UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY

Statement by Mr David Dutton, First Secretary, Australian Mission to the United Nations, to the United Nations

Item 112: Capital Master Plan

New York 25 October 2002

Mr Chairman,

It is an honour to address the Committee for the first time on behalf of the delegations of New Zealand, Canada and Australia. I wish to thank Under Secretary-General Niwa and Ambassador Mselle for introducing their respective reports.

The need to refurbish, update and improve this building is plain. The facilities at United Nations' headquarters must permit the Organisation's work to be conducted efficiently and conveniently. It should be a safe and secure place for delegates and staff to work and meet. The presence of hazardous materials, the lack of adequate ventilation, and the absence of modern safety systems make this place less practical and less safe than it ought to be. Moreover, the building is an asset of declining value and spiraling maintenance costs.

Our delegations agree with the Secretary-General that we should move expeditiously to remedy these deficiencies, especially where safety and security are concerned. It is also timely for us to better fit the facilities here to the needs of the Organisation and to employ new technologies which can help our work.

The `baseline scope' identified by the Secretary-General appears to be a sound basis for renovating and updating the complex. However, in a project of such complexity there are many needs and possibilities to consider. Our delegations have several questions to which we will seek answers during informals. For instance, we are interested in the requirements for meeting rooms and for information technology infrastructure. We will seek assurances that the renovation will deliver an internal environment which is fit and healthy for all staff and delegates. We would also appreciate comment from the Secretariat on the ACABQ's recommendations.

The `scope options' appear to be prudent and worthwhile. We look forward to discussing them in more detail and note that the ACABQ has recommended that the Assembly choose all three options.

On the question of phasing the project, our delegations see why the first approach is preferred by the Secretariat and the ACABQ. The construction of a new building across 42nd Street to provide `swing-space' - and ultimately to accommodate staff dispersed across numerous buildings - would seem to provide a more convenient, one-stage renovation and a better UN campus. However, we are unsure of the proposed timings and end date for the project and would appreciate clarification. We are also interested to hear the views of other delegations on the second approach which appears to offer a viable alternative.

Mr Chairman,

The options before us on both scope and phasing are the product of the joint efforts of the Secretariat, the host government and the City of New York. However, there are numerous procedural hurdles which need to be cleared for the project to move ahead and the continuing commitment of all parties will be needed.

We believe that it is appropriate and necessary at this juncture for the General Assembly to indicate that it wishes to proceed with the Capital Master Plan. We should choose which of the options before us will best suit the Organisation and approve the $22.5m needed in 2003 for the preparation of detailed designs. By doing so, we can show that the membership of the United Nations is committed to a specific and realisable project. This will allow the Secretariat and the host government authorities to move ahead on their parts.

At the 58th Session of the Assembly we should then consider the progress made. If problems have been encountered then we can find alternatives.

It will be essential for us to ensure that the Capital Master Plan proceeds with due attention to quality and cost-effectiveness. In this context, we agree with the comments of the ACABQ on the need for oversight by the OIOS and the Board of Auditors from beginning to end. The Fifth Committee should consider developments annually until the project is completed.

Mr Chairman,

We will need to decide in our next session how to finance the project. Our delegations look forward to proposals from the host government in time for our consideration next year.

An interest-free loan as described in the Secretary-General's report would be the most appropriate method of financing the project. However, there are also possibilities for encouraging donations from member states and the global private sector. An interestfree loan was used to finance the original construction of this complex and is therefore sanctioned by experience.

We would welcome such an offer from the host government. It would properly recognise the considerable economic benefits that the United Nations brings to New York.

Mr Chairman,

An unequivocal decision by the General Assembly is needed now. It will ensure that we move forward swiftly with the benefit of avoiding escalations in cost, and it will give the host government a strong signal that the project is a priority for the membership of the United Nations.

In conclusion, I wish to offer the appreciation of our delegations to the Secretariat, the authorities of the host government, the City of New York and UNDC for their endeavours which have brought viable and well judged options to the Committee. This project requires all the parties to work in concert. We trust that the current spirit of co-operation will continue and believe that the Assembly should play its part.

Thank you.