FIFTH COMMITTEE BEGINS SECOND RESUMED SESSION
Press Release
GA/AB/3225
FIFTH COMMITTEE BEGINS SECOND RESUMED SESSION
19980511Adopts Work Programme; Reports on Development Account Introduced
The Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary) this morning approved its programme of work for the second part of its resumed fifty-second session. Lasting for three weeks, from 11 to 29 May, the session will focus primarily on the financing of United Nations peacekeeping operations, with some 18 operations being taken up.
In addition, the Committee will consider reports on reform initiatives allocated to it by the General Assembly. In that context, it will take up the report on the revolving credit fund, and the note on the impact of the implementation of pilot projects on budgetary practices and procedures as it reviews the United Nations administrative and financial efficiency. Reports related to the Development Account will be considered under the agenda item on the 1998-1999 proposed programme budget.
Other items on the Committee's sessional agenda include administrative and budgetary aspects of peacekeeping operations. In that context, the Committee will discuss the United Nations support account; third party liability; the United Nations Logistics Base at Brindisi; and death and disability benefits. It will also take up matters related to the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda; human resources management; and appointments to the United Nations Staff Pension Committee.
Prior to approving its programme of work, Committee members discussed the quality and timeliness of documents. The representative of Indonesia, speaking on behalf of the "Group of 77" developing countries and China, said that not only was the chronic problem of late submission of documents continuing, but some reports lacked substantive content. Both those matters could negatively affect the Committee's work.
A number of speakers supported those views. Uganda's representative said his delegation was appalled at the quality of some of the reports that had been issued for the Committee's consideration. The United Nations effort to achieve savings must never be at the expense of quality and standard of work.
Fifth Committee - 1a - Press Release GA/AB/3225 60th Meeting (AM) 11 May 1998
The Committee Chairman, Anwarul Karim Chowdhury (Bangladesh) said that the Committee should keep in mind, regarding the timeliness of documentation, that there were barely six weeks since the conclusion of the first resumed session. At the same time, the Secretariat must comply with relevant General Assembly resolutions, he stressed.
Under-Secretary-General for Management Joseph Connor, introduced the Secretary- General's report on internal control standards, which proposes an amendment to article X of the Organization's Financial Regulations. In response, Conrad Mselle, Chairman of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions (ACABQ), stressed that any amendment to those Regulations must be preceded by an Advisory Committee review.
The Committee agreed to postpone consideration of the report until the Assembly's fifty-third session, to allow the ACABQ time to take up the report in the larger context of its review of reports of the Board of Auditors.
Also this morning, Mr. Connor introduced the Secretary-General's report on utilization of the Development Account, was part of the continuing discussion on the Secretary-General's proposal to create a dividend for development. The sustainability aspect of the Account was critical.
Introducing the ACABQ's related report, its Chairman, Mr. Mselle said that efficiency measures should take place throughout the Organization, and not be confined solely to central support services, such as the Department of Management. The time-frame proposed by the Secretary-General for realizing $200 million by the 2002-2003 biennium was overambitious. Also, it was yet to be demonstrated that the transfer of that amount would not affect programme delivery.
John-Pierre Halbwachs, United Nations Controller, addressed delegations' concerns regarding the issuance of documentation.
Statements were made this morning by the representatives of Algeria, United States, Syria, Uganda, Pakistan, Cuba, Portugal, Japan, India, Australia, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Canada, New Zealand, United Kingdom on behalf of the European Union, Norway, Cameroon and Bulgaria.
The Committee is scheduled to meet again at 10 a.m. tomorrow, 12 May to continue its review of the United Nations efficiency. It will also consider aspects of the 1998-1999 programme budget, namely, reports concerning the Development Account.
(page 2 follows) Fifth Committee Work Programme
The Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary) met this morning to begin the second part of its resumed fifty-second session, which will be held until 29 May.
This morning, it was scheduled to discuss its organization of work and begin considering a report of the Secretary-General on guidelines for internal control standards, as part of its review of the efficiency of the administrative and financial functioning of the United Nations. It was also expected to take up aspects of the programme budget for the 1998-1999 biennium -- including reports on the reduction and refocusing of non-programme costs, and on the utilization of the development account.
Administrative and Financial Efficiency: Internal Control
The Committee had before it a report of the Secretary- General regarding guidelines for internal control standards (A/52/867). In his report, the Secretary-General proposes that the Assembly adopt an amendment to article X of the Financial Regulations of the United Nations. By that amendment, regulation 10.1 (e) would state that the internal control systems and procedures of the organization should be in conformity, mutatis mutandis, with the Guidelines for Internal Control Standards approved by the International Organization of Supreme Audit Institutions (INTOSAI) in June 1992, or later promulgations which are acceptable to the Secretary-General. The INTOSAI is the professional organization of supreme audit institutions of virtually all Member States of the United Nations.
According to the report, the Guidelines -- which appear as an annex to the report -- are aimed at strengthening management control and enhancing more focused accountability in the public sector. They are the result of an international effort to summarize, formalize and publicize best practices in effective internal controls of government management. The Guidelines capture, in broad and general terms, the standards essential for such controls. They also provide an overview of internal control concepts, objectives and standards, set out definitions and limitations of internal controls, review relevant standards, and provide guidance on establishing the framework for internal control structures and recommendations on monitoring internal controls.
The report states that the general standards of internal controls include reasonable assurance by internal control structures that the Organization's objectives will be accomplished; a supportive attitude by managers and staff towards internal controls at all times; and personal and professional integrity and competence of managers and employees regarding internal controls.
The report further states that the formal acceptance of the INTOSAI Guidelines by the United Nations would not only signify the Organization's formal compliance with internationally approved standards of internal controls, but would also give impetus to the focus of streamlining and strengthening internal controls in the course of reform. With this in mind, the Secretary-General has decided to adopt the Guidelines as a general substantive standard against which the Secretariat's internal control procedures and systems should conform.
1998-1999 Budget: Non-Programme Costs
The report of the Secretary-General on the reduction and refocusing of non-programme costs (document A/52/758) refers to the two overall aims of this exercise. It is to reduce by 1 January 2002 non-programme costs by one third as compared to those for 1996-1997 as presented by the Secretary-General. In actual terms, this represents a reduction of $280 million of the $849 million attributed to such expenses. In so doing, efficiency dividend of some $200 million would be placed at the disposal of the General Assembly, through the mechanism of the Development Account, for reallocation to economic and social activities.
The Assembly decided last December to establish in the 1998-1999 programme budget, a Development Account to be funded from savings from possible reduction of administrative and other overhead costs.
The report states that six elements should be included totally or partially under non-programme costs. These are: direct administrative costs, executive direction and management, programme support, conference services, public information costs and general operating expenses. (For additional information, see Press Release GA/AB/3213 of 10 March.)
In its related report (document A/52/7/Add.10), the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions (ACABQ) states that the Secretary-General's report is flawed by the lack of a clear concept of what constitutes the nature of activities funded by the regular budget. The report states that the concept of "non-programme" is not applicable in the United Nations regular budget context since regulation 5.5 of the Regulations and Rules Governing Programme Planning, the Programme Aspects of the Budget, the Monitoring of Implementation and the Methods of Evaluation, states that "all activities for which resources are requested in proposed programme budget shall be programmed". (For additional information, see Press Release GA/AB/3213 of 10 March.)
United Nations Reform Measures: Utilization of Development Account
A note by the Secretary-General on utilization of the Development Account (A/52/848) states, on modalities for its implementation, that the Account is part of the regular United Nations budget and, therefore, will be governed by the same modalities and procedures that govern the regular budget. The Secretary-General will present his proposals for the utilization of the account funds for each biennium along with the budget proposals for that biennium. Specific projects would be implemented within the framework of the General Assembly's decisions on those proposals.
The Under-Secretary-General for Economic and Social Affairs will serve as the Programme Manager for the Account and will oversee its implementation, the note states. The Under-Secretary-General, in consultation with the Executive Committee on Economic and Social Affairs, will assist in the formulation of the Secretary-General's proposals for the utilization of the funds in the Account. The individual entities comprising the Executive Committee will be responsible for the implementation of approved projects. (For additional information, see Press Release GA/9403 of 27 April.)
Statements on Organization of Work
ANWARUL KARIM CHOWDHURY (Bangladesh), Fifth Committee Chairman, welcoming delegates to the second resumed session of the Committee, expressed the hope that within the time- frame, some concrete work could be accomplished.
PRAYONO ATIYANTO (Indonesia), speaking on behalf of the "Group of 77" developing countries and China, said that while the Group took note that a number of reports for this session had been issued, the chronic problem of late submission of documents continued. Important reports had not been issued, and many had not been submitted in accordance with the six-week rule. The Group also wished to express its concern at the lack of substantive content in some of the reports submitted. Such a lack would affect the work of the Committee. Also, while reports that had been requested by the General Assembly had not yet been issued, others, which had not been requested, were already issued.
The Committee should prioritize its work, he said. During the current session, important items included consideration of the support account, the Development Account, gratis personnel, and financing of peacekeeping operations; those items should be made a priority. The Group further wished to stress the importance of respecting the current decision-making frameworks in both formal meetings and informal consultations.
DJAMEL MOKTEFI (Algeria) fully supported the statement made by the representative of Indonesia on behalf of the Group of 77. The current session should have an efficient and effective programme of work. Therefore, as the representative of Indonesia had stressed, it was necessary to prioritize. It was also essential that work of the resumed session proceed with full transparency so that all delegations could be fully involved in negotiations. Regarding the allocation to the Committee of reports on reform, he said while Algeria could accept having the report on the Development Account inscribed under the item on the Programme Budget 1998-1999, that could not be the case for the other two reports. No such decision had been made by the Assembly and they should be kept under item 157, on United Nations reform, or under item 114, on review of the efficiency of the administrative and financial functioning of the United Nations.
JAMES BOND (United States) said his country was ready to participate constructively throughout the resumed session. Regarding consultations on third-party liability, he noted that a representative from the Office of Legal Affairs would not be present during the informal meetings. He hoped informals on the matter would be scheduled at a time when a representative from that Office could attend.
TAMMAM SULAIMAN (Syria) said he supported the statement made by the representative of Indonesia for the Group of 77 and China, pertaining to the delayed issuance of documents. It seemed that the Fifth Committee, rather than debating substance, was forever debating administrative matters.
He said his delegation was awaiting reports of the ACABQ pertaining to the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF) and the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL). His delegation regretted the delay in the issuance of those documents. He trusted that the Secretariat was aware of the political import of the subject. It would do well to hasten the issuance of those reports, particularly since the ACABQ's discussion had been completed some time ago. His delegation would not be able to take a decision prior to the issuance of those reports. He asked the Secretariat to keep the statement made by the representative of Indonesia in mind.
NESTER ODAGA-JALOMAYO (Uganda) said he hoped the current session would be permeated by a spirit of trust and renewal so that issues being discussed would be viewed on their own merits, rather than through linkages. He hoped that questions put to the Secretariat would be responded to promptly. His delegation subscribed to the statement made for the Group of 77 and China.
His delegation was appalled at the quality of some of the reports that had been issued for the Committee's consideration, he said. Committee members had stressed a number of times that savings must never be at the expense of quality and standard of work. Genuine savings were only those realized while maintaining -- or even improving -- quality of services. The savings being achieved seemed to be cost-avoidance or postponement of work.
He said it was important that pragmatism be exercised regarding the schedule of work. Certain non-priority items had been included in the programme of work, while items addressing crimes against humanity had not found a place in the Committee's work programme. His delegation, and others from the region, attached great importance to the issue of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda. The issue of crimes against humanity must be accorded the highest priority.
Reform was an ongoing process, he said. For over a decade, Member States had heard about reform. There was a tendency in the Fifth Committee to give priority to issues of reform over other issues. Yet such priority should not be given to such ongoing issues. Issues allocated to the Committee from the General Assembly must take into account the Committee's schedule of work, and should not be given priority over other important issues on the Committee's agenda.
AMJAD HUSSAIN SIAL (Pakistan) said his delegation fully supported the statement made by the representative of Indonesia. The current session was once again plagued by late submission of documents, and the comments of the ACABQ on reports were still being awaited. In general, all documents should be submitted in compliance with relevant Assembly resolutions.
Regarding the programme of work, he said that sufficient time should be given to the items mentioned by the representative of Indonesia. It was to be regretted that some of those reports, including that on gratis personnel, had been delayed. Concern expressed about the quality of some reports was also shared by Pakistan. This problem would have to be addressed.
DULCE BUERGO RODRIGUEZ (Cuba) said that her delegation supported the statement made by the representative of Indonesia. With regard to the programme of work, Cuba wished to draw attention to the critical situation with regard to the status of documentation. Reports, directly linked to Committee items, had been delayed, and others were of poor quality and lacked substantive information. This had a negative impact on the work of the Committee and backlogs would ensue. She also expressed concern at the trend of submitting reports that had not been requested, while others, that had been requested were not submitted. Cuba fully agreed with the priorities outlined by the Group -- peacekeeping and related issues, gratis personnel and the support account. It was important that the Committee discuss savings from the biennium 1996-1997 during the fifty-second session.
MARIA REGINA SERRAO EMERSON (Portugal) asked when the report of the Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS) on the peacekeeping mission in Angola would be available?
KAZUO WATANABE (Japan) said the Committee had started at 10:20 a.m. today and had therefore lost 20 minutes of this morning's meeting time. If the trend continued, nine hours and 20 minutes would be lost over the course of the session. Given limited time, priority should be given by the Committee to the Development Account, support account, gratis personnel and peacekeeping operations. Because of the late issuance of documents, the discussion on peacekeeping had not been scheduled for the current week. However, Japan felt that it was important that the Committee begin its discussion this week.
RAJAT SAHA (India) associated himself with the statement made for the Group of 77 and China, and with comments regarding the poor quality of some reports. Member States should be informed of fundamental problems with any report. He asked that the Secretariat inform the Committee of its concerns regarding documents, so that Committee members could deal with the matter more pragmatically.
MILES ARMITAGE (Australia) shared the dissatisfaction expressed about the absence of reports. Clearly, there were deep-rooted problems regarding the scheduling of documentation, and they were affecting the Committee's work. Any discussion of the Committee's working methods should address the matter of document issuance. Items for Committee consideration needed to prioritized. His delegation accorded priority to the peacekeeping items, reports on gratis personnel, and to the reports on United Nations reform that had been referred to the Committee by the Assembly plenary, to the extent that those were ready. When would the report on results-based budgeting be ready, and when did the Bureau expect to have the Committee take that item up? he asked.
When the plenary decided to allocate items, it was not up to it to investigate whether the new items fit into the Committee's work programme, he said. Rather, it was up to the Committee to make room for those additional items.
CONRAD MSELLE, Chairman of the ACABQ, said that the Advisory Committee had been working extremely hard to make sure reports on peacekeeping operations and others were available to members of the Fifth Committee. Many of those would soon be available. He agreed with the observations made regarding the quality of the reports being submitted. One problem increasingly faced by the ACABQ was the need to carry out lengthy dialogue with the Secretariat to clarify issues that were not clear in the reports. That problem would probably continue until top management of the Secretariat took a hard look at its causes. The ACABQ had submitted a general report on peacekeeping, in which it had made comments on the matter.
Regarding the items to be taken up during the resumed session, the report on guidelines for internal control standards should not be taken up at this stage, he said. Instead, it should be taken up together with the reports of the Board of Auditors on the United Nations and all funds and programmes, which would be submitted at the fifty-third session. Further, that would enable the ACABQ to report on the document. Amending the Organization's Financial Regulations should not be taken lightly. The Advisory Committee must review the proposal to amend Regulation 10. He recommended that the item be proposed to the General Assembly for deferral to the fifty-third session.
JOHN-PIERRE HALBWACHS, United Nations Controller, pledged the Secretariat's full support to the Committee. Regarding the delay in the UNCTAD report, he said the working group of the Trade and Development Board had completed its meeting in Geneva on 8 May. The result of that meeting would be processed as fast as possible. He hoped the results-based budgeting report would be issued by 22 May. The Office of Internal Oversight Services' report on Angola was scheduled to be released 14 May. Some 114 documents had already been issued for the Committee, with about 10 left to come, he added.
AMANY FAHMY (Egypt) said her delegation fully endorsed the statement of the representative of Indonesia. It would not be appropriate or acceptable to consider the report relating to the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) at the fifty-third session; it should not be deferred.
Mr. SULAIMAN (Syria) said that it was clear that the United Nations Controller had not referred to Syria's question concerning the United Nations forces in the Middle East. Syria had said it was dissatisfied and concerned by the delay in the publication of the relevant documentation. Syria was not convinced that the Secretariat had taken the appropriate steps to ensure that the document be issued. Why had the report not been ready, when it should have been ready six weeks ago? he asked.
Following a review by the Committee Chairman, of points raised by delegations, the Committee decided that of the three new documents referred to it by the plenary, on the 1998-1999 programme budget, the one on the utilization of the Development Account would be taken up under item 116, 1998-1999 budget. The other two would appear under item 114 on review of efficiency of the administrative and financial functioning of the United Nations. The item relating to UNCTAD would be considered at the third resumed session of the Committee.
The Chairman, Mr. CHOWDHURY, (Bangladesh) also announced that documents on the Middle East peacekeeping missions would be available on 13 May. He would return later to the items concerning the Rwanda Tribunal third party liability. He reiterated the request that members of the Secretariat preparing documents comply with the relevant Assembly resolutions. On the quality of reports, he said delegates should identify the reports that were a subject of concern, so that corrective action could be taken.
He said Under-Secretary-General for Management, Joseph Connor, would shortly introduce the report on internal control standards, and the Committee could take a decision after he had done so. He would convene informal consultations so that the Committee could decide how to proceed on reports of the OIOS and the Joint Inspection Unit. Results-based budgeting and the question of the timely start of the meeting had also been alluded to. The Controller had spoken to the former point. As Chairman, the latter point was of concern to him. The Committee needed to address some fundamental questions relating to the issues raised today. Regarding documentation, the Committee must not ask for everything and then regret the fact that not everything had been made available. It was important to keep in mind that there had not even been six weeks between the two sessions.
AHMED FARID (Saudi Arabia) said his delegation agreed with Mr. Mselle that the ACABQ should thoroughly examine the report on guidelines for internal control standards. His delegation had still not received the new procurement manual, as had been promised by the Chief of the Procurement Division during the last session.
Two requests for information from the budget office had remained unanswered for two sessions, he said, and he asked the Chairman's assistance in obtaining that information. He had requested the name and number of those employees who had been transferred from the regular budget to the support account, and the name and grade of those who had been transferred back to the regular budget account. Also, he had asked for the number of posts to be eliminated that were related to developing countries.
Mr. SULAIMAN (Syria) said he appreciated the Chairman's sympathy for the Secretariat. However, he wanted to know why the ACABQ report on UNDOF and UNIFIL had been delayed, when that body's work on the matter had been completed over a month ago. Issuing the report was simply a matter of translation. There was a document in English regarding the two operations.
SEYED MORTEZA MIRMOHAMMAD (Iran) said the Controller had mentioned that there were 114 documents to be prepared for the Committee's session, but many of those had been prepared during either the last resumed session or the main session. Also, some of the reports yet to be issued had been requested last year or some time ago, rather than during the last resumed session.
Mr. HALBWACHS, United Nations Controller, said he would have to find out when the report regarding UNDOF and UNIFIL had been submitted to the Secretariat.
The Chairman, Mr. CHOWDHURY (Bangladesh), said the Committee was unable to take up items related to peacekeeping reports during the first week, because it was awaiting some key reports.
SAMUEL HANSON (Canada), Coordinator for the Committee's informal consultations on the Rwandan Tribunal, said some delegations had expressed concern about informal consultations, in which some persons who had appeared before the Committee had effectively used the informal session as a forum to argue for and against the findings of the OIOS. Another concern was that some documents made available in the informal session contained information that could be embarrassing to identified individuals. In his opinion, if there was to be a debate in informal consultations, the parties to the debate should be Member States only.
A performance report on the Tribunal had just been issued, and the Secretary-General's note transmitting the report of the OIOS was still before the Committee, he noted. On the programme of work, he noted that an earlier draft had allowed for one hour for informal consultations on the item. However, one hour was not sufficient. Priority should be given to the budgets of the peacekeeping operations and then to other time-bound matters. It might be more appropriate for informal consultations on the item to continue at a later date.
Mr. MOKTEFI (Algeria) said his delegation believed that it was appropriate to hear different voices, as had occurred during the informal session, when delegates had considered an OIOS report and had also enjoyed the presence of the representatives of the International Criminal Tribunal. Some delegations had availed themselves of that opportunity to ask about the investigation. Representatives of the Rwanda Tribunal and members of the OIOS were both members of the Secretariat. It was up to Member States to hear both views before taking a decision. The presence of the representatives from the Tribunal had been extremely useful. The OIOS was a control unit, it could not represent an organ involved in the prosecution of people.
Mr. ODAGA-JALOMAYO (Uganda) said he shared the concerns expressed by the representative of Canada. Crimes against humanity should be treated with the highest priority. The subject might require some time to discuss, and he agreed that the previous allocation of one hour might not be sufficient. During the informal discussion, conflicting views had been expressed, resulting in delegations not knowing whom to believe. That was a continuing problem. As a matter of principle, he noted that the session was devoted to peacekeeping operations and peacekeeping- related issues. Those matters should thus be the focus. Uganda would be reluctant to consider any other item.
Mr. CHOWDHURY (Bangladesh), Committee Chairman, said that it was his view that, taking into account delegates' comments, it might be useful to take the matter up in another informal consultation. He asked the Coordinator to undertake that consultation.
WEN CHIN POWLES (New Zealand) said her delegation also regretted that the Committee could not proceed directly to peacekeeping items. She suggested some revisions to the Committee's programme of work.
Mr. CHOWDHURY (Bangladesh), Committee Chairman, said that the suggestions would be taken into consideration.
The Committee then approved the proposed programme of work.
Review of Efficiency of Functioning
JOSEPH CONNOR, Under-Secretary-General for Management, introduced the report of the Secretary-General on guidelines for internal control standards. He said that while the United Nations had a well developed system of internal controls, the streamlining and strengthening of the Organization's control structures was a key portion of the Secretary-General's reform package.
The guidelines for internal control standards adopted by INTOSAI set out useful guidelines and standards, he said. Acceptance of those standards would provide a means to check the effectiveness of the Organization's controls against the standards. The Secretary-General believed that it would be appropriate to reflect the formal acceptance of the INTOSAI standards in the Organization's Financial Rules and Regulations, in the form of an amendment.
AHMAD KAMAL (Pakistan) said the report before the Committee had a number of useful elements which might be helpful in improving the internal controls of the Organization. In view of the financial situation of the Organization, such strengthening and streamlining was essential.
There was, however, a need to carefully review the INTOSAI Guidelines in order to be sure they conformed with United Nations standards, he said. The amendment implied that the United Nations standards would be altered. Guidelines approved by INTOSAI might be appropriate for national governments. The United Nations, however, had a detailed structure of internal controls in which the existing oversight bodies played a significant role. Further clarification was needed.
The financial regulations of the United Nations must be respected by all Member States and the Secretariat, he said. He had noted a reference in the report to lack of independence and weakness or non-existence of internal audit units. In such a situation, secondment of staff might strengthen the internal audit function. However, that might compromise the operational independence of the existing internal oversight mechanism. The proposal to amend the Financial Regulations should be examined by the ACABQ before it was acted upon by the Committee.
Mr. MOKTEFI (Algeria) said his delegation would have difficulty in adopting the guidelines immediately and would prefer that an in-depth consideration be conducted prior to decision-making. He also sought further clarification on the meaning of various provisions in the annex to the report. What would be the effect of the adoption of the report on the relationship between the Board of Auditors and the Oversight Office? Any revision of the Regulations should first be examined by the ACABQ before the Committee endorsed it. Further clarification was required. Algeria could only adopt a decision to commence informal consultations on the matter.
Ms. BUERGO RODRIGUEZ (Cuba) said her delegation had wanted to make comments prior to the item's introduction. She recalled the question her delegation had raised on the report requested by the Assembly on savings for the 1996-1997 biennium. The Controller should provide information on the matter before the end of the meeting. The Controller had said that problems on documentation were due to capacity. There was need for the General Assembly to increase resources in that area, to ensure the timely issuance of documents. In addition to capacity, there was the issue of quality. Many reports had been the result of additional requests for information, due to the low quality of the reports, thereby increasing the number of reports. The Assembly should consider both the growing requests for reports and their quality.
On the report on guidelines for internal control standards, she said her delegation would make preliminary comments, since the document had just been released. She acknowledged the importance of improving oversight procedures, particularly in the Organization's current financial difficulties. The report must be submitted to the Advisory Committee for consideration, specifically in light of the proposed changes to the Financial Regulations.
Mr. HALBWACHS, United Nations Controller, said he was not aware of a report due on savings other than the one on UNCTAD, the status of which he had already explained.
NICHOLAS THORNE (United Kingdom), speaking for the European Union, said he had expected that the Committee's meeting on strengthening control mechanisms would be fairly routine. However, in light of the concerns expressed by some delegations, the Committee must give more time to the matter. If the Auditors had already approved the recommendation, the Committee would need access to those auditors when it considered the item.
TRYGGVE GJESDAL (Norway) said he supported in principle the Secretary-General's decision to adopt the INTOSAI Guidelines as a general standard to which the United Nations internal procedures should conform. The Guidelines applied to four levels of activity: financial, administrative, management and programme. Internal controls were to be regarded as a management tool, and not just the task of an oversight body. That was a position his delegation had been advocating for some time. The report stated that the Guidelines provided minimal acceptable standards of controls, and that United Nations funds and programmes were free to adopt a more extensive system of control. The funds and programmes should be encouraged to develop more comprehensive controls than they had at present.
THOMAS REPASCH (United States) said he had also assumed that the Committee's consideration would be fairly routine, and he had been prepared to support the Secretary-General's recommendation. At the same time, he understood concerns from other delegations that believed the ACABQ should review the matter. He hoped that the Advisory Committee's review would occur by the end of the resumed session. He thought that the Board of Auditors had endorsed the recommendation, but Mr. Mselle had said that the report should be submitted to the Board for further consideration. He asked for clarification on that point, and said he would accede to Member States' wishes regarding submitting the report to the ACABQ, and asked when that body's response could be expected.
Mr. SAHA (India) supported the view that the matter should be studied by the ACABQ. The amendment proposed said that internal control systems should be in conformity with the INTOSAI Guidelines. He asked whether the wording meant that the Organization's internal control systems would remain the same, and any fresh set of guidelines would be put up for approval.
Mr. MSELLE, ACABQ Chairman, said the Advisory Body had not taken a position on the Secretary-General's proposal. There were procedures for discussing such matters, and although many Member States came to the meeting knowing what to expect from the Secretariat and were thus prepared to take a decision immediately, a large number of delegations were not in that position. The ACABQ would take up the item in connection with the larger issue of reports of the Board of Auditors of the fifty-third session. At that time, it would exchange views with members of the Board, just as it discussed with them the reports they submitted to the Assembly. A lot of anxiety might be generated if the Committee was to proceed without adequate discussion of the document, and without the Advisory Committee's required review of the proposed amendment.
That article in question was very specific, but the amendment was not, he noted. Reading out the amendment, he asked what was really being said? Those matters should be discussed with the Secretariat and Board of Auditors. The normal procedures should be followed.
Mr. CONNOR, Under-Secretary-General for Management, responding to some observations by delegations, said the Board of Auditors and the OIOS had strongly recommended the adoption of the standards. The content of the paper had been reviewed specifically by the Board. Paragraph 81 of the report, which concerned the use of commercial auditors, simply stated that it was recognized that in some countries external auditors were used. The paragraph did not recommend such practices. The Secretariat did not object to a review of the report by the Advisory Committee; that body had initially declined to consider doing so.
Mr. ODAGA-JALOMAYO (Uganda) said that unlike the United States, Uganda had not come prepared to take action on the item. Uganda had thought that there were other issues that needed to be sorted out before action could be taken. Once the word amendment was heard, a pause was necessary.
Regarding the procedural approach, he wished to ask the Advisory Committee why it had originally declined to review the paper. He asked why there was no mention of the approval of the Board of Auditors and the OIOS in the forwarding note of the Secretary-General. Belonging to INTOSAI did not mean that one necessarily had to agree with everything it did. Consideration should be deferred until the right procedure had been followed.
Mr. MOKTEFI (Algeria) said appropriate procedures should be followed. He was surprised that the current paper did not include the technical views of the Board of Auditors and the OIOS. Those views should be conveyed to the Committee at the next stage to help it in its deliberations. The matter should be deferred and the Advisory Committee should transmit its comments.
PAUL EKORONG A NDONG (Cameroon), said it would have been better if the Advisory Committee had given its opinion. Time for consideration of the document was equally important. Cameroon would have no objection to deferral of consideration of the item.
DIMITAR IVANOV (Bulgaria) said his delegation supported the current document and therefore supported the statement of the representative of the United Kingdom. The Guidelines in question were the most basic international standards. What had taken the Secretariat so long to approve them? he wondered. Bulgaria had no objection to the Advisory Committee considering the matter. Study of the document would show delegations that the Guidelines were solid and based on common sense.
Mr. CHOWDHURY (Bangladesh), Committee Chairman, said he thought it would be appropriate to defer consideration until the report of the Advisory Committee was submitted.
The Committee decided to do so.
Mr. MSELLE, Chairman of the Advisory Committee, said that when the Advisory Committee took a decision, it took a decision as the Fifth Committee itself. The Fifth Committee had not made a decision not to review the document in question. The Secretariat might have been informed that the ACABQ could not take up the document at the moment, or that it would be more appropriate for it to take up the report when the reports of the Board of Auditors were considered. That could explain the Secretariat's belief that the Advisory Committee had decided not to act.
National practices and procedures sometimes had to be tailored to the requirements of an international organization such as the United Nations, he said. The document would be reviewed to ensure that there was nothing in it that would adversely affect the Organization.
Programme Budget for 1998-1999
Mr. CONNNOR, Under-Secretary-General for Management, introduced the report of the Secretary-General on utilization of the Development Account. He said that the paper was part of the continuing discussion on the proposal of the Secretary-General to create a dividend for development.
The sustainability aspect of the Development Account was critical, he said. Streamlining and simplification would result in savings that could be deployed to the Account. The collateral papers on reduction and refocusing of non-programme costs had been introduced by the Under-Secretary- General some months ago and he had responded to questions. He and his colleagues would again be available to respond to delegates' questions.
Mr. MSELLE, ACABQ Chairman, introduced the report of the ACABQ on utilizing the Development Account (document A/52/894). He recalled that he had introduced the ACABQ's report on refocussing non-programme costs on 13 March, and a number of those concerns had been taken into account in the present report. Balances due to savings from currency fluctuations and the effects of inflation would not be available for transfer to the Development Account. Efficiency measures should take place throughout the Organization, and not be confined solely to central support services, such as the Department of Management.
Paragraph 4 of the Secretary-General's report attempted to describe the procedure of transferring resources to the Account, he noted. It indicated that "each proposed programme budget will include... the amount approved for the Development Account in the previous programme budget, supplemented by any additional productivity gains achieved during the prior biennium together with any further prospective productivity gains anticipated in the forthcoming biennium". That contradicted the statement in the same paragraph to the effect that once a productivity gain had been identified and achieved, the Assembly's approval would be sought for transferring the associated resources into the Account. It was neither possible nor advisable to transfer prospective productivity gains, he stressed.
Member States in recent years had forced the Secretariat to absorb new mandates within existing resources, he noted. The actual results of efficiency initiatives should be indicated to the Assembly's satisfaction before related savings were transferred. The proposed time-frame required clarification. If the Secretariat maintained that $200 million would be realized for the account by the 2002-20003 biennium, that time-frame was overambitious. It was yet to be demonstrated that the transfer of that amount could take place without affecting programme delivery.
Mr. ODAGA-JALOMAYO (Uganda) requested that copies of both speakers' comments be made available to Member States.
* *** *