At
UN
Ban & Kim
Try to Bypass
GA with
"Change
Management,"
Budget
Overtime
By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
March 28 --
The UN's
Budget
Committee was
supposed to
finish
its work last
Friday but did
not, pushing
its deadline
back to today
March 28. Now
it's been
delayed again.
Among
with
opposition to
a US proposal
that the audit
of the Capital
Master Plan
cost overruns
be conducted
not by the UN
Office of
Internal
Oversight
Services but
by an outside
party, another
major dispute
is the issue
of Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon's
so-called
Change Plan.
This
document,
consisting of
“proposals to
the
Secretary-General”
prepared by
the Change
Management
Team which had
been led by
India's Atul
Khare
but has now
been taken
over by Ban's
senior adviser
Kim Won-soo,
has
run into
opposition by
the Group of
77 and China.
The
chairman of
the Budget or
Fifth
Committee told
Inner City
Press on
Tuesday night
that "there is
a fundamental
disagreement
on the vision.
G-77
are saying in
the letter of
March 14 he
already says
he can do
things
under his 'own
purview.' They
are inclined
to put a
resolution
saying
you have to
recognize the
General
Assembly is
the oversight
body,
come up
quickly with a
proposal to
the Fifth
Committee."
According
to a well
placed G-77
source, Ban's
Secretariat
has been
extremely
cagey about
which
recommendations
would require
GA approval
and which ones
can be
implemented
'within the
authority of
the SG.' While
there is broad
agreement by
all parties
that the
document
contains both
types of
recommendations,
the G-77 is
very concerned
that the
Secretariat is
taking the
broadest
possible
interpretation
of the
Secretary
General's
authority and
is attempting
to make
important
changes to
the
functioning of
the
Organization
that will
impact on
intergovernmental
mandates,
without
consulting
Member States.
The
members of the
Western
European and
Other Group
(WEOG) have
been adamant
in refusing
to take up the
Change Plan in
the Fifth
Committee,
under the
allegation
that it is 'an
internal
document' –
though these
countries have
never been shy
about pushing
through
intergovernmental
consideration
of internal
documents when
it is in their
interest to
do so.
The
G-77 has
argued
that as a
number of the
recommendations
will impact on
Fifth
Committee
mandates, as
the
Secretary-General
has formally
sent the
document with
a cover letter
to all Member
States, as the
Secretariat
has informed
Member States
that 50% of
the
recommendations
will be
'fully
implemented'
by July,
consideration
by the Fifth
Committee is
not only
appropriate,
but urgent.
The G-77 has
submitted
language
that does not
seek to
prejudge the
recommendations,
but to ensure
that those
which would
require
intergovernmental
approval are
brought
to the
consideration
of the General
Assembly.
The
issue has
reached an
impasse; the
atmosphere has
been further
poisoned by
nitty
gritty issues
such as the
facts that
language that
was proposed
by
the WEOG last
year for Fifth
Committee
resolutions
and
subsequently
rejected
subsequently
made their way
into the
Change Plan,
as
'independent
recommendations'
by the Change
Management
Team.
At
its root,
Inner
City Press
views it as a
separation of
powers
question, a
question of
principle that
will go down
to the wire --
or beyond.
Watch this
site.
, 
