Mr. Chairman,
Distinguished colleagues,

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

At the outset, I would like to thank you, Mr. Chairman, and the Bureau of the Second Committee, for convening this second dialogue on the Revitalization process of the Second Committee, in particular to exchange views on the Programme of work; the organization of the general debate and general discussions; the introduction of reports of the Secretary-General; and meetings other than plenary meetings.
In that sense, the Groups would like to share the following comments:

About the program of work:

1. We recognize that the current practice on disseminating the program of work and schedules is working well. Therefore, we highly recommend that we continue the current format for scheduling informal meetings for negotiations, including the use of google calendar and the posting of these on the Committee's Quickplace (website).

2. Sufficient lead time before the deadline for the submission of zero drafts must be provided for the group to effectively coordinate on the drafts.

3. Overlaps of schedules should be avoided, e.g. general debate with informals.

4. Member States should be informed regularly, through its regional representatives, on the results of the meetings of the Bureau, as well as to circulate, once agreed by the Bureau, the minutes of the meetings.

5. Close coordination with Secretariat must be maintained in order to facilitate the document distribution and communication of dates and schedules of informals.

6. Circulation of negotiation texts by email should be made per resolution indicating the title of the resolution in the subject, instead of one continuous email thread for all resolutions.

7. We should continue the practice of posting draft negotiation texts throughout the negotiation process through the Committee's QuickPlace.

8. Regarding the tabling of new resolutions, we should consider looking at guidance on the submissions of these resolutions, such as earlier deadlines for submission, and a timeline for the negotiations of new resolutions to ensure reasonable opportunity for consultations with capital, noting that new resolutions may require new discussions with the government agencies concerned.

About the organization of the general debate and general discussions:

1. The current format has so far been serving its purpose of promoting substantive and inclusive engagements among Member States through the opportunity to deliver statements at the general debate and/or at the specific agenda discussion, according to their desire. We should maintain the current format, as well as having a theme that may be linked with the main annual theme of the HLPF of the upcoming year, if relevant.

2. The introduction of resolutions by the proponents can be done during the debates on the individual agenda items rather than during their consideration, which is at the end of the informal consultations.

3. We should maintain the ordinary time allocation for delivering statements for both general debate and individual discussions, which is 10 minutes on behalf of groups and 7 on behalf of individual delegations . We note that the extraordinary measures introduced during the 80th session to address liquidity issues, including those that impacted on the time for delivery of statements as well as on agenda item debates, must remain temporary.

Regarding the introduction of and interaction on reports of the Secretary-General:

1. Reports should be made available early, if possible before or around middle of September. This will provide delegations the opportunity to study the reports and utilize them in preparing the zero draft resolutions and for the engagement in the general debate.

2. We should maintain the current format of introducing the reports during the general discussion of the specific agenda items. We may consider modalities for more in-depth technical briefings on certain reports.

Regarding meetings other than plenary meeting:

1. We recognize the Bureau's prerogative on this.

2. If possible, we request these meetings be scheduled outside of the main session to avoid overlap in schedules and to save time for the general debate and discussion of specific agenda items.

In reaction to some of the initial proposals made by other delegations during the First Dialogue, the Group provides the following comments:

1. Regarding Co-authorship of resolutions:

- We continue to consider this idea to be counter-efficient, provided the diverse nature of the membership of the G77 which can be a challenge and would make the process more complex and lengthy.

- We see the value of enhanced communication to address lengthy discussions on contentious issues during the informal consultations

2. Regarding the periodicity and merging of resolutions:

- This should be dealt with on a case-by-case basis. We do not support forced blanket rule to biennialize or triennialize resolutions, which could lead to an unnecessary exercise of prioritizing certain resolutions over others, sending the wrong signals on the UN's priorities on development

- While we are open to discussing this further, the group is of the position that the revitalization process of the second committee is the appropriate forum to have this discussion on a case by case basis. We wish to note that this exercise of reviewing the periodicity of second committee resolutions should not be duplicated in the UN80 process.

3. Regarding the streamlining of resolutions:

        The group acknowledges the benefit of streamlining resolutions on a case by case basis. But this has to be balanced with not compromising the substance of the resolution and remains the prerogative of proponents.

4. Regarding the Outcome document of the Revitalization process:

- We maintain our call for a text-based negotiations.

- As to the format of the Decision, we see the value of having a concise, more direct and action-oriented document, with the focus on the improvements needed.

- Any zero draft should be strictly based on convergences among delegations as well as the previously agreed revitalization discussion.

5. Finally, on the PBI issue:

- This has always been raised in every negotiation of resolutions, causing delay in the process. We may consider clarifying existing practice in this regard, including the fact that budgetary implications remains the purview of the Fifth Committee. We also stress that financial implications should not be the overarching consideration in determining the merit or not of a certain resolution in the Second Committee.

Mr. Chair,

The Group of 77 and China reiterates its commitment to engaging fully and constructively in ensuring that the work of the Second Committee is efficient and effective, with greater impact and relevance to its intended purpose. The Group will provide further comments and reactions relating to resolutions at the next dialogue.

I thank you.