Summary: EU Presidency Statement - Joint Inspection Unit (10 October 2005: New York)
EU Presidency Statement on Item 130, Joint Inspection Unit, by The Permanent Mission of the United Kingdom to the United Nations, on behalf of the European Union, Fifth Committee, New York
I have the honour to speak on behalf of the European Union. The Acceding Countries Bulgaria and Romania, the Candidate Countries Turkey and Croatia*, the Countries of the Stabilisation and Association Process and potential candidates Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Serbia and Montenegro, EFTA country Iceland, member of the European Economic Area, as well as Ukraine and the Republic of Moldova align themselves with this declaration.
At the outset, I would like to thank the Chairman of the Joint Inspection Unit, Mr. Ion Goriţa, for introducing the Report of the Unit for 2004 and programme of work for 2005, contained in document A/60/34.
GA Resolution 59/267, approved 10 months ago, was an important milestone in streamlining the work of the Unit and improving its effectiveness. We note that the Unit is still examining the ways to reform its internal working procedures and welcome the efforts being made. Yet, we would be interested in further information on the progress of implementation of this resolution.
We note with satisfaction that most of the JIU reports in 2004 were system-wide or inter-agency. We will be interested in due course in a proper assessment of the impact of these reports. The report on managing for results was particularly well-received. In this context, the section of the Annual Report on follow-up and implementation of recommendations lacks substance. Given the costs, we would welcome a more substantive assessment in future of the impact of JIU reports, including feedback from the client organisations and their executive bodies on the value to them of the recommendations. We remain concerned about slow progress in implementation of recommendations by participating organisations and are interested in what is done by the Unit to monitor and pursue such cases.
Turning to the relationship with other oversight bodies, the European Union considers that co-ordination is an essential tool to identify common areas of work, avoid duplication and create synergies. The EU therefore agrees with the finding of last year's tripartite meeting in defining the need to adjust the format and frequency of these gatherings.
Turning to the programme of work for 2005, we question the usefulness of discussing this when we are in the last quarter of the year and wonder whether there is scope for an earlier discussion of future work. We would welcome an indication at this time of ideas for the 2006 work programme. As regards the topics selected for 2005, in the wake of the Summit and given the external evaluation that has been requested, we would like to hear more about the study underway on the lacunae of oversight, i.e. what it consists of and precisely which bodies are to be evaluated. We have doubts about the proposed study of implementation of 10-year old recommendations on peacekeeping, the nature and size of which has changed almost beyond recognition in the past decade. On the other hand, we look forward to the further report on Host Country agreements and that on the United Nations system staff medical coverage, taking into consideration the substantial budgetary implications and the growing problem of unfunded after-service health care liabilities raised by the Board of Auditors.
I thank you, Mr. Chairman.
* Croatia continues to be part of the Stabilisation and Association Process.