VZCZCXYZ0000
OO RUEHWEB

DE RUCNDT #0546/01 0792155
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O 202155Z MAR 06
FM USMISSION USUN NEW YORK
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 8380
INFO RUEHXX/GENEVA IO MISSIONS COLLECTIVE PRIORITY

UNCLAS USUN NEW YORK 000546 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: AORC UNGA
SUBJECT: UN REFORM: BATTLE WITH G-77 LOOMING OVER CONTROL 
OF SYG REPORT ON MANAGEMENT REFORM 
 
REF: A. USUN 461 
 
     ¶B. USUN 442 
 
¶1.  SUMMARY: Ambassador Wolff met March 16 with GA 
President's Chef de Cabinet Lars Wiede to discuss next steps 
in Member States' consideration of the Secretary-General's 
report on management reform introduced March 7 entitled, 
"Investing in the UN: For a Stronger Organization Worldwide" 
(reftels).  Wolff argued that the GA Plenary should retain 
full control over the process, given the letter and intent of 
world leaders regarding the handling of the report as 
expressed in the Outcome Document (paragraph 163 a), the 
consequent GA General Committee decision to allocate 
consideration of the report to the Plenary, and the use of 
similar procedures in November/December 2005 when the Plenary 
took decisions to establish an ethics office; authorize an 
external evaluation of UN auditing and oversight; and, create 
an independent audit advisory committee.  Wiede agreed that 
while reason and logic supported the U.S. arguments, G-77 
members were determined to refer the SYG's Report to the 
Fifth Committee - a position that Wiede noted they had 
articulated even before the report's March 7 release.  Wiede 
also agreed with Wolff's insistence that any decision by the 
Plenary to allocate consideration of the Report or parts 
thereof to the Fifth Committee would have to be strictly 
time-bound, with a clear deadline for Fifth Committee 
response required. Wiede said GA President Eliasson was 
planning to convene a plenary session the week of March 20 to 
resolve the procedural dispute over the SYG's Report, but 
might delay such a discussion until ACABQ released its 
analysis, which might help to identify those issues that 
merited Fifth Committee consideration.  END SUMMARY. 
 
PROCEDURAL DEBATE 
LIKELY 
----------------- 
 
¶2. Wiede said he welcomed U.S. views on how best to handle 
Member State consideration of the SYG's management report in 
light of the G-77's continued insistence that the entire 
report be allocated to the Fifth Committee for analysis and 
review, a position key G-77 members publicly signaled even 
before the report's March 7 release.  Wiede's recent private 
consultations with a number of G-77 members revealed little 
change in their tough stance on this issue.  Wolff responded 
that reason and logic clearly supported allocation of the 
report to the Plenary.  The intent of world leaders, as 
specifically reflected in the actual language of paragraph 
163 (a) of the Outcome Document, was that the SYG's report on 
budgetary, financial and human resource policies be submitted 
directly to the General Assembly Plenary for its 
consideration and decision.  Reflecting this, the GA's 
General Committee in September 2005 allocated follow-up on 
the Outcome Document during the 60th UNGA to the Plenary, not 
the Fifth Committee, under agenda items 46 and 120, and the 
GA approved of this allocation.  In this manner, the Plenary 
was given the lead on the SYG's management report.  In 
addition, the recent precedent of the GA's handling of reform 
initiatives contained in A/60/568 (i.e., establishment of a 
UN ethics office, authorization for an external evaluation of 
UN auditing and oversight, creation of an independent audit 
advisory committee) placed overall control and 
decision-making in the Plenary, taking into account views 
sought from ACABQ and the Fifth Committee. 
 
¶3. Wiede agreed that logic and reason supported the U.S. 
approach, but noted G-77 members were insisting that past 
precedents demanded that a SYG report on administrative and 
budgetary matters be sent directly to the Fifth Committee. 
In response to a Wolff query, Wiede confirmed that ACABQ 
currently was evaluating the SYG's report without prejudice 
to the future venue in which Member State discussions would 
take place.  Wolff suggested the ACABQ report could prove 
helpful if it identified those initiatives on which the SYG 
could take immediate action, as well as those issues, such as 
the future role and working methods of the Fifth Committee, 
for example, that were more appropriately left for Plenary 
consideration of governance matters.  An ACABQ analysis of 
this nature could help to identify those initiatives that 
required further GA authority, and, hence, allocation by the 
Plenary, hopefully with minimal debate, to the Fifth 
Committee. 
 
¶4. Wolff and Wiede agreed that any Fifth Committee 
consideration of the SYG's report, or portions thereof, would 
have to be time-bound.  Once the Plenary decided to allocate 
items to the Fifth Committee, the GA President would have to 
specify a date by which Fifth Committee comments would be 
due, as was done with Fifth Committee consideration of 
A/60/568.  Otherwise, Fifth Committee discussions would drag 
on, with no concrete decisions taken.  Given the exclusive 
focus of the Fifth Committee during the resumed May session 
 
 
on UN peacekeeping budget issues, any Fifth Committee 
consideration of the SYG's management report ideally would be 
concluded prior to commencement of the resumed May session. 
Wiede suggested that G-77 members probably would seek a far 
longer time to consider the SYG's report. 
 
¶5. Wiede said that while GA President Eliasson was 
considering convening a GA Plenary session early in the week 
of March 20 to permit discussion of the procedural impasse 
over allocating the SYG's report, it might prove helpful to 
synchronize the scheduling of the next Plenary with ACABQ's 
issuance of its report. In any event, Wiede said he likely 
would convene a private meeting of 8 to 10 ambassadors, 
including from the U.S., on March 21 or 22 with a view to 
brokering consensus on a way forward. 
 
BOLTON