Fifth Committee Approves $3.72 Billion Budget for 2025, Formula for Determining Member States’ Financial Contributions to United Nations, Concluding Main Part of Session
The Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary) wrapped up the main part of its seventy-ninth session today by sending the General Assembly a 2025 regular budget of $3.72 billion, about $1 million more than the $3.6 billion budget laid out by the Secretary-General in October. In a year of ongoing fiscal constraints, delegates completed the crucial step of approving new scales of assessment — the complex financial mechanism the Secretariat uses to establish the annual contributions of each Member State — for both the regular and peacekeeping budgets.
After the Russian Federation delegate’s surprise request for a recorded vote, the Committee approved the “Scale of assessments for the apportionment of the expenses of the United Nations” (document A/C.5/79/L.5) with 151 delegates in favour, 5 against (Belarus, Comoros, Nicaragua, Russian Federation, Sudan) and 1 abstention (Togo). By its terms, the Assembly would decide that the scale for the 2025-2027 period shall be based on specified elements and criteria, using recommendations provide by the Committee on Contributions.
An amendment to that text, also requested by the Russian Federation delegation (document A/C.5/79/L.7), was rejected by a vote of 21 in favour, 67 against and 51 abstentions. Prior to the vote, Moscow’s speaker explained that his delegation opposed double standards in the collection of statistical data and discrimination that is selectively applied to some Member States in violation of Assembly and Security Council resolutions. “Impartiality is crucial,” he said.
Expressing regret at the amendment’s introduction, several delegates said it undermined the scale’s integrity. The representative of Hungary, speaking for the European Union, said it deviates from the Committee’s mandate to determine the scale of assessments formula and not to question the data. “It opens the door to undermine the work of the statistics data and goes against consensus on budgetary matters,” she said. Ukraine’s representative said the Russian Federation’s aim is to “unjustly accuse” the UN of bias in its collection of data and statistics and the subsequent calculation of the assessments levied on Member States. Disputing the Russian Federation’s claim that delegates had narrowed the issue down to an anti-Russian stance, he said it is a matter that impacts many countries.
The amendment would have included a paragraph ensuring that the resolutions and decisions of the General Assembly and the Security Council are respected, and that programme managers are held accountable for cases of non-compliance affecting the collection, processing, storage and presentation of statistics and population data, as well as the calculation of the scale of assessments for the contributions of Member States.
The Russian Federation’s speaker also disassociated his delegation from the scale of assessments for financing UN peacekeeping operations — set forth in draft document A/C.5/79/L.6. After that text was approved without a vote, he congratulated fellow delegates on the inconsistent application of Member States’ decisions.
Pact for the Future
While not giving the Secretary-General the $8.5 million appropriation he requested to begin carrying out the Pact for the Future, the Committee followed the guidance of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions (ACABQ) and approved a $2.9 million appropriation for 2025. The Pact is a landmark declaration approved by Member States by consensus during a high-level session in September. Two weeks ago, the Committee considered the Secretary-General’s request in his report (document A/79/583) for sufficient financing for the Pact and its annexes, the Global Digital Compact and Declaration on Future Generations. The $2.9 million appropriation, along with the establishment of seven new posts on 1 January 2025, were included in Part X of the resolution “Special subjects relating to the proposed programme budget for 2025” (document A/C.5/79/L.4).
Programme Budget Implications Relating to 2025 Programme Budget
The Committee’s deliberations took a contentious turn after it approved by consensus the 13 draft decisions on statements of programme budget implications related to the 2025 programme budget contained in sections A to M of draft resolution A/C.5/79/L.22.
United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East
Turning to section 26 of the 2025 proposed programme budget, which deals with Palestine refugees, the Committee approved — by a vote of 105 favour, 5 against (Argentina, Israel, Nauru, Paraguay, Tonga) and 50 abstentions — a resolution (document A/C.5/79/L.4) that would condemn in the strongest possible terms the killing of United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) staff and all acts of violence against civilians, and the destruction of installations, facilities and vehicles under the United Nations flag and bearing the United Nations emblem. It asked the Secretary-General to work to strengthen the Agency’s operational security and ensure sufficient, predictable and sustained funding.
In asking for a vote, Israel’s delegate said the text creates a terrible precedent by introducing political elements into what should be a technical process. The Group of 77 and China have chosen to use the Fifth Committee to undermine its neutrality, she said, adding that “it [the Committee] should maintain its technical and apolitical nature”.
Israel’s speaker later proposed a draft resolution “Revised estimates UNRWA” (document A/C.5/79/L.16) that asked the Secretary-General to provide a detailed analysis on UNRWA facilities that have been misused for political or military gain. The text also expressed the delegation’s deep concern with the findings in the Independent Review Group’s review, which indicated that “UNRWA faces challenges due to increased politicization among its staff, affecting its neutrality”.
In the first of several such actions, the representative of Uganda, speaking for the Group of 77 and China, and later supported by the representative of Saudi Arabia, asked that no action be taken on this draft. This motion for no action was approved by a vote of 99 in favour, 16 against and 40 abstentions.
Several delegates voiced their dismay with these resolutions and actions which do not respect the Fifth Committee’s technical nature. “The Fifth Committee works by consensus and should focus on financial and budgetary issues,” said New Zealand’s speaker. Australia’s delegate said such actions undermine the Committee’s mandate and its ability to achieve consensus, while Switzerland’s representative said it is not appropriate to include political language in a budgetary resolution.
At their 3 December meeting, delegates had thrown their support behind the Secretariat’s request for $4.98 million in additional funding for UNRWA in 2025 and called on Member States to step up their voluntary contributions.
Revised Estimates for Human Rights Council
The contention continued as the Committee considered parts of the draft resolution “Special subjects relating to the proposed programme budget for 2025” (document A/C.5/79/L.24), which was approved without a vote. Section IX of the text, also approved without a vote, focused on the revised estimates resulting from resolutions and decisions adopted by the Human Rights Council. In 2024, the body held three regular sessions, in which 71 resolutions and 3 decisions were adopted, of which 62 resolutions and 3 decisions involve resources with budgetary implications.
A draft resolution (document A/C.5/79/L.11) to refrain from approving resources for the implementation of resolutions S-35/1, 55/19, 55/21, 55/23, 55/27, 56/17, 57/2, 57/20 and 57/36, adopted by the Council during their its fifty-fifth, fifty-sixth and fifty-seventh regular sessions, was defeated by a vote of 15 in favour 79 against and 52 abstentions.
In introducing “L.11”, the Russian Federation’s representative asked delegates to refrain from financing “the politically motivated resolutions of the Human Rights Council” as these texts are part of the collective West’s efforts, particularly made through the Human Rights Council, “to impinge on the sovereignty of independent States”. The representative of Iran said the revised estimates were an unfortunate use of the Organization’s scarce resources, which should be used in an impartial manner. Sudan’s speaker vehemently opposed the texts that targeted his country, which was in the middle of a war.
Special Political Missions
The Committee also approved $595.21 million to fund 37 continuing special political missions authorized by the General Assembly and/or the Security Council, and nearly $2.3 million for the share of special political missions in the budget of the Regional Service Centre in Entebbe, Uganda, for 2025, under section 3, Political Affairs, of the proposed programme budget for 2025. This appropriation was also part of “L.24”.
UN Common System
The Committee also sent the Assembly a draft on the UN common system (document A/C.5/79/L.23), which laid out the complex compensation package meant to fairly reward thousands of United Nations employees — including those working in dangerous locales around the world.
Programme Budget for 2025
The Committee approved without a vote the programme budget for 2025 (document A/C.5/79/L.25), as technically revised to reflect the revised appropriation of $3.72 billion.
Other Resolutions and Decisions Approved
The Committee sent the Assembly several other draft resolutions for its adoption: financial reports and audited financial statements, and reports of the Board of Auditors (document A/C.5/79/L.20); capital master plan (document A/C.5/79/L.10); programme planning (document A/C.5/79/L.19); pattern of conferences (document A/C.5/79/L.18); report on the activities of the Ethics Office (document A/C.5/79/L.17); United Nations pension fund (document A/C.5/79/L.12); administration of justice at the United Nations (document A/C.5/79/L.27); financing of the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals (document A/C.5/79/L.13); questions relating to the proposed programme budget for 2025 (document A/C.5/79/L.21); unforeseen and extraordinary expenses for 2025 (document A/C.5/79/L.8); Working Capital Fund for 2025 (document A/C.5/79/L.9); report of the Fifth Committee on the proposed programme budget for 2025 (document A/C.5/79/L.26); and revision of the terms of reference of the Peacebuilding Fund (document A/C.5/79/L.15). Also approved was a draft decision on questions deferred for future consideration (document A/C.5/79/L.28).
Closing Remarks
Fifth Committee Chair Egriselda Aracely González López (El Salvador) said the closing session was a collective success for all delegates who worked long hours on complex subjects and in extraordinary circumstances. “You work will let the United Nations to continue to operate and fulfil its mandates,” she said, wishing everyone “a Christmas full of peace, gratitude and hope.” She hoped the delegates will return in March with renewed energy.
Delegates hailed the Committee’s consensus approval of texts on the Resident Coordinator system, resources for implementation of the Pact of the Future, special political missions, the capital master plan and common system, among other agenda items. Uganda’s delegate, speaking for the Group of 77 and China, was pleased the Secretary-General’s request for the revised estimates for UNRWA was fully granted, stressing: “We hope that this would represent a relief for UNRWA during this difficult time for the agency.”
However, the European Union’s speaker, in its capacity as observer, strongly advocating for consensus-based decision-making, noted with concern the continued increase in voting on drafts, including the introduction of “L” documents. “The practice of selectively defunding specific mandates, particularly those related to human rights or politically sensitive issues, undermines our collective responsibility to ensure that all approved mandates are adequately resourced,” she stated, stressing: “Our role is to respect and operationalize resolutions that define mandates, not to renegotiate their substance.”
Other speakers regretted that the adopted methodology for the scale of assessments, which should be based on the capacity-to-pay principle, maintains a fundamental distortion through the maximum contribution ceiling, with Egypt’s delegate, on behalf of the African Group, stressing “this aberration should be rectified” as it benefits only one country.
The United States’ representative said that over the past four years, under the leadership of President Joseph Biden, his Government has made it a priority to ensure that the United Nations has the resources needed to perform its critical mission. “The US believes that a strong and effective UN is good for the world — and good for US interests,” he said, pointing out that as the largest donor to the UN system, the United States provided $13 billion last year in assessed and voluntary funding — as much as the next four largest donors combined.
NEW – Follow real-time meetings coverage on our LIVE blog.