Daily report for 19 January 1995

Given the slow pace of work, the Chair requested suggestions for expediting theprocess. The G-77 and China requested that delegations raise proposals only withinregional group meetings. COMMITMENT 2(b): (provision of basic needs)The EU added references on access to employment, food security, conformity with theCairo document for family planning, and the disabled. The US added access toprimary health care and reproductive services. Australia included "indigenous peoples"after "women and children" and Japan added "human" before "basic needs." In2(c) (access), the US added a reference to sustainable livelihoods.Switzerland added a new (c)(bis) on expanding employment and economicopportunities. In 2(d) (socio-economic protection), the EU referred to civil,socio-economic and cultural rights. The G-77 and China added "maternity" after "illhealth." The US added two new paragraphs: one strengthening the role of communitiesand NGO participation, and another on implementation of community-basedmanagement programmes. In 2(e) (national budgets), the G-77 and Chinareplaced "review" with "ensure" and "to orient them towards" with "meet basicneeds." The EU added a reference to targeting poverty as a strategic objective. The USreferred to cost-effective, community-based policies. Australia added a reference tocomprehensive national implementation strategies by 1996. In 2(f)(international institutions), the EU referred to donor States developing an assessment-based approach for aid. The G-77 and China, supported by Japan, added "developedcountries," replaced "institutions" with "organizations," and added "multilateral"before "financial institutions." India noted that the national segment did not includeenabling activities in the field of agriculture and rural development. The US qualified"ensure" with "strive to," which the G-77 and China opposed. The G-77 and Chinasuggested language on financial and technical assistance for lower income countriesand on the removal of impediments to poverty eradication.

COMMITMENT 3: (freely chosen employment) The EU proposed areference in the chapeau to full employment as a basic economic priority. The G-77and China proposed an (a)(bis) on the right of disadvantaged groups to remuneratedemployment, stressing the importance of sustainable livelihoods. In 3(a)(creation of remunerated employment), the EU, supported by the US, agreed with thegeneral philosophy of the sub-paragraph, but deleted "adequately remunerated." TheG-77 and China, supported by Canada and Japan, strongly objected to this deletion,arguing that it was up to individual countries to develop employment policies.References were added to: disabled persons (EU); women (Norway); and the elderly(Switzerland). Norway added stronger language on workers" rights. In 3(b)(expanding work opportunities), the G-77 and China added language on secure andsustainable livelihoods for all. Canada referred to investing in basic education andskills development. In 3(c) (worker training), the US qualified the referenceto worker training with "seek to." In 3(d) (options for employment creation),the EU added a reference to expanding the concept of work. They also added newparagraphs on: reconciling family and professional life; womens" access to employmentand pay equity; and integration of employment strategies into trade mechanisms. TheG-77 and China supported the EU"s first two paragraphs. The US deleted "and fairdistribution of work" and objected to expanding the concept of work. In 3(e)(quality jobs), the US proposed language on forced and child labour. Australiacalled for indices recognizing womens" contribution to work. The US bracketed theparagraph and added reference to durable and long-lasting employment. In3(f) (migrant workers), the G-77 and China encouraged ratification and fullimplementation of relevant instruments. The Holy See suggested monitoring the quasi-trafficking of migrant workers.

COMMITMENT 4: (social integration) The EU included "all humanrights," "equality of opportunities" and "full participation of disadvantaged groups."The US referred to basic worker rights and capacity building. In the chapeau, the EUadded references to equality of opportunity and Canada added respect for diversity.The G-77 and China preferred the original text. In 4(a) (promoting socialawareness), Norway included human rights. The G-77 and China inserted "promoteddemocracy and the rule of law." The US added two new subparagraphs to precede4(a). The first, on the elimination of discrimination in all its forms, was supported bythe EU and the second, on strengthening activities of local communities and NGOs.The G-77 and China accepted them in principle. Switzerland added a new (a)(bis) onaccess to education. Confusion reigned supreme as delegates were unclear whetherthey were discussing the chapeau, 4(a), 4(a)(bis) or another variation. In 4(b)(protection of disadvantaged groups), the EU added reference to equal opportunitymeasures. The G-77 and China suggested alternative language regarding thedisadvantaged. The US said that the paragraph does not make a distinction betweendisadvantage and vulnerability. The US, supported by Japan, included women,minorities and youth among the groups enumerated. Iran opposed this reference.Belarus referred to the elderly and victims of war. The G-77 and China called for areference to inter-generational dialogue. In 4(c) (cultural diversity), the G-77and China"s addition of religious diversity and migrant workers and their families wasaccepted, notwithstanding the US amendment to qualify "adoption" with "promote."Costa Rica added ethnic diversity. In 4(d) (indigenous people), New Zealand,supported by Canada and Mexico, strengthened the reference to participation and self-sufficiency of indigenous people. The EU added a 4(dd) on the cultural and religiousrights of minorities. In 4(e) (institutions that enhance social integration), theEU added a reference to the central role of the family, "in all its forms, which the G-77 and China opposed. The G-77 and China added a reference to a supportiveenvironment. Belize, on behalf of the Caribbean Community and supported by Canadaand Australia, recommended ICPD language regarding the plurality of family forms.The Holy See called for a definitional paragraph on the family. Australia added an(e)(bis) on the prevention of discrimination. Consensus was reached on G-77 andChina and EU language on crime and violence. In 4(f) (ratification), the USreplaced "encourage" with "urge." Paraguay referred to access to justice. The EUadded "removal of reservation." The G-77 and China deleted "all" before"international instruments," added "all" before "human rights," and added a new (g)on international cooperation. Costa Rica proposed a (g)(bis) strengthening regional andsubregional institutions.

WORKING GROUP I

Given the slow pace of work, the Chair requested suggestions for expediting theprocess. The G-77 and China requested that delegations raise proposals only withinregional group meetings. COMMITMENT 2(b): (provision of basic needs)The EU added references on access to employment, food security, conformity with theCairo document for family planning, and the disabled. The US added access toprimary health care and reproductive services. Australia included "indigenous peoples"after "women and children" and Japan added "human" before "basic needs." In2(c) (access), the US added a reference to sustainable livelihoods.Switzerland added a new (c)(bis) on expanding employment and economicopportunities. In 2(d) (socio-economic protection), the EU referred to civil,socio-economic and cultural rights. The G-77 and China added "maternity" after "illhealth." The US added two new paragraphs: one strengthening the role of communitiesand NGO participation, and another on implementation of community-basedmanagement programmes. In 2(e) (national budgets), the G-77 and Chinareplaced "review" with "ensure" and "to orient them towards" with "meet basicneeds." The EU added a reference to targeting poverty as a strategic objective. The USreferred to cost-effective, community-based policies. Australia added a reference tocomprehensive national implementation strategies by 1996. In 2(f)(international institutions), the EU referred to donor States developing an assessment-based approach for aid. The G-77 and China, supported by Japan, added "developedcountries," replaced "institutions" with "organizations," and added "multilateral"before "financial institutions." India noted that the national segment did not includeenabling activities in the field of agriculture and rural development. The US qualified"ensure" with "strive to," which the G-77 and China opposed. The G-77 and Chinasuggested language on financial and technical assistance for lower income countriesand on the removal of impediments to poverty eradication.

COMMITMENT 3: (freely chosen employment) The EU proposed areference in the chapeau to full employment as a basic economic priority. The G-77and China proposed an (a)(bis) on the right of disadvantaged groups to remuneratedemployment, stressing the importance of sustainable livelihoods. In 3(a)(creation of remunerated employment), the EU, supported by the US, agreed with thegeneral philosophy of the sub-paragraph, but deleted "adequately remunerated." TheG-77 and China, supported by Canada and Japan, strongly objected to this deletion,arguing that it was up to individual countries to develop employment policies.References were added to: disabled persons (EU); women (Norway); and the elderly(Switzerland). Norway added stronger language on workers" rights. In 3(b)(expanding work opportunities), the G-77 and China added language on secure andsustainable livelihoods for all. Canada referred to investing in basic education andskills development. In 3(c) (worker training), the US qualified the referenceto worker training with "seek to." In 3(d) (options for employment creation),the EU added a reference to expanding the concept of work. They also added newparagraphs on: reconciling family and professional life; womens" access to employmentand pay equity; and integration of employment strategies into trade mechanisms. TheG-77 and China supported the EU"s first two paragraphs. The US deleted "and fairdistribution of work" and objected to expanding the concept of work. In 3(e)(quality jobs), the US proposed language on forced and child labour. Australiacalled for indices recognizing womens" contribution to work. The US bracketed theparagraph and added reference to durable and long-lasting employment. In3(f) (migrant workers), the G-77 and China encouraged ratification and fullimplementation of relevant instruments. The Holy See suggested monitoring the quasi-trafficking of migrant workers.

COMMITMENT 4: (social integration) The EU included "all humanrights," "equality of opportunities" and "full participation of disadvantaged groups."The US referred to basic worker rights and capacity building. In the chapeau, the EUadded references to equality of opportunity and Canada added respect for diversity.The G-77 and China preferred the original text. In 4(a) (promoting socialawareness), Norway included human rights. The G-77 and China inserted "promoteddemocracy and the rule of law." The US added two new subparagraphs to precede4(a). The first, on the elimination of discrimination in all its forms, was supported bythe EU and the second, on strengthening activities of local communities and NGOs.The G-77 and China accepted them in principle. Switzerland added a new (a)(bis) onaccess to education. Confusion reigned supreme as delegates were unclear whetherthey were discussing the chapeau, 4(a), 4(a)(bis) or another variation. In 4(b)(protection of disadvantaged groups), the EU added reference to equal opportunitymeasures. The G-77 and China suggested alternative language regarding thedisadvantaged. The US said that the paragraph does not make a distinction betweendisadvantage and vulnerability. The US, supported by Japan, included women,minorities and youth among the groups enumerated. Iran opposed this reference.Belarus referred to the elderly and victims of war. The G-77 and China called for areference to inter-generational dialogue. In 4(c) (cultural diversity), the G-77and China"s addition of religious diversity and migrant workers and their families wasaccepted, notwithstanding the US amendment to qualify "adoption" with "promote."Costa Rica added ethnic diversity. In 4(d) (indigenous people), New Zealand,supported by Canada and Mexico, strengthened the reference to participation and self-sufficiency of indigenous people. The EU added a 4(dd) on the cultural and religiousrights of minorities. In 4(e) (institutions that enhance social integration), theEU added a reference to the central role of the family, "in all its forms, which the G-77 and China opposed. The G-77 and China added a reference to a supportiveenvironment. Belize, on behalf of the Caribbean Community and supported by Canadaand Australia, recommended ICPD language regarding the plurality of family forms.The Holy See called for a definitional paragraph on the family. Australia added an(e)(bis) on the prevention of discrimination. Consensus was reached on G-77 andChina and EU language on crime and violence. In 4(f) (ratification), the USreplaced "encourage" with "urge." Paraguay referred to access to justice. The EUadded "removal of reservation." The G-77 and China deleted "all" before"international instruments," added "all" before "human rights," and added a new (g)on international cooperation. Costa Rica proposed a (g)(bis) strengthening regional andsubregional institutions.

WORKING GROUP II

PARAGRAPH 12: (interaction of market forces) In 12(c) (openmarket policy), the EU opposed the G-77 and China"s proposed deletion of "newsuppliers" in reference to reduced barriers to entry. The EU added "national"corporations to the G-77 and China"s 12(d)(bis) call for transnational corporationcompliance with national and international laws. In 12(e) (public and privateinvestment), the G-77 and China reference to poverty eradication required brackets. In12(f) (human resource development), the G-77 and China incorporated theEU call for capacity building, health education, empowerment and participation. TheEU altered its proposed 12(f)(bis) (small scale economies) to refer to indigenouspeople"s economies.

CHAPTER 13: (prevention of socially divisive disparities) The US,supported by the EU, proposed that the chapeau read: "ensuring fiscal systems andother public policies promote social cohesiveness and equality of opportunity." In13(a) (creating an ethical climate), the Holy See"s addition of "families" wasaccepted. In 13(b) (ethical responsibility of business), the Holy See suggestedaddressing codes of conduct. In 13(f) (strengthening international taxagreements), the Russian Federation and Armenia opposed deleting "countries witheconomies in transition." The G-77 and China, Benin, and Algeria thought thesecountries should have their own paragraph. In 13(g) (fair tax systems),China, supported by the G-77, suggested establishing tax systems "in accordance withnational priorities," but the EU found this unnecessary. The US, the EU, and Ukrainesupported the Canadian formulation on strengthening administrative capacity.

B: FAVOURABLE NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL POLITICAL ANDLEGAL ENVIRONMENT (Delegates accepted the G-77 and China"s titlechange.)

PARAGRAPH 14: (political framework) In 14(a) (institutionalcapacity), the Canadian reference to "cultural sensitivity" was bracketed. The EUsupported the Norwegian proposal for 14(a)(bis), to ensure the rule of law anddemocratic institutions, but the G-77 and China reserved. In 14(b) (rules andprocesses), the EU opposed the G-77 and China"s proposal to delete "adequate" rulesand processes. In 14(c) (eliminating discrimination), the US agreed to a G-77and China proposal to develop and encourage educational and media projects. In14(d) (decentralization), Canada proposed that decentralization be compatiblewith the "cultural make-up of society," but the G-77 and China reserved. In14(e) (freedom of association), delegates debated the necessity of the G-77and China"s preface "in accordance with national laws and regulations." In14(g) (full participation of women), the G-77 and China reserved on women"sinvolvement in policy monitoring.

PARAGRAPH 15: (rights of individuals) Delegates accepted the G-77 andChina"s proposals to include "all human rights and fundamental freedoms" and todelete "rights of individuals." In 15(a) (existing international rightsconventions), China said that if there are no provisions in existing covenants forreports on implementation, reports do not have to be given. In 15(c)(protecting women"s rights), the US preferred "working to ensure" women"s rights.Norway incorporated its 15(c)(bis) reference to the Convention of the Rights of theChild into the EU"s 15(c) (women"s rights) proposal regarding the rights ofthe child. Canada supported a separate sub-paragraph on children"s rights. In15(d) (justice system), the EU and US objected to the G-77 and China"sspecification of a justice system "in particular [for] the vulnerable and disadvantaged."In 15(e) (civil society capacity), delegates accepted the Holy See"s call tosupport social development "by education and access to resources." The G-77 andChina altered the EU-proposed 15(f), regarding discrimination and violence withinfamilies.

PARAGRAPH 16: (open political and economic system) In a new 16(a),delegates expanded the Swiss call to strengthen the educational system. In16(a) (media), the EU stressed using positive terms to encourage awareness-raising on non-violence, tolerance, and solidarity. PARAGRAPH 17:(promotion of favorable political and legal environment) Paragraph 17(a)(resolution of armed conflicts) was adopted ad referendum. In 17(b)(bis) (realization ofthe right to development), the EU, supported by the US, preferred "work to remove"such obstacles over "removing." In 17(e) (role of international organizations),the G-77 and China added reference to national and regional organizations, but thewhole paragraph was bracketed. The G-77 and China, supported by the EU, wanted toinclude the right to development, while the US objected. Paragraph 17(f)(policies to support objectives of social development) was adopted ad referendum.

CHAPTER II: ERADICATION OF POVERTY

Basis for Action and Objectives

PARAGRAPH 18: (people living in poverty) The G-77 and China preferred theoriginal wording. Algeria favored keeping poverty in generic terms at this time.Mexico asked for the Latin American region to be included. PARAGRAPH19: (manifestations of poverty) The G-77 and China supported the original draft,but Canada, the EU and others preferred their extensive amendments, which will beconsidered by the contact group. PARAGRAPH 20: (causes ofpoverty) Algeria stated that poverty is also due to the absence of development. Chinaadded national disasters, war and unreasonable international order to the list of causes,which was bracketed. The US proposal to delete "redistribute wealth and income toeliminate existing inequities" was also bracketed.

THINGS TO LOOK FOR TODAY

WORKING GROUP I: The Working Group will continue consideration ofthe Commitments section.

WORKING GROUP II: The Working Group will continue consideration ofChapter II. The Working Group"s informal-informal contact group will continuerevising the reference paper distributed on Thursday morning (documentation of workto date) in order to remove as much bracketed language as possible.