Madam Chairperson,

I have the honour to deliver this statement on behalf of the Group of 77 and China on Agenda Item 53: Follow-up to and implementation of the outcome of the International Conference on Financing for Development.
 

2. We thank the Secretary-General for his Comprehensive Report on this Agenda Item.  
 

3. The Group of 77 and China attaches high priority to the follow-up of the international development agenda embodied in the Monterrey Consensus, which outlined the comprehensive national and international policy actions required to achieve the internationally agreed development goals.  Our deliberations on this Agenda Item assume special importance this year as we prepare for the Follow-up International Conference on Financing for Development to Review the Implementation of the Monterrey Consensus.
 

4. As part of that process, the High Level Dialogue on Financing for Development held in New York on October 23-24, 2007 indeed catalyzed our preparations for a serious and meaningful review of the implementation of Monterrey and our endeavours to delineate a clear roadmap for future actions, based on the lessons learnt and the current and emerging realities.  

5. The Group of 77 and China made a comprehensive statement at the Dialogue outlining its priorities and concerns on Financing for Development issues.  A copy of the Statement is being circulated today and should be read as an integral part of this statement.   

Madam Chair,

6. This Committee, we understand, will also be adopting a procedural resolution on the Follow-up International Conference on Financing for Development to Review the Implementation of the Monterrey Consensus.  The Group of 77 and China would like to take this opportunity to reiterate, as follows, the views expressed by the Group during the Informal Consultations convened recently by the two Co-facilitators on the draft procedural resolution:

i. On the date, the Group of 77 and China would like to defer the issue of the finalization of dates to the State of Qatar, the host of the Doha Review Conference, in line with the parameters set out in paragraph 1 of General Assembly Resolution 61/191.

ii. On the Conference Segments, the Group has a very strong preference for carrying out the review at the Summit level. This we see as critical to bring the much needed political visibility and highest level of engagement on the important issue of Financing for Development. The Group of 77 and China is of the view that it is only reasonable and logical to review at the Summit level the commitments made by the Heads of State and Government. Any other approach or level would send a misleading message on downgrading the importance of Monterrey, which must be avoided.

iii. On the Format, the Group favours a combination format of general debate and roundtables. The roundtables may be six in total and follow the six chapters of Monterrey for their thematic focus. The Group of 77 and China would also like to stress the need for allowing everyone equal and fair representation during the general debate and roundtables in terms of allocation of time. Similarly, in selecting the Co-chairs and Panelists for various roundtables, it is important to ensure adequate representation from the developing countries as well as equitable geographical representation. A special effort will also be needed to ensure full and effective participation by the developing countries particularly LDCs, LLDCs and SIDS in the Doha meeting.

iv. On the Modalities of the Preparatory Process, we would like to underscore the importance of adopting an inclusive and transparent preparatory process ensuring full and active participation by all member states. We have heard the preliminary explanation offered by the Secretariat, during the Informal Consultations, on the differences between the two suggested approaches i.e. Preparatory Committee and the General Assembly Facilitation approach in terms of participation and conference servicing.  We will be reflecting on that information in the Group and will present our considered position in due course.

v. The Group of 77 and China would also like to underscore the relevance of regional inputs for the preparatory process. In this regard, we would urge the Regional Economic Commissions to participate more closely and feed into the larger preparatory process from their respective regional perspectives.

vi. On the outcome, the Group of 77 and China strongly favours a negotiated outcome that facilitates the implementation of the commitments made at Monterrey. A negotiated outcome, we believe, would infuse new life and vigor to the Monterrey process besides ensuring that the outcome is fully owned and shared by everyone.

vii. On modalities for participation of relevant stakeholders, the Group of 77 and China would prefer using the same modalities as used for Monterrey.

I thank you.