13 June 2017: The co-facilitators for consultations to enhance synergies and coherence and reduce overlap in the agendas of the UN General Assembly, the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) and their subsidiary bodies, in light of the adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development held a briefing with UN Member States regarding their draft recommendations, which were circulated in a letter of 2 June 2017. The five recommendations aim to capture areas on which governments currently agree, they noted, and will be the basis for a report to UNGA President Peter Thomson.

Gillian Bird, Permanent Representative of Australia, and Martín García Moritán, Permanent Representative of Argentina, explained the rationale for each recommendation contained in their letter, and received comments from government representatives. Following the discussion, Moritan said the next step is to compile the input, make final recommendations, and provide the summary to President Thomson at the end of June 2017. It was noted that the ongoing consultations on UNGA revitalization, taking place in an Ad Hoc Working Group led by Croatia, will reflect the synergies recommendations in its forthcoming draft resolution and request the president of the 72nd UNGA to take the synergies process forward.

The first proposed recommendation is that the UNGA committees and bureaux hold joint meetings to discuss how the UNGA’s work relates to the implementation of 2030 Agenda, and seek advice from the UN Secretary-General on the feasibility of issuing joint UN reports for Committee resolutions. Ecuador for the Group of 77 and China (G-77/China) suggested avoiding discussion on joint UN reports, and said a prerequisite for joint coordination is further discussion within each committee. Singapore suggested using joint meetings to address specific agenda items, and Colombia said joint meetings should have concrete objectives, to ensure they focus on specific topics of common interest that add value to improving the implementation of the 2030 Agenda. The EU said joint meetings should take place instead of, not in addition to, individual committee meetings, in order to preserve delegations’ “preparation and thinking time.”

The second proposed recommendation is that the Presidents of ECOSOC and the UNGA would convene an annual briefing for Member States, outlining connections between the UNGA’s work on the 2030 Agenda, and its link to the annual discussions at the HLPF under auspices of ECOSOC. The co-facilitators said this recommendation aims to enhance information sharing, coordination and alignment between the UNGA and ECOSOC, to ensure that the UN’s work on the 2030 Agenda is consistent and relevant.

G-77/China welcomed this recommendation, looking forward to the joint discussion convened by the two presidents. Russia affirmed the importance of involving ECOSOC and its subsidiary bodies.

The third recommendation is that future work on this process take into account other ongoing processes related to the 2030 Agenda, such as reform of the UN Development System (UNDS), which the co-facilitators noted is being guided by the UN Deputy Secretary-General, and the review of UNGA resolution 68/1 on the work of ECOSOC, on which they said separate co-facilitators will be appointed. This recommendation, said the co-facilitators, aims to align processes and ensure the synergies outcomes complement other related processes. They said the intention is not to incorporate the UN system reform discussions into the synergies process.

G-77/China said this recommendation needs more discussion. The EU called for a clearer understanding of the division of labor among the processes, including the current work to follow up on mandates given in the 2016 QCPR resolution, the upcoming review of ECOSOC, and the discussions on UNGA revitalization. Singapore also suggested accounting for the UNGA revitalization process, noting “obvious interlinkages” between alignment and revitalization. Colombia also called for more clarity on the review of resolution 68/1. The co-facilitators said ECOSOC must be reviewed during UNGA 72, according to resolution 68/1. This resolution, adopted in September 2013, constituted a far-reaching reform of ECOSOC including with regard to the calendar and location of its segments and created an integration segment to monitor and promote the balanced integration of the three dimensions of sustainable development in the work of the ECOSOC system.

In addition, Colombia cautioned against duplicating the work of the UN Secretary-General’s “three big reviews” which will address development, management, and peace and security. She noted that by the end of 2017, Member States will need to approve the modalities for any proposed changes and reforms related to those reviews.

The fourth recommendation is for the 72nd UNGA’s General Committee to present proposals on gaps and duplications in the UNGA’s agenda as they relate to the 2030 Agenda, based on the 2016 report produced by a small group of Member States led by Colombia. The co-facilitators noted that further, more concrete recommendations are not yet appropriate. A small group could be tasked with providing “realistic proposals on alignment,” they noted.

EU, US and Colombia affirmed that addressing gaps and recommendations is a core issue.

Singapore welcomed the recommendation, and suggested that the General Committee consult with the ECOSOC president in making its proposals. EU, US and Colombia affirmed that addressing gaps and recommendations is a core issue.

The EU expressed disappointment at the lack of more concrete recommendations on this, noting the “opportunity cost” of overlap and duplication. The EU and US called for a common understanding on the division of labor between the UNGA and ECOSOC, so as not to consider the same issues repeatedly in different fora, and to eliminate “outdated agenda items.” The EU added that consideration of the same topic from different angles should be reflected in a single report, noting that it costs US$40,000 to produce a single report of the UN Secretary-General.

Colombia also welcomed the recommendation, noting that “not every SDG has a docking port,” and the General Committee could be used to address this. She said this recommendation could also indicate the role of the UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA). Mexico proposed that following the HLPF’s review of the three “clusters” of SDGs in 2017, 2018 and 2019, all SDGs are then reviewed together, to promote an integrated implementation of the 2030 Agenda.

Finally, the fifth recommendation is for the UNGA President to consider the feasibility of completing the alignment process by 2019, in order to align with the HLPF session to be held under UNGA auspices. The EU said that four years is a long time for the system to spend adapting for a 15-year agenda, “much longer than we would allow at the national level,” and underlined the urgency of action. She called for rising above protecting national interests and allowing the UN to deliver real support to those who need it. Canada said it is hard to support the four-year timeline without knowing what specific activities are envisioned as part of the synergies/alignment process.

Croatia suggested specifying a cycle of the UNGA, not a calendar year. The US said that while the current five recommendations are modest, 2019 (or the end of UNGA 74) would be appropriate to complete a larger overall alignment effort. Colombia said 2019 will be an “emblematic year” as the HLPF will convene under the auspices of the UNGA in addition to its annual meeting under ECOSOC auspices. She said this could provide “leverage” for making progress by 2019, but that efforts to enhance synergies and coherence will need to continue beyond that date as well. Russia added that the HLPF under UNGA auspices will provide important inputs, and concluding the process in 2019 would allow for taking those into account.

In other comments, Switzerland said the five recommendations presented by the co-facilitators reflect the minimum consensus among Member States, so her country supports them “as the next small step.” The US also agreed with all of the recommendations and urged their implementation, but, along with Canada, noted its disappointment in the “lack of ambition.” G-77/China said that Member States have the ultimate responsibility for deciding on action to be taken, and the process should be inclusive. [Letter of Co-facilitators] [UNGA Resolution 68/1] [SDG Knowledge Hub Story on Previous Consultations]