Sixty-second General Assembly

Fifth Committee

11^th Meeting (AM)

DEVELOPMENT UNDER-FUNDED IN UNITED NATIONS PROPOSED 2008-2009 BUDGET,

SAY SPEAKERS, AS FIFTH COMMITTEE CONTINUES DEBATE

Reaffirming the need for a stronger United Nations, better equipped to address today’s challenges, many speakers in the Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary) stressed that the Organization required adequate resources in all three pillars of its activities -- peace and security, human rights and development.

“Our limited resources can be used in areas of most urgent need”, China’s representative said, as the Committee continued its debate on the $4.2-billion budget proposal for 2008-2009.  When formulating the budget, resources should be matched with actual requirements, and it was also necessary to practise economy and take into full consideration the paying capacity of Member States, he said.

China believed that, within the limited amount of overall resources, administrative and management costs should be drastically reduced and more resources should be devoted to development.  That would provide some benefit to developing countries -- the majority of the Organization’s membership -- enabling them to enjoy a “dividend” from United Nations’ activities for development.

Agreeing that the three pillars were complementary to each other and required a balanced and adequate provision of resources, many speakers pointed to an imbalance in reflecting those priorities in budget allocations, to the detriment of the development pillar.

Criticizing the budget proposal for “falling short” in ensuring budgetary rigour and presenting an accurate reflection of the Organization’s priorities, India’s representative called the proposed resource allocation “completely lopsided”.  The increase in resources for promotion of sustained economic growth and development had been limited to 18 new posts (0.5 per cent real growth); development in Africa had been “strengthened” by one post; no increase had been proposed for the Regular Programme of Technical Cooperation; and the Development Account budget had remained constant at $16.48 million.  In contrast, human rights with 36 new posts and peace and security with 35 new posts, not including the 34 additional posts for the Department of Political Affairs reform, had been treated more generously.  From a net increase of 428 posts to be financed under extrabudgetary resources, 260 were for the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights.

In that connection, the representative of Brazil underscored the call of the “Group of 77” developing countries for a comprehensive reform aimed at strengthening the development machinery of the United Nations.  For the Organization to address the challenges of poverty and development, which were at the root of many conflicts, it was necessary to focus on a “development budget”, with a significant increase in the resources allocated to development-related programmes, as well as the Development Account.

The representative of the Russian Federation said that, although the regular budget had been proposed at the level of $4.2 billion, with an increase of only 0.5 per cent, those figures were deceptive, as they did not take into account a number of factors.  The real level of the regular budget for 2008-2009 could come to over $4.6 billion, which was a solid increase, compared with the current budget and with the budget outline adopted by the Assembly.  Further, he shared the concern of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions (ACABQ) at the increasing tendency of piecemeal budgeting and called upon the Secretary-General, as a chief administrative officer of the United Nations, to devote priority attention to compliance with relevant financial rules and procedures and presenting new initiatives within the existing budgetary cycle.

In that regard, Norway’s representative said that, as Member States turned to the United Nations to find solutions to global challenges, so the United Nations must also adjust in order to meet the demands for an efficient and coherent operation in the twenty-first century.  In order to have a full understanding of the real growth of the 2008-2009 budget, one had to consider several late “add-ons”, including additional requirements for the establishment of the Independent Audit Advisory Committee, implementation of Human Rights Council decisions, overhaul of administration of justice, and strengthening of the Department of Political Affairs.  In principle, he believed the proposals to strengthen or reform parts of the Secretariat should be considered in the context of biannual budgets, based on a consistent strategy to ensure good management, appropriate funding and competency.

Also participating in the debate were representatives of Egypt, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Gabon, Cuba, Nigeria, Viet Nam, Singapore, Cameroon, Sudan, Kuwait, Philippines, Qatar, South Africa (on behalf of the African Group), Guatemala and Nicaragua.

Responses to delegates’ questions were provided by Under-Secretary-General for Management Alicia Barcena; United Nations Controller Warren Sach; and ACABQ Chairman Rajat Saha.

The Committee will take up programme planning at 10 a.m. Monday, 29 October.

Background

The Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary) met this morning to continue its consideration of the 2008-2009 programme budget presented by the Secretary-General yesterday (for details, see Press Release GA/AB/3818 of 25 October).

Statements

HESHAM MOHAMED EMAN AFIFI ( Egypt) aligned himself with the position of the “Group of 77” developing countries and China and the African Group, and stressed the importance of accomplishing the statement of intent expressed in the World Summit Outcome.  His Government was determined to do everything possible, so all mandated programmes were implemented.  Important issues, such as sustainable development and economic growth, should receive the utmost attention.  Poverty, hunger, trade imbalances, the environment and social health required urgent action and should receive adequate resources.  With limited resources available, it was necessary to optimize their use, promote the use of information technology, and channel additional resources for development assistance.

In that connection, he underlined the need to strengthen support to the Department of Economic and Social Affairs, which would enable the Department to reinforce the work of the Economic and Social Council.  He welcomed the intention of the Secretary-General to submit concrete proposals on strengthening the development and economic machinery of the Organization.  He also shared the view that the resources requested by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights should follow organizational discipline and must conform to the mandates approved by the Human Rights Council and General Assembly.  Paragraphs 74 to 76 of the Outcome Document emphasized the importance of prevention of armed conflict and the role of good offices of the Secretary-General in the mediation of disputes.  In that context, he was interested in proposals on strengthening the Department of Political Affairs, and he looked forward to receiving detailed proposals to that effect.

LIU ZHENMIN ( China) aligning himself with the statement of behalf of the Group of 77, noted that after recosting and the addition of other expected expenditures, the budget was $4.6 billion.  Given the expansion of activities in such areas as peace and security, human rights and development, a proper budget increase would be essential for the smooth functioning of the Organization, particularly for ensuring adequate funding for mandated programmes and activities.  When formulating the budget, the United Nations should keep in mind the principle of matching resources with actual requirements and the need to practise economy, and take into full consideration the paying capacity of Member States, so as to avoid an excessive increase in resources.

On resource allocation, he supported the priority items identified by the Assembly for 2008-2009 and hoped that “our limited resources can be used in areas of most urgent need”.  Within the limited amount of overall resources, administrative and management costs should be drastically reduced and more resources should be devoted to development.  That would provide some benefit to developing countries, which formed the majority of the Organization’s membership, and would enable them to enjoy a “dividend” from United Nations’ activities for development.

Compared with the proposed increase of resources earmarked for human rights and monitoring, he said that in the proposed budget there were only minimal resources for the promotion of economic development and regional cooperation on such issues as the environment, trade and African development.  The Secretary-General should take effective measures to maintain a balanced resource input, so that the priority programmes related to the economic development of developing countries could receive sufficient attention and guaranteed resources.

Taking up efforts to improve management and reduce waste, he noted the concerns of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions (ACABQ) regarding the piecemeal approach to the budgetary process and hoped that the Secretary-General would take effective measures to make sure that future proposed programme budgets reflected, to the greatest possible extent, all the requests for the biennium.  He noted the ACABQ’s recommendation that there should be systematic efforts to foster deeper cooperation and coordination within the United Nations to bring about synergy, enhance complementarity and remove avoidable redundancies.

He noted with concern the continued waste and mismanagement in the utilization of resources.  The United Nations needed to employ the resources provided by Member States in a scientific and rational manner to achieve optimal efficiency and put a resolute stop to any form of waste.  Budget and programme managers needed to strengthen communication and cooperation, formulate specific and feasible performance indicators, and put a timely stop to outdated and inefficient outputs.

YOSEPH KASSAYE ( Ethiopia), supporting the position of the Group of 77 and African Group, said that the complex challenges of peacekeeping required an integrated approach and stronger coordination.  In that regard, he stressed the importance of collaboration among various operations in different parts of the world and rapid response to the decisions of the Security Council and General Assembly through adequate allocation of budget resources.  He welcomed the support given to the Special Committee on Peacekeeping Operations, saying that his delegation expected that body to implement and follow up the legislative decisions in an efficient manner.  The Department of Peacekeeping Operations should be further strengthened to implement the recommendations of the Special Committee.  The same level of commitment should be extended to the Peacebuilding Commission and its Support Office.

Turning to the challenges facing Africa, he said that the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD), the Executive Committee of which was chaired by his Prime Minister, needed the support of the United Nations.  The three subprogrammes, under the joint responsibility of the Office of the Special Adviser on Africa and the Economic Commission for Africa (ECA), should be supported in all possible ways.  As per the ACABQ recommendations, the significant drop in extrabudgetary resources, especially under subprogramme I, must be considered seriously, as its implementation was indispensable for the work of NEPAD.  Filling the vacancies, in particular the post of the Under-Secretary-General for the Office of the Special Adviser, would contribute to the efforts of mobilizing the required resources for the Partnership.

The role of institutional coordination should be high on the agenda of the United Nations system and regional economic commissions, he continued.  Therefore, he would like to see the coordination between the United Nations and the African Union further strengthened.  The daunting task of ECA to reposition its activities to regional offices, as recommended by the Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS), was also important.  Unless the necessary consideration was given to the work and services of the Commission, it would be difficult to make the reform process work.  Thus, it was important to secure adequate resources and fill various posts in the Commission in a timely fashion.

In the area of international cooperation, he said the efforts of eradicating various deprivations had been highlighted in many internationally agreed development goals.  The implementation of the commitments and goals of existing programmes of action and strategies seemed to be far from being achieved.  His delegation was concerned over the functions of the Office of the High Representative for Least Developed Countries and was convinced of the need to strengthen the Office and follow up on its activities.  In particular, he concurred with the recommendation of ACABQ that a concrete strategic plan should be developed to achieve greater mobilization of resources to ensure that the Office’s programme delivery continue in an effective and efficient manner.

ADE PETRANTO ( Indonesia) supported the statement made on behalf of the Group of 77 and China and stressed that the budget, as a key instrument highlighting the fundamental priorities of the Organization, must capture, truthfully, the vision, mission and spirit of the United Nations.  To ensure that, he said the principal role of the Assembly must be acknowledged and appreciated, which must extend to its relevant intergovernmental and expert bodies, operating within their respective mandates.  The budget should present an accurate picture of all mandated activities, along with the resources allocated to achieve them.  He called the budget not merely a financial and accounting tool, but also a comprehensive, positive statement of the strategic vision of the Secretary-General, indicating the mandates bestowed upon him by Member States and the policies formulated to achieve them.

One important aspect of the budget, often treated lightly, was the allocation for development activities.  Development was one of the three main pillars on which the Organization rested.  Regrettably, the budget did not reflect that perspective.  Rather, most development activities were funded by extrabudgetary resources.  He was concerned that the approval procedures, reporting requirements and accountability mechanisms of the extrabudgetary resources often lacked transparency.  He also expressed concern about the implementation of zero nominal real growth in resources.  This strategy, which was so fast becoming standard practice, had been adopted without the Assembly’s approval.

Regarding the procurement process, he shared the concern of other Member States regarding the limited procurement opportunities available to developing countries.  Reform was needed in that area.  There must be consistent and transparent implementation of relevant rules and regulations.  In that regard, he expressed appreciation to ACABQ for its report.  Because of the significance of the Advisory Committee’s work, independence, impartiality and expertise in providing technical inputs on budgetary and administrative matters had to be preserved.  Likewise, the budgetary, programming and evaluation roles of the Committee for Programme and Coordination (CPC) should be respected.

MARIA LUIZA RIBEIRO VIOTTI ( Brazil) supported the position of the Group of 77 and the Rio Group, and highlighted areas of particular importance for her delegation.   Brazil reaffirmed the need for a stronger United Nations, better equipped to address today’s challenges in the areas of peace and security, development and human rights.  A stronger United Nations required adequate resources in all three pillars.  However, there had been an imbalance in reflecting the priorities of the international community in budget allocations, to the detriment of the development pillar.  She underscored, therefore, the call of the Group of 77 for a comprehensive reform aimed at strengthening the development machinery of the United Nations.  For the Organization to address the challenges of poverty and development, which were at the root of many conflicts, it was necessary to focus on a “development budget”, with a significant increase in the resources allocated to development-related programmes, as well as the Development Account.

She said the 2008-2009 budget should considerably strengthen the programmes related to trade and development, economic and social affairs, the least developed countries, landlocked developing countries and small island developing States; technical cooperation; indigenous peoples; and support for NEPAD.  Brazil supported strengthening the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), which had been instrumental in the effective promotion of development in the region, and had been an example of efficiency and accountability.  Increased resources were required to support NEPAD, ECA and the Office of the Special Adviser on Africa.  She also reaffirmed that the measures agreed by Member States to strengthen the Forum on Forests must be supported by adequate resources in the regular budget.   Brazil fully supported strengthening the Office of the High Representative of the Secretary-General for Disarmament Affairs, as well as the efforts of the Secretariat to increase accountability, transparency and oversight.  Strengthened internal controls and results-based management should be an ongoing concern in the Secretariat.   Brazil supported all measures to increase effectiveness and transparency of the Secretariat’s activities in the fulfilment of mandates conferred on it by Member States.

DENIS DANGUE REWAKA ( Gabon) associated himself with the statements made on behalf of the Group of 77 and the African Group.  He said the overall amount of the budget was almost $4.5 billion in expenditures, which could increase after examining awaited reports.  That may be due to a change of leadership, but he stressed the need, in the future, to avoid piecemeal budgeting.  Such an approach hampered Member States when it came to predicting and paying their assessments.  Once adopted, the budget should cover all activities mandated by the Assembly.

Specifically, regarding ECA, he took note of the restructuring of the Commission, the dynamism of new leader, the decentralization of its structure and the strengthening of its five subregional centres.  Next, he addressed the operations of the Subregional Centre for Democracy and Human Rights in Central Africa and requested the Secretary-General and the High Commissioner for Human Rights to allot the Centre additional human and financial resources.  He supported bringing about the full implementation of the relevant sub-section of chapter 23 of the budget, regarding budgeting for the Centre, to conform with Assembly resolution 56/253.  He eagerly awaited the implementation of these proposals.

Regarding the Office of the Special Adviser on Africa, he said it should be strengthened by all of its structures by filling vacancies, particularly the special adviser post, at the level of Under-Secretary General, to facilitate planning, coordination communication and evaluation functions.  He supported the CPC and ACABQ reports on those matters.  Concurring with the recommendations made by ACABQ, he also supported fully funding the Office for Least Developed Countries, Landlocked Developing Countries and Small Island Developing States.  With regard to the Peacebuilding Support Office, he welcomed the speed with which the Secretary-General established the Office and supported the allocation of resources recommended by ACABQ.

The budget was the best way to maintain a fruitful dialogue between the Secretary-General and Member States to make it an effective organization, he said.  As stated at the 2005 World Summit, he called for sufficient and timely resources to carry out the Organization’s mandates and to respect budgetary discipline.  Member States should meet their financial obligations to the United Nations.

JOHAN L. LØVALD ( Norway) said that the outcome of negotiations on the budget were of fundamental importance for the Organization’s operations and should reflect the collective priorities of its Members.  The United Nations had gained experience and was faced with an increasing number of important mandates.  The regular budget for the next two years was the most important strategic tool for the implementation of those mandates and should provide the United Nations with a clear direction based on how Member States believed it could utilize its resources in a fiscally sound and results-based manner.  As Member States turned to the United Nations to find solutions to global challenges, so the United Nations must also adjust in order to meet the demands for an efficient and coherent operation in the twenty-first century.  In order to have a full understanding of the real growth of the 2008-2009 budget, one had to consider several late “add-ons”.  In principle, he believed the proposals to strengthen or reform parts of the Secretariat should be considered in the context of biannual budgets, based on a consistent strategy to ensure a well-managed, appropriately funded and competent Secretariat.

His delegation would carefully consider the proposal to strengthen the Department of Political Affairs, he said.  It was necessary to strengthen the preventive capacities of the United Nations and, at the same time, its capacity to resolve conflicts and promote economic development, humanitarian efforts and human rights.  All the pillars of the United Nations were interlinked.  An agreed budget should reflect and balance those pillars.  He also called on all Member States to honour their commitments from the World Summit and said his country attached great importance to the fact that this year was halfway to 2015, and the deadline for achieving the Millennium Development Goals.  Negotiations on the regular budget should also be guided by those agreed targets and decisions.

He added that Member States should also honour their commitment to strengthen the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner on Human Rights, taking note of the Commissioner’s plan of action, through the doubling of the Office regular budget resources within five years.  It was necessary to ensure appropriate funding for assistance to meet the needs of victims of conflict, provide adequate funding of the Organization’s new peacebuilding architecture, including the Peacebuilding Support Office, and assistance to refugees and displaced persons, including the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA).

ILEANA NUNEZ MORDOCHE ( Cuba) concurred with the statement made yesterday on behalf of the Group of 77 and China.  She urged all Member States to agree upon the allocated resources in the proposed budget, so that all programmes and activities could be mandated.  She said it was of no use to address the importance of the United Nations in the resolution of today’s world problems, if in practice the necessary resources to fulfil such functions were denied.  Approval of depressed budgets, which did not meet the needs of the Organization -- on the basis of conditioned policies, imposed ceilings and zero-nominal growth -- showed the true political will of those who promoted them.

Regarding the proposed budget, she noted that a zero-nominal growth approach had been assumed, but it was a hard undertaking, given the reform of the Organization to meet so-called new challenges.  While she was aware of the need to use resources efficiently, she did not understand how an Organization facing new challenges every day could keep a regular budget that did not meet the priorities of Member States.  She was concerned about the growing predominance of extrabudgetary funds over the regular budget.  In that regard, she noted that the shy increase of the regular budget, compared to the foreseen increase of $764 million in extrabudgetary funds, was alarming. 

She reiterated the importance of CPC having the opportunity to review, exhaustively, the budget programme guidelines to facilitate the Assembly’s work on the matter.  Furthermore, she welcomed the improvements in the presentation and function of the results-based budget, to fully incorporate the concept into the Secretariat’s management.  Regarding the report of ACABQ on budgetary matters, she said she did not share some of the Committee’s observations and recommendations, and would address them more comprehensively during informal consultations.

Acknowledging that the budget proposal had been introduced at a time specific to reforming the work of the United Nations, she said that measures contained in the proposal should be analysed with the utmost care.  Rushed work on the budget proposal might lead to agreements, that were impossible to implement, or created negative situations for the Organization.  She reiterated that Cuba would not accept any attempt to condition approval of the budget to reform initiatives, or particular agendas of some countries.  She reminded the Committee that any attempt to withhold payment from the main contributor’s assessment, pressure delegations, impose conditions based on a country’s level of payment, or to try to use scandals stirred up by a country’s press, would be vigorously denounced and rejected by Cuba.  Negotiations should be carried out in an open, transparent and inclusive way.  Small groups should not make decisions on the part of the rest of the membership of the Assembly.

She was concerned that development resources represented a negligible part of the proposed regular budget and that the Development Account and the technical cooperation programme did not have actual and sustained resource increases.  In that regard, she reiterated that the Assembly had not adopted a resolution on the zero-nominal growth approach and, therefore, asked the Secretariat to table its proposals on the basis of the Organization’s real needs.  In particular, she sought clarification as to why the Development Account had not increased its resources, when recent reports had stated that the Organization had taken important economic steps.  It was high time the necessary resources were granted for the Organization to fulfil its role in the pursuit of the internationally agreed upon development goals, including the Millennium Development Goals.  Furthermore, she wanted to know what the real total amount of resources allocated for the 2008-2009 biennium were, given the various totals offered.  She noted that some reform initiatives on their way might require additional resources.

Concerning the proposed elimination of more than 2,000 outputs, she said, although she appreciated the Secretary-General’s effort to get rid of entities that were obsolete, of marginal quality or ineffective, she was concerned that most outputs proposed to be eliminated fell within the areas of economic and social development.  She noted that Cuba would address that disproportionate elimination at informal consultations, as well as at consultations carried out with relevant intergovernmental organs.  Concluding, she said she was also concerned that CPC did not have the opportunity to consider some sections of the proposed budget, which had not yet been published at the time it had convened.

NIRUPAM SEN ( India) said that, unfortunately, the proposal for 2008-2009 fell short as in budgetary rigour and as an accurate reflection of the Organization’s priorities.  The regular budget should present the fullest possible picture of the Organization’s requirements for a given period.  Some unpredictability was unavoidable and had to be addressed through supplementary demands, which should be an exception, rather than the norm.  “What we are witnessing here is the opposite”, he said.  Important items with significant budgetary implications, such as reform of the Department of Peacekeeping Operations/Department of Field Support, the Department of Political Affairs, information and communications technology, Enterprise Resource Planning, and costs related to the Human Rights Council and the Economic and Social Council decisions, were being presented outside the scope of the regular budget, “making supplementary demands the norm and marginalizing the regular budget”.  Such an approach subverted budgetary system and discipline.

Noting consensus that the three pillars were complementary to each other and required a balanced and adequate provision of resources, he said that resource allocation was “completely lopsided” in the budget proposal.  The increase in resources for promotion of sustained economic growth and development had been limited to 18 new posts (0.5 per cent real growth); development in Africa had been “strengthened” by one post; no increase had been proposed for the Regular Programme of Technical Cooperation; and the Development Account budget had remained constant at $16.48 million.  In contrast, human rights with 36 new posts and peace and security with 35 new posts, not including the 34 additional posts for the Department of Political Affairs reform, had been treated more generously.  The picture became clearer when the burgeoning $6.6 billion in extrabudgetary resources was added to those figures.  From a net increase of 428 posts under those resources, 260 were for the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights.

Without undermining the importance of the other two pillars, he believed that the budget exhibited an indifference to development, which was the top priority for the overwhelming majority of Member States and a necessary conditions for durable peace and security.  He called for an urgent redressal of that imbalance through allocation of greater resources for development-related entities like the Department of Economic and Social Affairs, the regional commissions and the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD).  New and practical proposals were also needed to finance the Development Account.  While important, South-South Cooperation was not and could not be a substitute for the fulfilment of commitments of development assistance made by the developed countries.  He looked forward to the Secretary-General’s proposals on strengthening the Secretariat to better serve development.  He also appreciated the vital role of the Office of the Special Adviser on Africa and the Economic Commission for Africa (ECA), called for expediting the appointment of the Special Adviser on Africa and supported the initiatives to strengthen the Commission and the United Nations Office in Nairobi.

Resources were always finite, he said.  Better results could be achieved, however, through efficient resource allocation and sound management practices –- the responsibility of the Secretariat.  While adequate and high-quality human resources were a sine qua non for the execution of the Organization’s work programme, the United Nations was not an employment-generation scheme, with creation of posts among its objectives.  He was troubled that, in the proposed budget, the cost of posts was estimated at $2.7 billion out of a total budget of $4.3 billion, and that the total cost of posts amounted to $5.5 billion, taking into account the extrabudgetary posts.  That meant that more than half of the Organization’s resources went into staff costs.  It was the responsibility of the management to increase the percentage of resources devoted to implementing the mandated programme of work, rather than encourage a proliferation of posts under the pretext of programme support.

FELIX ANIOKOYE ( Nigeria) aligned himself with the positions of statements on behalf of the Group of 77 and China, and the African Group.  Noting the relatively low rate of increase in the proposed programme budget, put at 0.5 per cent over the previous biennium, he said he had always supported reasonable growth in the budget, believing that priorities should determine its financial outlay.  Reiterating that, he said targets and priorities should determine the allocation of resources for dealing with them.

Emphasizing the importance of development in the promotion of peace and security in developing countries, he said adequate resources should be allocated to development, as it would not only give assurances to countries in the tight grip of poverty, but facilitate the actualization of the Organization’s primary objective of peace and development.  In that regard, he called on the Secretary-General to help accelerate the process of bringing resources allocated to the United Nations Office in Nairobi under the regular budget.

Taking up the development of ECA, particularly the attempt to reposition it so as to better serve and respond to emerging challenges, he said such an initiative was welcome.   However, in line with the recommendation of ACABQ, he said resource mobilization before recruitment of relevant staff of the Commission should be given consideration.  He noted that a priority area of the budget proposal was predicated on development in Africa.  In that regard, he said uncertainty around the Office of the Special Adviser on Africa, which was charged with mobilizing and strengthening international cooperation in support of NEPAD and achievement of the Millennium Development Goals, did not reflect that objective.  He said it was inexplicable that there was no mention of the Office of the Special Adviser in the proposed programme budget, and a bold effort should be made to bring it back to life.

VUONG DINH VAN ( Viet Nam) endorsed the statement of the Group of 77 and China.  He said that never before had the United Nations found itself in such a favourable environment in the common effort towards reform, yet also facing many similar challenges -- with the most critical challenge caused by a scarce budget.  He said the 2008-2009 budget might hardly finance the ambitious goals and targets set for the three pillars of peace and security, human rights and development.  No doubt every one of the goals was well justified and many found the notion of “zero growth” difficult.  That circumstance made the financial health of the Organization all the more precarious and unpredictable.  He urged that ways and means be further explored, while, at the same time, making budget allocations reasonable and making expenditures more efficient, effective and transparent, with considerable amounts devoted to development activities.

He said he attached great importance to the Organization’s policy of decentralization and believed firmly that delegation of authority down to the grass-roots level helped strengthen ownership, capacity-building and accountability.  Decentralization also fostered cooperation, not only within national borders, but also at the international and regional levels.  It was encouraging that the trend was common to most United Nations agencies, but he believed more projects and programmes could be jointly carried out by agencies.  Only in doing so could the United Nations really be “delivering as one”.  In particular, he supported initiatives to foster South-South cooperation, assistance for the least developed countries, landlocked developing countries and small island developing States, including the implementation of NEPAD.  He also noted the real need for greater efforts to facilitate the work of CPC.

Continuing, he expressed his support for a common system of salaries, allowances and benefits.  Harmonization of obligation, policies and benefits would no doubt help retain the best experts of the United Nations, and he suggested that work on those matters be further expedited.  He also requested that further practical measures be taken to make it possible for developing countries to share the procurement offers on an equal footing, and to improve their representation in the United Nations.  Finally, he attached great importance to harmonization of activities, including measures concerning the common system, which should ensure the equal treatment of the Organization’s entire work force.

KEVIN CHEOK (Singapore), supporting the statement made on the behalf of the Group of 77 and China, said development was one of the three main pillars of the United Nations, and Singapore was a beneficiary of development assistance from agencies like the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP).  When well-deployed, development assistance could be a great boon to a developing country?  He noted that, today, the United Nations development-related agencies handled $15 billion in funds, mostly extrabudgetary in nature.  Therefore, he was concerned that the development budget had only increased by a nominal 0.5 per cent in the Secretary-General’s proposal.  Much was being done, but much more remained to be done in those areas.

Regarding the allocation of additional funds to restructure the Department of Political Affairs, he said the Department could be strengthened to assume greater responsibilities.  Naturally, it was preferable to have the resources to resolve disputes early and prevent them from escalating.  All factors should be taken into account to ensure that the goals could be effectively translated into reality.  One question that could be considered was whether there was a possibility of redeploying staff from within the United Nations, as opposed to creating new posts.  That could also apply to other parts of the system that might be understaffed.

Taking up the renovations of the capital master plan, he called the proposed accelerated approach a positive development, if it resulted in significant cost savings.  The plan was a massive project that would cost almost $2 billion, so any savings would be welcome and attention paid regarding how delays would add to the overall cost.  As for effective accountability and oversight of the Organization, he noted that OIOS had been set up more than a decade ago to fulfil such a role.  However, the results appeared to be mixed.  He reminded the Committee that the United Nations must have, and adhere to, clear and transparent rules, and there could be no double standards or improper investigations.  He said the Procurement Task Force, called on to be funded by the Secretary-General, must also adhere to the same high standards as OIOS and others.  Nobody should quibble with the broad objective of combating corruption, and nobody was exempt from accountability.  In that connection, he supported the goal of making the administration of justice system more effective, particularly with regard to protecting the rights of United Nations staff members.  While some proposals concerning the administration of justice were sensible, others, like the proposals to abolish the Panel on Discrimination and other Grievances and to have the Secretary-General appoint judges to the Dispute Tribunal, needed to be carefully weighed.  A situation where staff members were disadvantaged even further in disputes with management should be avoided.

IGOR N. SHCHERBAK ( Russian Federation) said that the budget proposal before the Committee, the second one after the 2005 World Summit, was supposed to demonstrate progress in reforming the United Nations, in order to increase the effectiveness of implementing the mandates in the Organization’s priority areas.  Although the regular budget had been proposed at the level of $4.2 billion, it did not take into account a number of factors not included in the budget proposal.  Thus, while it initially seemed that there was an increase of only 0.5 per cent, that figure was deceptive.  The real level of the regular budget for 2008-2009 could come to over $4.6 billion, which was a solid increase, compared with the current budget and with the budget outline adopted in resolution 61/254.  That was a source of concern.

He shared the concern of ACABQ at the increasing tendency of piecemeal budgeting, he said.  His delegation agreed with the statement by the Advisory Committee that such an approach undermined the budgeting and financial system of the United Nations and undermined the already weak budgetary discipline, while also hindering informed decision-making by Member States.  He called upon the Secretary-General, as a chief administrative officer of the United Nations, to devote priority attention to compliance with relevant financial rules and procedures and presenting new initiatives within the existing budgetary cycle.

He said that the Russian Federation was prepared to consider additional concrete proposals on reforming the Secretariat, in particular the Department of Political Affairs, and looked forward to relevant detailed report in compliance with the procedure for the Assembly’s consideration of administrative and budgetary questions.  However, he was not convinced of the urgency of taking decisions on all those proposals during the current session, because their detailed consideration would be difficult due to their late submission and lack of compliance with budget rules and cycle.

During the budget negotiations, his Government would advocate the need to rein in unjustified increases in expenditures, further improve results-based budgeting, strengthen budgetary discipline, and improve programme evaluation.  His delegation would carefully assess justification of additional financial and human resources from the point of view of satisfying the needs through more effective reallocation of available resources.  At the same time, economy measures should not be carried out at the expense of reduced compliance with the basic principles of the United Nations, in particular those of multilingualism and the central role of intergovernmental bodies in determining the priorities of the Organization.

MARTIN BELINGA EBOUTOU ( Cameroon), associating with the statement on behalf of the African Group, said examination of the budget was important, because it was an essential tool for implementation of mandates as agreed to by Member States.  He noted that General Assembly resolution 61/254 decided to include among priorities for the proposed budget the development of Africa, sustainable development and sustained economic development.  He noted that the proposed budget provided for an increase of 3.5 per cent, under Chapter 11, and expressed his support for allocations to NEPAD.  However, he expressed concern that the reduction in extrabudgetary funds, as the report of ACABQ pointed out, was for the Special Adviser on Africa.  He asked for the help of the Secretary-General to strengthen the Office of the Special Adviser and to attend to the post that had been vacant for more than a year.  He said the whole success of the Office depended upon filling the post.

Regarding ECA, he supported the proposals of the Secretariat with regard to levels of staffing.  He said the support the Commission gave to efforts in African countries was of great importance and should increase, in compliance with the strategy of redeployment by the Commission, in conformity with resolution 61/235.  In that regard, sufficient means should be given to the Commission to change its structure to one of operational activity, and he encouraged the expansion in its activities.

Taking up the Development Account, he said it should be increased.  He called attention to Chapter 23, and welcomed the increase in allocations for the High Commissioner for Human Rights, as that would be a logical consequence of the final document of the 2005 World Summit, which agreed to strengthen the Office of the High Commissioner, by doubling the regular budget over the course of five years.  In that respect, promotion of human rights was a priority for 2008-2009.  However, he was dismayed that the increase in budget for the High Commissioner did not have an impact on the human and financial means of some of the regional offices, as pointed out by the ACABQ report. 

He was particularly surprised that no additional means were allotted to the Subregional Centre for Human Rights and Democracy in Central Africa.  However, he noted that the Assembly had requested an increase of the means available to the Centre and, in resolution 61/158, requested the Secretary-General and the High Commissioner for Human Rights to provide the Centre with additional funds and human resources.  In that regard, he called on the High Commissioner to reply effectively to the need for the promotion and protection of human rights and to create a culture of democracy and rule of law in the region.

He said the Secretary-General was expected to present a report on the issue at the sixty-second session, but noted that the Secretariat had not followed up on the resolutions of the Assembly.  No additional post had been allocated to the Centre, and the budget called for a reduction in the Centre’s expenditures.  The situation had led ACABQ to recommend that the High Commissioner submit appropriate proposals to the Assembly during the current session to ensure the implementation of resolution of 61/158.  He said complete implementation with regard to the Subregional Centre was especially important, because it had the least resources of all the centres in Africa, and its budget had declined from 2006-2007 to 2008-2009.

ABDALMAHMOOD ABDALHALEEM MOHAMAD ( Sudan) supported the position of the Group of 77 and the African Group and expressed concern over the fragmented presentation of the budget, which did not contain a number of important requirements.  Those would be presented in separate reports, with considerable financial implications.  The piecemeal presentation of the budget would complicate its consideration by Member States and went against the principle of transparency.  His delegation was very troubled over that situation.  He was also concerned about a decrease in resources for development activities.  Development issues were of utmost concern for developing countries, especially in Africa.  The achievement of the Millennium Development Goals remained a mere mirage, and the African continent was getting no attention in that regard.  Measures to strengthen ECA were most urgent.  He also expressed concern over the long-vacant post of the Special Adviser on Africa, saying that the failure to fill that position was a clear violation of a General Assembly resolution that had created the post.

Continuing, he said that the procedures in managing the resources of Member States in the field of procurement remained rather murky, and many doubtful and even suspicious practices were taking place.  The Organization would do well to learn the lessons of the past and avoid practices that could lead to scandals with serious financial and moral consequences.  In particular, he referred to a recent no-bid granting of a $250 million contract to Lockheed Martin for the hybrid United Nations-African Union Mission in Darfur.  Those unjustified exceptional measures had been taken unbeknownst to Member States and certainly did not obey the logic of contingency.  The bidding process had not been announced, while the normal procedure would have been to grant equal opportunities to several companies to bid in an open manner in accordance with the principle of transparency.  The Mission had not been dropped suddenly in the Secretariat’s lap.  Had the Secretariat done some prior planning, it would not have had to resort to such exceptional measures.  He requested a complete formal clarification on the uncompetitive bidding process.  His other question related to the fact that the value of the award had been initially $700 million and was then reduced to $250 million.  Such an astonishing lowering of the value of the bid also required an explanation.

He added that proposals on the need to ensure peacekeeping missions procured goods in local markets needed to be respected.  Currently, the missions represented “isolated islands” in the host countries, supplying their needs overseas.

ABDULLAH YATEEM AL FADHLI ( Kuwait) supported the position of the Group of 77 and reaffirmed the importance of the General Assembly and other relevant bodies involved in planning, programming, budget preparation, monitoring and evaluating.  He hoped the development activities, especially for the developing countries, would receive greater attention, so as to achieve the Millennium Development Goals.  The reform process at the United Nations was an ongoing process, and not an end in itself.  Rather, it was the means to create a more powerful and effective organization that could perform its duties and achieve the desired goals.  Likewise, it was imperative to strengthen the principles of transparency and oversight over various projects and activities, in addition to upholding the principle of equitable geographical representation.

Turning to the capital master plan, he confirmed the need to accelerate the renovations and start implementing accelerated strategy IV, without any delays, that would impose additional costs.

HILARIO G. DAVIDE, JR. ( Philippines) supported the position of the Group of 77 and China and said that the budget was not just a compilation of numbers -- it was a important document, which served as a fiscal blueprint, laying down the policies, strategies and actions the Organization would take, once approved by the Assembly.

Highlighting the issues of specific interest to his delegation, he said that balance should be maintained in the budget for items relating to the three indivisible pillars of the United Nations -- peace, development and human rights.  There was, however, a striking inadequacy in the field of development.  He reiterated the urgent need to implement fully and faithfully the development agenda as a major priority, especially in view of development-related processes, which would take place in 2008.  His delegation welcomed the Secretary-General’s statement that he would reinforce work on South-South issues with full involvement of the Department of Economic and Social Affairs, UNCTAD and the regional commissions.  That was a positive response to the Group of 77’s call for comprehensive strengthening of the development and economic machinery of the United Nations.

He expected to receive as soon as possible the Secretary-General’s proposals for allocations of adequate resources for the enhancement of development-related programmes in the current budget.  He shared the Group of 77’s concern over efforts to consolidate activities within the United Nations system, which diminished their development component.  He hoped current reorganization efforts within the Secretariat, particularly in the Department of Economic and Social Affairs’ handling the disability programme, did not narrow down or concentrate activities to a particular pillar, at the expense of others.

Continuing, he also acknowledged the efforts of the Department for General Assembly and Conference Management to improve its performance and looked forward to its continued efforts to ensure quality interpretation and translation, full servicing of meetings, particularly those of political and regional groups, timely processing of documents, quality printing and publishing, bearing in mind that the key performance indicator was Member States’ satisfaction.  He also echoed the Group of 77’s concern over the limited share of developing countries in the procurement opportunities within the Organization.  That matter should be thoroughly discussed and acted upon at the current session.

Mr. AL TAMIMI ( Qatar) supported the statement on behalf of Group of 77 and China.  He called attention to increasing global problems, and noted that it was necessary for the budget to reflect that trend and be commensurate with those needs.  He said zero-nominal growth was a worrying matter -- it should in no way mean that the Organization should not be reformed, or should neglect beneficial programmes.  Further, the role of the Organization in peacekeeping and the resources given to those operations should not mean the denial of resources to development and human rights.  He noted that attention must be paid to geographical distribution when allocating resources, to promote responsibly and effective policies when managing missions.  He welcomed the work of the CPC, the Economic and Social Council and other relevant bodies on the matter.  He said the capacity of ACABQ needed to be enforced, as an honest and independent body.  Lastly, he reminded Member States of the importance of their commitments, especially financial commitments, and encouraged the full payment of their assessments.

The Under-Secretary-General for Management, ALICIA BARCENA, thanked the delegations for their comments, saying that the dialogue was very important to the Secretariat.  A number of delegations had stressed the importance of the development pillar.  As indicated by the Secretary-General yesterday, there was an inextricable link between human rights, peace and security and development throughout the budget.  Resources to support development were thus deployed not only directly through the economic and social parts of the budget, but also through the peace, security and human rights components to strengthen the essential foundations for development.  Parts IV and V covered international and regional cooperation for development, showing the growth of 0.5 per cent, in line with the rest of the budget.  In addition, resources for development were of an operational nature and, as such, were delivered with the extrabudgetary component, with a significant increase of over $50 million in extrabudgetary resources for international cooperation for development.

She understood that such funding should not replace what the Organization should do for development, she said.  Thus, the Secretary-General intended to present his proposals for restructuring the elements in the economic and social area, with a view to reinforcing the work carried out by the Department of Economic and Social Affairs, UNCTAD and regional commissions, and to better meet the needs of Africa, least developed countries, landlocked developing countries and small island developing States.  In parallel to the current session, the United Nations System Chief Executives Board for Coordination (CEB) was holding a meeting with all specialized agencies to discuss how the system could best collaborate to meet the challenges of development, particularly in financing for development, meeting the Millennium Development Goals in Africa, and delivering the climate change goals.

Responding to questions regarding the decline of extrabudgetary resources for landlocked countries, least developed countries and NEPAD, she said that, normally, such resources were utilized in connection with facilitating least developed countries’ participation in intergovernmental forums and assistance to governments in holding meetings.  For 2008-2009, the estimates related only to facilitating those countries’ attendance at Economic and Social Council meetings, while in 2006-2007 they had also included financing for a mid-term review of the Brussels Programme of Action in 2006 and holding the Secretary-General’s panel on NEPAD, which had been completed.  Should the panel be reconstituted, related resources mobilization would take place.  There would be no negative impact on the implementation of the programme from the projected change in those extrabudgetary resource levels.

Turning to the Development Account, she said that a related report was contained in document A/61/282, which had been followed by action by the Assembly to make the first significant increase in the Development Account since its establishment 10 years ago.  Based on the guidance in resolution 61/252, a report had been prepared for consideration at the current session.  In that connection, she drew the delegates’ attention to document A/62/466, which addressed the critical issue of the identification of efficiency gains and set specific options for identifying additional resources for the Account, for decision by the Assembly.  The Secretariat proposed to work closely with Member States to find mechanisms to strengthen the Development Account.

Regarding efficiency gains, she said that the progress and impact assessment of management improvement measures had been separately reported in A/62/69.  It was expected that the implementation of stronger information technology systems would enhance the capacity to report with more precision on efficiency gains.  That would also help in connection with the Development Account.

Concern had been expressed on some aspects of the administration and budgeting of special political missions and related policies, she continued.  In that regard, plan and budget proposals had maintained a steady momentum, building on lessons learned and ensuring that feedback in that regard was useful and timely, to be taken into account in the formulation of subsequent plans.  It was a cultural change, but further work was needed.  A separate presentation on special political mission budgets would be made in November.  It was also expected that the ongoing review of results-based management would identify the areas of weakness that needed to be addressed.  The Secretariat would report on the matter later in the session, so the issue could be explored at depth at the resumed session, in conjunction with consideration of the accountability framework and risk management.

On discontinued outputs, she said that summary information was included in paragraph 16 of the budget introduction.  Further summary information had also been provided in table 5 of the ACABQ report on the budget.  However, she also pointed out that discontinuation of outputs should be evaluated against the background of new outputs initiated in the budget proposal.

Regarding human resources, she said that the issues of recruitment, geographic representation of underrepresented countries and gender balance were of great importance to the Secretary-General, and measures would be taken to ensure that approved policies were fully and robustly implemented, taking into account that United Nations staff now served in locations outside New York and in the field.  A full update on the vacancy situation would be provided in informals.  While vacancy levels varied by office and duty station, overall, realized vacancy rates for the regular budget were achieved within the range of 1 to 2 per cent of budgeted rates.

For the last decade, Member States had presided over great changes in the Organization, she continued.  Particularly in 2006, the Secretariat had received new tasks and mandates to respond to the needs in the Organization’s three pillars.  One of the main elements was management reform.  The principal issues during the current session related to the proposed budget; a package of add-ons, which included additional requirements to enhance transparency, and better management of resources, including establishment of the Independent Audit Advisory Committee, implementation of Human Rights Council decisions, overhaul of the administration of justice, enterprise resource planning and streamlining of contracts; strengthening of the Department of Political Affairs (some $18 million); and reports on issues with no budgetary requests, including procurement reform, accountability, results-based management and enterprise-wide risk management.

WARREN SACHS, United Nations Controller, first, addressed questions on the methodology used for preparing the proposed programme budget.  He recalled that the revised appropriations approved in December 2006 for the current biennium were a starting point.  Measurements through the initial appropriation of the prior biennium led to double counting and inevitably included consideration of matters already decided by the General Assembly at the prior session.  The 2006-2007 revised appropriation of $4.2 billion was the basis against which change was calculated.  Consequently, the proposed level of $4.2 billion before recosting reflected an increase of $21.3 million or 0.5 per cent real growth -- which, although small, could not be characterized as “zero nominal real growth”.

A number of delegates had raised the issue of full information on cost proposals, reflecting future costs resulting from delayed impact factors.  He noted that the General Assembly decided to maintain the practice of costing new posts with a delayed recruitment factor, rather than costing all new posts proposals on a full cost basis as outlined in the 2004-2005 budget proposal.  Thus, to provide full costing of proposals, supplementary information on the delayed impact in future biennium has been provided to ACABQ at the time of budget review.  The Committee could refer to Table 2 of A/62/7 for information relating to delayed impact in 2010-2011, which would result from proposals contained in the 2008-2009 budget.  He said that, if agreed upon, adjustments could be made to future budget presentations to include such information.

Taking up the issue of piecemeal budgeting, he noted that the Secretary-General fully appreciated the need for budget discipline.  However, he was also charged with the obligation to implement approved mandates and, therefore, had to maintain a balance between that and budget discipline.  The initial proposals strictly conformed to the 0.5 per cent real growth, while the add-ons responded to the dynamic nature of Member States’ requests, either by the provision of the statements of the programme budget as resolutions were adopted or as mandated reports were produced, giving rise to the need for revised estimates.  Both mechanisms were established practice of the Organization.  What was new was, perhaps, the level of programme activity, including reform items, especially with a change in the leadership of the Organization, which had led to new thinking regarding peace and security, among other matters.

He recalled that recent years had been particularly active with regard to significant reform implementation, including the proposed revision to the system of administration of justice.  Internal oversight services had been considerably strengthened and the Independent Advisory Committee had been established.  Frameworks for accountability, risk management and internal control were under review, building on the establishment of the Ethics Office and the ongoing implementation of the International Public Sector Accounting Standards.  The integrated Management Information System (IMIS) was introduced almost two decades ago, and needed to be replaced.

Addressing the contingency fund, he said that additional requirements related to peace and security or to the impact of recosting were not charged to the contingency fund.  However, given the magnitude of reform requirements in recent years, the General Assembly had also acted to appropriate the related additional requirements for implementation of reforms outside of the contingency fund, action which was necessary despite the procedures in place to review existing capacity at the time of issuance of each programme budget implication or revised estimate.  Existing resources were carefully reviewed to assess the possibility for redeployment, with similar reviews at the time of consolidated statements were issued on potential charges to the contingency fund.

With regard to the utilization of the $20 million limited discretion authorized by the Secretary-General, he said that it did not represent an additional appropriation, but, rather, the utilization of savings identified and attained during the course of the budget’s implementation.  Consequently, such savings could not be identified for a budget period prior to the start of the biennium or prior to the approval of the initial appropriation.  That authorization had been used during the course of the current biennium in respect of putting in place preparedness measures for pandemic influenza.  Requirements which would arise during biennium 2008-2009 would be handled under the authorization, subject to the identification of the required savings.  He noted that $13 million out of the $20 million had been used, with respect to 2006-2007.  Details on those expenditures would be provided in the second performance report issued in December.

He noted that, with the establishment of the Human Rights Council last year, resources were needed to implement the decisions of the Council.  The Committees of the General Assembly, and other subsidiary bodies, continued to act to entrust the Organization with additional mandates.  Given those mandates, he said proposals were made last year in the context of the budget outline for 2008-2009 to set a contingency fund level of 1.35 per cent, an increase of 0.6 per cent, as compared to the level of 0.75 per cent for previous periods.  While the General Assembly decided to maintain a level of 0.75 per cent, it also requested a review of the contingency fund.  During its review by the General Assembly, it was noted that, if the contingency fund was to be maintained as a key element of budgetary discipline, it would need to be established at realistic levels consistent with programmatic decisions and mandates.  Further, if the predictability of resources desired by Member States was to be achieved, consideration must be given, at the time of each budget outline, to establishing the contingency fund for the related biennium at a level that would provide for those additional expenditures that the fund would be expected to bear during the period, in accordance with Assembly resolution 41/213.

He noted that every effort had been made to handle additional requirements consistent with the terms of resolutions 41/213 and 41/211, including assessment of opportunities to redeploy resources or to defer activities.  Given the need to carefully review and assess approaches, he said it was not possible to include all proposals at the time of finalization of the proposed programme budget, due to the timing of the review of specialized bodies.  Established practice had been strictly followed, with the issuance of programme budget implications or revised estimates for the review and decision of the Assembly.

Finally, he took up the issue of procurement, noting that interest was expressed in the need to expand the share of countries in United Nations procurement.  A separate report on the status of procurement reforms, including arrangements to further diversify sources, would be brought before the Fifth Committee during the current session.

RAJAT SAHA, ACABQ Chairman, on behalf of the Advisory Committee, thanked the representative of Bangladesh for his kind words to the Chair and expressed appreciation for the remarks made by all delegates and groups of States.

He said he had carefully read the statement presented by the representative of Pakistan, on behalf of the Group of 77 and China.  He noted that in the statement it was mentioned that “the Group was constrained to reiterate that some of its observations and recommendations did not fall within the mandate of the Advisory Committee or have been made without due regard to the Assembly’s mandate and charter provisions”.

He said that had not been understood.  He presumed the Group would be elucidating the concern expressed with reference to specific observations and recommendations incorporated in the Advisory Committee’s report A/62/7.  That would facilitate clarifications to be given during the informal meetings.

FARUKH AMIL (Pakistan) thanked the Secretary-General for his intention to come up with some proposals for strengthening of the development machinery.  He had received very clear signal today from the Under-Secretary General for Management in that regard.  He requested that the Secretary-General come up with proposals as soon as possible, because there was concern in the Fifth Committee that reports were coming in late.  These reports would have an important bearing on the discussion of the budget.

Regarding budgetary add-ons, he said he hoped it would be the case that the reduction in extrabudgetary resources for the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD) would not impact its programme activities, as previously stated.  However, concerns about the issue needed to be reiterated.  He requested that comprehensive reports on add-ons be brought out as soon as possible, because they would have a strong impact on decisions.  In that regard, he noted that resources for such things as enterprise resource planning, International Public Sector Accounting Standards and the Human Rights Council had been approved last year, so work could have been done in at least those three areas.

He said Member States had been very clear in establishing mandates for proper budgetary preparedness, but responsibility for programmes like the Department of Political Affairs and Department of Peacekeeping Operations should not be passed on to Member States.  Those were reform ideas and should be timed to coincide with the budgetary cycle.  Discussions on the budget that took place outside of the budgetary framework created a serious problem.

Referring to reports on the Development Account, he said such reports were not helpful.  There was no modality to those reports and the framework established by the General Assembly was not working.  What that meant was that fresh appropriations were needed.  A proposal on those needs could have been part of the Secretary-General’s report on looking into efficiencies and saving possibilities, which, he noted, could not be identified.  He said programme managers had their own priorities, which undermined the mandate of the General Assembly on diverting resources to the Development Account.  That was a question of accountability and transparency.  It was not just about $2.5 million, but about the whole efficiency processes. The whole assurance that everything was used to gain efficiencies did not stand up, but, rather, was a kind of hollow promise that would not deliver.

Taking up flexibility money, he noted that, although $13 million had been spent, he asked what happened to the $7 million still with the Secretary-General for the next one to two months.  In two months, a proposal concerning the funds would be hurriedly made and, although it was the Secretary-General’s money and he could do what he wanted with it, expenditures of such a nature would raise concerns and would probably not be well done.  In that connection, he agreed with the need for a contingency fund, but emphasized that the contingency fund actually came out of the regular budget.  To have such a fund, cuts across programmes needed to be made and such cuts would have an impact on development activities.  He said a discussion would be prepared with emphasis on properly assuring the handling of the flexibility money.  Noting that concerns were expressed about procurement issues, he hoped the reports mentioned, thus far, on the issue would take into account expressed concerns about procedures for procurement in one particular mission.

In conclusion, he addressed the Chairman of the ACABQ, saying that, although he appreciated the work of the Advisory Committee, some of its recommendations needed to be a little more restrained.  In that regard, he thought there would be a debate on the issue at another time.  He expressed confidence that the Advisory Committee would listen to his concerns.  If there was any inconvenience or trepidation caused to members of the Committee, he apologized.  He said causing trepidation or inconveniences was not his intention.

Mr. TAWANA ( South Africa) said that no answer had been provided to one of the key questions posed by the African Group and others yesterday.  It related to the vacancies at the Office of the Special Adviser on Africa.  Yesterday, the representative of Botswana had asked what steps had been taken to fill the Special Adviser post and indicated other problems in filling vacancies.  Currently, the Office was five staff members short.  He worried that the Office was being neglected.  He also wanted to know what happened to the salaries for the unfilled posts -– were they allocated to someone else?

KARLA SAMAYOA-RECARI ( Guatemala) recalled yesterday’s question by the Rio Group, to which the Group wanted a written answer in a formal session.  From the national perspective, she said that, in the past, a P-3 post for indigenous affairs had been included in the staffing table experiment, but then the Assembly had decided to discontinue that exercise.  Since indigenous affairs were among the Organization’s principal activities, she wondered if the post could be included in the regular budget.  She asked for details on what exactly had happened to the post.

DANILO ROSALES DIAZ (Nicaragua) said that, yesterday, his delegation had stressed that five months after the Under-Secretary-General post for Field Support Services had been created, it had not been filled.  He asked for an explanation of the case and why, after very unusual pressure had been applied to approve the post, the vacancy still had not been filled.

Ms. BARCENA said that the missing elements would be included in the written responses that would be distributed to the delegations.

Mr. SACH, responding to a question regarding the treatment of the remaining $7 million of the $20 million on which discretionary power had been granted to the Secretary-General, said that, should additional needs be identified, they could be charged against the $7 million balance, but there should be clarity that those resources could be used during the current biennium, under the existing procedure. Any further use of those funds would require authorization by the Advisory Committee.

Mr. SAHA said that he would be available for answers in informal consultations.  With many reports under the ACABQ consideration, he would be requesting the Chair and Bureau of the Committee to keep him informed about the requirement for his presence in formal meetings.

* *** *

For information media • not an official record