SUSTAINED ECONOMIC GROWTH AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, INTERNATIONAL PEACE AND SECURITY TO BE PRIORITIES OF UN INTO TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY
Press Release
GA/AB/3133
SUSTAINED ECONOMIC GROWTH AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, INTERNATIONAL PEACE AND SECURITY TO BE PRIORITIES OF UN INTO TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY
19961218 Under Medium-term Plan Recommended for Adoption By Assembly as Administrative and Budgetary Committee Suspends WorkThe General Assembly would approve a medium-term plan for the period 1998-2001 which would set the pursuit of international peace and security and the promotion of sustained economic growth and sustainable development among the United Nations priorities, if it adopts a draft resolution on that strategic document which was approved this afternoon without a vote by its Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary), as it suspended its work.
The new medium-term plan would set a total of eight priorities, instead of the six contained in the Secretary-General's proposed plan. Some of the others are development of Africa, promotion of human rights, coordination of humanitarian assistance efforts, promotion of justice and international law, as well as disarmament. The approved draft plan includes 26 programmes, instead of the 25 proposed by the Secretary-General. The additional programme is on disarmament, which was a subprogramme in the original proposal. Decolonization has become a subprogramme. In addition to the draft on the medium-term plan, the Committee approved several other draft texts, including those on the proposed budget outline for 1998-1999, administrative and budgetary aspects of the financing of peace- keeping operations, United Nations pension system, and on the Committee's agenda items and its programme of work for the 1996-1997 biennium.
By the terms of the draft on the proposed budget outline, the Assembly would invite the Secretary-General to base the preparation of the 1998-1999 budget on an adjusted estimate of $2.480 billion, at revised 1996-1997 rates. The text would have the Assembly set the contingency fund at the level of 0.75 per cent of the preliminary estimate at 1998-1999 rates, namely, at $19 million. The draft text would then ask the Secretary-General to submit to it, no later than 31 May 1997, a policy paper that would help find a comprehensive solution to the question of how to handle all additional expenditures, including those for maintaining international peace and security, inflation and currency fluctuations.
Fifth Committee - 1a - Press Release GA/AB/3133 47th Meeting (PM) 18 December 1996
Also this afternoon, the Committee approved a draft resolution on the pension system that would concur with the proposed Agreement between the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Board and the Russian Federation in relation to the problems arising from the implementation of the 1981 Transfer Agreements between the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund and the former Soviet Union, Ukrainian SSR and Byelorussian SSR. By its provisions, it would concur that the proposed Agreement would represent the first step in resolving the problems that have arisen in relation to the applications of the Transfer Agreements. The draft resolution was approved by a vote of 78 in favour, to 1 against (Ukraine), with 19 abstentions. (See Annex IV.) That text was the object of three other votes on motions to either delete or defer consideration of section IV of the draft.
Other provisions of the wide-ranging draft resolution would have the Assembly amend, with effect from 1 January 1997, a relevant part the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund's regulations to incorporate the revised scale of pensionable remuneration for staff in the Professional and higher categories. Based on that scale, the pensionable remuneration staff at Step I of P-2 would be $59,564; $72,604 for P-3; $87,233 for P-4; $105,510 for P-5; $119,218 for D-1; and $175,139 for an under-secretary-general.
The draft would also have the Assembly approve the admission of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea into the Pension Fund as from 1 January 1997.
Further this afternoon, the Committee approved a draft resolution on the budgetary aspects of peace-keeping, which would relocate Zambia from one group of Member States in the special grouping of States created for assessing peace-keeping dues to another that is assessed at lower rates. The same draft would place the Czech Republic in "group (c)" of Member States and have its future dues calculated on that basis. That country would be placed in "group (c)" for calculating its past dues for the period from its admission on 19 January 1993 through 31 December 1996. The Slovak Republic would be placed in "group (c)" in relation to its dues for the same period. Slovakia and the Czech Republic joined the Organization on the same day.
On its own programme of work, the Committee approved without a vote two draft decisions to defer some items to its resumed session and to approve its programme of work for the 1996-1997 biennium.
Concluding statements were made by the representatives of Mexico (on behalf of the Group of Latin American and Caribbean States), Costa Rica (for the "Group of 77" developing countries and China), Poland (on behalf of the Central and Eastern European States), Mali (for the Group of African States), Canada (on behalf of Western European and Other States Group), Japan (for the Asian Group of States), France and Cuba.
Committee Work Programme
The Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary) met this afternoon to take action on draft resolutions on administrative and budgetary aspects of the financing of peace-keeping operations; review of the United Nations efficiency, particularly the proposed budget outline for 1998-1999; and also on texts relating to some of the Committee's agenda items and reports, the United Nations pension system and to programme planning, particularly the medium-term plan for 1998-2001. (For background on the draft texts on the Committee's agenda items and reports, as well as on the pension system, see Press Release GA/AB/3132, of 18 December.)
Financing of Peace-keeping Operations
A four-part draft resolution, submitted by the Committee Chairman on the administrative and budgetary aspects of the financing of United Nations peace- keeping operations (document A/C.5/51/L.34), would have the Assembly take ad hoc decisions on the peace-keeping assessments of Zambia, Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic, which would go into effect on 1 January 1997.
Under the terms of part A, the Assembly would include Zambia in "group (d)", with effect from 1 January 1997, in the special grouping of Member States created for assessing peace-keeping dues and calculate its assessments accordingly.
By the terms of part B, the Assembly would include the Czech Republic in "group (b)" as from the same date after welcoming its readiness to be placed there. Regarding the country's apportionment for the period from its admission on 19 January 1993 through 31 December 1996, the Czech Republic shall be included in "group (c)" and its dues for that period calculated accordingly. The Assembly would then decide to credit those past dues to Member States in "groups (b), (c) and (d)".
The Assembly would, according to part C of the draft, include Slovakia in "group (c)" for the assessment of its peace-keeping dues for the period from its admission on 19 January 1993 through 31 December. It would also decide that Slovakia's peace-keeping dues for 1993 and from 1994 to the end of 1996 shall be credited to Member States in "groups (b), (c) and (d)".
The draft's part D would have the Assembly continue considering the agenda item in its resumed session.
[Note: The United Nations membership is divided into four groups for apportioning peace-keeping expenses. Those in "group (d)" are named economically less developed Member States, that would be charged at one tenth of their regular budget assessment rates. Countries in "group (c)" are other economically less developed States, which would be billed at one fifth.
Fifth Committee - 3 - Press Release GA/AB/3133 47th Meeting (PM) 18 December 1996
"Group (b)" countries are named economically developed States, which are not permanent members of the Security Council and would be assessed at 100 per cent of their regular budget assessment rates. In "group (a)" are the permanent Council members, which would also be charged 100 per cent and, in addition, cover expenses left unapportioned.]
Review of Efficiency
A draft resolution submitted by the Chairman on the review of the United Nations efficiency: the proposed budget outline for 1998-1999 (document A/C.5/51/L.40) would have the Assembly invite the Secretary-General to base the preparation of the proposed budget for 1998-1999 on the total preliminary estimate of $2.512 billion at initial 1996-1997 rates, adjusted to $2.480 billion at revised 1996-1997 rates. It would also decide to set the contingency fund at the level of 0.75 per cent of the preliminary estimate at 1998-1999 rates, namely, at $19 million. In addition, it would decide that the preliminary estimates for the biennium does not include a provision for special missions for which there are no mandates.
By other terms of the draft, the Assembly would request the Secretary- General to submit, in the context of his proposed 1998-1999 budget, information on the outputs that have been deferred, postponed or curtailed in 1996-1997 and their disposition in the proposed 1998-1999 budget; on the number of posts for the biennium by section and category; and on the proposed vacancy rate for Professional and General Service categories sought for budgetary purposes.
The draft would also have the Assembly ask the Secretary-General to submit to it, no later than 31 May 1997, a comprehensive policy paper which would examine all issues related to all additional expenditures, including those for maintaining international peace and security, inflation and currency fluctuation. The paper should help find a comprehensive solution to such questions.
Programme Planning
Submitted by Committee Vice-Chairman Syed Rafiqul Alom (Bangladesh), the draft resolution on programme planning (document A/C.5/51/L.37) contains five parts -- the medium-term plan for the period 1998-2001, the structure, priorities, the programme performance report, and other conclusions and recommendations of the Committee for Programme and Coordination (CPC).
By the terms of the draft, the Assembly would adopt the proposed medium-term plan for the period 1998-2001, together with the relevant recommendations of the CPC and the additional conclusions and recommendations contained in the annex to the draft, taking into account the views of the Assembly's Main Committees. It would reaffirm that the medium-term plan, as
Fifth Committee - 4 - Press Release GA/AB/3133 47th Meeting (PM) 18 December 1996
adopted, is the principal policy directive of the United Nations and shall serve as a framework for the formulation of the biennial programme budgets. The Assembly would stress the importance of ensuring that the medium-term plan reflects all mandated programmes and activities and would decide to include reference in the approved version of the plan to the legislative mandates relevant for the work to be carried out.
Also by the draft, the Assembly would decide to approve the programme structure of the medium-term plan, subject to the provisions of the draft resolution and to maintain disarmament as an independent programme in the medium-term plan. It would also decide further to review in depth the structure of the medium-term plan, through the CPC, at its fifty-fifth session. However, the Assembly would take note with concern of the fact that the Secretary-General, in presenting the programme structure of the medium-term plan for the period 1998-2001, did not take fully into account the recommendations of the CPC, the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions (ACABQ), and the views and opinions expressed by Member States, as requested in decision 50/452, on programme planning, adopted on 22 December 1995.
The Assembly would endorse the conclusions and recommendations of the CPC on the report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations programme performance for the biennium 1994-1995. It would endorse the conclusions and recommendations of the CPC at its thirty-sixth session that have not otherwise been approved by the Assembly at its fifty-first session. The low rate of implementation of the self-evaluation of the programmes, as reflected in the report of the Board of Auditors, was be noted with concern.
By other provisions of the text, the Assembly would stress the importance of priority-setting as an integral part of the planning, programming and budgeting process and request the Secretary-General to present to the CPC at its thirty-eighth session recommendations on priority-setting within the medium-term plan for the period 1998-2001. The Secretary-General would also be requested to implement the plan in accordance with the overall- agreed priorities as contained in the annex to the draft resolution.
The annex to the text contains the conclusions and recommendations on programmes and subprogrammes of the medium-term plan for the period 1998-2001. It comprises a section on the plan's introduction and priorities and selected programmes of the medium-term plan which have been revised in the Fifth Committee's informal consultations. (The draft text initially had twenty-five programmes.) In the section on introduction and priorities, the Assembly would state that "in response to the need to address efficiently and effectively persistent problems, as well as to respond to emerging trends and challenges of the future, the Organization will, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, give priority to the following areas of work during the implementation of the medium-term plan for the period 1998-2001".
Fifth Committee - 5 - Press Release GA/AB/3133 47th Meeting (PM) 18 December 1996
Those priority areas are the following: a) maintenance of international peace and security; c) development of Africa; d) promotion of human rights; e) effective coordination of humanitarian assistance efforts; f) promotion of justice and international law; g) disarmament; and h) drug control, crime prevention, as well as combating international terrorism in all its forms and manifestations.
The priority area b) is still in brackets and reads as follows:
[(b) Promotion of sustainable development of developing countries, including countries with economies in transition.
Alternatives:
(i) Group of 77 and China: Promotion of sustained economic growth and sustainable development;
(ii) United States of America: Promotion of economic growth and sustainable development;
(iii)European Union: Promotion of sustained economic growth in the context of sustainable development;]
In Programme 1 (Political affairs), seven paragraphs of text on the programme on disarmament and the objectives of that programme would replace existing other text. In addition, new language on the objectives of the subprogramme and two paragraphs on the Special Committee on decolonization would replace earlier text. A number of new paragraphs have also been added on objectives related to the question of Palestine. A change is proposed for paragraph 8.1 on the general purpose of Programme 8 (Development support and management services).
For Programme 9 (Trade and development), a new paragraph is suggested on the ninth session of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD IX) (Midrand, South Africa, May 1996). There are a number of other paragraphs which propose changes in the draft text of Programme 9, including adding a new paragraph 9.5 (bis) which states that "UNCTAD will continue its role as the focal point within the United Nations for the integrated treatment of development and interrelated issues in the areas of trade, finance, technology, investment and sustainable development. Some of the other programmes that have been revised in the annex include Programmes 15 (Economic and social development in Asia and the Pacific), 19 (Human rights), 23 (Public information) and 24 (Administrative services). Programme 24 (Administration) has now been renamed Administrative Services and is also bracketed.
Fifth Committee - 6 - Press Release GA/AB/3133 47th Meeting (PM) 18 December 1996
Action on Financing of Peace-keeping Operations
PETER MADDENS (Belgium) introduced the four-part draft resolution contained in document A/C.5/51/L.34, on administrative and budgetary aspects of the financing of the peace-keeping operations. He recommended the resolution for approval without a vote.
HO TONG YENG (Singapore) referred to the placement of Zambia, Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic on the peace-keeping scale of assessments. He reiterated his request to the Secretariat to issue information on the financial ramifications of such placement on all Member States.
MARTA PEÑA (Mexico) said she had taken part in the negotiations and would not oppose a consensus decision on it. However, she noted that there were some new elements of the resolution which changed the financing of peace- keeping operations. When a new assessment was proposed for some Member States, the Assembly was transferring the assessment in financial terms, which should normally go to the permanent members of the Security Council.
The Committee then approved the draft resolution without a vote.
Speaking after action, NIRANJAN BASNYAT (Nepal) said he had joined the consensus in approving the draft resolution contained in document A/C.5/51/L.34, but regretted the fact that the Fifth Committee had not been able to discuss many subjects under administrative and budgetary aspects of the financing of peace-keeping missions, such as death and disability benefits. That had been due to provision of incomplete information from the Secretariat and the inadequacy of the proposals submitted by it.
MARCEL JESENSKY (Slovak Republic) said that the approved draft had taken into account the economic circumstances of his country. It was in the interest of his country to take its fair share of assessments for peace- keeping operations.
MILES ARMITAGE (Australia) said he had joined consensus on the draft as it was an opportunity for addressing some of the anomalies and deficiencies in the special peace-keeping scale, which was not transparent. The scale should be revised comprehensively, something that the draft resolution did not achieve. Although he would have preferred more than a partial solution, he would accept the draft resolution "for what it does rather than what it does not".
WILLIAM GRANT (United States) said he had joined consensus on the draft resolution with great reluctance, even though it sympathized with the situations of Zambia, Czech Republic and Slovakia. What was required was a comprehensive overhaul of the entire peace-keeping assessment system. He had
Fifth Committee - 7 - Press Release GA/AB/3133 47th Meeting (PM) 18 December 1996
joined consensus in the hope that a comprehensive overhaul of the special scale for peace-keeping assessment would be considered in due course.
ALBERT MUCHANGA (Zambia) expressed his delegation's appreciation for the Committee's approval of the draft resolution.
IVO SRAMEK (Czech Republic) thanked the coordinator of the informal consultations and other delegations that had helped bring about a consensus on the issue.
GABRIELLE DUSCHNER (Canada) associated her delegation with the statement by Australia.
DENISE ALMAO (New Zealand) associated her delegation with the statement by Australia.
YUKIO TAKASU, United Nations Controller, said as of today the Secretariat had been informed by the Russian Federation that it would pay about $57 million to peace-keeping budgets. That would bring to $310 million the amount that the Russian Federation had paid this year, an amount that exceeded its share for 1996 by $180 million. Reimbursements for troops for Somalia would be paid.
VIJAY GOKHALE (India) welcomed the news from the Controller, adding that the reimbursement should be made as early as possible to troop contributing- States.
Action on Programme Planning
As the draft resolution on the proposed medium-term plan for the period 1998-2001 was about to be introduced, SYED RAFIQUL ALOM (Bangladesh), a Committee Vice-Chairman and coordinator of the agenda item on the proposed medium-term plan for the period 1998-2001, requested that the meeting be suspended for one minute to attempt to conclude negotiations on one part of the text. He said if there was agreement, he would submit the full text to the Committee.
A few minutes later he requested that the meeting be suspended for 15 minutes.
NGONI FRANCIS SENGWE (Zimbabwe), Committee Chairman, suspended the meeting.
The meeting resumed after 15 minutes.
Fifth Committee - 8 - Press Release GA/AB/3133 47th Meeting (PM) 18 December 1996
Mr. ALOM (Bangladesh) said he was proud to inform the Committee that all aspects of the draft resolution had been accepted by delegations. He extended his "deep gratitude to all 185 Member States" and the Secretariat officials who had contributed to the successful conclusion of the negotiations on the agenda item. He also thanked the President of the General Assembly who had assisted in the informal consultations earlier today.
He said the proposed medium-term plan as stated in the draft resolution reflected landmark improvements in programme planning this year. It was a milestone achievement for Member States which was an indication that Member States "could do anything at anytime".
According to the draft resolution, the proposed medium-term plan would now have 26 programmes, not 25 as initially proposed. Disarmament had been added as a new independent programme, he said. Decolonization had been added as a new subprogramme. Issues related to Programme 19 (Human rights) had been agreed on. They had been looked at in the broader context of the proposed medium-term plan. As a result, they had reached agreement on that programme. The Committee had decided that the Office of Internal Oversight Services would remain an independent programme.
The informal consultations had also reached agreement on the priorities of the proposed medium-term plan in the section on introduction and priorities, as stated in the annex, he continued. The Committee had reached a successful conclusion also on the eight priorities, instead of six. They represented an integrated view of the Perspective and the Note, which were produced as introductory parts of the medium-term plan.
He then recommended the draft resolution for approval by the Committee without a vote. It had all the elements of a successful and workable medium- term plan as it was now structured.
He said the Secretariat had done a tremendous job in preparing the text and printing the draft resolution at 5 a.m. today.
He then informed of all the amendments to the draft text: In part II of the draft text on "structure", paragraph 4 was replaced by the following: "decides to adopt Programme 19 without prejudice to considerations by the General Assembly of the ongoing process of restructuring of the Centre for Human Rights". Paragraph 4 of part II would become paragraph 5. Also, to the third line of paragraph 2 of the part on "priorities", new text should be added after "priority setting". That line would now read: "priority setting, including at the subprogramme level".
He said the most important amendment was made to paragraph (b) of the second paragraph of the annex, which concerned areas of priority during the implementation of the medium-term plan. Based on consensus, that paragraph
Fifth Committee - 9 - Press Release GA/AB/3133 47th Meeting (PM) 18 December 1996
would now read: "Promotion of sustained economic growth and sustainable development in accordance with relevant General Assembly resolutions and recent United Nations conferences." All the alternatives listed under (b) would be deleted. The brackets around (b) would be removed.
He then read out other oral amendments to paragraphs 14 and 17 in Programme 1 (Political affairs). Amendments were also made to paragraph 5 of Programme 9 and paragraph 3 (d) of the section on Programme 19 (Human rights), as well as the section on Programme 24 (Administrative services).
The draft resolution was recommended for approval without a vote.
JOSEPH ACAKPO-SATCHIVI, the Fifth Committee's Secretary, said that some paragraphs in the French version would be translated to conform with the English text. Changes would be made to the annex.
DULCE MARIA BUERGO RODRIGUEZ (Cuba) said some editorial corrections should be made in page 8, regarding disarmament, in order to make the portion conform with the overall text.
Mr. SENGWE (Zimbabwe) proposed the approval of the draft resolution as orally revised.
Speaking after action, DONALD GELBER (United States) said his delegation would reserve the right to make a statement on the matter during the plenary.
PATRICK KELLY (Ireland), speaking for the European Union, said he would speak in the plenary in explanation of position. He praised the efforts of the coordinator of informal consultations on the matter, Mr. Alom (Bangladesh).
Ms. BUERGO RODRIGUEZ (Cuba) said the new mandates approved in the medium-term plan should be included in the list of legislative mandates that had been presented by the Secretariat during the discussions on the plan.
NAZARETH INCERA (Costa Rica), speaking for the "Group of 77" developing countries and China, said economic growth and sustainable development should be accorded the greatest priority. In accepting the language from prior global conferences, the Group had stated that sustainable development and the elimination of poverty were of the greatest priority to its members.
Action on United Nations Pension System
Mr. SENGWE (Zimbabwe), the Committee Chairman, gave the floor to the representative of the Russian Federation and of Ukraine to propose how to proceed on the issue of section IV of the draft resolution contained in document A/C.5/51/L.36, on the United Nations pension system. The section deals with the issue of the 1981 Transfer Agreements between the United
Fifth Committee - 10 - Press Release GA/AB/3133 47th Meeting (PM) 18 December 1996
Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund and the former Soviet Union, Ukrainian SSR and Byelorussian SSR.
YURI BOHAYEVSKI (Ukraine) said that the issue was very complicated and efforts should be made to repair the current situation regarding the Transfer Agreements. Time should be provided for more bilateral talks between the two sides to enable them to seek bilateral solutions to the problems related to the Transfer Agreements between the Pension Fund and the former Soviet Union and two other former Republics. He appealed to the Committee and the Russian Federation to respond to the official proposals made by Ukraine. One of them had been made by the Foreign Minister of Ukraine, with the other being made by its Permanent Mission to the United Nations.
He said he was seeking a fair solution to an understanding for his delegation's concerns. He proposed to defer action on section IV of the draft to the resumed session of the Committee.
VLADIMIR KUZNETSOV (Russian Federation) said he agreed with the representative of Ukraine regarding the fact that the issue before the Committee was of a technical nature. Therefore, bringing in issues related to bilateral relations was uncalled for. The separate proposed Agreement between the Russian Federation and the Pension Fund was the product of four years of work that had been requested by the Assembly, which had sought a solution to the problems arising in relation to the 1981 Transfer Agreements. The separate proposed Agreement had been worked out with representatives of various bodies, including the Assembly. It had been produced after going through various careful stages. The ACABQ also had stated its view on the proposed Agreement. Legal opinions, too, had been stated. Therefore, all the Committee had to do was a technical decision on the issue.
He said that postponing the approval of the draft resolution to the resumed session would mean that about 300 pensioners in the Russian Federation would not get their anticipated pensions early next year. He noted that, according to rule 131, proposals should be considered in the order in which they were introduced. Therefore, the Committee should first take action on the draft resolution contained in document A/C.5/51/L.36 before acting on other proposals.
Mr. SENGWE (Zimbabwe) said the Committee had postponed action on the draft resolution at the request of Zambia last night. Today's proposal was for a deferral of section IV of draft resolution contained in document A/C.5/51/L.36 to the resumed session.
Mr. KUZNETSOV (Russian Federation) said he would not accept the proposal, as it would change the substance of the problem at hand. He did not see why section IV should be isolated from the rest of the draft resolution. The Fifth Committee should take action on the draft resolution as a whole.
Fifth Committee - 11 - Press Release GA/AB/3133 47th Meeting (PM) 18 December 1996
Mr. SENGWE (Zimbabwe) asked the Committee to take action on what had been proposed by Ukraine.
Mr. BOHAYEVSKI (Ukraine) asked for a roll call vote on his proposal to defer consideration of section IV of the draft resolution contained in document A/C.5/51/L.36.
Speaking on a point of order, Mr. KUZNETSOV (Russian Federation) said the proposal to postpone the item was neither procedural nor an amendment. It should be voted on in the order in which it had been presented to the Committee. By the provisions of rule 131, the Committee should act on the adoption of the entire draft resolution, since such action had been proposed in an earlier meeting of the Committee.
Mr. SENGWE (Zimbabwe) said the Committee had concurred with Zambia's representative to defer action yesterday. That had effectively annulled the Chairman's proposal to adopt the entire draft resolution.
Mr. BOHAYEVSKI (Ukraine) referred to rule 128, which he said had provided that, after the Chairman had proposed the commencement of voting, no delegate would interrupt him, under certain conditions.
The Committee CHAIRMAN put to the vote the motion that section IV of the draft resolution contained in document A/C.5/51/L.36 be deferred to the resumed session.
The motion was rejected by a recorded vote of 4 in favour (Estonia, Latvia, Marshall Islands, Ukraine) to 18 against, with 61 abstentions. (See Annex I for details of the voting.)
Speaking after the vote, Mr. KUZNETSOV (Ukraine) said what the Committee had seen was where the situation stood. He regretted the fact that Ukraine's concerns on the matter of great importance to Ukraine and its citizens had not been understood. He reserved the right to speak in the plenary.
WOLFGANG STOECKL (Germany) said that, while he had an understanding for Ukraine, he was not sure that the payments of benefits for some pensioners should be deferred. He urged the Chairman to try to get a compromise agreement between the two sides. Further steps should be taken to seek a compromise.
JANIE LETROT (France) said she supported the view by Germany and appealed to the parties concerned to continue their dialogue to arrive at a compromise.
THOMAS SCHLESINGER (Austria) supported the view by Germany, saying that it was not too late to reach a consensus.
Fifth Committee - 12 - Press Release GA/AB/3133 47th Meeting (PM) 18 December 1996
Mr. SENGWE (Zimbabwe), Committee Chairman, said the Committee would now approve the entire text, including section IV.
Mr. BOHAYEVSKI (Ukraine) asked if there was a quorum for approving a decision.
Mr. ACAKPO-SATCHIVI, the Fifth Committee's Secretary, said there were 116 delegations. Ninety-three were needed for a quorum. There were a number of delegations in the room that were not voting.
Mr. BOHAYEVSKI (Ukraine) then proposed a motion to delete section IV of the draft.
Mr. SENGWE (Zimbabwe), Committee Chairman, asked for a clarification of the proposal.
Mr. BOHAYEVSKI (Ukraine) said the proposal was that section IV should not be included in the draft resolution.
Mr. KUZNETSOV (Russian Federation) said it was a new proposal to be voted on. His understanding was that the Committee should now take a decision on the text.
Mr. MUCHANGA (Zambia) asked what was the difference in the request to defer consideration of section IV, which was not granted, and the new proposal.
Mr. BOHAYEVSKI (Ukraine) said his new motion was based on rule 129 of the Assembly rules of procedure. He asked for a decision on the new motion.
Mr. SENGWE (Zimbabwe), Committee Chairman, read out the relevant rule. He then said that, in accordance with the rule, the next course of action was to take action on the draft resolution as a whole.
SAM HANSON (Canada) asked for clarification and said that, if there was an amendment, it should be voted on first.
Mr. BOHAYEVSKI (Ukraine) again read rule 129 to support his interpretation of it.
Mr. SENGWE (Zimbabwe), Committee Chairman, said Ukraine was asking for the deletion of section IV of the draft resolution.
Mr. MUCHANGA (Zambia) requested the Secretariat advice on the action that should be taken. He restated his position on the lack of difference in the proposal.
Fifth Committee - 13 - Press Release GA/AB/3133 47th Meeting (PM) 18 December 1996
Mr. ACAKPO-SATCHIVI, the Fifth Committee's Secretary, said there was a difference. The first decision was to oppose the deferral which had been rejected. The Chairman had now proposed taking a decision on the entire draft resolution as submitted, removing the brackets. Ukraine had asked for a vote to delete section IV.
Mr. SENGWE (Zimbabwe), Committee Chairman, said the motion was to delete section IV. Mr. KUZNETSOV (Russian Federation) said he could vote for the deletion of section IV.
Mr. SENGWE (Zimbabwe), Committee Chairman, said it would put the proposal to delete section IV of the draft resolution to a vote.
PAPA ALY SEYS (Senegal) said the Committee should know what were the implications of the proposal and the consequences of its vote. He asked what exactly was being requested by the action to be taken by the Committee. It needed to be very clear. He called for the meeting to be suspended for five minutes.
RAYMOND GIERI, Secretary of the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Board, said the implications of the deletion of section IV of the text would mean that the Assembly would not approve the recommendations of the Pension Board to reach an agreement with the Russian Federation. It would also mean that the Board would have no basis for taking action in that domain.
Mr. SENGWE (Zimbabwe) said the Committee would proceed to vote on the proposal to delete section IV.
The proposal to delete section IV was rejected by a vote of 2 in favour (Latvia, Ukraine) to 31 against, with 50 abstentions. (See Annex II.)
Mr. BOHAYEVSKI (Ukraine) said his proposals were a matter of principle. He knew what should be done next. He had been in diplomacy for 24 years. He then asked for a separate vote on section IV and then on the whole text.
Mr. SENGWE (Zimbabwe) proposed a vote on a motion on whether to approve section IV of the draft resolution contained in document A/C.5/51/L.36.
The motion to maintain section IV in the draft resolution as it stood was adopted by a vote of 32 in favour to 1 against (Ukraine), with 48 abstentions. (See Annex III.)
The Chairman then proposed a vote on whether to approve the entire draft resolution contained in document A/C.5/51/L.36, including section IV.
Mr. BOHAYEVSKI (Ukraine) asked for a recorded vote.
Fifth Committee - 14 - Press Release GA/AB/3133 47th Meeting (PM) 18 December 1996
The Committee then approved the draft resolution on the pension system as a whole by a recorded vote of 78 in favour to 1 against (Ukraine), with 19 abstentions. (See Annex IV.)
Speaking in explanation of vote, Mr. STOECKL (Germany) said he had voted for section IV not because he did not sympathize with Ukraine, but because that section would allow some individuals to receive their pension benefits. It would not have helped anyone to have that group of pensioners punished by the deferral of action on section IV. Any further developments on the Transfer Agreements should be referred to the Assembly, which should closely monitor developments on the question of those 1981 Agreements.
Mr. SCHLESINGER (Austria) expressed regret that a consensus had not been reached. He expressed hope that further steps, envisaged in the proposed Agreement, would be taken by the countries concerned.
ULDIS BLUKIS (Latvia) said Latvia had wanted enough time to find out the rights that affected pensioners residing in Latvia had under the 1981 Transfer Agreements and in the subsequent proposed Agreement. The question had moved too quickly for his delegation to find out and keep track of the facts on the ground. Latvia had abstained from voting on section IV, but had voted to approve the entire text so as not to block action on the pensions of other people who were not affected by the 1981 Transfer Agreements. It had sympathy for the pensioners who were covered by the proposed Agreements, as well as for those who were not covered by it.
TOOMAS LUKK (Estonia) expressed regret that the Committee was not able to reach a consensus agreement on the draft resolution.
Action on Budget Outline for 1998-1999
KLAUS DIETER-STEIN (Germany), Vice-Chairman of the Committee, who had conducted informal consultations on behalf of the Chairman, introduced the text on the budget outline for 1998-1999. A paragraph on the Organization's priorities would be taken from the approved medium-term plan and inserted into the draft resolution on the budget outline. He proposed a new paragraph 8, left blank in the draft resolution contained in document A/C.5/51/L.40, which would include as priorities of the budget such items that had been approved in the medium-term plan. They include the maintenance of international peace and security, development of Africa, promotion of human rights, effective coordination of humanitarian assistance efforts, promotion of justice and international law, disarmament, drug control, crime prevention, as well as combating international terrorism in all its forms.
Ms. PEÑA (Mexico) asked about the status of the draft resolution on the outline which had been proposed yesterday by a group of delegations. She
Fifth Committee - 15 - Press Release GA/AB/3133 47th Meeting (PM) 18 December 1996
asked whether the group was accepting a consensus draft and sought clarification as to whether that draft would be withdrawn.
Mr. ACAKPO-SATCHIVI, the Fifth Committee's Secretary, said the Committee would take a decision on the matter she was raising in accordance with an appropriate procedure. If the new draft text was approved, the prior draft resolution would be withdrawn.
Ms. PEÑA (Mexico) said she had needed the clarification. Even though the prior draft resolution should have been the first to be approved, she would not press the matter further.
Mr. SENGWE (Zimbabwe) proposed the approval of the draft resolution on the budget outline, as orally revised by Germany's representative, to include the budget's priorities.
The Committee then approved the draft resolution without a vote.
Speaking in explanation of position, Mr. GOKHALE (India) said he had joined consensus on the understanding that the Secretary-General would not include any funding for mandates that had not been legislated until a comprehensive solution to the issue of additional expenditures had been found. Such expenditures should be catered for according to the provisions of Assembly resolution 41/213 of December 1986, which had set out the proper budgetary procedure to be followed by the Organization. The arguments made by the Secretary-General's representatives for the inclusion of some amounts for special missions could not be accepted. The Secretary-General should propose a budget for 1998-1999 that would abide by the letter of the just-approved draft resolution.
Mr. ARMITAGE (Australia), also speaking for Canada and New Zealand, said he regretted the fact that a statement of the CANZ group (Canada, Australia and New Zealand) could not be made. He had supported the Secretary-General's proposals for the outline, which had included provisions for special missions. Member States would now face the prospects of deciding how to finance "add- ons" to the budget in the course of a biennium. He looked forward to the policy paper that would be submitted on the question of additional expenditures.
NORMA GOICOCHEA ESTENOZ (Cuba) said her delegation associated itself with the decision to approve the draft resolution. However, Cuba regretted the fact that the budget outline had not included a higher level of resources. The draft resolution's provisions regarding existing procedures for making adjustments to take account of inflation and currency fluctuations remained valid. When the Secretary-General submitted his budget for 1998-1999, he should take into account the negative effects on programmes delivery that the savings from the 1996-1997 had had.
Fifth Committee - 16 - Press Release GA/AB/3133 47th Meeting (PM) 18 December 1996
MOHAMED FATAH (Egypt) said the preparations of the next regular budget should be based on the just-approved draft resolution in document A/C.5/51/L.40.
Mr. KELLY (Ireland), speaking for the European Union, said he would make a statement during the plenary meeting later in the day.
Mr. SENGWE (Zimbabwe), the Committee's Chairman, asked whether the Group of 77 had agreed to withdraw a related draft resolution which it had proposed yesterday.
Ms. INCERA (Costa Rica), speaking for the Group of 77 and China, withdrew the draft resolution.
Action on Other Agenda Items
Mr. SENGWE (Zimbabwe) proposed the approval of a draft decision contained in document A/C.5/51/L.28, which would defer some of the Committee's agenda items to the resumed session.
Mr. ACAKPO-SATCHIVI, the Fifth Committee's Secretary, proposed the deletion of some of the items that would be deferred.
The draft decision in document A/C.5/51/L.28 was approved, as orally revised, without a vote.
Then, the CHAIRMAN proposed the approval of the draft text on the Committee's work programme for the biennium.
Mr. ACAKPO-SATCHIVI, the Secretary, said some items, which had been omitted, should be inserted.
The CHAIRMAN proposed the approval of the draft decision in document A/C.5/51/L.29, on the Committee's biennial programme of work.
The Committee approved it without a vote.
(annexes follow)
Fifth Committee - 17 - Press Release GA/AB/3133 47th Meeting (PM) 18 December 1996
Fifth Committee Press Release GA/AB/3133 47th Meeting (PM) 18 December 1996
ANNEX I
Vote on Motion to Defer Action on Section IV
The motion to defer action on section IV of the draft resolution on the United Nations pension system (document A/C.5/51/L.36) was rejected by a recorded vote of 4 in favour to 18 against, with 61 abstentions, as follows:
In favour: Estonia, Latvia, Marshall Islands, Ukraine.
Against: Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, France, Germany, India, Japan, Kazakstan, Morocco, New Zealand, Russian Federation, United Kingdom, United States, Zambia.
Abstentions: Algeria, Andorra, Bahamas, Barbados, Belarus, Belize, Bolivia, Botswana, Bulgaria, Chile, Colombia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Ecuador, Egypt, Fiji, Finland, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Kenya, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Malta, Mexico, Namibia, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Republic of Korea, Romania, Samoa, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Slovak Republic, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Thailand, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Uruguay, Venezuela, Zimbabwe.
Absent: Afghanistan, Albania, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Benin, Bhutan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Chad, China, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d'Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Federated States of Micronesia, Gabon, Gambia, Georgia, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Honduras, Indonesia, Iran, Israel, Jordan, Kuwait, Kyrgyz Republic, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Madagascar, Malawi, Maldives, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius, Monaco, Mongolia, Mozambique, Myanmar, Nepal, Netherlands, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Palau, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Moldova, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, San Marino, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Syria, Tajikistan, Togo, Turkmenistan, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zaire.
(END OF ANNEX I)
18
Fifth Committee Press Release GA/AB/3133 47th Meeting (PM) 18 December 1996
ANNEX II
Vote on Proposal to Delete Section IV
The proposal to delete section IV of the draft resolution on the United Nations pension system contained in document A/C.5/51/L.36 was rejected by a vote of 2 in favour to 31 against, with 50 abstentions, as follows:
In favour: Latvia, Ukraine.
Against: Andorra, Argentina, Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belgium, Brazil, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Iceland, India, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Kazakstan, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Morocco, New Zealand, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, Singapore, Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom, United States, Zambia.
Abstaining: Australia, Bahamas, Barbados, Belarus, Belize, Bolivia, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Egypt, Estonia, Guyana, Haiti, Hungary, Jamaica, Kenya, Liberia, Libya, Lithuania, Malaysia, Malta, Mexico, Namibia, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Romania, Samoa, Saudi Arabia, Sierra Leone, Slovak Republic, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Thailand, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkey, Uganda, Uruguay, Venezuela, Zimbabwe.
Absent: Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Benin, Bhutan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Chad, China, Comoros, Congo, Côte d'Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Honduras, Indonesia, Iran, Israel, Jordan, Kuwait, Kyrgyz Republic, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Madagascar, Malawi, Maldives, Mali, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Mauritius, Monaco, Mongolia, Mozambique, Myanmar, Nepal, Netherlands, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Palau, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Moldova, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, San Marino, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Seychelles, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Syria, Tajikistan, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zaire.
19
(END OF ANNEX II)
Fifth Committee Press Release GA/AB/3133 47th Meeting (PM) 18 December 1996
ANNEX III
Vote on Motion to Maintain Section IV
The motion to maintain section IV in the text of the draft resolution on the United Nations pension system (document A/C.5/51/L.36) was adopted by a vote of 32 in favour to 1 against, with 48 abstentions, as follows:
In favour: Andorra, Argentina, Armenia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Costa Rica, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Guyana, Iceland, India, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Kazakstan, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Morocco, New Zealand, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, Spain, Sweden, Syria, United Kingdom, United States, Zambia.
Against: Ukraine.
Abstaining: Australia, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Bolivia, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Egypt, Estonia, Guatemala, Haiti, Hungary, Jamaica, Latvia, Liberia, Libya, Lithuania, Malaysia, Malta, Mexico, Namibia, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Saudi Arabia, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovak Republic, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkey, Uganda, Uruguay, Venezuela, Zimbabwe.
Absent: Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belarus, Benin, Bhutan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Chad, China, Comoros, Congo, Côte d'Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Honduras, Indonesia, Iran, Israel, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyz Republic, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Madagascar, Malawi, Maldives, Mali, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Mauritius, Monaco, Mongolia, Mozambique, Myanmar, Nepal, Netherlands, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, San Marino, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Seychelles, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Tajikistan, the former Yugoslav Republic of
20
Macedonia, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zaire.
(END OF ANNEX III)
Fifth Committee Press Release GA/AB/3133 47th Meeting (PM) 18 December 1996
ANNEX IV
Vote on Text on United Nations Pension System
The draft resolution on the United Nations pension system was approved by a vote of 78 in favour to 1 against, with 19 abstentions, as follows:
In favour: Algeria, Andorra, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Barbados, Belgium, Belize, Bolivia, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Czech Republic, Denmark, Egypt, Federated States of Micronesia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Iceland, India, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Kazakstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Malta, Mauritania, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, New Zealand, Norway, Philippines, Poland, Republic of Korea, Romania, Russian Federation, Samoa, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovak Republic, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Syria, Thailand, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Uganda, United Kingdom, United Republic of Tanzania, United States, Viet Nam, Zambia, Zimbabwe.
Against: Ukraine.
Abstentions: Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bulgaria, Ecuador, Estonia, Hungary, Jamaica, Liberia, Libya, Lithuania, Mexico, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Republic of Moldova, Uruguay, Venezuela.
Absent: Afghanistan, Albania, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Bangladesh, Benin, Bhutan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brunei Darussalam, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Chad, Comoros, Congo, Côte d'Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Honduras, Indonesia, Iran, Israel, Jordan, Kyrgyz Republic, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho,
21
Madagascar, Malawi, Maldives, Mali, Marshall Islands, Mauritius, Monaco, Mongolia, Myanmar, Nepal, Netherlands, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Portugal, Qatar, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, San Marino, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Slovenia, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Tajikistan, Turkey, Turkmenistan, United Arab Emirates, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Yemen, Zaire.
* *** *