accommodating some of the elements of parallel proposals that
have been advanced by other delegations which at this late stage
we don’t believe would help to facilitate consensus. We like your
draft text, precisely because it stems from and is the product of a
consensual and inclusive process. All those who are attached to
and have advocated for this specific character of the OEWG
should be attached to it and defend it as a “common good”.
Generally speaking, we continue to approach this negotiation
with a very large dose of flexibility and hope that others do the
same.
We would like to see more explicit recognition that our work and
discussions would not have come all this way if we hadn’t had a
solid and consensual basis such as the work of the GGE,
enshrined in the 2015 report. We have noticed that the draft report
has been stripped of many of these references and we believe that
there is some room of maneuver to better highlight the impact of
the 2015 report.
We are thankful for your decision to insert a reference to the PoA
proposal that Italy has decided to co-sponsor. An initiative which
we still believe could best serve everyone’s interests in
continuing our conceptual work whilst at the same time
supporting States in implementing the agreed framework and
making progress on many practical issues in very concrete terms.
We invite all delegations to look at the PoA proposal as an
opportunity: a pragmatic, neutral and non-confrontational way
forward. Once again, as I did in previous session, let me flag again
Italy’s willingness and openness to have discussions about this
initiative, also on a bilateral level, with the understanding that
many issues have been deliberately left open until today to allow
the OEWG constituency to shape it.
Chair,