We associate ourselves with the EU statement. We believe that UNGASS will be a very important meeting, that can take stock what we’ve done so far, and what we can do better in the future.

We’re in favour of a balanced approach where demand and supply reduction are equally important under the framework of the three conventions. The focus must be concentrated on health and well being of all people. It must be based on human rights, including the right not to be exposed to drugs, right to access essential medicines.

The right to essential medicines is a joint responsibility of member states and UN bodies. There is a clear need to acquire more knowledge on the issue of gender inequality in the discussion of the drug problem.

High level meetings and the UNGASS are reviews of what works and what needs to be improved. We’ll leave the final evaluation of the work until 2019 when the present declaration is to be discussed. But we must avoid duplication of work and use resources efficiently.

We’ll get nowhere without civil society and the scientific community, so the process must have the contribution of various actors. We fully support the VNGOC.

We appreciate the work of parliamentarians in the preparation of UNGASS, which must result in the mobilisation of political will. We are lacking political will in combating drugs internationally. Political will is not there. UNODC has a budget of $200 million, making it one of the smallest UN agencies. Why do we allow them to be the smallest in the face of this problem?

We must go to our governments to convince them to prioritise working against drugs. We must also get other agencies involved, such as UNDP, UNICEF and regional banks so they feel responsibility to act. UNODC cannot do everything.