Functions Given to Programme, Coordination Organ Should Be Reached in Timely, Effective Manner, Delegate Tells Second Committee
With the Committee for Programme and Coordination unable to reach consensus and recommend the approval of programme plans in 2021, delegates in the Second Committee (Economic and Financial) today exchanged differing views on the role of their Committee in addressing programme planning, following the General Assembly’s decision to allocate that agenda item to all its Main Committees and the Plenary.
The representative of the Republic of Korea, echoing other delegations, emphasized the critical role of the Committee for Programme and Coordination as the main subsidiary organ of both the General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council for planning, programming and coordination. Pointing out that Committee’s mandate to provide recommendations and conclusions on all programmes of the proposed programme budget, he expressed regret that the Second Committee is being asked to consider the programme plan in the middle of its already tight programme of work and despite the limited capacity of each delegation to consider the subject in a meaningful manner.
Similarly, Switzerland’s representative said that while the Second Committee may choose to carry out the task not done in 2021 by the Committee for Programme and Coordination and review the programme plan, it has no obligation to do so. Moreover, according to the rules and regulations, it is not the role of the Second Committee to approve those plans. That is the role of the Fifth Committee, she said. As the current discussion is a duplication of the work of the Fifth Committee, it would be better for the Second Committee to focus on its already busy work programme.
Guinea’s representative, speaking for the “Group of 77” developing countries and China, emphasized that the functions and mandates given to the Committee for Programme and Coordination need to be reached in a timely and effective manner. Whenever the Committee for Programme and Coordination cannot reach consensus and recommend the approval of programme plans, the Assembly must step in to either confirm or modify those programme plans. “The Fifth Committee is not the appropriate place for all of these discussions, since not all the mandates have been established by it,” he said.
The representative of the Russian Federation, stressing the need for compromise, suggested that instead of delivering speeches about priorities, it would be more practical if the Chair could assign a co-facilitator and begin an exercise in drafting the programme as soon as possible. As debates are not helping the Second Committee and there are differences to overcome, he said the practical solution proposed by his delegation seems the easiest way to overcome those obstacles.
Brazil’s representative, in the same vein, said his delegation would have preferred a more dynamic exchange of views on programme planning where delegations could request the floor again and engage with one another. Underscoring the Second Committee’s ability to reach consensus, he said “although this might seem like a technical issue, this is at the very heart of what the United Nations does. This is how we translate resolutions into action.”
Also speaking were the representatives of the European Union, New Zealand, United Kingdom, United States, China, Japan, El Salvador, Mexico and Cuba.
Statements
The representative of Guinea, speaking for the “Group of 77” developing countries and China, emphasized that the functions and mandates given to the Committee for Programme and Coordination, the main subsidiary organ of the Economic and Social Council and the General Assembly, need to be reached in a timely and effective manner. Whenever the Committee for Programme and Coordination cannot reach consensus and recommend the approval of programme plans, the programmes are left without proper review by Member States. In this case, the Assembly must step in to either confirm or modify those programme plans. The organ that has established the substantive mandates, normally the Plenary or one of the Main Committees, is the sole forum that can carry out a proper review of the programme and evaluate its consistency with respective legislative mandates. “The Fifth Committee is not the appropriate place for all of these discussions, since not all the mandates have been established by it,” he said. The Fifth Committee will consider and approve programme budgets only after the programme plans have been reviewed by the Committee for Programme and Coordination and approved by the Assembly. “Otherwise, budgetary resources could be allocated to activities potentially inconsistent with the mandates established by Member States,” he said.
In its last session held in June 2021, the Committee for Programme Coordination recommended the Assembly should review, during the seventy-sixth session, the programmes on which it could not reach agreement for the 2022 budget, he said. This included Programme 7 ‑ Economic and Social Affairs, which is the Second Committee’s purview. “There is nothing innovative or unusual about the Main Committees considering programme plans with mandates related to their areas of responsibility,” he said. Similar circumstances occurred in the past, most recently in 2004, 2006, 2008 and 2012. In the case of the Second Committee, Programme 7 ‑ Economic and Social Affairs is strategically important to the Organization’s development system work and crucial to the Group’s priorities and interests. Programme 7 did not receive a recommendation of approval by the Committee for Programme and Coordination. The Group wants to avoid repeating the situation that occurred in 2019 and 2020, when the Fifth Committee members were unable to address the substance of the Second Committee programme. They reverted to the last approved programme narrative from the “2018-2019 biannual” programme budget, approved in 2016-2017.
The representative of the European Union, in its capacity as observer, expressed regret that the Committee on Programme and Coordination was unable to reach consensus yet again on programme planning, as it is the primary responsibility of that organ to provide recommendations to the General Assembly. Strongly encouraging that organ to conclude and reach consensus on all programmes in the future, she said the Second Committee provides guidance, rather than a review of planning. Regarding such guidance, she called on the Department of Economic and Social Affairs to expand its strategic plan, enhance its report on support to implement the Sustainable Development Goals, and boost coordination with regional commission in building on results achieved.
The representative of New Zealand, speaking also on behalf of Australia, Canada, Iceland and Norway, recalled that operative paragraph 8 of last year’s Programme Planning resolution suggested that the Committee for Programme and Coordination provide recommendations on all programmes in the programme budget. Expressing disappointment that it was unable to reach consensus on recommendations for several programme plans, she said operative paragraph 9 of that resolution has been invoked by some delegations in calling for other Main Committees to discuss programme plans on which it failed to agree. The role of the Committee on Programme and Coordination and the Main Committees is to ensure programme plans are in line with agreed mandates and provide any conclusions and recommendations to the Fifth Committee for its timely consideration.
Turning to Programme 7, “Economic and Social Affairs”, of the proposed programme budget for the year 2022, she encouraged that body to continue improving its reporting on results achieved in efforts to support Member States in implementing the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, to be vigilant in avoiding duplication with other United Nations system entities and to increase the effectiveness of programme delivery. Herr bloc recommends to the Fifth Committee that the General Assembly approves the programme narrative of Programme 7, Economic and Social Affairs, of the proposed programme budget for the year 2022.
The representative of the United Kingdom, noting that the Committee on Programme and Coordination plays an important role in the General Assembly’s review of the United Nations programme budget, expressed regret it provided no conclusions or recommendations to the General Assembly in 2021. What the Second Committee is being asked to do is review the proposed programme plans and check that activities proposed by the Secretary‑General are in line with agreed mandates, while it remains Fifth Committee’s role to endorse such plans. Considering the Second Committee’s significant burden of work, she said her country does not consider reviewing the Department of Economic and Social Affairs’ programme plan a good use of time or effort by the Second Committee in 2021. On behalf of the Second Committee, she requested that the Chair recommend to the Fifth Committee that the General Assembly approve the programme plan for Programme 7, Economic and Social Affairs, of the proposed programme budget for the year 2022.
The representative of the Russian Federation thanked the Chair of the Second Committee for providing an opportunity to discuss programme 7. Stressing the need for compromise, he suggested that instead of delivering speeches about priorities, it would be more practical if the Chair could assign a co-facilitator and begin an exercise in drafting the programme as soon as possible. As debates are not helping the Committee and there are differences to overcome, he said the practical solution he proposed seemed the easiest way to overcome those obstacles.
The representative of the Republic of Korea emphasized the critical role of the Committee for Programme and Coordination as the main subsidiary organ of both the General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council for planning, programming and coordination. The Committee, in accordance with its mandate, should provide recommendations and conclusions on all programmes of the proposed programme budget. He said that, even in the rare event that the Plenary or any of the Main Committees have programmes or subprogrammes before them, it is up to the Main Committee, before which it has such programmes, to decide whether and how it will consider them. For the last two years, the Plenary and Main Committees have chosen not to do so. For those reasons, he expressed regret that the Second Committee is being asked to consider the programme plan in the middle of its already tight programme of work, in the face of limited resources and despite the limited capacity of each delegation to consider the subject in a meaningful manner. He requested that, following the current discussions, the Second Committee Chair recommend to the Fifth Committee that the General Assembly approve the programme narrative of Programme 7, Economic and Social Affairs, of the proposed programme budget for the year 2022.
The representative of Switzerland, regretting that the Committee for Programme and Coordination was not able to agree on conclusions and recommendations for the programme plan, said her country would have preferred that the Second Committee not be called upon to discuss the adequacy of the programme plan with mandates which have already been approved. That is the approach that has prevailed in recent years and which her delegation wishes to maintain. While the Second Committee may choose to carry out the task not done in 2021 by the Committee for Programme and Coordination and review the programme plan, it has no obligation to do so. Moreover, according to the rules and regulations, it is not the role of the Second Committee to approve those plans. That is the role of the Fifth Committee, she said. In that regard, the current discussion is a duplication of the work of the Fifth Committee, which will deal with the programme plans in the context of the approval of the 2022 budget. It would be better for the Second Committee to focus on its already busy work programme, she said.
The representative of the United States expressed regret that the Committee for Programme and Coordination could not reach consensus on conclusions and recommendations for the programme plan under discussion. Noting appreciation for the decision of the Chair of the Second Committee to discuss the agenda item, he said, however, that a full review of the programme plan, which is best suited for the Fifth Committee, would be an unproductive use of the time and resources of the Second Committee.
Turning to the programme plan for the Department of Economic and Social Affairs, he said that, now more than ever, the Department must prioritize its work and be judicious in order to fulfil its mandate under new and challenging circumstances. He urged the Department of Economic and Social Affairs to continue its reform efforts, stressing the importance of reducing duplication and overlap of work with other United Nations system bodies. Noting that reforms within the Department of Economic and Social Affairs should be aligned with the broader reform efforts of the United Nations development system, he called on the Department to clarify and transparently report to Member States its role within the resident coordinator system. He also urged it to conduct a review of its programming to ensure that it remains impartial and focused on advancing United Nations values and missions.
The representative of China stressed the importance for all stakeholders to push forward together and approve programme plans, as the Committee for Programme and Coordination was unable to reach consensus in 2021. Adding that the Department of Economic and Social Affairs is crucial in supporting efforts to implement the 2030 Agenda, he said it should continue improving its reports on obtained results, while avoiding duplication with other United Nations bodies.
The representative of Japan said it is within the purview of each Committee to decide whether or how to take up programme planning in its programme of work. His country is committed to working constructively to reach the best possible outcome for everyone. Whatever discussions are held in various Committees about programme planning, the Second Committee delegates should be fully mindful that, as Member States of this crucial Organization, they are responsible for approving the programme plan and budget in a timely manner. He strongly pointed out that as the Second Committee delegates fulfil their responsibility in programme planning, they should not preclude the Fifth Committee, responsible for administrative and budgetary matters, from promptly taking up their related agenda items. The Second Committee’s consideration should proceed in a parallel manner, if necessary, with Fifth Committee discussions on related agenda items. The Second Committee’s contribution, if any, should be provided as soon as possible. He asked the Second Committee’s Chair to provide a recommendation to the Fifth Committee to decide to approve Programme 7, Economic and Social Affairs, of the proposed programme budget for 2022.
The representative of El Salvador underscored the important role the Committee for Programme and Coordination plays as a main subsidiary organ of the General Assembly. He stressed, however, that its mandate must be achieved in a timely, efficient and effective manner based on a constructive approach in keeping with its function. Expressing concern that the Coordination Committee is facing a crisis in executing its primary mandate and losing effectiveness in achieving it, he said a review should be carried out of time and resources needed to achieve consensus agreement on programmes. Lamenting that it could become common practice for the Second Committee to consider programmes the Coordination Committee fails to agree on, he said this would add to the Second Committee’s already heavy burden. Pushing programme discussions to the Fifth Committee should be a last resort, he added, as it lacks the necessary expertise.
The representative of Brazil, associating himself with the Group of 77, said that in cases where the Committee for Programme and Coordination is not able to provide recommendations, the Second Committee is formally required to discuss the programme and provide recommendations. In that regard, the current meeting should be the first of a few meetings. Noting, however, that making speeches does not address the issue properly, he said his delegation would have preferred a more dynamic exchange of views where delegations could request the floor again and engage with one another. There is room for the Committee to provide negotiated recommendations, not just a compilation of statements, he said, stressing the ability of the Second Committee to reach consensus. “Although this might seem like a technical issue, this is at the very heart of what the United Nations does. This is how we translate resolutions into action,” he said.
Turning to activities in programme planning, he expressed concern that references to the Addis Ababa Action Plan have decreased over the years. He also noted that some initiatives that have no mandates are included in the programme as if they have been approved by countries, and he requested that that be changed in programme planning.
The representative of Mexico expressed regret that the Committee for Programme and Coordination has once again failed to provide programme conclusions and recommendations as set forth in its mandate. That the Second Committee should carry out the programme review and ensure mandates are in line is irresponsible, she said, given its swollen agenda and lack of time for proper discussions. Adding that the Fifth Committee should be endorsing programmes, she requested that the Second Committee Chair recommend to the Fifth Committee that the General Assembly approve the proposed programme budget for the year 2022.
The representative of Cuba stressed the importance of discussing Programme 7 of the draft programme and budget for 2022. She expressed trust that the bureau of the Second Committee will continue to support the interests of Member States in considering Programme 7, with a view to transmitting recommendations and conclusions to the Fifth Committee so that they can review and approve the budget in due time.