Statement by Anne W. Patterson, Deputy United States Representative to the United Nations, On Agenda Item 124: Proposed program budget for the biennium 2006-2007, in the Fifth Committee, October 27, 2005 
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 
The United States joins other members in expressing appreciation to the Secretary-General for introducing his proposed budget for 2006-2007 to the Fifth Committee. We would also like to express our appreciation to the members of the Secretariat, including Under-Secretary-General Christopher Burnham and Controller Warren Sach and their staff members who have produced the budget estimates for our consideration. 
In addition, we would like to thank Acting Chairman Rajat Saha for introducing the ACABQ <http://www.un.org/docs/acabq/ http://www.un.org/docs/acabq/> report to the Committee and Vice Chairman Dae-jong Yoo for presenting the report prepared for the 45th session of the Committee for Program and Coordination. 
Distinguished colleagues, it is a special pleasure for me to participate here and speak before you today. The work of the Fifth Committee embodies some of the most important work done here at the United Nations given that it is entrusted with the responsibilities for administration and budgetary matters. The work we do here in this Committee is vital if we are to accomplish our mutually shared objective of reforming the United Nations to make it stronger, more efficient, transparent and accountable to member states. I would like to take a few moments to present the U.S. position on the UN Budget.
As laid out in the Outcome Document <http://www.un.org/summit2005/documents.html http://www.un.org/summit2005/documents.html> signed by our respective heads of state last month, our leaders acknowledged the need for the UN to take a close look at the many mandates originating from resolutions approved by the General Assembly over the years to determine whether the activities are effective in carrying out their stated goals, and whether or not there are possible ways to merge or streamline certain activities to avoid duplication and reduce waste. It is critical that we move forward quickly in this regard and that the budget includes the cost of the important management reforms approved in the Outcome Document. This cannot wait another biennium. 
The Unitary United Nations: 
A Tool to Assist the UN Membership in Analyzing the UN Budget 
Before discussing specific budgetary issues, I would like to set the stage if you will by discussing some broader concepts that would provide us with a principled rule of decision to prune the thicket of UN governing bodies. As has been discussed before, we believe that the concept of a unitary UN provides a useful analytic framework for helping us grapple with the difficult decisions we make on how best to give coherence and rationality to a UN system. The unitary United Nations provides us with a basis to deal with the UN system on both budgetary and policy grounds. We need to see how all functions and programs in the UN system relate to each other, and more importantly, the UN's core purposes. It is important to do so because we have seen over the years a Byzantine patchwork of activities, committees and institutional entities proliferate and evolve which bear little relation to their original purpose. Duplication, overlap and inefficiencies have too often been the expensive result of a lack of coordination in program planning and implementation.
We believe there is a strong need for some central coordinating mechanism which would enable member governments to share information beforehand in order to coordinate and make consistent its policies on issues affecting each of the UN system agencies. Let me be clear that this is not a concept that calls for central control over the activities of all agencies. We fully recognize that many of our substantive interests are best served, fostered, and protected by pluralism within the UN system. What we need, though, is a mechanism to serve as an informational and policy clearinghouse whose principal objective is to beget consistency in our approach to the myriad of problematic issues confronting the UN system today. 
In implementing this concept, it is important for member states, particularly major contributors, to be much more assertive in guiding and setting the policy agendas of the agencies. It is troubling to accept the notion that the agency Secretariats set the policy agenda for organizations, and not member states. Too often coordination difficulties and lack of agency effectiveness are directly attributable to the willingness of the Member States over time to let the agencies essentially do what they want. 
We must change this culture. As President Bush remarked <05gwb0914.htm>, the process of reform begins with members taking our responsibilities seriously. Governments, especially major contributors, need to exercise forcefully their collective voices in providing policy direction to the agencies. This will require internal coordination among the interested parties so that once agreement on the position is established, it is reflected and remains consistent in all venues of the UN system where the issue may be raised. While we are open to suggestions on how to best facilitate this coordination, we would like to propose the establishment of a consultative mechanism here in New York which would bring relevant parties together. The organization of this mechanism could be structured in ways to take account also of the special interests that members may have in its overall work. 
Such a consultative mechanism would greatly help us as member states assist the Secretariat in the mandate review process agreed to in the Outcome Document. Establishing a framework that first allows us to define what we want agencies to accomplish, will make it easier in helping us to decide whether it makes sense for the UN to continue each activity. Where the UN's role is relevant and the activity is efficient and serves a purpose, then we should continue it. On the other hand, we should put an end to activities that are duplicative or that cannot be justified by reasonable standards of efficiency and effectiveness. In cases where the UN does not have a competitive advantage, we should defer to other organizations. Resources freed through this process should be allocated to activities that are deemed relevant, effective, and non-duplicative. In some cases, it may be necessary to add to agency responsibilities, where they must grow to respond to new and emerging developments. The key linchpin, though, is to have a consultative mechanism in place to add coherence and consistency.
Specific Budget Proposals 
Applying this concept of a unitary UN to the specifics of the current budget, we can observe already several specific instances where we see duplication or the U.S. believes we can achieve increases in efficiency through rationalizing certain agencies and functions. Absent the inclusion of a thorough mandate review and other management reforms being implemented, the U.S. will find it very difficult to reach agreement on the 2006-2007 budget. Let me now delve into some specifics as they relate to budgetary matters as we chart a course forward for achieving our Secretary's goal of launching a lasting revolution of reform.
Increasing the Efficiency of the UN Public Information Function 
The worldwide network of UN Information Centers <http://www.un.org/aroundworld/unics/index.html http://www.un.org/aroundworld/unics/index.html> (UNICs) has long been the subject of controversy and a target of reform. While we commend the consolidation effort in Europe that established a single center in Brussels for Western Europe several years ago, the streamlining effort must continue beyond Europe. Given the location of the UN's headquarters, we should consider the justification to continue spending resources for UN Information Center activities in North America. We should also agree to consolidate UNICs in other regions to the maximum extent feasible. The UN should also fully exploit technological advances that would make public information functions more efficient and effective. Resources saved from such measures could be used to strengthen UN public information activities in other areas.
Reduce the Cost, Frequency and Duration of Conferences and Meetings 
The number of scheduled meetings, which stood at a staggering 15,484 during the last biennium, can and should be reduced by at least five percent initially, producing more than $4 million to use on higher priorities. UN meetings must start and end on time, and there must be a realistic assessment of the frequency and duration of meetings needed to accomplish goals. Inter-sessional meetings of main or subordinate bodies should be funded through voluntary contributions, or not be held at all. There are more than 300 subordinate or subsidiary bodies reporting to either the GA or ECOSOC; the mandates for meetings of these bodies need to be scrutinized to identify duplication and ensure relevance. We also recommend that the UN's marginally useful Committee on Conferences be eliminated, thereby saving additional thousands of dollars that could be applied to higher priorities. In addition, the UN Secretariat must exploit technological advances to reduce the number and cost of meetings.
Authority and Flexibility to Redeploy Posts 
In December 2003, the UN General Assembly granted the Secretary-General authority to redeploy up to 50 posts from lower to higher priority areas, meaning he can move posts within existing departments or between existing departments, or from existing departments to new units, bureaus or departments as circumstances warrant. This was an important first step towards expanding flexibilities to permit the strategic realignment and rationalization of budgetary and human resources. For reasons that remain unclear, the Secretary-General has not fully used this authority, which expires in any event in December. The Secretary-General should have the same authority that a CEO of any large organization possesses to run an efficient operation. Therefore, we propose to give the Secretary-General broad authority to redeploy posts and resources from lower to higher priority areas in the 2006-2007 budget. Greater reliance on outsourcing to the private sector for services such as translation or photocopying should also be implemented. More broadly, we ask the Secretariat to quantify savings made when proposing outputs for deletion. The budget proposes to lift the freeze on GS hiring. This should be extended and not lifted until critical reforms are actually in place. 
Reducing excessive travel allowances 
Delegates representing member states and certain expert members of UN bodies receive an additional subsistence allowance-40 percent more than the amount given to senior UN officials traveling to the same meetings. Aside from causing a disparity that is resented by UN officials, the practice is a waste of UN resources that should be used for higher priorities. Based on estimates provided two years ago, this correction would free up several million dollars. The General Assembly should encourage the use of videoconferencing and other communication technology to the maximum extent possible. The ACABQ has noted particular concerns in this regard with the UN Office in Geneva, International Civil Service Commission <http://icsc.un.org/ http://icsc.un.org/>, and the Joint Inspection Unit <http://www.unsystem.org/jiu/ http://www.unsystem.org/jiu/>.
Phasing Out the UN International Research and Training Institute for the Advancement of Women 
The UN's International Research and Training Institute for the Advancement of Women <http://www.un-instraw.org/en/index.html http://www.un-instraw.org/en/index.html>-INSTRAW--is an activity that was mandated to be funded with voluntary contributions but which has received support from the UN Regular Budget at times. Its donors have lost confidence in INSTRAW's ability to provide relevant services in an economical way. We therefore believe that this activity needs to be phased out. 
Too Many Consultants 
In many Departments and offices, the Secretary-General proposes new posts or reclassifications of current posts and also requests increased resources for consultants. This is an area on which the General Assembly should focus its attention. We should work to rationalize the use of consultants, ensuring that they are not used as a replacement or substitute for posts. The ACABQ specifically noted concerns in this regard with the Department of Economic and Social Affairs <http://www.un.org/esa/desa/ http://www.un.org/esa/desa/>, UN Conference on Trade and Development <http://www.unctad.org http://www.unctad.org>, and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights <http://www.ohchr.org/english/ http://www.ohchr.org/english/>. 
Consolidation of Offices 
Many offices have multiple liaison offices in North America and Europe and the General Assembly should look at consolidating these offices. For example, UNEP <http://www.unep.org/ http://www.unep.org/> has offices in both Washington, DC and New York. The ACABQ points out that the geographic distance between these cities is relatively short and that one office in New York could do the work of both offices. Similarly, UN-Habitat <http://www.unhabitat.org/ http://www.unhabitat.org/> has offices in both Geneva and Brussels. Again, these cities are close to each other and UN-Habitat should be able to do the work of both offices from one location.
Rationalizing Information Technology Among UN Agencies 
The information technology and communication strategy should be reviewed thoroughly. Organizations, Departments and offices should not be purchasing separate systems that are not compatible with other systems in the UN. In addition, the strategy should allow for greater productivity and easier communication. Related to this point, information technology rationalization can also help achieve ACABQ's call for more rigorous scrutiny of UN publications and how they are distributed. Significant cost savings can be achieved by producing less hard copies. 
Regular Program for Technical Cooperation 
We note that $42.8 million has been requested for the Regular Program of Technical Cooperation. This is a large fund for unprogrammed and unspecified technical activities carried out at the country level. The activity appears duplicative of projects carried out by other UN entities that have competitive advantages over the UN. In addition, Member States have been given little information about the results achieved with these funds. We believe this program should be phased out. 
Decolonization 
The U.S. supports the objective of promoting the decolonization process in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations <http://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/index.html http://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/index.html>. Nonetheless, we maintain that it is ultimately within the authority of an Administering Powers to determine when its obligations under Article 73(e) cease. We would welcome real progress on the delisting of the remaining territories, which is blocked by political considerations. We oppose attempts to link the work of the specialized agencies and other organizations to the declarations of the granting of independence to colonial countries and peoples. The U.S. sees no need for a publicity campaign designed to create support for work the specialized agencies already do. The U.S. does not support regular, periodic visiting missions. Decisions on missions should be made on a case-by-case basis, with the concurrence of the Administering Power. 
No Need for Reserve Fund for Re-Costing 
To deal with the need for additional expenditures arising from currency fluctuations and inflation, the Secretary-General has proposed the creation of a reserve funded with assessed contributions and replenished with savings gained by variations in forecasting. We believe it is better to wait until the dollar strengthens before considering such a mechanism. If there is a credit due to a strengthened dollar or lower inflation, members can decide then whether to forgo the credit to begin building such a fund.
Prioritizing Groups of Government Experts Meetings on Disarmament 
The convening of Groups of Governmental Experts (GGE) is threatening to become a substantial and unnecessary drain on the Department's budget. A GGE should only be convened in response to UNGA First Committee resolutions that enjoy widespread and overwhelming support; they should not be the pet projects of individual Member States. Moreover, there has been a disturbing trend recently after a GGE concludes without issuing a substantive report for the sponsors of resolution that created the GGE to immediately call for a new GGE. This is wrong and wasteful. The Department should require a cooling off period for the solicitation and distribution of the views of Member States before a new GGE on the same subject can be convened. If the views of Member States on the subject have not changed, the next GGE will likely suffer from the same fate as the previous one. In an era of limited budgets and competing priorities, this is a substantial and unnecessary waste of funds, and the U.S. will oppose convening and funding such GGEs.
The portion of the Department of Disarmament Affairs <http://disarmament.un.org/dda.htm http://disarmament.un.org/dda.htm> (DDA) budget devoted to support for the Conference on Disarmament <http://disarmament.un.org/cd/ http://disarmament.un.org/cd/> and related activities in Geneva will decrease from approximately $4.3 million to $4.1 million. - a decrease of $184,000 that reflects a reduction of one staff position. If the CD continues to be deadlocked on agreeing to a work program, this is a logical area to seek further reductions.
Voluntary Funding for the UN Forum on Forests (UNFF) and the UN Environment Program (UNEP) 
We believe that UNFF and UNEP <http://www.unep.org/ http://www.unep.org/> should be funded exclusively on a voluntary basis. Thus, the amount of funding from the UN regular budget to both should actually decrease, not increase. In the case of UNEP, we seek greater clarification on the proposed call for 13 new positions. 
Better Performance Measures for the UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) 
We take note of the progress made on management and accountability reform made in UNODC <http://www.unodc.org/unodc/index.html http://www.unodc.org/unodc/index.html> under the leadership of Executive Director Antonio Maria Costa, in place since 2002. While we strongly support these efforts, more work needs to be done on results-based budgeting, in particular in development of accurate performance indicators. These problems notwithstanding, UNODC's programs on legislative assistance and capacity building in the areas of organized crime, counter-terrorism, drugs, anti-money laundering and anti-trafficking are successful and relevant to U.S. policy goals. We also take note that UNODC has made robust efforts to reduce a number of meetings and reports in accordance with planning and budgeting rule 5.6. Many of these reductions are from non-recurrent activities. The United States encourages UNODC to inventory all meetings and publications to seek cost-saving reductions. In light of the improvements in UNODC, it should not come as a surprise to observe the increase in voluntary contributions provided by donors to support the many important programs UNODC carries out. Such an increase highlights the importance the international community attaches to multilateral cooperation to combat terrorism, illicit drugs, organized crime and corruption. 
Clarifying Activities and Performance Measures for the UNHCR 
We support the work of UNHCR <http://www.unhcr.ch/cgi-bin/texis/vtx/home http://www.unhcr.ch/cgi-bin/texis/vtx/home> and its efforts to build an improved culture of effective management and accountability, and welcome recent efforts to establish global strategic objectives, measures and indicators. We urge UNHCR to continue to improve on this effort, including establishing outcome-oriented measures, increasing its capacity to manage and make use of performance data, and integrating these efforts into broader UN humanitarian benchmarking efforts. Establishing appropriate measures and indicators is useful, though, only to the extent that they are achieved. Therefore, while UNHCR works to refine its measures and indicators, we urge UNHCR to pay even greater attention to achieving them. 
Question of Palestine 
The U.S. seeks the abolition of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People <http://www.un.org/Depts/dpa/qpalnew/committee.htm http://www.un.org/Depts/dpa/qpalnew/committee.htm> and of the Division of Palestinian Rights <http://www.un.org/Depts/dpa/qpalnew/dpr.htm http://www.un.org/Depts/dpa/qpalnew/dpr.htm> because both are inimical to the aim of ensuring that UN monies are directed to our highest priorities and in achieving a just and lasting solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. To be clear, the U.S. has consistently opposed the annual UNGA resolutions authorizing these entities and their activities. The number of resolutions adopted, civil organization accredited to the Committee, website pages viewed, as well as positive evaluations of the Committee's report are meaningless indicators. The United States strongly opposes the use of scarce UN resources to support the biased and one-sided political activities carried out by the Committee. 
The United States is working closely with its Quartet  <http://www.state.gov/p/nea/rt/c9963.htm http://www.state.gov/p/nea/rt/c9963.htm>partners and other states to encourage the Palestinians and Israelis to take concrete steps toward fulfilling their obligations under the Road Map <http://usinfo.state.gov/mena/Archive/2004/Feb/04-725518.html http://usinfo.state.gov/mena/Archive/2004/Feb/04-725518.html> and to achieving President Bush's vision of two states, Israel and Palestine, living side-by-side in peace and security. Our goal is a just, lasting, and comprehensive peace in the Middle East. These biased UN programs do not further that goal of the world community. And now especially, with increased prospects for peace with Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza Strip and Palestinian elections and steps to take greater responsibility for good governance, such programs only undercut the chances of a durable, just peace.
Deleting Outputs 
The United States notes with interest that the proposed budget reflects the deletion of some 3,000 outputs across most budget sections. We appreciate the Secretary-General's effort to eliminate activities that are no longer useful or are duplicative and encourage him to continue. Rather than wait until the next budget to delete additional obsolete outputs, we encourage the Secretary-General to propose outputs for deletion throughout the year so that the General Assembly can have this information available when considering proposed additions to the budget. 
Report of the ACABQ 
We would like to thank the Acting Chairman and all members of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions <http://www.un.org/docs/acabq http://www.un.org/docs/acabq> (ACABQ) for their work on the report before us this year. We have read the report carefully and find that the Committee has some interesting observations. However, we were disappointed that the ACABQ did not follow through on many of these observations by making action-oriented recommendations. We had hoped that the ACABQ would have made more concrete proposals to help guide the Fifth Committee in its work on the budget. For instance, the ACABQ questioned the need for additional resources for travel in light of the increased use of video conferencing, but then did not recommend any reductions in travel expenditures. In the same vein, the Committee concluded that the approval of new professional posts should lessen the need for consultants, but it went ahead and approved most requests for consultants. The U.S. was also disappointed that the ACABQ did not include information as to the total dollar impact of its recommendations, as it has done in the past.
Conclusion 
Given limited time, I have focused my remarks primarily on the concept of the unitary UN as well as other issues where we have concerns or questions. This is not to say that there are not issues we wish to address in the informal discussions. We believe that by setting priorities, eliminating obsolete activities, promoting efficiencies and finding creative ways of managing resources, the General Assembly can approve a budget that ensures sufficient resources for the UN's priority activities and includes substantial and significant measures to reform the UN. We look forward to working with other delegations and the Secretariat to achieve this goal in the coming weeks.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman