Administration and Budget

President Bush's FY 1991 budget request, issued in January 1990, provided for essentially full funding of U.S. assessed contributions and for payments in a 5-year plan to eliminate U.S. arrearages to the United Nations and other international organizations.

U.S. efforts in 1990 regarding UN budget, administration and institutional management issues continued in pursuit of reform measures initiated in 1986. A major accomplishment was the December decision of the UN General Assembly to approve the UN Program Budget Outline for the 1992-1993 biennium, which included setting an overall budget level and establishing a contingency fund to finance new activities. (Resolution 45/255.) This consensus approval continued implementation of Group of 18 administrative reforms as established in General Assembly resolution 41/213 in 1986. The budget level called for in this outline was based on zero real growth.

The work of the General Assembly's Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary) deals with organization-wide administrative problems, and thus is a major forum in which to pursue the policy objective of a "Unitary UN." The Fifth Committee must provide information on how General Assembly resolutions with financial implications, if adopted, would affect the UN budget. Its most important function is to make recommendations to the General Assembly on the regular program budget and on assessed peacekeeping budgets.

Several special UN bodies assist in this work. In financial matters, there are two key expert bodies composed of individuals acting as independent experts rather than as instructed delegates. The Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions (ACABQ) examines the Secretary General's proposals and reports to the General Assembly on UN budgets and UN accounts, on administrative budgets of UN specialized agencies and on other administrative, financial and budgetary matters referred to it. The Committee on Contributions advises the General Assembly on all questions relating to apportionment of UN expenses among member states. Other expert financial bodies are the Board of Auditors, the Investment Committee

(which advises on the management of the Pension Fund) and the UN Joint Staff Pension Board.

The International Civil Service Commission (ICSC), another expert body, makes recommendations to the General Assembly on the regulation and coordination of conditions of service within the United Nations, specialized agencies and other international organizations which participate in the UN common system of salaries and allowances. The Committee on Conferences is an intergovernmental, administrative body, which develops a workable calendar of UN meetings and advises the Assembly on the most efficient use of conference resources and on current and future requirements.

The Administrative Committee on Coordination (ACC), composed of the UN Secretary General and Executive heads of specialized agencies, IAEA and other major bodies and programs, meets regularly to supervise implementation of agreements between the United Nations and specialized agencies and to coordinate activities of the various organizations. The Committee for Program and Coordination (CPC), an intergovernmental body, serves as the main subsidiary organ of both ECOSOC and the General Assembly for planning, programming and coordination. It plays an additional key role in implementation of the new consensus-based budget process. The Joint Inspection Unit (JIU), a group of experts who serve full time, is empowered to investigate and evaluate any matter bearing on efficiency of services and proper use of funds.

UN REFORM

In December the Fifth Committee approved, by consensus, a draft resolution on the review of the efficiency and financial functioning of the United Nations. The draft resolution was approved by the UN General Assembly, also by consensus, as resolution 45/254. Despite efforts of certain members to end the reform process begun at the 41st UN General Assembly, the Fifth Committee resolution continued efforts to implement reform recommendations of the Group of 18 High-Level Intergovernmental Experts. Resolution opponents argued that the 3-year deadline set by the Group of 18 for implementation of the recommendations had expired, and no further work was required. This was countered by the strong stand taken by the United States and others calling for further action by the UN General Assembly.

A U.S. statement to the UN's Fifth Committee in October referred to several key areas for further strengthening UN reform efforts: further staff reductions in the UN Secretariat and in the number of high-level posts, reforms in the UN's economic and social sectors, strengthening of UN coordination and evaluation mechanisms, and further progress in implementing of the reforms recommended by the Group of 18 High-Level Intergovernmental Experts. Regarding the Secretary General's report on the reform process, the United States noted the report "... represents a point of departure for consolidating

and building on the (reform) efforts so far achieved in order to ensure the ongoing revitalization of the United Nations." The U.S. statement took account also of the need for strengthening the UN's ability to deal constructively with critical global problems. However, to achieve this, it noted "... we must ensure that reform and restructuring remain on the agenda of the United Nations as we prepare for a new century. Particularly at this time, we cannot afford any backsliding or any lessening of commitment to this endeavor."

Main provisions of the resolution, as subsequently approved in plenary:

Endorsed recommendations of the Committee for Program and Coordination, which outlined specific areas for further reform (e.g., conference services, economic and social sectors);

Encouraged the Secretary General and member states to pursue objectives of General Assembly resolution 41/213, particularly those yet to be met, and invited the Secretary General to consolidate and build upon the results achieved through the reform process and to submit proposals, whenever necessary, for improvements in the administrative and financial functioning of the United Nations;

Encouraged the UN Secretary General to continue to implement provisions of resolution 41/213 and other relevant resolutions on questions of personnel and posts (staff reduction targets), and invited member states and the Secretary General to exercise maximum restraint in proposals for the staffing table of the organization, particularly for high-level posts; and

Decided to continue considering annually the administrative, structural and other aspects of the improvement of the efficiency of the organization, and invited the Secretary General to report accordingly.

The U.S. Delegation had hoped to achieve a renewed commitment to the implementation of the 15 percent reduction in UN Secretariat staff and 25 percent reduction in high-level posts, but there was little support for such action. However, the resolution did encourage the Secretary General to continue to implement relevant resolutions on personnel, which was significant given the debate on the overall issue of UN reform.

CURRENT FINANCIAL CRISIS OF THE UNITED NATIONS

Resolution 45/236 regarding the current financial crisis and emergency of the United Nations was adopted without a vote in December. Unlike previous years, Fifth Committee deliberations on this issue were marked by a lack of contention.

The primary reason for this appeared to be the favorable outlook of the UN's financial situation as provided in the report of the Secretary General. The

report showed a significant improvement in the UN's cash position; cash on hand at the end of 1990 was estimated at $73.4 million as compared to $47.2 million at the end of 1989. The report also indicated improved cash projections for calendar year 1991.

The improved UN cash position reflected significant payments made by the United States during the course of the year. Total U.S. payments to the UN regular budget in 1990 amounted to $302.6 million. Of this amount, $225.7 million related to the U.S. assessed contribution for calendar year 1990, financed from fiscal year 1991 funds. The $225.7 million, which represented essentially the full U.S. contribution, was paid in two installments. The balance of the $302.6 million related to payments made from fiscal year 1990 funds toward the U.S. calendar year 1989 contribution.

The only issue on which there was some contention concerned the level of the UN's Working Capital Fund. The Secretary General had proposed to increase the authorized level of the Fund from $100 million to $200 million as a means to provide the United Nations with greater flexibility in accommodating unforeseen and extraordinary expenses, particularly for UN peacekeeping activities. The UN's Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions (ACABQ) did not endorse the proposal, recommending that "... a decision on the implementation of an increase in the level of the Working Capital Fund should only take place when the principle of payment by member states of their full financial obligations to the organization-the underpinning of the financial health of the United Nations is honored." Language included in resolution 45/236 would enable the Secretary General to resubmit a proposal for an increase in the Working Capital Fund to the 46th General Assembly.

Because of significant financial implications such an increase would have for the U.S. assessment level, the U.S. Delegation to the Fifth Committee was at the forefront in opposing the increase in the Working Capital Fund. A $100 million increase in the Fund, if approved for 1991, would have increased the U.S. assessment by approximately $25 million.

UN BUDGET

The UN General Assembly adopted two resolutions regarding the UN program budget. One concerned revised estimates for the current 1990-1991 biennium, while the other concerned the budget outline for the next, 1992-1993, biennium.

With regard to 1990-1991, resolution 45/252 was approved by consensus recommending revised estimates for the UN program budget. The revised expenditure estimate for the 1990-1991 biennium totaled $2,134,072,100 and represented an increase of $159,438,100 from the level approved initially in 1989. The bulk of the increase related to revisions in inflation and exchange rates.