General Assembly – Day 2

Given the results of day 1, day 2 kicked off with a big bang! Delegates were ready to get to work. They continued on the topic of “Setting Up the Post 2015 Development Agenda”. The chair opened the floor to a general speaker’s list but the delegate from Australia, quickly rose to the plate and motioned to have a 10-minute caucus to discuss specific problems of the development. Australia stressed the importance of coming up with goals that would meet the needs of citizens and countries. The delegation of Egypt wanted to stressed that there were more pressing issues like social and environmental change. Japan was in agreement and was even willing to develop a water turbine program. Japan urged all countries to take part of this program. Delegates then motion for an un-moderated caucus to discuss ways of solving some of these pressing matters. From that un-moderated caucus the delegation of Australia was able to present a working paper.

This working paper included concerns of food security, economic development, and concerns of general principles. In responds to this working paper, representatives of other countries quickly agreed or disagreed. Japan was deeply concern that the subject of food security was too vague. The delegation of Italy expressed concerns about the access to clean drinking water. The delegate was disturbed by it’s absence within the working paper given that it is a human right. So, delegates motioned for another un-moderated caucus to present another working paper.

Working paper #2 was presented by Brazil. This working paper was very similar to the previous one, but addressed the concerns of other countries that previously had problems with working paper #1. Although, many delegations were able to agree with working paper #2, there were still some countries that were just not satisfied. The matter of terrorism became a major concerned for countries. The delegation of Saudi Arabia stressed that terror conflict was not addressed in the working paper. Thus, delegates return to another round of an un-moderated caucus.

From this un-moderated caucus, delegates were able to produce a third working paper. Given the results of working paper #3, delegates were ready to start a resolution. So they returned to another un-moderated caucus to form one.

The delegation of Australia presented and reviewed the first draft resolution of the General Assembly. Although the draft resolution was well executed, delegates swiftly found ways to perfect the resolution and day 2 ended with amendments to the resolution. I hope delegates are able to pass a resolution on day 3.

During the un-moderated caucus, I was lucky enough to speak with the chair of the General Assembly, Manon Lainé Silas. Manon is currently a student at Sciences Po Rennes and is majoring in public affaires. Someday, she hopes to represent the country of France on an international level. Given that this was her first year of being a chair, I have to say she is very good at it! I ask her which positioned she enjoyed more, hosting or participating? She expressed that the two felt completely different. She conveyed that hosting is nice but it can also be frustrating because she cannot offer her opinion on a topic that’s being discussed. I wish Manon all the best on her journey to the international level.

After the conference I had the chance to speak with the delegate from Australia, Benjamin Alford. He is also a student at Sciences Po Rennes but he is in his second year. He was pleased with the way things were going within the General Assembly but hopes that the resolution he presented on the behalf of the delegation of Australia will go through on day 3.