|
|
Fifth Committee Report: Week of December 18-22, 2006From December 16 to 22, the Fifth Committee concluded negotiations on resolutions on, among other, Human Resources Management, Procurement Reform, Governance and Oversight, and the Scale of Assessments. PROCUREMENT REFORM Agreement on the draft resolution on Procurement Reform was reached. The resolution consists of 7 parts. Staff Internal Controls Governance Increasing procurement opportunities for vendors from developing countries and countries with economies in transition Procurement Management For background information on these issues read:
Resources Other Issues Relevant Document:
HUMAN RESOURCES MANAGEMENT REFORM Fifth Committee members reached agreement on a draft resolution on Human Resources Management. For an analysis of Human Resources Management reform and an overview of the resolution mentioned above read:
Relevant Document:
Report on Adoption of Resolutions on Human Resources Management and Procurement Reforms:
OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNANCE REFORM On December 20, 2006, during General Discussions, the Fifth Committee agreed on the financial implications of a comprehensive review of the governance and oversight systems of the UN. It is estimated that improving the system-wide oversight and governance mechanisms would require an additional amount of $1.32 million. Efforts will be made to accomodate the amount within the existing resources approved in the budget for 2006-2007. The preparation of the reports on the IAAC revised terms of reference and strengthening of the Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS) would not entail additional resources. However, the organization will need in-house and external expertise in order to formulate policies to build adequate frameworks for enterprise risk management, stronger internal controls, results-based management and better overall accountability. Hence, it is likely that additional appropriation of resources will be necessary. Relevant Document: For further information read:
SCALE OF ASSESSMENTS Background: In informal meetings, Member States continued to discuss proposals to amend the assessments scale methodology. The base period last used was constituted by the average of 6 Years (1999-2004) and 3 years (2002-2004). Some Member States have favored a shorter period while others prefer a longer base period. A longer period would benefit the EU (which currently pays 37% of the assessments and which would see an increase to 39-40% if the current scale would be applied) but would not be advantageous to the developing countries. The EU feels that a longer period would improve stability. Other amendments included a proposal to create multiple gradients for low per capita income adjustments: 85% for the least developed countries, 70% for large countries above 1% of world share and 80% for others. Currently there is a flat adjustment of 80%. The G77 and the Russian Federation do not favor multiple gradients. The G77 favors an increase of the 22% maximum assessment rate to 25% arguing that the US – the only State that pays the maximum rate – had received a reduction to 22% earlier after having promised they would pay their dues in a more timely manner, which has not been the case. The US made it clear that it would not be part of a 25% consensus. In a resolution agreed to by the Fifth Committee late on 22 December, it was decided that the current methodology will be continued. OTHER GENERAL DISCUSSIONS
------------------------------------ Contributors: Lydia Swart and Irene Martinetti In case of errors or omissions, please contact:
|
To SubscribeIf you are interested in receiving UN Reform Watches, Interviews and Fifth Committee Reports email us at: subscribe@ centerforunreform.org Download Book |


