VZCZCXYZ0000
RR RUEHWEB

DE RUCNDT #0584 1621444
ZNY EEEEE ZZH
R 111444Z JUN 09
FM USMISSION USUN NEW YORK
TO SECSTATE WASHDC 6708

UNCLAS E F T O USUN NEW YORK 000584 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PREL AMGT AORC UN
SUBJECT: UK HOSTS LUNCH FOR UN COMMITTEE ON CONTRIBUTION 
DELEGATES TO DISCUSS SCALES OF ASSESSMENT 
 
REF: A. USUN 518 
     ¶B. USUN 562 
 
Classified By: Ambassador Rosemary DiCarlo For Reasons 1.4 b 
 
¶1. (SBU) SUMMARY: On June 4, 2009 the UK Mission hosted a 
lunch for members of the Committee on Contribution (COC) to 
discuss the scale of assessment models and general views of 
the committee on the scales debate. In addition to CoC 
delegates from  Germany, Australia, the UK, Romania, 
Portugal, Japan, Republic of Korea (ROK), and the US. Fifth 
Committee delegates from Canada, the UK, Czech Republic, 
Japan, Germany, Sweden, Mexico and the US were also invited. 
(Comment: Notably, the participants included the experts and 
Fifth Committee delegates from the three countries which the 
EU and CANZ participants on the G7 discussions want to invite 
into the G7 initiative discussion. Reftel USUN 562 )The Brits 
indicated the lunch was an opportunity to share views on the 
CoC's work and the impact from the CoC's report on the scale 
debate outcome. The discussion was primarily focused on 
LPCIA, but there were discussions on the margins about the 
potential outcome of the scales negotiations. The Portugese 
CoC member made the observation that, based on his review of 
the financial data provided by the UN Secretariat, the status 
quo may not be such a bad outcome in the scales negotiation 
as many western countries assessment decreases whereas the 
assessment for Brazil, Russia and China increases. Many CoC 
delegates indicated interest in continuing to consider 
changes to the methodology e.g. debt burden, and LPCIA.  The 
Japanese CoC member advocated for an overall reconstruction 
of the scales methodology for the 2012 debate and continues 
to see value in incorporating some elements of the Purchasing 
Power Parity (PPP) into that new methodology. The Swedes, the 
Brits and the Canadian refuted the notion to maintain the 
status quo and indicated now is the time to push for a 
change. END SUMMARY 
 
¶2. (SBU) At this lunch, the UK host informed the group that 
the EU had intended to present to the CoC the elements of the 
EU models that had been outlined in a recent letter to the 
CoC chairman (Reftel USUN 518), however events in the May 
resumed session of the Fifth Committee appear to be making it 
difficult for the EU to prepare a briefing on their request. 
Therefore, it is unclear whether or when the EU will make a 
presentation on their request. The UK focused the 
conversation initially on LPCIA and the elements, such as the 
threshold and gradient, that could result in a fair scale 
methodology. The Portugese CoC member questioned whether it 
might be an acceptable outcome to maintain the status quo, 
given the data for the current scales methodology provided by 
the UN Secretariat indicates most of the Western members 
assessments would decrease while assessments for Brazil, 
China and Russia would increase. In addition, the Japanese 
CoC member stated the group should focus efforts on proposing 
an overall change to the methodology in the 2012 scales 
debate. 
 
¶3. (SBU) The Japanese CoC member indicated that the Market 
Exchange Rate (MER) is an element of the methodology that 
creates significant disparities and that if the group wants 
to achieve change to the methodology it would be better to 
propose a radical change in the methodology rather than 
continuing to try to make small changes to the existing 
methodology. The Swedes and the Brits responded that the 
opportunity to make a change to the scale methodology must be 
seized this Fall. Several of the CoC delegates spoke in favor 
of continuing to consider change, in the debt burden and 
LPCIA elements, focusing on adjustments to the threshold. 
Several CoC delegates also expressed support and interest in 
the proposal to include a point limit in the methodology, 
limiting the benefit that could accrue to any one member from 
the LPCIA. The US raised and other delegates recognized the 
difficulty this would create for the US given the potential 
implications for our position on the ceiling. 
 
¶4. (SBU) The Canadian raised the possibility of exploring a 
potential rift within the G77 over Gulf States discontent 
over paying more than China in the peacekeeping scale of 
assessment. The Canadian had also heard that the Pacific 
Island States had expressed dissatisfaction at having to pay 
more than other member states who they deem being able to pay 
far more than the pacific island states. The Brits and 
Canadians indicated they would ask Naru and Palau to consider 
providing the CoC with a briefing on the financial impact of 
scales on the pacific islands as a means to inform other 
member states of the disparity that exists because of the 
current methodology. 
RICE