EU Statement on UN Assembly Zero Draft Decision on the scope for the Summit of the Future

Distinguished co-facilitators,

Thanks so much for circulating the draft decision and for today’s presentation and additional clarifications you just provided. Thanks also for sharing your optimism – I think that’s what we all need for the way ahead. As time since circulation has been short, please allow me to provide just a few initial reflections on behalf of the EU and its Member States. We will provide a more detailed assessment at the first reading.

First, as we said already last week, we believe the proposed overall structure for the Summit of the Future outcome document to consist of a chapeau and four clusters or chapters, each containing specific policy elements for our consideration, is a good basis.

Secondly, we agree that the chapeau should frame the Pact for the Future. We welcome that our concerns on a too narrowly defined chapeau have been reflected in your first two paras, which reaffirm our commitment to the UN Charter and to multilateralism as well as to other key processes and agreements, most notably the 2030 Agenda and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. We also welcome the focus on strengthening global governance and on future generations

Thirdly, when it comes to the headings of the respective clusters: There are certainly many different ways to go about it, but we certainly see  also  the reasoning for the choice you have made which allows to capture traditional priorities – such as development and peace and peace and security – , and emergjng issues – such as digital cooperation – , alike. We note though that in particular Cluster IV is becoming quite loaded, and requires very close coordination between the respective co-facilitators and the next PGA.

Fourth, and that is where we need to raise a flag, is the omission of the previously announced cross-cutting issues. We heard the views expressed in the last meeting and certainly see the risk of those issues turning into a Christmas tree. However, we believe that human rights and the gender dimension deserve a more prominent placement in the draft decision.

As we mentioned last time, we urgently need to see concrete deliverables on human rights in all its dimensions, including on promoting gender equality and the empowerment of women and girls. The 75th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is not a reason to celebrate, but rather a painful reminder where we are falling behind on our commitments and must take concrete actions.  The UNSG has been very committed and outspoken in his Call to Action as well in his vision for a new social contract anchored in human rights. We need to see this strong commitment fully mainstreamed throughout the Pact for the Future.

We welcome your attempt to capture this commitment under (b). The way it is drafted it still falls short though of our expectation for equal treatment of human rights as one of the three UN pillars. We still believe that human rights alongside international law and sustainable development are indeed of cross-cutting nature for the whole Pact – just as it was defined in ‘Our Common Agenda’. This includes the mainstreaming of a gender perspective, which, regrettably, has completely disappeared from the draft decision. We would like to see this rectified.

Fifth, when it comes to the actual policy elements, we expressed already our overall support to both the elements you listed as well as the ambition to have them agreed as part of the decision. Just a couple of additional comments for now:

1. We need to underline that when talking about sustainable development that we must include all three dimensions, including the environment.
2. When it comes to the implementation of existing agreements, we believe that the Paris Agreement as well as Montreal-Kunming also merit being included.
3.  when talking about acceleration of the implementation of the 2030 Agenda, we see this applicable to the SDGs in their entirety. This also includes advancing on the social agenda, if not primarily towards the Summit for the Future, then at least containing a commitment with a view towards the World Social Summit and for the close interlinkage between the different summits to be reflected;
4.  we see the reasoning of moving the element on reform of the global financial architecture under the global governance cluster, but are not so sure if the same should apply to “Beyond GDP”. Grateful for rationale.

Lastly, we like to reiterate our support for your commitment to the Summit being geared towards advancing on the implementation of existing agreements, most notably the 2030 Agenda, and filling gaps in global governance, while avoiding duplication and overlaps.

I thank you.