A/41/PV.34 General Assembly

Before taking up the item on our agenda for this morning, .ay I, on behalf of all members of the Assembly, extend our deepest sympathy to the Government and people of El Salvador on the tragic less of life and extensive material dam~ge which resulted from the recent earthquake. May I also express the hope that the international community will show its solidarity and respond promptly and generously to any request for help. Mr. MEZA (El Salvador) (interpretation from Spanish): Allow me first of all to thank you, Mr. President, for your kind words of sympathy addressed to my country. I interpret those words as expressing the General Assembly's feeling of deep sympathy at the tragedy from which my country is suffering. Once again El Salvador is on the front page of The New York Tim~. However, this is not an occasion that we welcome being in the headlines, on the contrary, I am weighed down with my people's sufferings. Today we are in the news headlines owing to the tragedy that has struck my country once again. Powerful underground forces have once again caused havoc in my country. Like Mexico last year and Colombia this year, we have received immediate, united support, both from the united Nations Office for Disaster Relief and some fraternal countries. I take this opportunity to convey from the people of El Salvador to you all an appeal and a call for the necessary help to enable us to overcome this terrible tragedy that has befallen us. I hope that all the Governments and countries represented here will respond to this message from my country and realize how much we count on their support and assistance.

With regard to th~ statement by the the representative of El Salvador, I should like to repeat the hope, expressed on behalf of the international community, that it will show its solidarity and respond promptly and generously to the reauest for help by the Government and people of El Salvador.

Before calling on the first speaker for this morning, I should like to remind representatives that, in accordance with the decision taken by the Assembly at its 33rd plenary meeting on Friday afternoon, the list of speakers in the debate will be closed today at 5 p.m. I therefore request those representatives wishing to participate in the debate to inscribe their names as soon as possible. MR. KIKOCHI (Japan): On behalf of the Government and people of Japan, I should like to join in expressing our heartfelt sympathy to the people of El Salvador who are SUffering from a devastating earthquake that last Friday struck a large part of San Salvador and killed hundreds of persons. The Government of Japan has already sent a medical team and other disaster relief assistance to show lts solidarity with the people of El Salvador. On the eve of the fortieth anniversary of the united Nations the Foreign Minister of Japan provosed here in this very General Assembly Hall that a group of bigh-level experts be established in ~n effort to revitalize and renew confidence in the United Nations so as to ensure t~~t it will continue into the twenty-first century a~ a viable, effective and efficient world Organization. Based on the ideas of the Foreign Minister of Japan, Mr. Shintaro Abe, and on those proposed by Rany others the Group of High-level Intergovernmental Experts was established with the unanimous support of the membership to review the effici~ncy of the administrative and financial functioning of the united Nations. Since its inception early this year, the Group - which has come to be known as the Group of 18 - has worked assiduously, with great determination ond oourageJ to complete its difficult task and produce a report which is more comprehensive and more constructive than any other produced in the past by similar efforts. As the representative of the delegation that initiated the concept of establishing the Group, it gives me great pleasure to present my delegation's views on the report of the Group of 18. My delegation pays high tribute to the members of the Group of 18. Their commitment to a more efficient and stronger United Nations, together with the broad experience, knowledge and wisdom that they brought to their wor.k, assured that their efforts would ~ rewarded. Now that the General Assembly has begun its consideration of the report under agenda item 38, I believe it will be useful to recall the background against which the Group of 18 was created and the objective of its efforts, namely, the administrative and financial reform of the United Nations. The Foreign Minister of Japan said the following at the last session of the General Assembly: (Mr. Kikuchi, Japan) 81 aa concerned that the United Nations system JOy be losing the ••• support of pegples jU'ound tile world. It is thus illperative that the Organization itself make a determined effort towards effective administrative and financial reform so that it can function more efficiently. Only in this way will Mmaber States - developing countries beset with diffi~ulties in economic manag~nt as well as major contributing countries experiencing severe financial strain and striving to regain fiscal health - be able to gain the understanding of their peoples and continue their support of the United Nations for many years to come.- (A/40/7, p. 24-25). (Hr. Kikuchi, Japan) 1 wish to aake it quite clear that this cCl'lcern is a reflection of Japan's strQlg support for the O'lited Nations, in the belief that a leaner and more efficient organization will be bet~er able to lleet the genuine needs of Mel'lber States, now and in the future. Japan uintains that adllinistrative and financial reform is urgentl~· needed to bolster ccnfidence in the thited Nations and enhance the effectiveness of its functions. My delegatim is pleased to note that throughout the general deba te at the current session of the General Asseuj)ly, many representatives touched up)n and emphasiZed the need for an administrati.ve and financial reform of our Organizatime My delegatioo is also encouraged by the very positive attitude shOlin in the declaration of the eighth sUllmit conference of the Non-Ali~ed MoI1ement, in which all members were urged -to give due consideration to [the Group of 18] report and recoDlDendatims and to work constructively dur ing the forty-first session of the General AsseDbly in search of the COlllDon goal of improving the over-all administrative and financial efficiency of the Organizatim. - (NAC/o>NF.8/Doc.22, para. 320) The Q:)vernment and people of Japan place great importance on the United Nations and believe that, as the IIlOSt nearly miv«sal institution ever c:reated for the maintenance of peace and secur ity, it is extremely valuable - indeed, indispensable - to the entire internatimal COIDII\K'lity, East and West, North and SOuth. we urge all Member States to work together, positively and constructively, in order to preserve and strengthen this irreplaceable world Organization. The report of the Group of 18 covers a broad range of administrative and financial fmctions and ccntains many constructive recommendations for making the United Nations a more efficient organization. If acted upon and implemented immediately, those recommendations will - and this is most important - lead to the (Kr. KUcucbi, Japan) greater efficiency and higher procmctivity of the wexld IIBchinery and result in significant savings. They will also reinforce and supplement the efforts the secretary-General has been making with regard to the efficiency and effectiveness of the 5ecretar iat. My delegation welcomes the Group's penetrating and expert analysis of the problems and shortcomings of the O1ited Nations. The agreed recommendations are the prodlct of intensive efforts by all 19 malllbers of the Group, who represent all the regions of the wexlCj, to establish a COIDIDCI'l ground acceptable to the entire membership. My delegatioo therefore believes that 'lie, the lelllber States, should consider the recaamendations as a single entity and endClC'se them in their entirety. My delegaticn is prepared to do so, provided that it is joined by other Menber States. In view of the great imp)rtance of the rep)rt and of its implicati~s for the future of the tbited Nations, my delegation sincerely hopes that you, Mr. President, will guide our deliberations perscnally so that a satisfactory conclusion nay be arrived at as speedily as possible. I should like br iefly to highlight those of the wide-ranging reconmenda ticns that my delegation regards as the most important. The first regards the so-called pr inciple of scrap-and-build in the planning and setting up of progranmes. In the course of the 4l-year history of the O1i ted Ha tions, the priori ties of HeRber States have undergone certain changes. New activities have been added, but those activities that have achieved their objectives and those that have lost their relevance have not been properly eliminated. As a result, the ever lengthening agenda of the thi ted Ha tions has led to a constant expans ion of the intergovernmental machinery without sufficient attention being paid to the elimination of redundant or obsolete activities. 'iIlen 'Work programmes are (Mr. Kikuchi, Japan) fragmented am<Xlg too many thited Nations subsidi~y bodies, it becomes extremely difficult for delegatials to participate in them in a meaningful way. Co-exdination amalg those bodies also suffers. It is important to ensure that new bodies are created ally as existing ones that have lost their relevance are discmtinued. My delegation therefor:e fully supports the Group's recommendations that the nU11lber, frequency and duratim of meetings of intergovernmental bodies and IBchinery should be ratialalizad. Although we had hoped that the Group could have been more specific in its recxullDendations for structural reforms of the intergcwernmental machinery, my delegation agrees with the need for a canprehensive review of the entire structure of the United Natials. My delegation also believes that this review should be undertaken by fully utilizing existing exgans and that reforms which are found to be necessary should b~ implemented immediately, without waiting for canpletion of the overall review. The second point relates to staff. Calcomitant with the considerable growth of the intergCJlU'ernmental machinery, there has been a dranatic expansion of the structure and size of the secretariat over the years. we fully agree with the analysis of the Group of 18 that the structure of the 5ecretar iat is top-heavy, too complex and too fragmented. Even with the present organizatimal structure, the size of the secretariat could be reduced by elimina ting duplication, simplifying the hierarchical structure and improving persoonel p:>licies. A leaner and more efficient Secretar iat would be able to I:espcnd more readUy to the needs and expectations of the international coDlllunity. My delegatial therefore believes that streamlining the organizational structure of the secretar iat and increas ing its administrative and financial accountability are urgent tasks. The recommendatioo for a substantial reduction in personnel, particularly in the higher ecl1eloos, is extremely imp:>r tant; it is, indeed, a prerequis ite of other (Mr. Rikuchi, Japan) reforms. We hope that. the secretary-General will t.ake the necessary measures t.o implement. that. recoBDendation without. delay and that. a further recilct.ion will be made 'lben the canprehensive review of the int.ergOl7ernmental uachinery and the United Nat.ions secretar iat. has been oompleted. In implementing the staff reductien plan, beginning in 1987, my delegation also believes that. an l.nint.errupted flow of new blood, with cite regard to equitable geographical distribut.ion, is essential if the organization is t.o reuain vibcant. and well balanced. The third quest.ien is that of persennel management.. The quality of the Organization is a fl.nction of the quality and dedication of its staff. Similarly, the efficiency of the Organizatioo depends in large part on the efficiency of its staff. As stipulated in the Ulit.ed Nations Charter, it is essential to maintain the highest. standards of efficiency, competence and integrity in managing the secretariat staff. In order fully to mobilize the entire staff to achieve the goals of the United Natioos, it is important also to guarantee that persoonel management is based on a clear, coherent and transparent set of staff rules and regulations. My delegation heartily welcomes the contr ibutil.)ll made by the Group of 18 towards achieving these objectives. The fourth point is that of budget procedure. Ensur ing that the United Nations is placed on a stable financial footing is perhaps the most important objective of the reforms. 'lb this end, it is essential that a general agreement be readled amoog Menber States regarc'1ing the desirable level of the programme budget and that priorities be set to determine the appropriate allocatioo of resources amoog various programmes. (Hr. Kikuchi, Japan) (Mr. Kikuchi, Japan) • It is a startling fact that since 1979 Melllber States that account fOl' 70 to 80 per cent of assessed contributions have either voted against or abstained on the regular budget of the tbited Nations. If this trend ca\tinues and the Memer States contr ibuting the bulk of budgetary resources continue to be dissatisfied with mtters relating to the regular programme bUdget, the financial operations and the overall capacity of the united Nations will be gravely affected. My delegatia\ therefcce welcomes the serious eff«ts the Group of 18 has Ede to rectify the deficiencies of the present planning and budget mechanism. The Group agreed on aany iap«tant points regarding new bUdgetary procedures, including the active participation of Member States at each stage and the need for meni>er Governments to give guidance on the level of resources needed to cover all expenditures dur ing a biennium. As for the remaining issues that must be addressed dur ing the current session of the General Assenbly, my delegation is ready to sUPP«t alternative A, which is iDOre specific on the mandate to indicate the level of total resources for the biennilD and on the decision-male ing procedure of the new connittee. My delegatia\ a!n"erely h~s that during the current sessia\ the General Asseubly will make every effort to reach full agreement on ou tstanding di fferencas as speedily as possible. Only then can there be a new budgetary procedure \'!bich will facD.i ta te and encourage broad agreement on the level and content of the prograume buc:.get. Finally, on monitoring and follow-up, on many occasia\s in the past recaumendations on the administrative and financial efficiency of the united Nations have been made, but they have never been effectively implemented. This was due mainly to the lack of mechanisms to ensure and mooitor implementation. My delegation is pleased, therefore, that the Group of 18 has proposed target dates and follow-up procedures to ensure full implementation of its reCCllllendations. Once the Gen~al Assellbly decides to adopt those recOlllllendations at this sessiQ'l we shall have to see to it that the General Assembly itself lRQ'litors progress and ensures their lIlpleaenf!:atian as speedUy and as effectively as possible. qiven the urgent need to revitalize and renew confidence in the thited Nations, it is incUllbent upon us Member States and the secretary-General to work together to preserve and strenthen this irreplaceable world organization. I have spoken an t.h is important subject at some len9th because, as an initiator of th is whole exercise of financial and administrative reform of the thited Nations, my COlDtry is deeply COIIIIlitted to making this world organization stranger, more efficient and more financially sound, thus making the United NatiQ'ls worthy of the fullest support of all Menber States, large or small.

I assure the representative of Japan that I have taken note of the request he has made of me. Ms. IDRANGER (Canada) ~ At the outset, may I extend the condolences and sympa thy of the GoI7ernment of Canada to the GoI7ernment and people of El salvadcx on the tragedy they suffered this past weekend. My Government has already made an initial cQ'ltribution of assistance and we are mQ'litoring the situation carefully, in co-operation with the appropr iate international agencies, in order to determine liihat additional support we may best provide. At this time also, since it is the first occasion on which my delegation has spoken since the re-election of our secretary-General, we wish to add our congratulations to those already expressed. At the present critical juncture for this Organizatim, we have chosen collectiVely and wisely. we look focward to the Secretary-General's giVing renewed vigour to his efforts, as he has pledged, to strengthen the thited Nations, bring it througP its moments of difficulty and (Mr .. Kik.uc::hi, Japan) rcomte Eltilateral co~peration. II'. turn I pledge ay Gcwer.ment's fullest co~peration and assistance to hill in the fulfil1lent of his duties as secretary-General. (continued in French) The delegation of Canada has already used the general debate to expcess its views on the refcxa of the tbited Nations and on the rep«t of the Group of 8igh-Level IntergoverMental EKperts on the administration and financial fWlcticning of the tbi ted Nations. I should like to reaffirm today the position stated by the Canadian secretary of State for External Affa its, .mo spoke on 24 septeDber 1986 and E!lDphas ized Canada's unwaver ing and lcng-standing coumitment to the united Naticns. But, as he also pointed out, this commitment - and that of aany other comtries - has not been enough to protect the tbited Nations from the current crisis. we have pl'shed the instituticn closer to the brink c-e ::;inancial bankrUptcy and we have increasingly depr: ived it of relevance. we now need reform 00 two fronts - financial and political. We have too 10'19 postponed the necessary decisions. The depth of the present crisis and the feelings of apprehension and suspicion it arouses in some quarters are the unfortun.3te results of a past tendency to ignore the need for reform and to defer to some future day the hard work of identifying and carrying out solutions that are fair, sound and practical. We can continue aloog the same line and throw the blame for. the existing mess back and forth at each other. Or we can, and it would be a great deal more profitable to the united Nations and to us all, examine candidly what we have so far achieved, ""'at is required to set the organization on a solid footing and what should be done in the future to strengthen it. It is not a hard choice to make, at (MS. !pr8n9!r, CMada) least foe those of us who w~t to ~otect and to bolster the tbited Nations. It is a Ca'loice that Alas also been made easier as a result of the work of the higb-lerel Group, to ~ich we are very grateful for the quality of the wcxk dcme. The ability of the Group to discharge its Ila· date could not be doubted. It was caapcsed of 18 eminent, knowledgeable perstJns mo truly represented all regional groups. They received ideas and proposals from many interested parties not members. My own delegatien, en 19 June, through a letter fraa the Canadian Ferl1anent Representative, circulated its views on reform to the members of the higtr--level Group and to al.'\. Menber St" tea. The Group "I .~ked intens ively for several months, with the full assistance and co-operaticm of the secretariat and the secretary-General. Indeed the secretary-General made several appeara.'1ces at meetings of ttte Group. The Group's oonclusioos and reCOlllDendatiens deserve careful study, and we should get an "'ith that task. (Ms. Loranger, Canada) My delegation has studied the report of the High-level Group carefully. There are two main conclusions, conclusions that were reached by consensus and that should ~ere and now be endcxsed by consensus. The first is th~t the tbited Nations has grown heavy as it has matured. A diet is prescribed and there sho\!ld be no doubt that a sliramed-c1own Ulited Nations would not only still be able to accanplish its entire work programne but would also probably do its work better. The second main cooclusion reached is that, by and large, the Menber S,ates do not sUfficiently control either the process of planning and budgeting or the process of setting programme priorities. I should like to quote from the report: -It is abOl7e all important to secure that Memb& States take part in the planning and budget procedure from the very begiming and throughout the process. A procedure must therefore be deVeloped whidl makes it possible for Menber States to exercise - at the very begiming of the plaming and budget process, as well as throughout the whole process - the necessary intergOl7ernmental leadership, particularly regarding the setting of priorities within the resources likely to be available. - (A/41/49, para.68) My delegation notes a consensus on specific recommendations cOl7ering a wide variety of issues. While we do not agree with every detail in each recomnendation, we never expected that we would do 50. As my secretary of State for External Affairs stated here last month: -There are some reoomnendations with whidl Canada might quibble-, but, as he went on to say, -this is not the time for quibbling. The reoomnendations should be accepted without dlange and applied as soon as possible.- (Ms. IDranger, Canada) My delegatim firmly believes that, taken together, the 71 recommendations on which a consensus was achieved could significantly imprOl7e the operatim of the united Ra tions. It is out of that convictioo that we urge this General AsSellbly to endorse the consensus reoomnendations as a prelude to speedy implementation, whidl would significantly strengthen the financial recommendations already implemented by the 5ecretary-General. As my delegation believes that improvement of the prograDlRe planning and budgetary procedure is vital, we were cmcerned tha t here there was no overall consensus~ but we are not dispirited. Although the divisioos among the experts were real, those divisions do not obscure the progress made and the widespread - measure of agreement. There was a consensus on the need for improvements in the intergCNernmental nachinery of the budgetary process, on the need foe Menber States to become involved at the ear Hest possible stage in the budgetary process, on the importance of co-ordination between programme plaming and programme budgeting and on the need for the General Assembly to establish at an early date a level of resources available for the tlli ted Rations regular budget. My delegation believes that this high degree of agreeillent gives us a basis for moving forward. Canada has definite views 00 what makes a good plaming end budget procedure, but we are not dogmatic. We are prepared to sit down with other Member States and discuss this matter thoroughly. we are coofident that during this session of the General Assembly we, the Member States, will be able to resolve the points of divergence • (Ms. toranger, Canada) Resolve them we must. We cannot permit this organization to go through another year such as the one we have juSt lived through. MeJ:iber States currently owe the organization $400 million on the regular budget. The financial resources available are diminishing dangerously. Secretar iat staff are operating under ccnditions of uncertainty to which no natiooal gcwernment would subject its own employees. Cu'Crent progranme economie"'- have been introcilced in a largely ad hoc manner. As we gather here this mcxning we are still not certain whether the tbited Na tions will survive financially until the end of the year. Our acceptar.ce or rejection of meaningful refocm will be the litmus test of our commitment to renew the capacity of the United Ratioos to fulfil its mandate. Once the General Assellbly has endcrsed these measures of reform, the Secretary-General will be able to implement some aspects immediately. The implementation of others will require an intergovernmental body to carry out more detailed reviews and to pr0\7ide recommendations for consideration by the General Assenbly. Still others will require the secretary-General to prepare a detailed plan of action for the Assembly's consideration. We shall be able to proceed with meaningful reform ooly if we are fully aware of the implications and have a proper timetable. We must have a clear idea not only of where we are going but of how we are going to get there. Adoption of the reform measures discussed in the rep'r t of the Group is only part of what will be requ'ired to restore the viability of our Organization. The financial crisis, brought about by the arrears and the withholding by Member States of their ccntributiow., must not be ignored. Canada expects that as part of the reform process those countr ies that have long cr iticized the United Ra tions - (MS.. Loranger, Canada) sometimes using non-Payment of assesSlIerl.t i!S a pl'essure tactic - will then act so as to eliminate the problell.s caused by arrears and withholdings. The pl'etext for those acts, which are in lxeach of financial obligations mder the Charter, will no lQ'1ger edst. We consider that the super-Powers bear a special res~nsibility and in this regard Canada expects that they will join in creating the means to eliminate outstanding obligations in this area. we are all, by our very presence here, supportel'S of the Qlited Nations. Whether we view the current cr is is in political terms, in financial terms, or in some coJIbinati.on of both, we can all see _ple justificaticn for the revitalization of the organizatiQ'1o we have anguished long and har:d cner a comprehensive collection of reform proposals. we must now ccntinue the process by endcxsing the reconmendations of the Group of High-level Experts and agreeing on an imprOl7ed planning and budgetary procedure. Slch action would mark an impol:'tant milestcne in the process of ensur ing that the united Nations reJDains a vital and relevant international forlD. My delegatioo calls on Mell'ber States u ~e secretary-General and the secretariat to unite in that endeavour. I wish tc assure the Assembly of the total commitment of lily delegation towards a successful outcome of our efforts. (MS. IDranger, Canada) Mr. WOOLCOTT (Australia): Mr. President, first I should like to associate the Australian delegation fully with the sentimen~s you expressed on the tragic earthquake in El Salvador o Mr. President, the Auatralian delegation welcomes your decision to bring this important item before the plenary Assembly at the first available opportunity. If the fortieth session of the General Assembly was the Assembly of commemoration and rededication to the Charter, then this forty-first session should be seen as the Assembly of reform; as an historic opportunity to strengthen the united Nations. On 1 october in the general debate my own Foreign Minister expressed the Australian Government's continuing, firm and undiminished support for the united Nations and its ideals. He also observed that the Organization would only be endangered if it refused or postponed reform. As ~ne of the first countries to sponsor the resolution which set up the Group of hig~-level intergovernmental experts, Australia has taken a keen interest in its deliberations from the outset. Indeed, ours was one of the few non-member governments to offer some specific ideas for reform directly to the Group at its June session. We take this opportunity to express our appreciation to the Chairman, the energetic and able Permanent Representative of Norway, Ambassador vraalsen, and to the members of the Group for the considerable thought and effort which went into the preparation of their report. The Australian Government's support for the establishment of the Group reflected its strong and steadfast commitment to the United Nations and its desire to enhance the Organization's effectiveness as a force in international affairs. Australia believes that the United Nations should be reformed so that it might serve the interests of all Member states more effectively than it does at present. My delegation was encouraged to note during the general debate that the great majority of Member States share a common desire to make this Organization more responsive to the collective needs of the membership. The Group of high-level experts has performed a valuable service in focusing our attention on the fact that fundamental reform is overdue. For too long we have allowed the system to grow out of control. We have tolerated functional duplication and overlap, over-staffing, over-servicing and budget padding to an extent which would not have been accepted in our domestic systems. At the request of intergovernmental bodies, the Secretariat has become increasingly preoccupied with the preparation of reports, literally millions of pages annually, many of which are rarely read and have little impact on the political, economic and social problems confronting the international community. The agendas of united Nations bodies, including the General Assembly, are crammed with items of marginal importance, which overload the system and inhibit the Organization's capacity to address more important problems and disputes. I think it is important to recognize that it is we, the Member States, which must bear much of the responsibility for allowing matters to develop in this way. We have avoided taking the necessary and often hard decisions for too long. The Group of high-level experts' recommendations now provide us with an important opportunity to begin the process of creating a leaner and more efficient Organization. If we fail to take this opportunity, I fear that the results will he all too predictable. A growing international perception of waste and inefficiency at the United Nations has already given rise to serious concern in many of the countries which contribute the largest share of the United Nations budget. Increasingly, governments have begun to question the effectiveness of t:ie Organization in (Mr. Woo1cott, Australia) cost-benefit terms. Unless we take steps to change these perceptions, there is a real danger that Members will disreqard tileir Charter obligaticns. 'l'bis trend may intensify as Governments come under increasing domestic pressure to reci1ce their financial oontr ibutions to the united NatiQ'ls. De~elopnents over the past 12 raatths demonstrate just how damaging this could be. This is not the place to discuss the financial er isis in detail, but just as we argued at the resumed session of the fortieth session of the General Asseubly', that short-term cash flow problems CX)uld not be divorced from lQ'lg-term reforms, so we believe that our deliberations \Dder this item must take account of the financial situaticn. we note that the 5ecretary-General, in his initial observations on the Group of experts' report, referred to the coo tinu ing r elevance of the financial eris is to our discussioos. In addressing the Group's reoomnendations, we should not forget that the thi ted Na tions financial reserves remain fully committed against arrears and withholdings, leaving the organization no financial flexibility in 1987. I should like to turn now to the cootent of the Group of experts' report and offer several specific comments on the recoumendations. Perhaps the first thing that should be said about these reeommendations is that they do prOl7ide us wi th a starting point for what will inevitably be a lengthy process of reform. It is therefore important that we take steps to ensure the recommendations are implemented as quickly and as fully as possible. There may be some scope for technical clarification in the Fifth Committee, but ooce the proposed reforms are endorsed by the General Assembly, we would expect the 5ecretary~neral to act speedily to put them into effect. In this regard, my delegation has some reservations about several of the points made by the 5ecretary-General in his (Mr. Woolcott, Australia) preliDlinary observations m the Group of high-level experts' repcxt. we ackncwl~ the legitiaate concerns of the staff associatims, but we think these must be addressed in the tzoader cmtext of ~e overall viability of the Qrganizatial. They cannot be allowed to stand in the way of reforlDS agreed up)n by the meuber ship of the 011 ted Nations. The specific recomendations contained in Part A of Chapi:er 11 of the Grol:p's report have the full support of the Australian delegation. We have lal9 argued for such reforms, particularly with ~egard to the nunber and length of meetings and calferences. we also need to find new procedures and methods of work which will enable us better to utilize the time available. Too much time is currently used in the repeti tion of natialal positions in debates and not enough time is spent on constructive dialogue and negotiatial. I think too many people speak for too lalg on too many issues. And I can assure the Assenbly that I, and other meDbers of the Australian delegatial, will heed our own advice on this subject in the future. (Hr. Woolcott, Australia) Part B of chapter II calls for an in-depth st;udy to identify measures to rationalize and st.plify the intergover~entalstructure. We understand the thinking behind this re~endation, but would have preferred to see a more concrate formulation. There is clear evldent:e of functional overlap and duplication, whlc~ steps should be takEln to eliJIinate. We particularly welcOlle the recOlllendatlons in ~rt A of chapter Ill, based on the recognition that the Secretariat is overstaffed, pa~ticularly at senior levels. As I have alceady indicated, we look to the Secretary-General to ilsplement recommendation 15 within the three-year period identified by the Group of Experts. In our view the opportunity should not be lost to reduce inefficiency while redeploying coJlPetent staff 1n accordance with recommendations 16 to 24. It would not, in our view, be adequate for the Secretariat to seek to implement recoamendation 15 simply by means of attrition. The recommendations contained in part D of chapter 111 deserve careful consideration and follow-up. It seelle to my delegation that the lack of precision in a number of these recommendations could give rise to problems of implementation. The Secretariat should be in no doubt of our resolve to reduce administrative overheads by streamlining the Organization. Chapter IV contains 26 recosmendations, many of which are in the form of exhortations to implement existing rules and regulations. There are, however, a number of proposals which deserve particular attention. Recommendation 54 calls, for example, for limits on the lp.ngth of service of senior officers of the Secretariat. This is consistent with the Australian Government's proposal that, as a general principle, heads of all United Nations bodies should be limited to two terms in office. If implemented, this principle would serve to break down rigidity, inject new ideas and make organizations more responsive to current needs. (Hr. Woolcott, Australia) We also endorse recolDendation 61, which calls for a reduction in 'the total entitle~nts of staff ~rs. Like the Organization as a whole, staff .embers must accept that times have changed. As the Australian Foreign Minister said in his general debate state-ent, it would be wrong for the United Nations in any ¥ay to be seen as setting an eXaJllPle of conspicuous consulllption. Before concluding my statement, I should like to outline my Government's position on the MOst difficult and important part of the Group's report, namely, chapter VI. The introductory section of chapter VI, on which the Group agreed, has the great merit of acknowledging that the present priority-setting system is not sufficiently effective and that new planning and budget procedures are required. The Group also agreed that reforms were necessary to enable Member States to take part in all stages of the planning and budget process. However, as we are all aware, there was no consensus on precisely how this objective should be aehieved. I do not believe it would be productive to enter into a detailed analysis of the three options contained in chapter VI of the Group's report. Our own views on the need for new mechanisms have been set out in some detail on previous occasions and I will do no more than summarize theM here today. First, let-me make it clear that we fully recognize that the issues involved are complex and politically sensitive. We are concerned at the apparent level of mistrust which has arisen in relation to consideration of chapter VI. We very much hope it will be possible to resolve any differences in this area between groups in a positive and constructive manner. Whatever budget decision-making mechanism is finally adopted, it should, in our view, contain the following five essential elements. (Mr. Woolcott, Australia) First, Membe~ states must be able to determine resource allocations in accordance with more clearly defined priorities. secondly, Member States must be consulted fully prior to the preparation of the biennial programme budget and medium-term plan. Thirdly, atl upper limit on the level of the budget must be agreed by Member States before the Secretariat submits its expenditure proposals. This limit should be determined on the basis of the actual resources available to the Organization. Fourthly, any additional expenditure which becomes necessary after the preparation of the programme budget should be accommodated within the approved budget ceiling. Fifthly, to the greatest extent possible, decisions should be taken by consensus. Only in exceptional circumstances should voting become necessary. It should be a matter of principle that the budgets of the Organization should in future enjoy the widest possible support. It is the view of the Australian delegation that, taken together, these five elements would provide a more effective means of managing the Organization and a basis for resolving the financial crisis. It is essential that we take decisions at this Assembly which address the fundamental problems identified in the high-level Group's report. This is not just a debating point. We are dealing with the future of this unique and irreplaceable Organization. If we fail to reach agreement on major reforms and to start this process of reform at this forty-first session, then the conseauences for the future of the United Nations could be both crippling and disastrous. Mr. MAHBUBANI (Singapore): Mr. President, my delegation also would like to associate itself with the sentiments you expressed on the tragic event in El Salvador, which has caused the loss of so many lives. (Mr. Woolcott, Australia) Since we are discussing an agenda itell that was originally proposed by Japan, it may be appropriate for lie to begin by recounting a Japanese folk tale whicb I beard a long tiJle ago. This is a tale told of a young Japanese boy who woke up early one IIOrning and left bis village, set by tb6 sea, to walk up a bill to work on the r ice harvest that had just been collected. When he reached the top of the hill and looked down at his village he saw to bis bor~or ~t a tidal wave was approaching and was about to engulf and destroy the village and the villagers. He knew at that IIOIM!nt that he had no tiJle to rush down to wake up and warn the villagers. Out of desperation, be decided to burn the rice h~rvest, knowing that the fire would wake up all the villagers. The rice harvest was lost, but the lives of the villagers were spared. (Hr. Mahbubant, Singapore) The thited Hstions is about to be engulfed by a sillUar tidal wave. If I sOWld sc.evhat infla.atDry in sa.e of -z co-.ents this a.'iE'ninq, I hope W:f colleagues wUl realize that I an only burning a few thi~ H!tions rice stalks to alert e'l7er~ne to the tidal wave that is coiling. we all know what that tidal wave is. In the past few ..mths the thited Nations secretary·'General has issued s~eral reports on the critical financial situation of the Organization. The latest one, dated 11 septelllber 1986, has agairi resinded us that the thited Nations llight not have the funds to aee it through to the end of the year. This situation has added a sense of urgency to our consideration of the rep«t of the Group of 18. I had the ~ivUege and the hcnour of serving personally in the Group of 18. It was ay first experience wi th an intergOl7ernaental ~ttee and it taught me a great deal. It aade lie understand why the reports of intergOverrmental bodies are generally flawed. In fact lnY one of us wo served in the Group of 18 could have individJa11y written a aucb better report than the one we have before us. HOlIever, each item in our repoct had to be endcxsed by all 18 experts. In that process SOlle good proposals and any bad p~oposals were killt ..' Inevitably, we ended up with a selectioo that ncne of us was caapletely satisfied with. Inevitably I beca-e discouraged with this process, but I began to read the rep«ts of earlier thited Nations ee-ittees set up to discuss previous financial er ises. In the footnote in the text of ":l speecb I have listed three such repor ts , but let lie just read out the cooclusions of two recent repocts. The 1972 repoct ended with the follOlling lines~ -In submitting the pcesent report, the Special Coaaittee has been unable to focaulate a C:ClIDCIl position on the mtter of resolving the financial situation of the tklited Natioos since no COIlDOn viewpoint was reached among 1Iembers of the Comai t tee - • (Mr. MahtMbani, Singapore) The 1977 report CQlcluded with this sentence: -The Negotiating CoIIIittee was un2ltfle to r~c::b a consensus OIl a solutim to the financial difficulties of the organizaticn. B The report of the Group of 18, when J(~sured against these ~eQedenta, seems alDtost rel70luticruary by ccmparison, because the Group .maniaously agreed that the time for reforr had co.. The report is also refreshingly frank in analysing the weaknesses of the O\i ted NIltions. Fa: ex_ple, in the L it!t'.>dllcticn, the intergovernaentallllachinE:' r 7 is said to have Ban <Werly cogplex structure which generally suffers frail lack of cClhesion· (A/4l/49, para. 2). It further states: Bthe considerable resources allocated to conferences and meetings are not put to IIBxi.om pcomctive use. The vol.-e of docUJIentation ••• has ••• surpassed the limit of what; [v,d> be studied and constructively used by Melber States. B (ibid., para. 3) It notes that the thiUd Nations secretar iat Bis too complex, fragmented and top-heavy· (ibid., para. 4). SUch language has nel7er befa:e been used in the United Nations contexto The report also has 71 recoJllllendations, the vast majority of which were adopted amanimously £!\Ten thoucjl many meDlbers, including myself ~ may have had pr ivate reservations about some of them. Persmally, for exalllp1e, I am disappt)inted that the repoct calls for CNet 10 studies to be dme. A call for a study is often a substitute for actim. What the United Natims needs is action. To be fair, the report of the Group of 18 also cmtains concrete recoJlll1endations which can be implemented immediately. For example, first, recanmendation 15 calls for the entire staff to be cut by 15 per cent and states that the senior posts of Onder-Secretar ies-General and Assistant secretaries-General should be cut by 2S per cent. secmdly, recommendation 16 says that the political departments should be consolidated to avoid duplicatim. Thirdly, reco.-endatim 21 calls for a reduetion in the nUBber of staff of the Department of Politieal Affairs, Trusteeship and Deeolcnizaticn, 1.'\ reco91ition of the successes of ·the O1ited Nati<Jns in decolcnizatim. Eburthly, recolllllendatim 3S says that the nW1ber of outside eonsultants should be cut by 30 per emt wi th im!Dediate effeet and that the praetice of hir ing retired staff members should be abolished. Fifthly, recommendation 38 says that there are too many travel missions and that the level of offieial travel should be reCklced by 20 per cent. ~ the best of my knowledge, nel7er befoc:e has an intergcwernmental eommittee agreed to such concrete and speeifie measures for reform. The success of the Group of 18 should be attributed to its Chairman, Mr. Vraalsen, for he wccked tirelessly to ensure that the final report contained some meaningful and conerete recommendations. In doing so, h~ has created a new precedent whieh I hope will be followed by Chairmen of future such coltlllittees. All of us here owe him a sincere vote of than"s. The report, I should like to stress, is not perfeet. Many delegatioos in this Hall could, I am sure, suggest imprcwements. In praetical terms, however, knowing how difficult it is to get any prop:>sal endorsed by 17 other countries, I find it even moce diffieult to envisage any new proposal being easily endocsed by 158 countries. Therefore I propose that the General Assembly adopt this report, imperfect as it is, beeause it enbodies, in my view, a clear and reascnable call to action. In endorsing the report, the United Nations General Assent>ly would also be sending an important message to the tbited Nations secretariat. we know that over the years the secretariat has grown out of control. The Mentler States have never collectively protested against this qcowth. In faet many Meuber Sta tes have (Hr. ~hb1bani, Singapore) individually ccntributed to the problem. It is otwious to any management analyst that no chief executive officer can function with over 80 deputies, which I believe is the situation our secretary-General faces. Yet" in spite of this large nuDber of Assistant secretaries-General and Under-Secretaries-General, there is always pressure upon hia to appoint moce. I was told, for example, about something which occurred when U Thant was secretary-General. When be was ill in hospital, a Foreiq... Minister requested to see him very urgently- U Thant, thinking that he had a serious political problem to discuss, agreed to receive him at his hospital bedside, only to discOl7er sOtae~at sadly that the Foreign Minister only wanted to lobby him to appoint one of his nationals as an Assistant seeretary~neral. Clearly the time has come to put a stop to this practice. The report of the Group of 18 says this explicitly. The big<Jest weakness of the repor t of the Group of 18, hQiever, is its lack of agreement on the recommendations in its chapter VI on the plaming and budgetary procecilre, which is prcbably the most critical chapter. Ironically, in the introduction to the chapter, especially in paragraPis 65 to 68, all merrbers of the Group have agreed 00 the deficiencies of the present planning and budgetary procedures. They have also agreed on the need to recti fy these de ficiencies. Given this agreement, the lack. of consensus on the recoIIlllendation in paragraph 69 is all the more tragic. (Mr. Mabbubani, singapore) I susp!ct that IIOSt repr~entatives IIUSt be as puzzled as I was wen I first read proposals (a) and (b) of that paragraph. The differences seem so minute that it is strange that no agreement was possible. More tragically, even though the differences appear so minute, a heavy cloud of suspicion already surrounds those proposals. I am not discussing proposal (c), because I lnderstaned it is not being seriously considered. Let me state clearly, for the record, what proposals (a) and (b) do not call for. First, .neither calls for weighted voting in a.'\l' form. Neither proposal would transform the tklited Nations into the United Natioos Industrial Developnent Organizatioo. secmdly, nei ther would take me final decision-making p::>wer on the budget away from the General Assembly, which, as Article 17 of the Charter states, "shall consider and approve the budget of the Organizatioo·. As a small State, Singap::>re is fundamentally opposed to any weighted voting in the tlli ted Na tions, because it would lndermine the fmdamental pr inciple of sovereign equality. I was sorry, therefore, to learn that some members believe that some form of weighted voting is hidden in Chapter VI, although I have to acknowledge that recolIlllendatioo H of prop::>sal (a) has a misleading reference to the decision-mak ing record of the Committee for Programme and Co-ordinatioo (CPC). Is it possible to explain prop::>sals (a) and (b) in simple terms? I shall try. The proposals revolve round two tbited Nations COItIUittees, the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions (ACABQ) and the COItIUittee for Programme and Co-ordination, both of which have been in existence for some time. I believe that conrnittees, like human beings, develop and take on a life and character of their own. Hence the AC1lBQ, especially mder the outstanding chairmanship of Ambassaoor Coorad Mselle, is universally acknodedged to have done a good job, while the CPC is generally said to have failed in both its planning and its co-<)rdinatioo functions. lbt surprisingly, therefore, both proposals (a) and (b) reCOlllll\!lld that the CPC be strengthened through the election of expert aembers. Both proposals (a) and (b) also agree that the improved CPC should look more carefully at the programme budget each year. Even more significantly, both proposals agree on the need to define the lelTel of resources for the budget. They also agree that a limited financial envelope should cover additional expenditures, although proposal (a) is 1I0re specific in calling for a caltingency fmd of a'lly 2 per cent of the estimated budget, Which, incidentally, should have been adequate to meet the additional expenditures incurred in previous years. B;)th proposals also stress that any new additional expenditures outside the financial envelope would have to be obtained through redeployment of resources fran low-priority to high-priority areas. Baving participated in the Group of 18 discussials, I wish to assure you, Mr. President, that agreement on those points was not easily arrived at. If we cannot agree on anything else, let us at least agree on those cr itical points. ~at, then, is the heart of the disp.1te between proposals (a) and (b)? It revolves round the roles of the ACABQ and the ePe. Significantly, both proposals acknowledge that there would be inevitable problems in having two camuittees looking at the same budget simultaneously. To under stand what· problems that might create, try to think of a human body with two heads, each giving simultaneous instructions to the one pair of hands and one pair of legs on what to do. Unless the two heads CX)~perate, the hands and legs will become entangled and the body will tr ip over. In the same way, if the CPC and the ACABQ are given responsibilities over the thited Nations budget without careful definition of their respective roles, the budget will have two heads, possibly pulling in different directions. Why, then, can we not agree on ale head instead of two? In an ideal world, that would be the best solution. In the real wor Id, we have to live with untidy solutions. Hence I (Mr. Mahbubani, Singapore) fear that the thited Nations will have to live with those two COIEittees. Consequently, th.eir roles and functions will need to be carefully defined. That is the nub of the pcoblem that we, the Melllber States, are counting upa'l you, Mr. President, to solve, because the Group of 18 has, as the report says, fully discharged i~$ mission and dissolved itself. We have not had a pr:OlDising beginning in trying to find a solutioo. Even befcce the report reached the fiocx of the General Assellbly, aerima'ly had already begun. If the United Nations suffers from any chronic flaw, it lies in its tendency to tie itself up in pcocedural wrangles. we have already witnessed a . somewhat uns1!eraly discussion over whether the reIOrt should be discussed in the plenary meetings of the AsseJlbly cc in the Fifth Caamittee, as thoug. the AsSeDbly and the Fifth COIiIRittee are two colllpeting bodies. I am afraid the ci tizens of our col.lltries and outside observers must be puzzled by this debate and wOlder why the United NatiOlS is arguing whether the financial pr:oblems should be solved by its head cc its tail. Ther e is a danger also that the acr iJlony that has alr eady sur faced will blind us to the dangers of the tidal wave that my Ei\gulf the thi ted Ha Hons. I do not want to S\>und alarllist, but I hope I can take the attention of our mentlers away from the procedural wrangles for a few minutes to pause and consider this questiOl: Who gains if the United Nations is actually engulfed by the tidal wave? The answer, to me, is o17.Tious. The first State to gain will be SOUth Africa. As it is the only State to be declared here an internatiOlal outlaw, the SOuth Africans are bound to laug. if the thi tea Rations grinds to a halt. Nor will SOU th Africa be the only State to laugh. There ate other natioo States - including, I am afraid, Ole in my regiOl, South-East Asia - 1IIbich have violated ftmdamental pr inciples of international law. They will also be happy to see the end of the (Mr. Mahbmani, Singapore) tbi ted Nations. The super-PCYAers, foe obvious reasons, are also IDllikely to shed any tears if the United Natims disappears. Who will suffer if the united Nations disappears? Bere again the answer is obvious. The small States of the woeld are in many ways a mique twentieth century creatim. Until the second WOrld war, the war that led to the founding of the united Nations, werld history was generally dominated by me theme~ might is right. The united Nations is now trying to reverse a few thousand years of human history by stating that right is might. It is never easy to go against fmdamental historical trends. Hence, it is not surprising that the existence of the United Nations appears to be so precarious. As one of the smaller States of the United Nations Singapore is alarmed at the dangerous situatim certain MelIber States have created for the Unite~ Nations. The pr imary responsibility for this must lie with those States that have illegally wi thheld their cmtr ibu tions. Yet the small Sta tes have not been blameless. As my Foreign Minister said in his statement in the general debate, the small States acted ·..,isely at the founding of the United Nations. Be quoted the following paragraph from Inis Claude's classic work, Swords into Plowshares: ·Small Sta tes are not necessar ily the saints of the in terna tional community ; if great natioos are inclined to abuse their strength by behaving dictatorially, small ales are often tempted to abuse their weaknesses by behaving irresponsibly. But many small State representatives at san Francisco displayed a high degree of sta tesmanship. They did not challenge the principle of great Power leadership. Indeed, they welcomed it and relied upon it, but they made great and some\llhat successful exertions to modi fy it, and to oonfine its expression within tolerable bounds.- (A/41/PV.5, p. 68) The small States represented here today have to recOl1er that same wisdom and statesmanship and work with the major Powers to ensure the survival of the United Na tions. (Mr. Mahbtmani, Singapore) • 1st me stress me point here - tihich I believe the Chairman of the Group of 18 has also stressed~ this is not a !brth-South issue~ ncx is it an East-West issue~ ncx is it an issue affecting mly me particular regime Instead, this is an issue in whiCh all sull States have a COJllllOn interest, cutting across the traditimal lines that divide us in this Hall. Just as the Cmference cm the Law of the Sea deaonstrated that it could cut across the traditimal divisims in the United Nations, so too ~ust the small States here mite to fight for the survival of the United Nations. The Olited Nations is the COIlllCll'1 ground that we need to discuss the critical issues of aertheid and Namibia, the Middle East and Palestine, Kanp.1c:hea and Afghanistan. If we lose this COUlllOl1 ground we will also lose the oppor tunity to harness the conscience of mankind on these critical issues. In fact, sadly enough, our absorption in the financial cr is is has already diverted attentioo from these cri tical issues. Therefore this is my final question~ Is the disagreement CN& the roles of the CPC and the ACABQ so fmdamental that we are prepared to jeopardize the future of the Olited Natims CNer this issue? Mc. KORIDNEN (Finlandh My delegation wishes first to join in the expressions of s~pathy addressed to the people of El salvador. Any organizatim should continuously review its efficiency. Efforts to strengthen Olited Nations administrative capabilities should be a part of our everyday work. At this time, however, for well-known reasms, these efforts are pranpted by a sense of urgency, even by the pressure of an immedia te financial crisis threatening the solvency and thus the Viability of the United Natims, as the secretary-General has noted in his annual report. Dur ing the past decade several initia Uves and decisions were adopted for the pupose of strengthening the United Nations and iJlprcwing its administrative procedures and structures. In this connection, I recall the considerations and sUCjgestioos included in the report of the Nordic Q)verrments of 10 J\Dle 1983 on the strengthen ing of the O1i ted Ms tions. Good ex_ples are also the so-called restructur ing resolution 32/197 in the area of economic and social questions and the prograJlUle planning resolution 37/234. The Finnish delegation, together with other Nordic delegations, has over the years called for better plaming and implementation of tl1ited Nations programmes and, in particular, for a better: linkage between prograllllies and resource planning, for: setting of programme ~iodties, and for better evaluation and mcnitoring of implementation of the prograuaes. There has been progress on many of those questions - progress that has not been easy to establish and develop. At the same time, we rea:>gnize that several significant parts of the adopted resolutiens and decisions have not been impleaented. There are likewise many areas of thited Natiens activities still to be covered or: reconsidered in the light of changing priorities set by HeDber Stat'!S. There is mc:h to be dme to ratienalize and streamline the United Nations administrative and intergovernmental structures. Consequently, Finland very mch welcomes the rePOrt of the Group of High-level Intergovernmental Elcperts and coJBends its able members and intrepid Chairman, ADbassadorvraalsenof Norway. Likewise, we welcome the secretary-General's cOlllllents on the report contained in document A/4l/663. My delegatien, being one of the original sponsocs of the resolution establishing the Group, commends the work done by the Group - and done in the spir it of consensus on most of the issues dealt wi the The report is a valuable centinuation of the work previously undertaken in aany areas of O1ited Nations activities and, at the same tille, points out several new p:(i)leas in the Organization's work. The rec:o-.endatiats dwell in a ee-p:ehensive aamer on a vast area of adllinistrative and aanagerial questions p:cwiding, in our opinion, a good basis for further developnent of United Natiats aaainistrative and intergoverr.-ental structures. we also note that the Group has made several concrete and detailed recaraendations relating to -.any issues, while on others it has provided ooly guidelines for further study. Ca'lsequently, several questioos seem to be as open as ever in the light of the relevant resolutions acbpted yearS' ago. let me also refer to the reco.-endatioos relating to perscmnel measures. In our view, the p:oposed staff cuts lack the detailed criteria which are absolutely necessary for this measure to be effective. In addi tiat, the prograJaatic pr ior ity setting as a bas is foe the cuts v ill not be decided, according to the reCOllllllendations, by the Me~er States but by the secretary-General. On the persoonel recoDlDendatioos as a tibole, I catcur vi th the ebservations set f~th in the 5ecretary-General 's note. My delegatioo regrets that the Group of 18 did not reach agreement 00 the revision of the scale of assessments. we believe that there is broad sUPPort for the idea that the present scale does not adequately correspond to the Organizatioo's needs. Finland also regrets that it was not possible for the Group to reach agreement at plaming and budget pcocedures. Consensus should be our aim also in progranning and budgeting declsims, and it must be found 00 the basis of agreement on our operatiooal requirements. The cootent of our programme of wcxk is, in thited Natioos reality, the only reasooable point of departure in determining the scope of resources needed. That aim would be greatly facilitated by strengthening the . (Mr. Kor haten , Finland) intergovernmental mec:haniSllS. we welcome all the pcoposals of the Group of 18 to that effect. An effective intergoverI!1llen~3!.pceparatory mechanism is a prerequisite for better planning and implementation of thited Nations programmes. It is necessary, in particular, in order to p:OI1ide an instrument for establishing the p:iorities for the tbited Nations p:ogramme of wClI[k. That would contribute to our better judgement on the need for and use of resources. My delegation looks fCll[ward to further consultations m planning and budget procedlres on the basis of various proposals, including those presented in the report. we are confident that agreement on this issue can be reached and we are ready to participate constructively in the forthooming negotiations. The Group of 18 had to work Wlder the pressure of time~ against that background we understand the problems involved. The crucial point at this stage, therefore, remains the implementation of the recommendations. As the Secretary-General points out in his note, there must be an orderly, sequential process that will permit ratiooal and adequately planned implementation of the needed changes. During this session of the General Assembly it is necessary to agree on the implementatioo phases. That would be facilitated by prodlcing a plan of action which would provide not only a sequence of issues to" be implemented but also a clear picture of the intergOl7ernmental mechanisms that would guide the different phases of implementation. (Mr. Korbalen, Finland) My delegation hopes that after appcopdate discussion, the reCOElendations adopted by the Group of 18 by consensus will be accepted. The goal, however, should be clearly mdecstood - the implementation of the reCOllUllendations Bust strengthen and promote the role of the Olited Nations. we are not seeking a change merely for the sake of change, nor should we destroy "'at has been achieved. we Bust be guided by the principles a,d purposes of the Charter. The balance between the interests of all MeDber States must be lIBintained. Mr. D.l)UDI (Algeria) (interpretation from French)~ First and foremost, on behalf of the Alger ian delega tion, let me cOl1l1ey our deePest Sytlpa thy to the people of El Salvador at this time when tragedy has befallen them. During this critical period in the life of the Ckganizaticn, at a time wen we are consider ing the Report of the Group of 18 00 the efficiency of the administrative and financial ft.nctiooing of the tllited Nations, it is extreJllely important to stress and to welcome the unanimous support shown for a perSal who symolizes the peraanence and t.niversality of the Organizaticn. This is undoubtedly a tribute paid by the entire international coDllunity to the man who has been able to lead this Organization with faith in its principles and with deterllinaticn to achieve the goals of the Charter of the united Naticns. It is also a reco~ition of his qualities as a responsible leader, steadfast in the defence of the ideals of multilateralism. In accepting this new mandate in circumstances he knows to be difficult, Mr. Javier Perez de Cuellar has shown his unshakeable fa ith in the future of this Organizatioo and thus desecves our acknowledgement. We very much hope that the trust shown by Menber Statas in the secretary-General of the Organizatioo will enable us to ewercome the present financial er !sis, thus enabling us to make progress in promoting peace and development. Geneca1 Assellbly resolution 40/237 gave the Group of High-level Intergovernmental EKperts the mandate to conduct a th«ougb review of the administrative and financial matters of the ll'lited Nations, with a view to identifying measures for further iJaprOl7ing the efficiency of its administrative and financial fmcticning, wich would ccntribute to strengthening its effectiveness in dealing with political, economic and social issues. It is wi thin the framework of that goal that my delegation is present.ing its statement on item 38, entitled "Review ef the efficiency of the administrative and financial fmcticning of the ll'lited Nations~ Report of the Group of High-level Intergovernmental Experts to Review the Efficiency of the Mministrative and Financial Fmcticn ing of the ll'li ted Nations·. OUr current debate is of paramount importance because, over and abO'le the real problems il1l7olved in imprO'ling the fmctiClling of our Organization, we see the need to strengthen it to enable it to achieve the goals set out in the Charter. The commemoration last year of the fortieth anniversary of the tbited Nations, throtJ9'1 a lucid evaluation of its ach ievements and its shortcomings, showed a new awareness of that need, ~ich led to the creation of the Group of High-level Intergovernmental Expel: ts. By instructing that Group to review the administrative and financial fmcticning of the Organizatiaa, MeDber States showed their readiness to undertake a ser ious process of reflection and action so that they might better be able to carry out their responsibilites in regard to peace and development. It was thus only natural that the Organization would engage in self-criticism - not in regard to the goals of peace and development, which are and remain its very raiscn d'etre, but rather in regard to the deficiencies inherent in its method of fmcticning, which has been socely tried in its 41 years of existence. (Hr. D;ioudi, Alger ia) It is 8Jually true that the search fOl: a new balance to re.dy the administrative and financial shcx:teollings of the organization should not entail, by a soct of perversicn, a convergent pcocess that would interfere with the multilateral fra.work. Indeed, the O1ited Nations is at a critical juncture of its existence. The financial difficulties confrcnting the Otgcmization are serious not merely because they are disturbing its ncx:el functicning, but also because they are threatening its solvency - indeed, its very survival. The present difficulties are being stated in ~litical terIDS and they cannot be cwercome by recourse to milateral measures oc the various forms of pressure being exerted 00 the Otganizatioo. Ccnsequently, the preservatioo and consolidation of the autbocity and credibility of the thited Nations depends on the respect shown by all Member States for the indivic:lJal and collective obligaticns entered into mder the provisions of the Charter. My country's participatioo in all efforts aimed at improving the Otganizaticn, in the General AssetIDly, the Fi fth Carni t tee, the 5ecood Commit tee and coamit tee and groups with limited meIllbership, as well as in the Group of 18, stems from our desire to cootribute to collective action to ensure that the U1ited Nations will remain faithful to its vocatioo as a privileged forum for dialogue and concerted action on international problems. My country affirms its readiness to continue the effort to ratiooalize the activities of the Organization that the Group, because of obvious time constraints, was not able to complete. In this regard, the Report of the Group of 18 deserves our full attenticn in plenary meeting as well as in the Fifth CCDRlittee, since it has shed light on the nature of the prc:t>lems to be solved. (Mr. Djoudi, Alger la) The relevance of SOIIe of its cCllc1usions makes it a basis for discussion and negotiatim in the concerted effort to bring about gl:oter efficiency in the actions of the united Nations. Given the need to safeguard the funda1lenta1 functims of the Organizatim, it should be possible to tackle the restructuring of the intergOl7erlUllental IElchinery and the secretar iat and to iJlprOl1e the methods for the preparatim and implementation of the progr..e budget in order vigcxously to pursue the process of illprOl7ing the adJlinistrative and financial functioning of the Organization. (Kr. Djoudi, Alger ta) The study undertaken by the Group of E1cperts en this IMtter clearly shows that the proliferation of United Nations activities in response to the needs of a world in evolutioo poses management problems relating to co-ordination and the demarcation of mandates. The result has been the administrative top-heaviness and excesses the Group of 18 has diagnosed in its report. Coostraints of all types prevented the Group from carrying out a deeper analysis of all these problems. It is therefcxe essential that the Assenbly entrust that task m an intergovernmental colllllittee, which in the view of Jllf delegatioo could be the Committee for Programme and eo-ordinatioo (CPC), ~ose terms of reference and experience appear to m~ke it the most appropriate body to carry out that task. In doing so, the C011IDittee should be guided by a desire to strike a balance between the need to m£~ge ex elimina~·'A. certain bodies and the need to strengthen others. we believe that the same approach should prevail in the study of the nonber and frequency of the meet1ngs and ccnferences which otwiously constitute a basic part of the organization's activities. The Group of Experts has proposed detailed reconmendatioos on the restructur ing of the secretar iat. we apprecia te the effort it I'IBde in that respect. While noting the cogency of many of the recomnendations, we believe it is appropriate to call for the advice of the secretary-General, if, his capacity as the highest officer of the Organization, to enable us to take the necessary decisions with due regard for his authority and the need to preserve the secretariat's dynamism and skills. It goes without saying that in this res tructur ing exercise the continuity of the Organization's activities must be bcxne in mind. The secretary-General must therefore be allowed full scope to exercise his prerogatives in this respect. (Mr. Djoudi, Alger la) It is therefore" incuDbent upon us all to act in a constructive and CQ-ope!:ati~e spit it tQ pLese;;'Ve ooth Uie achievements that have been made over our 41 years of existence and the balance that has been struck by the Organization across the extremely broad range of concerns of Med>er States relating to economic and social co-operation and the broader Calcerns about international relations. !II.atters relating to the budgetary machinery, though they were the subject of a general review, did not give rise to any unanimously accepted recommendations by the Group. That is uncbubtedly due to the conplexi ty of those matter s. Hewever , that does not mean that the search for agreement is beyCXld us so lalg as our efforts are made within the overall framework of respect by all for the principles and purposes of the Charter. we must also have a correct perception of what is really at stake and I need hardly say that does not and never could involve any question of cCXltrol CHer the Organization by ale group or another~ it is strictly a question of making the Organization more effective in dealing with the problems it was established to solve. With that in mind, we must consider reviewing the present method of preparing the budget. The Group of EKpert's diagnosis in this regard emphasizes that Member States are not fully involved in the preparation of the budget. The remedY lies not in restructuring the the budget ltBc$inery but rather in adopting a new method so that Member States can participate and that the level and content of the programme budget would be negotiated throughout the budgetary process. Colsequently we could consider accepting alternative (b), contained in chapter VI of the report of the expel ts, who, according to wha t we know of the Group's work, sought to strike a conpromis.~ that, although based on a different original position was designed to take account of the effor ts to improve the budget machinery contained in alternative (a). (Mr. Djoudi, Alger la) Certain elements of alternative (b) suggest a procedural solutim for a prcblem identified as one of methods of work, but the acceptance of other elements of that same ;;.I:.r"posal would demand sacrifices of us, which we are nevertheless ready to make if that would ensure the financial stability of the Qrganizatioo's programmes. The proceciJre we have in mind for examining the prograDllling and financial aspects of the Qrganizatioo's activities, which my delegation will explain in further detail in the Fifth Committee and during the consultatioos that are to be held, could be as follows: first, the negotiation of the general plan for the future progratlll1e budget, which the secretary-General would submit to the Fifth Committee, through the CPC and the Advisory Committee 00 Administrative and BUdgetary Questims (ACABQ), in a nm-budgetary yeaq and, se(X)ndly, the drawing up of the draft programme budget m the bas is of guidelines which the Asseubly would in the main have already negotiated in the CPC, the ACABQ 2I'ld the Fifth Coumittee. rn order to ensure the txoadest possible agreement 900g Memer States on the budget's (X)ntent, the CPC's functions in planning and co-ordination of prograumes must be strengthened to include examination of the order of priority of programmes and to make the medium-term plan the pr incipal directive of general p:>licy in establishing the programme budget. The responsibility foe establishing priorities among activities should remain the prerogative of the CPC and the intergovernmental bodies cmc~ned, and presupposes agreement m the specific and objective criteria that should prevail. The question of addi tiooal expenditure could be solved by including the more for eseeable expendi tures in the body of the budget and by establ ishing a fund to finance the impact of inflation and currency fluctuatims. This new procedure presupposes the full implementation of the rules and regulatioo6 governing the planning of progranmes and the applicatia'l of all the (Mr. Djoudi, Alger fa) provisions of the terms of reference of the CPC and the ACABQr the carrying out of the process of improving the functioning of the CPC and its conditions of work, the bcoadening of the meDbership of the ACJlBQ, the strengthenin9 of the c:o-ocdination between the two budgetary structures through the holding of joint meetings and the allocation of the time necessary for negotiations en the centent and level of the budget in those two Conmittees and in the Fifth Conmitteer whose functions as a committee dealing with programme and budget natters should never be in any way altered or restr icted. The wor k of the Group of 18 has at least made it possible to deflate the excessively alarmist views about inefficiency and alleged lack of ratienality in the functioning o~ the organization, and has strengthened our belief that the origin of the present difficulties is rather to be fOWld in the decline evident in some quarters in the political resolve to give multilateral cooo<»peration its prc'r.er place in international relations. It is certainly necessary to redouble our efforts to improve the management of the secretariat and ratiCl'lalize of the work of intergovernmental bodies, but that must not distract us from the real reasCl'ls for what we have since last year been speaking of as the present financial crisis of the thited Nations. ti) one can call for improvement in the administrative and financial functiming of the thited Nations and at the same time cmtinue to place serious obstacles in its way by exerting persistent financial pressure and unilateral measures. If r the organization is allowed to founder for lack of funds while we are considering and aCbpting the report of the Bi9h-lel1el GrouPr it would be to nullify all the effort invested in the organization for over 40 years. It would also disappoint hopes pinned to the efforts of the Group of 18 to reconcile the disagreements ~etween Member States. (Mr. Djoudi r Alger la) OVer and above the recommendations of the Group we are convinced that the financial crisis will not be overcome unless Member states make an unalterable commitment to fulfil their financial obligations. It would be an illusion to believe that the recommendations of the Group could alone solve the problems in the functioning of the Organization caused by the practice of withholding. It is only logical, therefore, that the prOVision of sufficient funds in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Charter is the prereauisite for the implementation by the Organization of the recommendations of the Group of 18. It must not be forgotten, as was pointed out by the secretary-General in his note of 1 october, that the primary aim of the present exercise is to give the Organization the means to implement its substantive programmes and carry out its activities with increased efficiency. The Secretary-General, whose foresight and efforts we deeply appreciate, as we do the dedication he has always shown to mitigating the effects of the crisis, and his firm stand in defence of the purposes and principles of the Charter, can be assured of Algeria's support. states Members can best show their active solidarity at this ttme by fulfilling all their commitments under the Cbarter and giving him the necessary means to give effect to the recommendations of the Group of 18, the purpose of which is to strengthen an institution which, by its very vocation, is at the service of all nations collectively and iNdividually. Mr. BARNETT (Jamaica): First of all we wish to express our deep sympathy with the people of El Salvador, who have been the victims of a tragic earthquake. The Jamaican Government has studied very closely the report of the Group of High-level Intergovernmental EXPerts to Review the Efficiency of the Administrative and Financial Functioning of the United Nations established by the General (Mr. Djoudi, Algeria) Assembly. My delegation wishes to thank the Chairman of the Group, Ambassador Tom Vraalsen of Norway, for his clear statement in presenting the report. We also wish to express our appreciation to the Group for its competent and dedicated work in providing thoughtful and tho\19ht-provoking recOlUllendations to further achievement of the goal of an efficient and effective united Nations syster.l. We have taken note of the observations by the Secretary-General ,;'/41/663) and await his detailed comments on the individual recommendations in the report. In examining the recommendations of the Group, my delegation has been guided by the need for the Organization to preserve the universal participation of the membership in the decision-making apparatus on administrative and financial questions, in accordance with the CharterJ to develop an organizational structure which is responsive to the legislative mandates and limits duplication of activitie8J to maintain an objective, efficient and dedicated international career civil service which will implement impartially the decisions of the legislative bodiesJ and - last but by no means least - to recognize the pre-eminent position of the Secretary-General in the management of the Organization as its chief administrative officer. All of these elements have been addressed in the report. My delegation will support many of the Group's recommendations because we believe that their adoption could help to make the United Nations a more effective instrument for the strengthening of international peace and security and for international economic and social co-operation. We must, however, be careful not to distort or redirect the purposes, principles and goals of the United Nations in order to seek to satisfy the concerns (Mr. Barnett, Jamaica) about efficiency and financial soundness. As far as my delegation is concerned, the process of administrative and financial reform should not be a smokescreen behind which the united Nations system is reorganized to the detriment of the majority of its MembeLs. We must also bear in mind that much of the important work of the United Nations and its related organizations is not done at Headquarters. In the final analysis they will be jUdged by the qua~ity of their programme delivery in our countries. The report has usefully highlighted the problem of co-ordination. This, along with proper planning, execution, monitoring and evaluation and inspection will ensure that the united Nations system does not sauander the limited resources made available to it. Many of the problems have been identified in earlier reports, so they are not entirely unkr~wn. In this regard, we conaiaer that the function of evaluation, like aUdit, should be carried out by an independent internal unit in the Secretariat, as well as by the external system - like the Joint Inspection Unit and the Board of External Auditors. This would ensure timely identification of activities that are -obsolete, of marginal usefulness or ineffective-. Most of the money for development activities now comes from voluntary funds. While these are sincerely appreciated, we cannot help but note that by the increasing shift to voluntary funding the principle of collective responsibility enshrined in the Charter is being undermined, since these funds can easily be withheld an~ impair the impartial treatment of all participants in the multilateral process. (Mr. Barnett, Jamaica) It is for this reason that my delegation cautions against the funding of developmental activities totally from volu~tary contributions. If developmental activities are to be "rationalized", bow can fUnding be assured where funding is voluntary - as is the case, for example, with the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) - when the activities now in the regular budget are funded from assessed contrib~tions? We have also noted recommendation 8 (3) (d) calling for the management and control, at the intergovernmental level, of United Nations operational activities for development. While my delegation has no fundamental objection to this proposal, we need to make sure that it does not result in an unwieldy body that would have little time to give to individual programmes. The experience of the Economic and Social Council in seeking to carry out its mandate should be borne in mind. We agree that the established procedures for selection of the criteria for setting th~ relative priorities should be strictly applied by the intergovernmental machinery and the secretariat, and that the medium-term plan should be made to serve as "the principal policy directive" for the programme budget. The oversight and legislative bodies - the Committee for Programme and Co-oroination (CPC) and the Economic and Social Council - should ensure fulfilment of their mandates. We note that a start has been made in addressing these issues. I have dealt in brief with the planning, evaluation and monitoring functions of the intergovernmental bodies, since my delegation concurs in the view that these are of particular importance in ensuring administrative efficiency and the proper use of resources. I turn now to the recommendations on the intergovernmental machinery and the structure of the Secretariat. (Mr. Barnett, Jamaica) The Group of High-level Intergoverl'llRental Experts has reea-ended that a CQBPrehensive study of the lntergover~ntalmachinery and its function be carried out, and its findings presented to the General AsseJllbly no later than at its forty-third session. At the same tiae, the Group has rec~nded a substantial reduction in the number of staff aellbers at all levels. While we think that this is a laudable goal, we would prefer to have these reductions considered in relation to the study, in order to ensure that there is no negative illlpact on the programme activities deter.iDed by the General Assembly and other legislative bodies. The suggested percentages seem to have been taken out of the air. We note that the Secretary-General has emphasized the relationship between possible changes in the intergovernmental machinery and modifications in the size, composition and work of the Secretariat staff. My delegation strongly supports the maintenance of a highly motivated, efficient and competent international civil service. Proposed changes in the conditions of service should be examined by the International Civil Service commission to ensure system-wide application. We believe that only with predictable personnel policies will the united Nations be able to attract and retain th~ calibre of staff needed to implement its programmes. Here I must share some concerns about some of the recommended measures regarding personnel. We would wish to have further information - including the projected costs - on the proposals to hold world-wide national competitive examinations and to have individual tests up to the p-s level. My delegation has in the past expressed its reservations with regard to extending competitive examinations beyond the recruiting grades of P-l and p-2. The rec~ndations concerning the number of staff on fixed-term contracts do not appear to have taken into account those Member States that have fewer than (Mr. Barnett, Jamaica) 10 nationals - sa.et1aes two or three - e~loyed in the secretariat. We also believe that perJlanent appointJlents should be related to job perforaance, and not to the staff aellber's country of origin. My delegation has studied carefully the different proposals submitted by the Group on the planning and bUdget mechaniSll. While some parts recasend themselves for consideration, we believe that there should be further discussion on the implications of the proposals if broader agreement is to be achieved. At this tille, however, I will note that ay delegation believes that the functions of CPC and of the Advisory Co..ittee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions should be retained in their present forJll. It would, however, be useful for CPC to have available to it inforaation on the level of resources required for it\1?lementing the program.e budget. In its report, the Group has drawn a distinction between those recommendations that could be taken into consideration by the General Assembly at this session and those questions that require examination in greater depth. However, some of the recommendations for tmBediate implementation would appear to have a direct link with some of those requiring in-depth analysis. We agree, for ~xample, that the procedures and methods of·work of the General Assembly, the Economic and Social Council and their subsidiary bodies should be streamlined, and that the Com.ittee on Conferences should be strengthened. It seems to us, however, that the level of resources allocated to conference services JIlust be an integral part of the budget process, since conferences and meetings are mandated by legislative bodies. Similarly, the creation of a new body by the General Assembly cannot be arbitrarily linked to the discontinuing of an existing one, without regard to the functions mandated. We assume that the recommendation was intended to emphasize the need for periodic review by the General Assembly of the functions and work programmes of its subsidiary bodies. (Mr. Barnett, Jamaica) There are other recommendations about which my delegation has some serious reservations. These include recOlllDlendation 24. in which it is suggested that tlNDP take over the functions performed by the Office of the united Nations Disaster Relief Co-ordinator - an obvious incompatibility - and reeommendation 25 (2) on the integration of the Centre for Science and Technology for Developaent into the Department of International Economic and Social Affairs and the Department of Technical Co-operation for Development. My delegation will COIllIltent on these recommendations in detail when the studies on these proposals are presented. (Mr.,Barnett. Jamaica) Mc. KJlBANDA (Rwanda) (interpretation from French): Mr. President, I wish to associate my delegation with the ex~essions of sympathy addressed by you this mcrnL,g, on behalf of the General AsseJlbly, to t.~e delegatim of El salvador 00 the eartlquake that struck that COlDtry in the past week-end. I wish first to pay a tribute to the Group of High-level Intergovernmental Egperts for having carried out in record time and in a highly commendable way the mission entrusted to it by the General Assembly at the fortieth session. I coogratulate the Chairman of the Group of 18, A1IDassador Vraalsen of Na:way, on the admirable way he introdlced the re~rt in the Assembly. The report before us shows the weaknesses in the administrative and financial functicming of the United Nations and proposes remedies in the form of recommendations. It would have been desirable, however, for the Group of 18 to have had the necessary time to consider all the questions relating to the "administrative and financial flDCtiooing of the entire tllited Nations system, including the specialized agencies that have direct service relations with the secretary-General. We have the impressioo that for the most part the Group considered ooly the administrative and financial system of the secretariat. we believe that a f ..,Uer study should be lndertaken as soon as possible. FUrthermore, the Group of High-level Intergovernmental Experts expressed th,e opinion that a study of the flmctiooing of certain intergovernmental organs should be considered in order to ensure their effectiveness. My delegatioo shares that view and believes that the General Committee of the forty-first. sessioo could here and nOli be given the task of considering the recolIlllendations formulated by former Presidents of the General AsseIlbly and by the As ian-African legal Consul ta tive Coomittee, as well as the rationalization proposals of the 5ecretary-General. we are not opposed to refocm, cootrary to what certain press elements, foe undeclared motives, have said. we want reform, but not any reform at any price. Speak ing of the current cr is is in the Organ izatioo, the current Cha irman of the Organization of Afr iean Unity (OAU), President sassou-Nguesso, stated !n this AsSelli:>ly about two weeks ago that this crisis ·touches upon the very philosophy of international relations in our time, and the degree of credibility given to the multilateral system, which has been p:ltiently built up over 40 years. We therefore say yes to reform, if its purpose is to strengthen this valuable instrument, because a choice between a world with the United Nations and a wor Id without it would simply be a choice between the future, promising solidarity, IDJtual mder:standing and peace, on the one hand, and the past, meaning mistrust and the use of force as a means of settling disputes, on the other. ·Obviously improvements are necessary and desirable to ensure more rationalizatioo, with a view to greater efficiency and work that is more closely geared to the ncole aims of the san Francisco Charter. But the necessary changes should not lead to justification of the Organizatioo's very existence being called into question.· (A/41/PV.l7, p. 7) This should allay any doubt as to the intentions of the Africans. The delegatioo of R.o1anda welcomes, as I have said, most of the reconmendatioos of the Group of 18 and are prepared to coo tr ibu te to discuss ion of the proposals that have not conmanded a consensus within that Group, in particular the views coocerning Chapter VI, because these are merely three series of opinions which can be compared with other O2inioos. The participatioo of the delegatiQ'l of Rwanda in discussion of the reforms would be based 00 the following. (Mr. Kabanda, Rwanda) First, there must be full respect fex the Charter, ale of the cardinal principles of which is the scwereign equality of States. That principle cannot be Ixought into disrepute or violated in any way. secondly, we must aafeguard the prerogatives of intergoverDJlental bodies, particularly as regards programing future activities, co-ordination and monitoring. In this respect the prerogatives of the General AssE!lllbly, the EConomic and Social Comcil and the secretary-General as regards programming and drawing up pr ior i t!...es must be respected. Thirdly, the reforms envisaged should not place the secretary-General, who is the chief adainistrative officer responsible foe the managing and carrying out of pragrames, in a rigid institutional framework within which hin freedom of actiQ'l and right to take initiative would be impeded. We re-elected him ally four days ago. On our behalf the representatives of the regional groups promised him the necessary support in fUlfilling his missioo. we must keep the promise we renewed to him. Fourthly, the mechanisms for drawing up programnes and setting the order of priorities for programmes and sub-programmes are perhaps not operating to the full satisfaction of all Member States. we must have the courage to acknCJrlledge that, if it is the case. att we must also have the courage to'impcOlle their effectiveness if, after careful consideratioo, we realize that the rules and regulations gC7.7erning their operation are outdated. If, Q'l the other hand, this examination shows that the present rules and regulations are satisfact:6ry, we must leek foe the reasons wy they have not been respected and apply the appropr ia te remedy. (Hr. Kabanda, Rwanda) !!'.: d~e~tim does not: bel.if!!1e that it was a good idea to pt'opose the creation of alternative mec::banisms before this thorough, objective consideration of the rules mder Vaic::b the existing -ec::bcmisms operated had taken place. It could only agree to this appcoacb if it were assured that the needs that justified the establishment of the existing medlanisJlS no longer existed or that the new substitute mec::banisas would be more effective. Fifthly, the right to establish pdodties in pt'ogrammes cannot be the prerogative of certain CX)untries, but must be the right of all Mentler States of the organization and of the deliberative bodies, particularly the General AsseJlilly and the FconoJDic and Social Council. (Mr. Kabanda, Rwanda) Sixthly, the idea of large and small contributors, which is being increasingly int~oduced, could distort the facts of the problem and divert our discussion, which we want to be sincere, objective and constructive. M1 delegation is convinced that, in order to collect the contributions due to the Organization, all the contributing Member States must make an effort which is perhaps auantitatively disproportionate, if one takes into account the figures, but qualitatively comparable. The disproportion in the amounts paid to the Organization should not be the basis for uneaual treatment among Member States or confer any prerogative for speaking on behalf of so-called small contributors. Rwanda, one of the poorest countlies of the world, a land-locked country with a small area and a rapidly growing population with an annual per capita income of less than $300, is making a tremendous effort to put together the contributions it owes to the Organization as well as to other international bodies to which it has freely acceded. It is entitled to claim that it is doing everything in its power for the United Nations. It simply hopes that all Members will do their utmost to discharge their obligations. There are many ways of killing an international organization. The worst way is to use it for one's o~~ purposes, whether this be done by a State or by a group of States. My delegation must condemn this dangerous trend, which attacks the very essence of multilateralism, which has served the interests of mankind so well. The United Nations is not a super-Government or a fedfcal State, still less a corporation in which each shareholder determines his own int';~sts by the single yardstick of how much he pays in. The United Nations is an organization of free and sovereign States acting through dialogue and co-operation, which is pledged to seek as honestly as possible the best solutions for the problems facing mankind, to ensure the best possible conditions of existence and development. The united Nations is, as it were, a juxtaposition of sovereignty, in which each one has its own views on the various items and seeks to compare those to others' views( without imposing its own views at all costs. It is a political organization which must be activated by the collective political will of the Member States. It is our duty to work for its survival so that the principles and purposes set forth in the Charter can best be implemented. For most of our peoples, the united Nations represents the best, if not the only, guarantor of their independence. For those that are not yet members of this family, the United Nations constitutes the only hope for the recovery of their freedom and independence. At the commemoration last year of the fortieth anniversary of the United Nations we reaffir~ed our faith in the Organization. Today we have no right to block its path. On the contrary, we have a duty to put it back on track, or rather we, as Member States, have a duty to become imbued again with the spirit of the Charter, as that is the only way to satisfy the wishes of our peoples. Mr. BEPBURN (Bahamas): First of all we should like to join other delegations in expressing heartfelt sympathy to the Government and people of El Salvador at this time of their tragic loss. The complex question before us today is by no means novel. The financial emergency, though a vexing and embarrassing situation, is one of the components of the general malaise that Member States and Secretariat personnel have been experiencing in this Organization over the years. Evidently Member States worked on the assumption that this too wouid pass. However, it did not pass. Rather the auestion of finance became more and morc acute because of a number of other irritating circumstances: first, declining morale of the Secretariat personnel; secondly, the inability of the united Nations, particularly the Security Council, to deal with regional and global problems in an efficient and expeditious manner; and, thirdly, frustration of Member Governments with the status auo. Because these symptoms are inextricab'k intertwined, they result in a vicious cycle which makes simultaneous treatment imperative. Allow Wte to refer to what Y have alluded to as staff JIOrale. There seeas to be an artificial separation between Secretariat staff and Muber States except where financial and budgetary aatters are concerned. In allDost all other areas there is a lack of meaningful exchange. Should this not give us cause for alara? If, as we all agree, reforas .ust be made, then any re-exaaination of a rationale for an international civil service .ust go hand in tt<",ld with structural and administrative changes. TO illustrate the point I made earlier. Maurice Strong and the Aga Khan in a report on the united Nations financial eaergency admonish: -care aust be taken to ensure that the staff is not left with the feeling that all the cost savings are being made at their expense and that the entire burden of th_ Organization's financial crisis is being laid upon their shoulders.- What is even .are startling is the ambivalence that is evident among States regarding recognition and acceptance of the urgency of the need for interdependence and multilateralism. Everyone recognizes the iJmaediacy of the problem, but when they are faced with acceptance, which means action, then there are vague excuses, withdrawals or even total negation. My delegation's experience has shown that the combination of recognition and acceptance of problems makes for a more constructive and less painful process for reforms. This is only one example aJIOng myriads of other pertinent suggestions which recognize selective surgery as counterproductive. My delegation has read with interest the report of the Group of 18. The comment I wish to make at this stage is that the recommendations could serve as a sound basis for our deliberations on the medium-term and long-term future of the United Nations. Of course it is only human that the 18 high-level experts would wish to see some tangible results from their hard work, and the Assembly would be remiss if it let this opportunity pass without taking a positive decision on those several recommendations that lend themselves to consensus. (Mr. Bepburn. Bahamas) I CODnend the Chairman and members of the High-level Group for their valuable contribution in the preparation of the report. Yet as we deal with the broader ramifications of this sensitive issue we may tend to criticize or to cast blame. It would be in our best interest to refrain from such confrontation, as the United Nations is the sum of its member Governments, and all would benefit from, or be handicapped by, the decisions made. We should not resort to one-upmanship, for eX8l'lple, but should, rather, seek interdependently to: first, discourage mediocrity and nepotism and provide for eauitable distribution of nationals in all areas of United Nations serviceJ secondly, encourage recruitment of personnel with initiative and skill, and eschew discrimination on the basis of sex, creed or national origin; thirdly, reduce situations which breed animosity, injustice and political rivalry; and fourthly, eliminate selfishness and promote selflessness. As the question concerns a highly technical and political matter, my comments may seem somewhat esoteric, but they support my initial premise that the united Nations is in crisis and that reforms should go far beyond the financial and administrative aspects. My delegation understands well, and empathizes with, those Governments that pay the lion1s share of the United Nations bUdget and feel that that entitles them to a larger slice of the pie. That is precisely how any profit-making business venture should operate. But, while the United Nations should be conducted as a serious business, it is non-profit and should not be held hostage to the peCUliarities of Governments. No country, small or large, should be allowed to be in arrears. Small States should not feel intimidated or coddled by large States. Large States should not now seek to abrogate their agreements as signatories of the Charter, whose language and format clearly did not take into account the expansion of either the membership or the Secretariat. (Hr. Hepburn, Bahamas) I concur with a"comment that someone made to me recently: -This is the most auspicious moment to create a new United Nations - renewed in structure and spirit - lean perhaps, but potentially a great force for good, and an example of a well-run machinery culled from the best elements in the civil service of Member States. Dicken's words, that these are the best of times and the worst of times, is a timely paradox. There are many things we can do, and several recommendations have already been presented for our consideration. However, let me underline two actions that my delegation believes could solve this dilemma. The first deals with our responsibility as Member States to see to the survival of this uniaue and vital Organization, despite its imperfections. We have placed a great deal of confidence in the Secretary-General by re-electing him to a second term of office. That should not remain a passive gestureJ rather, it should be translated into active support for the programmes of reforms that the Secretary-General knows he must initiate if he is to fulfil the mandate that he has accepted. He knows as well as we do that the task is not an easy one, but, having accepted the fact that we have a problem here, we have no alternative but to tackle it head on. That means always seeking to eradicate those imperfections which may exist. Secondly, it is my conviction that the Secretary-General can now act from a position of strength. Be should not waver or be swayed by those who may welcome IlthiS time of crisis as an opportunity to sound the death-knell of the concept of (nterdependence and mUltilateralism, the last hope for international peace and security. As philosophical as it may sound, we are all convinced that the United Nations cannot fail and that reforms across the board would strengthen its future. We may ~ot all, however, be prepared to have those ohanges made at our expense, but, as (ME. Hepburn, Bahamas) Flui"a Lew'"ia sta~ Lw: he~ ~t!cl'!! in ttt~ 10 OCtober issue of TbeReW York T:illes, •••• the deformation can't be allowed to destroy the only structure there ia for a reasonably organized world. :It is clearly illPOs6ible now to change the Charter and sake it IIOre realistic. Perhaps it is even undesirable because hopes and illusions can play a constractive role a'C a ti_ of widespread bewilderaent and loss of direction o • We are indeed at the crossroads, and only decisive leadership and selfless co-operat~c;)h will help us to cOllPlete the onerous task of refont and reorganization that will allow the United Rations to carry out the task for which it was founded. The Reetinq rose at 12.55 p••• (Mr. Hep!)um, Babaaas)