 |

NEW ZEALAND (Right) supported, and the G-77/CHINA and CANADA
opposed, US-proposed text deciding that the first ministerial
segment would provide an opportunity to make a high-level commitment
to country goals and strategies for implementing the proposals for
action.
|
|
|
|

Ad Hoc Expert Groups: On financial implications of expert
groups, Chair Øistad said that once groups are decided, the Budget
Division would determine the financial implications. (R-L): Chair
Øistad with Jag Maini, UNFF Coordinator
|
|
|
|

Finance and Transfer of ESTs: The US preferred
"technology transfer" and opposed a G-77/CHINA proposal to
add trade to this group.
|
|
|
|

The EU proposed establishing this group at UNFF-2, with
submission of a report on technology transfer at UNFF-3, and on
finance at UNFF-4. The G-77/CHINA stressed concluding work by UNFF-2
to guide implementation of the PoA.
|
|

Monitoring, Assessment and Reporting (MAR):
The EU, NEW ZEALAND, CANADA, the US and SWITZERLAND (Right) proposed
establishing this group at UNFF-1 and reporting at UNFF-2. The
G-77/CHINA proposed reporting at UNFF-4.
|
|
|
|
Legal
Framework: The EU
proposed establishing this group at UNFF-3 and reporting at
UNFF-4 or UNFF-5. CANADA, POLAND, HUNGARY, JAPAN, the RUSSIAN
FEDERATION and SWITZERLAND supported reporting at UNFF-4. The
US, the G-77/CHINA, BRAZIL and NEW ZEALAND supported
establishment at UNFF-4 and reporting at UNFF-5. The issue of
expert groups was referred to a contact group. Right photo:
Iran (Center) speaking on behalf of the G77/China
|
|