UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY
National Statement by the Honourable Dr David Kemp, MP
Minister for Environment and Heritage
Plenary
Commission on Sustainable Development 11
New York
28 April 2003
It is impossible to begin this statement without offering my warmest congratulations to you Mr Chairman. Your leadership at Johannesburg, along with that of your President and all your colleagues, was essential to what we achieved. I am enormously pleased by both the substance and the symbolism of your being in the Chair here at the start of a new era for the CSD in this post-Johannesburg world.
CSD 11 offers the important opportunity to build on key outcomes from the World Summit - notably the recognition that sustainable development will mainly be achieved through practical actions by nation states, particularly by improving governance, and by greater participation in the global economy. Also important to sustainable development will be trade and private sector investment, regional efforts, partnerships and other forms of cooperation and assistance.
If we can use this meeting to chart a course for the next 10 years that will keep the CSD focused on practical actions, sharing knowledge about real solutions and deepening partnerships, we will have succeeded. If, on the other hand, we allow CSD simply to repeat the pattern of the last ten years of politicised negotiations focused on texts not solutions, emphasising the differences rather than the commonalities amongst states, then we will have failed.
A few weeks ago, Mr Chairman, at a Round Table organised by the OECD, you called for the CSD to concentrate on a practical dialogue around real solutions and sharing of experience and expertise. Australia agrees that this is what the CSD must now do. We should agree here that the CSD focus on facilitating the practical implementation of sustainable development by sharing what we have learnt and developing new areas of cooperation.
Australia, like other countries, will be striving to implement all elements of the Johannesburg Plan of Implementation. A key question for this meeting is how the CSD can best contribute to our common goal.
The Secretary General’s proposal for making the CSD more effective is a good start. But it does not go far enough. The simplest process and most concentrated focus on real solutions should be our aim. This would best be achieved by addressing one major theme over each two-year period, giving each cycle a clearly defined purpose and clearly defined outcomes - outcomes that we can take away and use such as capacity improvements, information flows, learning from others’ experience, new ideas, and a shared sense of purpose; outcomes that make a real difference.
A rejuvenated CSD will need the participation not only of ministers and professional negotiators, but also of people who can speak about practical issues and benefit from the dialogue. Regional inputs will be important and should include sub-regional and trans-regional bodies with experience at the level of implementation.
The selection of themes for each CSD needs to be managed successfully if its work is to be productive. In the past, we have tried to do too much at once. Any given theme will raise a number of complex issues. Water would be a good first theme under the new arrangements and would raise issues related to health, equity of access, wise use for sustainable development and theenvironment. This shows why one theme per session is a realistic ambition.
The Secretary-General gave particular attention to CSD’s role in monitoring progress. Intergovernmental organisations are accountable to their governing bodies, and national action is for states themselves to monitor, unless there are transboundary issues. The CSD should add value to those monitoring processes and not duplicate or create unnecessary work. It could add value through targeted assessment at the integrated global level, drawing together mostly existing information.
The targets agreed in the Plan of Implementation are important, but they are not the whole story. We should monitor progress against the drinking water and sanitation targets, for example, but that will not tell us if we are improving sustainability of freshwater generally. It is important to capture progress across a whole theme, by including existing indicators and qualitative information.
The partnership concept is perhaps the best and most tangible expression of the common interests we share. Partnerships are a successful and practical idea, and a logical approach ideally suited to implementation. The Summit agreed to elevate the attention we give to partnerships and consciously use them as a means to drive sustainable development. The CSD should support and foster partnerships.
Mr Chairman, we need a CSD for the new century and the post-Johannesburg world. CSD reform is part of the broader reform of the UN: it is vital that the new CSD contributes to the goals set out by the UN Secretary General of ‘doing what matters’, ‘working better together’, ‘serving members better’, and - clearly and sensibly – ‘allocating resources and priorities’. We must be willing to experiment and innovate. By giving space to the creativity of a wider range of participants, we can deliver the impetus to sustainable development that is the reason for the CSD’s existence.