General Assembly Session 51 meeting 64

Mr. Wisnumurti (Indonesia)

The Permanent Representative of Honduras has just informed us of the gravity of the situation created by the hurricane in his country, including the human toll and material damage. Let me, on behalf of my delegation, express our deep sympathy for the people and Government of Honduras. I fully associate myself with your expression of sympathy, Mr. President, and hope that the Government and the people of Honduras will eventually resolve the problems and issues raised by the hurricane with the help and assistance of the international community.

Indonesia has consistently viewed the endeavours to strengthen the United Nations system as a continuous reform process aimed at increasing the capacity of the Organization to play its mandated role, as envisioned in the Charter. It should help the Organization to function more efficiently through a conscious process of readjusting its structure and working methods, which are generally perceived to be a hindrance to its effective functioning. The capacity of the United Nations to pursue these objectives should be strengthened, not weakened, and the operating principles should always be those of transparency, equal opportunity, democracy and full participation of all Member States.

Reforms, be they in the areas of management, organization or intergovernmental process, must be undertaken with the full concurrence and participation of the developing countries, which constitute a majority of the membership of the Organization. The revitalization of this international institution, through a comprehensive process of restructuring its major organs and functions, has therefore become imperative. It is of pivotal importance that the General Assembly, the highest deliberative and decision-making organ within the United Nations system, should function effectively, focusing especially on major issues of political significance. It is our firm belief that the strengthening of the role of the General Assembly is a basic premise of the ongoing process of revitalization.

In this context, the Secretary-General, in his statement to the Working Group last March, rightly observed that the challenge of reform is fundamentally political and should be driven by substantive rather than procedural considerations. He also called for adapting structures and methods to the new global environment and its priorities.

The Indonesian delegation would like to reiterate its commitment to the ongoing process of streamlining and rationalizing the structure and working methods of the General Assembly, which will lead to greater efficiency and efficacy. It is essential to bear in mind, however, that in addressing that issue in the Working Group, the objective is to enhance the Assembly's role within the United Nations. Moreover, the process of reform should proceed on its merits, without diminishing in any way the political importance of the issues under consideration or the right of Member States either to retain agenda items or propose new ones.

Progress achieved to date in the Open-ended High-level Working Group in revitalizing the role of the Assembly, particularly in the context of the reorganization of the Main Committees and their agenda items, the finalization of the revised rules of procedure and the reduction in the number of reports requested from the Secretary-General has been excruciatingly slow. However, it has laid a solid foundation for our future endeavours.

The clustering of some agenda items has already led to tangible results in some of the Main Committees and has since become established practice. It has proven its value for the purpose of eliminating undue duplication and unnecessary expenses without negatively impacting on the proper functioning of the Committees concerned. My delegation also visualizes the possibility of consideration by the Working Group of the question of clustering similar items in the plenary meetings. There are agenda items that could be grouped together, such as those on cooperation between the United Nations and various regional organizations.

As far as the structure of the Main Committees and subsidiary bodies are concerned, my delegation wishes to reiterate its opposition to the views expressed by a number of delegations calling for the merger of the First Committee with the Disarmament Commission. In our view, each has performed and must continue to perform a distinct role. In the First Committee, the tradition of debates has reflected the position of Member States and clarified the myriad of issues involved, leading to the adoption of draft resolutions. But the mandate of the Disarmament Commission is to provide an impetus to negotiations through the formulation of proposals and recommendations. Furthermore, the usefulness of the Commission can be seen in its agenda, which is clearly focused and item-specific. In addition, non-members of the Conference on Disarmament have the opportunity to participate in its work. Considering these overriding factors, the Commission should continue to meet annually and make its contribution to strengthening the multilateral approach to disarmament issues.

Likewise, my delegation has reservations concerning the proposal to merge the First Committee with the Special Political and Decolonization Committee. Each has dealt with a distinct group of issues. The First Committee has focused attention on a wide range of disarmament and security questions and has acquired expertise in them. The practice of dealing with both disarmament and security in the same forum has proven its value, as have parallelism and the coordination of measures in both of these fields. Disarmament and security should continue to be dealt with by the First Committee, without introducing to its agenda items that are already being dealt with systematically and efficiently by the Special Political and Decolonization Committee.

In the context of the United Nations system, the office of the President of the General Assembly is a vital focal point of interaction for all Members of the Organization; yet the potential of that office has not yet been fully utilized. As such, it should be further strengthened, specifically through the promotion of a key role for and through institutionalizing consultations with the presiding officers of the other organs, especially the President of the Security Council, in the interest of democratization and accountability.

In conclusion, my delegation would like to express its support for the recommendations of the Open-ended High-level Working Group, inter alia, that it should continue its work in accordance with the mandate contained in resolution 49/252. In this context, it is our view that annex II of the Working Group's report could constitute the basis of our further work during the fifty-first session of the General Assembly.

Mr. Powles (New Zealand)

I would like to associate New Zealand with the expressions of sympathy extended to the Government and the people of Honduras. Our thoughts are with them at this time of need.

As members know, New Zealand was intimately involved with the work of the Open-ended High-level Working Group on the Strengthening of the United Nations System through the role that my predecessor, Ambassador Keating, played as Co-Vice-Chairman of the Group. We would like to take this opportunity to welcome the appointment of Ambassador Lian of Norway to this co-vice-chairmanship and pledge to him, as of course to Ambassador Shah, our full support.

As the Assembly takes up this item at its fifty-first session, we believe it is important to reflect on what the Group has achieved, and to look forward to what remains to be done and what can be effectively accomplished in promoting the strengthening of the United Nations system.

I would like to begin by considering the report of the Working Group (A/50/24), which was submitted at the end of the fiftieth session. That report records the progress achieved in the work of the Group. We believe the report should allay the doubts of most of its sceptics. The "Strengthening Group" has established a critically important milestone in the efforts of Member States to strengthen and revitalize this Organization. It has made a start in responding to the hopes and ideals expressed by so many at the Organization's fiftieth anniversary celebrations.

Both the style and the content of the report set valuable precedents. It demonstrates the positive and cooperative attitudes which prevailed during the Group's work. The clear acknowledgment of the progress achieved is a testimony to the openness of the Group's working methods. It is evidence that inclusiveness and open-endedness can work. Moreover, it can stimulate a willingness by the members to tackle even the most complex and difficult issues.

We are convinced that we can reshape the future of the Organization, but only if we work in an open, honest, inclusive and cooperative manner. In that regard, the manner in which this Working Group conducted its proceedings will, we believe, be one of its major legacies.

Let me turn now to annex II of the report, the Group's most recent working paper. The frankness and openness of the Working Group in annexing this paper in its entirety to the report is further evidence of the willingness of the members of the Group to adopt a forward-looking approach and sophisticated working methods. The paper in annex II contains not only those topics and ideas on which there was convergence of views, but also those ideas on which there is less convergence.

The willingness of the members to retain all of these ideas in the Group's working paper demonstrates, first, that decisions on many of these complex and far-reaching ideas could not be brought to finality in the few weeks of meeting time available to the Group in 1996. And secondly, it reflects the understandable political reality that in any final outcome to the work of the Group there will be individual ideas or components with which not all members will be entirely comfortable, but which will, when taken together, comprise a whole on which all can agree.

When the Group takes up its working paper again, it will be important for it to hold to the understanding that it should not return to detailed discussion of the concepts on which there was a convergence of views. Clearly some work of a drafting kind will need to be done. But on substance, we need to maintain the momentum, move forward and endeavour to find convergence on the main outstanding issues.

Thus far, the Group has dealt with two major areas of discussion: the General Assembly and the Secretariat. Some of the topics discussed under these headings necessarily overlap. I would like to highlight some ideas which have gained considerable currency through discussion in the Group and which we think will have a significant and beneficial impact on the Organization, when implemented. I would also like to suggest where the work of the Group may logically progress when it comes to take up other matters.

Under the General Assembly topic, the Group identified the need for a more interactive relationship between the Assembly and other organs of the United Nations, particularly the Security Council. The role of the plenary as the primary forum in which the full membership can debate issues of importance in the international community is very much in keeping with the spirit of the Charter. The mechanism for informal consultation described in annex II should help to reinvigorate debate in the plenary on key items.

A second issue discussed under the General Assembly heading, which cannot be ignored when we look to build an Organization that will be able to grow and strengthen in the modern world, is the issue of the relationship of the Assembly, and indeed of the United Nations system as a whole, with the ever growing range of non-governmental organizations and other actors under the umbrella term "civil society". The recent Economic and Social Council decision 1996/297 has recommended that the General Assembly examine and review the question of non-governmental organization involvement in the wider work of the Organization beyond the Economic and Social Council sphere. This and related issues have already been discussed in some detail by the strengthening Group and there are specific ideas in annex II of its report. The Assembly should note this fact and ask the strengthening Group to further develop convergence on this issue. New Zealand is convinced that developing mechanisms for non-governmental organization interaction with the United Nations system that do not alter its fundamental intergovernmental nature and that ensure that the Assembly and its committees are transparent and provide adequate access to civil society actors will be vital for the future health and credibility of the Organization.

Under the Secretariat topic, there was clear agreement in the Group that the current structure of the senior management in the Secretariat, with a large number of personnel at the Under-Secretary-General level, is unsatisfactory. It runs contrary to the desire for greater organizational efficiency. Annex II of the report responds to some of the Secretary-General's own preliminary thoughts, which he shared with the Group in March. It suggests that the Secretary-General review the functions and number of Under-Secretaries-General, Assistant Secretaries-General and Special Representatives of the Secretary-General, with a view to streamlining structures and making lines of authority, decision-making and accountability more transparent.

It also suggests that the Secretariat would be best served by a pyramidal structure featuring a small senior management group under the Secretary-General. This group would be not a new layer of management, but the result of reforms at the Under-Secretary-General level. The creation of such a management group would be linked to the creation of new coherent and transparent clusters of departments under each member of the senior management group. Again, the Working Group has picked up on and elaborated ideas floated by the Secretary-General in March. We believe that this kind of interaction between the Secretary-General and the intergovernmental machinery is both constructive and dynamic. The time has come, we believe, for more concrete ideas along these lines from the Secretary-General, who, as the chief administrative officer of the Organization, has the right and the authority to make the necessary structural changes, not only in the senior management, but also in the clusters that would work under each of the senior managers.

It became apparent during the work of the Group that one of the major challenges before the membership is how to deal effectively with the reality that the Organization as a whole and its executive branch, the Secretariat, cannot be reformed and strengthened in isolation from one another. The intergovernmental process and the number, structure and interrelationships of its bodies must be addressed.

As Member States, we continue to put a disproportionate and inefficient amount of effort into intrusive and time-consuming oversight of the Secretariat. This is reflected most acutely in the excessive micro-management of inputs in the budget process. Micro-management is the biggest constraint facing both Member States and the Secretary-General in any attempt to improve the Secretariat's performance and to achieve a genuine strengthening of its ability to deliver quality service. We need to strike a balance which ensures effective intergovernmental oversight, but which moves away from micro-management, so that the Secretariat is given the freedom to manage its resources efficiently -- and that includes the freedom to decide where jobs are allocated. This would allow Member States to concentrate on setting broad policy and financial guidelines which would give the Secretariat the organizational flexibility most efficiently to pursue the mandates and priorities set by the Member States in the political decision-making process.

The Member States should, via the budget process, determine at the "macro" level how much money should be allocated to each major area of activity. The Secretariat should not be allowed to transfer funds between these areas, but should have the freedom to allocate staff and financial resources needed to implement mandates within these broad areas.

Having set its priorities, the intergovernmental oversight machinery should then focus on evaluating what the Secretariat achieves with the resources it has been given. A key part of this process of evaluation would be for each Main Committee to evaluate, relevant to its area of work, the outputs of the respective Secretariat departments and divisions.

However, particularly in the economic and social field, it may be necessary to go beyond reviewing how the intergovernmental machinery interacts with the Secretariat. Reform and strengthening of the structure of the intergovernmental machinery itself seems unavoidable. The current division of labour across Economic and Social Council and its commissions and the Second and Third Committees is inefficient, often ineffective and sometimes even counter-productive. The argument for radical reform of the economic and social bodies is a compelling one precisely because the economic, social and developmental programmes of the Organization are defined by so many States as their highest priority for the United Nations. I make this point as an indication of areas to which we, as Member States of the General Assembly, must turn our attention.

In this connection, resolution 50/227 set the useful example of relaying broader institutional issues to the strengthening Group for consideration; this would be efficient for various reasons. But a wider question is the more immediate organizational issue: the problem which delegations face, at a time when the highest priority is being given to the whole reform agenda, in focusing attention and devoting energies to no less than five different high-level Working Groups of the General Assembly. We must begin to think hard about whether our time and resources are well spent in so many working groups.

Perhaps, remembering that we must be sensitive to not allowing groups to intrude into the area of work of other groups, we could look at reducing the number of groups. Some of the Working Groups, whose tasks are less urgent, could briefly go into recess. The Informal Open-ended Working Group on an Agenda for Peace is a good example, because its agenda is timeless in nature. There will be major issues on peace and security to be discussed for many years to come. Perhaps -- as it did in 1994-1995 -- that Group could recess for a year so that Member States can focus on the most pressing issues in a smaller number of working groups.

The strengthening Group has achieved a great deal during its brief existence. But it will require the commitment and a redoubling of effort of all Member States to bring this work to fruition and to lay a sound organizational and institutional foundation for the future of the Organization. New Zealand will make that commitment, because we are committed to building a strengthened and effective United Nations that is ready and able to tackle the challenges that lie ahead, and a United Nations system that is more internationally democratic and more representative of the world we live in as the century draws to a close.

Mr. Cassar (Malta)

My delegation associates itself with the Assembly's condolences to the Government and the people of Honduras. Our solidarity goes particularly to the families of the victims of the destruction wrought by the hurricane.

I would like to express my delegation's confidence, Sir, that under your leadership the Open-ended High-level Working Group on the Strengthening of the United Nations System will consolidate the achievements registered during the fiftieth session, which were guided by your predecessor, His Excellency Mr. Diogo Freitas do Amaral. I would also like to thank Ambassador Shah of India and Ambassador Keating of New Zealand, who as Vice-Chairmen skilfully directed the deliberations of the Working Group during the last session.

Reform has been on the United Nations agenda for a number of years. Discussions have ranged from the overall reform philosophy permeating the Organization to the specific reform of the functioning of the principal organs of the United Nations. The process has not been an easy one, nor was it as fast as some would have desired. Change within an Organization as complex and politically sensitive as the United Nations requires in-depth consideration and reflection.

Discussions in the High-level Working Group have reflected an awareness of the intricacy of the issues and the skilful treatment they deserve. The wealth of proposals reflects the keen interest of statesmen, Governments, scholars and organizations alike in promoting change to enable the United Nations to respond better to the demands of our times.

Malta strongly believes that if the United Nations is to improve its credibility and authority in the coming years it must improve its structure, its administration and its competence. Our ultimate aim is to have a United Nations which can adapt itself to changing realities and to insure more democracy in decision-making. Reform has not been and cannot be equated simply with cost-cutting.

As priorities change and emerge, structures need to reorient and redirect themselves. This should not be to the detriment of existing programmes which still hold relevance in today's world. Indeed, some areas on which the Organization has focused for a long time have acquired renewed impetus. The cooperation which supplanted bloc confrontation following the end of the cold war opened new avenues to address such issues.

Malta continues to believe that the United Nations, and the Security Council, should become more representative of today's geopolitical realities and must reflect the general views and opinions of the General Assembly.

The General Assembly's revitalization is a keystone of our work. Discussion on questions such as the streamlining of the agenda, time limits on statements and the organization of work is important. Yet these issues on their own will not enhance the relevance and effectiveness of this important body. Most important, the General Assembly should develop a more efficient mechanism by which the United Nations could implement and execute its decisions more effectively and more quickly.

Malta has been in the forefront in advocating efforts to revitalize the General Assembly, which comprises the totality of the Organization's membership. We have stated our support for an enhancement of the role and office of the President of the General Assembly. This office holds great potential, which can be buttressed through the institution of regular consultations with the Presidents of the Security Council and of the Economic and Social Council. Such a structured process of consultation would better the flow of information and facilitate input by the General Assembly. Decision-making can have a stronger impact through the establishment of a more effective relationship between the various United Nations organs.

A second matter to which my delegation has dedicated itself is the discussions of the reports submitted to the Assembly by the Security Council on its work and by the Secretary-General on the work of the Organization. These are indicative of the need for improvement in the type and nature of the information provided. These reports should enable Member States to assess the success, or otherwise, of activities undertaken. They should contain a balance between the descriptive and the analytical. The reports should be tools of reflection for Member States in helping them set priorities for the Organization and establish the manner in which these can best be achieved.

Increased interaction between the United Nations and civil society is another important area which requires further elaboration. Contributions by non-governmental organizations at the recent United Nations global conferences demonstrated the benefits of an effective partnership leading to an awareness of public opinion and greater involvement at the grass-roots level.

The Secretariat has also been a central point of our discussions. A number of interesting proposals have been introduced on both administrative and budgetary aspects. The Secretary-General's statement contained in annex II of the report (A/50/24) outlines the efforts being undertaken to reform the Secretariat's structures, to streamline activities and to coordinate action. Increased contact and participation with the specialized agencies and the Bretton Woods institutions has enhanced the partnership needed to maximize the benefits of cooperative action.

My delegation shares the opinion that leaner management teams at all levels and the rationalization of the lines of command would make the Secretariat more manageable. Our primary aim should be to enhance coordination and cooperation between different departments and programmes. The point of departure in any reform process is not an arbitrary decision to create additional bureaucratic layers or to delete existing ones, but an objective assessment of existing activities and their coherent direction in a streamlined structure.

Our effort to strengthen the United Nations system is best guided by a renewed faith in the principles on which this Organization was founded. The means we adopt to strengthen the United Nations system should further enhance and underline these principles and preserve that balance which is an in-built characteristic of the Charter.

Mrs. Vargas de Losada (Colombia)

My delegation too wishes to convey its condolences and feelings of solidarity to the Government and the people of Honduras at this time when a natural disaster has caused that country much damage in terms of human lives and economic damage.

I am honoured to address the General Assembly -- the supreme organ of the Organization, in which all Member States have a seat and in which they act on the basis of the principle of sovereign equality -- in connection with the question of the strengthening of the United Nations system, which affects each of us directly and profoundly. Pursuant to resolution 49/252 of 14 September 1995, which established the Open-ended High-level Working Group on the Strengthening of the United Nations System, the Group worked intensively during the fiftieth session, as the report contained in document A/50/24 indicates.

Following the end of the cold war period, the Organization began a phase of reflection about its own nature and about the work that it needed to do in view of the profound changes that international society has undergone. This was done with a view to finding an answer to questions that had arisen with respect to the demands and challenges of that process of change.

A number of open-ended working groups have been set up for this purpose. They have been working intensively to determine how, in which respect, in which areas and to what extent we need to strengthen the activities of the United Nations and its various bodies in order to respond to the aspirations and needs of Member States effectively and efficiently.

The tasks of the Working Groups on an Agenda for Development, the financial situation of the United Nations, the question of equitable representation on and increase in the membership of the Security Council and an Agenda for Peace, and the consultations on possible new ways of financing the operational activities for development, have proceeded separately and in accordance with the mandates that this Assembly gave to each in an attempt to avoid duplication on these issues. Nevertheless, it is clear that those groups are closely linked and that the results of their efforts to find consensus responses that recognize and incorporate the opinions and concerns of all Member States, in particular their aspirations to democratization, transparency, effectiveness and efficiency with regard to matters of importance to the life of the Organization will, taken together, be a driving force behind the activities of the United Nations in the new century.

My delegation has sought to contribute positively to the work of these Working Groups, either on an individual basis or through the Non-Aligned Movement or the Group of 77, and to facilitate the broad negotiating process begun and fostered by this organ.

With regard to the Open-ended High-level Working Group on the Strengthening of the United Nations System, the member countries of the Non-Aligned Movement and the Group of 77 decided to act in concert through the Joint Coordinating Committee. In this respect, the delegations of Colombia and Costa Rica served alternately as spokesman for the developing countries members of the Non-Aligned Movement and the Group of 77, which are chaired by each of them respectively.

On behalf of the Joint Coordinating Committee, Colombia and Costa Rica stressed the need to restore the political authority of the Assembly in various areas of the system, including peacekeeping operations; the fundamental importance of its ability to rely on an adequate and predictable supply of resources so that the Organization can fully perform its functions; and the essential need for it to redefine its relationship with other organs, in particular the Security Council.

They emphasized that the Secretariat should carry out its activities on the basis of the principle of delegation -- that is, on the basis of the mandates and directives that it receives from the General Assembly -- and that the search for efficiency and the introduction of modern administrative methods should in no way be used as pretexts to dismantle programmes that are of concern to developing countries. During the Group's seven substantive sessions, and on the basis of this general set of principles, more specific statements were made on the various items under consideration and analysis.

Although, as was only reasonable to expect, the Working Group did not reach any final conclusion on the issues it was discussing, we believe that the exchange of opinions and points of view on this issue, which is of great importance to the future of the Organization, has been useful. It is our wish and resolve to continue working next year with the same determination in order to explore formulas to satisfy the interests of all the parties involved in the negotiations.

Mr. Moreno (Cuba)

A problem occurred in a Python script. Here is the sequence of function calls leading up to the error, in the order they occurred.

<type 'exceptions.UnicodeEncodeError'>: 'ascii' codec can't encode character u'\xe0' in position 6051: ordinal not in range(128)
      args = ('ascii', u'\n\t<p id="pg008-bk01-pa01">At the outset, I shoul...States -- as enshrined in the Charter itself.</p>', 6051, 6052, 'ordinal not in range(128)')
      encoding = 'ascii'
      end = 6052
      message = ''
      object = u'\n\t<p id="pg008-bk01-pa01">At the outset, I shoul...States -- as enshrined in the Charter itself.</p>'
      reason = 'ordinal not in range(128)'
      start = 6051