CLOSE ATTENTION BEING PAID TO ASBESTOS SITUATION AT HEADQUARTERS, FIFTH COMMITTEE TOLD

Press Release
GA/AB/3361

CLOSE ATTENTION BEING PAID TO ASBESTOS SITUATION AT HEADQUARTERS, FIFTH COMMITTEE TOLD

Assistant Secretary-General for Central Support Services Says Safety Not Compromised by Presence of Asbestos

Close attention was being paid to the asbestos situation in the United Nations Headquarters buildings, the Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary) was told this morning, when it met to discuss the Secretary-General’s report on the matter.

Assistant Secretary-General for Central Support Services Toshiyuki Niwa said that safety was not compromised by the presence of asbestos. Existing asbestos management programmes -– including regular air monitoring –- would continue until it could be totally removed. That would happen when the buildings were renovated, under the proposed master plan. Currently, measures conformed to the guidelines of the host country, the United States.

The representative of the United States said he was pleased with the response to the asbestos situation, but asked whether the Secretariat had addressed the question of second-hand smoke. “Cancerous clouds” were often encountered in the Headquarters buildings. He asked whether steps had been taken to prevent that hazard.

The Committee then approved a draft decision, proposed by its Chairman, Penny Wensley (Australia), noting the Secretary-General’s asbestos report and endorsing the recommendations on the matter made by the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions (ACABQ). The ACABQ had recommended that information be provided on asbestos at other United Nations duty stations.

When Under Secretary-General for Management Joseph Connor introduced proposed regulations governing the behaviour of officials and experts who worked for the United Nations but were not staff, such as human rights rapporteurs and the Chairmen of various expert bodies, the representatives of Cuba and the United States asked for a comparison of the rights and obligations of those officials and those of United Nations staff.

When the Committee turned its attention to financing the High-Level Intergovernmental Meeting for Financing for Development, and the Third United Nations Conference for Least Developed Countries, the representative of Saint Lucia and the Lao People’s Democratic Republic expressed concern that voluntary contributions had not been forthcoming.

Fifth Committee - 1a - Press Release GA/AB/3361 55th Meeting (AM) 27 March 2000

Also this morning, comments were made by the representatives of Tunisia, Nigeria (for the “Group of 77” developing countries and China), and Portugal (for the European Union).

C.S.M Mselle, Chairman of the ACABQ, introduced that body’s reports. The United Nations Legal Counsel, Under-Secretary-General Hans Corell, and the Director of the Budget Division, Warren Sach, responded to Member States questions, as did a representative of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development.

The Committee will meet again tomorrow, 28 March, at 10 a.m. to consider administrative and budgetary aspects of peacekeeping operations, the programme budget for 2000-2001 and gratis personnel.

Fifth Committee - 3 - Press Release GA/AB/3361 55th Meeting (AM) 27 March 2000

Committee Work Programme

The Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary) met this morning to commence its consideration of several proposals from the Secretary-General concerning the duties and obligations of people working for the United Nations who are not United Nations staff (including the Secretary-General). It also planned to consider the resources required for the High-Level Intergovernmental Event for Financing for Development and for the Third United Nations Conference on the Least Developed Countries, and to examine the asbestos situation at United Nations Headquarters.

Status, Rights and Duties of Non-Staff Officials

The Committee had before it the report of the Secretary-General containing his proposed regulations governing the status, basic rights and duties of officials other than Secretariat officials and experts on mission (document A/54/695 and Corr.1). It concerns officials who perform services for the United Nations on a full-time basis but are not staff members, and experts who perform assignments for the Organization (experts on mission). The proposed regulations were modelled on article 1 of the Staff Regulations and chapter 1 of the 100 series of Staff Rules. The draft text of the regulations is annexed to the report, and the Secretary- General envisages the Assembly will adopt the Regulations in an annex to a resolution. They would then form part of the contract of employment or terms of appointment of such staff. A booklet explaining the regulations would also be produced to inform those to whom they applied.

Also before the Committee was a report from the Secretary-General on regulations governing the status, basic rights and duties of the United Nations Secretary-General (document A/54/710). That report states that, after reviewing the Charter for the purpose of developing the regulations, rules governing status, basic rights and duties of the Secretary-General as the Assembly asked, it became apparent that the provisions of the Charter relating to the Secretary-General appropriately address the status, basic rights and duties of that position, with the exception of the oath or declaration of office to be made by the Secretary- General.

On the understanding that any Secretary-General will make the declaration currently included in the staff regulations at a formal Assembly meeting, the Secretary-General states that he sees no need for additional regulations and rules.

Resources for Meetings and Conferences

Before the Committee was a note from the Secretary-General reviewing resource requirements for the forthcoming High-Level Intergovernmental Event for Financing for Development and for the Third United Nations Conference on the Least Developed Countries (document A/C.5/54/50). That review was urgently requested by the Assembly last December.

The Secretary-General states that resource requirements for the high-level intergovernmental event cannot yet be assessed, pending the outcome of the consultations with institutional and other "stakeholders" (including on the possibility of using staff from those stakeholders in the secretariat of the event) and also pending consideration of the organization of the event, its agenda and other related matters by its Preparatory Committee. The Secretary-General states he will return to that question when those issues have been resolved.

Regular budget resources were allocated for additional requirements of the Least Developed Countries Conference, he notes, but the cost of the participation of two government representatives from each least developed country at two sessions of the Preparatory Committee (some $1.16 million) and the Conference itself ($500,500) is intended to be met from extrabudgetary resources.

He advises that the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) sent a note verbale to all its members on 14 February asking for voluntary contributions to defray the costs of the government representatives’ attendance, and asked for a response by 6 March. The Secretariat plans to make an oral presentation to the Fifth Committee on Member States' responses to that note.

He notes that the first session of the Preparatory Committee will be held in July, and $582,000 will be needed to defray costs of representatives of least developed countries attending that session. If there is still a shortfall in extrabudgetary resources, he will advise the fifty-fifth session of the Assembly.

In related comments from the ACABQ, that body agrees with the Secretary- General's proposal that he return later to the question of the requirements for the High-Level Intergovernmental Event for Financing Development. It repeats its concern that some intergovernmental bodies -– in this instance the Assembly's Second Committee (Economic and Financial) –- attempt to determine the means of financing of mandates, for which the Assembly has affirmed the Fifth Committee is the appropriate vehicle.

The ACABQ notes that, while there had been no response yet to the UNCTAD appeal for voluntary contributions to defray the costs of the Least Developed Countries conference, it is still early to predict the outcome of that appeal. It recommends, therefore, that the Secretary-General advise the Assembly at its second resumed fifty-fourth session on the status of those voluntary contributions. It notes and agrees that, should there continue to be a shortfall in extrabudgetary resources for the second preparatory meeting and the Conference itself, the Secretary-General will bring that situation to the attention of the Assembly for appropriate action at its fifty-fifth session.

Asbestos Situation

The Committee also had before it the Secretary-General's report providing an assessment of asbestos-containing materials at Headquarters, and reviewing measures to ensure that such materials did not cause harm to persons working or visiting in the United Nations (document A/54/779). The report covers the Headquarters complex, the UNDC-I and UNDC-II buildings, the former United Nations Institute for Training and Research (UNITAR) building and leased spaces in other buildings in New York.

A long-range capital master plan for extensive renovation of Headquarters buildings has been developed and will be presented to the legislative bodies this year, the report states. If and when funding for such a plan is approved, and the plan implemented, a near-total removal of all asbestos-containing materials would be undertaken. The plan entails relocation of staff and other services from multiple floors in a phased manner. After that, all occupied spaces in the Headquarters building would be free of such materials.

Measures for managing asbestos include continued encapsulation of the existing asbestos, whereby it is not considered a health risk; semi-annual testing of air supply and return sources for asbestos fibres; and the removal of asbestos- containing materials only where the maintenance, alterations, improvement, construction or other activity necessitates its removal, according to the report. The United Nations complies with all standards, codes and regulations issued by the United States Government, New York State and City with regard to inspection, engineering controls, abatement and management of disposal of asbestos-containing materials.

Asbestos is a class of magnesium-silicate minerals which are light-weight, chemically inert and heat-resistant. They do not conduct electric currents and possess high flexibility, strength, durability and acoustic properties. At the Headquarters complex, asbestos-containing materials were extensively used, because the buildings were constructed in the early 1950s, when the use of asbestos was widespread. The harmful effects of exposure to asbestos fibres on the respiratory system has been clearly established since the early 1970s. The fibres are so thin that they hang in the air a long time before settling.

The Committee also had before it a report of the ACABQ on the asbestos situation at Headquarters (document A/54/7/Add.12) recommending that the General Assembly take note of the Secretary-General's report and that information be provided on buildings at Geneva, Vienna, Nairobi and the regional commissions.

The ACABQ was informed that all handling of asbestos followed standard procedures and unacceptable levels had not entered the air stream, the report states. The ACABQ was also informed that since measures to manage asbestos started at Headquarters, 30 per cent of the asbestos has been removed from the buildings. It was told that 70 per cent of the asbestos at the UNITAR building had been removed and the remaining 30 per cent remain encapsulated, mainly on the ground floor.

The ACABQ learned that roughly 15 complaints concerning asbestos are received every year. On receiving a complaint from staff, a licensed independent contractor was sent to test the area for the presence of asbestos fibres and the results were made available through the Medical Services Division. Investigation of past complaints had not led to a positive finding of asbestos fibres in the air stream.

For 2000-2001, $1 million had been budgeted for the management of asbestos at Headquarters, the ACABQ notes. Upon inquiry, it had been informed that since that programme started, $1 million has been budgeted every biennium and expenditures have ranged from $250,000 to $500,000 per year.

Statements on Proposed Regulations

Joseph Connor, Under Secretary-General for Management, introduced the Secretary-General’s reports on proposed regulations relating to people working for the United Nations other than Secretariat officials, including those relating to the Secretary-General.

The two reports were produced in response to an Assembly request from its fifty-second session, he said, when it approved changes to the regulations for Secretariat officials. The text was on their status (proposed regulation 1), on their conduct (draft regulation 2), and on their accountability (regulation 3). The proposals called for the highest standards of competence, loyalty and accountability, confidentiality of information, prohibition on acceptance of gifts, obligations to comply with legal obligations, conflict of interest and financial disclosure, and accountability. They applied to officials such as rapporteurs, the Chairmen of the International Civil Service Commission (ICSC) and the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Commissions (ACABQ).

Regarding the regulations applicable to the Secretary-General, it was recommended that there be no change, as the Charter and the oath of office covered what was required, he said.

COLEMAN NEE (United States), on the proposed regulations for those officials other than staff and experts, said he noticed that certain aspects that applied to staff were not included, and thus would not apply. For example, there were no equivalents to the staff regulation covering the proper use of assets of the Organization, or to the requirement for a full response to requests for information for investigations. He asked for an item-by-item comparison of basic rights applied to staff and those proposed to other officials.

RADHIA ACHOURI (Tunisia) drew attention to a letter that had been circulated by the International Civil Service Commission Chairman, and asked what follow-up had been undertaken by the Secretariat. She asked for clarification of the legal situation of the ICSC regarding those proposed regulations. Tunisia believed that the analysis made in the ICSC letter was well-grounded legally.

The letter, she continued, presented arguments from the Commission Chairman addressing concerns about the provisions in that set of rules, notably on the accountability of the ICSC. The Commission had a mandate to manage and watch over all the organizations of the common system, and its statute stipulated that it should be accountable to all of them. The proposed changes required loyalty to the United Nations Organization alone, which might impinge on the credibility of the Commission. The letter should have received a reply, as it was dated 10 March.

EVA SILOT BRAVO (Cuba) said an in-depth review of the proposals in the two reports was necessary. It would be appropriate to have information, for comparative purposes, on the draft statutes which the Assembly adopted for staff members and the proposals being put forward for officials who were not United Nations staff. There should be more detailed consideration of the various categories or levels of staff and officials for whom those regulations would apply.

All of the comments made by the Chairman of the ICSC should be taken into account, and perhaps the Committee should reconsider the situation of some staff members, namely, those of ICSC and special rapporteurs, she went on. Her delegation was awaiting the Secretariat’s responses to concerns expressed by various delegations and would engage in more in-depth analysis in informal consultations.

Mr. CONNOR, responding to comments and questions, said there were a number of differences between the requirements placed upon staff members as opposed to those on officials and experts on mission. For example, staff were subject to the authority of the Secretary-General, while mission officials were not. Staff are not allowed to engage in outside activities, they had to work for the Organization only. Only staff were subject to disciplinary measures. A comparison would be prepared, as requested, to focus attention on the differences.

On 10 February, the Chairman of the ICSC had written to the Secretary-General on the application of the proposed regulations to the Chairman and Vice-Chairman, he continued. The United Nations Legal Counsel had responded on 10 March, on behalf of the Secretary-General. In that response, he had stated that he did not believe that the draft regulations required revision. That letter was available for the Committee, should it request it.

HANS CORELL, United Nations Legal Counsel, said the two reports had been drafted cooperatively by the Department of Management and the Office of Legal Affairs; however, as they were fairly legal, his Office had had main authorship. Regarding the questions by the United States delegation, there was a table of concordances that could be made available and elaborated upon. Informal consultations might be a better forum for consideration of the details.

On the questions expressed by Tunisia’s delegate and reiterated by Cuba’s, he said he was not aware that the Chairman of the ICSC had submitted his letter so formally. In all fairness, his own response should be submitted the same way. It was a bit of a red herring. All groups concerned had been consulted during the preparation of the report, including the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the ICSC. They had been on board. They had subsequently changed their position, and that had been a bit of a surprise.

He said he had responded that he did not think it should be changed. The substance of the provisions would not hurt the two. It might be appropriate for the Fifth Committee to add a few words to the commentary. Since the matter had been raised, it should be clarified before a final decision was taken. The whole United Nations system was a family, and the statute of the ICSC had been adopted by the Committee and the Assembly. But he was prepared to discuss the matter further in informal consultations.

Ms. SILOT BRAVO (Cuba) said the Secretary-General’s report on the proposed regulations indicated that the Secretary-General’s explanatory comments be issued as an official publication, in booklet form. From the legal standpoint, what status would that commentary have, as it was not supposed to be part of the body of the regulations? she asked. Would it be part of the interpretation or application of the regulations, or would it simply be the Secretary-General’s interpretation?

Hans Corell, United Nations Legal Counsel, said the establishment of travaux preparatoires was a common feature in many countries when laws were passed. When considering the precise provisions to be adopted by the legislature, one focussed on the language that was the law. In addition, however, information had been collected that must be saved regarding the future application of the law. That information could be used to help better understand the law’s contents.

It was common in the General Assembly’s Sixth Committee (Legal) that preparatory work on treaties was used to understand those treaties, he continued. He suggested the Fifth Committee look at the commentary and perhaps insert a few words on the matters raised by the ICSC. The commentary should prove useful, especially when a new person came into the Organization –- such as a new rapporteur.

PENNY WENSLEY (Australia), Committee Chairman, then advised that the Secretary-General’s response to the concerns to the ICSC would be circulated

Statements on Financing of High-Level Intergovernmental Meeting for Financing for Development, and Third United Nations Conference for Least Developed Countries

C.S.M. Mselle then introduced the ACABQ’s comments on those matters. He said the costs of both were to be funded from extrabudgetary resources. If that proved impossible, the Secretary-General was asked to report to the General Assembly. He had informed the Assembly that an appeal had been made for those extrabudgetary resources, but it was too early to predict its outcome. The ACABQ recommended that the Secretary-General advise the Assembly at its second resumed fifty-fourth session on the status of contributions received.

SONIA R. LEONCE (Saint Lucia), speaking for small island developing States, regarded the two meetings as of great significance. The UNCTAD had a key role. She noted that no provision had been made in the UNCTAD budget for the financing of activities for development. She had taken note of the Secretary-General's report, and expected proposals to be made later. However, provision must be made in this current resumed session to ensure that the necessary resources existed. Small island States had supported the proposal of the “Group of 77” developing countries and China that the unspent balance from the 1996-1997 UNCTAD budget be used, to ensure that resources were available. She called on the Secretary-General to make specific recommendations at the next resumed Assembly session, and asked that the concerns of small island developing States be fully reflected in those recommendations. The Assembly had also asked for the establishment of a unit on those States within the Least Developed Countries office of UNCTAD. She stressed the importance of immediate implementation of that recommendation from the Fifth Committee.

THOMAS A. REPASCH (United States) said the United States supported the conclusions and recommendations contained in the ACABQ report.

HASSAN MOHAMMED HASSAN (Nigeria), speaking on behalf of the Group of 77 and China, said the Group was deeply concerned at the lack of resources for the financing of the two meetings. The Group would continue discussions on that issue in informal consultations.

Ms. SILOT BRAVO (Cuba) said she had noted that the Assembly had, on an exceptional basis, decided that the unspent 1996-1997 balance of the UNCTAD budget would be used until all activities detailed in the report were financed. She took note that those unspent balances had been earmarked to finance the expert groups for UNCTAD. She also noted that the Assembly’s Second Committee, in its proposed resolution, had made provisions that were a violation of established budgetary procedures. In particular, they focussed on financing preparatory committee activities for the Third Conference on Least Developed Countries, in contradiction of the Fifth Committee. Cuba fully supported the ACABQ comments that that practice was disturbing, since the Fifth Committee was the body that should deal with the adoption of resource use. The Second Committee decision was a violation of budgetary procedure in force.

She said a request had been made to defray the costs of some delegations’ attendance at the Third Least Developed Countries Conference through extrabudgetary resources. It appeared that there were now no resources available for the first segment of the preparatory process. The preparatory process and the conference itself had been brought into doubt, given the lack of resources.

She asked how the unspent UNCTAD balances which the Assembly had earmarked for expert UNCTAD groups were to be used. She also asked what the status was of extrabudgetary contributions for the financing of the first session of the preparatory process. She asked what approach would be taken to meet the needs and to hold that process if there were no voluntary contributions.

EDUARDO RAMOS (Portugal), speaking for the European Union, said the Union concurred with the ACABQ’s analysis, and would strive to have the Committee adopt the recommendation in the report to the effect that the Secretary-General should provide information on the status of voluntary contributions first, and only then should the Committee consider other options as an exceptional measure.

ZHOU QIANGWU (China) agreed with ACABQ that the Fifth Committee was the appropriate main committee of the General Assembly entrusted with administrative and budgetary matters. The Second Committee’s decision was therefore a matter of concern. He agreed with the comments of Cuba’s representative, and would discuss matters further in informal consultations.

ALOUNKEO KITTIKHOUN (Lao People’s Democratic Republic) spoke for the group of land-locked developing countries. During the Fifth Committee’s main session last year, the group had strongly supported using unspent UNCTAD secretariat balances for the additional mandates on financing for development and the third conference on least developed countries, “LDC III”, for which financing arrangements had not been made. Land-locked developing countries had been identified as a specific group requiring special attention, and the majority of land-locked developing countries were also among the least developed countries. They therefore had a special interest in the two events.

He said the land-locked States had taken note of the Secretary-General's report and understood that proposals would be made later. But they did not want to be “caught by surprise” when those proposals were made. Therefore, he supported the developing countries’ long-standing position that the unspent balance for the 1998-1999 budget be set aside for the LDC III conference to ensure that resources were available once such proposals were made, which should be specific and submitted to the Committee’s next resumed session.

He then recalled that last December, in its statement regarding the programme budget implications of LDC III, the ACABQ had recommended using the unspent balances. The UNCTAD secretariat should ensure that the concerns of the land- locked developing countries were adequately reflected in future proposals on financing the third least developed countries conference. He recalled the Committee’s decision last year to allocate Professional and General Service staff to set up the unit of land-locked developing countries and small island developing States, within the office of the coordinator, and asked for information on the status of the decision.

WARREN SACH, Director, Budget Division, said there were questions on possible sources of financing of travel for LDC representatives to the third LDC conference and preparatory meetings. The current status remained as it was at the time of the 6 March report. Action had been taken in February by the secretariat of UNCTAD to appeal to Member States for extrabudgetary contributions. He intended to keep the Committee up to date on the issue, and report back at the second resumed session in May. The first preparatory meeting was scheduled for July. Regarding the savings accrued from the 1996-1997 programme budget, directed during 1998-1999 for specific activities, they continued to be used in the way that had been originally foreseen, and as such, did not now provide an alternative source of financing for travel for the LDC III.

If by the May resumed session there were no extrabudgetary resources for travel, no channels had been ruled out, he said. In December, the Committee had been unable to reach consensus on any of the proposals. The Secretariat was fully aware of the great importance that delegations attached to the issue, and would bear that in mind when reporting back in May. Regarding what had been done with resources agreed to for preparation for the Conference, those had been included in the appropriation in December and had been allotted to UNCTAD. He understood that they had moved forward to ensure successful preparation of the conference.

Ms. SILOT BRAVO (Cuba) asked about the use of unspent balances earmarked to finance the meetings of groups of experts of UNCTAD. Also, she asked what was the status of voluntary contributions received to finance the preparatory activities of the conference. She understood that, so far, the Secretariat had not received any voluntary contributions to finance the conference.

A representative of UNCTAD said that following UNCTAD's tenth session last month, the Board was determining the agenda items for the Commission, from which the topics of the expert group meetings would be derived. He expected that the topics of the group meetings would be determined by the end of the week. At UNCATD IX, a programme of 10 expert meetings per year had been agreed upon, and that modality had not changed. He anticipated that in the next 12 months there would be 10 expert group meetings, to which the financing described would be devoted.

Regarding the mobilization of extrabudgetary resources for financing travel of participants from least developed countries, UNCTAD had issued a note verbale which had not yet elicited a positive response, he said. Further information would be provided to the resumed session in May.

Asbestos at United Nations Buildings

TOSHIYUKI NIWA, Assistant Secretary-General for Central Support Services, introduced the Secretary-General’s report assessing asbestos-containing material at Headquarters, and reviewing measures to ensure that such materials caused no harm. Most of the report's elements had been contained in his statement to the Committee in December. The matter was being dealt with in conformity with the host country guidelines. Measures included regular air monitoring as well as asbestos removal during non-working hours.

The Secretariat paid close attention to the asbestos situation, to ensure that safety was never compromised, he said. It would continue the existing asbestos management programmes until total removal could be undertaken through extensive renovation of Headquarters buildings under the master plan.

In response to the ACABQ's recommendation that information be provided on buildings in Vienna, Geneva and regional commissions, he said the Secretariat had requested information. He would advise on the situation at duty stations once assessments were received.

Mr. MSELLE, ACABQ Chairman, introduced that body's report. Asbestos- containing material had been used extensively in the construction of the building. When it was banned in the construction industry, the United Nations had implemented measures to manage the situation.

The ACABQ had been informed that it was not possible to remove all the asbestos-containing material from United Nations Headquarters without vacating multiple floors, which would be undertaken in the context of implementing the capital master plan, he said. Thirty per cent of asbestos had now been removed from the building and complaints concerning asbestos were investigated by a licensed independent contractor, he noted. The ACABQ recommended that the Assembly take note of the Secretary-General's report and that information be provided on buildings in other United Nations locations.

Mr. REPASCH (United States) thanked the delegations that had brought this issue to his attention, and said he was pleased with both the Secretariat’s response, and the ACABQ report. He also noted that the ACABQ had complied with the requirement that the conclusions and recommendations in its report be in bold.

He asked whether the Secretariat had addressed an even greater hazard –- second-hand smoking. He had often encountered cancerous clouds of smoke in United Nations Headquarters and wondered whether the Secretariat had taken steps to prevent that hazard. He was pleased to see that the asbestos had been contained but unsure what steps had been taken to contain the hazards from second-hand smoke and sought information on steps taken.

Ms. SILOT BRAVO (Cuba) said she placed great importance on the follow-up referred to in the Secretary-General’s report, in light of the capital master plan that had been announced and was to be introduced to the Assembly in the near future. She hoped the Assembly would be able to reach a decision on that plan and other matters to improve the United Nations buildings and stressed the importance of all Member States providing the necessary financial resources to carry out mandated activities on time, so that sufficient resources could be available for that important work.

Mr. HASSAN (Nigeria), speaking on behalf of the Group of 77 and China, said the Group appreciated the measures taken so far to correct the management of asbestos-related materials at United Nations Headquarters.

Mr. Niwa then responded to the issues raised by the United States. Smoking fell under the auspices of the Office of Human Resources Management, he said. Naturally it would be best to make the buildings smoke-free, but because of the international character of the Organization, it had not proven possible to completely adhere to that. Efforts had been made to discourage smoking as much as possible, and signs had been put up. The smoking area on the ground floor had been removed. The Secretariat conducted carbon monoxide tests, but did not test specifically for second-hand smoke. However, it tried to put heavy filtration in areas where smoking occurred.

He had also noticed that certain sections of the building were smoky, he said. At present, a contained smoking space was being sought. Signs had also been erected pointing out the health dangers of smoking.

The CHAIRMAN then proposed that the Committee approve a draft decision on that item. She said such a decision should be straightforward and should state that the Assembly took note of the comprehensive report of the Secretary-General on the asbestos problem and that it endorsed the recommendations of the ACABQ contained in paragraph 8 of its report.

The Committee then approved the orally proposed decision without a vote.

Other Matters

Mr. Sach, Director of the Budget Division, then responded to a question raise previously by the representative of Portugal, on behalf of the European Union, regarding the number and level of posts in the Non-Governmental Organizations Section. The Union had asked why the report was not available at the first resumed session of the General Assembly, he said. He understood that the Assembly had requested a report at a resumed session –- not specifically in the first resumed session. He understood that when the Assembly felt information was needed urgently it specified the first resumed session –- and so reports specifically requested for the first resumed session had been given priority.

Consultations had occurred between the Department of Economic and Social Affairs, which included the unit, and the Office of the Budget, and he felt the Secretariat was on track to submit a report to the second resumed Assembly session. However, procedurally, something seemed not to be working. He had not yet received a draft report, yet he was being asked questions about the contents of a draft which many delegations had apparently already received. That was not procedurally correct, and he would appreciate it if the Secretariat could be allowed to complete a balanced report.

Mr. RAMOS (Portugal), speaking on behalf of the European Union, said that he had asked about the possibility of receiving a report this resumed session, and that this question had now been answered.

* *** *