Thank you Madam Chair,
We firstly wish to acknowledge the many interventions in support of NZ’s transparency proposal, and secondly to support the EU’s proposed language in CRP.2 for the chapeau of paragraph 4, supported by NZ, to more accurately describe the functions of the COP. We think it is important to clarify that the review function is an additional rather than a primary function. Moreover, that suggested language may need to be adjusted, in light of suggestions made by delegations on Article 5, to avoid duplication of review provisions between the chapeau and article 5.
We also support the proposal by Nauru for the PSIDS for a new paragraph 6 with respect to powers for an advisory opinion. If it is not included, the COP will not be able to request such an opinion.