UNIFIL financing – Fifth Cttee debate – Summary record (excerpts)

Fifth Committee

Summary record of the 48th meeting

Held at Headquarters, New York, on Monday, 19 March 2001 at 10 a.m.

Contents

Agenda item 116: Review of the efficiency of the administrative and financial functioning of the United Nations (continued)

Agenda item 123: Human resources management (continued)

Gratis personnel

Agenda item 138: Financing of the United Nations peacekeeping forces in the Middle East (continued)

(b) United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (continued)

Agenda item 176: Financing of the United Nations Mission in Ethiopia and Eritrea

In the absence of Mr. Rosenthal (Guatemala), Mr. Kelapile (Botswana), Vice-Chairman, took the Chair.

The meeting was called to order at 10.10 a.m.

/…

Agenda item 138: Financing of the United Nations peacekeeping forces in the Middle East (continued)

(b) United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (continued) (A/55/482/Add.1)

3. Mr. Yeo (Director, Peacekeeping Financing Division) said that document A/55/482/Add.1 contained a second revised budget for the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) for the period from 1 July 2000 to 30 June 2001. The new revision of the first revised budget adopted in General Assembly resolution 55/180 of 19 December 2000 was occasioned by the fact that some contingents would, as it turned out, not be deployed. The budget had therefore been reduced by $26,437,900 to $207,154,194 and 31 posts had been suppressed. He pointed out that such a revision would normally not be submitted to the Committee at the current stage; the revised amounts would usually simply be reflected in the performance report. In the present case, however, a revised budget had exceptionally been prepared and submitted in response to concerns raised by a number of delegations, mainly in connection with the assessments relating to the mission. He noted that the action to be taken by the General Assembly was set out in paragraph 9 of the report.

4. Mr. Mselle (Chairman of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions) said that the Advisory Committee agreed with the proposals of the Secretary-General as outlined in paragraph 9 of the report. He pointed out that the Fifth Committee would be reviewing all peacekeeping operations in May and that action by it on the matter could be deferred until that review. He noted that the Security Council had renewed the mission of UNIFIL to 31 July 2001 and that the Secretary-General would probably inform the General Assembly about assessments at its next session.

5. Mr. Diab (Lebanon) proposed that consideration of the matter should be deferred until May, as the budget might be revised again with a new extension of the mission’s mandate.

6. Mr. Yeo (Director, Peacekeeping Financing Division) said that it would be technically possible for the Committee to defer action on the matter until May. If the Committee took action now, the Secretariat would be able to revise the assessments sooner.

7. Mr. Mirmohammad (Islamic Republic of Iran) said that, bearing in mind the technical clarifications offered by the Chairman of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions and the representative of the Secretariat, he supported the proposal made by the representative of Lebanon to defer consideration of the matter.

8. Mr. Diab (Lebanon) pointed out that the information provided by the Chairman of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions and the representative of the Secretariat indicated that there were no financial implications involved in postponing consideration of the matter.

9. Mr. Al-Abbi (United Arab Emirates), speaking on behalf of the Group of Arab States, said that his Group had no objection to the request made by the representative of Lebanon, although he had some concern about what changes in the situation might occur from the present until May.

10. Mr. Lenefors (Sweden) requested more information about the financial implications of postponing action on the matter.

11. Mr. Yeo (Director, Peacekeeping Financing Division) said that, owing to the deployment changes, the budget resources for UNIFIL had already been reduced to the level indicated in the report. The main concern at present was the assessments for the current year. If the issue was deferred, there would still be sufficient funds to maintain the mission at the current level, and the new assessments would be worked out when the Committee took action on the matter.

12. The Chairman said that, if there were no objections, he would take it that the Committee wished to adopt the proposal made by the representative of Lebanon to defer action on the matter.

13. It was so decided.

/…

The meeting rose at 10.50 a.m.