- Calls for a consolidated text.
- Deep sea exploitation is the common heritage of mankind, but when it comes to many other legislations, they also concern the interests of mankind as a whole but that doesn’t mean they give stakeholders a high degree of influence.
- To our mind: legislation is a process driven by member states.
- We have some clear regulations in the Convention, which is that when contractors have a joint arrangement with Enterprise, then those contractors can receive incentives. There are limitations: the incentive cannot give them subsidies.
- Support Mexico in their views on the deleting the requirement for independent expert assessment.
- Believe that underwater cultural heritage should not be included in the definition of the marine environment.
- In the draft regulations we should not mention the Convention on the Protection of Underwater Cultural Heritage.
- Draft regulation 49: As for underwater noise – we have some thoughts on whether it can be considered ocean pollution under the Convention. We need a further study on this matter.
- The delegation stated that “if relevant parties try to stop the adoption, with the possibility of the entire assembly facing failure, then all delegates understand the cost of failure.”
- Stated that next year’s assembly agenda should not have to be adopted together with supplementary items
- The delegation proposed that before the next session, for example 60 days before the next session of the Assembly, there could be a more flexible intersessional working method to have some preliminary or advanced discussions on the agenda items concerned so as to help us with a more successful session next year.
- China reiterated its opposition to the adoption of the agenda item establishing a general policy by the Assembly related to the consultation of the marine environment under the two year rule, proposed by Chile, Costa Rica, France, Palau, and Vanuatu. China states that this discussion is under the remit of the Council and not the Assembly.
- China called on parties to work on the basis of actively pushing ahead with the negotiations on the regulations by continuing to fully leverage the council as a platform. The delegation also stated that they believe the Secretariat should further beef up its support for the development of the exploitation regulations.
- China does not support the inclusion of agenda item establishing a general policy by the Assembly related to the consultation of the marine environment under the two year rule, proposed by Chile, Costa Rica, France, Palau, and Vanuatu
- China requested the removal of the provision on the LTC seeking advice from competent independent experts during the approval process of a Plan of Work.
- China was opposed to the general public being notified of an Environmental Plan and of an independent review.
- China believes that contractors who are delayed in submission of reports should receive a written warning rather than a financial penalty.
- China stated that “it is difficult to deny that contractors can submit applications and this we must process and come up with recommendations.”
- The delegation stated that Nauru say deep-sea resources are critical to green development but others note there is insufficient evidence.
- China endorses the view by the African Group. Peer review of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) should not be requisite requirement.
- Test mining may be regarded as a condition for commencement of formal commercial production but it should not become a condition for the application for an exploitation contract.
- The delegation stated that understanding of ocean environment might be accomplished through exploration and prospecting or test mining
- China stated that the principle of common heritage of mankind is the core of the deep seabed regime which should be turned into a reality based on development and exploitation
- On serious harm, China called to retain the word “serious” stating that the threshold should be based on how serious the harms are (other State and observers, including the DSCC have stated that ‘serious’ is a concerning threshold for harm as in line with UNCLOS Article 145)
- Questioned whether external experts where really necessary, or whether they create extra-burdens.
- China stated that the contractors will be the direct provider of environmental baseline information and contractors participation is is a must
- Advocated to ensure a reasonable balance between exploitation of resources in the Area and the protection of the marine environment.
- This was opposed by Costa Rica, Chile, New Zealand, the UK, Norway, Italy and the Netherlands and the paragraph was not amended.
- Called to improve ISA regime and that the development of regulations is a priority. The delegation added that regulations need to balance exploitation and protection based on scientific facts and evidence, strengthen and improve regime
- China also called for the promotion of the sustainable development of the seabed, which cannot be achieved without the progress of science, orderly use of resources, sharing of benefits, collaboration and solidarity.
- Stated that discussing “EPC operationalization now is a little premature.”