STATEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE GROUP OF 77 AND CHINA BY MR. M. W. MANGACHI, MINISTER PLENIPOTENTIARY IN THE PERMANENT MISSION OF THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA TO THE UNITED NATIONS, AT THE AD HOC OPEN-ENDED INTER-SESSIONAL WORKING GROUP OF THE COMMISSION ON SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

New York, 4 March 1997

The Group of 77 and China has examined the co-chairmen’s text and would like to make general comments on the draft circulated. However, we are of the view that for our discussions here to be meaningful, inputs from our capitals are imperative. It is therefore the view of the G-77 and China that while we are prepared to look at the text, we would not be in a position to really go into some agreements with degree of finality because we would like our governments to have a close look at what we are producing as an outcome of UNGASS.

Mr. Co-Chairman,

The text before us, is quite a useful piece of work. Significant efforts have been made as reflected in this draft and maybe it can provide a basis for our discussions. In this context, we would like to express our appreciation to the two co-chairmen for their effort in coming up with this text. However, it needs some improvements to bring the text in line with the interests of developing countries.

On the content, we think that the concept of sustainable development which becomes the dominant concept in the co-chairmen’s text, all the components of sustainable development should be treated on equal footing, including social, economic and environmental aspects. Rio was called "United Nations Conference on Environment and Development" and not "sustainable development". Therefore, development and environment should be treated in a balanced manner. In this regard, the Group of 77 and China notes with concern that there is weakness on the way economic development, particularly with respect to developing countries has been treated in this text. Our view is that when it comes to actions, we need to highlight the fundamentals of economic development and economic growth in developing countries. After all the Rio document highlighted that economic development is the engine that would provide impetus to environmental protection.

Mr. Co-Chairman,

The concept of common but differentiated responsibilities has not been reflected adequately in the text. This concept is of course important to our Group. On the basis of this concept, the question of responsibility for environmental degradation in general and in some specific areas, for both developing and developed countries are treated equally. But according to this principle that I mentioned above, they have differentiated responsibilities and should play their respective roles as mentioned in the Rio outcome. We would, therefore, like to see the co-chairmen’s text coming out clearly on this issue.

Mr. Co-Chairman,

In section B wehre the Co-chair’s text identifies urgent action, the G-77 is grateful that the issue of poverty has been given ample prominence. The G-77 expected the critical issues of the mobilization of financial resources including new and additional resources, as well as the transfer of environmentally sound technologies, needed in the developing countries would have been listed among the areas requiring urgent action. The Group sees merit in treating these issues under the section of Means of Implementation, but this section should focus only on actual mechanisms and the modalities as well problems of implementation, while Section B should underscore the critical importance of these issues in the implementation of Agenda 21 process. These issues of finance and technology transfer should appear in both Section B and C.

Mr. Co-Chairman,

The G-77 notes that the Co-Chairmen’s text covers adequately the Conventions of UNFCCC, Biodiversity, Convention on the Transboundary Movement of Chemical and Toxic Wastes, and follow-up measures that need to be undertaken. However, it is felt that the measures relative to the implementation of the Convention on Desertification and Drought need to be elaborated further to reflect the urgency of addressing this problem in the affected countries.

Mr. Co-Chairmen,

Regarding the outcome of UNGASS, the text has highlighted general principles and proposals, but does not come out clearly how are we going to implement Agenda 21 in the post UNGASS period. The G-77 and China would like to see the text coming out clearly with more concrete proposals on how the objectives of Agenda 21 would be achieved. In addition, we would like a direct and clear reference to international cooperation and the role of such cooperation in achieving the objectives of Rio.

Mr. Co-Chairman,

Most of the mix-up appearing in the co-chairmen’s text is due to the fact that the structure adopted did not follow the pattern of issues as presented in Agenda 21. The Group of 77 would like to stress that the final report of the Working Group should preserve the structure of the Agenda 21.

Thank you.