Speakers Focus on Work Programme for 2016, Organizational Resilience Management System, Joint Inspection Unit as Fifth Committee Resumes Session
The Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary) opened the first part of its resumed seventieth session today with a review of its 2016 provisional work programme, the 2016-2017 programme budget for the United Nations resilience management system and the role of the Joint Inspection Unit, among other matters.
Fifth Committee Chair Durga Prasad Bhattarai (Nepal) opened the resumed session with words of “welcome, caution and appeal” to continue the spirit of cooperation that had prevailed during the Committee’s main session.
Against that backdrop, delegates considered the Committee’s provisional organization of work, with some expressing disappointment that the Secretary-General had not presented a funding proposal for either the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development or the Addis Ababa Action Agenda, as called for by the General Assembly. Others pressed the Committee to conclude its work by the 24 March deadline, despite an increasing workload, voicing concern that important issues were pending from previous sessions.
Thailand’s representative, on behalf of the “Group of 77” developing countries and China, expressed concern at the late issuance of reports, a “chronic problem”. He and the United States’ representative looked forward to the Secretary-General’s report on how the Organization would reprioritize resources and activities to best support Member States in meeting the Sustainable Development Goals.
Japan’s delegate expected “excellent” cooperation by the Secretariat and the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions (ACABQ) to ensure the timely submission of documents.
Along similar lines, the representative of the Dominican Republic, on behalf of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States, expressed concern at delays in changing staff regulations and rules emanating from resolution 70/244 on the common system in human resource management. The Secretariat must expedite the submission of reports for consideration by the Assembly.
The representative of the United Republic of Tanzania, on behalf of the African Group, pressed the Committee to conclude all agenda items, especially on the funding and backstopping arrangements of special political missions and operational arrangement of ACABQ. “We will not subscribe to any ideas that bring the business as usual to these items,” he said.
Turning to progress in implementing the organizational resilience management system throughout the Organization, Craig Boyd, Director of the Facilities and Commercial Services Division of the Office of Central Support Services, presented the Secretary-General’s report on the matter. Headquarters had implemented all 25 recommendations emanating from the review of Storm Sandy, he said, pointing to “impressive” progress in joint emergency management at offices in New York, Geneva, Nairobi and Vienna. “This represents huge synergy gains and brings benefits to the efforts being undertaken by each office,” he said.
Carlos Ruiz Massieu, ACABQ Chair, added that implementation of the enterprise resource planning system, known as Umoja, in United Nations entities should help identify costs for activities that supported organizational resilience, as he introduced the body’s related report on the topic.
Reacting to those comments, Thailand’s delegate, on behalf of the Group of 77, said she was disappointed that the current report lacked clarity around decision-making. She would seek details of the full cost of the initiative during informal consultations. On recommendations from the review of Storm Sandy, which damaged New York Headquarters in 2012, the Group had taken note of the information and would be interested in learning about several elements, including those related to insurance coverage.
Also today, Achamkulangare Gopinathan, Inspector with the Joint Inspection Unit — the external oversight body tasked with conducting evaluations, inspections and investigations of the Organization — presented the Unit’s 2015 report and 2016 work programme. He cited seven new projects covering system-wide issues, among them a review of administrative services delivery in the United Nations system, donor-led accountability and oversight reviews and a comprehensive review of the system-wide support for small island developing States. Going forward, the Unit would adapt to new priorities, such as the 2030 Agenda, which presented a series of challenges to the system.
Rounding out discussion on those issues, Thailand’s delegate, on behalf of the Group of 77, expressed concern that the Unit’s budget submission process was not in full conformity with Article 20 of its Statute, while the United States’ delegate, noting that the Unit would review travel policies, its second-largest expenditure, cited the need for more comprehensive data and efficiency. She encouraged it to continue its resource mobilization efforts.
Salhina Mkumba (United Republic of Tanzania), Chair of the Audit Operations Committee of the Board of Auditors, introduced the Board’s reports on the Strategic Heritage Plan of the United Nations Office at Geneva, and on progress in the handling of information and communications technology (ICT) affairs in the Secretariat.
Mario Baez, Chief of the Policy and Oversight Coordination Service in the Department of Management, introduced the Secretary-General’s corresponding report on implementation of the Board’s recommendations concerning the Plan, while Atefeh Riazi, Chief Information Technology Officer and Assistant Secretary-General of the Office of Information and Communications Technology, introduced the Secretary-General’s report on implementation of the Board’s recommendations on ICT affairs. Mr. Ruiz Massieu introduced the Advisory Committee’s related reports on that topic.
Also speaking today were representatives of China and Russian Federation, as well as the European Union.
The Fifth Committee will reconvene at 10 a.m. Friday, 4 March, to discuss the 2016-2017 programme budget at it related to after service health insurance and human resources management.
Organization of Work
CHAYAPAN BAMRUNGPHONG (Thailand), on behalf of the “Group of 77” developing countries and China, said with regard to operational arrangements for the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions (ACABQ), deferring the item one more time “should not be an option”. He also expressed concern at the late issuance of reports, a “chronic problem”, and looked forward to the issuance of a new report by the Secretary-General that addressed adequate financing for the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. He also anticipated receiving a formal communication from the Secretary-General to clarify reasons and challenges that had hindered the ability to meet the deadline while providing a clear timeline and progress on the report finalization.
FRANCISCO ANTONIO CORTORREAL (Dominican Republic), on behalf of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States, expressed interest in a number of issues, including human resource management. He was concerned about the delay in changes to staff regulations and rules emanating from resolution 70/244 on the common system in human resource management, stressing the imperative for the Secretariat to expedite the submission of reports for consideration by the Assembly. Concerned about inaction with regard to special political missions, he hoped Member States would engage constructively in discussions on funding for those operations. More broadly, it was necessary to respect decisions that had been made in December 2015 on reforming the peacebuilding architecture. He reiterated the importance of strengthening accountability at the institutional and personal levels. He also said the Community was concerned over the delay of the submission of reports to Member States.
JUSTIN KISOKA (United Republic of Tanzania), on behalf of the African Group, associating himself with the “Group of 77” and China, urged the Committee to abide by the principles of inclusiveness, openness and transparency in conducting negotiations. Taking note that the workload had increased yet the time allocated remained unchanged, he said the Group was determined to ensure that the Committee concluded all items, especially funding and backstopping arrangements of special political missions and operational arrangement of ACABQ, stressing: “We will not subscribe to any ideas that bring the business as usual to these items.” The Committee also had failed to conclude human resource management items during its sixty-ninth session.
He expressed disappointment that the Secretary-General had not presented the proposal on funding for the 2030 Agenda and Addis Ababa Action Agenda, as called for by the General Assembly. He also expressed concern that the process to consolidate inputs from funds, programmes and specialized agencies “seems to be lost somewhere”, that a number of issues remained unaddressed, and that there was a lack of common understanding in the United Nations system on the way to address that matter. He would seek various clarifications during informal consultations and would propose a course of action.
IOANNIS VRAILAS of the European Union hoped to continue the “constructive spirit” shown in the main part of the seventieth session, drawing on the Committee’s extensive experience on administrative and budgetary questions, whose conclusion was essential. He recalled the importance of timely submissions of all required documents in all official languages. There were a number of important items to consider, including those that had been deferred from previous sessions, such as the Resident Coordinator system and human resources management reports. Many reports were over 18 months old. The seventy-first session would focus mainly on human resource management, and by that time, the Committee would have updated reports.
In that context, he called on all parties to find a pragmatic approach, stressing that new agenda items also deserved attention, including special political missions and construction and property management. Regarding revised estimates on the future of peacekeeping operations and the upcoming report on the 2030 Agenda, he stressed the importance of effectiveness, efficiency and budget discipline principles, reaffirming that there was “substantial” room for improving the functioning of the United Nations by fully using information technology platforms. The Union was committed to working with all partners in a spirit of openness, transparency and cooperation to reach decisions by consensus. He believed the Committee’s work programme could conclude by 24 March.
GUO XUEJUN (China) commended the Committee’s accomplishments in the previous session. To promote efficiency within the Organization, the Committee must improve its own performance and coordination and conclude the session within the agreed timeframe. He hoped the report on the 2030 Agenda would, among other things, ensure sufficient funding for the implementation of the Organization’s development goals and that political support would translate into action. Regarding special political mission financing, China supported several proposals Member States had tabled during the 2015 session. The Secretariat should improve its internal management and financing planning, he said, expressing hope it would address those issues and the work, as mandated by the Assembly.
HIROSHI MINAMI (Japan) said there were many important issues to consider, including human resource management, ACABQ reform, special political missions and their backstopping arrangement reviews, and various items that required examination of their revised budgetary estimates. He urged building on the positive momentum created during the Committee’s main session and enhanced working relationships in order to conclude the resumed session by 24 March, stressing that his Government expected “excellent” cooperation by the Secretariat and the Advisory Committee to ensure the timely submission of documents.
ISOBEL COLEMAN (United States) said it was important that reforms initiated by the Secretary-General reached their full potential. For those reforms under the development stage, she encouraged the Secretariat to move forward with its work to make the United Nations the best it could be. She looked forward to the consideration of a number of items, including the Board of Auditors’ report on information and communications technology (ICT). Several construction issues would also be considered and establishing a maintenance programme and ensuring the most efficient use of space in the Organization through flexible workspace strategies were key elements of a wider strategy to improve asset management. That action in combination with other related reforms, including Umoja, the Organization’s enterprise resource planning system, and the global service delivery model, would help to optimize the Organization’s global footprint. Turning to special political missions, she expressed interest in ensured funding for the mission in Burundi, the panel of experts on Iran and the Al-Qaida Sanctions Committee. She also looked forward to seeing the Secretary-General’s report on how the United Nations would reprioritize resources and activities to best support Member States in meeting the Sustainable Development Goals.
SERGEY V. KHALIZOV (Russian Federation) said the agenda included a broad range of issues, among them new and revisited topics. He hoped discussions would be fruitful and constructive, including on human resource management, particularly postponed items. In that regard, serious discord among Member States existed, he said, noting that the issue of mobility had triggered a wide spectrum of perspectives. The Secretary-General’s report on the review of the Organization’s capital assets would also be considered and there should be close consideration on that issue. Construction issues should be considered on a case-by-case basis. With regard to medical insurance for retirees, further work was required. As the Committee had been unable to decide on organizational arrangements of ACABQ, he hoped a decision would be taken soon.
The Committee then approved its programme of work.
2016-2017 Budget: Organizational Resilience Management System Implementation
CRAIG BOYD, Director, Facilities and Commercial Services Division, Office of Central Support Services, introduced the Secretary-General’s report on the progress in the implementation of the organizational resilience management system (document A/70/660). He said the report summarized implementation of the system at New York Headquarters and beyond, and it demonstrated the success of the strategy to extend it to specialized agencies, funds and programmes. At Headquarters, coordination among the Departments of Management, Safety and Security, and Public Information had become routine, as had their collaboration with other bodies such as the Senior Emergency Management Policy Team. Online courses on emergency preparation and staff support had been offered to enhance staff’s ability to act professionally in emergency situations.
Offices away from Headquarters and the regional commissions had reported impressive progress in implementing the system, he said. Joint emergency management represented “huge synergy gains” and brought benefits to each office’s efforts. The system had been fully implemented at the headquarters of the Departments of Peacekeeping Operations, Field Support and Political Affairs; full implementation in the field was targeted for mid-2016. An assessment of in implementation progress had been made at all peacekeeping and special political missions. Remote support and review of emergency plans for peacekeeping missions were ongoing. The dates for the United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in the Central African Republic (MINUSCA), African Union-United Nations Hybrid Operation in Darfur (UNAMID) and the United Nations Assistance Mission in Somalia (UNSOM) were being confirmed. He noted progress in the development of organizational resilience in the United Nations common system, with endorsement by the High-Level Committee on Management and Chief Executives Board for Coordination in 2014, as well as efforts by specialized agencies, funds and programmes to strengthen the system in their respective organizations.
Organizational resilience as a management system represented an approach of coordination, harmonization and cooperation, he said. It was a means of emergency management, built on existing capacities of United Nations departments, as well as specialized agencies, funds and programmes. It should not be seen as a “monolithic” programme that had a start or end. Rather, it was an ongoing way to “do smart business” by mainstreaming management components into daily business, especially when “crisis has become the new norm”. There were no new costs. The framework offered a system for benchmarking, with key performance indicators for policy; governance; maintenance, exercise and review; risk management; and planning. As well, Headquarters had completed the implementation of all 25 recommendations emanating from the review of Storm Sandy. “Headquarters vulnerability has been mitigated and the degree of preparation greatly strengthened”, he said.
CARLOS RUIZ MASSIEU, Chair of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions (ACABQ), introduced ACABQ’s related report (document A/70/7/Add.41), recommending that the Assembly take note of progress made in applying the principles of the system across the United Nations. Identifying costs for the full range of activities that supported organizational resilience was important. As such, implementation of Umoja in United Nations entities should facilitate the identification of such costs, and he looked forward to receiving updates in that regard. He trusted that efforts to assess emergency management risks would continue to be coordinated with the Organization’s overall risk management framework.
Ms. WAIRATPANIJ (Thailand), speaking for the Group of 77, welcomed the development of key performance indicators as a tool for measuring progress in implementing the organizational resilience management system. She would be interested to learn to what extent the harmonization and rationalization of the initiatives had been explored with regard to offices away from Headquarters, regional commissions and field missions of the Department of Peacekeeping Operations (DPKO), Department of Political Affairs (DPA) and specialized agencies. The Assembly had requested that future reports included detailed accounting of the costs of implementing those and related initiatives. She was, however, disappointed that the current report lacked clarity regarding the decision-making process and said she would seek details of the full cost of the initiative during informal consultations.
Also of interest was updated information on the cost-sharing arrangement, including by funds and programmes, and the roles and involvement of the host country authorities, she said. With regard to the implementation of the recommendations from the after-action review of storm Sandy, the Group had taken note of the information that had been provided and would be interested in learning in detail a number of elements, including those related to insurance coverage.
Reports of Board of Auditors
SALHINA MKUMBA, Chair, Audit Operations Committee, Board of Auditors, provided key findings of the Board’s first report on the Strategic Heritage Plan of the United Nations Office at Geneva (document A/70/569). The CHF 836.5 million ($869.54 million) project was slated for completion in 2023, with construction of the new building from 2017 to 2019 and renovation of the existing buildings by 2023. While the project should commence as proposed by the Administration, there were areas of concern, including that the timeline for financial approvals and advancing the work were “aggressive” and could pose challenges. Given existing delays, achieving the deadlines would require very close monitoring and proactive action to address any impediments that could arise.
Elaborating on those issues, he said deliverables targeted for completion in 2015 had not been fully achieved and certain central activities from an internal control perspective, such as the development of project manuals, needed to be expedited. Delays of up to 56 days had stemmed from a range of reasons, including late submission of local information. Addressing a number of issues with regard to governance structure, internal control and procuring and contracting, he noted that the Board considered risk assessment and mitigation was a priority area of concern. Based on its review of activities accomplished to date, the Board had made recommendations that aimed at strengthening the implementation process and mitigating the risks going forward.
Turning to the Board’s report on progress in the handling of information and communications technology affairs in the Secretariat (document A/70/581), he said that during the biennium 2014-2015, the Administration had estimated that it had spent $663.7 million annually on ICT, excluding Umoja, and employed a workforce of nearly 4,400 people to support more than 70,000 users across 376 locations. He noted that the report followed the Board’s first report produced in December 2012 (document A/67/651), which had responded to serious concerns over the inadequacy of the United Nations information security environment. After the Assembly’s approval of the Secretary-General’s revised ICT strategy in December 2014, the Board had decided to undertake a follow-up audit in September 2015, the findings of which were contained in the report before the Committee.
Summarizing key findings, he said the revised strategy focused on a standardization of policies, applications and procedures and a harmonization of support structures. Tangible progress had been made in developing updated security policies, the establishment of regional technology centres and the deployment of a global service help desk. Many activities, however, were in the preparatory or planning phases and some issues identified in the Board’s 2012 report had yet to be resolved. There remained a lack of agreement on identifying which activities required strong central control or operational freedom. There was also a lack of formal authority and capacity to monitor and ensure compliance with information security. Further, the Board was unable to provide assurance that the overall implementation of the revised ICT strategy was on schedule and within budget.
Continuing, he said the strategy recognized that it was dependent on clear governance, strong leadership and the optimal use of resources. Significant improvements were needed in those areas if the revised strategy was to be successful and the Administration needed to ensure unity of purpose around the key aims by showing strong governance and leadership. To maximize the chances of successfully implementing the strategy, the Board had made a further seven recommendations, all of which had been accepted by the Administration, albeit one only partially. Overall, of the 16 outstanding recommendations in the Board’s 2012 report, all of which the Administration had accepted, the Board had judged that only two had been fully implemented.
MARIO BAEZ, Chief, Policy and Oversight Coordination Service, Office of the Under-Secretary-General of the Department of Management, introduced the Secretary-General’s report on the Strategic Heritage Plan in the United Nations Office at Geneva (document A/70/585). Of the eight recommendations made by the Board of Auditors, the Administration had accepted seven, which dealt with the development of project and change control materials, risk management, donations and voluntary contributions policies, governance and procurement. The Administration partially agreed with the remaining recommendation, which concerned cost estimation methods. Additional information and clarifications on the Board’s recommendations had been provided in the Secretary-General’s related report.
ATEFEH RIAZI, Assistant Secretary-General and Chief Information and Communication Technology Officer of the Office of Information and Communications Technology of the Department of Management, introduced the Secretary-General’s report on the progress on the handling of information and communications technology affairs of the Secretariat (document A/70/670). The Administration had accepted all Board recommendations, one of them partially. The reasons behind the partial acceptance were explained in the Secretary-General’s report contained in document A/70/607, she said, pointing out that the audit had been undertaken eight months into a 60-month-long strategy and prior to the Assembly’s consideration of the budget proposal. Since that formative stage of implementation, much progress had been achieved.
Among areas of concern raised by the Board of Auditors’ report was a lack of transparency and resources management, she said, noting that measures that were being used to strengthen governance, the delegation of authority and the Umoja system would permit improved visibility and associated decision-making. Highlighting a number of challenges, including the absence of Department of Field Support data, she expected that a full Secretariat-wide assessment of ICT would be presented at the Assembly’s seventy-first session. It was essential that measures aimed at strengthening governance, clarifying accountability and overcoming fragmentation and duplication were implemented across the global Secretariat, including field missions.
Mr. RUIZ MASSIEU then introduced the Advisory Committee’s corresponding report on the Board of Auditors on the Strategic Heritage Plan (document A/70/608), noting delays in “critical” project activities that the Board had highlighted, along with the “stringent” timeline defined for the project. ACABQ agreed with the Board’s recommendations to meet project timelines without diluting the quality and scope of deliverables, to make project cost estimates transparent and open to verification, and to refine and update the project’s preliminary budget estimates. He reiterated that ACABQ’s recommendation for the approval of CHF 836.5 million as the maximum overall cost for the project was subject to further review of annual budget performance.
Concerning project governance, there was a need for clarity in the roles and responsibilities of the Steering Committee and the Advisory Board, he said. Once approved by the Assembly, any change in the project’s governance framework, or in such roles, should be presented for the Assembly’s consideration. In that context, he reiterated the need for strict compliance with United Nations regulations and rules, procurement policies and administrative procedures, emphasizing the importance of continuous assurance from the Board on the soundness of the project’s governance framework, internal controls and management practices.
Introducing ACABQ’s related report on the handling of ICT affairs in the Secretariat (document A/70/755), he welcomed reported progress in implementation of the ICT strategy, but was concerned that “not much progress” had been made in the management, governance and operational arrangements for ICT matters in the Secretariat. Continued weakness in addressing managerial and structural issues presented a major risk to the implementation of the ICT strategy. He stressed the need to implement Assembly requests concerning the central leadership role of the Chief Information Technology Officer for ICT activities and the need for appropriate delegation of authority. The Assembly should suggest that the Secretary-General expedite relevant documents, including his bulletin and technical procedures on ICT matters.
The Chief Information Technology Officer had noted that disagreements between stakeholders on the handling of ICT affairs, as described in the Board’s report, posed risks to the Organization’s operations, which had resulted in inefficient resource use. He stressed the need to clarify responsibilities and expected the Secretary-General to enforce accountability. All ICT projects must be subjected to internal vetting procedures and all proposals should be presented in the relevant budget documents. All ICT projects with total costs starting from a certain threshold — for example, $1 million — should be supported by a business case containing a level of detail commensurate with the project’s size. The Chief Information Technology Officer and her office should be fully engaged in budget preparations from the outset. She should issue instructions on budget proposals in line with norms.
In that context, it was necessary to eliminate duplication of ICT activities, he said, echoing the Board’s call to enforce compliance and ensure completion of information security awareness training by all staff. On the projected five-year ICT budget requested by the Assembly, accurate and comprehensive data on that prediction for all Secretariat entities would be provided to the Assembly. It was incumbent on the Secretary-General to ensure that all Secretariat entities aligned their ICT plans to the ICT strategy, in accordance with relevant Assembly decisions.
Mr. WAIRATPANIJ (Thailand), on behalf of the Group of 77 and China, turned first to the Strategic Heritage Plan, noting that gap between the presentation of the Board’s report and the Committee’s consideration of the item posed challenges in decision-making. The Group had noted the Board’s findings, comments and recommendations on 2015 activities; delays in project design; and lessons learned from the Capital Master Plan, among others. On cost estimates, he acknowledged efforts to ensure accuracy and would welcome the project’s completion within the agreed maximum overall cost. Lessons learned from other capital projects should be applied to the heritage project.
In that context, he encouraged the Secretary-General to continue preparation and presentation of information related to the scope, composition, technical expertise and decision-making mechanisms, as well as functional arrangements, in the overall governance framework. Turning to the current report, the Group noted findings in key areas related to standardization and harmonization of ICT policies, applications and procedures of various support structures; expected benefits of the revised strategy; governance and management for ICT affairs; and information security. He urged timely and full implementation of the Board’s recommendations, notably the need for a comprehensive assessment of the expected benefits of the revised ICT strategy, stressing the need for an accurate budget projection for ICT expenditures, including those related to field offices and peacekeeping operations.
Joint Inspection Unit
ACHAMKULANGARE GOPINATHAN, Inspector/Chairman, Joint Inspection Unit, introduced the body’s report for 2015 and the programme of work for 2016 (document A/70/34). Substantive work and continuing efforts to improve its internal procedures were two significant initiatives in 2015. The former encompassed taking up, at the request of Member States, more complex multi-stakeholder tasks and the latter included new features such as paying greater attention to the need for more effective management, oversight and accountability practices and procedures. The Unit issued five system-wide reports plus one covering several organizations and a series of management letters, launched five projects to be completed in the near future and undertook two pilot projects mandated by the Assembly. The Unit recognized the strained resource environment it confronted in taking on more complex assignments that required, among other things, more research and intense consultations. The rates of acceptance of Unit recommendations had improved in recent years, he said, pointing to Annex II of the report, which contained detailed figures.
The Unit’s 2016 programme of work, he said, consisted of seven new projects covering system-wide issues. They include a review of administrative services delivery in the United Nations system, donor-led accountability and oversight reviews and a comprehensive review of the system-wide support for small island developing States. Going forward, the Unit would adapt to new priorities such as the recently adopted 2030 Agenda, which presented a series of challenges to the system. As such, the Unit was committed to playing a supportive role.
KEITH HERMAN, Senior Adviser on Information Management, Chief Executives Board for Coordination (CEB), on behalf of the Secretary-General and the Board, introduced the Secretary-General’s note (document A/70/716) on the Unit’s 2015 report and 2016 work programme. Each year, the Board provided support to the Unit and played a major role in transmitting the Secretary-General’s comments and those of the Board on Unit reports of a system-wide nature. It was increasingly common for the Board Secretariat to work with the Unit’s inspectors during the preparation of draft reports. The Unit had continued to focus its energy on issues with a system-wide impact and close collaboration with the CEB had intensified. The CEB Secretariat performed those actions within existing capacities, which was a continued strain on its resources. The United Nations system placed high value on the Unit’s work. A continued dialogue between the CEB and the Unit had improved mutual cooperation on collective efforts. Looking ahead, the Secretary-General would continue to pursue a closer working relationship with the Unit, particularly in light of its increased measures to strengthen its system-wide focus and the monitoring and follow-up of the implementation of system-wide recommendations.
DHISADEE CHAMLONGRASDR (Thailand), on behalf of the Group of 77, said the Unit had provided valuable reports despite its limited budgetary situation. In that regard, the Group was concerned that its current budget submission process was not in full conformity with article 20 of the Unit’s Statute. He underlined the important role of the Unit in helping legislative organs of participating organizations meet their governance responsibilities. He welcomed the Unit’s willingness to adapt to new priorities defined by the legislative bodies, including the implementation of the 2030 Agenda. Encouraging the Unit’s continuing improvement of its internal working procedures, he also reiterated the value of the web-based tracking system for monitoring the acceptance and implementation of its recommendations.
CHERITH NORMAN CHALET (United States) said oversight bodies played a key role in ensuring the United Nations system’s effectiveness, welcoming the Unit’s efforts to improve its working methods and conduct system-wide reviews. The Unit should refine its indicators, which assisted States in making responsible decisions. Noting that the Unit would review travel policies, the second-largest expenditure, she cited the need for more comprehensive data and efficiency, and looked forward to learning more about its work on anti-fraud policies. In that context, she encouraged the Unit to continue its resource mobilization efforts and optimize those available.