So, distinguished delegates, ladies and gentlemen, I want to welcome you all and welcome our distinguished panelists to this discussion on sustainable development goals and the IOM Migration Governance Framework. I will shortly introduce each of the panel members individually just before each one speaks, but let me first make just a few initial remarks to set the scene. Many of you will recall that in 2013 this council passed a resolution number 1270. The resolution requested IOM to continue to engage in what is now the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development process. The whole idea was that we would inform and support you as member states in your work on migration and development. We were asked to do a number of things in that resolution. First of all, to take part in the final intergovernmental consultations on the Sustainable Development goals. Secondly, we were asked to work within the UN task team of which we were designated as a member for the post-2015 Agenda in order to support the negotiations with technical expertise and advice on the formulation of the text and the evidence base for the SDGs. Thirdly, we were asked to organize together with our partners a number of events. The purpose of the events would be to inform the negotiations. And I've given you one example on the screen here. We did a side event at the high-level political forum on the 1st of July on the question of migration and human mobility. And then finally, we were asked to take part in the deliberations of the interagency expert group on the SDG indicators. The overall overarching objective was that we would establish a viable indicator of progress in respect of the SDG target on facilitating safe and orderly migration through well-managed migration policies. And we are suggesting to you that the migration governance framework could be probably for us the best benchmark to conduct such a review. Now, in September, the General Assembly adopted, of course, as you know, the 2030 Agenda on Sustainable Development. And migration is broadly referred to throughout the agenda. The political declaration recognizes the, quote, positive contribution of migrants for inclusive growth, unquote, and the, quote, multi-dimensional reality of migration. I, for one, have never understood the debate in the UN about migration and development. I happen to come from a country which I know was built on the backs and with the brains of migrants. So I'm not sure what discussion is all about, but I'm glad they've come to the conclusion that migration has something to do with development. Very, very important conclusion. So we have a specific target, the most important one perhaps for us, a goal 10 on reducing inequalities that says we should be facilitating orderly, safe, regular and responsible migration and mobility of people. Also, the situation of migrant workers is mentioned specifically in the SDG on decent work and economic development. Trafficking is referred to as, quote, modern-day slavery, unquote, which should be abolished. And the situation of trafficked women and children is given special recognition. You may recall in yesterday's debate, I forget which member state it was, brought to our attention that there's, with the movement now through the Western Balkans, there's been a large increase in the trafficking of unaccompanied minors. And I think we can expect that to increase because they're very vulnerable. So migration is indirectly of relevance for targets also on sustainable cities and on resilience in the face of climate change. So therefore no longer is human mobility being looked at as just the background context for development or worse, that migration and human ability is merely a reflection of the lack of development in a country. Rather, with the SDGs, migration is now seen as an issue to act upon to enhance sustainable development. And IOM, as an important actor, is both advising on the prioritization and implementation on the ground, even though I have to admit it's still very unclear how we're going to get into that process since there's nothing in there that defines it. And we're not part of the UN, so we'll be looking for ways to make sure that we do our part. Let me quickly mention just two more things. IOM is already elaborating a strategy for our continued engagement with the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. We're going to be contributing our technical expertise, our nearly 65 years of experience from the field in the follow-up and review of the 2030 Agenda. And as I mentioned in my report on Tuesday, we will be organizing two sessions of the IDM in 2016 that will be dedicated to the follow-up and review of the SDGs. And this will be an occasion to present the results of our two key partnerships with the Gallup World Poll and the Economic Intelligence Unit on the well-being of migrants and also in evaluating migration policies. So the result of the IDM sessions in 2016, we see also as a possible important input or contribution to the global formal migration and development and the UN specialized commissions within the context of the SDG follow-up and review. And finally, it's quite clear, and there's a lot of emphasis throughout this session, I appreciate it very much, emphasis on action. Let's move from process to action. Because up to now, frankly, a lot of the discussions I've taken part in in the UN have been all about process and very little about action. We want to move beyond that. That's going to be the ultimate test. So we will be working with all of you and other partners in the UN country teams to ensure that migration now becomes an important part of the United Nations Development Assistance Frameworks and other development planning tools. So with that, let me go to our first speaker. We're so pleased that Ambassador David Donahue could join us from New York. He's literally just got off a flight this morning. And I'm grateful to you for the sacrifice you've made to be with us. You have been such a key player in the SDGs as the co-chair. The Ambassador played a key role in the negotiations of both the Anglo-Irish agreement and, of course, the Good Friday agreement. He then served as Irish ambassador to the Russian Federation, to Austria and Germany. And I have seen, as speak to him, an old Flesen Deutsch. We have a body to explore. After serving as the political director of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade in Dublin, he became the, and is still Ireland's permanent representative to the United Nations in New York. Ambassador Donahue, as I mentioned, successfully co-facilitated the very difficult task of the intergovernmental negotiations that brought us to the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. Ambassador Donahue, without further ado, the floor is yours. So pleased to see so many of our stalwart member states still with us today. Thank you very much. I think as you know, this is the first of two panels today, the second of three panels altogether. And I attach a particular importance to this one because we're going to be dealing with the 2030 agenda, the sustainable development goals, and how the IOM can relate to that in terms of its migration governance framework, which we discussed earlier on the first day. So distinguished delegates, ladies and gentlemen, I want to welcome you all and welcome our distinguished panelists to this discussion on sustainable development goals and the IOM Migration Governance Framework. I will shortly introduce each of the panel members individually just before each one speaks. But let me first make just a few initial remarks to set the scene. This council passed a resolution number 1270. The resolution requested IOM to continue to engage in what is now the 2030 agenda for sustainable development process. The whole idea was that we would inform and support you as member states in your work on migration and development. We were asked to do a number of things in that resolution. First of all, to take part in the final intergovernmental consultations on the sustainable development goals. Secondly, we were asked to work within the UN task team of which we were designated as a member for the post 2015 agenda in order to support the negotiations with technical expertise and advice on the formulation of the text and the evidence base for the SDGs. Thirdly, we were asked to organize together with our partners events. The purpose of the events would be to inform the negotiations. And I've given you one example on the screen here. We did a side event at the high level political forum on the 1st of July on the question of migration and human mobility. And then finally, we were asked to take part in the deliberations of the interagency expert group on the SDG indicators. The overall overarching objective was that we would establish a viable indicator of progress in respect of the SDG target on facilitating safe and orderly migration through well managed migration policies. And we are suggesting to you that the migration governance framework could be probably for us the best benchmark to conduct such a review. Now in September, the General Assembly adopted, of course, as you know, the 2030 agenda on sustainable development. Migration is broadly referred to throughout the agenda. The political declaration recognizes the quote positive contribution of migrants for inclusive growth and the quote multi-dimensional reality of migration. I for one have never understood the debate in the UN about migration development. I happen to come from a country which I know was built on the backs with the brains of migrants. So I'm not sure what discussion is all about, but I'm glad they've come to the conclusion that migration has something to do with development. Very, very important conclusion. So we have a specific target, most important perhaps for us, a goal 10 on reducing inequalities that says we should be facilitating orderly, safe, regular and responsible migration and mobility of people. Also, the situation of migrant workers is mentioned specifically in the SDG on decent work and economic development. Trafficking is referred to as, quote, modern-day slavery, unquote, which should be abolished. And the situation of trafficked women and children is given special recognition. You may recall in yesterday's debate, I forget which member state it was, brought to our attention that there's, with the movement now through the western Balkans, has been a large increase in the trafficking of, we can expect that to increase, but they're very vulnerable. So migration is indirectly of relevance for targets also on sustainable cities and on resilience in the face of climate change. So therefore, no longer is human mobility being looked at as just the background context for development, or worse, that migration and human mobility is merely a reflection of the lack of development. And with the SDGs, migration is now seen as an issue to act upon to enhance sustainable development. And IOM, as an important actor, is both advising on the prioritization and implementation on the ground, even though I have to admit, it's still very unclear how we're going to get into that process. There's nothing in there that defines it, and we're not part of the UN. So we'll be looking for ways to make sure that we... Let me quickly mention just two more things. IOM is already elaborating a strategy for our continued engagement with the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. We're going to be contributing our technical expertise, our nearly 65 years of experience from the field in the follow-up and review of the 2030 Agenda. And as I mentioned in my report on Tuesday, we will be organizing two sessions of the IDM in 2016 that will be dedicated to the follow-up and review of the SDGs. And this will be an occasion to present the results of our two key partnerships with the Gallup World Poll Intelligence Unit. And evaluating this on the well-being of migrants and also evaluating migration policies. So the result of the IDM sessions in 2016, we see also as a possible important input or contribution to the global formal migration and development. And the UN specialized commissions within the context of the SDG follow-up and review. And finally, it's quite clear, and there's a lot of emphasis throughout this session. I appreciate very much emphasis on action. Let's move from process to action. Because up to now, frankly, a lot of the discussions I've taken part in in the UN have been all about process and very little about action. We want to move beyond that. That's going to be the ultimate test. So we will be working with all of you and other partners in the UN country teams to ensure that migration now becomes an important part of the United Nations Development Assistance Frameworks and other development planning. So with that, let me go to our first speaker. We're so pleased that Ambassador David Donahue could join us from New York. He's literally just got off a flight this morning, and I'm grateful to you for the sacrifice you've made to be with us. You have been such a key player in the SDGs as the co-chair. The ambassador played a key role in the negotiations of both the Anglo-Irish agreement and, of course, the Good Friday Agreement. He then served as Irish ambassador to the Russian Federation, to Austria and Germany. And I have seen, as I speak to him, I know Flesendorch. After serving as the political director of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade in Dublin, he became the, and is still, Ireland's permanent representative to the United Nations in New York. As I mentioned, he successfully co-facilitated the very difficult task of the intergovernmental negotiations that brought us to the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. So Ambassador Donahue, without further ado, the floor is yours. Well, thank you very much, Director General, and good morning, ladies and gentlemen. I'm delighted to be here. It's a little unnerving to hear that series of achievements. I'm not sure that quite give, let's just say that I find it hard to actually connect that to the SDGs. But anyway, from time to time, the experiences I had in the Northern Ireland peace process did give me some inspiration for how we would get over particular hurdles in the intergovernmental negotiations. I should pay tribute to the IOM for its very detailed and impressive engagement in our negotiations as the Director General set out. We had, of course, a vast canvas of issues which had to be covered within the negotiations. And basically, a lot of the effectiveness of individual organizations came down to their own ability to lobby discreetly for particular language to be used. And I have to say the IOM was extremely effective in that regard. I'm glad that it was possible to have a number of references in the final document to migration and related issues. On the whole, there wasn't particular controversy about that. But there was, let's say, a basic unwillingness in the part of some member states or some groups to add to the draft goals and targets which had already been set in the so-called open working group. I mention that because the targets to which the Director General refers were set in the previous open working group negotiation, it would have been desirable perhaps to be able to add to or extend those in the final document. But because of a general reluctance to touch the careful compromises across the board which had been agreed in the open working group, we were unable to make any significant changes into governmental negotiations. But within the declaration, which was a new piece of work, the declaration to accompany the SDGs, it was possible to have a paragraph which, in fact, the Director General has summarized. It took one or two efforts before we got the tone and the content of that paragraph right. But essentially, we accentuated the positive contribution which migration makes to sustainable development and economic growth. And I'm pleased with the outcome. Now, the emphasis, of course, is on implementation of the entire framework. We have a number of references also to migrants as a category which is discriminated against, if I can summarize it like that. And again, with one exception, that was uncontroversial. We did have originally a reference to migrants regardless of migratory status. That disappeared in one sentence eventually because of an overall difficulty in reaching a consensus among the 193 countries on human rights references. So we deemed it necessary to go back to the real language. One consequence of that was that that particular qualification regardless of migratory status had to be dropped. But on the other hand, we put in the word all at the beginning of that sentence and that in fact achieved the same effect. I don't mean to get too technical about it, but I just wanted to demonstrate that some care was taken in covering the references to migrants throughout the text. So as to the role which the IOM can play in the and indeed must play in the follow up and review process. Let me just make perhaps a few general points about the high level political forum which will be the main body for global review of implementation. The high level political forum is as you perhaps know a subset of ECOSOC or at least it will be operating normally under the auspices of ECOSOC. But every four years it will operate under the General Assembly and will have the role of broader political guidance on those occasions. The high level political forum exists for the last year or two, but to be honest it is a skeleton awaiting some flesh. And we now in New York are giving thought to how the high level political forum can be developed so that it will be up to the huge challenge facing it. The Secretary General of the United Nations is expected to produce a report early in the new year which will touch on a number of important issues for the HLPF issues about organization, about competence, about working methods and so on. That report I'm guessing will end up having a General Assembly consideration of some kind which could take a few months. The relevance of that is that at the same time the actual meeting of the high level political forum in July of next year needs to be prepared in the usual way with agendas, arrangements and so on. The net effect is that the July 2016 meeting of the high level political forum will be essentially a transitional meeting. The full cruising speed as it were will not be reached until July 2017. I don't mean to get too bogged down in process but I just wanted to let you know that we will not have a perfectly functioning high level political forum next July but rather one which is trying to get its own basic rules and procedures worked out. Now there will be two basic approaches each year in the high level political forum. One is a thematic approach, a thematic analysis of how we're all doing in implementing the goals. And the second will be an opportunity for member states, those who want to do so, to report on how they are getting on on the responses that they have been giving at national level and indeed at regional level. So broadly speaking the meetings of the high level political forum will have those two segments. The reason why I mentioned that is because the IOM will therefore have an opportunity to contribute to the thematic part of the HLPF meetings. By thematic I mean that there is likely to be a systematic review of each goal and therefore of all the targets under each goal. So that means that in due course we will be reaching 10.7 and the other targets which relate to migration issues. So therefore that's the first door into the follow-up and review, the thematic part of each annual HLPF meeting. The second part is what the member states will be reporting about national and regional implementation. And again there will be an opportunity for the IOM, it seems to me, to contribute via dialogue with the individual member states. The IOM and indeed all the stakeholders relevant to migration issues can interact with, can engage with member states in the period coming up to each high level political forum to frankly put pressure on them to demonstrate that they will be, that they are implementing the provisions of 10.7 and the other couple of references. So I mean I'm simplifying the procedure mainly because in New York we are nowhere near precise detail on this. We're just really in the foothills. The Secretary General's report will be the first official moment for deciding on the structure and working methods of the HLPF. But until then we are really just brainstorming. It's more or less a blank page. The President of EchoSoc has the responsibility to make the arrangements for the HLPF meetings and he will be setting an agenda fairly shortly and a theme for the July meeting. The theme, well it's anybody's guess but one possibility which has been mentioned is that we would take something like leaving nobody behind or more particularly ensuring that nobody is left behind and that we reach the furthest behind first. Those of you who have read the Declaration may recognize those phrases. They are central to the equality aspects of the focus of the agenda. So one possibility is that the theme of the HLPF meeting in July, even though it won't be a fully-flagged meeting, will be that the theme will be ensuring that nobody is left behind. That puts the focus on what member states are doing operationally to translate this principle of equality into practice. So Director General I'd probably leave it at that for the moment unless other members of the panel contribute but I'm very, very happy to try to answer points and questions which you may have. I'm sure I want to thank you very much in the name of all of this. This has given us an excellent scene setter, a background on which we can move to our other speakers but particularly pleased to have more details on how this whole thing is shaping up even though it's still in a fairly amorphous state. It's nonetheless very encouraging to know that at least from our very parochial point of view there are possibilities for us to become somehow engaged in the review and implementation process. So thank you very much for that. I'm sure that's going to evoke a lot of questions here this morning. A very good panel. Let me move right along and introduce Claire Melamed who is the Director of the Growth, Poverty and Inequality Program, speaking of equality, of the Overseas Development Institute. She is leading the institute's work on the 2030 agenda. Miss Melamed recently served as the lead author of UN Secretary General's Expert Group on the Data Revolution. And the co-lead on the groundbreaking, quote, My World survey with the UNDP. And she was previously the head of policy at Action Aid in the United Kingdom and has undertaken field work with the UN as I understand it in Mozambique and has taught at the University of London and the Open University. You have the floor. Thank you very much. Thank you very much Director General and thank you all for being here and to IOM for the invitation. It's a particular pleasure as I think we all feel as the Director General said to be here talking about migration in the context of the agenda 2030 and the new sustainable development goals. As all of you know, migration was not mentioned specifically in the Millennium Development Goals. It wasn't simple as we've heard to get it into the sustainable development goals and I think first of all would like to congratulate many of my fellow panellists and many of the countries represented here today who work very hard to get the dimensions of migration that we do see scattered throughout the sustainable development goals. And really now that you know this presents those of us who care about migration and migration policy with a huge opportunity to use these new tools to try to effect change on the ground and change in outcomes for migrants for the countries from which they come and to which they go. I think there are really three ways that I want to just run through quickly today is to think about how migration has been incorporated into the sustainable development goals and therefore how these new tools, these new goals might be used as levers to effect change. The first one of course we've already heard about is the ways in which migration is mentioned directly through the goals. We've just heard about some examples of that in Goal 10 on orderly migration policy, others on relating to education, relating to employment and so on. And these are very important specific targets to hold governments to account for specific policy areas and for their treatment of particular groups of migrants and the outcomes for those particular groups. I think however that in the discussion on migration in the SDGs there is a risk of stopping there. That isn't all there is to migration in the SDGs and that may in the end not even be an important entry point but in terms of the kind of change that can be affected around migration for the SDGs that may not in the end turn out to be the most important new tool that we have. Another really important way to think about migration in the SDGs has already been mentioned is to think about migrants as a group and to link that to the appeal which has very wide support from member states, from civil society and others to really call to use the new goals as a tool to leave no one behind and to focus attention throughout the agenda on the very poorest but to try to use that as a tool not just to think about poverty in the abstract but to understand why it is that people end up without income, without education, without healthcare. What are the characteristics of particular groups that mean that they are discriminated against and disadvantaged and clearly migrant status is one important characteristic which determines outcomes for people and which needs to be brought in to the conversation on leave no one behind. I'm sure this group needs no reminding that for example half of Syrian refugee children are out of school. If we are going to meet the global aspiration to educate all children we simply cannot do that without tackling the specific needs and circumstances of migrant children. The same will be true of other access to other services, access to healthcare, access to water and sanitation, meeting the universal aspiration to provide all people with these services and with good outcomes in the areas of health and education. We simply cannot be done without governments, without civil society organizations, without multilateral organizations looking specifically at the circumstances and the specific needs of migrant populations around the world. Gender-based violence is another one which has also been mentioned, another issue which has come into the new sustainable development goals perhaps to a much greater extent than we saw in the Millennium Development Goals and an area where again women, migrants face particular risks and dangers and unless we understand those and use the opportunity of the sustainable development goals and the political pressure that they create as a way, I think, to be able to do that. As a lever to change policy in this area we're not going to be able to meet the universal aspirations to tackle gender-based violence. Having the goals is one thing. I think actually using the goals to affect the changes in these outcomes for migrants that we want to see is going to require at least possibly more but at least two new things. The first, and as the Director-General said I've recently been working a lot on issues of data so it won't surprise anybody to hear me say this, is that we need to know more. Like other groups of largely invisible people, we know we have very little good data on migrants. This stems from two specific issues around data on migrants. Firstly, in common with other groups who are disadvantaged, the political pressure to invest in data on those groups tends to be very weak, it's expensive, it's difficult, we don't really know how to do it. So actually encouraging governments and others to invest in collecting good data on migrants is difficult. But again, the call to leave no one behind and the recognition that migrants are a specific group that are in many cases being left behind should increase the demands for more resources, for more research, for more understanding of how to collect data and understand the particular needs of those populations. There is also of course a particular issue around migrants which is not common to data but which data collection systems tend to be pretty nationally based. We have national statistical offices, we have national systems, we have national standards and protocols around data but almost by definition many migrants are moving across borders and the adequate tracking and data collection of migrant populations is going to require more cooperation between countries in data collection that perhaps we've seen to date and that presents an interesting, by no means insurmountable, but interesting challenge and a need for new partnerships and new ways of thinking about data collection which again are entirely appropriate for the aspiration for a universal development agenda. A second way of course in which we hope that the call to leave no one behind can lead to specific changes for migrants and for migrant populations is in the use of the sustainable development goals as a political lever to for change. We've just heard from the ambassador about how the official reporting, the follow up and review processes are coming into shape and of course there will be a moment there for governments to report on what they're doing to hold each other to account for what, for progress, for global progress on the SDGs. We can't meet the universal aspirations for progress unless all governments play their part but I think we shouldn't see the SDGs as simply a once in a year moment that the success of the SDGs and their value as levers for change will also depend on other groups, civil society groups, on researchers and others using this opportunity, using in a sense this new tool in the toolbox to try to understand what it means to achieve those goals, what the pathways are to achieve them and how governments and others can work together to do that. So the third way in which I think migration is going to be important in the achievement of the SDGs as well as we have specific goals that specifically mention migration and migration policy. We have migrants as a specific group and how if we're going to meet the aspiration to leave no one behind that going to that requires attention and knowledge of the specific circumstances of migrant populations in many areas. But I think the third way in which migration is going to affect the outcomes of the SDGs is through broader processes of economic growth and demographic change. Clearly this is a 15 year project, the SDGs and a lot is going to happen in that time within countries and between countries. And as we know as we see all the time countries change, economies grow, economies shrink, capital moves around the world, goods move around the world in trade and these are absolutely essential forces shaping the progress of countries and of the world as a whole. Demography changes too and we see again and again most recently from the World Bank in the recent Labour monitoring report very compelling evidence about how demographic trends are shaping societies and are shaping patterns of growth and patterns of growth and production and investment in societies. And ultimately it's going to be long term trends particularly in economic growth and in the distribution of that growth which are likely to have the greatest effect on our success or failure in meeting the sustainable development goals. Demographic change is an absolutely essential component on that. It's always struck me as somewhat odd that while we are very happy not least just down the road from here in the World Trade Organization to get together to try to design systems. Which allow goods and money to move around the world as freely as we possibly can understanding that that is good for growth and good for the kind of dynamic economies that we all want to see. It's proved much more difficult in getting international agreements to allow the same thing to apply to people. The kind of essential third leg as it were of a global system. But I think we are starting to see pressures building up. You know we know I think we I'm sure this audience needs no reminding of the figures that we have some young and growing economies and some old aging and shrinking economies. And for economies for all of our countries to grow and to flourish we're going to need people to move around between from places where there are young populations who don't have work to populations to places where there are aging populations and people who need looking after. The National Health Service in the UK is my own country of the UK is a glaring example of this. So I think in the long run success for economies for the kind of flourishing growing dynamic economies that we all want to see which are going to be absolutely pivotal in the success of the achieving the sustainable development goals is also going to depend on longer term patterns of migration and demographic change. Of course those are the hardest to achieve and there are many good political reasons why that is a very very difficult thing to do. But I think my hope is that over time the sort of common the collective project of the sustainable development goals and the aspiration of the universal agenda can help to be one of the sort of common global norms which starts to move countries towards that direction and towards understanding a common interest in resolving some of these problems of migration that we're seeing all too vividly in Europe at the moment. So I think just to conclude I think the SDGs offer us a fantastic opportunity to change the conversation on migration and development to change the way that we talk and think about it as we're all doing today and where the IOM has so successfully led the way in formulating the goals. But I think they also provide us with a fantastic new set of tools to change the outcomes which after all is really the point. Thank you very much indeed. Thank you very much indeed Ms. Melameda for a very thoughtful presentation to follow on from that of Ambassador Donahue outlining for us the three ways in which these references to migration in four of the targets might well be used. I think we've all listened carefully to that and picked up a lot of ideas. Obviously in a more parochial way we appreciate the reference to data. I appreciate the reference to using the SDGs as a political lever to effect change the whole idea of linking us up with economic development and demographic change. We quite frankly are baffled up to now how the public mind can link up migration and terrorism overnight and cannot link up migration and the demographic deficit. And as I was saying in my opening remarks you will not solve the demographic deficit with the compassion deficit. So we've got to find a ways to make that argument so that countries can see migration movements essentially as working in the national interest between global north and global south. So a very interesting presentation. Thank you. And I'm also noticing you use WTO. They're just down the hill from us. But we're miles apart in terms of movement of people and capital goods and services. Let me move quickly to our third speaker. We're very happy to have an old friend back with us. It's a real file and a friend of ours in both Geneva and in our office in London. He's a London based and currently director of a UK based company that advises on socially responsible businesses, ethical business models and practices, Islamic finance and corporate responsibility. He is on many boards and many agencies. He's a board member for example of the ECUN joint migration and development initiative. He's also chairman of the African Foundation for Development of Ford, which I think is one of our most active observers in IOM. It's a charity that works to extend and enhance the role that diaspora can play. And he's also a founder of another group called Remit Aid, which is a program to transform remittances into a sustainable form of international development finance. He's played a very active role also in all of the civil society days that the various, the seven or eight global forums on migration and development have been helped. Mr. Fahl, you have the floor. Thank you very much, Director General. It is an honor and a privilege to join you in this council meeting being the first one since the adoption of the 2030 agenda and an important one for IOM with the adoption of the migration governance framework and of course the opening of the negotiations to join the UN. My comments would be focused on perhaps what approach we should use to implement the SDGs. Like many of you, there is a little bit of concern and a little bit of anxiety as to whether we would be able to live up to the aspirations reflected in the SDGs. And the concerns are legitimate indeed because many a good policy has waded away for one of implementation. So inaction is a worry. In this area of migration and development, reversals is a serious and present worry in that what is in the public interest is not always necessarily of interest to the public. When it comes to migration, the DG have just reminded us within a short time we see what I would perhaps call manufactured public consent or public interest being very narrow, being very protective to the detriment of some of the sentiments that are in the SDGs and the whole discussion of migration and development. And sometimes I do feel sympathy for our political leaders because of course they do need to win that public vote and so they react to it. Unfortunately it is to our disadvantage overall and the public good suffers. So my reflections then focuses on what can we do within the context of those serious and present realities of possible reversals. I would suggest a number of things. First in terms of implementing the letter of the SDGs that I think we need to be perhaps a bit creative because as we've heard from Ambassador Donahue, a lot of negotiations in the very wording of the SDG have taken place which betrays the sentiments of the progressive and perhaps not progressive sort of member states, nations in terms of these negotiations. So the wording that we have can effectively be used at a very basic level or it can be used to open up a whole lot of good. My suggestion then is that for the implementation we just take the literal wording as the red light. It is nothing more than the red light. We have to move. So I think we need in our individual countries to take the spirit of the SDG more importantly and the spirit is the undeniable nexus between migration and development. If we take that spirit it allows us to set our own targets, our own indicators that perhaps go further. Why is it important to go perhaps further than what we have? One is because it's only safer to achieve the targets. It's safer that we try to do more so that if we fail we still at least hit the threshold. That's number one. Number two is that implementation is difficult and in some countries, some countries are ahead of others in terms of what the agreements are. And the agreement of the SDG is a compromise. It is not necessarily the lowest common level but at least it was a compromise. We have to set our own personal targets or individual country targets. We are seeing this in the discussions now in relation to the indicators that follow from the targets. There's a sense we still do not have a very clear view as to how the indicators would be sorted out. But I would not be surprised if there would be many actors who are unhappy about the indicators that we end up having. So instead of remaining in that state of unhappiness and querying it, we as individual countries can set our own targets, make it ambitious, make it reflect the spirit rather than just the letter of an international agreement. There are other reasons why sort of this more ambitious approach in implementation is important. If you take 10.7, which I think perhaps it's the biggest category, planned and well managed migration, you may not be surprised to know that this is susceptible to perverse interpretation. For a country that want to interpret that as planned and well managed, meaning control and securitization, can indeed use this agreement for that purpose. There's not the spirit of it, but the letter of it does not exclude that perverse and perhaps retrogressive interpretation. So those who support the nexus and want to see it work should normalize the benefits of migration and development and setting targets for themselves beyond what's needed and doing it so much so that any reversals would even take us back to a threshold that's better than where we are in 2015 today. Another point is if you take a whole category of migrants who certainly are not refugees, they are not highly skilled migrants and these are the people who tend to find themselves in difficulty and these are the group of people who are also extremely useful to many economies. There is no explicit clear focus on them and that would have been difficult to get and I would say progressive nations should focus on this opportunity. The highly skilled migrants can always look after themselves. If you take the highly skilled African footballers, no European nation now can imagine itself without them. That means it's been normalized. So even if the FA in the UK starts talking about reducing the number of foreign players in a team, even if you start working towards that, you would come at a level that is far, far better than how things were several years ago. This is what I mean by normalization. So you have to aim much higher because we cannot guarantee that we will not suffer reversals. In fact, we can guarantee the opposite that we will suffer reversals, but those that should not take us backwards, it should take us to a decent threshold. Another example is the 3% reduction of transaction cost on remittance by 2013. Myself particularly have been very unhappy about it. Ambassador Donahue is the most lobbied man in 2015 and unfortunately I didn't get his ear on this one. But I was arguing that 3% by 2030, I don't need that because I already have it. It's not ambitious enough. Today in many European and American countries, you can send remittances for less than 3%. So to set that for a target to 2030, I would say it's not ambitious. But the compromise wording we've got is to reduce to less than. So it gives us a bit of room there. Now, the EU-Africa valet summit that just finished, there's been a lot of controversy around it, but I just want to highlight one area that is when it came to remittances. They had accepted wording which is in the axon plan that leaves it very open that with Europe and Africa, they may choose particular corridors and walk towards a target more ambitious than what the SDGs said. So the SDGs does give us a framework, but for those of us who support the spirit, I think we do need to be far more ambitious. Last set of comments I would make is in terms of the indicators. That part is far from being settled and I think the time scale is really between now and perhaps February-March to get it settled. The comments I would make for the interest of member states here and the good ambassadors is this. The role of civil society in the indicators. We now know and I don't think that will be changed, that the indicators would be monitored by the national statistical authorities. For many countries, this is the first time these authorities would be dealing with some of these interesting development indicators. So I would suggest that we push for the national statistical authorities to be independent. In some countries they are, in many they are not. So support for independence of the statistical authorities. Support for capacity building of these statistical authorities. And support for a multiple membership in the governance of these authorities so that it is not just civil servants, but businesses, civil society, academics are represented. And I would also make a point that civil society perhaps need to be supported to be able to produce their own shadow reports as it were dealing with different aspects of the indicators. So in some, my contribution to this debate is we are pleased and grateful for what we have in terms of the SDGs. We had had few months to wallow in it as it were. Now the necessary anxieties have to come back and it is good, all good anxiety that is that we extract from it the positive spirit that was behind the promulgation of the specific. Thank you very much for calling our attention to the key to success of the SDGs is going to be the implementation and to implement them as we would hope is going to require that we look well beyond the letter and that we not use the letter somehow to basically to in some perverse way to distort the intention of those who drafted and negotiated and agreed to the SDGs. So we'll work more in terms of the spirit and looking particularly after certain groups including those who are now being I think unwisely and unfairly regrouped that everybody who doesn't qualify for 1951 protection comes under one broad category called economic migrants, which covers as my mother would say a world of sin and many other groups in there. So thank you very much for that good presentation. Let me move right along now. We've had been patient with our fourth speaker who's also our newest arrival in Geneva, brand new on the job. Paul Ladd was very recently appointed by the UN Secretary General to be the director of a very important agency, the UN Research Institute on Social Development. He previously was the director of the UN development program UNDP team on the post-2015 development agenda and prior to that he was leading UNDP's policy team on inclusive globalization. He's also worked as Senior Economic Affairs Officer in the Executive Office of the Secretary General. Mr. Ladd, you have the floor. Thank you very much, Director General. Excellences, fellow panelists. Of course, coming last on a panel, sometimes you find that some of the things you want to say have already been taken, but I'll try to keep it short and interesting and to add value. I wanted to cover four things. The first is just to talk a little bit really about the spirit and nature of the 2030 agenda, perhaps also how it's a little bit different from the MDGs and the opportunities that that then gives us. Secondly, like Claire, to reflect a little bit on not just the migration content in the SDGs that we find in the targets specifically, but also the impact of migration and mobility on the achievement of all the goals and targets in all countries. Thirdly, to talk a little bit about the role of research. And fourthly, to try to address the DG's preoccupation quite rightly with action and talk a little bit about how the multilateral system, all actors in the UN, should hopefully now start to step up to the plate. So firstly, on the 2030 agenda, clearly one of the, I think, most popular critiques that people have made is that the agenda is very big, that it's very large. 17 goals, 169 targets, and some of the targets are perhaps less well specified than they could have been. It's certainly an incredibly ambitious agenda, an agenda that actually responds to the challenges that the world is now facing. One of the somewhat glib ways I respond to the critique on the fact that there are 17 goals and 169 targets is, well, if we'd have sorted some of them out by now, we wouldn't need 17 goals and 169 targets. But it certainly is comprehensive. Another asset of the agenda is that it is balanced and integrated across different dimensions, people called them dimensions, but effectively economy, society, the environment, and governance. And although the MDGs were a very welcome shift back to the social aspects of development in response to a decade, particularly in the 1980s, that had concentrated on economic growth and economic liberalisation, the MDGs were also somewhat kinky, as Lance Pritchett would say. They really encouraged resource allocation into a narrow number of areas, perhaps at the cost of some of these more important or equally important systemic issues, the environment in particular, but also governance, and the many things that the MDGs didn't cover. Lastly, and I think although it will be interpreted in different ways, the expression in the outcome document for the agenda to be universal is a real ground-breaker, a real game-changer. And I want to come back to that in terms of how we think about the impact of migration and mobility on the SDGs. I think the second thing worth noting about the agenda is the process that was undertaken to reach the goals and targets. We had an incredibly participatory governmental process through the Open Working Group and then laterally by Ambassador Donahue and Ambassador Macharia Kamau, with all member states negotiating on the words that they wanted to use to convey their vision. But before and in parallel to that, we also had huge participation from civil society, some from business, and from people directly. Claire is one of my oldest partners in crime in this business and it was Claire and I that put together the My World Survey that I think in the end reached out to 8.5 million people around the world and asked them what they cared about. And some of the things that they cared about, decent jobs, better governance, actually found their way into the agenda and that data was used by governments as they made their case in that democratic process. So in a way migration was able to present its case for inclusion. And of course, I commend my colleagues from IOM for pressing their case, but I think it stands on the validity of the substance. Migration is critically important to development and therefore it wasn't just the fact that a political filter was used to get the words right at the end, it was a Darwinian survival of migration in the data in comparison to many of the other issues that were presented. Ultimately, we've traded off some degree of simplicity for a much greater degree of ownership. And many of you who worked on the MDGs at country level or in NGOs or in business were probably aware that we didn't really get going on the MDGs for the first 5, 6, 7 years. And with the SDGs, because of the process, because I think of the maturity of the agenda, the prospects are for regaining that lost time with the SDGs and really starting the ground running on January the 1st. So now turning to migration and the SDGs, I won't go into the detail again of where trafficking and migration feature in the targets. What I'd like to spend a bit more time on is how the principle of universality means that migration impacts on the achievement of the SDGs across the whole suite of goals and targets and in every single country. So if you read the resolution adopted by member states, the definition of universality is actually quite clear. In paragraph 4, we wish to see the goals and targets met for all nations and all people. In paragraph 5, it is accepted by all countries and is applicable to all. Now of course, differing country contexts and different configurations of challenges means that it will be incorporated into national policy and implemented in slightly different ways. But I don't think there's any getting away from the interpretation that this agenda applies to every single person and every single country. Now the reason that's important is because even though migration is mentioned in the targets, I think they're largely designed with the mindset of static countries and immobility in mind. Now when you have a few people moving, that's probably a reasonable assumption to make. But when you have thousands of people moving or hundreds of thousands of people moving or millions of people moving, then actually it starts to warp the fabric of the SDGs and how you think about progress. Now the current tragic conflict that we see in Syria and the resulting refugee crisis that we see is very pressing right now. But migration is not an issue that will be going away in decades to come. Continued economic inequalities between countries exacerbated by the impacts of climate change are going to drive increasing numbers of people to move. Now when you think of migrants themselves, generally people are moving because they either have to or they want to and therefore they're revealing that they think they will be better off when they get to the place that they're going. So for that migrant community, for that community of people that are moving, we can say with some certainty that the SDGs are being reached for that transnational community. But when we look at the issue of countries it becomes slightly more complicated. We have to look at the numbers of people that are moving, the configuration of their skills, their expertise, their entrepreneurship, their energy because the impacts are going to be different in receiving countries and sending countries and in some places the goals are going to be progressed by movement but in other countries and other places the goals will be regressed by movement. And we simply don't know how that will play out, we simply don't know at this point. And I think that's my entry point to research. So five weeks ago I moved to Geneva from New York, I'd been in New York for ten years in a very operational agency, UNDP and now my focus is on learning things that we don't know. Now the UN Research Institute for Social Development has a tremendous heritage of working on things which are a little bit challenging to the mainstream, particularly with a focus on social development and people. We have three research programs, one is on social policy, the second is on gender and development and the third is on the social dimensions of sustainable development. Now we've done work on migration in the past, particularly South-South migration and more recently migrant precarity but I am absolutely committed as the new director to wanting to do more on migration. I think it's absolutely a critical issue and I'll be exploring with colleagues in IOM and beyond how we can make that happen. So lastly, I wasn't going to include this but I do want to address the Director General's comment on action. We're in somewhat of an informational void at the moment. The excitement from September has died down. I think people are beginning to realise what this new agenda means and the UN system and the multilateral system is no different. For my last year in New York I was working on a strategy for the UN Development Group to guide its support on implementation of the new agenda and we titled it Maps in the End. Maps stands for mainstreaming, acceleration and policy support. Now one of the critical divides that we have to jump is the way that IOM as an institution is brought in to that family that is addressing the SDGs at country level or whether it still sits slightly outside and I don't believe we can effectively address this agenda with the organisation that works on migration outside of country level UN processes and global level review mechanisms. I think it's absolutely fundamental to IOM, gets a voice and gets resources within those processes. What we've tried to do in crafting that strategy is recognise the assets that the UN system can bring both its resident and non-resident agencies but also the fact that there are millions of people who also want to contribute to implementation whether they sit in think tanks or the academic community or in the business community. So therefore there is no one monopoly on providing support to national stakeholders whether they're in governments or civil society. And I think within that context if we try to address the challenge of implementation in that multistakeholder way then I think we'll make far better progress even if of course as a UN, a committed UN worker I feel we also have a lot of leadership that we can bring as the UN system to supporting countries that let me stop there. Thank you very much Mr. Ladd for adding additional dimensions to our discussion this morning. I think that I won't go try to repeat them but I'm particularly encouraged by the positive view that you have of how migration is going to fit into this very universal set of SDGs, emphasis on action and how we can bring others in. It is not a document that's owned by the UN. It belongs to all of us. It's up to all of us to take action on it. Now I'm going to go immediately to an interactive discussion with all of you. I think it's been for me for very stimulating presentations from different angles. I think it's a lot of food for thought there. So why don't we start the discussion? As far as I'm concerned, I think we can go over a few minutes. The next item is to return to the general debate. So let me eat into a little bit of the general debate time in order to give you opportunity to raise questions, make points that you'd like to and do try to be as brief as possible. Thank you. Who's the first speaker? Okay, let me start with the first speaker. Mexico is the first speaker followed by Fiji. Then I saw, I think, Congo, Greece, and Sweden, I believe. Mexico, you have the floor. Thank you, Chairman and good morning, Director General. Good morning, everybody. We'd like to begin by thanking all of the panelists for a lot of very interesting comments and ideas. It's very clear to us that including migration on the 2030 agenda is a historic achievement of the international community. And we'd like to underscore that Iowa was instrumental in achieving that. Its support is vital, and we should really pay tribute to Iowa in that respect. I heard little about the IOM's Migration Governance Framework in those panel remarks, and I think that's an important aspect of this debate that we should neglect, in particular, because the Migration Governance Framework is drawn from the state declaration on the high-level dialogue of migration and development in 2013, in which these statements refer to very key aspects related to migration and development. The Migration Governance Framework will clearly, for us, make a key contribution to promoting planned and well-managed migration, and with the relevant advice of IOM on migration issues and the space for exchanges of views and experiences on issues connected to migration and availability. I'd like to point out that the three principles and objectives referred to in the Governance Framework complement the operational framework for migration emergency situations in Iowa, and what it has. I didn't want to take too much of your time to general, but we are sure that this Governance Framework can make a contribution to developing national capacities and provide normative advice for developing specific programs linked to developing public policies that make an important contribution to implementing the sustainable development agenda. And in that context, I have a question for the panelists. What do they think the relevant aspects for migration should be implemented and monitored in the 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda with particular emphasis on the role that IOM could play? Considering the cross-cutting nature of migration and the diverse array of international organizations and other stakeholders involved, thank you. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Chair. I wanted to take the floor on behalf of the African group to speak on the ECU of the ECGs and the Governance Framework and I'd like to pay tribute to that one. It has touched considerable importance to these matters which are so topical and ensure that they play an important part in the 2030 Agenda. I'd also like to thank the panelists for their important comments this morning and congratulate the administration for having facilitated this discussion. These are matters of great concern over recent years and so many meetings and forums. And we'll also congratulate the administration because all the conclusions that have been taken and all of the conclusions that have been taken during these forums have helped us to set platforms for managing migratory flows across the world. I would like to point out that the African group would like to talk about the social, political, political, social, political, and environmental crises. The world is now seen as a population displacement in extremely diverse and complex settings and as a result, we need to take the appropriate measures and governments and international organizations and indeed NGOs. We need to look from what inclusive management and migratory flows. And we need to ensure that there is a equal right space between the rights of women, children, and the most vulnerable groups in the context of migration. We need to meet the right efforts to improve the migration model, successfully resolve the needs of buildings and ensure access to social services. I would like to point out that I would like to point out that I am to be a clean stakeholder in all the countries related to migration to international regional and regional levels. We need to consider the situation in the Middle East and Africa connected to migration. The African group is less likely to be true in terms of protection and new guidelines on protection of migrants and they would best practice to be applied a capacity building program for state-of-the-art immigration. In conclusion, the African group thank the administration for the interest in this problem and reassure its willingness to do so. We do it in the middle of the resolution on the immigration framework. We encourage its effective application in national policies to implement that effectively in national programs for migration management. Thank you. Thank you very much. I'm going to proceed by trying to get as many of the discussion and then simply ask our four panelists if they would maybe respond to these or have a concluding remark, I think, rather than trying to answer each individually now in the interest of time. Grace, you have the floor. We want to thank the panelists for their presentations and my question refers to the collection of data which, of course, is of very big importance and we want to commend IOM for their valuable contribution in this field. The Migration Governance Framework mentions that the term credible, this data needs to be credible and my question refers mostly to Mrs. Melamed since she mentioned it in her speech. Which do you believe are the proper safeguards in order to ensure the credibility of this data, not so much on the part of the states because we believe Mr. Fahl made some important references to this in his speech but rather on the part of the potential partners since you said that there is a need for partnerships in this field. Thank you. Thank you, Sweden. Mr. Chairman, Director General and good morning to all colleagues around the room. I would like to begin by thanking the panelists for really very interesting interventions. Sweden shares the evaluation that it's a tremendous achievement to have agreed on the ambitious goals on migration within the 2030 agenda. Finally, there are clear and unquestionable commitments on the UN level. Undoubtedly, this fact will boost efforts and attract resources in this area. Both nationally and globally. How much is however yet to be seen? If goals are viewed as complicated, they risk to be sidestepped by other priorities. Therefore, all steps towards concretization and transparency will have a potentially positive effect. Some commitments on migration in the SDGs are easy to measure such as lowering the transfer costs of more remittances. Defining and measuring orderly, safe, regular and responsible migration is a completely different challenge. In only a few words, that commitment frames the essence of migration governance and exposes the challenges linked to its definition in national context. Luckily, IOM was proactive on this issue. IOM's work on developing the migration governance framework is of great quality and value. The MiGov is the best tent we have seen to identify the policies that could enable orderly, safe, regulated and responsible migration. IOM has managed to be sensitive to national and regional context and has succeeded to create a tool which is comprehensible and comprehensible, as well as operationally and universally relevant. Sweden is a long-time advocate of intensified discussions on global governance on migration. In our view, the adoption of the MiGov at the Council session is a milestone in global discussions on migration governance in that it provides an essential element of deciphering what is central to our discussions and goals. IOM's foresight and work on the MiGov show proof of the organization's strength and of its experience in the full width of the migration area. The timing and forthcoming thinking on this starting already early on in the negotiations of the post-2015 agenda gives evidence to what the organization has developed into over the last diszenium. Today, IOM is so much more than an operational service provider. We applaud IOM for providing the membership with MiGov directly after the finalization of the 2013 negotiations. IOM's expertise, participation and impact need to be ensured in the implementation and follow-up of the SDGs on migration. Now, even harder work starts. Follow-up monitoring and reporting on the SDGs will be a giant task for giants. An international migration policy index can be a very useful indicator to measure progress made regarding migration-related commitments. It may also be useful in order to identify policy gaps. In our view, the migration governance framework can contribute to the development of such an index. At this time of world distress, where migration often is described in terms of crisis and challenges, it's even more essential to concretize and facilitate for all states in implementing the 2013 commitments. To make migration reach its full potential as a means to this decrease inequalities and to reach the global goals. Thank you very much. This is a key followed by Switzerland, Armenia, Ethiopia and Turkey. Thank the distinguished panelists and the IOM providing us with the opportunity to discuss this very important topic. We believe that after agreeing on the SDGs now it's time to work on to build peaceful and inclusive societies by making sure that migrants are well integrated and that their rights are protected. With this understanding and as the GFMD chair we attach great importance to work on SDGs. At GFMD we had a dedicated round table, held a thematic meeting and also co-organized a side event with IOM on this subject. At GFMD Stumble Summit last month, as you all well know, we concluded once again that migration and migrants themselves can play an important role in sustainable development both as beneficiaries and development actors. Leaving no one behind is a key point underlined at the summit. In this regard, as a leading international migration agency IOM has a significant role we believe to play to ensure the continuity of our accomplishments. Therefore, we welcome the migration governance framework that we believe is a timely and useful reference point. Thank you. Thank you very much. Turkey, Switzerland. Thank you very much. Mr. Chair, we joined the voices of considering the inclusion of migration in the SDGs as a great success. Indeed, in 2012, many were the voices that claimed migration to be too toxic too impossible to be included in a new global framework for sustainable development. Luckily, we have proven these voices wrong. In that context, let me highlight the important work that IOM has done in reaching this ambitious goal. Most in process, and here I would like to recognize the work, for example, that IOM has done in facilitating two global events that we had the great pleasure of co-chairing with Bangladesh in 2013 and then in 2014, but also in operational aspects. I think the work that IOM is doing and the entire staff of IOM really demonstrates that migration development is not a theoretical concept, it is something practical and that is what IOM is about, by migrants and all the host communities and their families so that made it more simple that it is more evidence-based the claim to have migration in the SDGs. If I may, I just want to quickly to raise four points. It is important to us to recognize that the new development agenda sees migrants not only as beneficiaries for sustainable development, but as actors for sustainable development. And I think this is something that is incredibly important also to change the perception of migration around the world. This is a call to include the voices of migrants in all development-related debates, in all development-related processes at all levels. I think this is something that we need to take forward throughout the process. A second point is also and this very much speaks to the question of are we as a community working on migration issues fit for purpose? Are we fit to implement the agenda and are we fit to respond also to the possibilities giving to us and the promises made in the agenda to respond to these points. Here I would like to mention for example the role of the GFMD. It was extremely important to have the GFMD as an environmental state-led process to reach this goal and here I would like to highlight in particular the German shape of Sweden and now Turkey who has been tremendously important in reaching this goal. But also the high-level dialogue, we will have a third high-level dialogue latest in 2019. I think this is also part of the debate of moving forward and as been mentioned by previous speakers I think IOM has given us with the migration government's framework a very interesting instrument of tackling the challenges that we have put in the agenda. A third point I would like to mention is that really to make sure that this agenda doesn't remain a piece of paper but a vision, a tool to change the world we need a global partnership a global partnership of governments, international organizations, civil society, academia but also the private sector and Switzerland together with Turkey we have proposed and it was later endorsed an engagement mechanism for the private sector in the GFMD it will be rolled out on the leadership of Bangladesh next year but this is just one element on how we could capture the important role of the private sector and if I made this might be one of my questions to the panel, how does the panel see the role of the private sector in the implementation of the agenda and the particular emphasis on migration relevant issues and the last point I would like to mention if I may is that I've missed a little bit the mentioning of the Addis Ababa Action agenda. Now I understand it is an integral part of the 2030 agenda and rightly so but I think it is important to mention and to specify the way that the Addis Ababa Action agenda reflects for example what is the important role of the private sector in the GFMD and I think it is important to mention that there are a number of issues that go way beyond just the notion of reducing transfer costs it talks about financial inclusion it talks about financial literacy I think these are key issues when we talk about how to make the best use of remittances but it also talks about action agenda moving forward as it is an important and integral part of the 2030 agenda. Thank you very much. Thank you very much Armenia. We thank the distinguished panelists for their interesting presentations we particularly welcome the presence of Ambassador Donahue and his presentation of possible linkages between IOM and high-level political forum and we of course from Geneva 2 appreciate the important role that Ambassador played as a co-facilitator of the post 2015 intergovernmental negotiations and in bringing about the 2030 agenda for sustainable development our delegation actively contributed to the discussions and to the shaping of the outcome document and in particular strongly supported the inclusion of the paragraph on the relevance of migration to the growth and sustainable development Armenia has always advocated for a stronger international collaboration in the area of migration be it in the form of establishing new partnership for facilitating mobility of people or developing schemes for circular labor migration or for lowering surcharges for the remittances in conclusion if I may echo the words of Director General we are very much looking forward to the action oriented proposals and projects in course of the closer dialogue between the United Nations and IOM for achieving the goals laid out in the 2030 agenda thank you let me just say we will go until 12 before we start to general debate I think this is such an important issue and we have such good presentations it's worth spending the additional time so with that Ethiopia floor is yours thank you very much Director General I have two questions for the panelists the first one is it's related to the last point raised by the colleague from Switzerland on the means of implementation we are keen to the the 2030 agenda and also the action agenda because unless you have the means of implementation then it would be difficult to have the goals and the targets to see them implemented on the ground and in that in relation to that point we would like to know from the panelists what they think about the means of implementation in particular in targeting the countries of origin and bringing about development related projects linking migration to development and it's impact on the ground and what could be done like we know that there are projects like for example by IOM in terms of doing development projects to address the root causes of migration but in linking this means of implementation and the goals and the targets what could be done and what should we expect from Goal 17 and from the ad-saber action agenda and the second question is looking at paragraph 23 of the 2030 agenda it lists a category of one rebel groups whose needs are recognized in the agenda like persons with disabilities IDPs migrants and refugees and I was intrigued by the comment of one of the panelists which I can quote migrants which are not clearly refugees and I just wanted to know from the other panel and from one of the panelists who said this what would be the scope of the migration related goals and targets looking at the list in 23 and to the comment by one of the panelists what would be the scope would we be expanding it or would it be limited to just migrants and just wanted to know your thinking of the panelists thank you Director General and distinguished panelists actually I just wanted to commend you for the excellent presentations and as well Director General I can't help but express how much I admire the way you moderate these sessions I commend you for that I want to be a little brief just to refer to certain points first of all we would like to congratulate this honorable organization for achieving that wonderful and very splendid goal being able to incorporate the issue of migration into the SDGs that's something really worth congratulating and it's a good victory for you Director General and for your organization now talking about I just want to raise one point here that it's in a form of question that you know everybody knows how the humanitarian situation is deteriorating in my country especially the health system is already collapsed totally so in this regard those migrants that are stranded in our territories it's going to be quite hard if not impossible to provide them with social and health services that are needed for them due to these circumstances that I explained and until the country is free of this chaos that it's going on we won't be able to do that not forgetting that the government is not able to take control of its entire territories another thing is when it comes to I mean the question is are there any sort of consideration to because you mentioned one of the panelists talked about climate change so what about countries that are facing armed conflicts are there going to be sort of taken into consideration in terms of the situation now after the recent horrible attacks in Paris I know that the issue of refugees and migrants somehow been sort of a subject to a very negative impact but I wish that these things would not have that kind of impact because we could always deal with that like for example not putting categories in terms of refugees and migrants sort of taken into consideration children and vulnerable groups like women and elders I don't think those could be categorized in terms of you know being subject to be classified as terrorists finally it's a point of order I sincerely hope that there is going to be a day that this honorable organization will take into consideration incorporating Arabic language as a language being one of the six official languages to be also incorporated in the interpretation because I can't see a reason why not most particularly that most of the refugees now especially this year are coming from countries that are from the Arabian origin so I wonder I wish that this thing could be achieved in the future I thank you very much Thank you very much follow on the Integrated Center for the International Center for Integrated Development ICM Thank you Director General for giving this opportunity first of all I would like to thank all the panelists for their excellent and insightful presentation all the panelists mentioned in their presentation one word they referred the WTO and Director General you have also mentioned about that and you coined another very important term for me that is the demographic deficit excellence is all you know the demographic deficit and this demographic change is a major trend is coming and all we can remember that in the liberalization of economic liberalization trade and capital movement behind the main justification was the capital deficit or technology deficit in the LDCs now we see that because of the change in the demographic deficit in the north my first point is that whether we can we can have some vision in the long run Mr. Pal mentioned that there is a compromise negotiation this time whether there is some vision that like goods and services free movement of at least labor force economic migrants and my second point to the panel and to the Director General is that also Sweden delegation also rightly mentioned that we need a global governance mechanism for migration my point is then whether we can foresee some of the organization like WTO to regulate and facilitate movement of people and economic migrants and or whether IOM can take forward to take the role of WTO all other organization thank you very much sir thank you sir United States thank you very much Mr. Director General just two very quick but related questions to the panelists I'm curious as to whether or not the panelists fill with custodian agencies those agencies responsible for monitoring and tracking progress on the targets should also be involved in efforts to prevent those same targets or if this dual role might create a conflict of interest and secondly and relatedly IOM is regularly lauded as a highly operational effective organization which plays a unique role with states made possible in large part by the fact that it is not normative does not judge state action would this role change if IOM were to assume a custodian agency role for any of these migration target indicators thank you thank you very much ICMC Thanks Director General over here in the corner I'll speak up for ICMC in our own name and not broadly as we often do for civil society globally but just really to echo with very strong appreciation a lot of what's been said by Mexico, Sweden, Turkey and Switzerland in particular and maybe to wish that we had asked the question that the United States just asked of ourselves as well as of others on implementing and measuring progress on the sustainable development goals but really if I could just to go with an expression of appreciation to the whole panel and in particular to the word I think from a colleague Gibral Fallen and maybe Claire Melamed the importance of being the fullness of these sustainable development goals as they relate to migration not only the 6 or 7 that are explicitly referring to migration in such important ways but the broadness of the rest of the goals which apply across the board leaving no one behind regardless of migratory status so to stay with the fullness of the goals as they are now and as they project for 15 years very much I appreciate Mr. Donahue and Mr. Ladd referring to how transformative these particular goals can be already and can be going forward but on the fullness also in our own name as ICMC want to stand up and cheer for this migration governance framework which is so smart and so full and actually so real already in so many ways in the work of IOM ranging from work with Diaspora groups very recently and very strongly with local authorities this very year how practical can we get other than to work with local authorities and mayors and IOM is there, MICIC migrants in countries in crisis the recruitment program in IRIS again how real is that in some of these very very serious elements of the ambitions of the sustainable development goals and to my knowledge I don't think civil society worked very directly on the migration governance framework so it's even in some ways more amazing to us how good it looks maybe if we were involved we would have screwed it up but we really appreciate the references to the civil society five year eight point plan of action which was entirely for collaboration with governments and agencies so if we can once again be very much a part of the implementation of this framework at every level picking up very much Switzerland's emphasis on the role of migrants in Diaspora and then to close on the fullness you know all week we hear and many of us are saying IOM is the world's leading migration agency well this migration governance framework in its clarity and its practicality suggests IOM may well be already or be becoming the world's leading migration and development agency so congratulations on that congratulations on your move in these very real directions to look at better relations and relationships in the UN system from civil society for ICMC and I would say for our colleagues very much forward to improving our relations and relationship with IOM in the execution of this very full agenda thanks thank you very much we have two more speakers I'm going to steal just a little more time from the general debate I want to give our panel assistant such a good discussion and you've asked a number of very important questions I want to give them an opportunity to respond so let me take our last two speakers try to be as brief as possible if you can understand it then I'll solve it thank you director general first of all I would like to thank the panelist for their excellent affirmative presentations and Mr. director general I would also like to thank you and for your thank you for your excellent leadership of the organization and your ifa to help people all over the world as well as the IOM staff for their deduction and hard work often in difficult and dangerous situations we welcome the IOM active to tackle and predicted migration and humanitarian crisis my government value close partnership with the organization which cover broad range of issues in particular in assisting IDPs and affected communities combating human trafficking and migration management. Mr. Director General, if you allow me I would just highlight four points which is a priority for our government. Number one, recognizing all asylum seekers who have so rich to their countries of destination without any kind of discrimination. Second, to help to find better ways to manage and facilitate economic migration between countries of origin and the countries in need of labor migrants. Third, help create better employment opportunity to prevent irregular migration. Fourth, deceives decisions by all countries to counter organized human and migrant smugglers network. Mr. Director General, you may aware that on the October 5th, our government has launched a program portfolio project for the migration and returnies of Afghanistan, which is the longest in the history. Well, this project has been launched in the United Nations in Geneva and this has been published in the website of UNICEF as well. Well, my question at the end is regarding the article 10, which is reduced and inequalities and planned and well managed migration policies. Well, regarding this issue, my question to the panelists and also the aim is that in this 66th Executive Committee of UNICEF and also the high level segment, which was took place on 5th October in Geneva, our government has been pledged to plan a program for people not to immigrant abroad. My question to panelists as well as to I am is that how can we echo our plan or a strategic plan for preventing people not to immigrants irregularly. Thank you very much Mr. Director. Thank you. Good morning. I'd like to begin by congratulating the panelists before the very important comments on migration. I don't really have a question as such. I just wanted to make some remarks. What migration means to El Salvador. Migration is also an expression of development. We think there are different interpretation in the international context. The international community is not united in the way in which it sees the migration phenomenon. It's clear that some countries see migration with some concern and there is some rationale to that and then sending countries like El Salvador see it with great hope. El Salvador has about 3 million migrants around the world and that is a very important experience for us and that's why we consider migration as a possible development. The sustainable development objectives can be a very important reference frame to support that development process through migration and in that context it's important to consider sending countries like El Salvador and how they have historic responsibilities. That's why we think that the better development we achieve in our country, the better we'll be able to deal with migration in a very integrated comprehensive fashion which will enable us to pursue sustainable development objectives and that we see in this sustainable development agenda. My question must be a permanent factor for hope and development and it should never be treated in isolation. I think we're going along with the right lines now in considering migration and considering the STD. That's the main reference framework for dealing with migration as a factor for development. Thank you. I really do justice to all of your questions and very rich contributions so I want to turn it over to the panel now. Let's start with Ambassador Donahue first. We'll try to wrap this up then shortly. Thank you very much ladies and gentlemen so I won't try to answer all of those. I just picked one or two which struck me during the discussion. First of all in my own remarks I didn't actually refer to the the migration governance framework and I should have I mean just from a layman's perspective I think this is an extremely valuable initiative. I think that there was great value leaving aside the STGs there was great value in the IOM setting down some of the or perhaps probably all of the concepts and principles which need to be followed around the world in responding to this challenge. So I mean I have to say I think it's a very good piece of work before one gets to the question of how it will fit into the monitoring of the IOM's contribution to monitoring of the implementation of the STGs. I think that it is a tool which the IOM can use to engage in dialogues with other players in relation to migration be it say the Human Rights Council or the UNHCR or the EcoSelf Function Commissions. I mean there obviously there are many players the IOM is perhaps the leading player but there are many players who are relevant to finding solutions and ensuring protection for migrants. So in the very first instance I would see this as a document which enables the IOM to make a pretty fundamental contribution to the debate. You also through this document can give a structure and an emphasis to or let me use the word focus that the document will put pressure on governments to demonstrate that they are adhering to these principles in their own handling of migration issues. So you're really challenging through the IOM through this document you're challenging governments to prove that they are addressing the issues set out in 10, 7 and elsewhere. So I think it's a it's a very good piece of work and this is really by way of responding to Mexico who asked really what what was our attitude to that. The human rights perspective was brought out well by Congo and I thought that this is that I mean this this is it it's crucially important that the rights of women and children notably in relation to migration are protected and in the 2030 agenda human rights really permeates everything and it is as fundamental as the notions of equality leaving no behind and so on. Human rights in a broad sense underpins everything we're doing and therefore it underpins the the handling of migration within the agenda. The some I think it was Greece asked about credible data I don't quite remember where we have it in the document but there is some some point at which we describe I think the kind of data that we want to see covering all goals and targets in the agenda and obviously I mean there are people better qualified than me such as Claire on this panel to to talk about the crucial importance of data but in New York particularly we are we are highly aware of the challenge which arises for the smallest member states in terms of meeting the standard of of of data information which we have to have if there is to be a universal agenda and if there is to be universal monitoring of of performance so really the data challenge is absolutely fundamental and I responded well to what Greece was saying the issue then of the goals and targets being as concrete and transparent as possible which I think Sweden brought up I just refer back to the exercise which I mentioned earlier myself and my Kenyan colleague as co-facilitators tried very hard to get the targets up to the right technical standard when I say try hard the difficulty was really a political one or or let's say a procedural one and that there was a fundamental fear about the consequences of reopening the package which had already been agreed even even to make technical improvements so despite that myself and my colleague pressed ahead with with proposals that we put to the membership where we had the full support of the UN system through the interagency mechanism that the director general referred to and ultimately we were able to get a small number of amendments agreed but although it might not seem like much we did that in the teeth of fundamental opposition over many months to any changes at all so now one of the little changes which came in as I recall was the reference to ending modern slavery and human trafficking and we were quite pleased that we managed to get that in because it's obviously highly topical and that was a new element the let me see again I applaud the IOM also for having reduced the the MGF so rapidly with more or less in the same the same breadth as the adoption of the fine document it shows that the IOM is ahead of the park and in terms of recognizing the need for very specific and focused follow-up I think I'll probably leave it at that those are just a few the points that occurred to me the the question of means of implementation is obviously crucial I can't myself as a layman quite see I mean I can't give advice on specifically what means of implementation will be required to take forward the the migration references in notably in in 10-7 but what I will say is that it is expected that goal 17 and the Addis Ababa commitments will be reviewed fairly constantly in the HLPF in other words I don't want to be too specific because we're still at the brainstorming stage but I would expect that that that will be that the means of implementation will get constant scrutiny almost more than other goals so within that a lot of questions will be asked about the MOIs under specific goals fascinating series of questions it's always such a pleasure and a privilege to come into sort of intergovernmental bodies and listen to the experiences and the kind of the perspectives of different different governments have on on these issues so just seeing as you're limiting us two points really first of all I've just been keeping a tally as we've had the conversation I have recorded this this may be an underestimate I've recorded seven different terms that we've used this morning to describe people who move I won't list them all but I think there's sort of variety of ways in which we describe these groups of people and obviously the different meanings behind those words we use different words for a reason one example of why having the migration governance framework and the work of the IOM in this regard is so important bringing some kind of structure and organization to this very diverse world and issue in which we're operating so I very much echo the comments made that you know very much endorse that effort and wish it well and linking to a to the broader issues of course around how we tackle these issues within global structures and the global governance of migration and the interaction of the IOM with other agencies more broadly secondly there's been a couple of issues questions raised directly to me about data so let me try to tackle that the question of data and credibility is absolutely central has been a big focus of course of the work of the secretary general's expert group and the subsequent discussions within the UN and outside about data not just and I think it's always worth repeating this not just to monitor the sustainable development goals but the data that governments and other groups are going to need to actually achieve the goals themselves the data for planning the data for policy making the data for resource allocation and choices I think credibility is absolutely the right question to ask there is huge amounts of data in the world the problem in some ways is not an absolute lack of data the problem is a lack of access to that data and a lack of confidence in that and a lack of understanding of what constitutes good data and usable data for different groups and I think first of all we have to look to the statisticians as the sort of custodians of quality and the national statistical offices have an absolutely central place in this story as custodians of quality as the develop you know as the key people involved in developing the methodologies and the systems that will allow us to make use of this data but I think as you alluded to in the question the story has become much broader we governments no longer have a monopoly of providing data we're getting more and more data from the private sector in the form of big data from civil society groups and others and increasingly I think the role of governments is likely to be one of exactly that of guaranteeing the credibility and the quality of that data if I may I think this also links to one very specific example of the role of the private sector and the link to migration specifically in that obviously one of the issues here is the lack of data to track movement and that is one of the areas where we're seeing very early interesting success from the integration of national data and statistics with new sources of data such as mobile phone data and there's been some really interesting projects in that regard there has there's a new global partnership being established on data which is going to be experimenting with helping to form the sort of public private partnerships but also guarantee the quality and the ethical standards that can make this work institution body organization that does any implementation should do monitoring in my view that's a response to the United States but that is the monitoring that I would consider the equivalent of that's the internal audit the external audit to me that needs to be a separate entity because it needs to be viewed it should be sort of viewed like Caesar's wife that is beyond suspicion and many of us have suspicion as to government institutions monitoring order government institutions so internal audit everyone does it external audit an independent one in terms of linking the common question from I think is Afghanistan and Ethiopia the ultimate vision beyond 2030 is that migration becomes a choice not a desperate necessity this is the big vision beyond 2015 now within that some the SDGs mentioned particular vulnerable groups I think in the implementation and the discussion has begun people would have to think of which order specific groups and what sort of protection and support need to be given but it's not only the vulnerable groups the other side of it is diaspora second generation who already are part of the migration and development discussion who perhaps don't need protection but have extra things to bring in and finally about the agenda the Addis Ababa agenda action that brings in very many new forms of financing that we use in different parts of the world it has brought it now as a formal part of the development framework again my refrain is the same we should have in the implementation phase a list of omissions and commissions for example with public private finances what are the things we must do and most importantly what are the things we must not do because we have experience in our countries how it undermines the public group I think there was a couple of interesting interventions on the potential role of the private sector in implementing the agenda as a key partner and in particular it's relevant to migration when I used to participate in the I think the first five or six GFMD processes there was an attempt of course to make sure that external stakeholders could participate in that and present their perspectives as civil society strengthened within the GFMD process it wasn't so evident to me that the private sector was doing the same in fact there was usually very very spotty representation from the private sector and where it where they were engaged it tended to be directly an attempt to get groups who were involved in recruitment clearly for migration it's much more complex on the demand side as well as on the supply side I think if we were to truly get chambers of commerce trade bodies local trade bodies national trade bodies you would hear a quite different take on the importance of a variegated skillset that migrants bring and contribute to the process that will lead to the achievement of the of the SDGs and to stronger growth and to diversity and to all of the entrepreneurship and energy that migrants bring and just very briefly related to that there was a question about scope and what this agenda covers in terms of human mobility and my interpretation is that it's very broad I would read the goals and the targets in conjunction with the narrative that precedes them and I think it's quite clear that it's referring to people that are moving for the full variety of reasons of course some of them because they're escaping conflict and violence and xenophobia and discrimination there's a very unhelpful division that is growing up at the moment between legitimate migrants and illegitimate migrants and it's split down the asylum refugee line versus economic migrants and I think we have to do our best to oppose that very false division and not use language that plays into that because clearly people will move and are moving and will continue to move for a variety of reasons that relate to the many unequal structures that we have in the world and the lack of opportunities that they face thank you very much wonderful discussion no time for summary no time for closing remarks except to please join me in thanking our panelists thank you