 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
||
 |
|
||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
Operational Activities of the Statement by United States Representative to the
July 7, 2003 (As prepared for delivery) Thank you, Mr. President. The United States appreciates this opportunity to present its views on the Secretary-General's Reports submitted for this session in response to specific requests made by the General Assembly in Resolution 56/201. The UN Operational Agencies are making impressive progress in implementing the Secretary-General's 1997 Reforms. We are confident that the 2004 Triennial Comprehensive Policy Review (TCPR) will show the tremendous amount of work that has been done at headquarters, but especially in the field. In the fall of 2001, when Resolution 56-201 requested that the Economic and Social Council review funding of UN system development cooperation, Doha, Monterrey and Johannesburg had not yet taken place. These three conferences and the Millennium Summit drastically changed the development dynamic. "Business-as-usual" will no longer do - not according to the Report on Funding of Development Cooperation Activities of the UN System. There is much interest in this Report. We value the UN's role in development and certainly agree with the basic premise that the UN development capability must be sufficiently funded. The Report reviews current funding modalities and provides an overview of various other funding sources, but focuses on Official Development Assistance (ODA). A broader discussion of other sources, especially an analysis of how to generate and enhance all manner of foreign and domestic resources would have been useful. The Report states that, although the dialogue at the 2004 Triennial Policy Review may look into new issues, public financing, principally ODA, will continue to play the main role in funding development activities of the UN system. It asks why funding for the Operational Activities is not placed on a stable and secure footing as other multilateral mechanisms. Several of the high-level panel participants on Thursday addressed this question and provided some novel ideas. Among them: imposing minimum assessments, banning voluntary contributions, and initiating long-term country-related funding consortiums. The coming dialogue must be creative and resourceful. We look forward to participating in it. We do, however, hold strongly to the principle of voluntary contributions and would not agree to have it altered. We believe that this modality has served the system well and that it has played a key role in moving the UN operational agencies towards the results-based, output-oriented corporate structure that is becoming increasingly relevant in worldwide development. We would have liked more creative recommendations in a Report that asks probing questions about the international community's current "each-on-its-own" approach to development. It proposes that there should be a better understanding of, and greater complementarity between, the respective roles of the various development partners, but does not explore this aspect in great depth. In the wake of Monterrey, large increases in ODA will be forthcoming, as was discussed on Thursday as well. We would have been interested in learning how the UN development system expects to incorporate this new funding into their country-level planning activities. The U.S. wants to see an effective UN development capability; we cannot do without it. We strongly support UN operational agencies that produce results in assisting countries to develop good governance and sound policies with the aim of improving the lives of all their citizens. President Bush, through the Millennium Challenge Account (MCA), is determined to do just that. He wants to change the question "how much money are rich nations transferring" to one that asks - "how much good are we doing to help people who are poor?" The Report is focused on inputs. It cites a World Bank Paper that estimates that an additional $40-60 billion foreign aid is required to meet the international agreed development goals, including those contained in the Millennium Declaration. We do not dispute that more resources are required but there are some difficulties with the Bank's analysis. The model assumes that certain levels of investment are needed to reach certain levels of output growth, but treats investment as monolithic -- it does not distinguish between the differential impact on growth of private versus public investment. The cost estimate is not based on an understanding of what kinds of assistance are most effective. General Assembly Resolution 56/201 also requested that the Secretary-General report to the Economic and Social Council how the UN funds, programs and agencies learn lessons from evaluations. Evaluations are critical to results-based management. As the participants in Friday morning's panel emphasized, they must be timely and relevant and the findings must be heeded if they are to achieve the two major objectives -- accountability and learning. The Report, which we find useful and thought-provoking, rightly asks how the concepts contained in the terms "lessons learned" and "best practices" can be made more relevant to a specific country office and be more user-friendly. The U.S. Government, through its bilateral assistance program, has been engaged in evaluating its results-based development program for some time now and continues to fine-tune the identification and dissemination of best practices. It is a difficult and demanding process. Clearly, well-designed country-led development programs based on an organizing framework, be it the UN Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF), the Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP) or the internationally agreed development goals, including those contained in the Millennium Declaration, are beginning to identify common goals that may make the task more manageable. Finally, Mr. President to return to the subject of funding --
tangible results produced through good governance and sound policies
will generate increasing resources. What are some of the indicators
of good governance? These would be solid evidence that the political will and commitment
is there to achieve the international agreed development goals,
including those in the Millennium Declaration. |