Home > Media and publications > Media > MFAT speeches > 16 May 2008

Ministry Statements and Speeches 2008

System Wide Coherence Gender consultations

Statement by NZ Permanent Representative, HE Rosemary Banks, on behalf of Australia, Canada and New Zealand, 16 May 2008

Thank you, Co-Chairs. I have the honour of delivering this statement on behalf of Australia, Canada and New Zealand.

CANZ remains firmly committed to the need for significant improvements in the United Nation’s performance in gender equality, which is essential to the achievement of the internationally agreed development goals, including the Millennium Development Goals. Gender inequalities persist in all countries. In no country do women engage in paid labour in equal rates as men, have equal rates of political participation or live lives free from gender-based violence. The 2007 MDGs progress report clearly shows that nearly all the goals relating to gender equality are lagging behind and will not be met. More than half of those infected with HIV/AIDS are women. Each year, more than half a million women needlessly die from largely preventable complications associated with pregnancy and childbirth. Inadequate and lack of consistent, strong and targeted attention to gender equality undermines the ability of half of the world’s population to contribute to and benefit from development.

The UN mandate to promote and support gender equality is longstanding and is enshrined in the Charter. It has been reaffirmed and further defined in the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action and the almost universally ratified Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women. The Economic and Social Council and the General Assembly, including in the 2004 and 2007 Triennial Comprehensive Policy Review resolutions, have agreed that gender specific programming and systematic gender mainstreaming are the two parallel strategies that should underpin the UN’s actions by its bodies, funds, programs and specialized agencies. And yet, this mandate has been only partly implemented.

At the country level, we have seen mixed progress and significant gaps between the UN’s mandate and its performance:

Integrating a gender perspective in development programming requires an understanding of the different situations faced by men and women, boys and girls in order to determine appropriate responses. At the country level, the first point of entry would be in the Common Country Assessment. However, UN country teams continue to lack adequate capacity for gender analysis. As a result, only a few CCAs adequately analyze how development challenges differentially affect men and women, boys and girls. The use of sex-disaggregated information is often lacking, and indicators haven’t been established or are not applied. Without sound gender analyses, discussions with national authorities to set the UN’s development priorities at country level via the UN Development Assistance Frameworks will not consider gender equality.
As a result, the UNDAFs show low levels of integration of gender equality perspectives. The 2006 Synthesis of Resident Coordinators Annual Reports shows that just over one third of UNDAFs have incorporated at least one gender equality result, and there has been no progress in this regard in at least 3 years. Only a few UN country teams actually have a gender equality strategy. This situation also affects other country program planning processes. Most UN organizations are not systematically addressing gender equality in country program documents and annual work plans, and use of specific results and performance indicators for UN organizations on the ground remains inconsistent.
This failure to respond to a clear mandate is partly explained by the lack of commitment from senior management to integrate gender equality into plans, programs and policy support. At the country level, we note that the standard terms of reference for Humanitarian Coordinators clearly communicates their responsibility for promoting gender mainstreaming and women’s rights in policy, planning and implementation. However, no such responsibility is articulated in the standard job description or performance appraisal guidelines for Resident Coordinators, and there is no high level accountability mechanism in UN headquarters.
Many Resident Coordinators and UN Country Teams lack quality and dedicated advice, analysis and statistics on gender equality. Only a few country teams have dedicated gender equality resources, and this needs improvement. Less than half of UN Country Teams have gender theme groups, but these face heavy workloads, vague mandates, limited resources, limited political clout and often lack access to management. Gender focal points are rarely gender experts or devoted only to gender equality.
Most UN agencies allocate too little resources to gender equality and few track and report on their gender equality expenditures. Without specific allocation and tracking of resources and consistent monitoring and evaluation of the effectiveness of such investments, it is impossible to evaluate gender equality results, identify gaps and ensure timely and better responses.
UN staff members working at the country level do not always understand gender equality and development concepts, and efforts to train staff to support the implementation of gender equality have been decreasing. This is an area in which we see no progress in UN country teams, and requires attention. Despite the 2004 TCPR’s call for the assurance of adequate gender equality training, the 2006 RC synthesis report shows consistent annual decreases in staff capacity development initiatives in this area between 2004 and 2006. Only 13% of country offices reported any capacity development for staff in gender equality in 2006, representing a 25% drop since 2004.
Different parts of the UN system work on gender equality and women’s empowerment, which leads to gaps and overlaps in responses, and uneven attention between geographic regions. This situation prevents and frustrates optimal use of scarce resources currently available in the development system. As an example, we recognize the urgent need for increases in funding for the elimination of violence against women, but the multiple funds create confusion over roles and weaken the efficiency of the UN’s responses. They also make it challenging to determine the most effective and comprehensive opportunities for funding.
In recent years there have been advances in interagency mechanisms to promote gender equality in operations, notably through the UNDG Task Force on Gender Equality and the Inter-Agency Network on Women and Gender Equality. However, these lack clout and visibility, and we note that none of the UN’s women’s organizations are members of the Chiefs Executives Board for Coordination where decisions are made. The CEB took an important decision in 2006 in adopting the system-wide policy and strategy in gender equality; it now needs consistent support and leadership in making this decision operational via a comprehensive action plan focused on results and that is underpinned by strong accountability mechanisms.
The UN’s senior management ranks have grown to 81 Under Secretaries General. Despite a clear and longstanding UN mandate for gender equality and women’s empowerment, there is no senior leadership position to promote and support gender equality advances across the system and that has access to senior decision-making networks.
There are persistent gaps between the normative work and the operational work undertaken to achieve gender equality. National level implementation of the normative framework — a framework strengthened considerably by the Beijing Platform for Action and CEDAW, has stagnated due to several factors already outlined. There has also been little progress in ensuring that normative processes are informed by operational work addressing concrete situations on the ground, particularly in emerging issues. Such work is necessary to ensure that international standards meet new challenges and needs at country level.

Mr. Co-Chairs,

To summarize, the gaps revealed at the central level following an assessment of performance at the country level include nine areas:

institutional and individual accountability,
senior decision making,
comprehensive results structures,
gender advice, data collection and gender analysis,
system-wide monitoring and evaluation,
capacity development,
clarification of mandates, and
resources.

We recognize that slow, incremental improvements are taking place within the system, and that some operational agencies dedicated to gender equality have had some successes at the national level. However, the system’s own documents show that the overall picture is diluted, the responses diffuse and the gaps numerous. Without significant leadership, accountability and clarity of mandates, they will not be addressed in the current system.

Looking forward, CANZ requests the Co-Chairs to organize further consultations on this issue in order to lead us beyond a focus on gaps to a focus on solutions. We would welcome further analysis and advice from the UN Secretariat as a basis for further discussion.

Thank you.

back to 2008 speech index

top of page

Page last updated: Thursday, 05 June 2008 09:50 NZST

Print this page