Daily report for 7 September 1993

INFORMAL SESSION

On Tuesday morning the PrepCom met briefly in informal sessionbefore adjourning for the rest of the day so that various groupscould hold consultations. The Chair, Amb. Penelope Wensley, openedthe session by recapping what the PrepCom accomplished last week.

First, Wensley and Under-Secretary-General Nitin Desai madeintroductory statements. The PrepCom agreed on its work programmefor the two weeks, but recognized the need to be flexible andadjust as things evolved. The Secretariat introduced the majordocuments, A/CONF.167/PC/6, 9 and 10 and representatives from SPREPand Caricom introduced the reports of the two regional technicalmeetings, contained in A/CONF.167/PC/7 and 8. During the three andone half days of general debate that followed, delegates heard 70statements. A key statement was made by Vanuatu on behalf of AOSIS.Some delegates made formal requests for that statement to be madean official document and, as a result, it will be attached to thefinal report of the PrepCom.

AOSIS prepared a formal paper containing basic elements for anaction programme, which was endorsed by the G-77 and China andsubmitted to the PrepCom. This document is expected to be formallyintroduced on Wednesday as A/CONF.167/PC/L.5. In the meantime, thePrepCom agreed to accept the paper as the basis of work. TheCommittee completed a first reading of chapters I-XIV of the paperon Friday and there appeared to be a large measure of agreement onthe content of the paper. On Friday, the PrepCom also heard areport from Minister Harcourt Lewis from Barbados on preparationsfor the Conference, as well as a report from the Secretariat onoperations of the voluntary fund. Wensley concluded her review bysaying that last week was a most productive week that wascharacterized by a constructive atmosphere that maintained themomentum and captured the spirit of Rio.

XV. IMPLEMENTATION, AND MONITORING AND REVIEW: All theparticipating delegates agreed on the importance of Chapter XV.Belgium, speaking on behalf of the European Community, and otherdelegates made reference to several aspects that needed greateremphasis, such as the role of the private sector, capital flows,economic diversification and the liberalization of trade.

A major emphasis throughout delegations' comments was the need tobuild upon existing efforts and progress already achieved. Inparticular, some delegates insisted on the need to take advantageof other opportunities on the international agenda where thesustainable development of SIDS will be discussed. Regardingreferences to Agenda 21, the representative of the US asked that,wherever possible, this document use previously agreed text inAgenda 21. The US also highlighted the dangers of multilateralassistance since there is a predisposition of multilateraldevelopment agencies to favor large programmes, whereas in SIDS,smaller and less expensive projects aimed at capacity buildingmight be more appropriate.

Implementation should be carried out within existing institutionsas much as possible, not only within the UN, but also in thefinancial institutions. In this respect, the importance of theefforts of regional development banks was highlighted. It was alsodeemed important to increase coordination among donor countries.Japan called for greater clarity on the practical aspects oftransfer of finance and technology.

With regard to the triangular approach, delegates highlighted thelack of balance between national responsibilities and regional andinternational responsibilities in Chapter XV compared to the other14 chapters. There is a need to strengthen implementation at thenational and regional levels. However, regional implementationshould be flexible enough to allow for local particularities tosurface.

There was also extensive discussion on how the process shouldrelate to the Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD) and inthe work of the Department of Policy Coordination and SustainableDevelopment (DPCSD). Australia, Iceland, Japan and UNEP agreed thatthe SIDS follow-up process needs to be well integrated into thework of the CSD. Some delegates expressed their concern over apossible increased bureaucratization of the DPCSD and the dangersinherent in giving the Secretariat more monitoring authority. Itwas stressed that monitoring authority should, in fact, remain withgovernments. The Nordic Group felt that it might be easier for SIDSto prepare one report for both the CSD and the SIDS follow-upprocess at the same time.

There was also some confusion regarding the vulnerability index.Reference was made to the indicators on sustainable developmentthat are being developed by the CSD, and the need to ensure thatthey are appropriate to SIDS.

Delegates highlighted the need for a stronger role for NGOs andother major groups, particularly the role of women.

It was argued that the outcome of this Conference should bediscussed by UN agencies and other international bodies to developa coordinated plan of action and to decide which agency or body isbest placed to provide the necessary support. A representative fromthe UN Regional Commissions said they were ready to assist in thepreparation of development and environmental management plans. Talkabout a second follow-up Conference was perceived as premature atthis stage.

SUMMARY OF COMMENTS: During the morning's session, Wensleydistributed a paper titled, "Summary of Comments." This paper,prepared by the Secretariat over the weekend, contained a summaryof the comments on Chapters I through XIV of the G-77's basicelements for a programme of action. Wensley asked delegates toinform her or the Secretariat if there were any omissions orinaccuracies in this paper. The Holy See said that its comments onChapter XIV (Human Resource Development) were not adequatelyreflected in the "Summary." The Holy See had questioned whetherfamily planning can be categorized as a service by all States. Healso clarified his other comments on this chapter. As there were noother comments at this time, the Chair adjourned the informalsession.

AOSIS MEETING

The Chair cancelled the PrepCom's informal session Tuesdayafternoon to allow AOSIS/G-77 to continue its work in integratingthe comments of non-G-77 delegates, NGOs, UN agencies and othersinto the "Basic Elements" text. They expect to produce a revisedtext overnight. They are also incorporating some of their own ideasinto the text as there was some internal criticism within AOSIS dueto omissions in the first draft. The meeting was not expected toaddress the structure of the document, although this clearlyremains a major issue for a number of delegations. It was expectedto be another late night for AOSIS, especially for the delegateswho have been playing a mediating role between the two majorregional groups within AOSIS.

INTER-AGENCY MEETING

The Secretariat convened a meeting of agency representatives afterthe PrepCom adjourned Tuesday morning. During this meeting, theagencies discussed the preparation of a new document that willsummarize and highlight activities in the UN system relevant tosmall island developing States. The first attempt at such anexercise, A/CONF.167/PC/6, met with sharp criticism from many ofthe delegates in that it was too general and did not includereports from all of the relevant UN agencies. This new document isexpected to have a sharper focus on the particular problems of SIDSand how they are being addressed within the UN system. Some agencyrepresentatives expressed concern, however, that it would beimpossible to collect and collate all of the necessary informationin such a short period of time. Nevertheless, the Secretariat hopesto make this document available to governments in January so thatthey will be able to study it in advance of the BarbadosConference.

IN THE CORRIDORS I

In the corridors, delegates have been expressing concern with thefollow-up to the Conference, specifically the monitoring and reviewof the programme of action. The question seems to be how to allowSIDS to have their own reporting process while not overloadingtheir reporting capacity, bearing in mind the reporting dutiesrelated to the Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD) andother bodies.

The CSD is the UN institution established to monitor theimplementation of the UNCED agreements, and, so it is argued, isthe appropriate forum for SIDS monitoring and review. But howshould SIDS be dealt with by the CSD? The follow-up to thisConference needs due attention while, at the same time, SIDSconcerns should be integrated throughout all programme areas ofAgenda 21. Mindful of past mistakes and the consequentmarginalization of issue areas within the UN (two such issues,Africa and women, come to mind) the follow-up to the SIDSConference should appear as a distinct item on the agenda and alsobe addressed in each report submitted by agencies or governments,where appropriate, in whichever cluster of Agenda 21 is underdiscussion.

The job of the focal point, or whatever name is given to thepost-Conference coordination within the DPCSD, would be to ensurethis integration, and to manage interagency coordination. If thisConference can find an effective mechanism, it will be advancingthe cause of all Agenda 21 review and UNCED follow-up. Severaldelegates have noted that this issue is of greater importance atthe present than calls for a second conference.

IN THE CORRIDORS II

PrepCom delegates have been hard at work over the last weekdrafting and commenting on the basic elements for the programme ofaction to be adopted in Barbados in April. As the end of thePrepCom quickly approaches, however, there has also been somethought given to what will happen next. It does not appear likelythat the PrepCom will be able to complete the draft programme ofaction by Friday. Although there has been talk about a secondPrepCom or intersessional consultations, neither of these optionsappear likely at this time as the problem of ensuring adequaterepresentation of all interested States, in light of the limitedfunds available, appears to be unsurmountable. The most probablescenario is that there will be extended pre-sessional consultationsin Barbados immediately before the Conference. How many days ofpre-sessional consultations will be needed has yet to bedetermined.

At the Barbados Conference itself, there might also be a Committeeof the Whole that will finish negotiating the programme of actionas well as the second expected outcome of the Conference -- theBarbados Declaration. This proposed Declaration has been thesubject of informal consultations over the past week. There appearsto be consensus that such a declaration is necessary and theBarbados delegation has indicated that it would like to prepare thefirst draft. This draft would then serve as the basis fornegotiations at the Conference.

THINGS TO LOOK FOR TODAY

The PrepCom will meet in formal session at 10:00 am today in theTrusteeship Council Chamber to introduce documentA/CONF.167/PC/L.5, Position of the Group of 77 and China on BasicElements for an Action Programme for the Sustainable Development ofSmall Island Developing States. This document is the formal versionof the AOSIS/G-77 text introduced informally last week.

The Chair is then expected to convene an informal session where therevised text of AOSIS/G-77, prepared last night, will beintroduced. This text should form the basis for negotiation.However, as non-G-77 delegates will not have seen the paper inadvance, it is likely that the Chair will again adjourn the sessionto allow time for regional groups to meet and delegates to consultwith their capitals. The Chair may also decide to embark on areading of the text ad referenda, pending the result ofthese consultations as time is now at a premium.

The Secretariat has made arrangements for the use of ConferenceRoom 8, if the Chair should desire, for the afternoon session.Chances are good that discussions will continue in the TrusteeshipCouncil Chamber due to the limited seating capacity in Room 8.