UN Ocean Conference Opens With Calls For Urgent Action To Safeguard The Health Of The Ocean
'I urge all countries to come forward with bold pledges,' United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres said in his opening remarks to the Conference this morning. 'We live in an age of turmoil, but the resolve I see here gives me hope,' he said. 'Hope that we can turn the tide.'
President Emmanuel Macron of France, also addressing the opening ceremony, said, 'we need to revitalize multilateralism behind the UN Secretary General,' adding that, 'the only way to meet that challenge, is to mobilize all actors, heads of state and government speaking here, but also scientists.'
President Rodrigo Chaves Robles of Costa Rica stated that 'this summit must be remembered as the time when the world understood that looking after the ocean is not simply an option. Rather, it is a moral, economic, and indeed we need minimum protection.'
Bringing together world leaders, scientists, private sector representatives, civil society, Indigenous Peoples and local communities, the high-level gathering underscores the ocean's vital role in regulating the climate, sustaining food security and livelihoods, and preserving biodiversity.
The ocean is under growing pressure from climate change and human activity, with record heat severely impacting marine life, and escalating threats from pollution, overfishing and biodiversity loss pushing marine ecosystems to the brink. The Conference is expected to adopt an intergovernmentally negotiated political declaration, which, along with a registry of voluntary commitments from across sectors, will be referred to as the Nice Ocean Action Plan – outcomes aimed at catalyzing urgent, inclusive, and science-based action to safeguard the ocean for present and future generations.
'The time for incremental progress is over. We need billions, not millions, in investment. We need binding commitments that survive political transitions and economic pressures,' United Nations Under-Secretary-General Li Junhua, the Conference Secretary-General said at the opening.
Key issues under discussion during the five-day conference include:
The Marine Biodiversity Treaty (BBNJ Agreement): Advancing ratifications of the Agreement under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biological Diversity of Areas beyond National Jurisdiction, which was adopted in 2023 and covers nearly two-thirds of the ocean. Entry into force of the Agreement is critical for the health and resilience of the ocean and can make vital contributions to achieving Sustainable Development Goal 14. A Special Treaty Event held later today, provides an opportunity for States to sign or ratify the Agreement.
Sustainable Fisheries: Ending illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing practices, while encouraging science-based, community-led approaches to rebuild fish stocks and minimize ecosystem damage.
Marine Protected Areas: Advancing progress on the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework target of protecting 30% of the ocean by 2030.
Decarbonizing Maritime Transport: Accelerating the transition to low- and zero-emission fuels and electrifying port infrastructure, recognizing early leadership from both national governments and the maritime industry.
Plastic Pollution: Generating renewed political will and momentum for tackling plastic pollution, with negotiations resuming in August 2025.
Financing: Unlocking new finance streams — including philanthropic capital, blended finance, and public-private partnerships — to support coastal resilience and sustainable blue economies.
Science and Governance: Underscoring evidence-based policymaking and the role of cutting-edge research, observation systems, and Indigenous knowledge in shaping effective ocean governance.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NZ Herald
2 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Recognition of Palestine - NZ weighs decision amid global pressure
Neither argument is strictly relevant to New Zealand's decision, which will be made by UN leaders' week in six weeks. The purpose of recognising Palestinian statehood is not to please Hamas or the Palestinian Authority or to infuriate Israel, although it will do all of those things. It is not to instantly magic up a happy ending to the misery in Gaza. It is to preserve the viability of a two-state solution, a state of Israel co-existing with a state of Palestine in the occupied West Bank and Gaza. Every country that has joined the latest international effort to recognise Palestinian statehood has cited that as the rationale. And the reason for that is that Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu is redoubling efforts to undermine and reject a two-state solution, including plans to take control of Gaza City, and a symbolic vote in the Knesset (Israeli parliament) last month calling for Israel to annex the West Bank. 'The Netanyahu government's rejection of a two-state solution is wrong – it's wrong morally and it's wrong strategically,' said British Foreign Secretary David Lammy. 'The two-state solution is in mortal danger. It is about to give way to perpetual confrontation. That is something France simply cannot resign itself to,' said France's Minister for Europe and Foreign Affairs, Jean-Noel Barrot. 'Prospects for a two-state solution have been steadily and gravely eroded,' said Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney. 'The Netanyahu Government is extinguishing the prospect of a two-state solution by rapidly expanding illegal settlements, threatening annexation in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, and explicitly opposing any Palestinian state,' said Albanese. As in New Zealand, the two-state solution has long been endorsed by most countries, and the United Nations, as the only fair long-term answer to two peoples with claims to the same land. Palestinians wait to receive hot meals with their pots and pans in Deir Al Balah, Gaza. Photo / Anadolu via Getty Images The alternative, one state of Israel, is one in which the Palestinian quest for a homeland would never be satisfied, one in which Palestinian rights would be subjugated and one in which conflict would be permanent. At times, Israel has supported a two-state solution. But Netanyahu, now in this third stint as Prime Minister, has actively undermined it by supporting Israeli settlements in the West Bank, in breach of international law. When New Zealand was preparing to co-sponsor UN Security Council resolution 2334 in 2016 – again in order to preserve a two-state solution - he described it as 'a declaration of war'. Netanyahu had already bullied Egypt out of co-sponsoring the resolution, but it passed, and Israel withdrew its ambassador from Wellington for five months. The United States, whose Secretary of State John Kerry had done a huge amount of work in the Middle East, abstained, allowing it to pass without dissent. The present has some echoes to back then. Today's rallying of the international community, once again to preserve the two-state solution, also serves to reinforce the position that this protracted conflict needs a political solution, not a military one. Since the Hamas attack on Israel in October 2023 and the ensuing crisis, New Zealand's position has remained non-committal about when it will recognise Palestine and to 'focus on the needs of the moment'. It is the classic bob-each-way position of a small state, trying to keep onside with Israel by not recognising Palestine, and keeping Palestinians onside by saying it's just a matter of when, not if. But given that Israel has thumbed its nose at the international community and its disproportionate, horrific actions in Gaza, the question New Zealand must ask is whether it is still valid to try to please everyone. With movement on the issue from a large number of like-minded friends, Australia, Britain, France, and Canada give a small country the cover it might not normally have over such a major shift. No shift is likely without conditions. They could be similar to those accepted by France and Canada, such as commitments by the Palestinian Authority to reform its governance, commit to elections in 2026, exclude any role for Hamas, and demilitarise any Palestinian state. If a condition by New Zealand were to wait for recognition until an actual state was in place, that would be tantamount to the status quo. Foreign Minister Winston Peters took an oral item to cabinet on Monday about recognition of a Palestinian state, as opposed to a cabinet paper. That is not to say that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade won't have plenty of advice on recognition, and that is being prepared. But it is also a reminder that no matter what the official advice is, it will be a political decision. Peters himself, a former student of Hebrew, has been a hawk on Israel. He was critical of New Zealand sponsoring resolution 2334 in 2016. That meant his strong criticism of Israel's actions in Gaza last year and this year has carried more weight. Planes drop aid packages by parachute over western Gaza City, Gaza. Photo / Anadolu via Getty Images It is acknowledged by most countries that the United States and President Trump, Israel's strongest ally, hold the key to ending the conflict and what happens afterwards. And because Peters is sympathetic to the Trump Administration and its America First ethos, he is open to accusations of delaying recognition in order to please the United States. That is why Peters, despite professing to loathe the common refrain that New Zealand has an independent foreign policy on the basis that it implies that others don't, on Monday insisted that 'New Zealand has an independent foreign policy'. An important factor in how New Zealand is approaching the issue of recognition is the unique makeup of the Government. It is the prerogative of the cabinet to make such a decision. However, given that the cabinet avoids votes (National with 14 out of 20 would win every time) and operates on party consensus, it effectively gives a veto to each of the three parties in Government, National, Act and NZ First. That could lead to an outrageous outcome if, for example, every party in Parliament except Act favoured recognition of Palestinian statehood or if every party except Act and NZ First supported recognition. The parties other than Act, led by Deputy Prime Minister David Seymour, and NZ First, led by Peters, represent 85% of the Parliament. Prime Minister Christopher Luxon says the recognition of Palestine is a complex issue and will take time to work through. Actually, it is not that hard. What will be hard is presenting the views of a disparate Government to a country that has largely lost sympathy with Israel because of its appalling treatment of Palestinians. One of the reasons Peters might find it difficult to support recognition of Palestinian statehood is that he has spent the past year saying why New Zealand shouldn't. But when the circumstances change, as they have done, it is not unreasonable for the response to change.
Scoop
4 hours ago
- Scoop
'Once A Poster Girl, Now An International Laggard': Pay Equity Appeal Goes To UN
A pay equity advocacy group is making an urgent appeal to the United Nations (UN) to investigate the government's changes to pay equity laws. The Pay Equity Coalition Aotearoa (PECA) has made a formal submission to the UN Commission on the Status of Women (CSW) to investigate what it calls a "historic and deliberate regression" of women's economic and political rights in New Zealand. In its appeal, PECA outlines how the Equal Pay Amendment Act has dismantled the country's pay equity system, cancelling 33 live claims covering more than 180,000 women, many of whom are low-paid essential workers in care, health, education, and public services. The group's Dame Judy McGregor told Nine to Noon it had informed Prime Minister Christopher Luxon of the request about a fortnight ago, which had been done "in a spirit of desperation". "It's an unprecedented step," she said. After pleas to the government to review and potentially repeal the legislation, it felt dialogue between the independent CSW and the government would be useful, Dame Judy said. "Perhaps a country visit in which a committee member can hear the stories and witness personally the anger and despair… thousands of women, many of whom are Māori and Pasifika migrant women workers who really now are condemned to decades and, in some cases, a lifetime of poverty wages." The submission stated $12.8b previously set aside to address pay equity claims had been diverted by the government for other budgetary purposes. The group believed the legislation breached Article 11 of the UN's Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), which guaranteed women the right to equal pay for work of equal value, as well as Article 2(3)(a) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which ensured access to effective legal remedies. Dame Judy bemoaned New Zealand's reputational slide on gender equity issues. "I think New Zealand has gone from being a poster girl for gender equality now to probably an international laggard," she said. PECA alerted Luxon of the submission about a fortnight ago "as a courtesy". "Given women weren't given that courtesy in relation to pay equity, we felt at least the government should," Dame Judy said. Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters and Women's Minister Nicola Grigg had also been alerted. No response had been received from the prime minister's office, other than receipt of the correspondence. The group was also considering filing a complaint to the UN's Optional Protocol to the CEDAW. Union backs move In a statement, the New Zealand Council of Trade Unions (NZCTU) said it backed PECA's appeal. Secretary Melissa Ansell-Bridges said cancelling pay equity for more than 180,000 working women was a "flagrant attack on their economic and political rights". "PECA are right to call for action from the United Nations to ensure that Aotearoa New Zealand lives up to its reputation on the world stage. "Overnight our world-leading system was gutted without consultation or normal checks and balances. What remained in its place is a series of roadblocks, thresholds and obstacles masquerading as pay equity." NZCTU said New Zealand was once proud to be world leaders for making progress on ensuring women were paid what they were worth. "It is shameful that our government has such low regard for women's rights," Ansell-Bridges said. "This government refuses to listen. We must use every forum to pressure them to restore pay equity claims. In June I raised pay equity at the International Labour Organization conference, and support taking the fight to the UN." Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety Brooke van Velden earlier this week said the pay equity changes were made to ensure genuine instances of pay inequity are identified and resolved. "As a government, we want to be sure that the pay equity process is robust, workable and sustainable and getting the settings right for claims that demonstrate genuine sex-based discrimination," van Velden said. "Equal pay is here to stay. Pay equity remains open as a process and the law is more robust." When the changes were rolled out earlier this year, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon said claims the government was "cutting pay for women" were incorrect. "Equal pay remains, no change. Pay parity remains, no change. Collective bargaining remains, no change. Settlements that have already happened under pay equity, no change." RNZ has sought comment from Peters, Griggs and Luxon.
RNZ News
4 hours ago
- RNZ News
Is the UN still fit for purpose?
conflict war 31 minutes ago Our conversation with Auckland University's Dr Maria Armoudian about what recognising Palestine as state means, really resonated with a lot of you. It got us thinking about the United Nations, and its role in 2025. The United Nations was created in 1945, after the end of World War 2, when leaders from 50 countries gathered in San Francisco to agree upon an international treaty to enshrine the equal rights of all people and maintain peace .. Fast forward to today, is it remaining true to the resulting treaty, its founding document, the UN Charter? The Right Honourable Helen Clark served as an administrator of the United Nations Development Programme from 2009 to 2017 and has been in Egypt visiting the Gaza border. She spoke to Jesse.
