Co-facilitators,

I have the honour to deliver this statement on behalf of the Group 77 and China.

At the outset, the Group would like to express our appreciation for the two documents, namely the "Questions to guide the discussions on follow-up and review at the global levels of the 2030 Agenda" and the flow chart which was the request by the Group to capture the whole follow-up and review process and the interlinked elements. We found the Informal brainstorming meeting for Member States at the expert level as well as the first informal consultation with Stakeholders held last week constructive and useful. The latest document for guiding questions on behalf of the Co-facilitators circulated yesterday came at a short notice on which the Group did not have enough time to arrive at deliberated common positions.

Co-facilitators,

The Group would like to reiterate that the 2030 Agenda in its section of follow-up and review already provides very robust and detailed guidance on how the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are to be followed up at the national, regional and global levels. Our discussions must be built upon this guidance and do not seek to re-legislate the issues and principles that were already agreed upon as part of the 2030 Agenda outcome document. In addition, the Report of the Secretary-General on Critical milestones towards coherent, efficient and inclusive follow-up and review at the global level (A/70/684) is a good basis for discussion on the architecture of the follow-up and review framework at the global level and therefore should guide our discussion.

Co-facilitators,

We would like to share our views, building upon the Informal brainstorming meeting last week, as follows:

First, the Group stresses the importance of ensuring the integrated and indivisible nature of the SDG while maintaining the ambition of the 2030 Agenda. In our view, all 17 goals are of equal importance and evolving in nature. We believe that the integrated and indivisible nature of the goals should lead to a review system that is systematic and promotes a cross-cutting understanding of the significant interlinkages across the goals and targets.

As for the proposal for the High-Level Political Forum (HLPF) under the auspices of the ECOSOC to review focused set of goals each year as to allow a more in-depth discussion, we think that such consideration should be done in a more strategic manner once the review system is effectively and appropriately put in place.

Second, we are of a firm belief that all inputs and reports, including from functional commissions as well as the General Assembly's main committees, should be fed into the HLPF. We wish to refer to Paragraph 82 of the 2030 Agenda, which states that "The HLPF will have a central role in overseeing a network of follow-up and review processes at the global level, working coherently with the General Assembly, ECOSOC and other relevant organs and forums, in accordance with existing mandates." In this regard, it is of crucial importance to establish a link between the General Assembly (GA) and the HLPF.

Paragraph 83 of the 2030 Agenda defines the Global Sustainable Development Report (GSDR) as a tool to inform the HLPF and strengthen the science-policy interface. We therefore think that the annual SDG Progress Report to be prepared by the Secretary-General in cooperation with the United Nations System based on the global indicator framework and data produced by national statistical systems and information collected at the regional level is at a more appropriate position to synthesize, at the same time, all reports of the GA main committees.

In our view, the SDG Progress Report should be a tool to integrate and streamline all of the inputs, including a number of resolutions related to the implementation of the SDGs that are aligned with the 2030 Agenda. An online platform, such as a web link to support and document all of the full reports, can be developed for this purpose.

During the brainstorming meeting, the Group requested the Secretariat to provide information on how the MDG Progress Report was done and what the Statistical Commission is planning to do with the global indication framework in relation to the SDG Progress Report. This information could help us understand the previous mechanism and try to build on the existing mechanism. Third, the Group believes that it is up to each member state to decide how it would like to present the national review at the HLPF. It is important to not overburden countries with the national reviews, especially those countries with limited capacities and resources. At the same time, reporting guidelines should not result in a cap on the ambition of countries. Moreover, the United Nations System must support countries conducting reviews at the HLPF upon request.

The Group is of the view that experiences from the 2016 HLPF's national reviews can further pave way to design how national reviews can be presented in a more meaningful and relevant way at the future HLPF.

Fourth, the Group would like to reiterate Paragraphs 80 and 81 of the 2030 Agenda that the follow-up and review at the regional level and sub-regional levels can, as appropriate, provide opportunities for peer learning, sharing of best practices and discussions on shared targets and recognize that it is important to build on existing mechanisms. We are of the view that regional review is a bottom-up approach. Thus, there should be a level of flexibility for each region to define its own term of reference for the review process. We also recognize the role of the sub-regional level and see that the UN regional commissions, as well as other regional actors, could support member states in this endeavor.

Fifth, it is important to reinforce the existing modalities of Groups of countries in special situations and the HLPF must devote adequate time to the discussion of the sustainable development challenges facing developing countries, including the most vulnerable ones, in particular LDCs, LLDCs, SIDS and African countries. Particular challenges facing the middle-income countries in achieving SDGs should also be recognized and supported by the international community. Moreover, we must not leave countries under foreign occupation behind.

Sixth, the Group cannot emphasize enough the importance of system-wide coherence on implementing the 2030 Agenda. In our view, the United Nations system must support the implementation of the 2030 Agenda by ensuring coherent and integrated support of the system-wide strategic planning implementation and reporting. As for the Quadrennial Comprehensive Policy Review (QCPR), to review United Nations System's support to the implementation of the 2030 Agenda based on the existing reports of the Secretary-General on the QCPR and on mainstreaming the SDGs in the UN, the discussion will not be completed by June 2016 by the deadline of this resolution. Thus, there could be a place holder for the QCPR.

Seventh, the secretariat must support member states in the implementation of the 2030 Agenda and must not work in silos. In this regard, the Division for Sustainable Development and the Office for ECOSOC Support and Coordination, both from DESA, must work together and the secretariat must be strengthened with adequate resources. There is a need to discuss the role of the GA, the chief deliberative and policy making organ of the UN, and how the HLPF can work coherently with the GA, the ECOSOC, and other relevant organs and forums, in accordance with their existing mandates. We also think that the global follow-up and review could benefit from the discussion on the revitalization of the work of the GA.

Last but not least, as for the other outputs of the HLPF under the auspices of the ECOSOC, the Group would like to reiterate OP7(g) of the Resolution 67/290 stating that the HLPF shall result in a negotiated ministerial declaration for inclusion in the report of the ECOSOC to the GA.

Co-facilitators,

These are our some of our views and we look forward to discussing the critical issues in a focused manner and exchanging views further. We wish to reiterate that all documents for relevant consultations and meetings be circulated well ahead of their respective schedules to allow adequate time for Member States to consult with their capitals and groupings.

I thank you.