Daily report for 17 January 1995

WORKING GROUP I

Part I-B: PRINCIPLES AND GOALS

PARAGRAPH 19: (commitment and priorities) The G-77 and Chinaproposed adding "economic" to the list. Slovenia proposed an additionalsentence noting past mistakes in social development policies. Interesteddelegations were asked to prepare text. Kuwait"s proposed addition of"religious" was opposed by India, who emphasized a more people-centered approach. Pakistan proposed reference to freedom of culturaland religious values, considered to be a crucial aspect of socialdevelopment. Japan"s addition of "justice" after "social progress" wasaccepted. The EU added "human rights" after "human dignity" and "fullparticipation of all," which were accepted. PARAGRAPH 20:(framework for action) In 20 (a) (people centered), the EUpreferred the original text. The text remains bracketed. Costa Ricawanted a reference to sustainable development, whereas Iran preferredthe broader concept of development. The Chair noted that thesustainable dimension is covered in the next sub-paragraph. In 20(b) (equity among generations), India proposed replacing"respecting intergenerational equity" with "ensuring intragenerationalequity." As a compromise, the Chair suggested "ensuring equity amonggenerations." The US proposed "achieving a sustainable balance betweenhuman population and the earth"s resources." Brazil, supported byAlgeria and India, opposed this formulation because of its emphasis ondemographic factors. The Chair noted that the integrated logicunderlying the paragraph was being undermined by the excessivenumber of proposed amendments. He noted that text will be produced onpopulation and on consumption. Norway insisted on references tosustainable development. In 20 (c) (national responsibility forsocial development), the G-77 and China replaced "national" with thebroader term "collective," which was bracketed by the US. In 20 (d)(integrating economic and social policies), the EU added "culturalpolicies." In 20 (e) (sound economic policies), the US preferred"sustainable" instead of "sound" and bracketed "economic policies are anecessary foundation to social development" and proposed "growth isessential to social development." The G-77 objected to this proposal,noting the over-emphasis on growth. Sub-paragraph 20 (f)(promotion of democracy) was approved with minor changes. In20 (g) (equitable income distribution), the G-77 and China added"just access" and "equitable" instead of "just" distribution. The USopposed "just distribution of income" and suggested "policies thatincrease income-earning opportunities for the poor." Pakistan and othersopposed the proposal. The EU deleted "equity" before "equality."Norway called for the participation of disadvantaged groups. In 20(h) (family as the basic unit), the EU added "rights, responsibilitiesand capacities of family members." The US bracketed reference to theentitlement of families to comprehensive protection. Tunisia, Morocco, andIran called for deletion of "in its various forms." The EU and the USopposed their proposal, noting that this was consensus language fromthe Cairo text, which the Chair urged delegates to read. In 20 (i)(human rights), the G-77 added the rights of children and of self-determination for people under occupation. The latter was bracketed bythe EU. Algeria objected to the EU proposal to delete "equity," notingthat it was central to the goal of social cohesion. India"s reference toadolescents was bracketed. Delegates agreed to the US proposalregarding promotion of universal respect for all human rights andfundamental freedoms. In 20 (j) (meeting basic human needs), noagreement was reached regarding the G-77 proposal to delete"communities." The EU proposed a new paragraph after (h) on therecognition and protection of indigenous peoples. New Zealand expresseddisappointment with the lack of references to indigenous peoples andsupported the EU proposal. In 20 (k) (good governance) the G-77and China replaced "good governance", with "transparency". The EUsupported the inclusion of "transparency" in addition to "goodgovernance." Discussion ensued on the elements of "good governance."Australia, supported by Pakistan, proposed a list of the elements,including openness, and accountability. Brackets remain on "goodgovernance." The Holy See noted that there was a different right toparticipation in public and private institutions and suggested softbrackets for this. In 20 (l) (empowerment), the G-77 and Chinaproposed "asserts the universality of social development and outlines anew strengthened approach for social development based on internationalcooperation and partnership with new impetus," which was accepted.India added a reference to empowering women. The EU added referencesto the betterment of the disabled and the linkage between socialdevelopment goals and new information technologies. Mauritius added areference to the elderly. The Chair pointed out that the group neededto acknowledge the new information technology era. India proposedadding to the EU proposal "and render transfer of new technologieseasy." The EU preferred the broader term "use" rather than "transfer"of information technologies. The Chair proposed "access and use" as acompromise. The US proposed a reference to improve the participation ofwomen in all spheres of life and India suggested that women"sparticipation should be as complete equals. PARAGRAPH 21:(responsibility for goals) The G-77 and China suggested substituting"Governments" with "States" and a reference to multilateral institutions.The EU proposed adding "all regional and local authorities." The US,supported by Japan, suggested deleting "Governments," inserting "atthe national level" after the word "goals." The US also added referencesto the work of NGOs and to increasing the income levels of the poor.Algeria could not support the US proposal. India said that the referenceto multilateral financial institutions was important. The US proposal to"encourage sustainable growth to raise the incomes of the poor" wasalso bracketed.

PART C " COMMITMENTS:

PARAGRAPH 22: (global drive for social development) The G-77 andChina replaced "vision" with "pursuit of social development." The EUreplaced "vision" with "concept," and added "solidarity" after "socialjustice." Delegates also agreed to add "territorial integrity" after"national sovereignty." After "diversity" in the fourth line, the USadded "and in conformity with universally recognized internationalhuman rights." This stimulated a protracted debate regarding the use ofhuman rights language from either the Vienna or Cairo texts. The EUand the G-77 and China preferred the Vienna formulation. The EUproposed "based on the promotion and protection of all human rights."

Commitment 1: (enabling environment) The G-77 and Chinaincluded "social" in the enumeration and Costa Rica recommended adding"cultural." Both words were added. The EU suggested deleting "at alllevels" and included a reference to sustainable development. The Chairpointed out that this paragraph refers to the environment conducive tosocial development. In 1 (a) (legal framework), the EU proposedstrengthening the reference to fundamental human rights in bothprinciples and commitments. The Iranian proposal to create an enablingeconomic environment to promote access by all to income resources andsocial services remains bracketed. The G-77 and China proposed adding"in accordance with our national laws and procedures" after "legalframework," and "all" before "human rights," and deleting "fundamentalfreedoms." Costa Rica was opposed to the deletion of "fundamentalfreedoms." The US suggested inserting "good governance" after "defacto discrimination." The EU added "promotion of partnerships" withcivil society organizations. The EU proposal was incorporated but noticewas taken of possible repetition. Brackets remain on the references tonational laws, good governance, and the Japanese proposal to include"the elimination of major sources of social distress."

The Chair noted that some progress had been made on a consensus text.He had asked Vice-chair, Amb. Richard Butler (Australia), to undertakeconsultations on the outstanding issues. The Chair emphasized that thiswork would be transmitted to the Working Group.

WORKING GROUP II

Amb. Richelle announced the distribution of the Secretariat"s compilationof amendments on Chapter I. Additional amendments were read and theWorking Group then broke for regional consultations.

DRAFT PROGRAMME OF ACTION

PARAGRAPH 1: (introduction) Switzerland proposed an explicitintroduction of the aim of social development, but withdrew theamendment for the sake of brevity. Canada"s proposal, which noted thesuccess of the Programme of Action would be based on results, wasadopted ad referendum. PARAGRAPH 2: (recommended actions)Iran specified the creation of an "international and national"environment favorable to social development, which the EU wanted "ona sustainable basis." The G-77 and China found acceptable language toincorporate both ideas. Canada, Japan, and Norway supported the USsentence on environmental concerns, but the G-77 and China objected,so the proposal was bracketed. The G-77 and China objected to theCanadian proposal to delete the word "basic" before "human rights."Canada noted that the Cairo document refers to "all" human rights, andAlgeria reformulated the text using "all," and incorporated Swiss and USproposals on rights to health care.

PARAGRAPH 3: (background of world conferences) China wantedto mention specific conferences. Algeria suggested a general reference tomajor conferences. The G-77 suggested a reference to "world conferenceand global concerns." The EU only wanted to highlight what has beendiscussed at these meetings. The Chair suggested that interesteddelegations meet to work out compromise language. Delegations acceptedthe EU amendment to include "principles" after "commitments." Kuwaitwithdrew its amendment on national laws, but wanted "religious values"placed after the word "priorities." The US said that the dynamic of theProgramme of Action should be emphasized. The Chair said that the firstand last parts of paragraph 3 need discussion.

PART I: ENABLING ENVIRONMENT FOR SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT

PARAGRAPH 4: (social development) The EU said that "spiritualenvironment" is encompassed by "cultural environment." The G-77supported deletion of the next sentence on promotion of socialdevelopment, and agreed with the Holy See"s formulation. The US, EUand Japan supported replacement of this sentence with languageproposed by Switzerland. The Chair asked Switzerland and the Holy Seeto find compromise wording. The US proposed language for the lastamendment in the section: "Human dignity, human rights, fundamentalfreedoms, equality, and justice must be fundamental values of allsocieties." Iran suggested substituting "constitutes" for "must be." TheG-77 offered "human dignity, all human rights, fundamental freedoms,equity, equality, and social justice." The US bracketed the words"equity and social." The G-77 objected to the Canadian amendment onpeople-centered development. She preferred a reference to sustainabledevelopment. The Holy See offered compromise language based on the RioDeclaration and the Cairo document. The Chair suggested furtherconsultations on the basis of Agenda 21.

PARAGRAPH 5: (increasing interdependence) Delegates acceptedthe proposal from the G-77 and China to mention food crises andTurkey"s reference to threats from racial discrimination and xenophobia.Algeria objected to the Canadian proposal that "social development isprimarily a national responsibility" on the basis that this fact is self-evident. PARAGRAPH 6: (market forces and national policies)Delegates could not agree on the Libyan proposal to refer to social, aswell as economic activities and "social" remains bracketed. A Libyanproposal to refer to social forces rather than market forces was notadopted. Delegates objected to a Norwegian proposal for public policiesto supplement market mechanisms. An EU reformulation calling for publicpolicies to "correct market failures" was accepted, although Norway"sinsistence that policies also "supplement market mechanisms" requiredbrackets.

THINGS TO LOOK FOR TODAY

WORKING GROUP I: The Working Group will continue itsdeliberations on Part I-C: Commitments. Informal consultations to beconducted by Amb. Butler will be held in Room 2963 of the Secretariat at10 am.

WORKING GROUP II: The Working Group will continue discussionon Chapter I this morning. Night sessions are expected Wednesday andThursday. The Secretariat requested delegates to submit all amendmentsfor Chapters II-IV by Tuesday evening. This compilation should beavailable soon.