DEVELOPMENT IN AFRICA IS GLOBAL PRIORITY -û "BUT MORE TALK THAN ACTION", FIFTH COMMITTEE IS TOLD
Press Release
GA/AB/3333
DEVELOPMENT IN AFRICA IS GLOBAL PRIORITY - BUT MORE TALK THAN ACTION, FIFTH COMMITTEE IS TOLD
19991104Increased Resources Urged, as 2000-2001 Budget Review Continues
The international community attached great importance to the question of development in Africa, but there was more talk than action, the Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary) was told this afternoon as it began discussing the section of the proposed budget for 2000-2001 on Africa: New Agenda for Development.
The representative of China said she hoped States would quickly translate words into action in support of Africa. An urgent increase in resources for that section was required, if there was a genuine will on the part of the international community to promote development in African countries, said the representative of Israel. The representative of Ghana welcomed the 14.9 per cent increase in proposed resources under that section, but he was concerned about the decline in availability of the extrabudgetary resources that would be needed to implement all mandated activities. Member States should not run from their Charter obligations, the representative of Botswana said. Mandated activities must be funded through the regular budget, rather than by extrabudgetary financing.
Equitable geographical distribution was particularly important when it came to addressing Africas needs, the representative of Ethiopia stressed. The continents own professional experts must play an important role in promoting its development.
The Committee continued its examination of budget proposals under part III, on international justice and law, before turning to part IV, on international cooperation for development, which includes the section on the new agenda for development of Africa.
Also speaking this afternoon were the representatives of Algeria, Finland (on behalf of the European Union and associated States), Mexico, Japan, United States, Guyana (on behalf of the "Group of 77" and China), Philippines (on behalf of the Association of South-East Asian Nations ), Zambia, Zimbabwe, Cuba, Chile, Bolivia, Kenya, Uganda, Sudan, Cameroon, Nigeria, Tunisia, Lao People's Democratic Republic (as Chairman of the Group of Land-locked Developing Countries) and Bangladesh, on behalf of the 48 least developed countries. Warren Sach, Director of the United Nations Programme and Budget Division, answered questions from Member States.
The Committee will meet again at 10 a.m. tomorrow, when it will elect candidates to fill vacancies on a number of subsidiary organs of the General Assembly, and then continue its part-by-part examination of the programme budget for the next two years.
Committee Work ProgrammeThe Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary) met this afternoon to continue its part-by-part consideration of the proposed programme budget for 2000- 2001, specifically budget parts III and IV, concerned with international justice and law, and international cooperation for development, respectively.
(For an introduction to the proposed programme budget see Press Release GA/AB/3322 of 27 October. For background on parts III and IV see Press Release GA/AB/3331 of 3 November.)
Statements on Proposed Programme Budget
DJAMEL MOKTEFI (Algeria), speaking on section 7 of the budget, legal affairs, said that he wished to express support for the Office of Legal Affairs, but favoured the Advisory Committees recommendation which asked the Board of Auditors to make a study of commercial arbitration and litigation.
The Committee then turned to section 9 of the budget.
JARMO SAREVA (Finland), speaking on behalf of the European Union, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Cyprus and Malta, said his statement would address all the sections of part IV of the budget proposal.
On section 9, he said he agreed with the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions' (ACABQ) observations on the use of general temporary assistance. Existing staff services should be used to the fullest extent in all sub-programmes.
He also agreed with the ACABQ that the costs for the Office for Inter-Agency Affairs were not sufficiently transparent. He felt the activities of the Non- Governmental Liaison Organization Service should be reinforced, and he also agreed with the ACABQ that consultants should only be used when the relevant expertise was not available in the Secretariat. The Union also subscribed to the general observations of the ACABQ on travel expenses, an area where judicious management and new technology could produce savings.
Under section 10, the Union wished to reiterate its commitment to development in Africa, and he appreciated the increase in resources for the programme. However, he hoped that in future the objectives of the programme could be better reflected in the accomplishments part.
Under section 12, he agreed with the recommendations of the ACABQ that steps be taken to determine more accurately the level of services that the United Nations Office at Nairobi was required to provide and the rate of reimbursing the cost of those services. The Union took note of the fact that that administrative functions in the United Nations Office at Nairobi had been reinforced in the budget.
The Union strongly support the increased resources proposed for the priority programmes on crime prevention and criminal justice, and on drug control, but it encouraged still further efforts in future budget proposals to increase the resources available to those sections. In section 15, extrabudgetary resources represented 95 per cent of resources available for the United Nations Drug Control Programme (UNDCP), he noted.
He welcomed Committee for Programme and Coordination (CPC) efforts to modify the narratives of those last two sections, but did not feel they reflected the efforts for gender mainstreaming by the Secretariat. More efforts were required.
ERNESTO HERRERA (Mexico) said, on section 15, that illicit drug trafficking had serious effects on society and undermined the institutions of State. His delegation agreed with the Advisory Committee in its recommendation for additional resources in that area.
TETSUO KONDO (Japan) said his country always worked closely with the United Nations in order to enhance its effectiveness. As the staff costs of the Department of Economic and Social Affairs were calculated using significant vacancy factors, he urged the department to step up recruitment measures in order to ensure orderly implementation of mandates.
On the Commission for Sustainable Development, he was concerned about reports of voluminous and indigestible documentation. He also asked why travel expenses were rising even with a reduction in posts.
Mr. MOKTEFI (Algeria) said he supported the role of the Department of Economic and Social Affairs. Attention should be devoted by this Department to the urgent needs of Africa, least developed countries, small island States, South- South development and other key issues. He stressed that it should perform all activities in its programme of work.
For the sake of those people who did not have access to electronic communications, he said, the Department should continue to provide its publications in traditional forms. He endorsed the comments of the CPC on the workload and responsibilities of the Non-Governmental Organization Liaison Office. He hoped there would be a structural strengthening of this office via appropriate resourcing.
He was concerned about the vacancy rate in this Department, he said. Steps should be taken to improve it. The Department should fill its posts to ensure that its mandates were carried out. He was also concerned to know the details of the financing of the secretariat for the Convention on Desertification, which were not included in the proposal.
The financing of the Office of Inter-Agency Affairs was not transparent and should be made so, he said. Work needed to be done on staffing for carrying out technical cooperation, as this activity should be handled by permanent staff.
On the role of the NGO Liaison Office, he supported the ACABQ comments.
COLEMAN NEE (United States) said a major focus for economic and social affairs in the biennium would be the two five-year reviews of the Social Development summit and the World Conference on Women. He was puzzled by requests for new and non-recurrent funds totaling $760,000 for servicing those reviews.
He would assume that equivalent costs were involved in the follow up to the Population Conference and Narcotics Conference in the current biennium, he said.
By his calculation, since responsibility no longer rested with the Department for running the interim secretariat for the Desertification Convention, the resource request represented a substantial real increase over the previous biennium. He asked for details of the reallocation of the $6.9 million provided previously for that secretariat.
In addition, he noted that a number of activities planned were not mandated, he said. For example, there was no mandate for a follow up to the Lisbon Declaration, or for a review of tax competition between countries. Those were but a few of the unmandated activities.
GARFIELD BARNWELL (Guyana), speaking on behalf of the "Group of 77" developing countries and China, said the United Nations had to keep pace with developments in the world. Regarding the Department of Economic and Social Affairs, he asked how the Secretariat was implementing technical cooperation activities? What was the number of people involved? How did the budget reflect lessons learned from the merging of the three departments?
He said the best way to demonstrate the United Nations role in economic and social development was to ensure that adequate resources were provided for those activities. He sought clarification for the nominal increase that was not commensurate with the mandate of the General Assembly. He was also concerned that, as of April, the vacancy rate was 14.6 per cent - staff should be recruited to ensure full and timely implementation of mandates.
MARY JO B. ARAGON (Philippines), said she supported activities in this programme aimed at promoting sustained economic growth and sustainable development in developing countries. She also supported the 0.3 per cent budget growth proposed.
She was pleased to note that particular attention would be given to the need to incorporate gender perspectives into all policies and programmes in the United Nations system, she said. The subprogramme on gender issues and the advancement of women was particularly important and she supported the 2.1 per cent growth proposed.
Regarding the General Service to Professional (G-to-P) examination, she said the Philippines believed that all staff members of all nationalities in the General Service category should be given equal opportunity to be promoted. Focus on this should be maintained.
She supported the Committee for Programme and Coordination conclusions and recommendations on that area, she said.
MATHIAS DAKA (Zambia) asked for clarification from the Advisory Committee on vacancy rates and asked what measures were being taken to rectify the situation.
LOVEMORE MAZEMO (Zimbabwe) looked forward to seeing adequate budgetary resources to cover all United Nations support costs; this would release resources for programme activities in the field. He believed regular budget funds should be able to encompass administrative costs. He was hopeful that extrabudgetary resources would be available in the meantime. Zimbabwe was equally concerned with the vacancy rate.
QUIANGWU ZHOU (China) said that as globalization accelerated, the importance of economic and social affairs grew. The next two years was the key period of the programme of action adopted in Beijing. China agreed with the Advisory Committee when it asked for an increase in the hiring of temporary assistance.
DULCE BUERGO RODRIGUEZ (Cuba) said consideration of section 9 grouped together activities which had formerly been implemented by three different departments. The General Assembly had asked for the department being established to be given all adequate resources to carry out its tasks - Cuba had noted the very small increase being granted to the merged department. Cuba asked for information from the Secretariat on the rationale behind the small increase being provided; it would have thought there should have been an increase in resources in this area. Development trends and policies at the world level was an extremely important issue, she said, and Cuba would follow up in informal consultations.
Cuba asked how the Executive Committee had functioned since it was established and wondered what it had accomplished during the period. Specifically, she noted the reduction in extrabudgetary resources for the next millennium - how, she wondered, could the Secretariat fulfil all of the mandates given this shortage?
On technical cooperation, she asked if the Secretariat could elaborate on which activities had been implemented. What was the number of posts related to those activities?
ALVARO JARA (Chile) said this was a core of United Nations activity and therefore all necessary resources must be assigned. That was not certain in proposed resources.
EDUARDO GALLARDO (Bolivia) said all activities of the United Nations should have adequate resources. He stressed that the increase in the regular budget was infinitesimal compared to the needs of the world at present. Under extrabudgetary resources, he noted an alarming reduction.
RON ADAM (Israel) said he attached great importance to the work of NGO liaison in the Department of Economic and Social Affairs. Strengthening that activity was important, as civil society had a very positive impact on work of the Organization. He drew attention to its increased workload.
Mr. NYAMIOBI (Kenya) said this was an important part of the United Nations for developing countries and provided important assistance on national accounts and other matters.
WARREN SACH, Director of Budget Division, answered Member States questions.
He said the stated overall growth rate of 0.3 per cent for this area in the regular budget needed to be taken with care because, as noted, the secretariat of the Desertification Convention was no longer included. Overall, with that taken into account, the growth rate would be 1.8 per cent. The Desertification programme was now functioning under a treaty body, and was funded by contributions assessed from States signatory. The related extrabudgetary resources that were available until 1998 had been transferred. That explained the large decrease in extrabudgetary resource estimates noted.
In addition, he pointed out that figures for extrabudgetary activities for the future were projections, done conservatively on a basis the Secretariat believed to be sound. They were less certain than current resources, and it was usually found that additional pledges and resources were received during the biennium. The extrabudgetary resource position was not as dire as it seemed.
The fast growth of travel expenses requested under executive direction and management was explained in the proposal, he said. In bulk, it related to the implementation of decisions made regarding panels of experts for the Economic and Social Council and for the General Assemblys Second and Third Committees. The other large contribution to that increase related to travel for the recently established Office of Inter-Agency Affairs, where levels proposed for the current biennium were found to be inadequate.
The resources allocated previously for the Desertification secretariat had in essence been redistributed throughout the programme, thereby allowing a proposal with real growth of 1.8 per cent but a proposal for only 0.3 per cent growth in resources requested.
On the question of resources for special sessions of a one-off nature, he said it was normal to provide for those activities and then discontinue them when they were completed. Any remaining resources were reprogrammed.
On the frequency of meetings of the Committee for Development Policy, the mandate was for one per year, and the resource request would need to be adjusted accordingly, he said.
There had been considerable comment on vacancy rates, he said, and they continued to be well above budgeted rates. There had been some improvement, which would be reported soon. In looking at the problem, the Secretariat had noted the requirements for filling posts did not help. Some were imposed by Assembly decisions. Progress was being made but not all the progress the Secretariat would like.
Ms. BUERGO RODRIGUEZ (Cuba) said that she hoped the large number of questions asked would be answered in writing. She would like preliminary information at least on her question of how, after the three departments had been merged, mandates were being implemented by the new department. The more information Member States had, she noted, the easier the resource questions would be answered.
She noted savings listed following the closure of a Geneva statistics unit, she said. She asked where the activities undertaken by this unit were now performed and why it had been closed.
She expressed Cubas support for the adequate resourcing of the NGO Liaison section.
She also drew attention to the resources indicated for contractual services for external printing, and asked what policy was used to determine which publications were internally reproduced and which were outsourced.
Mr. SACH explained that if things could be printed in-house they were, but that some materials and printing requirements were beyond the capacity of the internal print shop, and therefore went out. The record over the years had shown a steady reduction of external printing, as in-house capacity had improved. Priority was given to legislative documents.
The statistics work previously undertaken by the closed unit in Geneva was now being done in New York, he said. The unit had collected statistics in Geneva. With improved communications courtesy of technology, there was no need for that activity to continue to be performed in Geneva, and there were savings attached to consolidating the office, so the staff had been moved to New York.
Ms. BUERGO RODRIGUEZ (Cuba), speaking on section 8, asked about an increase in resources for a new special rapporteur - what would the subject matter and terms of reference be? she asked. On the regional legal inter-governmental bodies, she asked with which commissions cooperation had been established. On the private financing of infrastructural projects, what would the Committee be considering in that context? she asked. On the increase in appropriations for consultants and experts, what areas and what activities would that involve? she wondered.
On the question of expected accomplishments, she said it was hard to understand the creation of legal regimes contributing to the maintenance of international peace and security. Estimates were included for peacekeeping missions - were those resources not also included under the support account? she asked. Activities were proposed for that division during the next bienniums reforms in human resources management - she asked for more comments on those activities.
Mr. KONDO (Japan) wanted to second Cubas question on the addition of a special rapporteur.
The Budget Director, Mr. SACH, said he would need to have recourse to written answers for the most part. Under the travel costs item he pointed out that there were always support account resources made available to the Office of Legal Affairs. On the issue of consultants, information on the use of that resource would be maintained for the coming biennium.
The Committee then turned to section 10.
Mr. BARNWELL (Guyana), speaking on behalf of the Group of 77 and China, said the Group wanted the African development programme to be more action oriented. It should comprise tangible actions towards achieving economic growth and sustainable development in Africa.
The Group also felt that the United Nations New Agenda for the Development of Africa should be financed by the regular budget since it was a priority within the medium-term plan. The Group noted with deep concern the inadequacy of resources for that section, which would adversely affect the implementation of programmes.
HAILE SELASSIE GETACHEW (Ethiopia) noted the increased overall resource requirement for the next biennium and the new posts that were planned. He also wished to underscore the importance of equitable geographical distribution so that the continents own professional experts could take full part in the programme.
Mr. MOKTEFI (Algeria) said the development programme for Africa should serve as the basis for more active developmental work in the field. Activities within the programme should be focused on action, rather than information and raising public awareness. Algeria thought the various departments involved should coordinate their actions clearly. He welcomed the new posts recommended by the Secretary-General. The possibility of including additional resources should be explored.
NESTER ODAGA-JALOMAYO (Uganda) said he welcomed the Asian-African cooperation in the field of technology transfer. He noted constant references to use of the consultants - was that the result of lack of in-house expertise? he asked. He appreciated the publication by the Department of Public Information of "Africa Recovery" and other publications - but could they not be harmonized? He asked whether the DPI had been able to assess the effect of the various publications.
Was there a real growth in extrabudgetary resources or was it the result of moving resources around? he also wondered. Uganda supported the new posts in the Secretary-Generals report and hoped the question would not present problems in informal meetings.
Mr. EL GHAZALI (Sudan) said the ACABQ had stated that the budget would total some $6.3 million in this programme before recosting. The previous proposal was for some $5.4 million. There was a substantial increase.
He also said he did not believe that the actual inflation rate justified the amount requested to be allocated.
Mr. NEE (United States) said the Special Initiative for Africa was the most practical way to work towards the aims of the Africa New Agenda for Development programme aims. He questioned the need to support other offices which seemed to duplicate the work the Special Initiative office performed. The United States saw very little value added from activities in section 10 and did not support additional resources for it.
Mr. PEIXOTO (Brazil) subscribed to the priority the United Nations had assigned to Africa, particularly as social and economic development lay at the heart of conflict there.
The Secretariat submission reflected existing mandates and should be approved, as adjusted by the Committee for Programme and Coordination. He would prefer to see an increase in posts, rather than merely a replacement of those previously funded from extrabudgetary sources.
Mr. KONDO (Japan) supported the New Agenda for Development with the understanding that the programme should be more operationally oriented. The momentum for development cooperation for Africa should be kept up.
On the four posts, he was prepared to consider them, if the additional reasons for the job were presented. He wondered whether existing information tools were available, for example from the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), that might mitigate against the need for a new database to be implemented by DPI.
He shared the representative of Ugandas views on a consolidated publication policy on Africa, he said.
Ms. BUERGO RODRIGUEZ (Cuba) said she supported the activities under this section, which supported Assembly mandates. All necessary resources should be provided to ensure mandates could be carried out. She reiterated Cubas sincere commitment to the development of Africa. To allow mandates to be carried out, it was of great importance to increase resources for this area.
She believed the objectives proposed, on the promotion of a proper framework for development, and the support for South-South cooperation, were of vital importance. She supported the acceptance of the proposed level of resources, and thought perhaps it would be worth deciding to increase resource levels for some items.
She drew attention to a trend throughout the budget -- that it was proposed that extrabudgetary resources be used for funding many mandated activities.
COLLEN VIXEN KELAPILE (Botswana) said he fully supported the objectives and intent of this section. He noted the resource increases proposed, and said he believed the proposed 14.9 per cent increase was a step in the right direction, as it was in concert with the priorities of the medium-term, plan. He welcomed the proposed post requirements, and endorsed the ACABQ recommendations for acceptance of all the new posts. He aimed to explore the possibility of increasing them.
He reaffirmed Botswanas position on the continuing need to finance mandated activities through the regular budget, rather than by extrabudgetary financing. Member States should not run from their Charter obligations. Extrabudgetary resources were unpredictable and therefore unreliable for financing priority activities. The projected decrease in such resources bore testimony to that unpredictability.
Mr. DAKA (Zambia) said he wanted to reiterate the importance of this section. Any initiative was meaningless without resources. In view of the number of initiatives on Africa that had been launched, and the list was long, it was very important to see an increase in resources under this section. He supported the proposals to increase the number of posts.
LESLIE KOJO CHRISTIAN (Ghana) noted the 14.9 per cent increase in resources under section 10, but was concerned about the decline in the availability of extrabudgetary resources. Increased extrabudgetary resources would be needed to implement all mandated activities.
Mr. ADAM (Israel) said an urgent increase in resources for this section was required if there was a genuine will on the part of the international community to promote development in African countries.
EKORONG A DONG PAUL (Cameroon) said he fully supported the planned increase in the regular budget under this section, but asked for more information about the criteria for promotion in that structure. His delegation welcomed work carried out by the Committee and he asked for additional resources to be added to the regular budget because the extrabudgetary resources were not a foregone conclusion.
SUN MINQIN (China) repeated her delegations support for development in Africa. She noted that the international community was attaching great importance to that issue, but she stressed that there was more talk than action. China hoped the international community would translate words into action in support of Africa.
FOLORUNSO MICHAEL OSEWA (Nigeria) said he was concerned at the item on expected accomplishments in the New Agenda for Development in Africa. They were unspecific and vague. He wished to draw attention to the New Agenda, which was aimed at accelerating economic growth and the further integration of Africa into the global economy. But there was no definite commitment to concrete goals, he said, just vague and unspecified targets. He asked for clarification on targets within this mandate - had it in fact been revised?
RADHIA ACHOURI (Tunisia) was concerned about the sizeable recourse to extrabudgetary resources and wished to emphasize the collective responsibility of Member States in that regard. There was more to development than studies and pleading the cause of Africa - concrete action was needed. She noted that the Agenda for Development was not part of the medium-term plan or the development programme for Africa.
Mr. MAZEMO (Zimbabwe) said that, with regard to additional post requirements, it was clear that there was a need to increase the capacity of the Economic Commission for Africa, as well as DPI, which played a crucial role in raising awareness about Africas situation. Zimbabwe strongly supported the additional posts and welcomed the preparedness of Member States to consider the proposals with an open mind.
Mr. SACH, Director of the Budget Division, said as the largest programme, programme 1 had a more stable base and a better working arrangement. Programme 2 needed reinforcement. Programme 3 needed offsetting for the loss of extrabudgetary posts to allow it to continue to publish Africa Recovery.
There was no publication duplication between the three organizational units, he said. All three reviewed the others publications programmes to ensure that. The publications from the three subprogrammes were a complementary set. It was important, he said, to recall that this was an advocacy programme, not an operational programme, and it aimed to raise awareness of needs, and thereby promote development.
Regarding the proposals for posts, three extrabudgetary posts had gone, and four regular budget posts were proposed, so the net increase was one post, he noted.
In response to a question about the use of consultants, he explained that more than half the funds requested related to ad hoc expert groups. For the remainder, given the range of expertise needed to fulfil the programme requirements, he felt 17 Professionals could not be expected to span all the disciplines, and therefore it was reasonable to expect that consultants would be needed.
The method for calculating inflation was the same as in every other section of the budget, he added.
EKORONG A. DONG (Cameroon) said he had noted assurances that he would be given written answers to his question on more clarity about promotions. He felt that the answer should come from a senior official from the relevant area.
The Committee then turned to its consideration of trade and development, section 11A.
Mr. BARNWELL (Guyana) said the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) was the key focus for the United Nations in several areas. It was currently preparing for UNCTAD X, the first United Nations conference of the millenium. All member States should support the preparatory process for that conference. The conference outcome would be critical for fashioning the strategies of developing countries in the following decade. It would stand or fall depending on the support it received from the international community.
The UNCTAD had remained a competent and faithful pillar of support for developing countries, he said, providing substantive information for developing countries to better understand the subjects it dealt with. Such an in-depth understanding of global economic processes in the context of development imperatives was essential.
The organization had established an unchallenged primacy in the areas it dealt with and he strongly supported its continuance, he said. If Member States were serious about the role of the United Nations in assisting developing countries to integrate into the global world economy, there was no choice but to support UNCTAD.
The level of resources for UNCTAD had been reduced between the last and the current biennia, and that was of real concern, he said. The UNCTAD had suffered as a consequence. In the name of efficiency improvements, the organizations capacity to monitor and coordinate secretariat-wide activities had been reduced.
The Group of 77 and China requested the reestablishment of the programme for Africa within UNCTADs budget, with adequate human and financial resources supplied to it.
The Group supported the ACABQ recommendation that a review of the workload of the Office of the Special Coordinator be carried out, he said. It looked forward to the inclusion of the outcome of the twenty-second special session of the General Assembly on Small Island States in UNCTADs work programme.
There were four areas where UNCTAD should be given additional resources, he said. It should receive additional resources to support African countries in trade-related issues through the implementation of the Agenda for Development and beyond. It should be better resourced to assist developing countries in multilateral trade negotiations following the Seattle meeting of the World Trade Organization. More funds should be supplied to support the preparatory process for the third United Nations Conference on Least Developed Countries, he added. And resources should be increased for supporting developing countries in their high-level and global preparations for the Financing for Development Conference.
Ms. ARAGON (Philippines), speaking on behalf of the Association of South- East Asian Nations (ASEAN), under section 11a, said ASEAN was pleased to note that UNCTADs main objective for the next biennium would be to maximize the trade and development opportunities for developing countries and to assist them to face the challenges of, and derive the maximum benefits from, the process of globalization.
The ASEAN attached particular importance to the CPC recommendations that the UNCTAD secretariat should continue to participate in and provide support to the preparatory process of the high-level inter-governmental event on financing for development, as well as to assist the developing countries in that regard.
The ASEAN was concerned, she said, that the budget reduction experienced by UNCTAD in the last biennia was adversely affecting its capacity to effectively and efficiently implement its mandated programmes and activities. But she noted that the proposed level of resources for the next biennium reflected a modest increase of $428,000. She said ASEAN also supported the focus on technical cooperation activities on capacity-building and human resources development. It was of the view that in the light of the current economic crisis in some parts of the world, the issue of human resources and development should also be given attention.
ALOUNKEO KITTIKHOUN (Lao Peoples Democratic Republic), speaking as chairman of the group of Landlocked Developing Countries, said the work of UNCTAD had the highest importance for developing countries in general and land-locked countries in particular. It had been providing those countries with critical work on much- needed areas such as technical cooperation. It was the only body which dealt with the transit/transport issue.
In the course of downsizing at UNCTAD, he said, the resources it was able to allocate to land-locked developing countries had been drastically reduced. Today there was only one Professional post in the Office of the Special Coordinator dealing with those countries. That situation was a cause of great concern.
He said that in a rapidly globalizing world and given their high transport costs and poor trade environment the development prospects of land-locked developing countries depended critically on the availability of trade/transit facilities. The work of UNCTAD in support of those countries acquired greater salience in that overall development context. The Fifth Committee should make its contribution by providing the Office of the Special Coordinator with the requisite level of resources in its work related to land-locked developing countries.
ANWARUL CHOWDHURY (Bangladesh), speaking on behalf of the 48 least-developed countries, said the ACABQ had stated it was not convinced that resources proposed would provide adequate capacity for the Least-Developed Countries Special Coordinator, and that was an important observation. It had also been suggested that the Secretary-General of UNCTAD review the work of the Special Coordinator. The Fifth Committee should keep those comments in mind when it considered this budget section.
The Office of the Special Coordinator was facing an important task in 2000, he said, when heightened preparations for the third Least Developed Countries Conference would begin, and when the need to prepare the case for least developed countries for UNCTAD X would begin.
At present, as mentioned by the representative of the Lao Peoples Democratic Republic, there were 10 Professional posts provided for that office, but only seven were occupied. Thus there were only seven people to account for all the meetings and this was a daunting task. At the time of the second Least Developed Countries conference, it had 38 Professionals. The number of staff serving the needs of least-developed countries had continued to dwindle.
The proposed budget should amend that situation, he said, and strengthen the Special Coordinators office. The-least developed countries would be happy with a return to the old arrangement where there was a special unit. The reestablishment of that unit was the best way to address the concerns of those countries, and he strongly supported its reestablishment. The concerns of least-developed countries were unique and they required special attention.
* *** *