VZCZCXYZ0006
RR RUEHWEB

DE RUEHGV #0635/01 2101359
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 291359Z JUL 09
FM USMISSION GENEVA
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 9007
INFO RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK 3105
RUEHAB/AMEMBASSY ABIDJAN 0317

UNCLAS GENEVA 000635 
 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPARTMENT FOR IO/T, IO/EDA, IO/MPR:GABRAHAMS 
DEPT PASS USTR 
USUN FOR JLAWRENCE BRASHKOW CNORMAN 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: ECON UNCTAD USTR
SUBJECT: UNCTAD Working Party on the Budget 
 
¶1. SUMMARY: The United Nations Conference for Trade and Development 
(UNCTAD) Working Party met June 8-12 in Geneva to discuss UNCTAD's 
draft program budget for the 2010-2011 biennium.  The budget 
fascicle was presented along with the results of a survey UNCTAD 
conducted on the quality of its publications.  While several of the 
suggested changes in UNCTAD's strategic framework that the Working 
Party made when it last met in January were taken into account, the 
suggested change from the African countries (a presentation of the 
new commodities unit as if it were a subprogram in the strategic 
framework) was rejected by the budget office in NY.  This incensed 
the Africans.  The regular budget resource level allocated to UNCTAD 
for the 2010-2011 biennium amounted to USD 136 million - a 2.2 
percent increase - and 12 new posts were created under the 
development pillar.  END SUMMARY 
 
PUBLICATIONS SURVEY 
------------------- 
 
¶2. The UNCTAD secretariat presented the results of a recent survey 
of their publications, which it was required to do by the Accra 
Accord.  UNCTAD was very happy with both the response rate and the 
ratings of the publications. 
 
¶3. The United States thanked UNCTAD for this first effort to survey 
its publications but expressed concern that the response rate was so 
low as to be statistically insignificant.  The US made several 
specific requests to improve future surveys and their usefulness. 
The US comments were supported by Japan and the EU, and captured in 
the agreed conclusions which mandated: "The working party requests 
the secretariat to continue to improve the usefulness and quality of 
the readership survey by, inter alia, improving the survey's 
questions, expanding the survey to cover more UNCTAD publications, 
and adding to the survey results the number of each publication 
printed, whether or not the survey results are statistically 
significant, as well as the range of responses and the mode." 
 
PROBLEMS WITH THE BUDGET FASCICLE 
--------------------------------- 
 
¶4. Delegates unanimously expressed dissatisfaction with the late 
release of the budget fascicle, which was only given to delegates 
the morning of the first meeting instead of the previous week. 
Furthermore, the budget was only available in English, and included 
many discrepancies.  In paragraph 1 of the agreed conclusions, the 
Working Party asked the UNCTAD Secretariat to be aware of this issue 
in the future, and to ensure that documents are available in a 
timely manner. 
 
¶5. Delegates were concerned that some suggestions they made at the 
January Working Party were not taken into account in the updated 
version of the strategic framework, and urged the competent bodies 
of the UNGA to reflect those recommendations in paragraph 3.  The 
UNCTAD secretariat explained that recommendations were usually not 
taken into account after the GA accepts a budget in NY, which they 
did in December of 2008.  Delegates further recommended in paragraph 
4 that the UNCTAD secretariat should take into account 
budget-related meetings and deadlines when scheduling the Working 
Party meetings so the Working Party can contribute more efficiently 
to formulation of the budget. 
 
12 NEW POSTS ALLOCATED TO UNCTAD'S DEVELOPMENT PILLAR 
--------------------------------------------- -------- 
 
¶6. Delegates requested that the SG of UNCTAD distribute the 12 new 
posts in a manner that would contribute to south-south cooperation, 
and geographic and gender balance in UNCTAD's staffing. 
 
¶7. The Working Party further requested that the new resources for 
the development pillar should be used to strengthen the program of 
assistance to the Palestinian people in accordance with paragraph 44 
of the Accra Accord.  This agreed conclusion was contentious. 
Initially Iran refused to accept reference to paragraph 44 of the 
Accra Accord.  Iran said that while it had joined consensus on the 
Accra Accord, it didn't support all the contents of paragraph 44 and 
didn't want reference made to that paragraph.  The US supported 
Israel in refusing to have a paragraph about assistance to the 
Palestinian people in the meeting's agreed conclusions without 
referring back to the agreed paragraph from the Accra Accord. 
 
TECHNICAL SERVICES UNIT 
----------------------- 
 
¶8. The US proposed that within the draft budget, resources be 
reallocated to provide regular budget funding for the technical 
assistance unit within UNCTAD.  The G-77 was unwilling to make such 
a clear statement, but did recognize the validity of the US concern 
that fundraising for technical assistance and transparency in 
utilization of those resources is a core UNCTAD function.   The 
Working Party highlighted that the SG should ensure that the 
technical assistance unit remains fully staffed and has adequate 
resources. 
 
RESOURCES FOR AFRICA, LDC'S, AND SPECIAL PROGRAMS 
--------------------------------------------- ---- 
 
¶9. In accordance with paragraph 41 of the Accra Accord, the Working 
Party sought to ensure adequate funding for the 2010-2011 biennium 
for the Division for Africa, LDC's and Special Programs , as 
currently the Division must rely on voluntary contributions to 
produce even its two flagship publications (namely, the annual 
Africa and LDC reports). 
 
¶10. The delegates requested that the SG of UNCTAD ensure greater 
coordination between subprograms 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, and the Africa, 
LDCs and Special Programs subprogram, and that the SG produce a 
report enumerating the regular budget and extra-budget activities of 
each subprogram in favor of Africa. 
 
¶11.  (Background: The Africa et al subprogram receives a smaller 
budget than the other subprograms since the other subprograms are 
supposed to do work on Africa and LDCs in their areas of expertise 
and coordinate their work with the Division for Africa, LDCs and 
Special Programs.  In practice this rarely happens.  The Africans, 
LDC and special program countries complain that they do not feel 
their countries are given priority, but there are no statistics 
showing regular budget expenditures by country to confirm their 
feelings.  The UN Budget does not break down expenditures by 
geographical regions, such as expenditures on Africa-related issues, 
but rather by type of expenditure, such as travel.  The U.S. has 
both initiated and supported African efforts to get more of UNCTAD's 
budget allocated to Africa and LDC-related work. End Background) 
 
FINANCING FOR EXPERTS FROM LDC'S 
-------------------------------- 
 
¶12.  Currently only Turkey, Switzerland, and India have donated 
funds to finance the participation of experts from developing 
countries. While expressing their appreciation to these donors, 
delegates from G-77 requested additional donor countries to 
similarly contribute funds. 
 
COMMENT 
------- 
 
¶13. The UNCTAD Working Party provides a unique opportunity for 
member states to influence formation of part of the UN's regular 
budget.  However, for the Working Party to exercise that influence, 
the UNCTAD Secretariat must schedule Working Party meetings before 
budget decision meetings in NY.  Delegations from all geographical 
regions agreed that it is valuable for member states to provide 
advice on the formation of the UN budget and chastised the UNCTAD 
Secretariat for not doing a better job scheduling the Working Party 
meetings. 
 
¶14. Despite delegates clear desire to make the Working Party more 
effective and relevant, the Working Party has trouble prioritizing, 
so often its agreed conclusions are so watered down as to provide 
only minimal guidance.  For example, although all countries have 
agreed that Africa and LDCs need more aid, UNCTAD delegates from 
Asia and Latin America are unwilling to reallocate resources within 
the budget to satisfy that need. Instead, the G-77 proposes strong 
language asking for additional resources for everything, which the 
U.S. opposes.  The agreed conclusion requiring the UNCTAD SG to 
enumerate regular budget activities of each subprogram in favor of 
Africa represents a break-through, since it should provide the 
necessary data to convince delegates and the UNCTAD Secretariat to 
allocate more resources for the neediest countries. 
 
¶15. Were the Working Party to become more effective at prioritizing 
its work, the Working Party could guide greater member state input 
to the UN regular budget from subject experts.  The UNCTAD effort to 
track regular budget expenditures by country potentially could be a 
model for great transparency in the UN regular budget. In this 
light, the U.S. should continue to participate actively in the 
Working Party meetings and continue to coordinate with budget 
experts at USUN in NY. 
 
¶16.  Allocation of resources in UNCTAD creates tension in the G-77 
block, where the wealthier developing countries and particularly 
Asia heavily influence the UNCTAD agenda. Since it is a contentious 
issue, G-77 often tries to avoid it.  The U.S. has been, and should 
continue to be, outspoken in advocating for the neediest countries 
and fulfillment of the UNCTAD mandate to make those countries a 
priority. This effort is not only useful on its own merits but has 
inspired delegates from Africa and LDCs to speak out more on issues 
that concern them, including expressing some support for good 
governance, an issue the Asian block tends to oppose in UNCTAD. 
 
GRIFFITHS #