VZCZCXYZ0009
PP RUEHWEB

DE RUCNDT #1014/01 3161457
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 121457Z NOV 09
FM USMISSION USUN NEW YORK
TO SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 7577

UNCLAS USUN NEW YORK 001014 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: AORC KUNR PREL UNGA
SUBJECT: UNGA 5TH COMMITTEE REVIEWS 2010-2011 BUDGET: G77 
AND OTHERS RAIL AGAINST SPM FUNDING INCLUSION IN THE 
REGULAR BUDGET AND DEPRIORITIZATION OF DEVELOPMENT 
 
¶1. (U) SUMMARY:  On October 29, the Secretary General 
introduced his 2010-2011 proposed budget in a formal meeting 
of the  Fifth Committee which continued Friday, October 30th. 
Developing countries called for increased funds to address 
poverty and to reach targeted spending goals on development. 
Many of the same countries attacked the inclusion of Special 
Political Missions (SPMs) in the regular budget, rejected 
arguments to cut spending in the wake of the financial 
crisis, and maintained that efficiency should not necessarily 
imply budget cuts. The E.U., CANZ, Japan, Mexico  and several 
others provided a counter-balance urging delegates to control 
costs, particularly during the financial crisis. Several 
countries railed against the steep increases in SPM funding 
in recent years and suggested that SPMs be placed in a 
separate account apart from the regular budget (this idea was 
proposed earlier this year by the Secretary General in 
informal consultations with Member States on reforming the UN 
budget process).  Ambassador Rice delivered the U.S. 
statement and stressed the need to allocate UN resources to 
the highest priority programs. She reminded the audience that 
the U.S. considers SPMs a critical piece of the regular 
budget.  In addition to the Secretary General, the following 
34 countries  addressed the Committee: Sudan on behalf of the 
G-77, Sweden on behalf of the EU, Mexico on behalf of the Rio 
Group and in its national capacity, Australia on behalf of 
CANZ, Angola, Switzerland, China, Senegal, the United States, 
Morocco, Norway, Cuba, Thailand,  the Republic of Korea, 
Russia, Nicaragua, Japan, Singapore, Brazil, Iran, Indonesia, 
Cameroon, Pakistan, Algeria,  Bangladesh, Egypt, Syria, 
Turkey, Venezuela, Tanzania, Zambia, India, Argentina, 
Vietnam. END SUMMARY. 
 
¶2. (U) SECRETARY GENERAL INTRODUCES BUDGET: Secretary General 
Ban Ki Moon asserted that the preparation of the budget had 
"my full involvement from the strategic framework to the 
budget outline" and claimed the proposals "reflect the 
priorities identified by the General Assembly."  Ban Ki Moon 
outlined three priorities:  ending micromanagement, 
consolidating the number of budget fascicles, and finding an 
"alternative funding mechanism" for SPMs.  He also stressed 
the importance of funding ICT projects, implementing the 
Enterprise Resource Planning system, and the need to take the 
impact of the global financial crisis into consideration. 
 
¶3. (U) ACAQB VOICES RESERVATIONS ON SPM FUNDING AND LACK OF 
INFORMATION:  The Chairman of the Advisory Committee on 
Administrative and Budgetary Questions (ACABQ) addressed 
shortcoming in the budget and noted concern that "a number of 
requirements that have been or will be addressed in separate 
reports" had not been included in the proposed budget. Some 
attention was devoted to addressing staffing needs with the 
ACABQ noting that "no entity in the United Nations 
Secretariat has a true picture of actual vacancies." The 
Chairman called for a review of the plans for new facilities 
and maintenance and seeks more information on "major 
management initiatives and structural changes." 
 
¶4. (SBU) G77/CHINA URGE TRANSPARENCY AND A FOCUS ON 
DEVELOPMENT:   Sudan , speaking on behalf of the G77, voiced 
concern over "efforts to restrain the growth of the budget," 
suggesting that the financial crisis is a "flawed argument" 
to advocate slashing budgets.  Sudan stressed the importance 
of funding developing-world initiatives and called the 
proposed budget "unbalanced to the detriment of development 
related activities." Sudan urged delegates to correct a 
double-standard between the "privileged" mandates, which 
receive a "constant flow of resources from assessed 
contributions or voluntary assistance by donor countries" 
versus the "neglected" mandates that are typically 
"scrambling for a few crumbs of the regular budget." The 
G77/China are concerned over the portion of the regular 
budget dedicated to SPMs and "will not allow priority 
activities funded by the regular budget to be jeopardized by 
the aforementioned increase in SPMs." (NOTE: China 
specicially told the U.S. delegation that they oppose moving 
the SPM's to the regular budget)  Sudan warned delegates away 
from "working out deals in small groups," calling the process 
disruptive and contributing to "mistrust and polarization." 
 
¶5. (U) E.U. REJECTS ABILITY TO FUND CURRENT PROPOSED BUDGET, 
REFERENCING SCALES, AND CALLS FOR GREATER EFFICIENCY: 
Sweden, speaking on behalf of the E.U. and associated 
countries agreed that the "Organization should be provided 
with the necessary resources to implement its mandates," but 
added that given "this period of global financial crisis," it 
is critical for resources to be used "in the most effective 
and efficient way and that the same strict budgetary 
discipline is applied." The E.U. expressed reluctance to fund 
the current budget, which they note is $700 million more than 
the proposal for the current biennium, and added that "the 
European Union wants to stress clearly, this would be a very 
 
 
 
substantial increase which is more than we, as the largest 
contributor, are able to resource." The E.U. alluded to the 
ongoing scales of assessment debate (reftel), calling for "a 
fair and more balanced way to share the budgetary 
responsibilities of the United Nations." The E.U. also 
complained about the piecemeal fashion of the budget 
presentation and stated that proposed budget "is not 
complete." 
 
¶6. (U) NO-GROWTH IS NO-GO FOR MANY:  G77 members came out in 
force against attempts to prevent the budget from growing. 
Angola, on behalf of the Africa Group, stated that, "the 
application of measures that lead to the realization of 
zero-nominal growth in the budget of the Organization does 
not augur well and may actually impede the effective 
implementation of all the mandates given by member states." 
Angola does not support the reliance of "extra-budgetary 
resources", since those resources may not represent the 
collective priorities of the UN. Morocco added that the 
organization is being asked to take on more tasks, but cannot 
do so with "stagnant budget levels, particularly in the areas 
of economic and social development."  Singapore agreed that 
members have "every right to demand the efficient use of 
resources and to stretch every dollar given to the 
Organization," but quickly added that "we should not confuse 
this entitlement with parsimony."  Indonesia considers that 
"zero budget growth just for the sake of no growth, as an aim 
in and of itself, can hardly be perceived as an impressive 
management strategy." 
 
¶7. (U) JAPAN, ROK, RUSSIA, AND OTHERS JOIN CALL FOR FISCAL 
DISCIPLINE: Several countries outside of the E.U. also called 
for fiscal responsibility. The Republic of Korea commented 
that "while adhering to strict financial discipline, the 
Secretary General must also be selective and focused in 
fulfilling the current mandates set by Member States" and 
made clear that  the Secretariat "should follow appropriate 
financial discipline."  Japan continued on the same theme, 
expressing that "additional expenditures must be contained 
within the previously agreed level of the contingency fund" 
and suggesting that "new budgetary requirements should be met 
first through redeployment."  Russia stated that it will 
continue to focus on results-based budgeting and underscored 
the importance of enhancing effectiveness. Russia added that 
the size of the budget is "a matter of concern, particularly 
given the current economic recession."  Turkey pointed out 
that spending choices must be logical and well-matched to the 
economic situation, but referred to the presented budget as 
"reasonable." 
 
¶8. (U) DEVELOPING COUNTRIES STRESS DIRE NEEDS: Singapore 
noted that the "budget assigns less than a dollar to each of 
the world,s inhabitants."  Brazil also rejected the idea 
that "human rights and development should be funded by 
voluntary contributions" and urged members to "strengthen the 
role, capacity, and effectiveness of the United Nations 
Secretariat in the area of development." Bangladesh declared 
that "it is unfortunate that the development account accounts 
for only a meager 0.38% of the regular budget reflecting a 
proportional decrease" and called on members to acknowledge 
that "sustainable development is inextricably linked to peace 
and security." Egypt stressed the need to fund development 
measures in Africa and said the current budget shows an 
"inequality concerning the allocation of the resources." 
Nicaragua added that "development is still the Cinderella of 
the regular budget" and claimed the imbalance reflects the 
lack of a global vision.  Iran referred to development as 
"the cornerstone of this organization" and said the proposed 
budget shows that the pillar is being de-prioritized. 
 
¶9. (U) CRITICISM OVER SPM SIZE AND INCLUSION IN RB: Singapore 
led a chorus of countries against the current SPM funding 
structure, and urged that "SPMs be considered as a separate 
exercise during our deliberations on the proposed program 
budget."  India concurred, stating that "this increase in 
budget for Special Political Missions, which is drawn on the 
regular budget, gives the feeling that the regular budget is 
growing rapidly." India connected the SPM increase on the 
budget to the call for austerity measures and pointed out 
that "the axe of austerity normally falls on 
development-related issues. " 
 
¶10. (U) MEXICO,S BALANCING ACT DEMANDS AUSTERITY AND 
DEVELOPMENT:  Mexico,s Undersecretary for Management and 
Finance Julion Camarena Villasenor spoke on behalf of the Rio 
Group, but concluded by speaking his national capacity. 
Mexico engaged in a balancing act, calling for austerity 
measures, while at the same time emphasizing the need for the 
organization to help the most vulnerable. Villasenor urged 
member countries to fund "those programs aimed at achieving 
better life conditions for our peoples" and stressed the need 
 
 
 
to support development initiatives such as the Economic 
Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC). 
Villasenor targeted  SPM funding, noting that "the Group is 
concerned about the considerable increase in financial 
requirements for Special Political Missions, which are the 
main cause of the budget growth."  When speaking only for 
Mexico, Villasenor noted that "Mexico is committed to an 
austerity measure for public expenditures" and added that he 
expects the Secretariat to find ways of managing the growth. 
He stated firmly that the proposed program budget is 
"unacceptable for Mexico." 
 
¶11. (U) AMBASSADOR RICE CALLS SPMS "CRITICAL" AND URGES 
PRIORITIZING RESOURCES:  Ambassador Rice highlighted recent 
U.S.  payments   that  "dramatically reduced" our regular 
budget and peacekeeping arrears and fully paid our 2009 
peacekeeping assessments thus far.  She said these payments 
are critical to the "new chapter of international 
cooperation" that the U.S. is spearheading.  Rice explained 
that the U.S. position on the budget is focused on endorsing 
results-based budgeting, assuring that decisions reflect 
value for money, and prioritizing commitments in order to 
"determine appropriate priorities for today."  Ambassador 
Rice stressed this final point, adding that "resources 
related to program activities based on prior UN priorities 
must be eliminated or reduced ) unless their continuing 
relevance and effectiveness can be clearly demonstrated." She 
referred to SPMs as "critical priorities" and an "integral 
component of the UN,s regular budget."  Rice called on the 
Secretary General to present a full "comprehensive and 
transparent budget" as soon as possible and voiced "concern 
that we continue to receive the budget in a piecemeal 
manner." (Full text of Ambassador Rice,s remarks can be 
found at: 
http://usun.state.gov/briefing/statements/200 9/131074.htm) 
 
¶12. (U) SUDAN/ANGOLA,S CRITISISM OF SYG,S ABSENCE IS 
QUICKLY REBUKED BY UNDERSECRETARY KANE: Sudan and Angola each 
spoke for a second time at the end of the formal meeting  in 
order to criticize the absence of the Secretary General from 
the meeting.  Sudan expressed "disappointment with the 
Secretary General for not listening to one member speech on 
his budget." Angola noted being "equally disappointed." 
Angela Kane, Undersecretary for Management, admitted that she 
was "a poor substitute for the Secretary General," but 
quickly reminded delegates that the Secretary General had 
been working to address a terrorist attack earlier in the 
week in Kabul, Afghanistan that had killed 6 UN staff. She 
said that the Secretary General had "fully planned to be 
here" and added that given the Secretary General's priority 
to the families of the victims and an emergency session on 
safety being held at the same time as the budget meeting, the 
decision not to attend "does not show any disrespect." 
Rice