Delegates called for a more detailed picture of funding needed by the Secretariat to help implement the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Addis Ababa Action Agenda, as the Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary) considered the Secretary-General’s report on the subject.

Bettina Tucci Bartsiotas, Assistant Secretary-General and Controller, presenting the Secretary-General’s report on supporting implementation of the two agendas, said an extra $33.5 million for biennium 2016-2017 and $42.5 million for 2018-2019 would be required to pay for enhancing the Secretariat’s role to carry out related tasks.

However, Carlos Ruiz Massieu, Chair of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions, said the body could not recommend the appropriation of resources at the current stage because the Secretary-General’s report failed to comply with the General Assembly’s request for a comprehensive proposal on how the Secretariat would help Member States implement the agendas.

Thailand’s representative, on behalf of the “Group of 77” developing countries and China, agreed with the Advisory Committee’s concern, calling the Secretary-General’s report incomplete and incoherent.  Member States, the Group stressed, should be given a full picture of required resources.

Chad’s representative, on behalf of the African Group, said there was no plan within the Secretary-General’s current proposal to strengthen capacities, through appropriate mechanisms, particularly for the most vulnerable countries, despite specific requests in that regard, submitted by more than 100 Member States.

 The European Union’s representative said no request for new resources should be proposed unless there was a specific, well-defined need clearly linked to the 2030 Agenda.

Given the late hour in which the item was being introduced in the resumed session and the need for much more information, the United States’ representative supported a more comprehensive discussion of the issue in the main part of the seventy-first session.

Also during the meeting, Thailand’s representative, again on behalf of the Group of 77 and China, introduced a draft resolution on financing of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL), in which the Secretary-General indicated that Israel owed UNIFIL $1.12 million resulting from a tragic incident at Qana on 18 April 1996. 

India’s representative, the head of consultations on that agenda item, said the Committee had been unable to arrive at consensus on the issue.  Committee Vice Chair Omar Castañeda Solares (Guatemala) said action on the text would be taken at a later date. 

Also speaking today were the representatives of Israel and Switzerland (also on behalf of Liechtenstein).

The Committee is scheduled to reconvene to conclude its work for the second resumed session at 3 p.m. on Friday, 27 May.

Financing of the United Nations Peacekeeping Forces in the Middle East

MANJUNATH CHENNEERAPPA (India), who conducted the informal consultations on the agenda item on financing of the United Nations peacekeeping forces in the Middle East, said that unfortunately, on that item, the Committee had been unable to arrive at a consensus on the financing of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL).

SIRITHON WAIRATPANIJ (Thailand), on behalf of the “Group of 77” developing countries and China, introduced the draft resolution entitled “Financing of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon” (document A/C.5/70/L.38).  As reported by the Secretary-General, Israel had not paid $1.12 million due as accounts receivable for UNIFIL resulting from a tragic incident at Qana on 18 April 1996, she said.  That amount should be paid by Israel, she said, adding in that regard that the Group of 77 and China would sponsor preambular paragraph 4 and operative paragraphs 4, 5 and 6, as well as the draft resolution as a whole.

YOTAM GOREN (Israel) said the formal introduction of the draft reminded him of what Albert Einstein once said about insanity being doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.  Also quoting Mr. Einstein, he said problems could not be solved with the same thinking used when they were created.  Calling out biased conduct that politicized the work of the Committee and singled out one delegation, he said the draft was a cautionary tale of what happened when political interests came into the Committee’s negotiations.

OMAR CASTAÑEDA SOLARES (Guatemala), Vice-Chair of the Committee, said action on the draft would be taken at a later date.  

Supporting Implementation of 2030 Agenda and Addis Ababa Action Agenda

BETTINA TUCCI BARTSIOTAS, Assistant Secretary-General and Controller, presented the report of the Secretary-General on “Supporting the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Addis Ababa Action Agenda of the Third International Conference on Financing for Development” (document A/70/794) and said that the new agendas would require ambitious, comprehensive and transformative actions. 

The proposals built on the Secretariat’s comparative advantages and included; supporting the strengthening of capacity and improving policy coherence at the regional, national, subnational and local levels; facilitating regional and international cooperation; catalysing new partnerships and improving the effectiveness and accountability of existing partnerships; supporting a favourable enabling environment through intergovernmental processes; supporting follow-up and review; and undertaking public advocacy of the Sustainable Development Goals.  The new agendas did not always specify such additional expectations for the Secretariat and ultimately, it was up to Member States to determine how the United Nations could best support them.

Over the next 15 years, it was expected that the Economic and Social Council and its subsidiary bodies, as well as the General Assembly and its committees, special sessions, high level meetings and other processes would guide the United Nations system on how to best contribute to the two agendas.  The Secretary-General recognized that the Organization must operate efficiently and with fiscal prudence and the current proposals were the result of a process that applied those imperatives. 

If the General Assembly agreed with the proposed strengthened roles and activities, an extra $33.5 million would be required for biennium 2016-2017 and $42.5 million for 2018-2019.  The difference lay primarily in the application of a different vacancy rate:  50 per cent for new temporary professional posts in the first biennium and 9 per cent for the continuation of those posts.  All 62 posts were proposed as “temporary”, as the agenda would only cover the period through 2030.  The requirements for the upcoming biennia, including 2018-2019, would again be reviewed and validated in the context of the biennial programme budget formulation process.

CARLOS RUIZ MASSIEU, Chair of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions (ACABQ), presented that body’s related report (document A/710/883) and said that the Advisory Committee noted that the Secretary-General’s report did not comply with General Assembly resolution 70/247 of 2015, nor did it contain a request for appropriation of related resource requirements.  The Committee also noted earlier problems with the Secretariat’s handling of the two agendas; from the adoption of the draft resolutions to the submission of revised estimates.  In view of those concerns, the Committee was unable to recommend appropriation. 

However, to avoid a delay in implementation, the Advisory Committee recommended that the General Assembly authorize the Secretary-General to enter into commitments of up to $10 million for 2016 for the implementation of mandated activities related to the two agendas.  It also recommended that the General Assembly ask the Secretary-General to submit, without further delay, a comprehensive proposal that addressed the effective and efficient delivery of mandates in support of the two agendas.

Ms. WAIRATPANIJ (Thailand), spoke again for the Group of 77 and China, expressing disappointment that not only did the submission of the current report of the Secretary-General fail to meet the timeframe set by the General Assembly but it also did not comply with the General Assembly’s request for a comprehensive proposal for the effective, efficient delivery of mandates in support of the agendas.  The Group agreed with the Advisory Committee that the Secretary-General’s report lacked detailed presentation and justification as well as a request for appropriation of related additional resource requirements, making it incomplete and incoherent. 

The Group stressed that Member States should be provided a full picture of the resources required for the effective and efficient delivery of the mandates in order to make a well-informed financial decision, she said.  The Group stressed the importance of adhering to the content and spirit of paragraph 14 of Assembly resolution 70/247.  Further, the Group stressed that it was imperative that the Secretariat comply with specific mandates, especially timeframes, while observing relevant rules, regulations and established practices in budgetary processes and to include a clear and fully justified request for appropriation of resources for future budget proposals.

BACHAR BONG ABDALLAH (Chad) spoke on behalf of the African Group, associating himself with the Group of 77 and China.  He noted that despite repeated requests, the report of the Secretary-General lacked concrete proposals and did not take into account the mandates contained in General Assembly resolutions 70/1 and 69/313 on the 2030 Agenda and the Addis Ababa Action Agenda, respectively.  The 17 Sustainable Development Goals were integrated and indivisible and must balance all three dimensions of sustainable development.  The Group noted that there was plan within the Secretary-General’s proposal to strengthen capacities, through appropriate mechanisms, particularly for the most vulnerable countries despite specific requests in that regard, submitted by more than 100 Member States.

The Group noted with concern that it took a significant amount of time and consultations within the Committee to introduce the item, and that a small group of Member States had resisted its consideration, he said.  The proposal was not only an issue of resources, it also related to the collective devotion of the international community to global development and “win-win” cooperation, which would bring huge gains for all countries around the world.

JAN DE PRETER, of the European Union delegation, said that the 2030 Agenda and Addis Ababa Action Agenda were landmark agreements that truly offered a global framework for development action of unprecedented ambition.  The international community needed to adapt itself to the new development agenda and not seek to adapt the plan to the status quo.  A response from the Secretariat and the wider United Nations development system that reflected that new paradigm was needed.  The 2030 Agenda demanded a system that worked cohesively as a network for a common set of goals and not merely some “rebadging” of existing tasks. 

The focus of the Secretary-General should be on reprioritization and thorough analysis of current mandates.  No request for new resources could be proposed unless there was a specific and well-defined need that was clearly linked to the new agenda.  New resources from the regular budget were only warranted in view of specific mandates.

MATTHIAS DETTLING (Switzerland) also spoke on behalf of Liechtenstein, saying that through the adoption of the 2030 Agenda and the Addis Ababa Action Agenda, the international community had equipped itself with a global framework to consolidate efforts for sustainable development and poverty eradication.  The agreements were historic in scope and could not be overemphasized.  Given the importance of the two agendas, his delegation and that of Liechtenstein were unsatisfied with the procedure the Secretariat had followed in the development of specific proposals with a detailed budget, flowing from its intergovernmental mandates. 

While the proposals made last year were limited to the financial needs of the Department of Economic and Social Affairs and did not take into account any type of necessary institutional reform for implementation, the new proposal was also inappropriate, as it was neither a budget document nor a strategic plan that was coherent in nature.  He agreed with the Advisory Committee and expressed great concern that some of the more important information for the Fifth Committee was only given to the Advisory Committee, under the provision that the information should not be shared.

CHERITH NORMAN CHALET (United States) strongly supported the 2030 Agenda and the Addis Ababa Action Agenda as transformative agreements, and in that regard, her Government was reviewing and reorienting its activities to implement the Sustainable Development Goals at home and to support them globally.  The United Nations should and must do the same, while also reprioritizing current resources that would further support Member States to achieve the goals.  Given the late hour in which the item was being introduced in the resumed session and the need for much more information, the United States supported a more comprehensive discussion of the issue in the main part of the seventy-first session.  The United Nations was fully capable of delivering the support needed for the Sustainable Development Goals, as additional resources were provided to the Organization for that purpose in December 2015 in addition to the existing resources the Organization already had at its disposal for such activities.