UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY

Statement by H.E. Mr John Dauth LVO, Ambassador and Permanent Representative, Australian Mission to the United Nations on behalf of Canada, Australia and New Zealand

Plenary Statement

Items 55, 57, 58 & 59: Strengthening of the United Nations Revitalisations of the General Assembly

New York 28 October 2003

Mr President,

Secretary-General,
I have the honour to address the Assembly on behalf of Canada, New Zealand and Australia.
I wish also to associate my delegation with the statement that Fiji will deliver on behalf of the Pacific Islands Forum.

Our three delegations are convinced that the need for reform in the United Nations is more pressing than ever before. The Secretary-General is right to say that the UN has reached a historic ‘fork in the road’. Encouragingly, we sense a greater realisation of this and a rare opportunity is emerging this year – and perhaps next – for us to act. After that, it may be
too late.

Today’s debate covers reform processes in several parts of the UN, and I will mention a few of them specifically. The common problem faced by all ideas for change in the United Nations is generating enough political will to overcome the inertia intrinsic to an organisation governed by 191 sovereign members.

Certainly, there is no lack of good reform ideas here. But, a decade of labours towards revitalising the Assembly and making the Security Council more representative has produced few results.

The bright spot has been the leadership of the Secretary-General, who has achieved welcome progress in modernising and improving the Secretariat. The Brahimi peacekeeping reforms will stand as another of his achievements.

The Secretary-General recently announced a new panel that will examine the policy challenges facing the Organisation and the institutional structures needed to meet them. Such an examination is timely and much needed. The panel should consult widely with member states and be bold in its analysis and recommendations. Our delegations stand ready to contribute and we look forward to receiving the Secretary-General’s proposals next year. But, in the meantime there is plenty that needs doing.

Mr President,

A year ago, the Secretary-General presented the Assembly with a fresh agenda for reform. This year he has given us a progress report, submitted several detailed reports on specific proposals, and requested our approval of other reforms in the 2004-05 budget.

Resolution 57/300 broadly welcomed the Secretary-General’s proposals. Since then, we have been disappointed that, wherever the reform actions have been discussed, there has been resistance or opposition from one quarter or another. For instance, at the Committee on Programme and Co-ordination in June, every one of the reform measures proposed in the budget was criticised and efforts were mounted to block several.

This year – with elaborated and refined proposals before it – the Assembly needs to take decisions. Our delegations will give full support to the implementation of the Secretary-General’s measures in all inter-governmental bodies.

Many proposals have now been referred to the Fifth Committee. Reform must be the abiding theme of deliberations and decisions there. The Fifth Committee has a particular responsibility to advance management and administrative reforms that make the organisation stronger and more effective.

Our delegations attach special importance to the request by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights for a greater share of the regular budget. In particular, we support the new posts to strengthen the human rights treaty bodies, in line with the Secretary-General’s recommendations.

Mr President,

The budget, planning and evaluation cycle is of critical importance to the Organisation. This cycle brings together the many legislative mandates created by the Assembly, the Economic and Social Council, and their subsidiaries. And, it matches them with the finite resources available to the Organisation.

The two reports before us – on ‘improvements to the current process of planning and budgeting’ – offer a compelling diagnosis of flaws in the current process. Taken as a whole, the process is so protracted and burdensome that it disenfranchises the majority of member states.
The medium-term plan – as now constructed – leads to rigidity in the Secretariat’s work and inhibits our ability to respond to changing circumstances. Programmes and resources are considered on separate tracks, undermining the development of results-based budgeting. And, programmatic evaluation does not feed back into the planning and budgeting cycle.

We consider that modest refinements of the process can lead to significant improvements. Our approach starts from five principles:

• the process should better support results-based budgeting;
• programme and resource decisions should be integrated;
• member states should be able to give strategic policy direction;
• evaluation of results must be effective and affect planning; and
• the inter-governmental organs must spend less time on reviewing the budget.

The Secretary-General’s proposals offer a way forward and a starting point for our discussions. But, we will take a flexible and creative approach to finding a set of reforms that serves all of us better and makes the Organisation stronger.

Mr President,

We welcome your efforts to inject life into the process of revitalising the General Assembly. Our delegations believe that revitalisation needs to start with the second of the two areas that you have identified: ‘improving working methods’.

The agenda is the core of the malaise in the Assembly. It is overloaded, outdated, highly repetitive, and often of marginal relevance even in the capitals of member states, let alone to their peoples. As everyone knows, the Assembly spends most of its time negotiating the same resolutions, year after year.

We must start with a thorough re-appraisal of the agenda. We could, for instance, envisage a streamlined agenda of a limited number of items relevant in terms of contemporary problems and challenges. Such an agenda would be established anew for each General Assembly. We need to concentrate on resolutions which are meaningful and can be implemented. At the same time we should evaluate the committee structure, and re-shape it to fit a new agenda that focuses on the major issues facing the globe today.

Only by making fundamental changes to its work programme and methods can the authority and prestige of the Assembly be restored. While biennialisation of some items has helped to rationalise the agenda, it is not enough to turn the Assembly into the thriving centre of the multilateral system that it ought to be.

The revitalisation process has yielded so little not because of a lack of good ideas but due to a lack of political will. If the Assembly is going to be revitalised then all member states need to reassess their positions and be prepared to adapt their preferences to accommodate those of others. Without recognition by all parties of our shared interest in a productive and effective multilateral system, then the Assembly will continue to wither.

Mr President,

The common challenge facing proposals for reform is to create political will and generate momentum. Our endeavours to make the UN more productive and effective assume even greater importance in this complex and daunting international environment.

Thankyou.