EFFICIENCY BOARD 'MACHINE FOR CUTTING THE BUDGET' ADMINISTRATIVE AND BUDGETARY COMMITTEE TOLD
Press Release
GA/AB/3111
EFFICIENCY BOARD 'MACHINE FOR CUTTING THE BUDGET' ADMINISTRATIVE AND BUDGETARY COMMITTEE TOLD
19961108 Speakers Raise Questions on Board's Mandate, Operations; Under-Secretary-General Says Board Draws on Member States' Reform ExpertiseThe Efficiency Board was a "machine for cutting the budget", staffed by experts from the private sector or representatives of national governments who might not be sensitive to some provisions of the Charter, the representative of Uganda told the Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary) this afternoon, as it discussed savings from the regular budget and human resources management.
The Efficiency Board was set up by the Secretary-General in November 1995 to advise him on the implementation of his programme for promoting efficiency. Chaired by the Under-Secretary-General for Administration and Management, Joseph E. Connor, it recommends actions needed to enhance efficiency in the Organization. The United Nations should be run differently from a multinational corporation, he added.
Speakers this afternoon raised a wide variety of questions on the mandate and operation of the Board. The representative of Cuba, for example, asked if the Board might not duplicate the work of existing efficiency mechanisms, if it was actually cost-free, if its proposals might not affect programmes mandated by the General Assembly, and if it might not infringe upon Member States' prerogatives.
Australia's representative, on the other hand, expressed support for the Board, saying it had been established within the Secretary-General's authority and deserved broader support. Rather than destroy the Organization, the pursuit of efficiencies would revitalize it and improve its delivery of programmes, he said.
Responding to questions on the Board, Under-Secretary-General for Administration and Management Joseph Connor said that it had drawn on Member States' expertise in reforming their national governments human resources, finance and procurement. Those working for the Board came from the 28 Member
Fifth Committee - 1a - Press Release GA/AB/3111 25th Meeting (PM) 8 November 1996
States that were ready to take part in its activities. About $204,311 had been received from Germany, Saudi Arabia, Australia, Ireland, Sweden and New Zealand for financing the Board. Expenditures were $168,700, so far.
Before the Committee began its discussion this afternoon, the representative of Costa Rica, speaking for the "Group of 77" developing countries and China, warned high-level Secretariat officials to stop calling Group of 77 permanent representatives to complain about the actions of some Group of 77 delegates in the Committee. The officials had asked the permanent representatives to tell their delegates to stop some of their actions or remain silent on some issues, as they might otherwise hurt the Secretariat's interests. The officials' actions violated Charter principles.
Statements were also made by the representatives of Algeria, Pakistan, Iran, Bangladesh, Mexico, United States, Ireland (on behalf of the European Union), Japan, Indonesia, Portugal and Colombia.
The United Nations Controller, Yukio Takasu, and the Assistant Secretary-General for Human Resources Management, Denis Halliday, answered questions raised in the debates.
The Committee will meet again at 3 p.m., Monday, 11 November, to take up reports from the Office of Internal Oversight Services. It will also continue discussing the medium-term plan for 1998-2001, as well as financial statements and reports of the Board of Auditors.
Committee Work Programme
The Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary) met this afternoon to continue discussing the savings on the 1996-1997 programme budget and the United Nations proposed medium-term plan for the period 1998-2001.
The Committee was expected to take up the following programmes of the proposed medium-term plan: programme 9 (Trade and development); programme 11 (Human settlements); programme 12 (Crime prevention and criminal justice); programme 13 (International drug control); programme 19 (Human rights); programme 20 (Humanitarian assistance); programme 21 (Protection and assistance to refugees); programme 22 (Palestine refugees); programme 23 (Public information); programme 24 (Administrative services); and programme 25 (Internal oversight). (For details of the 25 programmes of the medium-term plan, see Press Release GA/AB/3096, of 21 October.)
The proposed medium-term plan, which provides the framework for the biennial programme budgets, is the principal policy directive of the United Nations. It is prepared by the Secretariat for consideration by Member States.
For its consideration of the proposed medium-term plan, the Committee has before it a comprehensive document (document A/51/6) which includes two forward-looking policy documents -- the Perspective and the Note -- which provide analyses of persistent international problems, challenges and emerging trends that need to be addressed by the international community in the next four years, as well as the role and the priorities of the Organization. The proposed medium-term plan also includes the outlines of 25 programmes in the form of fascicles (document A/51/6-fascicles).
The Committee has also before it the report of the Committee for Programme and Coordination (CPC) (document A/51/16-Part I) on the first part of its thirty-sixth session, which contains the outcome of the Committee's consideration of programme planning, coordination questions and reports of the Joint Inspection Unit (JIU). Part II of the report contains the recommendations of the second part of the Committee's thirty-sixth session, held from 26 August to 6 September. The report reviews the 25 programmes of the proposed medium-term plan.
The programmes in the medium-term plan cover a period of four years and are presented along sectoral lines. Each programme consists of a short narrative which identifies the mandates that provide overall direction for the programme and which, therefore, govern the overall work of the responsible department/office. It describes the broad approach of the department/office in carrying out the work and the results that are expected to be achieved in pursuance of the mandates. Each programme contains subprogrammes which would cover an area of activity entrusted to a major organizational unit within a
Fifth Committee - 3 - Press Release GA/AB/3111 25th Meeting (PM) 8 November 1996
department or office. It identifies the objectives and expected results to be achieved at the end of four years.
Programme 9 (Trade and Development)
Programme 9 contains the following seven subprogrammes: 9.1 -- Globalization and development; 9.2 -- Investment, enterprise development and technology; 9.3 -- International trade in goods and services, and commodity issues; 9.4 -- Service infrastructure for development and trade efficiency; 9.5 -- Least developed countries; 9.6 -- Institutional development and support services for trade promotion, export development and international purchasing and supply management; and 9.7 -- Market development and trade information. The programme will be implemented by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) and the International Trade Centre UNCTAD/World Trade Organization, the technical cooperation arm of the two organizations.
The mandates for the programme flow from the role and responsibilities assigned to the UNCTAD secretariat, the quadrennial sessions of the Conference, the Economic and Social Council and its subsidiary bodies, including the Commission on Science and Technology for Development and the Trade and Development Board and its subsidiary bodies. The programme mandates are also derived from the 1990 Programme of Action for the Least Developed Countries for the 1990s, the Cartagena Commitment, adopted at the eighth session of UNCTAD in 1992, and, in particular, the Midrand Declaration and "A Partnership for Growth and Development", adopted at the ninth session of UNCTAD, in May.
The CPC requested the Secretary-General to submit a version of programme 9, revised in the light of the results of UNCTAD IX, as well as of the decisions that may be adopted by the Board at its forty-third regular session, to be held at Geneva from 7 to 18 October 1996, for the consideration of the General Assembly at its fifty-first session. The Committee was informed of the amendments proposed by the Trade and Development Board's Working Party on the Medium-term Plan and the Programme Budget during its twenty-seventh session, held at Geneva, on 17 June 1996.
Programme 11 (Human Settlements)
Programme 11 consists of the following three subprogrammes: 11.1 -- Sustainable human settlement development; 11.2 -- Adequate shelter for all; and 11.3 -- human settlement assessment and monitoring. The programme's overall orientation is to promote the adoption at the national and local levels of environmentally sustainable human settlement policies and programmes and thereby contribute to economic growth, and to further the political and social goals of democracy, peace and equity. It is under the responsibility of the United Nations Centre for Human Settlements (Habitat).
Fifth Committee - 4 - Press Release GA/AB/3111 25th Meeting (PM) 8 November 1996
The broad approach to be followed by the Centre is to provide support to and work in partnership with governments, local authorities, non-governmental organizations and the private sector in responding to the social, economic and environmental consequences of rapid urbanization and in ensuring that settlements, especially cities and towns, have the capacity to play their key developmental role. Attention is also to be given to issues that adversely affect the living conditions of the poor and the marginalized.
In view of the adoption of the Habitat Agenda at the United Nations Conference on Human Settlements (Habitat II) in June 1996, the CPC recommended to the General Assembly that programme 11 be revised to reflect the consensus reached at the Conference and that the revision be submitted to the Assembly at the fifty-first session for approval.
Programme 12 (Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice)
Programme 12 consists of one subprogramme: 12.1 -- crime prevention and criminal justice system. The programme's general orientation is to promote more effective international cooperation in crime prevention and criminal justice by devising strategies to deal with global problems and by assisting governments in their national and multilateral efforts to respond to changing crime trends. It will also create the necessary instruments and institutions for a more accountable, transparent and effective crime prevention and control system. The programme will also endeavour to transfer expertise in the effective and humane handling of offences, offenders and victims. The Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice Division will be responsible for the implementation of that programme.
The CPC recommended that the Assembly approve programme 12 with a few modifications.
Programme 13 (International Drug Control)
Programme 13 consists of the following three subprogrammes: 13.1 -- Coordination and promotion of international drug control; 13.2 -- International drug control monitoring and policy-making; and 13.3 -- Prevention and reduction of drug abuse, elimination of illicit crops and suppression of illicit drug trafficking. Concerted international action is anchored in the consensus of the international community embodied in the drug control Conventions: the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs and its Protocol of 1972; the 1971 Convention on Psychotropic Substances; and the 1988 United Nations Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances.
The CPC recommended that the Assembly approve programme 13 with a few modifications.
Fifth Committee - 5 - Press Release GA/AB/3111 25th Meeting (PM) 8 November 1996
Programme 19 (Human Rights)
Programme 19 consists of the following three subprogrammes: 19.1 -- right to development, research and analysis; 19.2 -- Supporting human rights bodies and organs; and 19.3 -- Advisory services, technical cooperation, support to human rights fact-finding procedures and field activities. The programme is under the responsibility of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights.
The programme's objectives are: to provide leadership on human rights issues and to emphasize the importance of human rights on the international and national agendas; to promote international cooperation for human rights; to stimulate and coordinate action across the whole United Nations system; and to promote universal ratification and implementation of international standards and to assist in the development of new norms.
Other objectives are: to support human rights organs and treaty- monitoring bodies; to anticipate potential serious violations and react to violations; to emphasize preventive human rights action and promote the establishment of national human rights infrastructures; to undertake human rights field activities and operations; and to provide education, information, advisory services and technical assistance in the field of human rights.
During the CPC's discussion of programme 19, divergent opinions were expressed on the content and structure of the programme. In that regard, the Committee took note of the programme and recommended that the General Assembly consider the programme, taking into account the views expressed and amendments proposed by Member States. One of the proposed amendments discussed is the creation of a new subprogramme for the right to development.
Programme 20 (Humanitarian Assistance)
Programme 20 comprises the following five subprogrammes: 20.1 -- Policy and analysis; 20.2 -- Complex emergencies; 20.3 --Natural disaster reduction; 20.4 -- Disaster relief; and 20.5 -- Humanitarian emergency information. The programme's overall orientation is: to ensure the timely, coherent and coordinated response of the international community to disasters and emergencies; to promote prevention, preparedness and mitigation measures aimed at the reduction of vulnerability of those affected by such events; and to facilitate the elaboration of policies to guide the work of the humanitarian community and the smooth transition from emergency relief to rehabilitation and development. The programme is under the responsibility of the Department of Humanitarian Affairs.
The CPC recommended that the Assembly approve programme 20.
Fifth Committee - 6 - Press Release GA/AB/3111 25th Meeting (PM) 8 November 1996
Programme 21 (Protection and Assistance to Refugees)
Programme 21 comprises two subprogrammes: 21.1 -- International protection; and 21.2 -- Assistance. The programme's orientation is to provide international protection to refugees, to seek permanent solutions to their problems and to provide humanitarian assistance to those groups. The pursuit of durable solutions to the problems of refugees is the principal objective of the programme. The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) is responsible for the achievement of the programme's objectives.
The CPC recommended that the Assembly approve programme 21 with two major modifications. Paragraph 21.12 should be replaced with text on the objective of promoting more comprehensive regional approaches to resolve refugee situations and other forms of involuntary displacement. Paragraph 21.19 should be replaced with text on establishing the link between the broader development efforts and the practicability of proposed solutions, such as reintegration assistance in support of voluntary repatriation.
Programme 22 (Palestine Refugees)
The overall strategy of programme 22 is to provide assistance to the Palestine refugee population until matters are resolved. That assistance involves the provision of essential education, health and relief and social services to eligible Palestine refugees living in Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, and the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Emergency relief assistance and ad hoc assistance in response to requests from the Palestinian Authority, the host governments and the Secretary-General are likewise rendered to the beneficiary population. The United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) is responsible for programme implementation.
The CPC recommended that the Assembly approve programme 22 with a number of modifications.
Programme 23 (Public Information)
Programme 23 consists of the following four subprogrammes: 23.1 -- Promotional services; 23.2 -- Information services; 23.3 -- Library services; and 23.4 -- Publication services. The programme's overall objective is to promote, in cooperation with governments of Member States, media organizations, non-governmental organizations, educational institutions and the business community, public understanding of the objectives and the work of the Organization. It emphasizes developing information strategies, promotional activities and public services that will highlight the responsibilities and capabilities of the United Nations in carrying out its tasks in the fields of sustainable development, peace and security, democracy, human rights and
Fifth Committee - 7 - Press Release GA/AB/3111 25th Meeting (PM) 8 November 1996
humanitarian assistance. The Department of Public Information (DPI) is responsible for the implementation of the programme.
The CPC recommended that the Assembly approve programme 23 with a number of modifications.
Programme 24 (Administrative Services)
Programme 24 consists of five subprogrammes: 24.1 -- Management services; 24.2 -- Programme planning, budget and accounts; 24.3 -- Human resource management; 24.4 -- Support services; and 24.5 -- Conference services. The overall objectives of the programme are: to provide an effective administrative structure and services in support of the substantive programmes of the Organization; and to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of the Organization in the administrative, financial and human resource support and conference-servicing areas. The Department of Administration and Management at Headquarters and the United Nations Offices at Geneva, Vienna and Nairobi are responsible for the implementation of the programme.
The CPC recommended that the Committee approve programme 24 with a number of modifications. It recommended that paragraph 24.20 be replaced with text on the objective of restructuring the procurement and transportation function. One addition in paragraph 24.12 (a) refers to establishing a career development policy in the Secretariat with regard to all types of appointments. The Committee recommended that paragraph 24.21 (f) be replaced with the text of the subparagraph on developing a computer programme to select registered suppliers from all geographic regions. The Committee further recommended the addition of a new subparagraph, 24.21 (e), on further improving the methodology for uniform practices and procedures in evaluating bids and awarding conference resources.
Programme 25 (Internal Oversight)
Programme 25 consists of the following four subprogrammes: 25.1 -- Central evaluation; 25.2 -- Audit and management consulting; 25.3 -- Central monitoring and inspection; and 25.4 -- Investigations. The programme's general orientation is to attain more effective programme implementation and better internal control of the Organization by assisting the Secretary-General in fulfilling its internal oversight responsibilities with respect to staff and other resources of the Organization. The Office of Internal Oversight Services is responsible for its implementation.
The CPC recommended that the Assembly approve the narrative of the activities of programme 25 with a number of modifications. It proposed the addition of the following two new subparagraphs: 25.14 (c) bis on undertaking timely identification of problems affecting implementation of programmed
Fifth Committee - 8 - Press Release GA/AB/3111 25th Meeting (PM) 8 November 1996
activities; and 25.17 (b) bis on providing guidance to the Secretary-General on jurisdictional or disciplinary action in cases of waste, fraud or mismanagement.
Special Statement by Group of 77
NAZARETH INCERA (Costa Rica), speaking for the "Group of 77" developing countries and China, said that members of the Group could not accept a practice that had recently come to their notice. In the past few days, some permanent representatives in the Group had been called by high-level officials of the Secretariat, who had complained about the actions of some of the Group's delegations in the Committee. The Secretariat officials had asked the permanent representatives to tell their delegates to cease some of their actions, or to remain silent on some issues, as they might hurt the interests of the Secretariat. Such an action violated the principles contained in the Charter. Delegations had been cooperating with the Secretariat, but that cooperation did not mean they could not take certain political positions or that they could not follow instructions they had received from their governments. The Secretariat's practice should stop.
Statements on 1996-1997 Budget
JOSEPH E. CONNOR, Under-Secretary-General for Administration and Management, said that the Secretary-General had developed a management plan, which was detailed in his 1995 report on the work of the Organization. One of several key objectives in that plan focused on efficiency. Specifically, the Secretary-General had set as an objective better management of the Organization's cost structure and enhanced cost effectiveness. To facilitate an enhanced programme of efficiency, the Secretary-General commissioned a small task force, called the Efficiency Board, to guide the management effort. Member States requests for cuts of $154 million from the 1996-1997 budget gave impetus to that effort. The Board became the mechanism for helping the Secretary-General cushion the effect of the cuts on activities. The identification of more efficient ways of performing work became a management task.
He said the Efficiency Board, in addition to himself, consisted of the following members: Rafeeuddin Ahmed, Associate Administrator of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP); Ibrahim Gambari, Permanent Representative of Nigeria; Jamsheed Marker, former Permanent Representative of Pakistan; Jean-Claude Milleron, Under-Secretary-General for Economic and Social Information and Policy Analysis; Gert Rosenthal, Executive Secretary of the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC); and Sir Brian Urquhart, former United Nations Under-Secretary-General. It provided directional guidance to some task forces and working groups dealing with efficiency studies. In order to finance the groups without affecting the
Fifth Committee - 9 - Press Release GA/AB/3111 25th Meeting (PM) 8 November 1996
regular budget, the Secretary-General asked several Member States for their financial and staffing support.
Mr. Connor said that the United Nations drew on the expertise developed by Member States in reforming their own national governments in, for instance, human resources, finance and procurement. The expertise of the participants in the working groups varied, and the length of service ranged from less than a month to 10 months, with some personnel loaned by their governments and others engaged through consultancies. Fellows and interns were provided by Member States to support the working groups in training, analysis and research. Besides the loan of experts, contributions totalling $204,311 had been received from Germany, Saudi Arabia, Australia, Ireland, Sweden and New Zealand. Discussions were under way with Denmark, Finland, Norway and the United States for additional funds, which might reach $250,000. Expenditures of $168,700 had been made.
Continuing, he said the resources had been used to support the participation of developing country experts and fellows in the Board's working groups, for honorariums and travel of Board members, and the publication and distribution of the Board's report to the Secretary-General entitled UN21: Better Service, Better Value, Better Management. About 23 per cent of some 400 efficiency projects had been implemented by September. For example, there were announcements in the Journal on the availability of the optical disk system to permanent missions. The new United Nations Home Page was getting nearly 400,000 "hits" weekly. Video-conferencing technology was being used to reduce the need to travel.
Regarding the 400 projects, he said that an additional 20 per cent would be completed in the coming months, such as improved procedures for buying foreign currency and the rationalization of travel. The Board was carrying out cross-cutting reviews to reduce administrative costs and looking for ways to clarify lines of responsibility and give programme managers greater authority for the use of resources.
NORMA GOICOCHEA ESTENOZ (Cuba) said she had problems regarding the Efficiency Board. Some proposals from the Board seemed to contradict some of the views of the various substantive departments of the Secretariat. She asked about the impact of the Board's proposals on the various rights of Member States. She also asked if the mechanism of the Board would not duplicate other existing mechanisms related to efficiency, if the 13 per cent overhead charge related to the Board had been reimbursed to the United Nations, and if there were direct or indirect costs of the Board that had been charged to the regular budget. What was the contractual link between the staff that worked for the Board and the United Nations as a whole?
DJAMEL MOKTEFI (Algeria) said that the Board drew from people outside the Organization, even though various bodies of the United Nations had
Fifth Committee - 10 - Press Release GA/AB/3111 25th Meeting (PM) 8 November 1996
expertise on efficiency, such as the JIU, the Board of Auditors and the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions (ACABQ). For more transparency, it would be useful to draw upon internal competence. In looking at the origin of voluntary contributions to the Board, the financing showed certain ideological and geographical tendencies, which contradicted the universal nature of the United Nations.
AHMAD KAMAL (Pakistan) said it was unfortunate that the debate, which should be focusing on improving the Organization's efficiency, should have turned into a debate on the Efficiency Board. The Committee should be engaged in improving efficiency, not be carried away by a discussion of the Efficiency Board. The Board should have been established with the Assembly's approval, which might have dissipated some of the energy on that issue in the Committee today. In discussing efficiency, the Committee needed to define its objectives -- such as how to remove duplication and waste and how to improve the methodology and techniques of the Secretariat. "What efficiency is not, is downsizing", he said.
He intended to put emphasis on such issues as permanent contracts, he continued. Such contracts were contributing to inefficiency in the Organization. Their existence removed management's ability to fire and hire staff and they put a premium on mediocrity. One example of that could be seen in the late issuance of documents, especially during the current Assembly. The other issue of concern was that of loan officers. What did their existence imply in terms of subcontracting of staff? he asked. That situation was insidious and needed to be debated.
The problem of interpreters was also an important issue because of their practice of working [to rule] and had to be addressed. In that connection, the Secretariat had to provide Member States with services. It should not be allowed to determine the course of Member States' deliberations and to tell them when they should stop deliberating. Stressing that those were some examples of problems of efficiency that should be discussed, he urged his colleagues not to divert the Committee from the much more important exercise -- to see how the monies of the Organization could be put to best use.
NGONI FRANCIS SENGWE (Zimbabwe), Committee Chairman, said it was his responsibility to level the playing field. He would, therefore, allow those delegations that had made statements specific to the Efficiency Board to express themselves and not be stifled.
SEYED MORTEZA MIR MOHAMMAD (Iran) said, in his view, Member States had not recognized the status of the Efficiency Board. They were still in great doubt about the need for the Board, especially at a time of downsizing. They were also concerned that the Board might be duplicating activity within the Organization and that the Board should not have any financial impact on the regular budget. The extent of the programmatic impact of the 400 efficiency
Fifth Committee - 11 - Press Release GA/AB/3111 25th Meeting (PM) 8 November 1996
programmes that the Board was implementing should be clarified. Any change in the Organization's work programme should be approved by Member States.
Mr. CONNOR, Under-Secretary-General for Administration and Management, responded to questions. To the question about how the Board's proposals were formulated, he said they had been formulated by the programme managers, with the involvement of staff. Citing the contributions of staff to improving efficiencies, he said they also implemented their suggestions and they had welcomed their participation in that exercise. The Board had provided guidance in the process.
Regarding the interns, he said they assisted the more experienced persons in such tasks as analysing problems, analysing data and helping to build databases on some problems areas. They were entrusted with a "sort of fact-finding", rather than conceptualization. He reassured the Committee that, with regard to the Board, he had followed all the United Nations financial rules and regulations regarding payment. Concerning the Board's funding mechanism, he said every Member State had been asked to provide voluntary resources. Twenty-five had responded with personnel and a fewer than that had made financial contributions. From such a fairly modest funding mechanism, a tremendous amount of work had been done. The Board had tried with remarkable conscientiousness to permit programmes to be carried more efficiently, in such areas as recruitment and the early issuance of documents.
The Secretary-General had urged him to cushion the impact of the mandated budget reductions and preserve as much as possible of Member States' mandates, he continued. He had focused on cutting the area in which "a disproportionate amount" of the Organization's resources were expended -- administration. Several Member States believed that since the Secretariat did not follow procedure in setting up the Board, it should be disbanded. "I have heard your comments", he said.
SYED RAFIQUL ALOM (Bangladesh) said that the report had concentrated more on cost savings than on long-term efficiency. The basic questions behind the efficiency measures could be better tackled when the true causes of inefficiencies were identified and listed. He wondered if the Secretariat could list the inadequacies, the inefficiencies and shortcomings in the Organization before going further.
Ms. GOICOCHEA ESTENOZ (Cuba) said that the Under-Secretary-General fully understood the core of her delegation's questions. She and other delegations were concerned about the status of the Board and how far it would go and be kept. She asked how the role of the General Assembly was viewed in the entire exercise, especially when some of the prerogatives of the Assembly might be affected. Had there been reimbursement of the 13 per cent overhead costs? she asked. Did the Board have any indirect or direct costs in the regular budget? What principles were used to recruit the interns working with the Board?
Fifth Committee - 12 - Press Release GA/AB/3111 25th Meeting (PM) 8 November 1996
Mr. CONNOR, Under-Secretary-General for Administration and Management, said that the Board's next phase was to look at such issues as how quickly personnel were paid and how travel was approved. The Board was looking, for example, at the question of whether the number of people required to approve a trip would be reduced from seven to, say, three. The Board had nothing to do with mandated programmes. It was concerned only about how much administration was needed to manage programmes. Its members only wanted to reduce the amount of administration needed for programmes, not change programmes. Some of the questions from the Committee members implied that the Board was engaged in destructive work, which was not correct.
Ms. GOICOCHEA ESTENOZ (Cuba) said that her questions about the direct or indirect costs of the Board had not been answered. She repeated her other questions about reimbursement to the United Nations, whether some United Nations staff worked for the Board and about the role of the Assembly in the process.
MARTHA PEÑA (Mexico) said repeated questions from Member States were going unanswered, and she was concerned about such a trend in the dialogue with the Secretariat. "It is easier to get water out of stone than to get direct answers from the Secretariat", she said.
Mr. MIR MOHAMMAD (Iran) said that Member States had not been told about the programmatic impact of the savings from the 1996-1997 budget. Mexico's point should be fully contemplated.
Mr. CONNOR said some United Nations people had been involved in re- engineering the Secretariat. He was not sure about the proportion of the 13 per cent of costs of the Board that had been reimbursed. Since he had missed some of the questions, he asked for their repetition.
Ms. GOICOCHEA ESTENOZ (Cuba) repeated her question as to whether any Secretariat staff had worked for the Board, as rumoured. She wanted Mr. Connor to say how much had been reimbursed to the United Nations. She repeated her question as to the criteria used in hiring interns.
NESTER ODAGA-JALOMAYO (Uganda) said "latecomers usually end up eating bones". He apologized for arriving late. With a small delegation, his country had to make efficient use of resources and send delegates to several forums at the same time. He said that his remarks were not targeted at any member of the Secretariat and were made in good faith. From time to time, the Secretariat was being driven to a level where it would lose its international character in the name of efficiency. The Board seemed to be a machine for cutting the budget and a "sweet pill" for a nominal zero-growth budget.
The Board was staffed by experts from the private sector or representatives of national governments that might not be sensitive to some
Fifth Committee - 13 - Press Release GA/AB/3111 25th Meeting (PM) 8 November 1996
provisions of the Charter, he said. Member States could not allow a situation where parallel bodies were engaged in pursuing efficiency. He asked for information on the mandate that established the Board. If there was no mandate, the Secretariat should not bring the report of an entity that had not been legally constituted. The Board's work should be included in the Secretary-General's report, not sent to the Assembly directly. Any attempt to make reference to a report of a Board that lacked legal standing was unfair.
Furthermore, he asked for a clarification of the entire concept of efficiency. Was it a matter of cuts? he asked. For instance, the condition of the United Nations Headquarters was getting worse and worse. It would need colossal sums to repair later on. The United Nations was a political organization, which should be run differently from a multinational corporation.
HERBERT DONALD GELBER (United States) said that during the earlier discussions, he had recalled an incident in which a family member had a heart attack. He had welcomed the fact that a good samaritan had offered urgently needed assistance to save that relative's life. In the same way, the assistance being offered to the Organization was welcomed. The representative of Pakistan had defined the issue that the Committee should be discussing. It was not the Efficiency Board, nor the precision of legal texts establishing the mechanism that was helping to improve the Organization's efficiency and effectiveness. The Organization's efficiency and effectiveness was the issue.
The Secretary-General had the responsibility to ensure that the Organization was efficiently and effectively managed, he said. If he believed that he needed expertise to do so, it would be remiss of him if he did not request such advice. Whether or not he took their advice was his prerogative. The Efficiency Board had offered some sound counsel, with the cooperation of those working in the Organization. If, as a consequence of the advice received, managers could function more effectively, those measures should not be criticized. The principles that guided the Organization were no different from those which guided a multinational organization. Efficiency was important. Member States should not be arguing about the geographical representation of the bureaucrat who was delivering the efficiency. The focus should be on helping to define more efficient ways to do the business of Member States.
PATRICK KELLY (Ireland), speaking on behalf of the European Union, said he agreed with Pakistan that the emphasis should be on efficiency, rather than on the Efficiency Board. The Secretary-General had initiated an efficiency exercise and had kept Member States informed of its progress. The European Union had welcomed the efficiencies identified by the Board. The Secretary- General had a responsibility to implement mandates and to determine the best way to implement them. It was in that context the European Union viewed the Board's work.
Fifth Committee - 14 - Press Release GA/AB/3111 25th Meeting (PM) 8 November 1996
Ms. GOICOCHEA ESTENOZ (Cuba) said the issue of mandates had been raised and there were different types of mandates. Referring to the statement made by the United States, she said "the "disease was chronic" because of the budgetary problems the Organization faced. The patient needed to go into intensive care and medical assistance had to come from all Member States, because they had a collective commitment. The need for transparency was of great importance. It was important to ensure that specific and timely measures were taken. The Secretariat's role could not be pursued by downsizing. It was important to be clear on what was being discussed. She insisted that the role of Member States must be considered.
Mr. ODAGA-JALOMAYO (Uganda) reiterated his position that no Member State was opposed to efficiency. "That must be very clear", he said. However, there was disagreement on the definition of efficiency and how to achieve it. Was there no need for the Fifth Committee to meet and make decisions and give mandates to the Secretary-General? he asked. Some Member States had made statements that insinuated that the Secretary-General had a blanket right to act as he willed with the Organization.
That was not the situation, he continued. That was the reason mandates were always asked for and why Member States referred to the Charter and had formulated rules and regulations to govern the work and the functioning of the Organization. Those regulations existed to ensure its effectiveness and efficiency and should be followed. The principles that governed multinational corporations were not the same as those that governed the United Nations. They could not even be compared.
FUMIAKI TOYA (Japan) said he supported the enhancement of efficiency and welcomed the activities of the Efficiency Board. However, the Board's work should be carried out with the support of as many Member States as possible. It was important for the Secretariat to provide Member States with the information they required. The continuation of the dialogue with Member States was absolutely necessary for the implementation of the Board's efficiency measures.
Mr. MOKTEFI (Algeria) said he was concerned that the establishment of parallel structures might divert the Secretariat from its tasks. He still had doubts about the Board's effectiveness.
MILES ARMITAGE (Australia) said that Member States should take opportunities as they arrived to pursue efficiency that would allow better use of resources. The appointment and the work of the Efficiency Board were within the authority of the Secretary-General. The Board deserved broader support. The exercise of seeking efficiencies was not about destroying the Organization, but about revitalizing it and improving the delivery of programmes. He agreed with Japan on the need for more information. He
Fifth Committee - 15 - Press Release GA/AB/3111 25th Meeting (PM) 8 November 1996
regretted that much time had been spent on questioning the mandate of the Board, with less attention on its objective of efficiency.
Mr. MIR MOHAMMAD (Iran) said he wanted information on the effect of the 400 efficiency projects on mandated programmes.
Ms. INCERA (Costa Rica), also speaking for the Group of 77 and China, said her Group favoured efficiency, but had difficulties with how it was being pursued.
Mr. CONNOR, Under-Secretary-General for Administration and Management, said that the Secretary-General had set up the Board under his executive authority. If Member States found fault in the executive authority, they could seek redress. Several under-secretaries-general, including himself, served on the Board. Efficiencies that would affect mandated programmes were in the report, and Member States would have to decide on how to deal with them. The Board's interns were chosen in the same way as their colleagues were -- young, capable support for the Board's experts were sought and found through the Office of Human Resources Management.
Every Member State had been asked to take part in the Board, including Cuba, he said. Twenty-eight Member States had responded favourably about taking part in the Board. The principle of equitable geographical representation usually applied only to regular budget posts, but attempts were made to ensure wide participation in the Board. The Board's members were drawn from the Member States that agreed to participate.
The Committee Chairman, Mr. SENGWE (Zimbabwe), summing up the positions of Member States, said one position was that the issue of efficiency measures was the Secretary-General's prerogative. Another position was that, although Member States wanted efficiency measures to be taken, they felt that they should be involved or consulted on the process. They also wanted transparency. Those were issues that the Secretariat had to deal with. As long as those questions remained unanswered, the Member States would not be able to move forward on the issue.
Ms. GOICOCHEA ESTENOZ (Cuba) said she had taken note of the answers given by Mr. Connor. She regretted the fact that he had heard of the Board's creation when he did, a situation that said much about the Secretariat's efficiency. At the time of the Board's creation, the Permanent Representative of Cuba had responded to a letter he had received from the Secretariat about the Board and had raised a number of issues with the Secretariat. Some of the answers the Secretariat had given did not go to the heart of the matter. She said she would give the Secretariat the questions she wanted answered in writing and she expected detailed answers, also in writing.
Fifth Committee - 16 - Press Release GA/AB/3111 25th Meeting (PM) 8 November 1996
Mr. ODAGA-JALAMAYO (Uganda) said the issue was very important, and he did not regret having to spend so much time discussing it. Unless some issues were straightened out, "the sheep may be going in the wrong direction", he said. He asked about the role played by interns on the Efficiency Board, since he had been told that the Board had been filled with high calibre persons who had a deep knowledge of the Organization.
He reiterated the point that if programme managers made proposals for efficiency measures, their proposals would come to the Committee as proposals from the Secretary-General. He accepted that it was within the Secretary- General's purview to ensure efficiency in the Organization, but the methodology he used should be integrated into a report. If the Efficiency Board was so effective, its report should be integrated into a Secretary- General's report. The Secretariat could not continue to come to the Fifth Committee to report on the Board's proposals, because, for the Committee, the Board did not exist. That was the position he would continue to take on the matter.
PRAYONO ANTIYANTO (Indonesia) said he would express his views with caution. He fully agreed with the Chairman's comments and had appreciated his conclusions. The Board's existence was a problem. The answer to that issue lay in the hands of Member States. The question had been unresolved for some time, and it was up to Member States to decide how to deal with it, to ensure that the debate was not repeated. He appealed to Committee members to take a decision.
Mr. CONNOR, Under-Secretary-General for Administration and Management, said he would clarify the issue of the interns. They were not part of the Board. Listing the Secretariat's Board members, he said the Secretary-General had acted within his authority. If Member States disagreed with him, they had to make a decision on the issue.
The Committee Chairman, Mr. SENGWE (Zimbabwe), noted that there was no meeting of minds on the issue being debated. He stressed that the support of Member States was important. The Secretary-General acted under the Assembly's mandates. He suggested that the Committee return to the matter at a later date.
DENIS J. HALLIDAY, Assistant Secretary-General for Human Resources Management, said that posts were frozen on the basis of the decisions taken by department heads, when posts could be frozen without major impact on the implementation of programmes. Efforts were being made to redeploy the two or three staff yet to be placed in posts. A conference paper would be submitted on the question raised by the representative of Portugal on the exceptions granted to recruitments through the normal process.
Fifth Committee - 17 - Press Release GA/AB/3111 25th Meeting (PM) 8 November 1996
He said only one candidate remained on the list of those who had passed national competitive examinations in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea as the second was not available for recruitment by the Secretariat. The compendium of vacancies had 165 Professional and 30 General Service vacancies. It also contained not only vacant posts, but also those encumbered by temporary employees. Long-term staff would have priority over temporary staff. The compendium should not be seen as absolutely final, yet.
He said that since January, 12 P-3-level staff had been appointed, 10 of whom had been on short-term appointments. Eight of the appointees were women. Many of them came from Member States that were below the mid-point of their desirable ranges. The Secretariat always tried to answer questions from Member States as much as possible. Details would be provided on the hiring of several types of personnel, including consultants. Member States could have regular reports on any issue they wanted to discuss. On staff-management relations, he said he had chaired the Joint Advisory Committee this morning. The meeting had discussed such issues as mental health, passive smoking, health insurance, the Staff Management Coordinating Committee, the recovery of overpayment of mission subsistence allowances, and other matters.
HIDEKI GODA (Japan) said he wanted further information, which could be provided in informal consultations. The Assistant Secretary-General should provide his remarks in writing. In addition, the remarks on the freezing of posts was a little confusing and should be clarified. There were two types of job freeze -- those initiated by various departments and those directed by the Department of Administration and Management. He asked whether the freeze on recruitment was still on.
Mr. MIR MOHAMMAD (Iran) said that the written material provided to Member States had referred to some involuntary separations, even though Mr. Halliday had said that no one had been separated involuntarily. The Secretariat should clarify its intentions regarding the reduction of staff.
Ms. INCERA (Costa Rica) said she had asked in a previous meeting for all Mr. Halliday's answers to their questions to be transcribed and circulated to Committee members. She had assumed then that today's answers would also be in writing. She asked why that was not the case. She also asked when the Committee would be given the remarks in writing.
Mr. ODAGA-JALAMAYO (Uganda) said he awaited the responses to the questions on the freezing of posts and on involuntary separation. He asked about the policy and the philosophy on downgrading posts and the impact of such action on programme delivery. It seemed contradictory that a programme could be implemented when the level of a post was lowered.
He asked know how long the three officers who had returned from mission had been waiting without being placed and what was their nationality. He also
Fifth Committee - 18 - Press Release GA/AB/3111 25th Meeting (PM) 8 November 1996
asked about the progress of management implementation of decisions from the Joint Appeals Board that were favourable to staff members. Were there instances in which staff members had been refused promotion and less qualified persons were then recruited to those higher level positions? In addition, he had heard "some uncomfortable remarks" on racial discrimination in the Organization. What steps had been taken to address racial discrimination regarding the promotion of "coloured people and those of African descent"? he asked.
Ms. GOICOCHEA ESTENOZ (Cuba) said it was important to have all the answers to the questions asked in writing. She raised questions about the vacancy rate and how savings could be absorbed. She also asked about the fate of the posts of permanent staff members who had been sent to certain missions. Did the Secretariat's request for funds in the 1996-1997 budget take into account promotion costs?
She also asked about a report on programme budget implications concerning international drug control, which referred to planned activities that would be postponed. The Assembly had not reached any agreement on postponement of activities in the context of efficiency measures. The case she referred to might just be one of many. What was the point of the exercise the Committee was involved in, when such proposals were put into programme budget implications? They had to be considered in the context of economy measures.
REGINA EMERSON (Portugal) said that the Secretariat should explain whether the involuntary separation of some staff members had been proposed in order to achieve cuts from the budget or because of the poor performance of some employees.
Ms. GOICOCHEA ESTENOZ (Cuba) said that the Secretariat should provide written answers to the questions her delegation had asked and also present the informal consultations to be held on the proposed cuts from the regular budget.
YUKIO TAKASU, United Nations Controller, said that Member States had agreed to set vacancy rates at 6.4 per cent for both Professional and General Service staff, which would create a savings of $50 million. Beyond that, the Assembly's budget resolution sought to achieve another $104 million in savings. For the Secretariat to achieve the additional savings mandated by that resolution, it had to pursue higher vacancy rates than the 6.4 per cent initially envisaged. Without a doubt, he said, the savings from the budget would affect the implementation of mandates.
He said that statements of programme budget implications would be submitted by the Secretary-General whenever additional costs arose from the decisions of intergovernmental bodies, such as the Assembly's Main Committees.
Fifth Committee - 19 - Press Release GA/AB/3111 25th Meeting (PM) 8 November 1996
The draft resolution before the Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural) on the special session on drug control would have some budgetary implications. Whenever a resolution with additional costs was passed, the Secretariat would try to find out to what extent the additional costs could be absorbed within existing resources. If the extra costs could not be absorbed, they would be reported to the Assembly for necessary action, or voluntary contributions could be sought.
AURELIO IRAGORRI (Colombia) said that he had problems with the Controller's explanations on the relationship between the vacancy rates and how much savings they could produce for the United Nations. Since staff costs accounted for about 75 per cent of United Nations spending, a vacancy rate of even 5 per cent should be able to produce about $100 million in savings.
Mr. ODAGA-JALOMAYO (Uganda) asked what Secretariat officials meant when they spoke of modifying work programmes, even though Member States had specified that all mandated programmes should be implemented fully.
Mr. MIR MOHAMMAD (Iran) requested that the Controller be present when the Committee discussed agenda item 120 on human resources management, in view of the questions that had been asked.
Mr. TAKASU, United Nations Controller, said he was ready to provide further explanations in informal consultations. The relationship between savings and the vacancy rates did not work out as simply as the representative of Colombia suggested. Indeed, staff took up 73 per cent of costs, but the relationship between savings and vacancies was complicated by several factors. First, the initial budget proposed by the Secretary-General had not been based on a staff strength of 100 per cent for either the Professional or the General Service staff. Rather, it had been based on assumptions that already included a vacancy rate of about 6 per cent. So, the vacancy rate required to save the additional $104 million mandated by the Assembly had to be higher than 6.4 per cent.
* *** *