UN CAPITAL MASTER PLAN: GENERAL ASSEMBLY APPROVES

UNCLAS USUN NEW YORK 001351 SIPDIS SIPDIS E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: AORC KUNR UNGA SUBJECT: UN CAPITAL MASTER PLAN: GENERAL ASSEMBLY APPROVES STRATEGY IV REF: A. 2006 USUN 911 ¶B. 2006 USUN 1191 ¶C. 2005 USUN 1492 ¶D. 2005 USUN 1617 ¶E. 2005 USUN 1938 ¶1. SUMMARY: After several months of discussion, the General Assembly approved Strategy IV (phased approach) for the Capital Master Plan, and also converted into an appropriation the existing commitment authority of $77 million. The resolution (currently found in A/C.5/60/L.66) provides the CMP office with the necessary authority, funding and direction to complete design and pre-construction work, including locating office swing space and designing and building a temporary conference building on the North Lawn. A decision on financing for the construction phase is still needed and is expected during the main part of the sixty-first session. END SUMMARY. ¶2. At the outset of discussions, delegations were generally agreed on Strategy IV, although the Group of 77 and China expressed its continuing interest in the possibility of constructing a new permanent building on the North Lawn, an idea related to Strategy III. Although the G77 agreed that the building could not be constructed in time to be used as swing space for the CMP, and would therefore only serve as a consolidation building, the Group insisted that this resolution should authorize and fund a $5 million feasibility assessment so that Member States would have the information available for the future. The U.S., EU, Australia and Canada all argued that a new building on the North Lawn was not related to the CMP and therefore a feasibility study should not be included in a CMP resolution. In addition, the G77 and Russia also advocated a decision on financing, through direct assessments, during this session. USDel, working with the EU, Canada and Australia, was successful in pushing off both issues until the future. ¶3. USDel also successfully negotiated the inclusion of language to promote transparency with regard to procurement processes related to the CMP and to ensure that an appropriate construction audit is conducted. In addition, the resolution includes other U.S.-initiated language regarding financial disclosure statements and welcoming the establishment of the CMP website. This language reflects the GA's position that the CMP should be carried out in a transparent and accountable manner and in compliance with other relevant GA resolutions (such as future resolutions on procurement reform and strengthened oversight). ¶4. The final resolution includes the following key elements: -- Approves Strategy IV effective July 1, 2006; -- Converts the existing commitment authority of $77 million into an appropriation; -- Decides to review updated project costs at the main part of the sixty-first session; -- Requests the Secretary-General to include information regarding a feasibility study in his proposed program budget for the biennium 2008-2009; -- Notes that the CMP office will provide resources to OIOS to ensure an appropriate construction audit and requests the Secretary-General to report on the findings to the GA; SIPDIS -- Requests the SYG to ensure that procurement processes are conducted in a transparent manner and in accordance with relevant GA resolutions; -- Requests the SYG to ensure financial disclosure statements are filed by CMP staff; -- Language on general Host Country responsibilities, as well as the special role of the Host Country with regard to UNHQ in New York; -- Reverts to the issue of the funding plan at the main part of the 61st session. ¶5. COMMENT: The resolution includes three paragraphs on Host Country responsibilities that were originally part of a "package" of five paragraphs (reftels C-E). Cuba submitted the these three paragraphs (the first one of which was then amended by USDel),which were not problematic, and has indicated to USDel that the other two paragraphs will be submitted this fall during discussions on financing for the construction phase. The two remaining paragraphs are related to the lack of an interest free loan from the Host Country and will lead to a difficult discussion in the fall. Other issues to be covered during the financing discussion include the scale of assessment to be used for assessments for the CMP and the impact on Member States if some Member States pay their full amount up front (rather than over a number of years). The question of how Member States would be held responsible for interest charges in a situation where the UN needs to utilize a letter of credit or other credit facilities will also need to be addressed. END COMMENT. BOLTON