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