Co-Facilitators,

I have the honour to speak on behalf of the Group of 77 and China.

The Group would like to express our appreciation for all the efforts of the Co-facilitators in putting together the Final Proposal on the Agenda of the Second Committee.

We have been engaged in this process in the past months with the spirit to make the work of the Second Committee more relevant, meaningful, efficient and effective so that it addresses key issues related to sustainable development and international development cooperation.

To enhance the quality, the coherence and the efficiency of the Second Committee, we believe that it is important to adopt a well-structured agenda that is based on the current agenda of the Committee and adjusted to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

While we notice some improvements in this document and see some values in the ideas proposed, we think that the Proposal must be considered carefully, bearing in mind that the 2030 Agenda would not only affect the work of the Second Committee, but also the work of other main committees, UN bodies and organs and that we may need not haste, but wait to see whether the 2016 High Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development meets our endeavors.

Co-Facilitators,

We wish to express some of our views as follows:
 
First, on the scope of the Agenda:

Revitalization of the work of the Second Committee means updating the Agenda in light of the new sustainable development framework. In this regard, it is important to ensure system-wide coherence, as our discussion is not an isolated one. It should be a broader exercise including all the relevant organs whose mandates are related to the new sustainable development framework, including the Third Committee, ECOSOC and its functional commissions, and others as appropriate.

At the same time, the scope of work of the Second Committee is broader than the 2030 Agenda; it is related to the whole Development Pillar of the United Nations, and includes issues addressed in other outcomes including the Addis Ababa Action Agenda, the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction, among others.

Second, on rationalizing and priorities:

Updating the Second Committee agenda in line with the new sustainable development framework and its rationalization should not necessarily lead to the elimination of agenda items. The priorities are determined by Member States according to their development needs, interest and level of development. Building on new sustainable development framework, emerging and relevant issues could arise as new items for the agenda of the Second Committee. These could include overarching issues in the SDGs such as infrastructure, water, energy, industrialization, investment, sustainable consumption and production, among others, which are not reflected in the Co-facilitators proposal.

Third, on reporting:

Reporting is one of the main aspects of the work of the Second Committee and the Group is of the view that the reports should be maintained as they currently are. Streamlining reporting will not allow meaningful and substantive discussion of the issues and topics at hand. For us, it is unclear about linking the General Assembly and the HLPF. What is the role of the SDG Progress report in relation with the Second Committee's reports? We need more clarity on this.

Fourth, on Financing for Development (FfD):

The Group is surprised to see the Agenda on FfD is no longer reflected in the Final Proposal as a stand-along agenda item. FfD is indeed a major component of the means of implementation of the sustainable development.

Fifth, on the issue of biennial resolutions, we think that this can be discussed at a later stage which may not have to be during the 71st Session of the UNGA.

Co-Facilitators,

On the Way Forward, the Group will continue to discuss about rationalizing the Agenda of the Second Committee in the General Committee Process which shall begin in June or during the 71st Session of the Second Committee, on the basis of current Second Committee's agenda items.

We are committed to remain engaging constructively on this matter.

The Group will submit our positions in writing at a later stage which can be reflected and resulted in a factual summary of the current Chair of the Second Committee to the incoming Chair.

We would like to reiterate that this Revitalization of the work of the Second Committee is not a PGA's process, thus, a submission of its summary to the PGA could not be supported by the Group.

Last but not least, we would like to once again thank the co-facilitators for the tireless efforts and for convening informal informal consultations at the experts level. The Group is of a strong view that the discussions on Revitalization of the work of the Second Committee should continue and remain at the experts level.

I thank you, Co-Facilitators.