor, Two United Nations Plaza (DC-2), New York 14 June 2011, 10 a.m. 1 p.m. 1. Adoption of the Agenda 2. Updates by the Secretariat AGENDA 3. Organization of Work for the Third Prepcom and the Conference 4. Discussion on the Compilation Document 5. Discussion on the Outcome Document 6. Bureau s meeting with the Principals of UN System entities and IFIs 7. Miscellaneous Items (a) Dates of the meetings during the preparatory process (b) Current status of the UNCSD Trust Fund (c) Date of Bureau s meeting after July (d) Any other business

8 - 8 - Annex 2 Dates of Meetings during the Preparatory Process MEETING DATES 2011 Second intersessional meeting December Initial discussions on the zero draft of outcome document January 2012 Negotiations (informal-informals) on the draft outcome document February 2012 Negotiations (informal-informals) on the draft outcome document March 2012 Third intersessional meeting March 2012 Negotiations (informal-informals) on the draft outcome document 30 April 4 May 2012 Third Preparatory Committee Meeting May 2012