The Permanent Representative of Algeria to the United Nations, Youcef Yousfi, was elected Chairman of the Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary) for the sixty-first session of the General Assembly on 7 July 2006.

Q: How are the 2005 World Summit and ongoing efforts to reform the UN reflected in the Fifth Committee?

A: In many ways: Management reform, procurement reform and the financial implications of reform in all of the committees-the creation of new bodies, for example. Let's say that all of the reforms are reflected in the Fifth Committee. I think we have made a lot of progress in 2006 with the establishment of the Human Rights Council, the Peacebuilding Commission and the Ethics Bureau established by the Secretariat. We are progressing with the management of human resources. This issue is quite difficult but we are working on it. We are also examining the reform of the Secretariat itself: its management, oversight, and governance. This is a lot of work for the Fifth Committee.

Q: In August 2006, the Security Council adopted three resolutions, increasing peacekeeping activities by 50 per cent and increasing the overall cost of peacekeeping from the expected 2006-2007 level of $ 4.7 billion to possibly $8 billion per year. How has this increase been reflected in the Fifth Committee?

A: We are a little bit concerned by the financial aspects of this because, according to the Controller, Warren Sach, this year we lack $2.5 billion for the peacekeeping budget. By the end of the year, we will be short US $ 40 million. We would like to appeal to Member States to make their contributions to avoid these problems, especially so that the UN can reimburse the countries that have contributed troops to the peacekeeping missions.

Q: Singapore's delegate questioned the use of consultants from Deloitte and Touche to analyze procurement reform. Algeria's delegate said the consultants had not come up with any new ideas and that the funds used to pay them would be better used for activities in developing countries. How do you think this might affect the use of outside consultants at the UN in the future?

A: In my experience it is advantageous to have internal auditing and internal resources for this kind of work. But we must have internal auditing and oversight that is efficient, independent and credible. I think such auditing is necessary for the General Assembly to have sufficient information to make decisions and strong oversight of the work of the Secretariat. However, consultants might be used for some very particular items. There are consultants around the world, so when we decide to use consultants we should open the scope to competition, establish very clear terms of reference, and have professionals oversee the work of the consultants to make sure they do what they were hired for. Of course, it is up to the Fifth Committee to decide this, but this is what I feel.

Q: Some representatives, including those of New Zealand (also on behalf of Australia and Canada) and Finland (on behalf of the European Union) say the Secretary-General's proposal to create a cadre of 2,500 career civilian peacekeepers for peacekeeping operations is worth exploring. Others, including the Russian Federation and Japan, question the proposal, saying it is very costly and that the benefits are not entirely clear. How feasible do you think the implementation of this proposal is?

A: We think it is necessary to have these specialists. Exactly how many and what the implied cost will be are things we will discuss. If they are 2,500 or 1,000, a little bit more or less, we will discuss this. The cost is one of the concerns, as is the question of the nationality of the specialists. Of course, Member States are very sensitive about the equitable geographical representation of these specialists. They should come from all of the regions of the world, not just from Europe or North America. Most of these specialists are already on the ground. We need to consolidate them into one group so that they can move between the peacekeeping missions efficiently.

Q: Speaking on behalf of the "Group of 77" developing countries and China, South Africa's delegate said the commitment in the 2005 World Summit Outcome Document to address the special needs of Africa, the only continent not on track to meet any of the Millennium Development Goals by 2015, was not reflected in budget estimates. What is the future of funding for programmes such as the New Partnership for African Development (NEPAD) and the Economic Commission for Africa (ECA)?

A: I share the view of the delegates who have said that the funding for programmes in Africa is not sufficient. Africa is the continent that has the most serious development problems in all sectors: education, health, development, etc. At the same time, it is one of the richest continents in natural resources. This continent has many conflicts because of poverty, underdevelopment and its difficult past. I think the international community should devote more attention and resources to Africa. Concerning NEPAD, my country [Algeria] was one of the leaders in the establishment of this programme, and we are also one of the countries following up on its implementation. I think that the world would be in better shape if Africa were given the opportunity to develop. I think it is within the possibilities of the United Nations to do more than it is doing now for Africa. One of the possibilities is to reinforce the Economic Commission for Africa, but this is just one of many possibilities. The world should really give more to Africa and help it get on the track of development. The world would win because stability in Africa would contribute to global stability.

Q: How has the newly created Ethics Office affected business at the UN and in the Fifth Committee?

A: We had a satisfactory first report and we hope that this Office will play its role, be very efficient and also credible. It is difficult for us to judge at this time.

Q: Viet Nam pointed out that 40 per cent of procurement at the United Nations went to developing nations-a figure unchanged since 2001. What are some of the issues surrounding procurement?

A: I think procurement should be reformed and we are beginning to study this issue. All procurement should be examined and be made more efficient and less costly to the United Nations. Also, procurement should involve more developing countries, and efforts should be made to help them participate. For example, African countries are not contributing very much, and that is a shame. UN procurement accounts for a huge amount of goods and services, around $4 billion, and most of it goes to the developed countries.

Q: How does the financial situation of the United Nations in 2006 compare to previous years?

A: It is not very different from previous years. There might be a slight improvement. But, as I said before, there is some concern, because to date only 122 of the 192 Member States have paid their contributions for this year. We are urging the largest contributors to help the UN avoid a difficult situation by paying their contributions on time and in full.

Q: Angola's representative said that it faces difficulty in paying a 700-per cent scale-to-scale increase as it came out of the "longest internal conflict in Africa". What can developing countries do when they have difficulty paying their dues to the United Nations?

A: I think we should understand these contributors. For the UN, this is not a question about Angola specifically. Many of the big countries do not make their contributions on time, and this is the most serious problem for the finances of the Organization. The financial situation at the UN is not only linked to these developing countries. The big problem lies with the arrears and the on-time payment of the big countries.

Q: Last year, there was a serious question regarding the UN budget, and the budget was approved only after extended negotiations. How does that situation compare to this year?

A: This year is different. We have to negotiate a new scale of assessment to calculate the contribution of each Member State by the end of this year for the following six years. We are going to discuss this in the coming weeks and I hope we do not have difficulties. If we don't have a scale of assessment, we won't have a budget.