Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
08USUNNEWYORK10
2008-01-04 20:19:00
UNCLASSIFIED
USUN New York
Cable title:  

UN BUDGET AND MANAGEMENT: GENERAL ASSEMBLY ADOPTS

Tags:  ABUD ACABQ AFIN AORC PGOV UNGA 
pdf how-to read a cable
VZCZCXYZ0011
RR RUEHWEB

DE RUCNDT #0010/01 0042019
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 042019Z JAN 08
FM USMISSION USUN NEW YORK
TO SECSTATE WASHDC 3490
UNCLAS USUN NEW YORK 000010 

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: ABUD ACABQ AFIN AORC PGOV UNGA
SUBJECT: UN BUDGET AND MANAGEMENT: GENERAL ASSEMBLY ADOPTS
BUDGET ON VOTE CALLED BY USG; USG VOTES AGAINST BUDGET

REF: A. USUN NEW YORK 00818 OCT 2007


B. USUN NEW YORK 01102 NOV 2007

C. USUN NEW YORK 01172 DEC 2007

D. USUN NEW YORK 01180 DEC 2007

E. USUN NEW YORK 01223 DEC 2007

F. USUN NEW YORK 00002 JAN 2008

G. USUN NEW YORK 00003 JAN 2008

H. USUN NEW YORK 00005 JAN 2008

I. USUN NEW YORK 00009 JAN 2008

UNCLAS USUN NEW YORK 000010

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: ABUD ACABQ AFIN AORC PGOV UNGA
SUBJECT: UN BUDGET AND MANAGEMENT: GENERAL ASSEMBLY ADOPTS
BUDGET ON VOTE CALLED BY USG; USG VOTES AGAINST BUDGET

REF: A. USUN NEW YORK 00818 OCT 2007


B. USUN NEW YORK 01102 NOV 2007

C. USUN NEW YORK 01172 DEC 2007

D. USUN NEW YORK 01180 DEC 2007

E. USUN NEW YORK 01223 DEC 2007

F. USUN NEW YORK 00002 JAN 2008

G. USUN NEW YORK 00003 JAN 2008

H. USUN NEW YORK 00005 JAN 2008

I. USUN NEW YORK 00009 JAN 2008


1. Summary: In the early morning hours of December 22,
2007, the General Assembly passed the 2008-2009 biennium
budget, along with resolutions on the financing of two newly
established peacekeeping missions. After intense
negotiations, the General Assembly adopted a final
appropriation of $4,171,359,700 (A/C.5/62/L.18 and
A/C.5/62/L.19) for the 2008-2009 biennium budget. See also
A/C.5/62/L.20. The approved budget represents a substantial
reduction from the budget that was before the General
Assembly, including numerous "add ons" informally identified
by the SYG on which the General Assembly deferred action.
See paras 3 and 4. The budget adopted by the General
Assembly included controversial aspects dealing with the OIOS
Procurement Task Force (PTF),the UN Joint Staff Pension Fund
(UNJSPF),the Special Political Mission in Lebanon, and
certain program budget implication resolutions (PBIs),
including funding for the Durban Review Conference and the
"SPIDER" program proposed in connection with the peaceful
uses of outer space. While successful in dealing with the
PTF and the SPM for Lebanon, USUN was unable to obtain
satisfactory outcomes in relation to the other controversial
matters, and declined to endorse General Assembly action in
regard to them. See para 2. Because of USG concerns on the
piecemeal nature of the budget and its potential growth
during the 2008-09 biennium, and the decision of the G-77 to
support the PBI on the Durban Review Conference, USUN called
for a vote on the budget. The USG cast the only vote against
the budget. See para. 5. After intensive discussions, the
General Assembly also approved peacekeeping funding for

UNAMID (Ref. G) and MINURCAT. End Summary.


2. USUN was successful in dealing with the PTF (Ref. H) and
the SPM for Lebanon (Ref. F). The G-77 refused to compromise
on three additional controversial matters: the UNJSPF, a PBI
on the peaceful uses of outer space, and the proposed Durban
Review Conference. On instructions, USUN called for a vote
on the UNJSPF and disassociated from consensus on the outer
space PBI. While isolated on the vote on UNJSPF, virtually
the entire WEOG abstained in respect to the principled
objection identified by USUN (Ref. I). The G-77 refused to
compromise on funding for the Durban Review Conference.
Consequently, USUN, after consulting with the Department,
called for a vote on the paragraph of the draft resolution on
PBIs approving such funding, and voted against this measure.
The paragraph was approved by a vote of 94 to 40 against with
6 abstentions. Virtually all of the EU joined the USG in
voting against the paragraph. In an explanation of vote,
Ambassador Wallace said that the USG concerns had been stated
in the Third Committee and stressed that the role of the
Fifth Committee was to provide a fully informed view on the
PBI. He noted that the PBI statement in this case was unlike
any in the history of the UN, with one exception. He
emphasized that this PBI was missing key information and that
the Committee needed to rely on detailed and precise
information in order to make an informed decision. The
Committee then adopted the entire draft decision without a
vote. Subsequently, in the General Assembly, the Third
Committee resolution authorizing the review conference was
put to a vote. Once again, virtually the entire EU joined
the USG in voting against the resolution (105-46-6).


3. The approved budget of $4.171 reflects a substantial
reduction from the budget proposed by the SYG of $4.397
billion, which included over $200 million for recosting. Ref

A. The $4.171 billion is less than the final budget for the
2006/2007 biennium, which was $4.188 billion. A/C.5/62/L.10
(orally amended upwards to $4.193 billion). The reduction
achieved by the GA is substantially greater when taking into
account that the SYG in introducing his budget separately
identified a number of "add ons" for possible action by the
General Assembly. Refs. A, B, C. In addition, the budget
includes a number of increases due to the implementation of
reforms to the internal justice system (Ref. E) as well as
approval of a number of Program Budget Implications (PBIs),
Revised Estimates, and other proposals relating to specific
budget fascicles to increase staff. Taken together, the "add
ons" and the proposals on these other matters, if acted upon
by the General Assembly during this Main session, could have
increased the budget to as much as $4.8 billion. Ref D. In
the end, these "add-ons" were not included in the initial
budget and the General Assembly identified a range of savings
or reductions that amount to some $320 million. Most of the
savings result from the deferral of action on the proposed


UNHQ for the UNAMI SPM ($180 million) (Ref. F) and action on
cross cutting issues such as the rate of inflation, vacancy
rates and non-post costs.


4. The SYG voluntarily reduced the inflation rate from 3.2
percent to 2 percent in the face of an EU proposal, supported
by the CANZ and USUN, despite original misgivings from the
GOJ. USUN worked with the EU, the CANZ and G-77 to agree to
a vacancy rate higher than that proposed by the SYG, despite
initial GOJ misgivings, agreeing on a 6.5 percent rate for
professional posts and 3.5 percent for general service posts.
The increased rates notionally result in savings of some $35
million. USUN also worked with the CANZ and the G-77 to
achieve a 2 percent across the board reduction in non-post
costs, despite some initial opposition from the EU. This cut
results in savings of some $13.8 million. In addition, the
G-77 identified $10 million savings in the Department of
Safety and Security (DSS) and $40 million from SPMs, based on
unexpended 2006/2007 funds, as well as $18 million from the
Office of Central Support Services (OCSS). While USUN in
principle supported cuts proposed for DSS and SPMs on the
basis of the Final Performance Report, the EU and the CANZ
initially opposed such cuts. USUN sought to bridge the
differences between the G-77 and the EU/CANZ in the ensuing
negotiations, where agreement was reached on reducing the
savings for DSS to $5 million and the savings for SPMs to $20
million.


5. While working with other Member States to substantially
reduce budget, the USG repeatedly stressed its concerns on
the piecemeal nature of the budget. At the same time, the
USG warned Member States that the Organization will be faced
with demands to increase the budget during the course of the
biennium that could bring the final budget for the biennium
up to a total of some $5.2 billion, or more. Such a budget
would represent a 25 percent increase from the 2006/2007
budget, the largest in the history of the organization. Refs.
B, C, D. USUN was unsuccessful in its efforts to address
these concerns in connection with the adoption of this
initial 2008/2009 budget. In the end, because of those
concerns and the refusal of the G-77 to compromise on the PBI
on the Durban Review Conference, USUN called for a vote on
the budget, both in the Fifth Committee and the General
Assembly. The USG cast the only no vote in both the Fifth
Committee (141-1-0) and later the General Assembly (142-1-0).
See Ambassador Wallace's statement, para 6.


6. Statement of Ambassador Wallace in the Fifth Committee on
the vote on the 2008/2009 biennium budget. Begin Text:

Thank You Mr. Chairman,

Thank you all for the incredible work during session. My
country also expresses sincere thanks to the extraordinary
work of the fifth committee coordinator for this item Mr.
Alejandro Torres of Argentina. Finally I thank all of the
delegates who worked hard and who did a fine job in
identifying real cuts to this initial 2008-2009 UN budget.
Although this statement is ostensibly on the UN budget, we
believe the most accurate characterization of the resolution
before us is an "initial" budget. Why is that? From the
outset of our consideration of this matter my country joined
with the broader UN membership to express our concern over
the "piece meal" and "ad hoc" approach presented by the
2008-2009 UN budget. Moreover, we joined in proposals by the
broader UN membership that emphasized that some 75% of the UN
budget is comprised of staff costs.

Today we adopt in essence an initial appropriation of $4.2
billion. We applaud all those delegations that worked hard
to get this initial appropriation down to a manageable level.
However, we know that there are significant and many budget
items deferred and we know that other budget add-ons are in
the pipe-line. Accordingly, we are concerned that the final
2008-2009 budget for the biennium will be significantly
higher than this initial budget. We appreciate the
commitments expressed by the PGA, the Secretary-General and
many Member States to vigorously adhere to the principle of
real and credible fiscal discipline in the adoption of the
final budget. We will work constructively to that end.

Finally Mr. Chairman, we could not support this budget
resolution because this budget today contains funding to what
we refer colloquially to as the "Durban 2 conference." Our
political sentiments have been clearly expressed on this
revisiting of an event that was noxious to my country and a
disgrace in the International Community. Unfortunately, the
objectionable political agenda that seeks to revisit Durban
has seeped into the fifth committee. This committee is a
body of technical experts. We do not pursue policy agenda's
here. Unfortunately the budgetary matter on Durban 2 - the
purported PBI - is fundamentally and fatally flawed. These
technical flaws - unprecedented in the history of this


committee - did not dissuade the political advocates from
pursuing the misguided agenda of Durban 2 without regard to
the rules, policies, procedures and practices of the
committee. We are disappointed in this abuse of the work of
the fifth committee for these reasons.

With our dear and well founded concerns on the piecemeal
nature of the budget, concerns on the potential growth in the
final 2008-2009 biennium budget and the straw that broke the
camel's back - the PBI on Durban 2 - we cannot support this
budget. Again I truly thank the many delegates and members
of the Secretariat that worked constructively but in vain to
an acceptable outcome.

Thank you Mr. Chairman.

End Text.

Wolcott