UNEP Press conference: Plastic Pollution (INC-5.2)- 05 August 2025

45:56

MP4

2.9 GB

05-08-2025

Press Conferences , Edited News , Images | UNEP

UNEP Press conference: Plastic Pollution (INC-5.2)- 05 August 2025

ENG FRA

Shotlist Story

STORY: Widespread starvation in Gaza – IPC, UN Women

TRT: 3’10”

SOURCE: UNTV CH

RESTRICTIONS: NONE

LANGUAGE: ENGLISH/ NATS

ASPECT RATIO: 16:9

DATELINE: 05 AUGUST 2025 GENEVA, SWITZERLAND

Speakers:

Inger Andersen, Executive Director, United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)
Katrin Schneeberger, Director of the Federal Office for the Environment (FOEN), Switzerland

SHOTLIST

Exterior wide shot: Palais des Nations, flag alley.
Wide, Press room podium and journalists, TV screens.
SOUNDBITE (English) – Inger Andersen, Executive Director, United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP): “We can't forget that the world wants and indeed needs a plastic conventional treaty because the crisis is getting out of hand and people are frankly outraged; people who are living with that pollution. We know that plastic is in our nature, in our oceans, and yes, even in our bodies.”
Wide, podium speakers.
SOUNDBITE (English) – Katrin Schneeberger, Director of the Federal Office for the Environment (FOEN), Switzerland: “Today, we stand at a critical crossroads. Plastic waste is choking our lakes, harming wildlife and threatening human health. This is more than just an environmental issue, it is a global challenge that demands urgent and collective action.”
Wide, journalists, participants, TV screens showing speaker.
SOUNDBITE (English) – Katrin Schneeberger, Director of the Federal Office for the Environment (FOEN), Switzerland: “Contrary to some media reports, this is no call for a production cap. Clarifying this in informal meetings was an important message to producing countries. Reaching a shared understanding that measures are needed on both the production and consumption sides can help unlock the negotiations.”
Wide, journalists, participants, TV screens showing speaker
SOUNDBITE (English) – Inger Andersen, Executive Director, United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP): “What is sure is that no one wants to live with the plastic pollution. No one wants it in the soils, in the drinking water, let alone in our oceans and in our bodies.”
Wide, Press room journalists, participants, TV screens showing speaker, control booths.
SOUNDBITE (English) – Inger Andersen, Executive Director, United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP): “I had the privilege but also the heavy duty of visiting Pakistan right after the floods; these dreadful, dreadful, unbelievably catastrophic floods. And debris and plastic was a big part of the problem and so this is why we're here, to find a solution while not leaving anyone behind and while ensuring that the economic wheels would keep turning.”
Wide, journalists, photographers, participants.
SOUNDBITE (English) – Inger Andersen, Executive Director, United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP): “Some will have to deal with reduction, others will have to deal with mechanical recycling and others will deal with alternatives. Let's see how we can get to this through the negotiations. I think there's a lot of good faith in the working group right now.”
Medium-wide, TV video journalists, journalists, control booths.
SOUNDBITE (English) – Inger Andersen, Executive Director, United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP): “It begins with having global rules. That's really it. And that's what this treaty will enable; when there are global rules around how these things are managed, investors can see that they have predictability because they know that there's a market for what they collect and then there will be investments. Because all of a sudden, that thing that today's waste, tomorrow will have value.”
Medium-wide, journalists.
Medium, journalists.
Medium, photographer.
Medium-wide, journalists, participants.

The world wants a treaty to curb growing plastic pollution, insists UN agency chief

Negotiations got under way at UN Geneva on Tuesday to agree on a legally binding treaty to curb plastic pollution, with delegates from nearly 180 countries attending.

“The world wants and indeed needs a plastic conventional treaty because the crisis is getting out of hand and people are frankly outraged,” said Inger Andersen, UNEP Executive Director of the UN Environment Programme (UNEP), the UN agency leading the talks. “We know that plastic is in our nature, in our oceans, and yes, even in our bodies…What is sure is that no one wants to live with the plastic pollution.”

Unless an international accord is inked, plastic production and waste is projected to triple by 2060, causing significant damage – including to our health - according to UNEP.

Switzerland’s top environment official Katrin Schneeberger echoed the call for a legally binding treaty, insisting that plastic waste “is choking our lakes, harming wildlife and threatening human health. This is more than just an environmental issue, it is a global challenge that demands urgent and collective action.”

Speaking to journalists on the sidelines of the treaty negotiations, Ms. Schneeberger underscored that there was “no call for a production cap” by producing countries. “Reaching a shared understanding that measures are needed on both the production and consumption sides can help unlock the negotiations,” she said in her capacity as Director of the Swiss Federal Office for the Environment.

Supporters of a deal have compared it to the Paris Climate Accord in terms of its significance. They have also pointed to the pressure allegedly being brought to bear against a deal by petrostates, whose crude oil and natural gas provide the building blocks of plastics.

“We will not recycle our way out of the plastic pollution crisis: we need a systemic transformation to achieve the transition to a circular economy,” UNEP Executive Director Inger Andersen has insisted in previous comments on the need for global regulations on plastics.

With 10 days of talks scheduled on the treaty at the UN in Geneva, supporters of an accord hope that the deal will cover the full life cycle of plastics, from design to production and disposal.

The treaty should “promote plastic circularity and prevent leakage of plastics in the environment”, according to the text now guiding negotiations led by the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC).

At 22 pages, the INC document contains 32 draft articles which will be discussed line by line. The text is designed to shape the future instrument and serves as a starting point for negotiations by countries meeting in Geneva.

“Some [countries] will have to deal with reduction, others will have to deal with mechanical recycling and others will deal with alternatives,” Ms. Andersen said. “Let’s see how we can get to this through the negotiations. I think there's a lot of good faith in the working group right now.”

The UNEP-led talks follow a decision in 2022 by Member States to meet and develop an international legally binding instrument to end the plastic pollution crisis, including in the marine environment, within two years.

The scale of the problem is massive, with straws, cups and stirrers, carrier bags and cosmetics containing microbeads just a few of the single-use products ending up in our oceans and landfill sites.

In comments to journalists, Ms. Andersen recalled touring Pakistan after deadly flooding killed more than 1,000 people in 2022 and seeing that debris and plastic were “a big part of the problem and so this is why we’re here, to find a solution while not leaving anyone behind and while ensuring that the economic wheels would keep turning”.

Campaigners gathering on the sidelines of the negotiations expressed their hopes for as ambitious a treaty as possible.

They included Shellan Saling, from California, who’s the interim chair of the Youth Plastic Action Network (YPAN). “Plastic affects everything from climate change to health to fertility to even birth defects; it affects physical disabilities, as well as invisible disabilities,” she told UN News. “People don't realize how much it actually impacts, and you know every single day we are impacted by plastic and without production cuts, it could get significantly worse.”

Any treaty inked in Geneva will have to be sufficiently robust to accommodate the needs of all countries of the world whose approach differs regarding plastic design, production, waste and recycling. It will also have to stand the test of time, Ms. Andersen said.

“It begins with having global rules, that's really it. And that's what this treaty will enable; when there are global rules around how these things are managed, investors can see that they have predictability because they know that there's a market for what they collect and then there will be investments. Because all of a sudden, that thing that today's waste, tomorrow will have value.”

According to the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee on Plastic Pollution, in 2024 alone, humanity was expected to consume more than 500 million tonnes of plastic. Of this, 399 million tonnes will become waste.

ends

Teleprompter

All right.

Good afternoon to media colleagues here and to everyone watching online.

Welcome to this media briefing on the opening day of the resumed fifth session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee, Inc 5.2 to develop an international legally binding instrument on plastic pollution.

My name is Keisha Rubikaya, Head of News and Media for UNIP.

I'll be moderating this short briefing.

So this afternoon, we'll hear some remarks from our panel, who will then take a few questions.

And on our panel today, we have Miss Enya Anderson, who is the Executive Director of the UN Environment Programme.

We have Ambassador Louis Vaas Valdivieso, who is the Chair of the Inc.

We have Miss Ketrin Sheenberger, who is the Director of Switzerland's Federal Office for the Environment.

And we have Miss Jyoti Mather Philip, who is the Executive Secretary of the Inc.

Now before we get to our speakers, I'll go over a couple of housekeeping rules.

We have about 40 minutes or so available, and we hope to use more than half of that time for questions.

The session is being live streamed by UN Web TV Now for media with questions once we move to the Q and A portion, when I call on you before you ask your question, please state your name and media outlets that you represent.

If you are not a member of the media, you're free to observe the press briefing, but questions should be limited to journalists, please.

Now, our first speaker this afternoon is missing Anderson, Executive Director of UNEP.

Over to you.

Thank you very much, and good afternoon to members of the press.

As I said this morning, we have arrived here after three, 3 1/2 years of hard work, and we really do see a possible pathway to the treaty.

Yeah, it's complicated.

Yes, the pathway may be narrow, but yes, it absolutely exists.

And so we've stood at the crossroads before in multilateral settings, and we know very well what now needs to happen.

We cannot let this opportunity bypass us and we have a very critical role road ahead now in the coming 10 days for Member States who are negotiating as members of this committee to land the treaty text with a strong engagement and listening closely to observers who wish to inform of their positions.

I think the heads of delegation, which was arranged under our very able chair and I have to give big credit to the chair for getting us this far.

The heads of delegations meeting which took place in in Nairobi just a few weeks back, everyone said clearly we are going to Geneva with the intention to secure this treaty.

And that's something that we very much took on board.

Now, we, of course, understand that nothing is guaranteed, and we also understand very much that the ball is very much firmly in their court.

Let me also give a big shout out of thanks to Catherine.

Catherine Sneeberger, who's a state secretary and runs all things environmental in this country under the Presidency, and the seven ministers who run the beautiful Switzerland.

Let me say that we are very, very grateful, Madam, for your leadership and for the generous hospitality of allowing us to come here and for, yes, the financial support that you have provided.

Now, back to plastics.

We can't forget that the world wants and indeed needs a plastic conventional treaty because the crisis is getting out of hand and people are frankly outraged, people who are living with that pollution.

We know that plastic is in our nature, in our oceans and yes, even in our bodies.

And so as today we're producing around 430 million tonnes annually and as a large proportion of that ends up untreated and unmanaged in the open environment, it is clear that if we continue as we are under business as usual scenario, plastic production is set to triple and we have to make a gear change.

That is why we are here and that is why public pressure to get this thing done is so high.

But let's be very clear, getting the treaty is not the final step.

That is the first step, and so it is not the end point.

Resolution 514 and UNIA in 2022 paved the way.

And as the executive director of UNIP, it's our job inside the United Nations to sort of create that big tent where all member states can fit.

That's multilateralism at its finest.

And that includes, of course, stakeholders who are helping to secure this treaty.

But negotiations are never easy, but they are doable even when multilateralism maybe in WAVY, WAVY oceans.

We saw just a month ago the gaveling of this Intergovernmental Science Policy Panel on Chemicals, Waste and Pollution.

That is a triplet.

That will be a triplet to IPCC Science Policy Panel on Climate and IPPES science policy panel on biodiversity.

That was gabbled in the midst of complexity at the political level.

Nevertheless, multilateralism delivered.

And just a a few months back, the pandemic treaty was gabbled here in this beautiful city as well.

So since Busan, there's been a lot of diplomacy.

We have seen the the chair engage extensively.

We've seen regional consultations, heads of delegation meeting and of course informal ministerials.

As we've done in at the sidelines of Cops.

We also did it at the sidelines of the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm COP and indeed on the sidelines of the Nice Ocean meeting.

And I think the Chair really appreciate and admire that you constantly created spaces for those negotiations and informal exchanges.

The agenda is very clear.

This is the longest Inc yet with 10 days, but the opening plenary and Congrats because you just got it through and we didn't get stuck on procedure.

This is very important.

Delegations are now hard at work.

Work can be done straight away and the contact groups will be starting right after lunch and so the the draft text is really now in the ownership of the contact groups and they will do the hard work.

It is clear there's still some areas where we will need to see convergence.

That's the job of the contact groups and we hope very much that the final treaty text will be strong, but also that will include clear hooks for what the future will bring.

A treaty has to be for the ages, not not for the moment.

We UNF, we are sitting with treaties that are 3040 years old and they have to have the robustness but also the language that enables them to evolve.

On the ministerial, we're expecting something like 25 ministers and and high level representatives Wednesday and Thursday next week.

This is an informal session that is outside the formal negotiations and how ministers engage, it's obviously up to them how they engage in the in the negotiations.

Finally, just to conclude, yes, can we get this done?

Yes, it is truly possible we can find it.

Now is the time.

We all know where the positions are, and I really want to say that delegations have come here with the intent of making it happen.

And so thank you very much for that.

And now I look forward to your questions after the other speakers.

Thank you, thank you, Miss Anderson.

Our next speaker is Ambassador Luis Valles Valdevieso.

Over to you, Chair.

Thank you very much and good afternoon to you all.

It is so nice to see you here, dear members from the media.

First of all, I would like to express my gratitude to the Government of Switzerland for welcoming us here in this scenic Geneva beautiful city.

I'm pleased to speak with you today at the opening of this resume session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee on Plastic Pollution.

Allow me to begin by sincerely thanking, thanking you all that we know that there are more than 300 members of media from over 200 outlets who are here in Inc 5.2.

So thank you very much for that big presence of you here in Inc 5.2.

Your ongoing presence and coverage truly make a difference.

You are not just documenting the historic process, but you are also breaching between this negotiation rooms and a world that closely follows our work, filled with high hopes and Great Expectations.

As negotiations have advanced, the awareness of this process has grown significantly.

That should not surprise us.

The goal we are working toward, the creation of a legally binding international instrument on plastic pollution, is one of the most urgent environmental priorities of our time.

As such, it has attract increasing attention from the public, not to mention from policymakers, scientists, communities, youth and civil society organisations worldwide.

We are here today to fulfil an international mandate.

August 14 is not just a deadline for our work, it is a date by which we must deliver.

The war depends on us to finalise an agreement that is effective and inclusive, one that sets clear and credible rules to end plastic pollution and what that can enable overtime.

Rooted in science and fairness, this resolution session provides a unique and a historic opportunity for the international community to bridge differences and find common grounds.

It is not just a test of our diplomacy.

It is a test of our collective responsibility to protect the environment, safeguard human health, enable sustainable economies and stand in solidarity.

We those most affected by this crisis.

I sincerely thank Member States for their support of sorry of our organisational work, which has been carefully planned to meet the needs of the process at this critical stage.

I'm especially pleased that the opening plenary this morning finished in a very constructive spirit, enabling negotiations to begin without delay.

This sense of urgency and responsibility is exactly what this moment requires.

We now have a clear path ahead and we must work in together with determination, professionalism and mutual respect.

I firmly believe that with the continued support and cooperation from all delegations, the Committee can complete this work by the end of the resume session here in Geneva.

And let us be clear, the success of these sessions will be a success not just of governments, but of the entire global community.

As you know, we are not beginning from zero.

We are building on five sessions of hard work, engagement, and convergence.

The Church texts and the structure approach to the negotiations provide us with that essential tools to move steadily forward, generating the broadest possible alignment.

Now it is up to all of us, especially the Member States whose delegations are involving in these negotiations, to turn these tools into concrete results.

Distinguished members of the press, thank you again for joining us in this journey.

[Other language spoken]

You promote transparency and share knowledge about the process, helping to keep the world informed and engage.

As we approach this opportunity.

I trust that governments are currently recognising not only the urgency but also the unique opportunity that negotiation, that negotiating an international legally binding instrument in Geneva, represents an effective agreement that shapes history through collective actions and measurable results.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Excellency.

And next, from our gracious host country, Miss Katrin Schneeberger, Director of the Swiss Federal Office for the Environment.

Over to you, dear media representatives.

It is a great pleasure for Switzerland to host these pivotal negotiations aimed at finalising A treaty to end plastic pollution.

Today, we stand at the critical crossroads.

Plastic waste is choking our legs, harming wildlife, and threatening human health.

This is more than just an environmental issue.

It is a global challenge that demands urgent and collective action.

Reaching a global agreement to end plastic pollution is essential.

Over the coming days, we have an opportunity to make a real difference by negotiating an effective plastics treaty and identifying comprehensive solutions and measures that address the full life cycle of plastic.

We are aware that much work lies ahead.

At the same time, we see a strong political will to find common ground.

[Other language spoken]

Contrary to some media reports, this is no call for a production cap.

Clarifying this in informal meetings was an important message to producing countries.

Reaching a shared understanding that measures are needed on both the production and consumption sites can help unlock the negotiations.

Another helpful in element will be will be better explain the economic opportunities of an effective treaty.

Well designed measures can enhance the circular economy, foster innovation and research, and stimulate investments, especially from the private sector, in alternative products and sustainable systems.

As a representative of Switzerland, it is an honour to welcome this final round of negotiations in Geneva.

We believe that the successful Inc 5.2 will be critical in mitigating the environmental, social and economic threats posed by plastic pollution.

It will also send a strong signal in support of multilateralism.

In this context, Geneva expertise and existing institutional infrastructure are highly relevant.

Geneva is a global hub for environmental governance, particularly in the field of pollution.

It is a city that embodies dialogue, Co operation and a deep commitment to multilateralism.

The paledenacion where we meet today stands as a symbol of that commitment, a place where governments and stakeholders come together to find common solutions.

The goal is clear, to end plastic pollution.

This is not merely an an ambitious aspiration, it is a necessity.

The time is to act now.

We will acknowledge that there is far too much plastic pollution in the world.

Let's not waste the opportunity to make meaningful and effective progress.

Thank you very much for your attention.

Thank you very much, Director.

And just before Q&A, we will now hear from the Executive Secretary of the Inc Secretariat, Miss Jyoti.

Mother Philip.

[Other language spoken]

And if you allow me, all courtesies observed to give you more time for Q&A.

I just want to give you some logistical updates and some background on how you can follow the meeting.

So this is our largest session yet.

We have 3700 participants registered and able to participate in this session.

We have more than 1800 participants that have from Member States that have already joined us here in person.

We have 184 Member States that have registered to attend an over 619 observer organisation.

The live daily schedule is available on the Inc website and this also includes when plenary sessions will will take place.

This is also available through a mobile app which is called the Plastics Pollution Negotiations app if you want to download that.

We this session will also include a legal drafting group who will work to refine the text legally before it's adopted on 14th, hopefully on 14th of August.

We also have all our plenary sessions are live streamed and interpreted in all six UN languages.

Documentation will be continuously updated, ensuring that everyone, stakeholders worldwide can follow the developments in real time.

And I think that's all I have I can add right now.

[Other language spoken]

Thank you so much, Madam Executive Secretary.

So we'll move to the Q&A session now.

Please raise your hand and ask your question.

Don't forget to state your name and outlet.

We'll go here first.

Laurence Rose, Swiss News Agency.

Thanks for that press conference.

Question for Inger Henderson and and Catherine Schneeberger, because you both stressed on that full life cycle which is the target.

And you mentioned, Madam, that the gap since Busan has been reduced with the producing countries, there won't be any, any production cap.

But how do you see that last mile that still has to be run towards these producing countries and the bunch, bunch of countries which were opposing the treaty in Busan?

[Other language spoken]

Miss Anderson, you'd like to start.

Thank you very much.

I think where I'd like to start is at the UNIR resolution itself because it was very, very clear.

And the UNIR resolution speaks to life cycle approach as well as to promote sustainable production and consumption of plastics.

And therein lies and then it says.

Through amongst other things, product design, environmentally sound but waste management, including resource efficiency and circular economy approaches.

I'm sure that you've read this and are well aware the magic lies within these words and it is for Member States to look at those words and look at therefore what does national circumstances and capability look like?

Cos that's also in the, in the treaty text.

What is life cycle approach?

Certainly the intent is very much from beginning to end of the life cycle and not part part of it.

And certainly sustainable production and consumption of plastics.

Therein lies the issues and I think it would be and and that's exactly what is going on.

[Other language spoken]

I believe at any rate one of the contact groups are looking at that.

There will be, there are still clear views on this from a number of Member States, but there's also an understanding that if we take the issue of sustainable consumption and production of plastics into into the definitionals and therefore how we will measure, monitor and implement this, that is where the magic key lies.

And that isn't what is in negotiations right now.

I think on and on the issue of life cycle approach, I think again, there's a broader understanding what that means.

It means that from the beginning to the end, but different approaches by different member states.

As you may know, I live in Kenya and Kenya doesn't have high end recycling as a, as a, as an example, and so would not be able to do, for example, what is being done in Switzerland as easily as.

And so one would have to take that life cycle approach somewhat differently.

Some will have to deal with reduction, others will have to deal with mechanical recycling and others will deal with alternatives.

Let's see how we can get to this through the negotiations.

I think there's a lot of good faith in the working group right now in the contact group and I'm confident that they will reach there.

Miss Schneeberger, well, thank you.

In your, I mean you have mentioned it correctly.

I guess to find a solution in the negotiations.

It was really important to clarify that point.

As I've mentioned before that we are not talking about a production cap in order to limit the production, but that we understand that it's the full life cycle from the production to the consumption.

And in this sense, it's not neither production or consumption, but it's both.

Both has to go hands in hands.

[Other language spoken]

Thank you very much.

Steve Dolegan from Plastics News, apologies, sorry, apologies.

So Steve Tolegan with Plastics News, I want to follow up on the production cap question to Minister Schneeberger and the other panellists.

[Other language spoken]

Are you saying that it became obvious at the heads of delegation meetings that if the treaty was going to have any chance of passing, you had to say this?

There could not be a specific production cap in the treaty.

Obviously there were calls in the observer session for the cap, and there's a lot of groups that oppose the cap, countries that oppose the countries are in favour.

So was it clear?

I mean, can you expand on those discussions when it became clear that you had to, you couldn't have a cap in the treaty?

I mean, you refer specifically to the heads of delegation meeting.

I believe that Madam Sneeberger was not there.

So it's not fair to ask her to respond to that.

But just to say that there are a variety of views.

And I wouldn't say that this issue has been resolved.

And there's still some member states that look at at at production through a different lens.

However, there has been a lot of very helpful conversations and we'll see how they'd end up defining sustainable consumption and production and full life cycle.

[Other language spoken]

Thank you very much over here, please.

Thank you, Laura Messi for French media context, can you, you talked a bit about what happened between Buzanne and Geneva.

You talked about diplomacy and from also informal settings.

Can you tell us a bit more exactly what happened then?

Have you seen lines moving, position shift shifting that would allow for a deal here?

Why should it work here, although it didn't work in Busan?

[Other language spoken]

Thank you very much.

[Other language spoken]

And before I talk about the our intersessional.

Between Busan and Geneva, I think it's also important to mention a bit of what happened before Busan.

Before Busan.

I present as Chair of the of the process of the ANC non papers iteration documents that they were evolving according to the negotiations that we had, yes, in the previous Inc meetings, but also in that intersessional.

[Other language spoken]

I present three non papers during the intersessional.

[Other language spoken]

And then during our negotiations in ISC 5.1, I also present and we work with two a chair, a chair's text that were presented to the members also for for negotiations in Busan in our formal session.

Well, they are just do the chair's text, but they take what is happening in the in the negotiation rooms, what has happened in the previous INCS and what it has happened also in the intersessional periods that we keep working.

And I think very much Member states because we do work and negotiate formally in the Incs.

But a lot of things happens.

And that's why I say this is very important your question because a lot of things happen in the intersessional.

In formal.

Between each session and between Busan and Geneva, right after Busan, I encourage members to own the text, to have the ownership of that text.

And it has happened so and it has happened very well.

Also meetings, consultations among member states, among regional groups are among also a different groups of countries.

And also what I have encouraged and it has happened is that it's good that members with the same or similar position gets together also to bring suggestions to bring proposals.

But even more important that members with different position gets together and also work in those proposals.

And that has happened.

That has happened.

As our executive director mentioned, we had an informal meeting in in Nairobi, informal in person meeting because we had also a virtual one.

But the formal in person meeting where we could see how this progress has been done here intersessional.

Where we can, we could see countries and group of countries presenting proposals to breach positions.

And that has been also our request.

And we have mentioned also this morning in our opening well the the resume plenary session that new proposals should go in that light to breach positions, to find common grounds to identify landing source that we will use and we must use here in in Geneva.

It was also important the work between these in person meeting in Nairobi and now then IE to release also the scenario note of our organisational work after many consultations with regions and with countries and also with the heads of delegations on the organisational work on this, on this session.

That was presented officially or formally this morning in the plenary meeting.

And it has been accepted.

And I'm really happy to see that the meeting this morning went in that constructive way, went, you know, with the sense of that urgency to move to to negotiations.

Negotiations are going on.

We will see in the contact groups we have present and schedule also for the work of those contact groups.

We will be evaluating day by day that work.

But that has been the work between Busan and and Geneva, a lot of work, a lot of work, a lot of pressure too that good pressure to to bring those proposals.

Now we have to deal here in Geneva formally with those proposals formally also with that negotiation that I can see it's going in this constructive spirit that will help us to get a successful Inc 5.2.

[Other language spoken]

Over there in the back of the white shirt.

[Other language spoken]

My question is please, please identify yourself, Bernard, in your news outlet.

[Other language spoken]

My name is Bernardo Gambo for the Daily Nation.

And my question is, as you know that a lot is resting on the Inc 5.2 and in the spirit of the chair that nothing is agreed until everything is agreed.

So how can we build on this momentum to ensure that ambitions translate into tangible outcomes and the and that key provisions are not diluted?

[Other language spoken]

Yes, thank you very much for the question.

And yes, I completely agree that we have a momentum that we need to keep.

We have seen that momentum also in this intersessional.

We saw it in in our in person informal meeting of heads of delegation in Nairobi and we have kept that momentum and we have brought that momentum and we could see that this morning also in the primary session, delegations, delegates eager to to start negotiating and going to the contact groups negotiate.

We saw that, we saw that flexibility also this this day, this morning also the acceptance of that organisation of work to start working.

Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed is one of the principles that we deal with in the negotiations in every process that we have a or we negotiate as member States and it is so and and we need to keep that principle because in the contact groups they will be negotiating, they will be negotiating the different provisions.

Member states will be negotiating different articles that we have distributed in the four contact groups.

The Co chairs has clear instructions of how to deal also with the different articles that has different level of convergence.

And that's important also to to have into in, in, in, in mind because without different level of convergence, we hope that we can start sending in an early stage also provisions that are agreed or you know, that it has been negotiated and agreed by the members of the contact group.

We could start sending them to the legal drafting group through the plenary and that's why it comes this principle that you mentioned because those provision that yes, they have agreed on that text, they got to the legal drafting group to put them in a legal manner and they come back to the committee.

And then is when the committee will decide to agreed on those texts that has been already sent and come back from the legal drafting group.

So, and then the committee will decide once it's back those provisions in the plenary, we and I, I'm confident that we will do this in, in, in the 14th of August, by the end of this session, we will have a whole clean text that will be agreed by the by the members in plenary, the whole text.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Chair, over here.

[Other language spoken]

My name is Christiana with the German Press Agency.

I would like to know, are you making preparations for a vote at the end of this session?

Are there people working on rules and procedures or would you say it's out of the question and this will be either a consensus deal or no deal at all?

[Other language spoken]

I mean, obviously this is a purview of the chair, so let's be very clear.

But I think that on multiple occasions, Member States have spoken of the importance of finding mutually agreeable solutions and to reach consensus, as you just heard from the from the Chair.

And I think the Chair has also consistently said that he wants to have this negotiation in the spirit of consensus, in the spirit of inclusive multilateralism.

Now the draft Rules of Procedure, as we heard the Chair mentioning this morning continue to be provisionally applicable and this is a member State driven process and Member States are participating here as members in these negotiations.

So ultimately Member States and therefore the members in the process will determine how they will deliver on the mandate.

But I think the Chair has been very, very clear and I'll hand it over to him to again emphasise his pathway.

No, thank you for the question.

But it's not too much to add after our executive director has has explained we have work in this constructive spirit in in the previous Incs in Inc 4IN Ottawa, when we start actually with the with the negotiations in the contact groups negotiating text, you know, we could see that spiritual and we deal with that in in Ottawa too, in Busan the same.

And I have been saying and I will say I will say it again, this constructive spirit, cooperative spirit among members.

It has been there and I can see very clear here to take decisions by consensus that will also strength this, this this agreement make it an international while like our mandate is to to work with it.

So I see that and I can and see that we can't keep working in the same manner here in Geneva.

[Other language spoken]

Thank you gentlemen over here.

Thank you for the opportunity.

This is a fan.

So those from Don News Pakistan, it's just a concern that our in almost entire, you know, our economy relies on plastic like, you know, from children toys to polythene bags and everything.

So if this treaty is, I mean, done, so how these countries like Pakistan and South Asian countries would tackle to those who are doing this, I mean, they would be badly affected.

Thank you very much.

Of course, they're also badly affected today by the plastic in the open environment.

I had the privilege but also the heavy duty of visiting Pakistan right after the floods, these dreadful, dreadful, unbelievably catastrophic floods.

And debris and plastic was a big part of of the problem.

And so This is why we're here, to find a solution while not leaving anyone behind and while ensuring that the economic wheels will keep turning, maybe on newer different solutions.

But certainly what is sure is that no one wants to live with the plastic pollution.

No one wants it in the soils, in the drinking water or let alone in our oceans and in our bodies.

So finding a solution, that's what all Member states have come together on.

Well, recognising that this will impact, yes, environment, economy, but also people at large.

That's why these negotiations are happening.

That's why it's complex.

But that's also why a country like Pakistan is participating in good faith in these negotiations, trying to be part of the solution.

That's the best I can say.

[Other language spoken]

John Halpern Erette News, I'm wondering following up on the just repeat the news outlet.

[Other language spoken]

Sorry, are you hoping for an outcome like with the pandemic treaty that depended on abstentions and deferral on key questions to reach consensus?

And before you get there, how are you working to bridge the gap between countries that call for a dedicated stand alone financial mechanism to support treaty implementation and between those that prefer to use existing funds?

And without a dedicated financial fund to support implementation, do you think the treaty goals can be achieved in the countries that need it most?

[Other language spoken]

Thank you very much.

A very important question too.

Well, what I'm expecting is an effective treaty, an effective treaty that will fulfilled and will deliver on the mandate of Resolution 514 that we are we are working for that.

We are negotiating to, to deliver on that mandate and to have this effective treaty that will give us credible rules to combat and to end plastic pollution.

A treaty that will be alive on time to a treaty that will be effective now.

Well, the ones that enters into force and also in the decades to come, in the years to come and it has to you know, we will enrich the the the future this this instrument with sign with science, with if more data, etcetera.

So I am I envisage A treaty that way, that effective one with credible rules to end plastic pollution and that includes a financial mechanism because yeah, different provisions, different with different positions.

We we are seeing and we are seeing how we are negotiating the the different articles.

But when we come also to our financial mechanism is something that we must have it of course, in the in the text, in the in the future instrument.

And it should be a need must be a mechanism that start working as soon as possible.

We need that you have say it for the implementation because it has to be an effective text.

Yes, that will give give us credible rules, yes, but it has to be also effective implementation of that text and that goes along with the financial mechanism.

Very important question and is a is an article that yeah, it's it it it it might require a bit more time for for discussions, negotiations and agreement, but there's an article that must have this future text.

[Other language spoken]

See somebody at the back.

Thank you Jeremy for the French public radio.

A number of points of procedures were raised this morning by different delegations.

I was wondering, could we see that as a way to delay the negotiations to make sure that we don't get an agreement at the end of next week?

I thought that very few procedural issues was raised.

It was essentially one.

Can we shuffle the cards on the contact group because it will be more convenient for smaller delegations?

And then there was a little bit of a discussion.

Well, this delegation is not entirely prepared for the OK, but we're willing to yield that delegation.

[Other language spoken]

Yes, but we will yield.

We'll just consider for two minutes.

It was exceptionally light and very well handled.

Now, in the beginning and the earlier sessions of the Inc, there was a lot of procedural issues on the table because a member states were not exactly clear what would be the process and the rules of the game and so on.

But I thought that this was exceptionally light on procedural issues.

Could we see that?

I don't have a crystal ball, but I think that everybody has come here with the intention to actually get down into the contact groups and to negotiate the treaty.

I don't know if you would agree, Chair, I completely agree with you.

And well, this morning also I saw the need also of clarity in some aspects and that we presented clarity and the need also to see in the contact groups and more effective way to work.

When we were talking about Article 1 and three working in parallel, I could see that more than a procedural matter that a better way to work and be more effective and efficient in our negotiations.

And that's what we have done.

And we will be talking with the Euro in few minutes actually also to to with the secretariat to arrange that those work of the contact groups to be once again efficient and effective.

So that's what I saw this morning and also the need, yes, of clarity in one aspect that I think it was not a big issue.

Thank you very much.

[Other language spoken]

I think we have time for two more over there.

Helen, please introduce yourself.

[Other language spoken]

My name is Helen Shikanda from the Nation Media Group in Kenya.

[Other language spoken]

You mentioned that there are clear disparities in terms of how different countries handle plastic waste, giving an example of Kenya and Switzerland.

And we've seen so many reports showing that Africa is sort of like a dumping waste for plastic waste.

So I want to know, like beyond the treaty, how best can we ensure that there's equality in terms of ensuring all countries have clear ways of handling plastic waste and empowered to have things like material recovering sentence.

[Other language spoken]

Thank you very much, Helen.

It begins with having global rules.

That's really it.

And that's what this treaty will enable.

When there are global rules around how these things are managed, investors can see the the, they have predictability because they know that there is a market for what they collect.

And then there will be investments because all of a sudden that thing that today's waste tomorrow will have value.

And so that is why this treaty is so important because with global rules we'll be able to get on the recycling side this up and running.

There's more to the treaty than waste management, I hasten to add.

And I think we all know that very well, but that's very, very critical.

I will say though, on your statement that Africa is a dumping ground, very important that the Basel Convention in the plastic annex and was in agreed by the COP in January 2022, I want to say.

But please, we'll verify because the Basel Convention deals with illegal and transbound illegal transboundary waste across borders and a number of plastics were actually classified as such and cannot be transported across borders and therefore dumping cannot be done of those particular plastics that are mentioned.

So dumping is and under Rotterdam, of course, free plan informed consent has to be there.

Rotterdam convention, which is also a unipostal convention, which means that you have to say, yes, I'm willing to receive that thing.

So the opportunity to just dump is has shrunk and much of the plastic we are seeing today in any nation's waste is, is waste from that nation.

But that's not always because there is indeed trade, but I just wanted to make that point.

But let's get the treaty done with the global rules that should drive investments in infrastructure for waste management.

[Other language spoken]

Thank you very much.

So unfortunately, it has to be a hard stop.

A couple of our panellists have have meetings at 2:00 PM.

So we'll have to end there.

Thank you so much to our panellists and to the media for this lively discussion.

I will inform you of the next official press briefings to take place and we remain available for questions.

In the meantime, thank you very much everyone.