2nd Conference of the Parties to the Stockholm Convention on 
Persistent Organic Pollutants  -  Issue #2 

EARTH NEGOTIATIONS BULLETIN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PUBLISHED BY THE INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR 
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (IISD) <http://www.iisd.org>

Written and edited by:

Karen Alvarenga, Ph.D. 
Andrew Brooke 
Alexis Conrad 
Reem Hajjar 
Amber Moreen 

Editor:

Pamela S. Chasek, Ph.D. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Director of IISD Reporting Services:

Langston James "Kimo" Goree VI <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


Vol. 15 No. 131
Tuesday, 2 May 2006

Online at http://www.iisd.ca/chemical/pops/cop2/ 

POPS COP-2 HIGHLIGHTS:

MONDAY, 1 MAY 2006

The second Conference of the Parties to the Stockholm Convention 
on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs COP-2) opened on Monday, 1 
May, in Geneva, Switzerland. During morning and afternoon plenary 
sessions, delegates addressed organizational matters, heard 
general statements, and considered agenda items on rules of 
procedure, the Secretariat’s activities, the budget, non-compliance 
and financial resources.

OPENING PLENARY

Fernando Lugris, Uruguay’s Ministry for Foreign Affairs, on behalf 
of Mariano Arana, Uruguay’s Minister of Housing, Territorial 
Planning and Environment, noted the urgency of working efficiently 
to strengthen the Convention, and the need for progress on issues 
related to the financial mechanism, technical assistance and 
regional centers.

Bruno Oberle, Swiss Agency for the Environment, highlighted the 
role of the Global Environment Facility (GEF) in providing the 
necessary financial support to address POPs, and called for 
enhanced synergies among the Rotterdam, Basel and Stockholm 
Conventions.

Shafqat Kakahel, Deputy Executive Director of UNEP, underlined the 
need to strengthen national capacity, and the importance of 
regional centers in developing capacity building and monitoring 
activities.

Leonard Good, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the GEF, 
reported on the GEF’s work with the Stockholm Convention. He 
called for integration of national chemicals programmes and 
mainstreaming of chemicals management in national development 
strategies. He underlined that a modified resource allocation 
framework (RAF) could apply to other focal areas besides 
biodiversity and climate change in the future. 

ORGANIZATIONAL MATTERS 

ELECTION OF OFFICERS: Delegates elected Nik Kiddle (New Zealand) 
as President of COP-2. Honduras, on behalf of GRULAC, nominated 
Fernando Lugris (Uruguay) as Vice-President. Egypt and Burkina 
Faso were nominated as Bureau members for their region while 
nomination of other members was postponed to allow for further 
regional consultations. 

ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA: SWITZERLAND, supported by Austria, on 
behalf of the EU, requested non-compliance mechanisms be added to 
the agenda. Noting the small size of some delegations, INDIA, 
GRULAC, and others, opposed establishing a contact group on non-
compliance. COP-2 President Kiddle said the issue of non-
compliance was already incorporated into the agenda, and delegates 
adopted the agenda (UNEP/POPS/COP.2/1) without amendment.

ORGANIZATION OF WORK: COP-2 President Kiddle proposed, and 
delegates agreed, that contact group meetings be held inparallel 
with plenary, rather than creating a Committee of the Whole, and 
introduced a draft meeting schedule. CHINA, with INDIA, BRAZIL and 
Kenya, for the AFRICA GROUP, suggested delaying discussion on non-
compliance until later in the week, while the EU preferred 
commencing such discussion on Monday afternoon. Delegates agreed 
to introduce the Open-Ended Working Group on Non-Compliance (OEWG 
NC) report on Monday afternoon, and postponed substantive 
discussion on non-compliance for later in the week. 

RULES OF PROCEDURE 

Delegates agreed to apply the rules of procedure 
(UNEP/POPs/COP.2/3) for the COP and its Subsidiary Bodies under 
Decision SC-1/1 (Rules of procedure), keeping in brackets a 
provision for decisions to be taken, as a last resort, by a 
two-thirds majority vote of the parties. 

REPORT ON CREDENTIALS

The Secretariat presented an interim report on credentials, and 
noted that a final report will be provided by the Bureau on Friday 
morning.

ACTIVITIES OF THE SECRETARIAT AND ADOPTION OF THE BUDGET

John Whitelaw, Acting Executive Secretary of the Convention, 
reported on the activities undertaken by the Secretariat, the 2006 
budget and the 2007 indicative budget (UNEP/POPs/COP.2/24, 
UNEP/POPs/COP.2/INF/16 and UNEP/POPs/COP.2/INF/13). He 
highlighted, inter alia: the preparatory work for COP-2; 
finalization of the permanent arrangements for the Secretariat in 
Geneva; elaboration of guidance for National Implementation Plans 
(NIPs); and cooperation with other organizations, especially the 
Basel and Rotterdam Convention secretariats, the GEF, UNEP 
Division of Technology, Industry and Economics (DTIE) (Chemicals 
Branch), and the World Health Organization (WHO). 

MEXICO, with CHILE, expressed concern about increasing the 2007 
budget, while the EU, with Canada, called for only minimal 
increases. NORWAY, with MEXICO and SWITZERLAND, expressed concern 
about funding core activities via the Special Trust Fund. CANADA 
advocated balancing activities funded through different sources, 
namely the Special Trust Fund, core budget, and other funding 
sources, while SOUTH AFRICA noted that doing so is dependent on 
discussions on synergies. CHILE highlighted the budgetary 
implications of proposed expert groups. In response to a comment 
from NIGERIA, the Secretariat noted that it is taking into account 
geographical and demographic diversity in selecting Secretariat 
personnel. A contact group was established to discuss budgetary 
issues.

GENERAL STATEMENTS

The EU emphasized the need to finalize the non-compliance 
provisions, calling for the OEWG NC to continue its work during 
COP-2. The EU also called for the inclusion of further substances 
in the list of POPs, announcing that details of three proposed 
additions to the relevant annexes would be provided before the 
next meeting of the POPs Review Committee.

UGANDA noted that it is unlikely to be able to transmit its NIP in 
time, and therefore supported a non-compliance mechanism that 
assists parties with compliance. The AFRICA GROUP reported that 
many countries in Africa are developing their NIPs, and noted that 
the completion of the SAICM process will facilitate the process of 
information exchange on POPs. MONGOLIA called for strengthening 
capacity and mobilizing financial resources for NIPs. COTE 
D’IVOIRE, the PHILIPPINES, MOROCCO, EGYPT, RWANDA and KUWAIT 
called for technical and scientific assistance to enable 
developing countries to carry out their Convention obligations.

GUINEA highlighted problems with controlling illegal transboundary 
movement of pesticides and a lack of awareness of risks of 
exposure to dangerous pesticides.

The INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE OF FREE TRADE UNIONS stressed that 
technical and financial assistance is crucial for phasing-out POPs 
while ensuring a proper transition for affected workers. NAMIBIA 
highlighted a lack of financial resources and technical capacities 
to address POPs issues, especially in Africa, and the need for 
developing alternatives for DDT for disease vector control.

The UNITED NATIONS INSTITUTE FOR TRAINING AND RESEARCH outlined 
details of its activities on chemicals waste and environmental 
governance, especially training initiatives for NIPs. The WORLD 
BANK highlighted activities it has carried out to assist 
developing countries in implementing the Convention, including: 
promoting capacity building, especially in Africa; fostering 
developing countries’ participation in the SAICM process; and 
assisting developing countries in identifying and assessing gaps 
and needs for chemicals management. 

The INTERNATIONAL POPS ELIMINATION NETWORK said that a non-
compliance procedure should recognize the linkage between 
compliance and availability of financial resources. The US called 
for a transparent, science-based risk assessment process for 
adding chemicals to the list of POPs.

The WHO reported on a study monitoring POPs levels in human milk, 
and offered to share information and experiences in monitoring 
implementation of the Convention. The UNITED NATIONS INDUSTRIAL 
DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION reported on work with the private sector 
on the introduction of best available techniques and best 
environmental practices to eliminate and reduce the use of POPs. 
The UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME stated that the 
sustainability of results relies on synergies and harmonization of 
efforts at the national and global levels. 

NON-COMPLIANCE

COP-2 President Kiddle introduced the agenda item on non-
compliance (UNEP/POPS/COP.2/27). OEWG NC Chair Anne Daniel 
(Canada) summarized the major issues of the OEWG NC, including: 
establishment of the non-compliance committee and the basis for 
selection of members; trigger mechanisms; non-compliance measures; 
and the nature and principles of the non-compliance procedures. 
The plenary then took up discussion on when to reconvene the OEWG 
NC. AUSTRALIA suggested an intersessional meeting. ETHIOPIA, the 
EU and NORWAY emphasized the necessity of a non-compliance 
mechanism to facilitate implementation of the Convention and, 
supported by SWITZERLAND but opposed by CHINA and INDIA, favored 
continuing the OEWG NC during COP-2. NORWAY and SWITZERLAND 
further noted the relevance of compliance to agenda items on 
technical and financial assistance. GRULAC said its members’ 
delegations were too small to attend a contact group on this 
subject during COP-2. INDIA further noted the budgetary 
implications of convening an intersessional OEWG NC. The EU noted 
the need for COP-2 to take a decision on any future work of the 
OEWG NC and JAPAN suggested COP-2 agree, at a minimum, to 
reconvene the OEWG NC at COP-3. President Kiddle noted the 
difficulty of accrediting participants for an additional OEWG at 
COP-2 and, as per Chile’s suggestion, parties agreed to forward 
discussion on reconvening OEWG NC to the Bureau.

FINANCIAL RESOURCES

Following the Secretariat’s introduction of the agenda item on 
financial resources, the GEF indicated a willingness to respond to 
questions from parties during contact group meetings and at two 
side events hosted by the GEF. NORWAY noted that the draft report 
of the independent evaluation of the GEF’s activities in support 
of the implementation of the Convention (UNEP/POPS/COP.2/INF/9) 
was positive, and that the GEF has demonstrated its ability and 
value as the financial mechanism of the Convention. The EU noted 
that the GEF should be confirmed as the principal financial 
mechanism on a permanent basis, and expressed disappointment with 
the lack of analytical methodology in the draft decision on the 
terms of reference for work on modalities on the needs assessment 
(UNEP/POPS/COP.2/18). EGYPT noted that even though the Convention 
states that all developing countries have a right to financial 
assistance and the Gulf States are developing countries, they do 
not receive support because they do not fall within the GEF 
standards. SWITZERLAND questioned whether the GEF RAF would 
benefit the functioning of the Convention, but stated a 
willingness to work with the GEF to find a positive solution. 
CHINA noted the need to eliminate POPs at their source and his 
hope that financial support would be available to assist China 
with this. Plenary discussion of this item will continue on 
Tuesday morning.

IN THE CORRIDORS 

On the opening day of COP-2, some delegates anticipated that 
issues related to regional centers, the financial mechanism and 
availability of funds for implementing the Convention, and 
technical assistance would emerge as major topics this week. 
Following a positive and productive COP-1, some delegates were 
optimistic that even if these issues are contentious, the COP-2 
agenda would prove comparatively light, leaving participants 
plenty of time to enjoy the Geneva spring.




This issue of the Earth Negotiations Bulletin © <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> is 
written and edited by Karen Alvarenga, Ph.D., Andrew Brooke, 
Alexis Conrad, Reem Hajjar, and Amber Moreen. The Digital Editor 
is Anders Gonçalves da Silva. The Editor is Pamela S. Chasek, 
Ph.D. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and the Director of IISD Reporting Services 
is Langston James “Kimo” Goree VI <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. The Sustaining 
Donors of the Bulletin are the Government of the United States of 
America (through the Department of State Bureau of Oceans and 
International Environmental and Scientific Affairs), the 
Government of Canada (through CIDA), the Swiss Agency for 
Environment, Forests and Landscape (SAEFL), the United Kingdom 
(through the Department for International Development - DFID), the 
Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Government of Germany 
(through the German Federal Ministry of Environment - BMU, and the 
German Federal Ministry of Development Cooperation - BMZ), the 
Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the European Commission 
(DG-ENV) and the Italian Ministry for the Environment and 
Territory General Directorate for Nature Protection. General 
Support for the Bulletin during 2006 is provided by the United 
Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the Government of Australia, 
the Austrian Federal Ministry for the Environment, the New Zealand 
Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, SWAN International, the 
Japanese Ministry of Environment (through the Institute for Global 
Environmental Strategies - IGES) and the Japanese Ministry of 
Economy, Trade and Industry (through the Global Industrial and 
Social Progress Research Institute - GISPRI). Funding for 
translation of the Earth Negotiations Bulletin into French has 
been provided by the International Organization of the 
Francophonie (IOF) and the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs. 
Funding for the translation of the Earth Negotiations Bulletin 
into Spanish has been provided by the Ministry of Environment of 
Spain. The opinions expressed in the Earth Negotiations Bulletin 
are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views 
of IISD or other donors. Excerpts from the Earth Negotiations 
Bulletin may be used in non-commercial publications with 
appropriate academic citation. For information on the Bulletin, 
including requests to provide reporting services, contact the 
Director of IISD Reporting Services at <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, +1-646-
536-7556 or 212 East 47th St. #21F, New York, NY 10017, USA. The 
ENB Team at POPs COP-2 can be contacted by e-mail at 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.

You are currently subscribed to enb as: [email protected] 
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Subscribe to IISD Reporting Services' free newsletters and lists for 
environment and sustainable development policy professionals at 
http://www.iisd.ca/email/subscribe.htm

Reply via email to