New York, Monday, 22 June 2009

Mr. Co-Chairs,

On behalf of the Joint Coordinating Committee of the Group of 77 and China and the Non-Aligned Movement (JCC), I would like to thank you for convening this informal consultation.

We thank the Secretary General, Mr. Ban Ki-moon, for his presence and his support to the successful continuation of the intergovernmental consideration of the recommendations emanating from the High-Level Panel’s Report and his comments thereon, and concerning the five priority and exclusive areas agreed upon for the continuation of this process.

Let me reiterate the willingness of the JCC to engage constructively in the course you have set up to facilitate the continuation of this process. At this stage, when you are planning on moving forward with some recommendations on funding, governance and gender with a view of a possible decision on this regard, the JCC expresses it will review carefully these recommendations and wishes to state the following overall considerations:

1. We reaffirm all the JCC general, substantive comments on SWC in all previous informal plenary meetings of the General Assembly, including our preference for an integrated process instead of a divided one. For us all relevant areas of the HLP’s Report would be discussed before a final decision is reached and at that point, we will have a single comprehensive decision. These are approaches endorsed in G.A. resolution 62/277. Governance, funding and development continue to be JCC areas of priority interest. Likewise, for the JCC there should be no a priori decision or artificial deadlines with regard to when decisions will be made because this should flow from the consultations.

2. These general and principled positions of the JCC do not imply, of course, any limitation on the progress already made in this process.

3. For the JCC the five priority areas of the system-wide coherence are interrelated and interlinked. This is one of the reasons we advocate for an integrated approach. “Delivering as one”, harmonization of business practices, funding, governance, and gender equality and empowerment of women are strongly interconnected. So, for the continuation and the benefit of the process of SWC, it is essential to achieve parallel progress in all these areas.

4. We commend the great efforts of the Secretariat in providing additional papers and information on the strengthening of the gender architecture, funding architecture and governance of operational activities for development. All these papers give better justification for the recommendations and options on these matters. Nevertheless, it is important to improve the interactive exchange with the Secretariat on these documents and information, so as to address questions that have not yet received any or sufficient response and receive all responses in writing.

5. JCC recognizes once again the explanations and complementary information of the Secretariat on the gender architecture. We give our general support to the strengthening of this architecture and state that the status quo is not an option, similarly as other delegations. But we look forward to deepening in the future this discussion, in order to achieve appropriate agreements for the design of a more effective, efficient and coherent institutional framework related to gender.

6. Furthermore, the same minimum level of understanding in the priority areas of governance and funding has not been achieved. For some delegations both issues are not as relevant and important as gender. However, governance and funding issues are inextricably linked and will carry implications for positive and effective results regarding the UN Gender Architecture, as well as concerning the other two areas of the SWC process (Delivering as One and harmonization of business practices).

7. Therefore, we call upon all delegations to give appropriate emphasis to these two areas. As it is well recognized, the most important component for operational activities for development is an expanding and adequate source of funding. However, some donor countries affirm that the key is to focus on quality of funding and no to give the same emphasis to the essential issue of quantity, and interpret that solving the problem of the imbalance between “core” and “non-core” resources is not important, when this problem is a main reason of the incoherence in the UN development system, including at country level.

8. Taking into account that all we could do to improve governance should be with the objective to enhance the situation on funding, it is essential also to move forward and achieve important understandings in this area.

9. Regarding Delivering as One, it is time for to define how to guarantee the independent, objective and impartial evaluation processes of the One UN pilot programs, with clear methodology and terms of reference, as well as with precise criteria of success and ways to compare the results of the pilots with the UN development activities in non-pilot countries. It is essential also to address how to complete the country led evaluation as requested in the TCPR resolution 62/208. These evaluation processes are essential to begin the consideration of the recommendations linked with Delivering as One. All delegations agreed on this.

10. Despite others’ different opinions, for the JCC it is time to inter-governmentally agree on the criteria and methodology to assess the impact of One UN Pilots. These elements should not be put in place by the Secretariat prior to consideration by member states. As on other matters, we look forward to further discussions with other delegations on how best to facilitate the process of developing these criteria and methodology.

11. Regarding the activities of the CEB and the UNDG, as interagencies coordinating mechanisms, the work of which is associated with all the areas of the SWC including harmonization of business practices, it is important to define as soon as possible how to achieve greater accountability of CEB or the UNDG to the intergovernmental bodies in charge of operational activities.

Distinguished Co-Chairs,

We look forward to reviewing your recommendations; but for the time being the JCC wants to comment on its visions of a possible outcome at the end of the 63rd General Assembly, as a contribution to the advancement of this process.

12. We foresee an eventual draft enabling or transitional decision addressing all the five interrelated areas of the system-wide coherence, transmitting the discussions and progress made on these areas to next session. At this stage, it will be difficult to envisage an alternative approach on these matters taking into consideration the integrated approach decided in resolution 62/277, that there are still remaining questions in all areas and the opposite views on fundamental issues like funding and governance.

13. A greater understanding among the Member States on these last two areas, as well as on primary elements for future continuation of the debates on “Delivering as One” and harmonization of business practices could help an eventual decision to broaden its scope and set up the way forward, within the limits of an enabling or transitional decision.
The JCC will continue to participate actively and constructively in the process and is ready to following your program of work for discussing an eventual decision agreeable for all. (
Thank you