GA/AB/3421

SECRETARY-GENERAL ASKS FIFTH COMMITTEE FOR FUNDS TO PLAN HEADQUARTERS REPAIRS

As the Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary) began its consideration of the proposed $964 million Capital Master Plan this morning, Under-Secretary-General for Management, Joseph E. Connor said that a major refurbishment and repair programme of the United Nations Headquarters complex was inevitable. The question was how to go about it.

Introducing the Secretary-General�s report on the plan, he said that over 25 years, using a reactive approach, the United Nations would spend almost $1.2 billion without being able to remedy some of the most significant problems. Even worse, almost half a billion dollars would be spent on energy, much of it wasted.

Instead, the Secretariat was proposing a much more far-sighted and sensible course of action, he continued. The Capital Master Plan was a concentrated six- year refurbishment programme, which would bring buildings to modern standards. There was also an opportunity to make improvements at a reasonable cost, including three new mid-sized conference rooms in addition to a new full-sized conference room over the multi-purpose presentation space. At this point, an initial provision of $8 million was needed to develop a detailed implementation plan.

Also this morning, as the Committee concluded its detailed discussion of the Brahimi report, several speakers agreed with the need to strengthen and expand the Department of Peacekeeping Operations, stressing the importance of making peacekeeping more efficient. It was also pointed out that increasing resources in implementation of the Brahimi panel recommendations should not be achieved at the expense of development.

While welcoming the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions (ACABQ) report on the matter, the representative of Pakistan said that the number of posts it recommended was excessive and warranted closer scrutiny. One reason why the United Nations had been unable to effectively respond to conflicts in the past was lack of advance planning, which needed to be improved.

The representative of Algeria said that the Secretary-General�s proposals on the implementation of the first phase were fully justified and deserved full support. However, he was concerned about the staffing of peacekeeping operations. Most of the personnel involved in peacekeeping operations were from the countries of the South, and not from the developed countries of the North.

Fifth Committee - 1a - Press Release GA/AB/3421 39th Meeting (AM) 14 December 2000

Given the level of training available to developed countries, that situation was unacceptable.

The Committee also began its consideration of the first performance report for the current biennium and took up programme budget implications of draft resolutions on United Nations Verification Mission in Guatemala (MINUGUA) and the situation in Central America, as well as the critical financial situation of the International Research and Training Institute for the Advancement of Women (INSTRAW).

United Nations Controller, Jean-Pierre Halbwachs, introduced several reports of the Secretary-General before the Committee. The reports of the ACABQ were introduced by Chairman of that body, Conrad S.M. Mselle. Director of the Programme Planning of Budget Division, Warren Sach, responded to delegates� questions. Secretary of the Committee, Joseph Acakpo-Satchivi also answered questions from the floor.

Also speaking this morning were the representatives of Nepal, Cuba, Gambia, Israel, China, Colombia (on behalf of the Rio Group), Bangladesh, Syria, Canada, Guatemala, Sweden (on behalf of the European Union and associated States), United States, Nigeria (on behalf of the �Group of 77� developing countries and China), Australia (on behalf of CANZ), Morocco, Argentina, and Dominican Republic.

The Committee will continue its work at 10 a.m. tomorrow, 15 December, when it will begin its general discussion of the proposed budget outline for 2002-2003 and continue its consideration of the first programme performance report for the current biennium, as well as the Capital Master Plan.

Fifth Committee - 3 - Press Release GA/AB/3421 39th Meeting (AM) 14 December 2000

Committee Work Programme

The Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary) met this morning to consider a series of issues, under its agenda items entitled �programme budget for the biennium 2000-2001� and �review of efficiency of the administrative and financial functioning of the United Nations�.

Brahimi Report

It first planned to conclude its general discussion of the Report of the Panel on United Nations Peace Operations (the Brahimi report) and other related reports. [For background on these reports, see Press Releases GA/AB/3420 of 13 December, GA/SPD/207 of 6 December, GA/PK/169 of 4 December, and GA/AB/3414 of 27 November.]

Capital Master Plan

Also before the Committee was a report of the Secretary-General on the capital master plan (document A/55/117); a planned and managed renovation programme carried out over a set period of time developed by the Secretariat for the United Nations Headquarters complex in New York.

The report says that the United Nations Headquarters complex, which was largely built during 1949-1952, is a superbly designed and well-constructed landmark. The structures, however, are aging and require major repair and refurbishing. They are extremely energy inefficient and no longer conform to current safety, fire and building codes. The complex is also deficient in terms of meeting modern-day security requirements. A major repair and refurbishment programme is required.

The capital master plan identifies serious deficiencies of the ageing buildings and sets forth possible remedies in a comprehensive, systematic cost- efficient manner, the report says. In the capital master plan, large portions of the Headquarters complex would be vacated and isolated in an organized and planned manner, so that improvements could be made efficiently and without risk to building occupants. To vacate spaces and do the work, adequate swing spaces would have to be identified to accommodate vacated staff.

The report states that there are several funding options and timeframes in which the capital master plan can be carried out. The Secretary-General believes that the most practical and desirable approach is a six-year option, at an estimated cost of $964 million, under which 33 per cent of the Headquarters facility would be under construction at any time. This would require the availability of swing space at an estimated cost of between $62 and $91 million. In addition to having a completely refurbished Headquarters site, there would be substantial energy cost savings of some $164 million over a 25-year period, in comparison with a reactive approach.

On sources of funding for the project, the report says that the Secretary- General recommends that Member States consider amortization of the refurbishment cost of $964 million over a period of 25 years in the form of interest-free loans and/or outside commercial borrowing. He also recommends that he be authorized to continue exploring all possible financing options for meeting the plan's capital cost requirement.

The Secretary-General recommends that the General Assembly endorse in principle his recommendation to implement a six-year capital master plan, approve a special assessment of some $8 million to cover the costs of the initial schematic design for the plan. The General Assembly should also request the Secretary-General to submit, no later than 2001, a comprehensive implementation schedule and financing plan for the capital master plan for approval by the General Assembly.

Also before the Committee was a related report from the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions (ACABQ) (document A/55/7/Add.4). The ACABQ welcomes the Secretary-General�s report and notes that it has made extensive comments previously on this matter, most recently in document A/55/7.

It recommends that the Secretary-General be authorized to proceed with the preparation of the comprehensive design plan and cost analysis, and that an additional $8 million be appropriated for that purpose.

The ACABQ notes that no independent analysis has been undertaken to ensure the reliability of the costing ($964 million) of the six-year plan, and that, in the absence of specific details, it was unable to determine whether there was a fair basis on which to assure the Organization against cost overruns. It asks the Secretary-General to work out the required measures and detail them in his next report.

It notes, in the report, that as well as repairs, the plan covers certain improvements to meeting facilities and public and technological support spaces, and cautions against presentation of unrealistic or overly ambitious plans.

Recalling the prominent role that the host government, New York City and State governments, and private donors played in the original development of the complex, the ACABQ asks for information on the role played by host governments in maintaining United Nations assets in their respective countries, and suggests that the Assembly may wish to encourage such participation in the comprehensive renovation of United Nations Headquarters.

Also before the Committee was an addendum to the Secretary-General�s report (document A/55/117/Add.1), in which the Secretary-General provides a table detailing the participation of host governments and local authorities in maintaining United Nations assets, in response to a request from the ACABQ.

Proposed Programme Budget Outline for 2002-2003

The Committee had before it a report of the Secretary-General containing the proposed preliminary estimates for the budget outline for the biennium outline 2002-2003 (document A/55/186). To establish the preliminary estimate of resources for 2002-2003, the current level of appropriations -- $2,535.7 million -- was taken as the starting point. The preliminary estimate expressed in 2000-2001 prices, amounts to $2,475.4 million. The estimated requirements include full provisions for new posts approved in 2000-2001 amounting to some $13.2 million. One-time costs in 2000-2001 amounting to some $13.4 million would not be required. New resource needs for 2002-2003 are projected at $30.1 million and include implementation of the international arrangements on forests, reinforcement of the United Nations Office at Nairobi, conference servicing, peace-building and electoral assistance.

Regarding provision for special political missions, in the 2000-2001 programme budget the Assembly authorized some $90.4 million to fund missions authorized by the Assembly or the Security Council, the report says. While the full provision of $90.4 million could have been maintained in the outline, in light of the ongoing review of the recommendations of the panel on United Nations peace operations (the Brahimi panel), no provision has been provided for special political missions or for the implementation of the panel's recommendations. Provision has also not been made for the strengthening the security and safety of United Nations system personnel, as a separate comprehensive plan on that issue will be submitted to the Assembly at a later date.

The report says that the programme budget for 2002-2003 will reflect priorities proposed in the medium-term plan for 2002-2005. They include maintenance of international peace and security, promotion of sustained economic growth, sustainable development and the development of Africa. Before adjustment for the non-inclusion of special political missions, the preliminary estimate represents an increase of $30.1 million, or 1.2 per cent over the initial appropriation for 2000-2001. Once account is taken the non-inclusion of the special political missions, the preliminary estimate represents a decrease of some $60.3 million or 2.4 per cent. The contingency fund has been set at 0.75 per cent of the overall level of resources, and the Secretary-General recommends that its level be determined at $18.6 million for 2002-2003.

The Committee also had a related report from the ACABQ before it (document A/55/685), in which that body recommends that an amount be included in the budget outline for special political missions. It therefore recommends that the Assembly adopt a preliminary estimate of $2,515.3 million at the revised 2000-2001 rates for biennium 2002-2003.

The Committee also had before it a report of the Committee for Programme and Coordination (CPC) (document A/55/16) on its fortieth session, which was held from 5 June to 1 July and 21 to 29 August at United Nations Headquarters.

[For the summary of this report, see Press Release GA/AB/3401 of 2 November. The budget outline is a preliminary figure, approved by the General Assembly, which is used by the Secretary-General as a starting point for the development of his next biennium budget proposals.]

First Budget Performance Report for Biennium 2000-2001

In his first performance report on the 2000-2001 budget (document A/55/645 and Corr.1), the Secretary-General states that the level of resources required for the biennium would be some $2.495 billion -- about $40.5 million less than the $2.535 billion originally approved.

The report indicates changes to budget requirements caused by inflation and exchange rate variations and by changes to cost assumptions made when the initial appropriations were calculated. It also accounts for General Assembly and Security Council mandates approved subsequent to the biennium budget appropriation, unforeseen and extraordinary items that could not be deferred to 2001, and certain decisions of policy-making organs.

Additional commitments for expenditure of some $10.98 million have been entered into under the Secretary-General's authority to meet unforeseen and extraordinary expenses, according to the report. Of this amount, some $7.23 million relates to the maintenance of peace and security, $345,000 relates to unforeseen expenses of the International Court of Justice, and $13,000 relates to inter-organizational security measures.

Decisions of policy-making organs account for an increase of some $3.63 million, the report continues. That amount includes some $1.64 million for the Millennium Summit, $1.63 million for HIV/AIDS, the human immunodeficiency virus/acquired immunodeficiency syndrome, $124,000 for strengthening the capacity of the Non-Governmental Organizations Section and $236,900 for the global environment forum/special session of the Governing Council of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP).

Changes in exchange rates account for a decrease in resource requirements of some $66.2 million, the report says. The exchange rate recostings are based on an average of operational rates experienced so far in the biennium, rather than on the rates at the time of recosting. This method was chosen in accordance with General Assembly and ACABQ instructions that whichever of the two methods produced the lowest estimates should be used. The reduced requirements are mainly a result of favourable exchange rate movements of the United States dollar against the Swiss franc and the Austrian schilling.

Higher than anticipated inflation rates account for an increase of some $1.91 million, the report continues. Revised inflation rates are based on promulgated post adjustment multipliers, the latest available information on consumer price indices and actual versus budgeted cost-of-living adjustments. In the case of non-post expenses, the most significant change relates to high inflationary costs of utilities. In New York, the cost of electricity and heat increased significantly, mainly because of deregulation of pricing structures, higher fuel costs worldwide and increased demand in the New York region. By mid- year, billing rates were 54 per cent and 30 per cent higher, respectively, over previous years.

Adjustments to standard costs, totalling some $8.62 million, reflect the net changes in salary standard costs, common staff costs, vacancy and staff assessment rates, the report says. Staff assessment changes result in an increase of about $18.63 million, offset by an equivalent increase in related income from staff assessment. The change reflects the accumulated effect of consolidations of post adjustments made in 1999, 2000 and now proposed for 2001. Consolidating post adjustments into base salary for staff in the Professional and higher categories increases the level of assessable salary for staff assessment purposes.

The report also notes that the Secretary-General has issued estimates of programme budget implications amounting to some $12.2 million in response to draft resolutions considered by the General Assembly's Main Committees. They include revised estimates for safety and security of United Nations personnel ($3.1 million) and for International Court of Justice ($737,300); resource requirements for implementation of the report of the Panel on United Nations Peace Operations ($7.53 million); revised estimates resulting from resolutions and decisions of the Economic and Social Council at its 2000 substantive session ($114,800); and programme budget implications under the Human Rights Inquiry Commission on Palestine ($741,600). A number of reports yet to be submitted to the Assembly (relating to the subvention to the United Nations International Research and Training Institute for the Advancement of Women and the continuation of the operations of a number of missions in 2001) would result in programme budget implications and revised estimates amounting to some $800,000 and $26.9 million, respectively.

An addendum to that report (A/55/645/Add.1) updates the information for December. There has been a notable change in the performance of a number of currencies against the United States dollar, as well as changes in a number of other parametres, the Secretary-General notes. The result of these December changes is a net decrease in requirements of some $53.7 million. The addendum provides further details on the sources of the change.

In a related report from the ACABQ (document A/55/7/Add.5), that body recommends acceptance of the revised requirements from the Secretary-General.

Programme Budget Implications of Drafts Before Assembly

Also before the Committee was a statement submitted by the Secretary-General on the United Nations Verification Mission in Guatemala (document A/C.5/55/24). The Secretary-General explains that, should the General Assembly extend the mandate of that Mission to 31 December 2001, some $16.62 million would be required under section 3, political affairs, of the 2000-2001 programme budget to finance it.

Estimated expenditures for 1 January to 31 December are about $26.46 million against the appropriation of $26.84 million authorized by the Assembly during its fifty-fourth session, resulting in an unutilized balance of $383,500. Taking that amount into consideration, the net additional requirements for 2001 would amount to $16.23 million.

The Secretary-General goes on to say that in December 1999 the Assembly approved a provision of some $90.39 million for special political missions under section 3 of the programme budget for 2000-2001. Some $66.1 million have been used so far, and an unallocated balance of $24.31 million remains. Charges totaling $17.07 million for actions taken by the Security Council regarding good offices, preventive diplomacy and post-conflict peace-building missions have been reported in the first performance report on the programme budget for 2000-2001. Should these changes be approved by the Assembly, the residual uncommitted balance of the original $90.39 million provision for special political missions would amount to some $7.24 million.

Also according to the statement, should the Assembly adopt draft resolution A/55/L.3, some $7.24 million of the estimated additional requirements of $16.23 million for 2001 would be charged against the $90.39 million provision for special political mission. An additional appropriation of $8.99 million for the balance of the requirements would be required under section 3 of the programme budget for 2000-2001.

A related report from the ACABQ was also before the Committee (A/55/680) which provides some comments on the Secretary-General�s report.

The Committee also had before it a statement submitted by the Secretary- General on the critical situation of the International Research and Training Institute for the Advancement of Women (INSTRAW)(document A/C.5/55/26).

According to this document, in the statement of programme budget implications of draft resolution A/C.3/55/L.16/Rev.1, which was approved by the Third Committee on 6 November, that Committee was informed that if the Assembly provided the Institute with financial assistance on a non-recurrent basis, it could do so only through the regular budget. Given the non-reimbursable nature of the proposed financial assistance, the provision of regular budget funds to the Institute would constitute a one-time exception to the relevant provisions of the statute of the Institute, according to which it should be funded by voluntary contributions from various sources.

The Secretary-General reports that despite repeated urgent appeals to Governments, contributions to the INSTRAW Trust Fund have continued to decrease. Without significant additional contributions, the Institute would run out of funds at the beginning of 2001 and would have to be closed. Taking into account expenditure trends in 2000, and assuming that of the amount of outstanding pledges $140,000 will be collected, the balance of resources expected to be available as of January 2001 would amount to some $350,000. That amount excludes a reserve of $200,000, which has been set aside to cover final expenditures and liabilities in the event that the Institute has to close. Based on pledges for 2001, it is estimated that some $90,000 would be received in 2001. Based on past expenditures, and the fact that INSTRAW's Board of Trustees recommended that the Gender Awareness Information and Networking System (GAINS) be given the highest priority, the Institute's requirements would amount to some $1.3 million in 2001, leaving an anticipated shortfall of some $860,000.

The statement goes on to say that given the level of uncertainty inherent in activities funded from voluntary contributions, the Assembly may wish to set the level of financial assistance for the Institute on a non-recurrent basis at $800,000. As it is not anticipated that this amount could be absorbed within the existing provisions of the programme budget for 2000-2001, it would be charged against the contingency fund.

Should the Fifth Committee decide to provide the Institute with financial assistance, it should inform the Assembly that adoption of the draft resolution would give rise to additional requirements of $800,000 under section 9, economic and social affairs, of the programme budget for 2000-2001, on the understanding that it was a one-time exception to the provisions of the Institute's statute.

The Committee also had before it an ACABQ report on the financial assistance to INSTRAW (document A/55/677), in which the Advisory Committee points out that it does not consider the budget of INSTRAW and thus is not in a position to confirm whether the expenditure estimate of $1.3 million for 2001 is realistic. Thus, from a technical point of view, it is unable to confirm the estimate of the Secretary-General. It would be for the General Assembly to indicate the level and the manner in which the assistance should be provided to meet the anticipated shortfall of INSTRAW financing.

Under the circumstances, should the Assembly decide to provide the Institute with financial assistance, such additional requirements as are decided upon by the Assembly, would arise under section 9, economic and social affairs, of the programme budget for the biennium 2000-2001.

Regarding programme budget implications of draft resolution A/55/L.42, the Committee had before it a statement by the Secretary-General (document A/C.5/55/27), according to which, if the draft in question were adopted, an additional appropriation of $191,800 would be required under section 3, political affairs, of the programme budget for the biennium 2000-2001.

The draft requires that adequate support be provided for the efforts of the Secretary-General in Central America. For that purpose, in 2001, resources would be needed for one political affairs officer at the P-4 level and one General Service staff member. Should the Assembly approve some $17.07 million relating to actions taken by the Security Council regarding good offices, preventive diplomacy and post-conflict peace-building and the charge of some $7.24 million representing partial requirements for MINUGUA in 2001, the existing provision for special political missions would be fully utilized. Accordingly, the estimated costs related to the salaries and common staff costs of the above-mentioned staff members would be required in addition to the amount already approved.

In a related report (document A/55/674), the Advisory Committee recommends that should the General Assembly adopt draft resolution A/55/L.42, an additional appropriation of $191,800 be approved under section 3, political affairs, of the programme budget for 2000-2001.

Statements

DURGA P. BHATTARAI (Nepal) said that, as a country involved in peacekeeping for more than four decades, Nepal attached great significance to the United Nations role in peacekeeping. Over that period, Nepal had garnered considerable experience and it welcomed the Brahimi report as timely and useful. Nepal was eager to see many, if not all, recommendations of the report implemented. At the same time, because the implementation of the report was so important, the Committee must have a comprehensive implementation plan. Before such a plan was in place, it would be difficult to accept any ad hoc, partial implementation of the recommendations of the report. He wondered about the ramifications that the report was likely to trigger. The Secretariat had not sufficiently established that the request to increase resources constituted an emergency.

In the past, the Department of Peacekeeping Operations had been able to handle a much larger number of peacekeepers than was currently on the ground, he said. The report raised a number of fundamental questions, including whether the piecemeal strengthening of the Department of Peacekeeping Operations at a time when other departments were being slashed would alter the balance of the Organization. Would many positions be available for troop-contributing countries? Understanding the complex issues would take time. He would appreciate the Secretariat�s enlightenment. A reasonable and rational approach must be followed to develop consensus. That would be possible with a comprehensive implementation plan. The Committee required a better understanding before acting on report.

RAFAEL DAUSA CESPEDES (Cuba) said that he was concerned that throughout the process of considering some reports, the rules and procedures of the General Assembly had not always been respected. At a time when it was a principle that functions of the various organs must be respected, some were interested in sidestepping procedures and imposing their own political interests. The introduction of budget implications for the implementation of the Brahimi report was a violation of rule 153. In addition, the ACABQ�s consideration of those proposals without prior decision by the General Assembly was another violation of the rules. He hoped that the next stage of consideration would be carried on strictly in accordance with established procedures.

The Secretary-General had initially proposed to convene a high-level panel to study United Nations activities in peace and security and to draw up a series of recommendations on those activities, he said. Budgetary matters were within the competence of the Fifth Committee and the ACABQ. The General Assembly had not approved human or financial resources for the panel. He would appreciate as much information as possible on how the expenditures for the panel had been met. Many of the recommendations started from the assumption that the United Nations faced serious difficulties in discharging its responsibilities and that urgent action was needed. That assumption changed the priorities of the United Nations vis-a- vis other urgent issues related to social and economic development. Development and peace were inseparable. It was unacceptable that implementation of the Brahimi panel recommendations would impact the already meager resources allocated to development. He questioned the request for an additional $22.2 million for a number of reasons, he said. In December 1999, under the support account, 67 additional posts had been provided for the Department. In May 2000, two new posts were provided for the training unit. The General Assembly, in resolution 243, approved 469 additional posts to be financed from the support account. Having analysed the situation, he believed that there were real grounds for questioning the emergency request.

When peacekeeping was at its height of activity in the 1990s, the Department of Peacekeeping Operations had only 407 posts, he said. Following lengthy debate in the Special Committee, the result was a delicate balance of views. That balance should not be disrupted. Regarding the comprehensive review of all elements of the peacekeeping, and the request for emergency resources pending that review, the recommendations of the Special Committee must be followed. He continued to question efforts to make the Department of Peacekeeping Operations a mini secretariat, which would duplicate the functions of existing bodies. He was against allocating resources for that purpose. On the proposal to redeploy posts, he was not in favor of the recommendation that would reduce the role of the Department of Public Information. Existing structures fully met the need for information and analysis. What was still lacking, however, was political will. There was no justification for the role to be given to High Commissioner for Human Rights. He did not support that request. He also felt that it was not necessary to increase posts for the electoral assistance unit.

BABOUCARR-BLAISE ISMAILA JAGNE (Gambia) welcomed the fact that since the publication of the Brahimi report, the ACABQ had acted promptly. Agreeing with some ACABQ observations, he still believed that an emergency was an emergency and should be treated as such. Most of the criticism of the United Nations was in the area of peacekeeping, which was one of the most difficult problems to deal with. The main idea of the Brahimi report was to address that problem. In the debate on the matter, questions were being raised, and clarifications were being sought on many issues. However, they might complicate the matter even further.

The panel could not have been clearer on the need for additional resources for the Department of Peacekeeping Operations, for planning and support of peacekeeping operations, he continued. There was no question that the Department was grossly understaffed and overburdened. It was not surprising that it took so long to deploy major missions. He could not agree more that the Secretary-General should have some flexibility and financial resources to respond to emergencies, to increase the capacity of the Secretariat to react immediately to unforeseen demands.

He went on to say that peacekeeping should be treated as a core activity of the United Nations, and be financed through the regular budget of the Organization. The Advisory Committee had approved a significant number of posts, and he hoped that the Secretariat would fill those posts promptly, taking into account the principle of equitable geographical representation. He understood concerns regarding development and peacekeeping. However, one was not possible without the other.

RON ADAM (Israel) said that both the report of the panel and its financial implications should be considered in the most serious manner. His country attached great importance to United Nations peacekeeping operations and fully agreed with the observations of the Special Committee on Peacekeeping Operations on the Brahimi report and by the Secretary-General in his report on the work of the Organization.

The Secretary-General had called attention to several lessons which could be useful for future peacekeeping missions, he continued, including the importance of joint efforts by Member States and the Secretariat to strengthen peacekeeping, the need to understand clearly whether peacekeeping was needed in a specific situation, the importance of providing adequate resources for mission needs and the need for a credible deterrent capacity. The requirement to improve information flows and the need for more effective analysis of information had also been emphasized.

The Secretary-General in a 1990 report on United Nations peacekeeping had said that no operation could be established without a broad consensus within the international community. It was the Security Council�s responsibility to ensure that operations were given a clear mandate, which was accepted by the parties concerned and practicable in the situation on the ground. Israel shared that view. Therefore, Israel agreed with the need to strengthen and broaden the Department of Peacekeeping Operations, as suggested by the panel and the ACABQ. It strongly supported further detailed discussion on the subject in the framework of both the current budget and the next one.

SUN MINQIN (China) said that the Special Committee on Peacekeeping Operations had conducted heated discussions and put forward its report on the recommendations of the Brahimi panel. The ACABQ had also held discussions on the report and the Fifth Committee should respect the proposals of that body. Strengthening the capacity of peacekeeping operations was an urgent task that called for political will from all parties. The success of the United Nations peacekeeping operations however, was dependent not only on the support of Member States but also on provision of sufficient resources. She had noted that the General Assembly had already approved 469 posts to be funded from the support account. In his report, the Secretary-General had proposed an increase of 35 posts from the regular budget. She hoped that the Secretariat could provide a written explanation on the structure of peacekeeping forces at present, including the classifications of peacekeeping personnel and their nationalities. Information on the structure and operation of the Department of Peacekeeping Operations would allow her to better participate in the discussions.

AIZAZ AHMAD CHAUDHRY (Pakistan) said that his country had been a consistent contributor to United Nations peacekeeping operations. He noted with disappointment that rule 153 of the rules and procedures of the General Assembly had not been followed. The Secretariat must comply with established rules of procedure.

While he welcomed the ACABQ�s report, he said that the number of posts it recommended was excessive and warranted closer scrutiny. The Secretary-General had described his estimates as an emergency request. He would appreciate clarification from the Secretariat on the justification for such a large number of posts if there was indeed no emergency. The Brahimi report had dwelt on the reasons why the United Nations had not been able to effectively respond in the past. One reason was lack of advance planning. What had happened recently in Sierra Leone was a serious reminder of that fact. The problems of United Nations peacekeeping were not only the result of logistics. He was surprised that the ACABQ did not recommend the additional post of Assistant Secretary-General for the Civilian Police Unit. Additional posts for logistics should await the comprehensive review.

Peace and development were complementary and should be accorded equal priority, he continued. Troop-contributing countries should be properly represented in the Department of Peacekeeping Operations. He was concerned about the growing amounts owed to troop-contributing countries. He hoped that the impending comprehensive review would address that issue.

GUSTAVO PAREDES (Colombia), speaking on behalf of the Rio Group, agreed with the position expressed by the Group of 77 and China. When the report was introduced in the Committee, the Rio Group had noted the importance of considering the recommendations with the view to making peacekeeping more efficient. The Rio Group was planning to participate constructively in the work of the Committee.

It was important to inject new financial and human resources into peacekeeping, he continued, and it was fundamental to abide with the recommendations of the ACABQ, and the Special Committee on Peacekeeping Operations. Having participated in the discussion in the Special and Fourth Committees, his delegation understood that peacekeeping was a long-term commitment.

He went on to support the authorization of 95 additional posts recommended by the Advisory Committee. Regarding the 150 posts that had been deferred pending a comprehensive review, the Group believed that the emergency package was just the first step in a thorough reform process. The complexity of the problem would require further study of the proposals. He hoped that the political will shown at this stage would also prevail in the future. Consensus in the competent political bodies was important, and the Rio Group was willing to work towards consensus in the future.

It was necessary to work gradually to put life into the political consensus, he said. The implementation of the recommendations would improve the credibility of the Organization, allowing it to effectively address the challenges before it.

RIAZ HAMIDULLAH (Bangladesh) said that peacekeeping formed an important activity of the Organization, and he welcomed the Brahimi report. At the point of the implementation of the proposals, a number of questions arose. Nigeria, speaking on behalf of the Group of 77 and China, had underlined some important matters which should be kept in mind. All issues should be looked at comprehensively, from a wider perspective.

He had some questions regarding allocations for electoral assistance and for public information, he said. Effective implementation of recommendations on strengthening the Department of Peacekeeping Operations would require additional resources. Serious commitment could not be made while maintaining a cap on the budget. As a major troop contributor, Bangladesh was committed to peace and security. He was a little surprised that the recommendations before the Committee ignored the rates of troops costs within the context of the comprehensive review.

In conclusion, he said that increased resources needed for implementation of the recommendations arising out of the Brahimi report should not be at the expense of funds for development. The biggest problem was addressing the roots of conflict, and a long-term development approach was important.

ABDELMALEK BOUHEDDOU (Algeria) said that he was fully satisfied with most of the ACABQ�s recommendations on the Secretary-General�s report. The Secretary- General�s proposals on the implementation of the first phase were fully justified and deserved full support. However, he understood several of the concerns of troop-contributing countries. He was concerned about the staffing of peacekeeping operations. Most of the personnel involved in peacekeeping operations were from the countries of the South, and not from the developed countries of the North. Given the level of training available to developed countries, that situation was unacceptable because it deprived the operations of considerable support.

He also raised the question of working languages. Algeria was astonished that the non-mastery of a working language was a handicap for serving in a peacekeeping operation. The United Nations had given six languages official status and had made English and French the two working languages of the Organization. By making knowledge of English a central condition for participation in a peacekeeping mission, the Department of Peacekeeping Operations was not functioning in line with the United Nations policy of multilingualism. A large number of staff were being excluded.

JEAN-PIERRE HALBWACHS, Assistant Secretary-General for Programme Planning, Budget and Accounts and the United Nations Controller, said that two major issues had been raised in the Committee. One was the procedure for submitting the paper on resource requirements and the other was on the issue of whether such resources needs were of an emergency nature. A third issue, which he wished to address, related to the timing of the comprehensive report and its relationship with the budget for the next biennium. On the issue of procedure, the Secretary-General, on his own authority as Chief Executive Officer, had established the panel, which was funded from voluntary contributions. The panel submitted its recommendations, and the Secretary-General passed them to the General Assembly and the Security Council. At the same time, the Secretary-General issued a report on implementation of the panel�s recommendations. There were recommendations that if implemented would require additional resources. The discussion on the implementation of the recommendations could not take place in a vacuum. He did not believe that any of the rules of procedure had been violated.

Regarding the emergency nature of the requests, the emergency related only to the resources requested from the support account, he said. That went back to the recommendations contained in the Brahimi panel report. The report also sought resources for other services, but not on an emergency basis. There was a mandate to consider the recommendations of the panel. That mandate stemmed from the Millenium Declaration. In that Declaration, heads of State expressed their resolve to make the Organization more effective by giving it the needed resources. The heads of State also asked that the Brahimi report be considered expeditiously. The Secretary-General thought it was incumbent on him to provide a plan and to indicate the resources required. On the question of the timing of the comprehensive review, he said that the results of that review would not be ready in time for submission in the support account report. It would be issued as a separate document and would be ready when the General Assembly considered the programme budget for 2002-2003 next fall.

Ms. SUN (China) thanked Mr. Halbwachs for the information he had provided and added that she had asked for written information on the present structure of the Department of Peacekeeping Operations and the posts and nationalities of its staff, as well as on adjustments made by the ACABQ.

Mr. DAUSA CESPEDES (Cuba) also thanked the Secretariat for the explanations provided. He only wanted to talk about the problem of procedure, which he had already mentioned. Above all, it was the question of maintaining the credibility and usefulness of the Special Committee, which had been seriously placed in doubt. It was the body mandated to study peacekeeping in all its aspects. He also requested the list of voluntary contributions used to finance the activities of the Brahimi panel.

Mr. HALBWACHS said that the current structure of the Department of Peacekeeping Operations could be found in the proposed budget for 2000-2001. The future proposed structure was in one of the documents before the Committee now. The information asked for by China would be provided to that delegation. As for the funding of the Brahimi panel, several people had willed their money for peace and security. Those amounts were available at the discretion of the Secretary- General.

When the Committee turned to the capital master plan, JOSEPH CONNOR, Under- Secretary-General for Management, introduced the report of the Secretary-General before the Committee. He said that, in response to a request by the Advisory Committee, a summary of information on the participation of host governments and local authorities in maintaining the United Nations assets was being presented to the Committee in document A/55/117/Add.1, which was available today.

In 1998-1999, a team of engineers and architects had examined the United Nations Headquarters complex, he continued. What they had found was not really a surprise: the buildings had deteriorated severely, and maintenance could no longer keep pace. Also, codes and standards had risen since the buildings were built. The buildings were very energy inefficient.

A major refurbishment and repair programme was inevitable, he said. The question, of course, was how to go about it. Having asked for estimates from experts to project the cost of continuing making repairs, the Organization found out that over a 25-year period, using a reactive approach, the United Nations would spend almost $1.2 billion without being able to remedy some of the most significant problems. Even worse, over the same period, almost half a billion dollars would be spent on energy -- much of it wasted.

Instead, the Secretariat was proposing another course of action, which was much more far-sighted and sensible, he said. A concentrated, planned and managed refurbishment programme was being proposed �- a Capital Master Plan. Each building would be brought to modern standards of fire safety, energy efficiency and accessibility. That work could be completed in six years, at an estimated cost of $964 million. The upgrades would reduce the energy consumption by one- third. To perform construction work, it would be necessary to work together to match meeting schedules and the construction timetable. It would be also necessary to find temporary office space to accommodate about 1,000 staff during the construction period.

The plan would also create an opportunity to make some improvements at a reasonable cost, he said. Among them was the creation of three new mid-sized conference rooms, in addition to creating a new full-sized conference room above the multi-purpose presentation space in the Conference Building. He took note of the comments of the Advisory Committee, saying that the plans for improvements and expansion would be realistic, and not overly ambitious.

To pay for all that, several approaches were possible, he continued. One was a special assessment: �to pay as we go�. Another approach was to borrow the money and repay it over the 25-year period of the improvements. Member States may wish to offer interest-free loans today. He believed that was the best approach. If those loans were not sufficient to cover the full capital requirement, other ways of raising funds had been investigated. With the approval of Member States, the Organization could issue quasi-sovereign bonds similar to the bonds issued by the World Bank. A very strict mechanism would be required, which was explained in the report. If the Member States were able to provide interest-free loans for half of the cost of the Plan, the Organization could borrow the remainder through a commercial bond offering. The total cost of construction, energy and interest would still be less than the reactive approach.

He believed that the cost estimates presented today were realistic, he said. It was necessary to develop a detailed implementation plan, which would require an initial provision of $8 million. The next stage would include the schematic design phase. During the implementation planning phase, an Advisory Group would be established to further develop the financing possibilities.

CONRAD S.M. MSELLE, Chairman of the ACABQ, said that the ACABQ�s report was brief. It would provide a detailed review and submit its recommendations to the General Assembly after the Secretary-General had reported to the Assembly at its fifty-sixth session. The recommendations in the ACABQ were preliminary, therefore. The ACABQ was recommending that the Secretary-General be provided with the means to carry out the schematic design and to present to the General Assembly options for financing of the plan. Currently, the only thing that the Fifth Committee might wish to do was take note of the Secretary-General�s report and to endorse the comments and recommendations of the ACABQ. In doing so, the Assembly would affirm the Secretary-General�s statement that a need existed to address the problems he had identified. It would also appropriate some $8 million under section 31 of the programme budget for 2000-2001. The General Assembly would also authorize the Secretary-General to report to it at its fifty-sixth session on the results of the process.

LOIPA SANCHEZ LORENZO (Cuba) asked for information on host country involvement in similar projects in other cities.

ABDOU AL-MOULA NAKKARI (Syria) said that there were several options for dealing with difficulties facing the Organization. He required additional information on the concept mentioned by the Under Secretary-General as one of the solutions. Paragraph 5 of the ACABQ�s report said that the ACABQ was unable to ascertain that the assumptions used were a fair basis on which to assure that the Organization was protected against cost overruns. He asked the Under Secretary- General to provide further information on that. In paragraph 7 of the report, the ACABQ cautioned against unrealistic or overly ambitious plans. What did it mean by that reference?

JOHN ORR (Canada) wanted to know how far down the road such a decision would take the Committee. Regarding the $8 million, if such a decision were made now, would they be locked into a specific type of project? Would that mean that the Committee would not look into other options? The initial document given by the Secretary-General said that one option was refurbishment. Were there other options? If $8 million was spent, and a suitable financing arrangement was not obtained, did that mean that the money was wasted? The Committee was still in the information-gathering stage, and he would appreciate clarification.

Mr. CONNOR said that there was no question that the Organization would be embarking on a major activity for which there was no perfect solution. He had tried to give the membership an overview of how that might develop. Host country arrangements differed. Collectively, host countries provided enormous support for the Organization. The options on financing were numerous. The one rule he was trying to follow was �safety first�. Cash must be available at the outset. He had proposed a number of financing options, including lump sum options and a series of assessments. He also suggested a return to the arrangement when the building was erected, in which one Member State delivered a check for the entire cost on a non-interest basis. Most attention would be directed to another option, the sale of bonds to the public. That was a serious matter. He had suggested a lock-box approach. It was tried and tested. While the plan involved some modest expansion, the focus was overwhelmingly on refurbishment.

As the Committee turned to the programme budget for 2000-2001, United Nations Controller, JEAN-PIERRE HALBWACHS, introduced the first performance report for the current biennium. He said that the effect of the change in parameters as of December had resulted in decreased net requirements of $53.7 million. The performance report took into account variations in the rates of inflation and exchange, as well as the standards assumed in the calculation of the initial appropriations. The report also took into account the additional mandates that the General Assembly and the Security Council had approved after the appropriation of the programme budget, unforeseen and extraordinary items that could not be deferred to the second year of the biennium, and decisions of policy-making organs.

As he introduced the related report of the ACABQ, Mr. MSELLE made a correction: in annex 4 to report A/55/7/Add.5, the footnote should read A/C.5/55/24. The Advisory Committee recommended approval of the revised requirements of $2.5 billion under the expenditure sections and $380.39 million under the income sections, resulting in the net revised requirements of some $2.12 billion, an amount which was some $53.74 million less than the initial appropriation. Some potential additional requirements were being considered by the Fifth Committee, for example those related to security coordination services.

KARLA SAMAYO (Guatemala) said that extension of the United Nations Verification Mission in Guatemala (MINUGUA) was essential to the implementation of the peace agreements in her country. The United Nations presence in Guatemala was a success, and she hoped that it would continue to be successful in the future.

Mr. NAKKARI (Syria), referring to high vacancy rates in the Economic Commission in Africa (ECA), said that the vacancies had been announced in international and regional publications. He asked for clarification on the procedures to fill those posts. He was still awaiting information on the candidates submitted to review bodies in the first quarter of 2001. What had the Secretariat done to date to fill those posts? What were the nationalities of the candidates? Although the reclassification of three posts at the centre might be wise, he would need greater detail in that respect. Regarding redeployment of funds under section 26, public information, for the implementation of the radio pilot project, had that had an impact general operating expenses?

He said that the recruitment procedures for Nairobi had been aimed at ensuring Nairobi�s full functioning as an autonomous conference centre. All posts for interpretation and translation were supposed to be filled by the beginning of 2001. He had at least expected a mention of those posts. Had they been filled?

Mr. ORR (Canada) asked if a written update of annex 1 of the ACABQ�s report would be possible before finalizing the discussion. It would be helpful to know what budget level they were approving.

WARREN SACH, Director of the Programme Planning and Budget Division, said that there had historically been a high vacancy rate in the ECA, as well as high levels of turnover. Because of the critical situation, special effort had been made by the Office of Human Resources Management to accelerate recruitment rates during the current biennium. There was a minimum recruitment period, however. A task force had been established between the Office and the ECA. Staff were assigned to classify jobs, prepare vacancy notices and launch advertising campaigns. The fruits of that effort would be seen in 2001 when the selected staff came on board. He did not have information on nationalities. Regarding interpreters at Nairobi, there were enough resources to have a full team available at least for one calendar year. Arrangements had been moving forward between the Department of General Assembly Affairs and the Director in Nairobi to get the service functioning. The teams were not yet in place. It required identification of qualified individuals willing to take the assignment.

On the question of redeployment of funds under public information, he said that the Secretary-General had been asked to ensure that the radio pilot project would be undertaken as soon as possible, utilizing extra-budgetary funds to the fullest extent available and other redeployable resources, if possible.

Mr. NAKKARI (Syria) thanked Mr. Sach for his answers. However, he still had a question about Nairobi. The posts there should have been filled by the start of 2001, and he had expected that the related expenses would have been included in the first performance report. As he did not see them there, he wanted to continue with that discussion in the informal consultations.

The Committee then turned to the programme budget implications of several draft resolution before the Assembly.

Mr. MSELLE introduced the ACABQ reports on the draft resolutions on United Nations Verification Mission in Guatemala (MINUGUA), the situation in Central America, and on the critical situation of International Research and Training Institute for the Advancement of Women (INSTRAW).

MAGNUS LENEFORS (Sweden), speaking on behalf of the European Union and associated States, said that he agreed with the proposed decisions on MINUGUA and Central America. He had some questions concerning INSTRAW, however. The Union wanted to make sure that INSTRAW continued its work, but he felt that there were several unclear matters concerning the true financial needs for the Institute. He wanted to ask for brief informal consultations to clarify those matters.

THOMAS A. REPASCH (United States) said that he also had no issues with statements of programme budget implication concerning MINUGUA and the Central American peace process. With regard to INSTRAW, he had some questions, and he supported the request of the European Union for informal consultations. The work pursued by INSTRAW was important to his delegation, and he was concerned at the lack of financial support for the Institute. However, the documents before the Committee placed it in an unusual situation. The situation was unclear, and the ACABQ report was vague. He wondered how the Committee could take decisive action, given the information before it.

More information should be provided, including the current status of pledges for the Institute. He also wanted to know what the amount requested would be used for. Had the Institute established accountability mechanisms to ensure that the money was used effectively?

According to the report of the Advisory Committee, the ACABQ was not in a position to ascertain the financial situation of the Institute, and that required further clarification, he continued. The annual report of INSTRAW activities referred to last year�s resolution, which requested the Secretary-General to provide a number of services to the Institute, including in setting up the new structure. He would like to know what the status of those requests was. Also, the report of INSTRAW indicated that the Institute had support from its partners to ensure that project gains could be efficiently achieved. He wondered if that statement was true.

Mr. NAKKARI (Syria) welcomed all three proposed decisions. He hoped they would be approved as soon as possible, including the one on INSTRAW. As for the proposal to hold informal consultations on the Institute, he thought that the Committee was to act on that body today. Also, he thought that the issue of provision of documentation in all official languages had been resolved, and he regretted that he had to return to that issue. He expected the three draft decisions to be provided in all the languages before they were adopted.

As for INSTRAW, there was a true crisis in the Institute. Donations were $1.9 million in 1999, and in 2000 they were about $620,000. There was a severe decline in donations, for in 2001 they so far amounted to about $350,000. The Institute�s important role was always appreciated at the United Nations. There was a crisis of credibility, for on the one hand Member States spoke about the equality of women and gender issues, and on the other, there was a lack of support for INSTRAW.

The requested amount of $800,000, added to the pledged donations, would amount to about $1.2 million, he said. If the General Assembly approved the proposed amount, the total would still be less than the total amount available to the Institute in 1999. The money would be charged to the emergency fund, and he hoped that would not arouse sensitivities, as there were always lengthy discussions when that was done. He hoped there would be no protracted debate on INSTRAW today.

HASSAN MOHAMMED HASSAN (Nigeria), speaking on behalf of the �Group of 77� developing nations and China, expressed concern on the financial situation of INSTRAW. Available funding for 2001 was limited, putting at risk the existence of the only United Nations body specializing in research and training for women. The lack of resources in 2001 stemmed from a long history of problems that had discouraged donors from contributing to the fund. They were at a critical stage in the history not only of INSTRAW, but also of the advancement of women. Unless immediate action were taken, they were likely to face the closing down of the Institute. The issue could be concluded without going into informal consultations. He urged all delegations to display a sense of understanding on the issue to enable them to conclude the item.

Mr. PAREDES (Colombia) said that the Rio Group endorsed the statement of the Group of 77 and China. He would have liked a decision without going into informal consultations. A decision must be taken. The Rio Group echoed the view of the Group that informal consultations should not be used to close down the discussion.

HENRY FOX (Australia), also speaking on behalf of Canada and New Zealand, said that he did not wish to see the other two items delayed. He wondered if the decisions on Central America and MINUGUA could be adopted to expedite the work of the plenary. OMAR KADIRI (Morocco) also endorsed the statement of the Group. For several years INSTRAW had seen its budgetary resources reduced. The chronic financial crisis had a negative impact on the capacity of the Institute to reach its objectives. He wanted to see the necessary assistance provided to the Institute for 2001.

GUILLERMO KENDALL (Argentina) supported the proposal by Australia that action be taken on MINUGAU and Central America.

Mr. LENEFORS (Sweden) said that Australia�s proposal was excellent. His intention was not to make it difficult for INSTRAW next year. On the contrary, he wanted to put it on a sound financial basis so that it could continue.

The Vice Chairman then asked the Committee if it was ready to take action on the proposed decisions.

Mr. NAKKARI (Syria) said that in his previous statement he was clear that he had no objection to the three drafts. However, there were some procedures to be respected. Draft resolutions and decisions must be distributed in the six officials languages before they were adopted. He insisted that they be in the six official languages. He did not see where the problem was in translating documents. All three drafts ought to be adopted today. However, the Secretariat must provide any draft decision or resolution in all six official languages.

JOSEPH ACAKPO-SATCHIVI, Secretary of the Committee, said that the Secretariat had no intention of violating any rules of procedure. The proposed decision had been taken word-for-word from the report of the ACABQ, which had been distributed in six official languages. It would be a waste of time to reissue the same paragraph in six languages before action was taken. It would take several days. The representative of Syria could read the text in Arabic in the ACABQ report.

JULIA TAVARES DE ALVAREZ (Dominican Republic) said that when the Third Committee�s report containing six drafts on the advancement of women was introduced in the plenary, her delegation had drawn attention of the Secretariat to the fact that one of the texts (the one on INSTRAW) had not been approved by the Fifth Committee. However, according to the rules of procedure, no text could be taken up in the plenary without recommendations on its financial implications. When her delegation noticed that the rule was being sidestepped, she approached the Secretary of the General Assembly, who took appropriate steps to correct the situation.

The instructions of the Foreign Ministry of her country had been that all the resolutions on the advancement of women should be taken together, she said. She had agreed to only five texts being presented in the plenary, provided the President of the Assembly made a statement in that regard. That was done, but the remaining resolution should be acted upon in the Fifth Committee first. Not much time was left, and she urged that the Committee do what the President of the General Assembly had requested. Action on INSTRAW draft must be taken before the plenary suspended.

Mr. NAKKARI (Syria) said that the Secretary should know limits of courtesy when speaking to delegates in their official capacity. When calling for implementation of the rules, he had not expected such terminology as �waste of time�. Secretariat officials should not make any judgements. He wanted to make an official complaint about the discourteous words used by the Secretary. No one could tell him that he was wrong in making his request. The issue was not whether the drafts were taken from the ACABQ report. Commitments arose out of the draft and merely quoting the report would not resolve the issue. He insisted on implementation of the rule on the necessity of translation into all official languages. The translation of the documents would take several days, he had been told, but the Brahimi report had been translated in two days �- Saturday and Sunday. All he was asking for was for three short texts to be translated.

HAE-YUN PARK (Republic of Korea), Acting Chairman of the Committee, said it was the Secretariat�s duty to explain the situation and respond to questions from Member States.

Mr. NAKKARI (Syria) said that he did not deny the Secretariat�s right to make explanations. When providing them, though, the Secretary should not infringe on sovereign rights of States. Words like �waste of time� should not be used. He utterly rejected such behaviour on behalf of the Secretary, who should behave within the boundaries of courtesy.

The Secretary then made an announcement on behalf of the Coordinator regarding the evening meeting. The meeting was then adjourned.

* *** *

United Nations