Sixty-third General Assembly

Fifth Committee

26^th Meeting (AM)

FIFTH COMMITTEE TAKES UP BUDGET OUTLINE FOR 2010-2011

 

“Widespread expectations of Member States have not been met, and we are left with a budget outline that is incomplete, not inclusive and misleading,” the United States representative said this morning as the Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary) considered a preliminary estimate of the Organization’s requirements for the next biennium, as it usually does in “off-budget” years.

The United States was among the countries that expressed concern over the fact that the budget outline did not include the cost of a number of “add-ons” that were currently considered or were expected to be presented to the Assembly, which were likely to bring the Organization’s total requirements to $5.2 billion. Several speakers also expressed disappointment at having the budget outline presented after the Committee’s official closing date and agreed with the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions (ACABQ) that it should have been submitted sufficiently early in order to be a practical tool in the budget preparation process.

The Secretariat had an important responsibility to produce an outline that was complete, comprehensive and fully reflective of the resources that would be needed to carry out mandated activities, the United States representative said.  It had to give Member States a clear picture of the costs associated with proposals from the Secretary-General that were still under consideration or expected to be approved by the time the new budget took effect.  When the Committee had considered the Organization’s budget last year, almost every Member State had expressed concerns about the add-ons.  A frequently heard comment was that the budget had been presented in a “piecemeal” manner.

The representative of Canada, speaking also on behalf of Australia and New Zealand, agreed that the estimate presented to the Committee risked continuing the piecemeal approach to budgeting and insisted that the Organization’s new challenges made even more apparent the importance of budget discipline, transparency and strengthening results-based budgeting and management.

He also expressed concern about the accuracy of the estimate of $825.7 million for special political missions, whose requirements tended to fluctuate considerably more than other parts of the regular budget.  As it was almost impossible for the Secretariat to accurately predict those budgets two years in advance, he suggested that the Secretary-General’s analysis distinguish between changes relating to ongoing programmes and those driven by the needs of political missions, while still maintaining a place for special political missions in the budget.

The representative of Switzerland (also on behalf of Liechtenstein) said that separating the budgets for special political missions from the rest of the regular budget, by creating an annually budgeted special account, would increase the transparency and predictability of both budgets.

He also pointed out that “the current budgetary process is dysfunctional and no longer meets the needs of an organization that is considerably larger, more decentralized and more operational than 20 years ago”.  He appreciated the Secretary-General’s intention to launch a review of the budgetary process in early 2009, but added that a review could only be successful if Member States participated actively, keeping in mind their share of the responsibility for making the budgetary process work.

The representative of Antigua and Barbuda, speaking on behalf of the “Group of 77” developing countries and China, reaffirmed that resources approved by the Assembly should be commensurate with all the mandated programmes and activities, and cautioned against repeating the mistakes of the past, where Member States had been presented with a zero nominal growth budget in areas of development.

The Group of 77 also had questions regarding the instruction that the Secretary-General had given to all departments and offices to achieve a 2 per cent reduction across the board in preparing for the budget outline.  It was about time to recognize that there was only so much that could be done through instituting saving measures and moving funds from one activity to another before the implementation of individual programmes and, ultimately, the overall work of the Organization suffered.

Also this morning, the Committee considered the first performance report for the current biennium, 2008-2009, and took up a series of statements on revised estimates and programme budget implications of the decisions of Human Rights Council and a number of texts before the Assembly.

Statements were also made by representatives of France (on behalf of the European Union), Republic of Korea, Japan and Guatemala.  The reports before the Committee were introduced by United Nations Controller, Yun Yamazaki; the Chair of ACABQ, Susan McLurg; and the Director of the Programme Planning and Budget Division, Sharon Van Buerle.

The Committee is expected to hold its next formal meeting at 3 p.m. Monday, 22 December.

Background

The Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary) met today to consider the United Nations budget outline for 2010-2011 and first performance report for the current biennium, 2008-2009, as well as revised estimates in connection with various drafts before the Assembly.

The Committee had before it an outline of the proposed programme budget for the next biennium (document A/63/600), which represents a preliminary estimate of the Organization’s requirements for 2010-2011, in the amount of $3.79 billion, before the inclusion of special political missions.  That amount represents an increase of $20.1 million, or 0.5 per cent, compared with the approved appropriations and related provisions for the current biennium.  Once account is taken of the full inclusion of required provisions for special political missions, the total preliminary estimate of $4.62 billion would represent an increase of $410.3 million, or 9.8 per cent, compared with existing provisions for 2008-2009.  The report also recommends setting the level of the contingency fund at 0.75 per cent of the overall level of resources, or $34.6 million.

The report recalls that, in its resolution 59/278, the General Assembly endorsed the recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions (ACABQ) on the budget outline, including the continuation of the practice of costing provisions for new posts at 50 per cent for the Professional level and above, and 65 per cent for the General Service. Consequently, the full biennial provision in 2010-2011 for posts that were newly established in 2008-2009 and, at present, are only partially funded, would require an additional $44.3 million in 2010-2011.  This additional provision is required to maintain the post staffing table at the same level as has been approved for 2008-2009.

The additional requirements of $44.3 million relate mainly to the strengthening of the administration of justice system and provision of quality control in relation to increasing outsourcing of translation of documents ($12.9 million), as well as strengthening the management structure of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) and the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) ($11.1 million).

The report further states that, in 2010-2011, resources will be required to cover continuing costs of the implementation of an enterprise resource planning system, training related to the implementation of the International Public Sector Accounting Standards, and continued strengthening of the Office at Nairobi and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), in accordance with relevant resolutions.  Estimates are also included for the holding of the Twelfth United Nations Congress on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice and the Fourth United Nations Conference on the Least Developed Countries, as well as for public information related to other conferences and meetings.  Additional requirements are also anticipated with regard to the International Court of Justice, as well as a strengthened and unified security management system for the United Nations.

The Secretary-General also reports that requirements for the funding of special political missions have increased significantly in recent years.  While the present composition of those missions will change somewhat in 2010-2011, it is not anticipated that the overall level will go downward.  The maintenance of the initial provision of $435.5 million for 2010-2011 would provide slightly less than half of currently anticipated biennial requirements.  Accordingly, an increase of $390.2 million is included in the outline, which would provide funding for special political missions at a level of $825.7 million in 2010-2011.

The first performance report on the Organization’s programme budget for 2008-2009 (document A/63/573) identifies adjustments in the level of appropriations required as a result of variations in costing parameters assumed at the time of the initial appropriation, unforeseen and extraordinary items and additional mandates.

Revised requirements under the expenditure sections amount to about $4.39 billion, an increase of $180.8 million vis-à-vis the appropriation level approved in General Assembly resolutions 62/237 A and 62/245 (or $217 million more than the initial appropriation approved in December 2007).  The revised estimate under the income sections amounts to $526.9 million, an increase of $6.8 million.  Consequently, net requirements amount to about $3.86 billion, an increase of $174 million.

Also before the Committee was a report on budgetary requirements resulting from resolutions adopted by the Human Rights Council in 2008 (document A/63/541), which estimates those requirements at $6.89 million.  Of this amount, provisions in the amount of $3.69 million relating to activities of a “perennial nature” have already been made in the budget for 2008-2009.  In addition, it is anticipated that some $1.94 million, which is considered as additional requirements for the biennium, will be accommodated, to the extent possible, from within existing appropriations.

The report says that the Secretary-General intends to submit a consolidated statement of requirements arising from the continuing review by the Human Rights Council of its subsidiary machinery.  Following an in-depth review of the 2008-2009 budget, a consolidated statement will be produced containing proposals on how to meet $1.27 million in additional requirements arising from the Human Rights Council’s amended programme of work for 2008-2009, as decided in 2008.  The report also discusses various alternatives to improve the procedure in presenting financial implications arising from the decisions of the Human Rights Council.

Next, a consolidated statement on the programme budget implications of resolutions and decisions adopted by the Human Rights Council following its continuing review of its subsidiary machinery (document A/63/587), contains an estimate of $1.73 million for the biennium 2008-2009.  The Assembly is requested to address those requirements when it considers the consolidated programme budget implications report and revised estimates relating to the use of the contingency fund.  However, an estimated requirement of $1.41 million will be considered in the context of the proposed programme budget for 2010-2011.

A further report on revised estimates resulting from resolutions and decisions adopted by the Human Rights Council at its ninth session (document A/63/541/Add.1) says an additional $2.15 million in estimated requirements would arise from resolutions and decisions adopted by the Human Rights Council at its ninth session. Of that amount, $1.68 million relating to activities of a “perennial nature” have already been provided for in the programme budget for 2008-2009.  An estimated balance of $467,600 will be accommodated within the existing appropriations for the biennium 2008-2009, to the extent possible.

The report adds that an estimated $6.14 million (gross) would have arisen from decision 9/103 on strengthening of the Human Rights Council.  However, the Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural) has decided to orally revise draft resolution A/C.3/63/L.57/Rev.1, by which the Assembly would “endorse” the report of the Council instead of “acknowledge”, resulting in the withdrawal of those programme budget implications.

A report on revised estimates resulting from the entry into force of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and the Optional Protocol thereto (document A/63/583) says that requirements for the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and the Conference of States Parties currently stand at $32,500 for 2008, $2.35 million for 2009 and $14.19 million for 2010-2011.

The next report before the Committee concerned the review of the lump-sum arrangement of UNHCR (document A/63/537).  The lump-sum arrangement began in the biennium 2002-2003 to fund a portion of the Office’s management- and administration-related costs under the regular budget, which also provides funding for the posts of High Commissioner and Deputy High Commissioner.  The Secretary-General recommends that the current lump-sum arrangement be maintained, given that, in the past three bienniums, it has simplified the budgetary presentation and provided more flexibility to the Office.

[As background, the report explains that, for the biennium 2000-2001, an amount of $2.33 million was provided from the regular budget towards UNHCR non-post administrative expenditures (other staff costs, general operating expenses, supplies and materials).  The number of posts financed by the regular budget for the biennium 2000-2001 had amounted to 220, which represented 50.8 per cent of the number of management and administration posts.  Based on estimated total non-post costs of $28.36 million for the management and administration category, the regular budget contribution towards non-post administrative expenditure would therefore rise from $2.33 million to $14.40 million.

However, taking into account the budgetary constraints of the United Nations at that time, it was not considered that such a substantial increase in the Organization’s contribution to UNHCR could be included in the regular budget proposals for the biennium 2002-2003.  It was considered that, at that stage, an increase of $2 million, or 5.1 per cent, could be proposed for 2002-2003, with subsequent increases to be considered in the context of proposals for each subsequent biennium, but not to exceed $2.5 million.  Hence, beginning with 2002-2003, UNHCR has received funding from the regular budget for the posts of High Commissioner and Deputy High Commissioner, specifically, and, separately, a lump-sum grant for a portion of the other management- and administration-related costs.]

Next, the Committee had before it a statement on programme budget implications (document A/C.5/63/10) of the First Committee’s (Disarmament and International Security) draft resolution on establishing common international standards for the import, export and transfer of conventional arms (document A/C.1/63/L.59).  According to the document, the adoption of the draft would lead to additional requirements of some $1.23 million in 2009 for the work of an open-ended working group, to be established to further consider the elements of an eventual legally binding treaty on the import, export and transfer of conventional arms.  The working group would hold three sessions in 2009 in New York and four sessions in 2010-2011 at venues to be determined at the organizational session, to be held before 27 February 2009.

According to the programme budget implications statement, every effort will be made to accommodate the conference-servicing ($1.18 million) and support services ($44,000) requirements for 2008-2009 from within the Secretariat’s existing capacity, but it will be possible to determine the extent of that accommodation only in light of a consolidated statement on the contingency fund, reflecting the demand for additional services stemming from all programme budget implications statements and revised estimates for 2008-2009.  Resources in the amount of about $2.31 million would also be required for conference servicing and other support services for the four sessions of the open-ended working group in 2010-2011.  Additional requirements for that biennium would be considered in the context of the proposed budget for 2010-2011.

Contained in document A/C.5/63/12 is a programme budget implications statement on the Third Committee draft resolution on the situation of human rights in Myanmar (document A/C.3/63/L.33).  The Secretary-General states that estimated costs of continuing the good offices of the Secretary-General to facilitate the process of national reconciliation and democratization through his Special Envoy for Myanmar, as requested in the draft, would amount to $753,200 net ($837,700 gross) for a period from 1 January to 31 December 2009.  Appropriations for these requirements would be sought in the context of the report on estimates in respect of special political missions, good offices and other political initiatives authorized by the Assembly and/or the Security Council (A/63/346/Add.1 and Corr.1) that is being submitted to the Assembly during its current session.

Regarding the resolution’s request concerning technical assistance, the Secretary-General states that, such assistance, if requested, would be accommodated within the technical cooperation activities of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. As to the request pertaining to the Special Rapporteur, the Secretary-General informed the Human Rights Council, prior to its adoption of resolution 7/32, that associated requirements of $72,200 per annum would be provided under the human rights section of the budget for 2008-2009. The Secretary-General also informs the Assembly of these estimated requirements in his report on the revised estimates resulting from resolutions and decisions adopted by the Human Rights Council in 2008.

ACABQ, in a related report (document A/63/614), states that, should the Assembly adopt draft resolution A/C.3/63/L.33, a total of up to $837,700 gross ($753,200 net) would be required for the period from 1 January to 31 December 2009 for the continuation of the efforts of the Secretary-General’s good offices in Myanmar.  Those requirements would be charged against the provision for special political missions for 2008-2009, as submitted to the Assembly during its current session.

According to a programme budget implications statement regarding a Third Committee text on the Committee on the Rights of the Child (document A/C.5/63/13), the adoption of the draft resolution (document A/C.3/63/L.46/Rev.1), as orally revised, would require an additional appropriation of some $513,100 for the current biennium.

By the draft, the Assembly would decide, as an exceptional measure, to authorize the Committee on the Rights of the Child to meet in parallel chambers for 10 working days during each of its three regular sessions between October 2009 and October 2010.  The Committee’s working group would be authorized to meet for five working days during its pre-sessional meetings.  Those meetings would allow the Committee to address a backlog of over 80 reports by States parties.  The additional amount would cover for additional conference servicing and staffing requirements in connection with those meetings.

The extent to which an additional appropriation for 2008-2009 would be required will be determined in the context of the consolidated statement of programme budget implications and revised estimates for the biennium, to be submitted together with proposals on the utilization of the contingency fund.  The requirements of some $3.61 million for conference and support services for the work of the Committee in 2010-2011 will be dealt with in the context of the proposed budget for that biennium.

Another programme budget implications before the Committee (document A/C.5/63/14) related to the Third Committee draft on the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination (A/C.3/63/L.53/Rev.1).  By the text, the Assembly would note a persisting backlog of reports awaiting consideration by the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination and authorize that body to meet for an additional week per session, as a temporary measure, from 2009 to 2011.

Should the Assembly adopt the draft resolution, it is estimated that additional requirements for 2008-2009 could arise to provide for staff costs, daily subsistence allowances of members of the Committee and conference servicing requirements for 10 additional meetings in August 2009, which would be additional to those listed in the calendar of meetings for 2009.  Moreover, it is estimated that 20 additional annual meetings would be held in the biennium 2010-2011.

The overall impact of the proposals on the programme budget for 2008-2009 would amount to net additional requirements of $379,900 under General Assembly and Economic and Social Council affairs and conference management.  The extent to which an additional appropriation for the biennium would be required would be determined in the context of the consolidated programme budget implications statement, to be submitted towards the end of the main part of the sixty-third session, together with the proposals on the utilization of the contingency fund for those additional requirements.  Net requirements for the biennium 2010-2011 are estimated at $1.87 million and would be dealt with in the context of the proposed budget for 2010-2011.

According to a programme budget implications statement (document A/C.5/63/15) on Assembly resolution 63/3 (request for an advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on whether the unilateral declaration of independence by Kosovo is in accordance with international law, the adoption of the text will entail additional requirements of $435,000 in respect of translation, reproduction, documentation, security and media coverage for the Court.  Efforts will be made to accommodate the requirements of $130,000 in 2009 within the budget for the biennium, and actual expenditures will be reported in the second performance report for 2008-2009.  Hence, no additional appropriation is sought at this time.  The requirements for 2010-2011 will be considered in the context of the budget proposal for that biennium.

The Committee also had before it a programme budget implications statement (document A/C.5/63/16) on the Third Committee draft resolution on the rights of the child (document A/C.3/63/L.16/Rev.1), by the terms of which the Assembly would extend the mandate of the Special Representative for Children and Armed Conflict for a further period of three years and request continued reporting on the progress achieved and challenges remaining.

Currently, funding for the Office of the Special Representative has been provided only for 2008, in accordance with the current mandate of the Office.  The extension of the mandate would require additional resources for 2009 in the amount of some $2.19 million gross ($1.97 million net).  No resources under the 2008-2009 budget could be made available for the support of the operations of the Office in 2009.  Any amount that the Assembly may decide to allocate in support of the Office would need to be provided through an additional appropriation for the current biennium in the context of the contingency fund.

Document A/C.5/63/17 contains programme budget implications for a Third Committee text by which resources would be sought to support various working groups tasked with implementing the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action, including preparatory work for the April 2009 Durban Review Conference (document A/C.3/63/L.51/Rev.1).  An estimated $3.75 million is thought to be required for the Durban Review Conference and its preparatory process, of which $3.18 million would be absorbed by General Assembly and Economic and Social Council affairs and conference management, the Human Rights section, and Administration, Geneva.  That leaves a balance of $570,400 in additional requirements.  The extent to which additional requirements are needed to implement Third Committee resolution A/C.3/63/L.51/Rev.1 would be determined in the context of that consolidated statement to be submitted to the Assembly towards the end of the main part of its sixty-third session.

And finally, the Committee had before it a programme budget implications statement (document A/C.5/63/19) on draft resolution A/63/L.57, by the terms of which the Assembly would endorse the Doha Declaration on Financing for Development: outcome document of the Monterrey Consensus review.  The Declaration, in paragraph 79, calls for holding a conference at the highest level on the world financial and economic crisis and its impact on development, to be organized by the President of the Assembly, with the modalities of the event to be defined by March 2009.

The Secretary-General states that the adoption of the draft could give rise to additional resource requirements in the current biennium.  However, in the absence of sufficient details at this stage regarding the conference, it is difficult to determine the full extent of the programme budget implications arising from the draft resolution.  Should the draft be adopted, a detailed statement of programme budget implications would be submitted during the current session as soon as specific information on the format and modalities of the conference is available.

Introduction of Budget Outline

Presenting the budget outline, YUN YAMAZAKI, United Nations Controller, said there were several initiatives of which the Assembly was currently seized or for which reports were expected to be submitted by the Secretary-General.  Those items, when considered and if adopted, would have a significant bearing on the level of the proposed budget for the next biennium.  Those items included the proposals on the administration of justice, Capital Master Plan associated costs, the strengthened and unified security management system, after-service health insurance, construction in Baghdad and the study for the Strategic Heritage Plan in Geneva.  However, the extent of such requirements was dependent on decisions to be taken by the Assembly.

On the estimates for special political missions, he said that, in light of the very major increase in the requirements, the Secretary-General was once again proposing that the Assembly might wish to consider the treatment of special political missions under the present procedures.  He also recalled that the budget outline was presented at the same rates as the current 2008-2009 budget and did not contain any provision for inflation for 2010-2011 or currency fluctuations.  Those would be dealt with when the proposed budget was prepared.

SUSAN MCLURG, Chair of ACABQ, introduced a related report of that body (document A/63/622), saying that, most importantly, the Advisory Committee pointed out that the budget outline should have presented the fullest possible picture of the estimates of resources for the coming biennium.  The document under consideration fell short of such requirements.  The Advisory Committee had been informed that, if the budget outline were to include the estimates of all items currently before the Assembly and foreseeable reports yet to be issued, then the outline would likely increase to a preliminary estimate of some $5.19 billion.  The Advisory Committee recommended that the Assembly take into account that updated information.

Regarding special political missions, she said that the Advisory Committee recommended that the Secretary-General continue to present the estimates in such a way as to readily identify the resources attributable to special political missions.  That would enable the Assembly to better assess the impact of the estimates for special political missions on the proposed budget outline.  The Advisory Committee also recommended that the Secretary-General used the same approach to the presentation of special political missions in the proposed budget.  ACABQ supported the proposal that the level of the contingency fund for 2010-2011 should remain at 0.75 per cent of the overall level of resources.  Finally, ACABQ pointed out that the budget outline should be submitted by the Secretary-General sufficiently early during off-budget years, so that instructions for the preparations of the budget proposal could be based on the outline parameters, as approved by the Assembly.

Statements

CONROD HUNTE ( Antigua and Barbuda), speaking on behalf of the “Group of 77” developing countries and China, said the Group fully endorsed the comments of ACABQ.  He deeply regretted that such an important item had been introduced so late and that the Advisory Committee’s report had not been issued with sufficient time given for proper consideration of the issue.  He sincerely hoped that the situation did not reoccur.  Relevant rules and regulations required that the budget outline be submitted by 15 August of the off-budget year.

Taking note of the proposed programme outline for 2010-2011, he said that the Assembly was considering a number of proposals and reports that would lead to an increase in the preliminary estimates for the biennium.  The budget outline should have presented the fullest possible picture of the Organization’s estimates of resources for the coming biennium.  According to the Advisory Committee, a more realistic picture of the budget would increase the level of the regular budget to $5.2 billion.  In that context, the Group of 77 wished to reaffirm that resources approved by the Assembly should be commensurate with all the mandated programmes and activities in order to ensure their full implementation.  He also noted that the preliminary estimates of resources for the coming biennium amounted to $4.21 billion, which, before the inclusion of special political missions, represented a marginal increase of 0.5 per cent compared with the current biennium.  Once again, as in previous budgets, compared to the current provisions, activities related to security and human rights were the only areas in the proposed outline where significant growth was being foreseen, with provisions for special political missions showing a significant increase.

The estimates were indicative in nature, and the level of the proposed budget for 2010-2011 might be higher or lower than the preliminary estimates before the Committee today, he continued.  However, he cautioned the Secretariat not to go back to the mistakes of the last budget, where Member States had been presented with a zero nominal growth budget in areas of development.  He reiterated the great importance of having adequate resources to implement the development agenda, as mandated by the Assembly.  He noted the proposed indicative resource change of 0.1 per cent under both part IV and part V of the programme budget and asked how much of the resource change in those areas was accounted for by technical delayed impact adjustments.

In accordance with the Charter, the Assembly was the only body authorized to consider and approve the budget of the United Nations, he said.  Also under the Charter, the staff of the Organization should be appointed by the Secretary-General under regulations established by the Assembly.  The Group of 77 would be guided in its approach to the elements under this agenda item by relevant Articles of the Charter, rules and procedure of the Assembly and other rules and regulations.  He also stressed that the role of the Fifth Committee in the budgetary and administrative matters should be respected.  The Group, therefore, deemed it necessary to remind other Main Committees to desist from using the phrase “within existing resources” in their resolutions.

The Group of 77 had raised questions to various senior officials in regard of the instruction that the Secretary-General had given to all departments and offices to achieve a 2 per cent reduction across the board in preparing for the budget outline, he continued.  The Group believed that the cut could not be reflected in the budget outline, as stated by the Controller in one of the informal meetings.  It was about time to recognize that there was only so much that could be done through instituting saving measures and moving funds from one activity to another before the implementation of individual programmes and, ultimately, the overall work of the Organization suffered.  In addition, the Secretary-General had informed Member States in the previous session that by calling on the Secretariat to absorb costs of new mandates that arose during the course of a biennium, the funding mechanism was being undermined that had been envisaged at the time the Development Account had been established in 1997.  As for the contingency fund, he agreed with the proposal to maintain its level at 0.75 per cent of the preliminary estimates.

GRÉGORY CAZALET (France), speaking on behalf of the European Union, expressed deep concern at the late issuance of the budget outline and said that steps should be taken to halt that trend, for it affected the Committee’s debate on the issue.  He noted that the European Union was the “number one contributor” to the budget.  Reforms currently being discussed would impact the future budget and contribute to the Organization’s improved running.  Budgetary discipline guaranteed good management of increasing resources.

He remarked that the Secretary-General, working together with the United Nations membership, should concentrate on ensuring that funds were deployed in line with priorities set out by Member States.  For that to happen, States needed information ahead of time to make their choices in a transparent and “documented” fashion.  He was concerned that the effort had not been reflected in the outline.  The outline lacked transparency and quantified data, and did not describe the Organization’s priorities clearly.  The European Union would actively participate in efforts to help develop a clearer overview of the Organization’s priorities in a quantifiable manner.

CHRIS PLUNKETT ( Canada), speaking also on behalf of Australia and New Zealand, expressed disappointment at having the budget outline presented after the Committee’s official closing date.  The group found it “inappropriate” that the Committee’s time to consider the proposal was so constrained.  It was also disappointing that many elements being considered by the Committee, or which it was about to consider, were not included in the estimates or included in the accompanying report.  The estimate risked continuing the piecemeal approach to budgeting that the Committee had repeatedly criticized.

While he understood the outline to be a preliminary estimate, he said that presenting it in that way inhibited any attempts to produce a realistic budget figure upon which States could plan ahead.  Taking account of the many proposals before it, the final figures for 2010-2011 would inevitably be much higher than that which was currently being presented.  In that regard, he thanked ACABQ for its report, since the additional information provided was likely to prove useful for the Committee’s consideration of the outline.

He expressed concern about the accuracy of the figure presented for special political missions, whose budget tended to fluctuate considerably more than other parts of the regular budget.  It was almost impossible for the Secretariat to accurately predict those budgets two years in advance.  For that reason, he suggested that the Secretary-General’s analysis distinguish between changes relating to ongoing programmes and those driven by the needs of political missions, while still maintaining a place for special political missions in the budget.  The revised appropriation for the current biennium was the point of departure for the next budget, but accurate costing of special political missions should be reflected in the next biennium’s budget proposal.

He said the Organization’s new challenges made even more apparent the importance of budget discipline, transparency and strengthening results-based budgeting and management.

FLORIAN GUBLER (Switzerland), also speaking on behalf of Liechtenstein, expressed regret that the proposed programme budget outline for 2010-2011 was delayed for several months, and that it was submitted beyond the official ending date of the Fifth Committee’s main session.

He welcomed the inclusion of a provision for special political missions, expected to cover the requirements for both years of the biennium.  Also, he welcomed the suggestion in paragraph 16.  Separating the budgets for special political missions from the rest of the regular budget, by creating an annually budgeted special account, would increase the transparency and predictability of both budgets.

He said he had some concerns with the “relevance” of the budget outline, however.  Many items being discussed by the Committee were reform-related and would have a considerable impact on the next biennium’s budget.  Information relating to potential additional requirements should have been annexed to the report.  He understood that those additions might bring the budget for the 2010-2011 biennium to well above $5 billion.

As for the current budget cycle, he remarked that revised appropriations after the first year might be 20 per cent higher than that which had been outlined in the budget outline for 2008-2009.  Such rises were not sustainable and must be avoided in the future.

He said the shortcomings he had outlined demonstrated that “the current budgetary process is dysfunctional and no longer meets the needs of an Organization that is considerably larger, more decentralized and more operational than 20 years ago”.  He appreciated the Secretary-General’s intention to launch a review of the budgetary process in early 2009, but added that a review could only be successful if Member States participated actively, keeping in mind their share of the responsibility for making the budgetary process work.

PARK IN-KOOK ( Republic of Korea) said that the importance of the budget outline could not be overstated, because it showed the preliminary estimate of resources and provided basic direction to the Secretary-General in preparing the budget for the next biennium.  While he had no doubt that the Secretariat had done its best to produce a comprehensive and balanced budget outline under tremendous pressure, his delegation regretted that the late submission of the report might prevent Member States from performing a careful review of that important agenda item. He noted, at the same time, that the budget outline for 2010-2011 showed improvements in some aspects. In particular, he was pleased to see that the report had introduced a chapter on other issues, exemplifying several initiatives for which reports were expected to be submitted.

It would have been helpful to Member States if the Secretariat had included indicative estimates for expected requirements for the initiatives described in the report, he continued.  In addition, it did not capture the costs arising from such areas as human resource management, strengthening of the Department of Political Affairs and improving the effective delivery of the mandates of development-related activities, and so on.  According to the Secretary-General’s report, the preliminary estimate of resources for 2010-2011, including provisions for special political missions, exceeded the previous budget level by 9.8 per cent.  At the same time, he wanted to pay special attention to the findings by ACABQ that the total estimate of resources was expected to amount to $5.2 billion, a 24 per cent increase from 2008-2009, reflecting all potential add-ons.  While providing financial contributions to the Organization to fulfil the mandates set by Member States was a right and inevitable obligation, his delegation was concerned that the striking increase in the overall budget was likely to become a serious burden on Member States, given the current economic downturn.

He appreciated the Secretary-General’s efforts in the outline formulation to attain efficiency gains to acquire additional funding available for the priority areas of the United Nations, he continued, but noted that that effort needed to be continued in the process of preparing the budget proposal for 2010-2011, ensuring that those activities would not hamper the successful implementation of mandates.  He urged that “the budget proposal will reflect the benefit of further reviews of possible obsolete activities, additional cost-effective measures and simplified procedures”, as stated in paragraph 17 of the Secretary-General’s report.

“We should not become so fixated on merely reducing the overall budget level that we risk undermining our concerted effort to implement such noble and important mandates and goals as tackling climate change and [the Millennium Development Goals],” he said in conclusion.  A balance between efficiency gain and continuous implementation of such initiatives was needed.  He also shared the view of ACABQ that the level of the contingency fund should remain at 0.75 per cent of the overall level of resources.

KENICHIRO MUKAI ( Japan) said the budget outline was a tool to help guide the Secretariat, as it prepared the proposed programme budget for the following biennium.  The outline had other uses, however.  Most notably, it presented States with a comprehensive picture of the next biennial programme budget, indicating its size and structure.  It conveyed the Secretary-General’s priorities and explained how he intended to translate his vision into reality.  It was not a document to be rubber-stamped after a few hours’ perusal.  For that reason, he deeply regretted its late submission.

He also expressed concern that the document did not show the estimated impact of the “add-ons” to the next biennial budget.  The Controller had supplemented the budget outline, with the total estimate of nearly $5.19 billion, to ACABQ.  That figure was understood as changeable depending on ongoing budgetary consultations.  The proposed programme budget for the 2010-2011 biennium should be based on the total indicative estimate of nearly $4.62 billion presented in the outline document.

He said there were shortcomings in both the preparations and presentation of the current outline and those should be corrected.  He believed it was the view of many States that the document should be considered and adopted without delay.  Deferring adoption would only produce greater confusion and damage the process of preparing the proposed programme budget for the 2010-2011 biennium.  There was no time to spare, and Japan would expend every effort to help ensure consensus.

BRUCE RASHKOW ( United States) said that the Committee’s consideration of the budget outline was a critical component of an orderly and predictable process created to advance the cause of responsible budgeting.  The Secretariat had an important responsibility to produce an outline that was complete, comprehensive and fully reflective of the resources that would be needed to carry out mandated activities.  Because the outline was required to be “indicative”, it must also give Member States a clear picture of the costs associated with proposals from the Secretary-General that were still under consideration or expected to be approved by the time the new budget took effect -- the add-ons.

Last year, he continued, almost every Member State had expressed concerns about the add-ons.  A frequently heard comment was that the budget had been presented in a “piecemeal” manner, making it difficult for delegates to inform their Governments about the resources needed by the United Nations to carry out its priority activities.  Given the many calls to do the budget outline differently this year and to provide a complete and transparent estimate, his delegation had been surprised and very disappointed with the outline before the Committee.

The widespread expectations of Member States had not been met, he said, “and we are left with a budget outline that is incomplete, not inclusive and misleading”.  While the outline total rightfully included a two-year allocation for special political missions, it failed to include the add-ons that would have a significant impact on the bottom line.  Paragraph 22, for instance, provided a list of add-ons that omitted a number of important proposals.  More importantly, possible costs of those add-ons were not shown anywhere in the submissions by the Secretary-General.  In particular, the add-ons were entirely missing from the key table in section II, whose title was “preliminary estimate of resources needed to accommodate the proposed programme of activities during the biennium”.  The outline also failed to capitalize on efforts to streamline and prioritize United Nations operations.  While referring to the application of regulation 5.6 of the programme planning and budget rules, which required the Secretariat to identify obsolete and marginal outputs, there was no specific evidence that had been done in arriving at the budget outline.

The ACABQ report tracked closely with his observations, he continued.  He strongly agreed that the outline needed to be submitted sufficiently early in order to be a practical tool in the budget preparation process.  Issuing the document just a week before the close of the Assembly was not sufficiently early.  Nevertheless, he was pleased that the Secretariat had provided ACABQ with the full picture of budget requirements that was not in the Secretary-General’s report.  The outline total had, thus, become $5.2 billion, which was in line with his delegation’s estimates.  He hoped that Member States could have a full and complete discussion over the next few days, leading to a resolution that would provide clear guidance for the preparation of the next budget.  If that was not possible, then there would be little choice but to continue the budget outline discussion next year.

Introduction of 2008-2009 Performance Report

The Secretary-General’s report was presented by Mr. YAMAZAKI, who noted that revised estimates and programme budget implications statements in response to draft resolutions under current consideration had not been included in the performance report.  Those amounts, which were being handled outside the first performance report, were subject to the Assembly’s decisions and would impact the level of the revised appropriation.

The adjustments to rates of exchange mainly reflected the general weakening of the United States dollar in 2008, compared to what had been foreseen in the initial appropriation.  Total requirements due to exchange rate fluctuations amounted to $63 million.  Additional requirements due to inflation amounted to $103.8 million.  Adjustments to standard costs would result in an increase of $6.6 million, reflecting the net effect of changes in salary standard costs and common staff costs.

Both Professional and General Service vacancy rates had trended downwards from January to September 2008, he said, and a further reduction in realized vacancy rates was expected in the course of the second year of the biennium.  Therefore, no adjustments for vacancy rates had been made in the report.  The situation would continue to be monitored.  For field security staff, adjustments had been made for realized vacancy rates of 5.3 per cent for Professional posts and 13.9 per cent for General Service posts.  That would result in additional requirements of $25.5 million to be shared with other United Nations organizations under the cost-sharing formula decided upon by the United Nations System Chief Executives Board for Coordination (CEB).  The Secretariat share would amount to $6 million.

Turning to requirements arising from unforeseen and extraordinary expenses and decisions of policy-making organs, he said that, under the terms of resolution 62/239, commitments had been entered into in the amount of $1.4 million, of which $1.2 million had been certified by the Secretary-General as relating to the maintenance of international peace and security and $200,000 had been certified by the President of the International Court of Justice.  Owing to delays in the construction of additional office facilities at the Economic Commission for Africa (ECA), the utilization of the commitment authority previously approved in the amount of $1.94 million gross had not yet been utilized.  Accordingly, it was proposed that such requirements would be reported in the context of the second performance report for 2008-2009.

Introducing the ACABQ report (document A/63/620), Ms. MCLURG said that the Advisory Committee was recommending approval of the revised estimates contained in the Secretary-General’s report, subject to such adjustments as might be necessary as a result of its consideration of matters before the Assembly, such as revised estimates and programme budget implications statements submitted in response to draft resolutions considered by the Main Committees.

In connection with the inclusion in the performance report of information in restructuring of the Office of Human Resources Management, the Advisory Committee pointed out that, as a document describing parameter changes, the first performance report should not deal, in principle, with such issues as the restructuring of the Secretariat.  The content of the first performance report should be limited to the parameters endorsed by the Assembly, or adjustments owing to variations in the rates of inflation and exchange, and in standards assumed in the calculation of the initial appropriations.  With respect to the recosting methodology used, ACABQ urged the Secretariat to continue working closely with the International Civil Service Commission (ICSC), with a view to providing for a full recosting on the basis of more up-to-date data.  The methodologies used by other international organizations should also be explored.

Statements

Mr. HUNTE (Antigua and Barbuda), speaking on behalf of the Group of 77 and China, said he valued the consideration of the first performance report for the insight it provided, but States would have benefited from receiving it, and the related ACABQ report, in a timely manner.

He said the performance report had identified several adjustments in the level of appropriations for 2008-2009.  The bulk of the increases were related to the implementation of the maintenance of peace and security.  But, all proposals approved by the Assembly and Security Council came with a price tag, and the Group of 77 would like to caution against the “misconception” that peace and security issues could be financed at the expense of other activities.

He noted that the increase in resource requirements for special political missions had been due to the fact that provisions for those missions for the first year of the biennium had almost been depleted.  He also noted that provisions for special political missions, peace and security, and human rights remained the only areas of the regular budget that had experienced actual growth.  The Group of 77 attached great importance to the implementation of the development agenda, and for that reason its members were concerned by the lack of commensurate growth in that important area.  It was also why the Group was committed to approving a resolution at this session, because it would enable the implementation of the Assembly’s development mandates.

He then turned to the “experiment” of limited budgetary discretion for the Secretary-General to enter into commitments for up to $20 million at each biennium for post and non-post requirements.  The Secretary-General had said that that authority was being used to address the continued funding of a dedicated project team to maintain the momentum and ensure the progress on major foundation tasks relating to the enterprise resource planning system, as well as for operational preparedness and business continuity in a protracted crisis of a human influenza pandemic.  Because of lack of time, the Group intended to pursue that issue during informals.

He said the Group of 77 was concerned that the performance report had not responded to a provision in Assembly resolution 54/15, in which it had decided that savings achieved as a result of efficiency measures should be transferred to the funding mechanism of the Development Account, with the Assembly’s prior approval.  The Group noted that the performance report did not contain any information on such savings, yet it was puzzling that the Secretariat often managed to identify “savings” when it suited its purposes.  It was clear that the funding mechanism was not functioning as envisaged in 1997, and that concrete action was required of the Assembly to regularize the funding of the Development Account.

He said the Group fully endorsed ACABQ’s recommendations that performance reports should report changes in planning parameters and should not deal with substantive issues, such as Secretariat restructuring.  On recosting methodology, he stressed that it should only be implemented by including the recommendations of the International Civil Service Commission.  Recosting was an attempt to predict the resource needs for the following year and did not represent actual expenditure or savings.  Attempts to manipulate recosting for short-term results did not affect actual requirements; it was not intellectually sound to start negotiations on the 2010-2011 budget with “conveniently distorted figures”.

He took note of ACABQ’s recommendations on recosting methodologies used by other international organizations.  The unique nature of the United Nations, with its diverse international field presence and size of staff, meant that recosting measures must be customized for its needs.  On the construction of additional office facilities at ECA and the related use of the commitment authority in the amount of almost $1.94 billion, the Group would concur with ACABQ recommendations.

Turning to programme budget implications, he said those should be treated in accordance with Assembly resolutions dealing with the operation of the contingency fund.  The Group noted that the programme budget implication and revised estimates subject to the contingency fund were within the level of the fund.

He also asked for copies of the statements delivered by the Controller.

Mr. RASHKOW ( United States) noted that, in paragraph 11 of its report, ACABQ had urged the Secretariat to continue working closely with ICSC to provide recosting on the basis of up-to-date information, and asked that the information be updated as of December, rather than November.  He also asked whether the Secretariat had considered exploring recosting strategies used by other international organizations.

He said he endorsed the ACABQ suggestion in paragraphs 5 of its report that extraneous issues not be included in the performance report.  That was subject to exceptions, because it was possible that the Assembly might request that certain items be included from time to time.  But, the inclusion of reorganization in the performance report had seemed “a little out of place”.  He looked forward to discussing those issues during informals.

Revised Estimates and Programme Budget Implications Statements

SHARON VAN BUERLE, Director of the Programme Planning and Budget Division, introduced a series of the Secretary-General’s reports.

The related reports of the Advisory Committee were introduced by Ms. MCLURG.

First, she took up ACABQ report A/63/629 relating to the Secretary-General’s three reports on the Human Rights Council (documents A/63/541 and Add.1, and A/63/587).  The report addressed the Council’s proposals to improve the procedures for presenting financial requirements arising from the Council’s resolutions and decisions.  She said ACABQ regretted that the Secretary-General’s three reports on that issue did not give a clear presentation of requirements.  ACABQ’s own report had endeavoured to provide the Assembly with a succinct understanding of both the requirements and the Committee’s recommendations.

Continuing, she said ACABQ saw merit in having an annual presentation of financial implications of the Council’s work.  But, explanations on requirements relating to special political missions (as discussed in paragraphs 98, 99 and 105) required greater clarity in presentation and further elaboration and study.  ACABQ would, thus, recommend that current modalities for considering financial requirements arising from Human Rights Council resolutions and decisions be maintained on an annual basis, but that they be comprehensively reviewed in the context of the 2010-2011 proposed programme budget.

Further to that issue, she said ACABQ would recommend that the Assembly approve additional requirements of $1.73 million for 2008-2009 on the understanding that any appropriations that might be requested would be determined in the context of the consolidated statement of all statements of programme budget implications and revised estimates for 2008-2009, which would be subtitled to the General Assembly with proposals on the use of the contingency fund.

Presenting the ACABQ report on the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and its Optional Protocol (document A/63/628), she said the Advisory Committee noted that the Secretariat had informed the Assembly at its sixty-first session of financial implications, estimated at $10.31 million, that would arise should the Convention enter into force during the current biennium.  Those estimates had now been revised and amounted to $2.39 million for the current biennium and $14.19 million for 2010-2011.

Under section 23, Human Rights, the Secretary-General was requesting three posts to provide minimal substantive and technical secretariat services to the States parties and the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, she continued.  Upon enquiry, the Advisory Committee had been informed that there would be no overlap between the functions of the incumbents of the three posts requested and those of eight existing posts in the Department of Economic and Social Affairs referred to in paragraph 17 of the Secretary-General’s report.  With regard to resources requested under General Assembly and Economic and Social Council affairs and conference management, ACABQ noted that several changes to the scope and workload of conference services in 2008-2009 had resulted in lower requirements for the biennium, and a much lower requirement for documentation for the sessions of the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in 2009.

She said the Secretary-General estimated that requirements arising from arrangements to ensure accessibility with regard to the meetings of the Committee and the Conference of States Parties would be met, to the extent possible, from existing resources.  He also indicated that requirements in relation to measures to ensure compliance with article 9 of the Convention would be taken into account during further consideration of the renovation of the United Nations facilities.  ACABQ recommended that the Assembly request the Secretary-General to take necessary steps to ensure that United Nations facilities worldwide were accessible to persons with disabilities.

She said that, on the actions to be taken by the Assembly, the Advisory Committee recommended, in essence, that it take note of and approve the proposals of the Secretary-General as set out in his report, on the understanding that such appropriations would be requested in the context of the consolidated statement of all programme budget implications and revised estimates for the current biennium.  The Advisory Committee further stressed that approval of the Secretary-General’s proposals relating to additional requirements for 2008-2009 should not be seen as prejudging in any way the outcome of the consideration of the proposed programme budget for 2010-2011.

Turning to the ACABQ report on the lump-sum arrangement of UNHCR (document A/63/16), she recommended that the Fifth Committee take note of the Secretary-General’s report and endorse maintenance of that arrangement.  The arrangement eliminated the need for separate administrative procedures in terms of the 220 posts funded under the regular budget.  UNHCR standard costs for posts were higher than United Nations standard costs, owing to the additional common staff costs incurred as a result of the Office’s mandatory rotation policy.

Taking up the ACABQ report on moving towards an arms trade treaty: establishing common international standards for the import, export and transfer of conventional arms (document A/63/621), she said additional requirements of up to $1.3 million would arise from the adoption of draft resolution A/C.1/63/L.39.  Any additional appropriations for the biennium 2008-2009 would be considered by the Assembly in accordance with the procedures for the use and operation of the contingency fund.

She then took up the ACABQ report on the situation of human rights in Myanmar (document A/63/614).  She said that continuation of the Secretary-General’s good offices efforts of the Special Envoy for Myanmar, arising out of draft resolution A/C.3/63/L.33, would require a total of up to $837,700 for the period of 1 January to 31 December 2009.  They would be charged against the provision proposed for special political missions of the proposed programme budget for the biennium 2008-2009.

Turning to the ACABQ report on the Committee on the Rights of the Child (document A/63/624), she said adoption of resolution A/C.3/63/L.46/Rev.1would entail an additional appropriation of $513,100 for the biennium 2008-2009.  The extent to which an additional appropriation for the biennium 2008-2009 would be required would be determined in the context of the consolidated statement of all statements of programme budget implications and revised estimates for the biennium 2008-2009, together with proposals on the use of the contingency fund for those additional requirements.  The requirements in the amount of $3.61 million would be addressed in the context of the proposed 2010-2011 programme budget.  In addition, ACABQ would recommend that the Assembly take note of the proposed modifications to the outputs to be incorporated into the programme of work under “supporting human rights bodies and organs, human rights”, of the 2008-2009 programme budget.

Taking up the ACABQ report on the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (document A/63/617), she said the Committee might wish to inform the Assembly of additional requirements of up to $379,000 to meet the conference servicing needs of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, as would arise from adoption of draft resolution A/C.3/63/L.53.

Regarding the ACABQ report on the request for an advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on whether the unilateral declaration of independence of Kosovo is in accordance with international law (document A/63/619), which discusses requirements to enable the International Court of Justice to prepare an advisory opinion on Kosovo, she said ACABQ recommended that the Secretary-General provide further justification in the context of the 2010-2011 biennium budget.  Efforts would be made to accommodate additional requirements of $130,000 in 2009 to process initial documents and move forward with Court proceedings.  Actual expenditures would be reported in the context of the second performance report for the 2008-2009 biennium.  Requirements for 2010-2011 would be considered in the context of the proposed budget programme for that biennium.  Adequate justification relating to media coverage and security should be provided also in the context of the 2010-2011 budget.

On the ACABQ report on the rights of the child (document A/63/623), she said adoption of resolution A/C.3/63/L.16/Rev.1 would entail $2.19 million for the period from 1 January to 31 December 2009 for the extension of the mandate of the Office of the Special Representative for 2009.  That extension would involve the continuation of the current complement of eight staff and requests for two new professional posts, at the P-4 and P-3 levels, even though ACABQ was of the view that the functions could be handled by two Programme Officers at the P-3 level.  The extent to which additional appropriations were needed would be determined in the context of the consolidated statement of all statements of programme budget implications and revised estimates for the biennium 2008-2009, which would be submitted to the General Assembly together with proposals on the use of the contingency fund.

She then took up the ACABQ report on global efforts for the total elimination of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance and the comprehensive implementation of and follow-up to the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action (document A/63/618).  She said that $570,400 would be required to enable the Preparatory Committee of the Durban Review Conference to hold a third substantive session, arising out of draft resolution A/C.3/63/L.51/Rev.1.  The extent to which additional appropriations were needed would be determined in the context of the consolidated statement of all statements of programme budget implications and revised estimates for the biennium 2008-2009, which would be submitted to the General Assembly together with proposals on the use of the contingency fund.

Finally, she addressed the ACABQ report on the Doha Declaration on Financing for Development: outcome document of the Follow-up International Conference on Financing for Development to Review the Implementation of the Monterrey Consensus (document A/63/625).  She said insufficient detail on the modalities of the Conference called for in draft resolution A/63/L.57 made it difficult to determine the full extent of its programme budget implications.  The Committee might wish simply to inform the Assembly that “additional resources might be required” for additional conference servicing once the modalities became clearer.  A detailed statement would be submitted for the Assembly’s consideration during its current session as soon as specific information became available.

THOMAS REPASCH ( United States) said the Committee had before it “a long and complicated list” of programme budget implications statements.  For many of those, there would be a consolidated list, which would provide a clear snapshot of all financial implications, and he would reserve judgement until that list was produced.  However, several programme budget implications statements related to the texts that the United States either opposed or expressed reservations about.  His delegation would consider action on several issues in the coming days.  For instance, the one related to the programme budget implications of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racism and Related Intolerance and implementation of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action; the request for an advisory opinion on Kosovo; and the programme budget implications of the Committee on the Rights of the Child.

He also wondered if a statement presented on the Doha Declaration could be considered a statement of programme budget implications as it was “one of those strange PBI statements” that did not have programme budget implications.  The statement indicated that the Committee would get something at a later date, and he asked when that would happen.  How could the Committee take a decision on a statement that did not have any implications?

Responding to the United States statement, CARLA SAMAGOA RECARI ( Guatemala) said that the Group of 77 fully supported all programme budget implications statements on the decisions of relevant bodies.  The Fifth Committee needed to provide resources for those causes, once they were approved.

Responding, Ms. BUERLE said her Division knew “very little” of the actual budget implications of the resolution on the Doha Conference, but that consultations would be held with the Office of the General Assembly President soon.  But, because it was understood that the resolution was proceeding to adoption, it was thought wise to bring to the Committee’s attention the possibility of programme budget implications.  A similar approach had been taken with regard to the 2005 World Summit Outcome, where a simple programme budget implications statement had been presented and followed by a full report to the Fifth Committee.   A similar instance was taking place with regard to the International Court of Justice opinion on Kosovo, where requirements had also been envisaged.

* *** *

For information media • not an official record