Statement by HE Ms Frances Lisson, Chargé d’Affaires of Australia to the United Nations at Informal Consultations on System-Wide Coherence on Gender and System-Wide Coherence
16 June 2008
(As delivered)
Thank you, Co-Chairs. I have the honour of delivering this statement on behalf of Australia, Canada and New Zealand.
CANZ is pleased to participate in this second discussion on gender equality issues in the UN system. We would like to start by thanking the Deputy Secretary General for sharing her analysis on the current system’s achievements, gaps and challenges, and we recognize that there is general broad agreement among many member states based on our discussions on May 16th.
We concur with the key challenges outlined, such as in the areas of
• coordination and coherence -- including the roles played by diverse governing bodies;
• authority and positioning of the system’s many organizations and interagency groups & initiatives;
• human and financial resources, and here we would add the difficulty of effectively funding the system when diverse actors engage in similar thematic areas with little coordination between them; and most of all,
• reporting and accountability, and the fact that the system as a whole and many of its individual parts cannot report what it allocates and spends on gender equality, and that there appear to be no consequences for neglecting to make progress in gender mainstreaming and achieving gender balance in the system.
As we discussed at the last consultation the gaps and challenges at the country level, today we’ll focus on issues relating to the linkages and gaps in the UN’s normative and operational work in gender equality.
Mr. Co-Chairs, CANZ believes that there is a robust international normative framework for gender equality and women’s empowerment but that – despite progress in some areas – there are significant gaps and shortfalls in the realization of this framework. A renewed United Nations has a crucial role to play in supporting member states to realize commitments made in this area.
We concur with the Deputy Secretary General that there is significant synergy between the substantive content of the CEDAW, the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action and the commitments regarding the MDGs.
Just as the list of commitments is long, so is the evidence that the promise behind these commitments has not yet been fulfilled. Reporting on progress made in the 10 years following the Beijing Conference, Governments reported “significant but uneven national achievements.” Progress was made in “developing policies, operational programmes, legislation and institutional frameworks in support of gender equality.” However, all governments reported numerous challenges and that “a large gap remains between policy and practice in promotion of gender equality…” and that there is “the need for comprehensive and multidimensional approaches to address continuing constraints and challenges.”
The efforts required include:
1. National capacities to implement international commitments require strengthening. When member states request assistance to make changes, the United Nations system should provide top quality technical advice to support them. Currently, Member States can request technical support from various parts of the system, but coordination and strengthening of such support is needed. If there was a consolidated entity responsible for promoting normative commitments, supporting countries in their achievement and assisting them to monitor progress, this gap could be addressed. UNICEF plays this kind of role for the Convention of the Rights of the Child and UNFPA for the International Conference on Population & Development.
2. We need to strive towards better analysis and research on what works. We have a start on understanding the linkages between investments in women’s empowerment and national development and between investments in sexual and reproductive health and gender equality, but gaps still exist.
3. We need to improve the availability of data to track and monitor progress at the national level, and to support countries to produce this data. For example, data on all six official indicators of MDG3 were available for 2000 – 2005 for only 59 out of 154 developing countries. This makes it impossible to track progress at the global level, and hinders the implementation of normative commitments.
4. Linked to this, we need to arrive at more complete and comprehensive reporting on progress and gaps. Currently there is little visibility of CEDAW reporting and the last global report on progress on the Beijing Platform for Action was issued in 2005. The World Survey on the Role of Women in Development published by the Division for the Advancement of Women is only issued every 5 years. Reporting on the MDGs takes up some, but not all, of the relevant issues. We simply don’t know where we stand on some of the commitments.
5. And we need to renew the system to ensure global leadership and authority in gender equality. A strong, united voice from the United Nations would provide guidance and mobilize political will for positive change.
To summarize, we believe that member states have set out a clear agenda to be followed to achieve gender equality and the empowerment of women – nationally and globally. However, an enormous gap exists between the promise of our commitments and their achievement on the ground. As the Deputy Secretary General’s paper points out, the gaps and overlaps at various levels and sectors, the ongoing fragmentation of responsibilities, and the lack of accountability for gender equality keeps the UN from adequately responding to the growing demand from Member States. It is increasingly clear that the UN needs a strong, authoritative voice and an effective operator on gender equality -- the same level of authority and leadership as the system affords to children and humanitarian assistance, for instance.
Mr. Co-Chairs,
CANZ believes that the gaps have been clearly identified. It is now time to address these gaps. It is time to explore options and find solutions to strengthening gender equality in the UN. There may be multiple possible paths towards this, and we remain open to exploring approaches for the way forward. As a start, CANZ would invite the Deputy Secretary General’s continuing assistance to map out possible models of institutional responses, including an analysis of the pros and cons of various approaches.
We have confidence that under her leadership and continuing engagement, we can work together to resolve the shortcomings of the current system highlighted today and in May’s session. CANZ remains committed to support such a process and provide constructive comments and suggestions on possible models.
Thank you.