5 February 2016: The UN General Assembly’s (UNGA) Second Committee (Economic and Financial) discussed the relevance of its work for implementing international development objectives, and began a process of reviewing its methods of work. In the first informal meeting in a series taking place between February and April 2016, governments exchanged views on: the Committee’s organization of work; timelines; engaging with stakeholders; rationalizing or expanding the Committee’s agenda; and resource management.
The informal meeting took place on 5 February 2016, in New York, US.
On the relevance and impact of the Second Committee, Andrej Logar, Permanent Representative of Slovenia and Committee Chair, said the Committee contributes to the body of codified international law, guiding the behavior of the international community, and provides guidance for UN’s operational matters. He said the Committee’s mandate has evolved over time and now addresses issues such as global economic governance, international finance, sustainable development, technology, agriculture, industrialization, debt, commodities, or the global environmental agenda. He added that assessing the impact of development entities is very complex, as outcomes can be observed only at a high level and over a significant time span.
On the Committee’s working methods, Reinhard Krapp, Permanent Mission of Germany and Co-Facilitator of the Committee’s discussion on working methods, identified several problems: over the past five years, the Committee has not adhered to deadlines; the number of resolutions has grown to 45 per year; resolutions have proliferated on similar agenda items; and the costs of the reports required by the Committee amount to US$50,000 per report. Krapp said solutions could include: holding shorter plenary meetings to allow more time for negotiations; increasing the role of the Bureau in ensuring that drafts are ready on time; not accepting draft texts after the deadline; rationalizing and combining resolutions on similar agenda items; and reducing the documentation requested for the preparation of resolutions. He also asked whether stakeholder discussions and academic briefings are necessary.
On deadlines, some delegates said the Committee’s efficiency should be defined by reaching agreement through consensus and compromise, and strict deadlines and voting should be avoided, in favor of resumed sessions. Others suggested setting more realistic deadlines.
On the organization of work, several countries observed that the general debate and the debate on thematic clusters are duplicative, and proposed to choose only one type to allow more time for negotiations. Many delegations proposed that Member States engage more in informal settings to reach agreement on guiding principles before negotiating. Some supported allocating time to discussions with external stakeholders, while others said stakeholders can engage through side events and roundtables.
On the Committee’s agenda, some observed that the work of the Committee is based on “the accumulation of historical items” rather than a systemic approach. Several delegations expressed support for merging resolutions on similar items. Others cautioned against streamlining or cutting items on the Committee’s agenda to save time, saying the focus should be on strengthening support for the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development by adding items currently not well represented, such as those pertaining to Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 6 on water, 7 on energy, 8 on economic growth, 9 on industrialization, 10 on inequality, and 12 on sustainable consumption and production (SCP).
On the ongoing process of overall UNGA revitalization, a few delegations stressed that the Second Committee’s discussion should not prejudge the broader discussions, while several others said the Second Committee should show leadership for UNGA revitalization.
Co-facilitators Germany and Indonesia will convene the next consultations on the Committee’s working methods on 10 February. The informal-informal discussions are expected to result in a summary by the Co-Facilitators. [IISD RS Sources] [IISD RS Story on Working Methods Road Map]