FIFTH COMMITTEE CONTINUES CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED PROGRAMME BUDGET
Press Release
GA/AB/3331
FIFTH COMMITTEE CONTINUES CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED PROGRAMME BUDGET
19991103The Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary) this afternoon continued its part by part discussion of the proposed 2000-2001 programme budget, starting with budget section 3 on political affairs.
A good budget narrative should be clear, concise and concrete, the Chairman of the Committee for Programme and Coordination, Tommo Monthe, said. The narratives in the programme budget for the biennium 2000-2001 had an important official status, and his Committee agreed with delegations that a number of adjustments were needed.
The representative of China said the narrative on disarmament did not pay attention to new developments in the area. Some countries were intent on developing anti-missile systems which might upset the existing military balance. This, and other developments, might lead to the weaponization of outer space and sabotage the nuclear disarmament process.
Algeria fully supported the Department of Disarmament Affairs, but felt the budget proposal narrative did not fully conform with the mandates established in the medium-term plan, the representative of Algeria said. Efforts should be intensified to ensure the proper functioning of the regional disarmament centres, he added.
The representative of Pakistan said the disarmament section placed too great an emphasis on weapons of mass destruction, and he wondered what role the Department of Disarmament Affairs could play in that area.
In addition to concluding consideration of budget section 3, on political affairs, and budget section 4 on disarmament, the Committee also commenced its discussion of budget section 5 on peacekeeping.
The representatives of Brazil, Egypt, United States, Cuba, Japan, India, Philippines, Mexico, Bangladesh, the Republic of Tanzania, Finland (on behalf of the European Union) and Canada also spoke.
The Chairman of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions, C.S.M. Mselle, presented that Committees recommendations and observations and answered questions, and the Director of the Budget Division, Warren Sach, also answered Member States questions.
Fifth Committee - 1a - Press release GA/AB/3331 25th Meeting (PM) 3 November 1999
The Committee will meet again at 10 a.m. tomorrow morning, when it will conclude its general discussion on the United Nations common system and continue its part by part consideration of the programme budget. More speakers on the budget section on peacekeeping are expected.
Work Programme
The Committee had before it Part III of the Secretary-General's proposed budget for 2000-2001 (document A/54/6/Rev.1). This part relates to International Justice and Law, with sections on the International Court of Justice and Legal Affairs. Also, it had before it the related comments of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions (ACABQ) (document A/54/7).
[For a general introduction to the programme budget proposal and the general response of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions (ACABQ), see Press Release GA/AB/3322 of 27 October 1999. Further parts of the Secretary-General's proposed budget and the relevant ACABQ responses will be summarized in the press release covering the meeting at which the Committee commences considering them.].
PART III
Under the section of the proposed budget that deals with the International Court of Justice (section 7), the Secretary-General proposes that some $21.31 million in resources be allocated for 2000-2001, up $655,100 or 3.1 per cent from 1998-1999. The increase is largely related to the provision of four new posts (two at the P-2 level and two at the P-4 level) for the Registry. These new posts are requested to tackle the Courts translation and publication needs, to reduce the backlog in its publications and to introduce technology for improving document storage, publication, retrieval and distribution.
In its related comments, the ACABQ states that this proposal was drawn up before an additional ten cases were submitted to the Court, resulting in a prospective doubling of its workload. It therefore recommends that the resource implications of this situation be reviewed to ensure the Courts work is not adversely affected.
The Committee recommends acceptance of the requested four additional posts. Additionally, given that the number of ad hoc Judges used by the Court in 2000-2001 is likely to grow from 14 to 22, and that this may exacerbate existing secretarial problems, the Committee asks the Secretary-General to report on efficient management of the ad hoc Judges system in his next budget proposal, and draws attention to its request made elsewhere for a report on means of adjusting various budget levels in the Assemblys resolution in light of unforeseen and extrabudgetary expenses.
The ACABQ reports no objection to the $931,200 requested to eliminate the large backlog of printing. It notes that a decrease of $349,800 in the amount to be paid for facilities provided at the Peace Palace is a consequence of a reduction in the inflation factor of that payment. It also commends the Courts response to its previous request to vigorously explore the introduction of modern technology.
Under the section of the proposed budget that deals with the Legal Affairs
(section 8), the Secretary-General proposes that some $33.42 million in resources
be allocated for 2000-2001, up $975,300 from 1998-1999. Two new staff at P-3
level, for the General Legal Division and for the Administrative Tribunal
secretariat, and the reclassification of a P-2 (language) post to P-3 for the
Treaty Section, are proposed.
The ACABQ notes that extrabudgetary resources of some $4.82 million were
expected, against some $6.54 million for the current biennium. It recommends
acceptance of the proposed new posts. Regarding resource requests for the
elimination of the backlog of the Repertory of Practice of United Nations Organs,
the Advisory Committee notes that details of the programme to eliminate this
backlog were not shown in the introduction or in individual sections of the
proposed budget. Nor had details of a timeframe for its elimination been provided.
These, along with measures to coordinate the backlog and to ensure timely
production of future volumes.
Regarding the Division of General Legal services focus or dealing with
arbitration and litigation of commercial and private claims and disputes against
the United Nations, the ACABQ states that a way must be found consistent with legal
confidentiality requirements, to allow the Assembly to assure itself that the
United Nations liability was being properly managed. It plans to revert to this
matter in its consideration of the Secretary-Generals procurement related
arbitration report, and has asked the Board Of Auditors to examine practices and
procedures currently used.
PART IV
For economic and social affairs (section 9), the Secretary-General proposes
some $107.28 million for 2000-2001, up $325,300 from 1998-1999. No increase in the
number of posts is proposed. General temporary assistance resources are sought for
the special follow-up sessions for the Fourth World Conference on Women and the
World Summit for Social Development, to address the backlog of the Repertory of
Practice of United Nations Organs, for consultants and experts for preparatory work
for the General Assembly special sessions and the Ad Hoc Working Group of the
General Assembly on Financing for Development, and for travel related to panels of
experts and eminent persons held in conjunction with the Assembly's Second and
Third Committees, and the Economic and Social Council and its subsidiary bodies.
The increases will be offset in part by decreases as a result of the States parties
directly funding the secretariat expenses of the Convention to Combat
Desertification in Those Countries Experiencing Serious Drought and/or
Desertification.
The ACABQ notes that, as a consequence of the integration of three departments after the presentations of the previous proposed programme budget, direct comparisons with past proposals is not possible. Extrabudgetary resources for this section are estimated to be some $217.02 million.
Given that vacancy rates are high and exceed the levels used to calculate the cost of posts for 2000-2001, the Advisory Committee urges the Department to step up recruitment measures to ensure the orderly implementation of mandates. In addition, it states it has no objection to the specific requests related to employment of short-term staff, consultants and experts made, but it expects that before recourse is made to such funds, efforts should be made to use existing staff services available under the relevant subprogrammes of this section.
Regarding the proposed reclassification of two P-3 posts to the P-4 level, the ACABQ recommends acceptance of the request.
In its examination of proposals related to the Office of Inter-Agency Affairs in the Department, which was established as part of the Secretary-General's reform measures, the Advisory Committee has concluded that the cost of this office is not transparent, and no clear statement has been made any agreement among Administrative Committee on Coordination members regarding the funding of the Office, which appears to depend on ad hoc procedures and the willingness of Administrative Committee on Coordination members to loan staff for the Office. This situation is not satisfactory, according to the ACABQ.
It recommends that the status of financing of the Office be reviewed, and that the full cost, including staff costs, office space, furniture and equipment, travel, operating expenses and other support, be disclosed, regardless of the source of funding. It notes that the response to a recommendation on the proposed 1998-1999 programme budget regarding the cost of the Administrative Committee on Coordination and its machinery is not satisfactory, and repeats that recommendation.
The ACABQ believes that a request for $193,400 for general temporary assistance to coordinate technical cooperation activities has not been justified. It questions the rationale for employing short-term staff, and does not see the rationale for transferring 5 posts that were dealing with transitional arrangements for coordination and then requesting short-term staff to continue coordination of technical cooperation activities. Existing staff should be used to provide the requisite coordination.
For travel, across this section, some $4.85 million has been requested, the ACABQ notes. However it is not clear from the proposal how much travel is included for technical cooperation activities.
Noting the resources requested for non-governmental organization (NGO) liaison, the ACABQ suggests it is time to appraise the impact on the programme budget of the large increase in non-governmental organizations involved in United Nations work, as administration and cost implications will become more critical. It suggests this information should be included in future budgets.
It reports that programme formulating bodies should pronounce on the work programme and publications that form the basis for the estimates submitted to the Assembly. The budget proposal response to a previous Advisory Committee recommendation that intergovernmental machinery become more involved in an in-depth review of the Department's publications programme is unsatisfactory. This has been done in a number of other sections of the proposed programme budget, and should be included in this section.
The Advisory Committee recommends that the staffing resources for technical cooperation programmes be kept under review, and that in future budget presentations the level of resources to maintain the Organization's capacity for this should be clearly reflected.
It also asks that in future the use to which extrabudgetary resources are put under the subprogramme on sustainable development be explained. It also asks that information provided on management of technical cooperation indicate the role of intergovernmental machinery, such as the Commission on Sustainable Development, in the review of the programme of work. Given the low levels of extrabudgetary expenditure to date under this section, the Advisory Committee suggests a review of the process of project formulation, approval and implementation.
The ACABQ encourages the Department to expand use of new technology for dissemination and communication services, but asks that clear information on new technology projects and costs for maintenance of existing and proposed projects be included in the next budget proposal. It notes that resources for consultants have been requested for studies that may be called for by the General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council, and concludes from this that consultancy funds are requested anticipating that expertise would not be available in the Secretariat. The resources are, therefore, contingency funds which might not be required, and thus, although it is prudent to assume some mandates will require consultancies, the request is not strictly in accordance with relevant General Assembly provisions on consultants. In future, such contingency requests should be clearly differentiated. The number of ad hoc expert groups requested and the related number of meetings should also be disclosed under each subprogramme, and the ACABQ asks for relevant historical information.
For Africa: New Agenda for Development (section 10), the Secretary-General
proposes some $6.01 million for 2000-2001, up $783,100 from 1998-1999. Four
additional posts are also proposed; one at P-4, one at P-3 one at the General
Service level and one at the local level. These posts are to be used to strengthen
effective and substantive monitoring and evaluation of the United Nations System-
wide Initiative on Africa and the campaign to increase global awareness of Africa's
economic situation. Additional resources are also sought for general temporary
assistance to prepare the Third United Nations Conference on Least Developed
Countries, for the preparation of studies and reports, for ad hoc expert group
meetings and for operational requirements.
The Advisory Committee recommends acceptance of the requests for the four posts.
For trade and development (section 11 A), the Secretary-General proposes some $93.3 million for 2000-2001, up $428,500 from 1998-1999. No additional posts are requested. The proposed increase is intended to be used for general temporary assistance for the tenth United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) session and the Third United Nations Conference on Least Developed Countries, the contract production of promotional material, purchase and upgrading of office equipment, and for grants and contributions for computer processing, data storage and other services provided to UNCTAD.
The ACABQ recommends that, in the future, when resources are requested to service conferences, the UNCTAD secretariat indicate the specific service or output that would be delivered by each organizational unit as well as the related estimated costs.
It notes that six Professional posts and two General Service posts have been proposed for redeployment. These redeployments need further justification. It is also not convinced that the Office of the Special Coordinator for Least Developed, Landlocked and Island Developing Countries has the required capacity to carry out its duties.
The report states that the ACABQ believes that the resources proposed for some areas are unrealistic, given workloads, and recommends that the UNCTAD Secretary-General review the workload of the Office of the Special Coordinator and determine whether additional staff and non-staff resources should be provided after the next special session on small island developing States.
While acknowledging that UNCTAD services mainly developing countries where travel costs can be quite high, the ACABQ states that as UNCTADs use of new technology such as videoconferencing increases the rate of growth in travel expenditure should decrease.
Regarding resources requested for the use of consultants to prepare studies for UNCTAD, the ACABQ believes that many of the tasks can be carried out by the secretariat staff.
It suggests that future presentations include the total number of ad hoc expert groups and the related number of meetings with historical data for comparison. Information on the actual number of the groups convened and the number of meetings held should also be disclosed.
The ACABQ asks for additional information on new information technology projects and the related full cost of these projects from inception to completion, regardless of the number of years it would take to implement the project.
The effect of the intergovernmental reviews of publications is not very apparent from the estimates for that area, the ACABQ states. The Committee recommends that, in future, information be provided on the estimates on non- recurrent and recurrent publications for UNCTAD, covering two biennia and proposed for the next biennium.
It also asked for information on the state of recovery of funds defrauded from the Organization and measures taken to prevent a recurrence of fraud.
For the International Trade Centre UNCTAD/WTO (section 11 B), the Secretary- General proposes some $19.81 million for 2000-2001, unchanged from 1998-1999, pending further consultation between the United Nations and the World Trade Organization. A detailed fascicle on this section is expected later this Assembly session.
The ACABQ concurred with this temporary figure.
The Committee also had a reformed narrative for environment (section 12), before it (document A/C.5/52/20) in addition to the Secretary-General's original proposals. The Secretary-General proposes some $8.71 million for 2000-2001, down $42,700 or 0.4 per cent from 1998-1999. Extrabudgetary resources of some $182.71 million are expected. No additional regular budget posts are requested, but an increase in temporary posts funded from extrabudgetary resources of 66 is planned.
The report explains that, following a restructuring, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) will have seven subprogrammes and the United Nations Office at Nairobi will take responsibility for its budget administration, staffing control, implementation of audit recommendations and the provision of administrative support to UNEP and to environmental conventions associated with it.
The ACABQ notes that no resources are proposed against certain UNEP subprogrammes, and recommends that a uniform presentation be adopted. It also recommends the cost of services performed by the United Nations Office at Nairobi be revealed.
It has considered the programme budget of UNEP and has submitted its recommendations to the UNEP Governing Council.
The ACABQ recommends that urgent steps be taken to review what appears to be a very cumbersome, duplicative and costly appointment and promotion process in Nairobi. It also recommends the level of services that the Nairobi Office provides to the organizations be more accurately determined along with the reimbursement rates for these services.
In addition to the sections in the Secretary-General's budget proposal, the Committee also had a reformulated narrative for human settlements (section 13), before it (document A/C.5/52/16). The Secretary-General proposes some $13.29 million for 2000-2001, up $701,400 or 5.5 per cent from 1998-1999. The increase is explained by costs of preparation activities of the special session of the General Assembly (Istanbul + 5) and additional requirements for temporary assistance. Extrabudgetary resources of some $89.70 million are expected. No additional regular budget posts are requested.
The ACABQ notes that a comprehensive reform and restructuring of United Nations Centre for Human Settlements (Habitat) is underway, and that the proposed restructuring has been endorsed by the Commission on Human Settlements.
It recommends that in future the cost of services provided by the United Nations Office at Nairobi be revealed.
The ACABQ reports it has submitted its programme support recommendations to the Habitat Commission, in which it called for clear identification of programme support charges and also careful monitoring of administrative and management costs to ensure that more resources contributed to the Foundation are available for projects.
For crime prevention and criminal justice (section 14), the Secretary-General proposes some $5.96 million for 2000-2001, up $599,000 or 11.1 per cent from 1998-1999. He proposed that $236,100 of the increase would be used for non- recurrent requirements for the Tenth United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders in 2000, and that the remaining $362,900 would strengthen the Centre's operational activities, in particular through the provision of one additional P-4 post. Extrabudgetary resources from the United Nations Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice Fund are projected at about $4.13 million. Administrative costs and programme support for this section are included in section 27 of the budget proposal, on the United Nations Vienna Office.
The ACABQ recommends acceptance of the requested P-4 post. It also notes that three posts on non-reimbursable loan in 1998-1999, out of the 16 posts funded from extrabudgetary activities, have not been continued in 2000-2001.
For international drug control (section 15), the Secretary-General proposes some $17.02 million for 2000-2001, up about $2.3 million or 15.5 per cent from 1998-1999.
According to the proposal, three additional post are requested. A P-3 post would be to enhance the World Drug Report publication. One P-4 post has been requested to strengthen monitoring and evaluation capabilities of the International Narcotics Control Board, and the other would be used to enhance targeting of the Programme's Action Plan.
Extrabudgetary resources are expected to total some $213.42 million.
The ACABQ recommends the new posts be accepted.
Statements on Proposed Programme Budget
C.S.M. MSELLE, Chairman of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions (ACABQ), introduced that bodys comments on Part II of the budget proposal. The major change in this area of the proposal was the inclusion of resources for special political missions.
While noting certain specific recommendations in the ACABQ report, he drew Member States attention to the authority granted to the Secretary-General under a resolution 52/223 on unforeseen and extraordinary expenses. Over 70 per cent of resources available under this authority had been used in just five months of 1999. This trend should be monitored and use of the resources should be reported to the Assembly on a regular basis. The time had come to review the levels approved in the Assembly resolution. The ACABQ had asked for proposals and a review from the Secretariat for the fifty-fourth Assembly.
FLAVIO SOARES DAMICO (Brazil) said the Department of Political Affairs should place more emphasis on prevention and peacekeeping, and he welcomed the fact that a budget for political missions was included in this section. However, he took note of the reduction in resources for section III. With the provision for anticipated missions, was this estimate based on past experience?, he asked. Brazil also attached importance to electoral assistance, and agreed with the Committee for Programme and Coordination (CPC) that the inclusion of a just and lasting settlement of the Palestine question should be more clearly reflected in the overview.
AYMAN EL GAMMAL (Egypt) said he supported the activities of the Department of Political Affairs, but he noted that the major objective of the area was not mentioned -- effort for the peaceful settlement of the question of Palestine. This was identified in paragraph 1.1 of the medium-term plan, and he insisted that the budget narrative should include a statement of the medium-term objectives.
THOMAS REPASCH (United States) said he generally supported the programme as critical for a priority activity of the Organization. He was pleased that provision had been made for special political missions, which made the budget more meaningful. The United States sought information on the status of spending on special political missions now included in budget, so he could analyze the proposal in a more complete fashion.
He noted an increase of about $20,000 for travel for the Chairman of the Sanctions committee under the resource requests for the Security Council, and asked how sanctions committees were funded.
On the resources for the programme on the inalienable rights of Palestinian people, the United States believed this programme was a waste of money, and unjustified. The programme had no educational or political value and was a throwback. He proposed its deletion from the budget.
He noted an increased request under staff costs for additional travel on behalf of the Secretary-General of senior staff, and he asked for information and workload statistics on these activities.
He also noted a request for resources for consultancy services to look at early warning of conflicts. Since early warning was a primary function of the Department of Political Affairs, he asked why money must be spent on consultants. Further explanation was required about a request under electoral assistance for conversion of a D-1 and a P-5 post, he added.
Overall, he was interested in seeing better, more fully-realized statements of expected accomplishments in this section and others, and asked how progress towards achievement of the accomplishments indicated in the various subprogrammes of this area would be measured. They seemed vague and unmeasurable, and he would need evidence that they could be useful to Member States seeking to determine what had been done with the resources they provided.
DJAMEL MOKTEFI (Algeria) said he was concerned that the objective of a settlement of the Palestinian question had not been reflected in section III. He supported the recommendation of the Committee for Programme and Coordination about the inclusion of a new sentence on the Palestinian question. Algeria also questioned the overlapping of the Policy Planning Unit with the Strategy and Planning Unit of the Secretary-Generals office. He was concerned at the trend to establish new structures and was not prepared to encourage this approach, which might lead to overlapping.
DULCE BUERGO RODRIGUEZ (Cuba) said she wished to draw attention to overlap between Department of Peacekeeping Operations and the Department of Political Affairs. The General Assembly had referred to this question on numerous occasions. Cuba wanted to hear from the Secretariat on the issue.
She wished to support the activities carried out for Palestine and supported the recommendation of the CPC. She asked what had led to the establishment of the policy planning unit. What were its basic functions? She also asked for information on its relationship with the strategic planning unit. Cuba endorsed the inclusion of the $86.2 million for special political missions, she noted.
On the question of travel by representatives, her delegation had noted the new provision for the travel of the chairman of the sanctions committee. How had those trips been financed in the past and where were those resources coming from?
JUICHI TAKAHARA (Japan) said he welcomed the inclusion of statements of expected accomplishments in the proposal. It was very important that the results of the implementation of programmes were evaluated objectively. Such statements should be specific not abstract, and to the extent possible should include numerical indicators to allow quantitative assessments. These statements of accomplishment needed to be further improved. He noted with regret that such information had not been provided for all subprogrammes and needed to be refined.
There were several requests for increases, he said, including for travel, where it was difficult to understand the reasons for the increases based on the explanations provided.
RAMESH CHANDRA (India) noted that the ACABQ had expressed no objection to a reclassification of a P-5 post to the D-1 level, a position with which he agreed. However, he also agreed with the subsequent ACABQ request for a review of the classification of the level of the post of Chief of Disarmament in Geneva, and he hoped this review would be expeditiously conducted.
AMJAD SIAL (Pakistan) said the political affairs section was an important element of the budget. He was pleased that peace and security expenditures were included. He recalled Assembly resolution 53/206, which endorsed the ACABQ view that if the proposal for inclusion of these special political missions was approved a report on a technical proposal for the modalities of implementation must be submitted by the Secretary-General, and asked if this report had been submitted to the ACABQ or the Assembly.
Additionally, he suggested that the title of this budget section be changed to political affairs and special missions.
MARY JO ARAGON (Philippines) said she welcomed the incorporation of a gender perspective in the Department of Political Affairs and wished to encourage the Secretariat in this regard.
The Chairman of the CPC, TOMMO MONTHE, said the narratives in the budget had an important official status and the CPC had had a very scrupulous consideration of this and had agreed on a number of adjustments. Sometimes the narratives were corrected in order to make them conform to a mandate, or adjusted from the standpoint of its technical structure. The rules which governed planning should be different from those covering activities which provided services. The narratives suffered from a great drawback because their technical structure still had to be improved on. There should be no overlapping or marginal activities.
The CPC realized that things were not yet perfect, he said. A good narrative should be clear, concise and concrete. Representatives were pointing out that narratives were vague in nature. That was why the CPC had made recommendations on this aspect of the issue, so that in forthcoming budgets the narratives would have the best characteristics possible. He wished representatives to be aware that narratives did have drawbacks in various ways, and if they were to be corrected, it should be along the lines he had mentioned.
The Director of the Budget Division, WARREN SACH, said there had been a number of questions raised on the provisions for special political missions in the proposal. The level of the provision had been determined by the Assembly as part of the budget outline in its resolution last year. He believed it was based on experience. The provision within the current budget for 1998-1999 was for $100 million and, as of end July, some $68 million had been committed. He suspected that the $86 million was the most ever spent under this item. Whether it would be enough to cover all missions in the biennium would depend on the appetite of the Security Council and General Assembly for new missions, and arrangements had been discussed last year to expand the available resources if required. A technical report on modalities had been issued.
Regarding remarks about the statement of expected accomplishments in the budget proposal narratives, in particular their vagueness and the need to make them measurable, he said there was currently no specific place for a statement of how progress would be measured. The Secretariat would look at this in the course of biennium and, if the Assembly wished, would try to work them in.
In response to a question about why requests under subprogramme one and two of the political affairs section were presented together, he explained that they were both supported by the same programme unit. As they called upon the same skills and knowledge-base of staff, it was most useful to present them together.
In response to questions about travel by Department of Political Affairs staff in support of the Secretary-General, he had a list of several pages of such journeys, and he would make it available in the informal consultations.
In the past, travel expenses of the Chairman of the Sanctions Committee had been found from other places, as there were no budget resources specifically allocated for this purpose. It was specified in the proposal to avoid such ad hoc arrangements.
Regarding resources requested for consultancies for early warning specialists, he said this request should be put into perspective. The requested provision was less than 0.5 per cent of the budget of the area. There were no staff able to carry out these activities and consultancy resources were used very sparingly.
Answering questions on the new policy planning unit proposed to be established by redeployment, he said there had been questions asked in the Committee for Programme and Coordination on this. He would provide copies of a document prepared in response to these questions for that Committee. The purpose of the unit was to provide policy coordination within the Department of Political Affairs. The structure of this Department was regional. There was a need to ensure that coordination occurred across the different geographical desks. This unit differed from the strategic planning unit in the Secretary-Generals Office, which had a much broader mandate, including preparing the annual Secretary- Generals report on the work of the Organization.
Regarding the request for reclassification of posts in the electoral division, he said the posts referred to were temporary posts that had been in existence for many years. It cost no more to have them properly established and, given that they were not non-recurrent, their conversion was recommended.
On the ACABQ recommendation of a review of the classification of a disarmament post, all senior posts had been carefully reviewed in the preparation of the budget proposal and the Secretariat had been very selective about recommendations for reclassification, bearing in mind comments from Member States about a top-heavy Secretariat. As a consequence, no recommendations had been made to establish posts at the D-2 level or above, or to request reclassification of any post up to the D-2 level.
Ms. BUERGO RODRIGUEZ (Cuba) said she noted comments about travel for the C Chairman of the Sanctions Committee; the answer was not clear to her delegation. Where were those resources coming from? She asked for clarification on a number of other questions, including the roster of international experts for electoral assistance -- what were the criteria for selecting those experts? There were to be about 50 electoral assistance missions -- which of these were to be financed from the regular and which from extrabudgetary resources?
She drew attention to the Advisory Committees comments on criteria for determining activities on decolonization, and asked for information on how coordination had worked in practice since the changes which had taken place in the framework of United Nations reform.
Mr. SACH, Director of the Budget Division, said most of Cubas questions were detailed and merited written answers, particularly with regard to electoral assistance missions. It was not entirely possible to predict where electoral missions would be undertaken during the next biennium. The criteria for financing these were pragmatic - the regular budget took the core and it supplemented as necessary.
He said the coordination arrangements for decolonization was a structure designed and mandated by the General Assembly with some difficulty. The programmes were being carried out without difficulty despite the awkward alignment of departments.
Ms. BUERGO RODRIGUEZ (Cuba) thanked Mr. Sach for his detailed answers.
The CPC Chairman, Mr. MONTHE introduced that bodys comments on the disarmament section of the budget. At the end of its discussions, he said, the CPC had not reached a clear conclusion. At one point it had felt that the construction of the section did not conform with the medium term plan, but on the other hand there was a text of great complexity.
Proposed modifications were made but time was short and perhaps the CPC did not possess the requisite specific expertise, he said. Hence it had been unable to give a clear-cut recommendation regarding acceptance or rejection of the narrative under this section. The CPC felt that, at the current Assembly session, Member States might have a little more time and relevant expertise might be available to them. It was therefore wise to recommend to the Assembly that the explanatory text be looked at much more carefully. The CPC had not accepted or rejected the narrative, he noted.
FLAVIO DAMICO SOARES (Brazil) said he agreed with the CPC that this narrative was not in accordance with the medium term plan. He also concurred that more emphasis was put on biological weapons over nuclear weapons. Branches that were established in the Department were not in conformity with Assembly resolution 52/220, he added, and said he would like comments from the Secretariat on this.
He noted the stated role of the Department on the illegitimate use of small arms, he said, and wondered how the Department would decide on the legitimacy of the use of small arms. The proposal area was not clear at all, and the CPC had raised important questions about it.
As to the proposed level of resources, Brazil considered that the proposed 4 per cent increase was adequate in principle.
ERNESTO HERRERA (Mexico), speaking on section 4, said disarmament had always been a key theme for his country and the United Nations medium term plan recognized it as a priority area. The Organization should maintain a firm stance on this issue. Resources devoted to the issue would benefit all mankind.
Mexico concurred with the content of the relevant budget section, and felt it was a faithful reflection of the mandates of the General Assembly, which fit the structure of the medium term plan. He hoped that the new posts proposed for the Weapons of Mass Destruction Branch would successfully reinforce the work of that section.
AYMAN ELGAMMAL (Egypt) said the narrative on disarmament should be in line with the medium term plan.
RIAZ HAMIDULLAH (Bangladesh) said he supported the United Nations disarmament fellowship programme. He also supported regional centres on disarmament, but felt they should be located within their respective regions.
Mr. SIAL (Pakistan) said the sections on overview, programme of work and expected accomplishments did not fully comply with the mandate contained in the medium term plan. Moreover, the concepts and proposed actions were mostly repetitive in the three sections of the fascicle. This was not helpful because revision of one sentence, phrase or paragraph would have to be reflected in several places.
He said it was of the utmost importance that the Secretariat should comply with approved mandates to facilitate the work of inter-governmental and expert bodies. The contents of paragraphs 4.3, 4.13 and 4.16 went far beyond the mandate contained in programme 26 on disarmament in the medium term plan, he said. Pakistan sought clarification from the Secretariat in writing about the mandates for the Department in development, acceptance, promotion, strengthening and consolidation of international norms in the field of disarmament.
Pakistan also had several questions on paragraph 4.13, and he requested the Secretariat to indicate the mandate, in writing, on various proposed actions in this paragraph. The thrust of the paragraph was to create a role for the department in creating new legal and political norms and its central role in the field of disarmament. This was the prerogative of the relevant inter-governmental bodies and not of the Secretariat. The adherence to disarmament treaties was the sovereign right and prerogative of Member States and the Secretariat had no role in this regard.
Pakistan also felt that the entire fascicle on disarmament placed too great an emphasis on weapons of mass destruction, and he wondered what role the Department of Disarmament Affairs could play in that area.
DJAMEL MOKTEFI (Algeria) said that for the most part he agreed with previous speakers. Algeria fully supported the Department of Disarmament Affairs. The narrative in the budget proposal did not fully reflect Assembly resolution 52/220, nor was it fully in conformity with the mandate established in the medium term plan. In addition, efforts should be intensified to ensure the proper functioning of the regional centres.
He also drew attention to the request to review the classification of the D-1 Chief of Disarmament post. In the immediate future, the Secretariat should submit in writing a description of the work of that D-1 as currently carried out.
SUN MINQIN (China) said the narrative on this section did not pay attention to new developments in this area and therefore they were not manifest in the programme. For instance, the strengthening of a military alliance and the way some countries were intent on developing anti-missile systems thereby upsetting the balance were not mentioned. Those might lead to 'weaponization' of outer space and sabotage the basis of the nuclear disarmament process.
Those things should be manifest in the programme here, so that all Member States efforts could be used to reverse the developments and promote progress in the area of disarmament, she said.
In addition, some narratives were not accurate and some were not in conformity with the mandate established in the medium-term plan, she said. This must be corrected.
China supported the increase proposed for the budget, she said. It took the
needs of the Department into account. She suspected there might be inadequate
human resources available to the Department and therefore it would not keep up with
work demands, and hoped due attention would be given to this as soon as possible.
There were certain errors of fact in the narratives, she said. For example, the Ottawa Convention had not been negotiated under United Nations auspices, and the Convention on the Prohibition of Transfer of Mines was not complementary to that convention but rather to the Conventional Weapons Convention.
It was not appropriate to discuss expansion of the Conventional Arms register within the biennium, she said, as the Expert Committee on the Conventional Armaments Register would not discuss changes until 2000.
THOMAS REPASCH (United States) said the United States supported the work and activities in this programme area overall. He agreed with most of the items in budget proposal.
He noted a reference to the development of a weapons of mass destruction database, but it was not clear how this would help Member States or the Secretary- General, he said. He asked what information it would contain and how it would differ from currently available information. Regarding a plan for a separate conventional arms database, he asked what use this database would be put to, and whether the Department should be in the business of synthesizing information.
He found the prospective accomplishments listed too vague, he said, and asked how success in facilitation of negotiations or improving awareness of Member States could be measured. They were not useful measures of accomplishment. Both were important, but they were difficult to measure and assess. The same applied to increasing involvement of non-governmental organizations.
He noted a reference to reinvigorating the publications programme and asked what this entailed, as he was under the impression that the Department was trying to streamline this programme. The questions of how much outreach the Department should conduct and to whom it should reach must be answered.
As least two reports mandated by the Assembly, on the relationship between disarmament and development, and on observance of environmental norms in disarmament and arms control, were of little use, he said, and he proposed their deletion. He also asked whether they had changed considerably in recent years, and whether they had made any significant contribution. He would also like to be told the basis for determining the number of meetings of subsidiary body meetings per session.
As to the Interdepartmental Steering Committee on the Relationship between Disarmament and Development, he said he would like to be informed of what this Committee did, what other agencies participated in it and what those agencies contributed to the costs of the meetings.
He asked why the United Nations was analysing developments in the Conference on Disarmament, for whom this analysis was prepared, and was it prepared in Geneva or in New York. In addition, he sought information on how this analysis contributed to United Nations efforts for disarmament or for the United Nations overall missions. Such efforts might be misdirected, he said. Similarly, he would like to be informed as to why political assessments were prepared on weapons of mass destruction and for whom they were prepared.
On the subvention to the United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research, he said the United States was opposed to subventions to bodies outside the United Nations, and could not support this request for resources. He proposed the deletion of the amount requested for this from the programme budget. He also sought more information on steady increases in resources requested for travel for the Conference on Disarmament, and, in the absence of justifications, proposed that the travel allocation be reduced to the level of the previous biennium.
Ms. BUERGO RODRIGUEZ (Cuba) said she endorsed the activities developed under this section, but in particular there was an imbalance in the narrative regarding mandates. It was unfortunate that the importance attached to nuclear disarmament was an imbalance. Cuba drew attention to an in-depth report of the Office of Internal Oversight Services on disarmament submitted to the CPC in which there was a recommendation that the previous structure of the department be re-instituted. She asked for a conference room paper on how the structure would look if this were done.
She noted the proposal to reclassify a P-5 post in the weapons of mass destruction branch to the D-1 level. Why had a review not yet been submitted to the General Assembly? she asked. Cuba felt the post should be at the D-2 level and was officially proposing to reclassify that post.
Cuba had looked closely at all of the activities referred to in paragraph 4.17 and there was not a clear definition as to the circumstances in which these activities would be financed. She asked what the future outlook for the disarmament centre in Kathmandhu was.
Cuba would return to specific amendments when modifications were made, she said. But there was a problem with the inclusion of a number of activities which were the prerogative of Member States and not of the Secretariat.
Her delegation was pleased to see inclusion of reports on the relationship between disarmament and development, she said. This was fully in line with General Assembly mandates on these issues.
MUHAMMAD YUSSUF (United Republic of Tanzania) asked for clarification on paragraph 70 of volume I of the budget proposal which said the overall level of resources had grown 4 per cent as a result of the merging of offices. He agreed that the Secretary-Generals reform exercise was an expensive one, but this was a very substantial figure and the Advisory Committee had not commented. Could the Secretariat comment on this?
Mr. TAKAHARA (Japan) said insufficient information on consultants and experts had been given to the Advisory Committee. The expertise available within the Secretariat should be fully used. On the question of travel, he asked for more information to justify the increase in travel expenditure.
Japan appreciated the role of the regional disarmament centres, he said. With the Kathmandhu centre, careful consideration should be given to improving the appropriate working conditions for the centre.
The Director of the Budget Division, WARREN SACH, then answered Member
States questions.
He said the best explanation of the 4 per cent increase sought for the Department of Disarmament Affairs was in table 4.2 of the budget proposal. The great bulk of the increase related to posts. A new P-3 and a new P-2 were requested, and the reclassification of a P-5 post to D-1 in the Weapons of Mass Destruction Branch was sought.
There was also over $100,000 extra requested for stipends for disarmament fellows, he added. Although some $1.5 million had been requested for experts and consultants, the vast majority of those resources was for ad hoc expert groups, not consultants. Regarding money for travel, the amount requested was actually considerably less than that approved for the 1998-1999 biennium.
Regarding the financing of Regional Disarmament Institutes, he noted that those Institutes had almost been at the point of closing two years ago because of a failure to find funding for them. Many years ago, regular budget posts had been provided to serve as core resources for the Institutes, with the idea that extrabudgetary resources would be found to provide funding for their work. As those extrabudgetary funds had not been forthcoming, their abolition had been contemplated.
Member States had made clear their decision that the Institutes must be retained, he said, and further efforts had therefore been made to raise funds. There had been some improvements, notably in the Lima Institute where the Government of Peru had provided rent-free premises and funds. He had heard of prospects for the provision of premises for the Institute in Nepal, but no agreements had yet been signed. Efforts to raise funds for the Institutes continued.
Support had been voiced for the prospective reclassification of a D-1 post in Geneva, he noted, however, there were two actions required before a post could be reclassified. First, the duties of the job had to be reviewed to see what grade it merited. Second, if an upgrade was warranted, an approach must be made to seek financing for the upgrade. Regarding this particular post, neither had happened. Its duties must be analysed to see what grade it merited, and only then would the possibility of a reclassification be examined in budgetary terms.
He noted that the representative of Pakistan had asked for answers to questions in writing. He would provide them in writing rather than attempt to answer them here, he said. Some other questions posed related to political and philosophical debates between Member States, and the Secretariat would not answer those. He would also respond in detail to other questions in writing.
JARMO SAREVA (Finland), speaking on the peacekeeping section of the budget on behalf of the European Union, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Cyprus, Malta, Iceland and Norway, said the Unions support for peacekeeping was well-known and long-standing. As a matter of principle, core functions of the Organization should be funded from the regular budget. The division of peacekeeping functions between the support account and the regular budget raised the question of whether this principle was being applied. Core Secretariat staff dealing with peacekeeping should eventually all be funded from the regular budget.
Adequate peacekeeping backstopping functions were necessary, he said. Recent increases in peacekeeping and the phasing out of gratis personnel made growing demands on the support account, and the success of peacekeeping and the security of peacekeepers must not be compromised by scarcity of funds. The Secretary-General had spoken of mechanisms for hiring flexibility and surge capacity, and the Union looked forward to suggestions regarding those. It also asked whether the merging of military and civilian police expertise had yielded the expected results. It strongly supported the United Nations Mine Action Service.
A gender perspective must be integrated into peacekeeping operations, he said, as women and children were disproportionately affected by armed conflict and due attention must be given to childrens rights. A strong human rights component was important to peacekeeping operations.
Mr. DAMICO SOARES (Brazil) said that for the general public peacekeeping missions were the most important feature of the United Nations. Brazil shared the concerns of the CPC and the Advisory Committee about reimbursement for contingent- owned materials. The Advisory Committee had noted that some permanent activities were funded on temporary basis. Brazil asked for updated information on this question.
Mr. HAMIDULLAH (Bangladesh) stressed the importance of reimbursement for contingent-owned material; he said hardship was being caused in certain developing countries because of non-payment.
Mr. BURTON (Canada) commented on the reduction in resources for military staff and civil police and asked about the rationale for this. He also pointed out that some trust funds had no balances and wondered if they could not be closed. He asked for details on various items under the heading miscellaneous services.
Mr. SIAL (Pakistan) endorsed the conclusions of the CPC which, he said, should be incorporated in the final budget document. In the Assemblys last support account resolution, it had approved the redeployment of six posts which had not yet happened, and he stressed that those redeployments must take place.
The ACABQ had not given any rationale for its recommendation to reduce travel costs for the United Nations Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan (UNMOGIP). It had recommended streamlining travel for this mission, but streamlining might involve an increase in resources. He sought an assurance from the Secretariat that proposed requirements for travel for this mission would be adequate.
The ACABQ had also reported that an aeroplane used by UNMOGIP was not suitable, he noted, but it had not proposed a remedy. He would like to be informed by the Secretariat of what measures it would take to provide a suitable aircraft for the missions needs.
Pakistan supported the Secretary-Generals resource proposals for this section, he concluded.
Mr. TAKAHARA (Japan) said the proposals for this budget section asked for a considerable increase in general temporary assistance funds, and it was difficult to assess the reasonableness of this level of resources without detailed information. He noted that the ACABQ had cautioned against using general temporary assistance resources to compensate for reductions in established posts. On resources requested to address the backlog of claims for contingent- owned equipment and the backlog of the Repertory of United Nations Organs, the work required should be clarified, he said, and estimates of requirements for subsequent biennia should also be included.
He noted that the level of total resource requirements proposed under this section showed no change in real terms, although there was an increase after recosting of about 10 per cent.
* *** *