I am delivering this statement on behalf of Canada, Denmark, Luxemburg, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Sweden, the United Kingdom and my own country Norway.
The Executive Board’s deliberation on the revision of the programming arrangements has been a long and complicated process. We are therefore very pleased that the Management has been able to put forward a well-founded proposal on UNDP’s future programming arrangements at this Board session.
We support this proposal, as it promotes the core quality that we believe is in the interest of all the Member States, i.e. UNDP’s ability to deliver the best possible results in the most cost-efficient way.
In our opinion, UNDP’s four recommendations on the eligibility option, the allocation model, the four-year averaging approach and the principles on global strategic presence constitute a well-balanced package that will enhance UNDP’s ability to provide effective and efficient development cooperation. It favors the Low Income Countries, it provides a sensible distinction between lower and upper Middle Income Countries and is clear on UNDP’s need for flexibility to tailor its cooperation to country contexts.
As we said, the Board’s debate on this issue has been long and complicated. One curious aspect of this debate, is that all the focus is put on how UNDP’s scarce programmatic core resources should be allocated and distributed, while little attention is given to how more core resources may be mobilized thanks to an improved and updated programming arrangement, that will enable UNDP to deliver better results. We encourage the members of the Board to look holistically at both these aspects when making a decision on this important issue.
It’s crucial that we make a decision on the above-mentioned recommendations at this Board meeting in order to enable UNDP to make progress in the difficult task of developing the integrated budget and preparing the next strategic plan. We agree with the need for more information with regard to the proposal to establish a contingency fund and to include UNCDF in the programming arrangements, as well as with regard to the existing fixed budget lines. However, we cannot defer a decision on these issues until the second regular session in 2013. We believe the formal discussions we will have on the integrated budget and the strategic plan 2014-2017, will become significantly less complicated if we are able to sort out and make a decision on these outstanding issues already at the first regular session in 2013. At that session, we would also appreciate a proposal on the principles for allocating resources among the all the TRAC mechanisms, the regional and global programmes as well as other fixed budget lines.