8 March 2011
General Assembly
GA/AB/3982

Department of Public Information • News and Media Division • New York

Sixty-fifth General Assembly

Fifth Committee

29th Meeting (AM)


Nearly Three Years since Groundbreaking, Plan to Renovate United Nations Headquarters


on Track for Completion within Reach of Approved Budget, Fifth Committee Told


Executive Director of Capital Master Plan Offers Detailed Update; Committee

Also Takes Up Compensation for Civil Service Commission, Budget Advisory Committee


Nearly three years after its start in May 2008, the complex, multi-year overhaul of the historic United Nations Headquarters ó known as the Capital Master Plan ó was on track for completion between 2012 and 2014 with cost overruns of the $1.87 billion project now reduced to $80 million, Secretariat officials told the Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary) at its first resumed session today.


Assistant Secretary-General Michael Adlerstein, who serves as Executive Director of the Capital Master Plan, said he was confident that the Plan could be completed close to the original budget as cost overruns, which tallied $219 million in 2007, had been slashed by more than half.† He gave delegates an extensive update of the Plan as he introduced the Secretary-Generalís Eighth Annual Progress Report, prepared last summer.† While noting that the risk of any large adverse financial surprise was minimized, since 75 per cent of the projectís purchases and commitments already had been made, he said the budget could not absorb any of the associated costs or the cost of a secondary tech centre.


Collen Kelapile, Chairman of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions (ACABQ), introducing a related ACABQ report, voiced concern that absorbing these related costs within the Planís approved budget, as mandated by the Assembly, could be difficult.† ACABQ recommended that the Assembly ask the Secretary-General to set out proposals, no later than the second quarter of 2011, on how to best deal with these associated costs.


Several Member States urged the Secretariat to keep pushing to curb estimated overruns and ensure the associated costs were absorbed in the Planís general budget.† Hungaryís delegate, speaking on behalf of the European Union, said additional savings were needed to avoid an anticipated cash flow crunch over the long term.† Member States could not be expected to bear any financial burdens over the budget already approved by the Assembly, she added.† New Zealandís representative, speaking also on behalf of Canada and Australia, agreed and shared the Advisory Committeeís concern that it could be difficult to absorb the associated costs within the Planís budget.


Jun Yamazaki, United Nations Assistant Secretary-General and Controller, introduced the Secretary-Generalís report on proposals for financing the associated costs for 2011 from within the Planís approved budget.† The report put the total resource requirements for associated costs for 2011 at $110.98 million.† After accounting for the $39.11 million balance still available at year-end 2010, the Secretariat proposed that the Assembly approve a net additional amount of $71.87 million, in order to let core activities, including many that would begin their implementation phase during 2011, continue.† Beyond 2011, he said, the report set out best estimates in the amount of $14.7 million for 2012 and $3.6 million for 2013.


Regarding the timetable for completion of the project, Mr. Adlerstein said significant progress had been achieved during the projectís second year of construction.† The Secretariat Building and basement infrastructure remained on-track, unaffected by work in the Conference Building.† As planned, staff could begin returning to the Secretariat Building in mid-2012 and their return could be completed within 2012.†


In order to improve security at Headquarters, officials from the Department of Safety and Security and the Plan had had extensive discussions with the Host Country and Host City and developed a revised concept to better protect delegates, staff and visitors to the Conference Buildings, he said.† The negative fallout of the revisions was a delay in the construction schedule, as the additional structural work was woven into the construction contracts.† He said he did not yet have a firm understanding of the structural changesí impact on the completion dates and that information would be reported more precisely in the Planís fall report to the Assembly.


Argentinaís delegate spoke on behalf of the Group of 77 and China and said it was concerned that security enhancements, noted in the Board of Auditors and the ACABAQ reports, would cost about $100 million and delay the projectís completion date by about six months until 2014. †The Group was troubled that the security enhancements had led Plan officials to develop a revised concept that constituted a scope change.† It recalled that in resolution 62/87, the Assembly had decided that the Secretary-General would submit any scope options, beyond those already approved, to the Assembly for its consideration and approval.


The Group stressed that the Project should be completed on time and within the approved, sizeable budget of $1.88 billion.† The Group agreed with the recommendations of the Board of Auditors and ACABQ.


Mr. Kelapile added that, since the security installations would delay the planned completion schedule of the General Assembly Building from late 2013 to 2014, the Committee had requested that the Assembly receive updated details.


In introducing the Board of Auditorís report for the year ending 31 December 2009, Liu Yu, Director of External Audit (China) and Chair of the Boardís Audit Operations Committee, said the report noted that the project was nine months to one year behind schedule, compared with the six months previously reported.† The delay in evacuating people from the Secretariat Building to various swing spaces was one reason behind the delay.


In other business, the Committee considered a review of the compensation and conditions of service for officials of the International Civil Service Commission (ICSC) and the Advisory Committee.† Arnab Roy, Chief of the Policy and Conditions of Service Section of the United Nations Office of Human Resource Management, introduced the Secretary-Generalís report on the issue.† The report stated that procedures for compensation adjustments, based on the local consumer price index, indicated that the annual net compensation of the two full-time members of ICSC and the chair of ACABQ was revised from $197,564, effective 1 January 2008, to $205,545, effective 1 January 2010.† In coming updates, the annual salary of the two Chairmen would need to be increased to $232,084, and that of the Vice-Chairman of ICSC would be increased to $222,084.


Introducing the Advisory Committeeís report on the issue, Alejandro Torres LťPori, Vice Chair of the Advisory Committee, said that since the total net annual compensation of the two Chairs did indeed fall below the level of Assistant Secretaries-General on 1 January 2009, ACABQ regretted that the Secretary-General did not follow the provisions of Assembly resolution 58/266 (2003) and inform the Assembly at its sixty-fourth session.


ACABQ recommended that the Assembly approve the increase in the net annual compensation of the three officials concerned as outlined in the Secretary-Generalís report.† Additionally, it recommended that the General Assembly consider establishing an automatic mechanism for adjusting the compensation of the three officials concerned.


The Fifth Committee will reconvene at 10 a.m. Monday, 14 March, to discuss Special Political Missions, an item related to the Programme budget: biennium 2010-2011.


Background


The Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary) met today to take up financing for the Capital Master Plan and conditions of service for members of the International Civil Service Commission (ICSC) and the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions (ACABQ).


Under the Capital Master Plan it had before it five documents:† the Eighth Annual Progress Report of the Secretary-General on the Implementation of the Capital Master Plan (document A/65/511); the report of the Secretary-General on proposals for financing associated costs for 2011 from within the approved budget for the Capital Master Plan (document A/65/511/Add.1); a Report of the Board of Auditors for the year ended 31 December 2009 (document A/65/5/Vol.5); the Secretary-Generalís Report on the Implementation of the recommendations of the Board of Auditors (document A/65/296); and a Report of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions (document A/65/275).


The Eighth Annual Progress Report (A/65/511) reviewed achievements made over the past year in the area of the Plan, including the relocation of several thousand United Nations staff to off-site and on-site swing space, the completion and inauguration of the North Lawn Building, and the closure and commencement of construction in the Conference and Secretariat Buildings. †The Organization remained within reach of completing the project on schedule and within the budget, states the report.


Additionally, the Advisory Board for the Capital Master Plan was established by the Secretary-General and held its first meeting in May 2010.† In the reportís addendum (A/65/511/Add.1), the Secretary-General provided an update on the status of the activities under the associated costs to the Capital Master Plan, including historical expenditure to date, current forecasts of resource requirements for 2010, and estimated resource requirements for 2011 and until the completion of the construction project, which was anticipated for 2013.† According to the report, the total resource requirement for associated costs for 2011 was estimated at $110.98 million.


The Report of the Board of Auditors (A/65/5/Vol.5) on the Capital Master Plan reviewed the findings of the Boardís Audit for the year ending in 2009, including that a shortfall of income relating to the Capital Master Plan existed in the amount of $79.0 million, compared to an excess of income over expenditure of $397 million for the previous biennium.† The latest cost estimate for the project provided to the Board, which was carried out as at January 2010, was $2 billion, representing an overrun of almost $95.2 million above the $1.9 billion budget, or 5.1 per cent.† To bring the total project cost back down to the level of the approved budget, the Office of the Capital Master Plan continued to identify savings through the value engineering programme.† Regarding procurement and contract management, the Capital Master Plan Administration had responded to previous recommendations by the Board by setting up a post-award review committee for amendments to Capital Master Plan contracts, but regrettable delays existed in fully implementing it.† The report went on to issue a number of related recommendations to the Capital Master Plan Administration.


A subsequent report of the Secretary-General on the implementation of the Board of Auditorís report (A/65/296) found that the Capital Master Plan Administration has concurred with many of the Boardís recommendations, and that most of the comments of the Secretary-General had been duly reflected in the reports of the Board. †It presented additional comments from the Administration and information on the status of implementation, the office responsible, the estimated completion date and the priority for each recommendation contained in the reports of the Board of Auditors.† In addition, the report contained updated information on the status of implementation of the recommendations of the Board relating to prior periods that had been reported by the Board as not having been fully implemented.


Finally, the report of ACABQ on the Capital Master Plan (A/65/725) took into consideration each of the aforementioned reports and issued a series of conclusions and recommendations, including that the General Assembly take note of the progress made since the issuance of the seventh annual progress report and that the Secretary-General be requested to continue reporting on the status, the schedule, the projected cost to complete the project, the status of contributions and the working capital reserve.† ACABQ also recommended that the Assembly take note of the progress cited in the report of the Secretary-General on proposals for financing associated costs; note that the associated costs for 2011 amount to $110.98 million; approve a net amount of $71.87 million for 2011; and approve the continued funding of the associated costs from within the approved budget of the Capital Master Plan.


Under the agenda item entitled ďConditions of service and compensation for officials, other than Secretariat officials, serving the General Assembly:† full-time members of the International Civil Service Commission and the Chair of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary QuestionsĒ, a Report of the Secretary-General (A/65/676) stated that, according to procedures for compensation adjustments based on the local consumer price index, the annual net compensation of the two full-time members of ICSC and the Chair of ACABQ was revised from $197,564, effective 1 January 2008, to $205,545, effective 1 January 2010.† The report also considered other conditions of service; post-retirement benefits; and financial considerations relating to conditions of service.† In accordance with past General Assembly resolutions, the report stated that the next comprehensive review should be undertaken when the level of the annual compensation of the Chair of ICSC and the Chair of ACABQ fell below the level of the compensation of Assistant Secretaries-General.


Also under the same agenda item, the Report of ACABQ (A/65/767) reviewed the findings of the aforementioned Secretary-Generalís report.† Among other things, it noted that, given that the total net annual compensation of the two Chairs did indeed fall below the level of Assistant Secretaries-General on 1 January 2009, ACABQ regretted that the Secretary-General did not bring the issue to the attention of the General Assembly at its sixty-fourth session in accordance with the provisions of its resolution 58/266 (2003).† ACABQ recommended that the General Assembly approve the increase in the net annual compensation of the officials concerned as outlined in the Secretary-Generalís report.† Additionally, it recommended that the General Assembly consider establishing an automatic mechanism for adjusting the compensation of the officials concerned.


Introduction of Reports


MICHAEL ADLERSTEIN, Assistant Secretary-General and Executive Director of the Capital Master Plan, introduced the report of the Secretary-General on the Eighth Annual Progress Report (A/65/511), prepared last summer, and provided an update since the reportís preparation.† Since its groundbreaking nearly three years ago in May 2008, the Capital Master Plan approved by the General Assembly was on track for completion within reach of the approved budget, he said. †The projectís schedule was divided into two separate phases.† The Secretariat Building and the complex work on the infrastructure in the basements remained on schedule for completion in 2012. †The other phase, the Conference Building, General Assembly Building and the smaller Dag Hammarskjold Library and the South Annex Building had been delayed and were back in full construction activity.


The progress over the past 18 months since the publication of the Seventh Annual Progress Report included the relocation of 6,000 United Nations staff to off-site and on-site swing space locations, the completion and inauguration of the North Lawn Building, and the closure and commencement of construction in the Conference and Secretariat Buildings.† In addition, the Advisory Board for the Capital Master Plan was established by the Secretary-General and held two meetings in 2010 and one so far in 2011, he said.


The most critical swing space was the North Lawn Building, which hosted the functions of the Conference Building, the Offices of the Secretary-General, the President of the General Assembly, the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions, and other important functions.† The installation of a wide range of construction infrastructure had been needed as the renovation plans of the Secretariat and Conference Buildings began.† The replacement curtain wall was assembled in Mexico, with components sourced from many Member States, including India, the Republic of Korea, the Philippines, Thailand and the United States.† The first shipment of glass panels arrived in September 2010 and deliveries and installation would continue until the end of 2011.


Renovation of the Conference Building had begun in March 2010, asbestos abatement was under way and a temporary home for the Security Council was created in Conference rooms 4,5,6 and 7.† The Plan had been very diligent in caring for the artwork that had been donated to the Organization.


He noted the projectís excellent safety record, adding that preservation was a key aspect of the plan and the architects were supervising the preservation of the character-defining aspects of the Secretariat, the Conference Building and the Assembly.


Regarding security, he said the Department of Safety and Security and the Capital Master Plan had had extensive discussions with the Host Country and Host City regarding the security of United Nations Headquarters.† Also, the Plan officials had been engaged with security authorities regarding strengthening the security of the perimeters.


Criteria for blast protection had been incorporated into the initial Capital Master Plan scope.† It was jointly agreed in August, after studying the design implications on the Headquarters complex of raising the blast criteria, that higher levels of blast protection should be incorporated into the Plan.† Due to the Planís ongoing construction activity, the compoundís most pressing vulnerability was on the east side, over the FDR Drive, the location of the Conference Building.† Upgraded protection on the compoundís west side, facing First Avenue, had also been agreed upon.† Current construction activity was not yet impacted.


The negative fallout of the revisions was a delay in the construction schedule as the additional structural work was woven into the construction contracts.† Mr. Adlerstein said he did not yet have a firm understanding of the structural changesí impact on the completion dates. This information would be reported more precisely in the Planís fall report to the Assembly.


Turning to the financial status of the project, he said the fifth and last scheduled assessment was sent to Member States in January 2011 and he expected payments to be received throughout the year.† After three years of work, the Plan had made financial commitments of approximately $1.5 billion, representing more than 75 per cent of the project.† Procurement was progressing well.† The projectís cost overruns had been reduced from about 10 per cent over budget during the projectís first year, to less than 4 per cent currently and costs were moving in the right direction.† As 75 per cent of the project had been purchased and committed, the risk of large, adverse surprises had been significantly reduced, and that allowed officials to reduce any contingency and escalation provisions.† In 2007, projected costs totalled $219 million over budget.† That had been reduced to $91 million in the Seventh Annual Progress Report and now totalled $80 million in the eighth annual report.† He was confident that the Plan could be completed close to the original budget.† Yet, it could not absorb any of the associated costs or the cost of the secondary tech centre.† The Assembly approved a Plan budget of $1.876 billion.† Right now, the cash flow would be sound until 2012.† At that time it would require a full funding for the associated costs.


The Plan had made significant progress during the projectís second year of construction.† Although the basements and the Secretariat phases were on track, the space changes to the Conference Building would require additional time and work to absorb, delaying the completion of that phase, he said.


JUN YAMAZAKI, United Nations Assistant Secretary-General and Controller, introduced the report of the Secretary-General on proposals for financing associated costs for 2011 from within the approved budget for the Capital Master Plan (document A/65/511/Add.1).† In that report, the Secretary-General reviewed the findings of the Steering Committee for the Capital Master Plan, which was established in 2010 and had met regularly throughout the year to act as a periodic review mechanism on the renovation.† He also provided an update on the status of the activities under the associated costs to the Capital Master Plan, including historical expenditure to date, current forecasts of resource requirements for 2010, and estimated resource requirements for 2011 and until the completion of the construction project, which was anticipated for 2013.


According to that report, the total resource requirement for associated costs for 2011 was estimated at $110.98 million.† After taking into account the balance of $39.11 million still available at the end of 2010, it was proposed that a net additional amount of $71.87 million be approved by the General Assembly, in order to enable the continuation of core activities, many of which would be entering implementation phases during 2011.† Beyond 2011, he said, the report set out best estimates in the amount of $14.7 million for 2012 and $3.6 million for 2013.


LIU YU, Director of External Audit (China) and Chair of the Audit Operations Committee of the United Nations Board of Auditors, introduced the Report of the Board on the Capital Master Plan for the year ended 31 December 2009 (document A/65/5/Vol.5).† The Report reviewed findings of the Boardís assignment of March 2010, in which the Board concentrated its efforts on a more elaborate review of contracts relating to the Capital Master Plan ó an area that had been intensified since the last review in 2009.† The Capital Master Plan Administration had agreed to take remedial action by setting up an ex post facto review committee to look into all contract amendments relating to the Capital Master Plan.† At the date of reporting, the committee had not been set up, which meant that the problems highlighted by the Board still remained.


With regard to the construction project, the report indicated that the project continued to be behind schedule ranging from nine months to one year, compared with six months previously reported.† In relation to the Secretariat building, the increase in delay was due to the difficulty of evacuating everyone from the premises on time.† At the time of audit, the estimated total project cost was approximately 5 per cent above the budget approved by the General Assembly, and it seemed it would be a challenge for the Administration to reduce costs and stay in budget.† In that context, the Board had indicated that the Administration had not produced evidence that the value engineering programme introduced several years ago had generated any significant savings.† The report went on to issue a number of related recommendations to the Capital Master Plan Administration, and noted that out of 20 recommendations issued this year, 14 had already been implemented while six were under implementation, as against seven and one, respectively, in 2008.


COLLEN KELAPILE, Chair of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions, then introduced the report of ACABQ on the Capital Master Plan (A/65/725), which drew attention to a security-related consideration which was expected to impact the Capital Master Plan completion date and overall costs.† Specifically, ACABQ had been informed that certain areas of the perimeter of the United Nations Headquarters premises required better protection from vehicle-borne threats.† Since those security installations would delay the planned completion timeframe of the General Assembly Building from late 2013 to 2014, the Committee had requested that updated details be provided to the General Assembly.


Concerning the associated costs of the Capital Master Plan, the Advisory Committee had expressed some concerns that it might be difficult to absorb the related costs within the approved budget of the Capital Master Plan, as mandated by the General Assembly.† ACABQ had recommended that the Assembly should request the Secretary-General to make proposals, no later than the second quarter of 2011, on how to best deal with the associated costs.† Noting that one of those costs related to furniture, the Committee welcomed the fact that modular furniture in good condition would be reused as much as possible.† It further expected that the procurement process would be in full compliance with the Financial Regulations and Rules of the United Nations.


Statements


Speaking on behalf of the Group of 77 and China, MARÕA LUZ MELON (Argentina) said the eighth annual progress report should have been considered in the fall, following the relevant legislative mandate.† She wanted to know why the report was delayed.


The Group was concerned that security enhancements, noted in volume IV of the Board of Auditors and the ACABAQ reports, would cost about $100 million and delay the projectís completion date by about six months.† The new completion date was 2014. †The Group was concerned that the security enhancements had led the Plan to develop a revised concept that constituted a scope change.† The Group recalled that, in resolution 62/87, the Assembly had decided that any scope options, in addition to those already approved, would be submitted by the Secretary-General to the Assembly for its consideration and approval.


The Group stressed that the Project should be completed on time and within the approved, sizeable budget of $1.88 billion.† The Group agreed with the recommendations of the Board of Auditors and ACABQ.†


Referring to procurement, the Group reaffirmed the relevant provisions of Assembly resolutions 61/251, 62/251, 63/270, and 64/228, which clearly stipulated that procurement activities should be fully compliant with United Nations rules and regulations.† It was concerned with the Board of Auditorís observation that some contract amendments represented significant amounts without any direct links to the initial scope of services contained in the original contract.† It hoped the Secretary-General would take additional steps to increase procurement opportunities for vendors in developing countries and countries with economies in transition, he said.


While appreciating the creation of the Advisory Board, the Group agreed with the ACABQ request that the information on Board activities should be provided to the Assembly on a routine basis in the context of future progress reports on the Plan.† The Group believed the Board could also play an important role in helping the Assembly assess the project.


The Group was also concerned that expenditures in connection with the plan and associated costs would reach a substantial level in 2011, amounting to $110.9 million.† On the issue of possible financing options for the associated costs for 2011, with a view to absorbing them from its approved budget, the Group agreed with the ACABQ recommendations.† Those recommendations addressed the importance of the issue of cash drawdown in a transparent and appropriate manner, without placing an additional financial burden on Member States.


Committee Chairman GERT ROSENTHAL (Guatemala) said the Fifth Committee Bureau had made the decision to delay consideration of the Capital Master Plan during the first week of December, since the Committee had not been able to consider all issues by the close of the session on 23 December.† It decided to take up some of the less pressing issues, including the Capital Master Plan, in the first resumed session.† It was a collective decision of the bureau, which include three Member States from the Group.


ANNA REICH (Hungary), speaking on behalf of the European Union, said that the European Union had been a firm supporter of the Capital Master Plan, and was now pleased to see the project under way.† Despite some concerns about the ongoing slippage in the construction schedule, the delegation was confident that the Plan would be completed by 2013, as scheduled.† However, it concurred with the recommendations made by the Board of Auditors, and particularly shared concerns with regard to the cost overruns of the project, also made by ACABQ.† Further efforts were needed to achieve savings in order to keep the project within the approved budget limit, to ensure that associated costs were absorbed, and to avoid the anticipated cash flow problem in the long term.† Member States should not be expected to bear additional financial burdens above the budget approved by the General Assembly.† The Secretariat should continue to seize opportunities presented by the current economic climate to lower costs of contracts and operations.† Moreover, the Union wanted a better idea of the potential volume of donations from Member States and private donors, as well as of the development of the income side and possible activities to improve it.


PAUL BALLANTYNE (New Zealand), also speaking on behalf of Australia and Canada, said that he welcomed the significant progress made over the reporting period.† He noted the ongoing discussion between the host country and the Department of Safety and Security related to perimeter security and how it could be strengthened in the context of the Capital Master Plan.† He looked forward to further information on those discussions.† He also shared ACABQís concern that there might be difficulty in absorbing the associated costs in the approved budget of the Capital Master Plan.† The issue needed to be addressed in a manner that did not place any additional financial burden on Member States.† He also welcomed steps taken to improve physical accessibility and the ongoing efforts to fully comply with, and in some cases exceed, the relevant design standards for the needs of persons with disabilities.† Finally, he supported the ongoing process of value engineering and welcomed the significant cost savings achieved so far.


Introduction of Reports


ARNAB ROY, Chief of the Policy and Conditions of Service Section of the United Nations Office of Human Resource Management, introduced a Report of the Secretary-General (A/65/676) on conditions of service and compensation for officials of the International Civil Service Commission and the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions.† The report stated that, according to procedures for compensation adjustments based on the local consumer price index, the annual net compensation of the two full-time members of ICSC and the Chair of ACABQ was revised from $197,564, effective 1 January 2008, to $205,545, effective 1 January 2010.† In coming updates, the annual salary of the two Chairmen would need to be increased to $232,084, and that of the Vice-Chairman of ICSC would be increased to $222,084.


The report also considered other conditions of service, post-retirement benefits, and financial considerations relating to conditions of service.† In accordance with past General Assembly resolutions, the report stated that the next comprehensive review should be undertaken when the level of the annual compensation of the Chair of ICSC and the Chair of ACABQ fell below the level of the compensation of Assistant Secretaries-General.


ALEJANDRO TORRES L…PORI, Vice-Chair of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions), introduced the related ACABQ report (document A/65/767).† Among other things, that report noted that, given that the total net annual compensation of the two Chairs did indeed fall below the level of Assistant Secretaries-General on 1 January 2009, ACABQ regretted that the Secretary-General did not bring the issue to the attention of the General Assembly at its sixty-fourth session, in accordance with the provisions of its resolution 58/266 (2003).† ACABQ recommended that the General Assembly approve the increase in the net annual compensation of the three officials concerned as outlined in the Secretary-Generalís report. †Additionally, it recommended that the General Assembly consider establishing an automatic mechanism for adjusting the compensation of the three officials concerned.


MARÕA LUZ MELON (Argentina), speaking on behalf of the Group of 77 and China, said that he was concerned that no action had been taken on the report on the conditions of service and compensation submitted by the Secretary-General at the General Assemblyís sixty-third session, even after it was deferred to the sixty-fourth session.† The Group also regretted that the net annual compensation for the two Chairs of ICSC and ACABQ had fallen below the level of the compensation of Assistant Secretaries-General on 1 January 2009 and that the Secretary-General and the Secretariat did not bring the issue to the attention of the General Assembly at its sixty-fourth session, in accordance with the provisions of the related resolution.† The Group would be seeking clarification on the implication of that omission and how that impacted compensations packages for the individuals concerned.


Further, the Group concurred with the observation by ACABQ that the review of compensation and conditions of service for the three officials had been considered by the General Assembly with increasing frequency.† Noting that the Secretary-General had indicated to ACABQ a preference for the establishment of an automatic adjustment mechanism, the Group also stated its belief that such a mechanism could help to achieve greater efficiency.


* *** *


For information media • not an official record