EU Presidency Statement - Report of the Secretary-General on the activities of OIOS

Mr Chairman,

1. I have the honor to speak on behalf of the European Union. The Candidate Countries Bulgaria, Romania, 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, and the EFTA countries Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway, members of the European Economic Area, align themselves with this declaration

2. We should like to thank the USG for Oversight, Mr Dileep Nair, for introducing his final OIOS annual report.

3. As ever, the annual report of the OIOS covers a great deal of ground, including issues which have been, or will be, debated separately in this Committee. We shall therefore comment on a few specific areas of the report and make some general observations. We will also develop further some of the issues we raised in our statement under the agenda item concerning the OIOS mandate.

Implementation of Recommendations

Mr Chairman,

4. The OIOS figures on the impact of their audit and investigation recommendations are striking. The average annual total of $16 million actually saved and recovered resulting from these is significant, although we note that the amount that was recommended for recovery per year averaged almost twice this. It should be clear that the Office's critical recommendations - those addressing areas with far-reaching consequences for the organisation's performance - should be fully implemented or sound reasons given for why this is not possible. It is a matter of great concern to us that many of these critical recommendations from prior years have not been acted upon at all. They are listed in Annex II of the report, but this does not provide much enlightenment. Engagement and accountability of senior management in this process is vital. We believe that a stronger follow-up mechanism within the Secretariat is needed to ensure this. Greater access to a wider range of OIOS reports would also assist us in identifying areas where progress must be sought.

Strengthened evaluation

5. The EU welcomes the steadily increasing focus of the office on evaluation of activity. With the establishment of results-based budgeting in the Secretariat, it is vital that the work that goes into defining the measurable indicators is complemented by an effective way of judging these results at the end of the period. The CPC rightly commended the OIOS for the improved format of the programme performance report for the biennium 2002-03. We still believe that further improvement can be made in terms of streamlining the report and shifting the emphasis away from outputs towards programmatic achievements. We therefore support the OIOS recommendations on strengthening the role of evaluation outlined in paragraph 68 of the annual report, in particular the need to align performance assessment with formulation of future programme plans.

Investigations

6. The OIOS report conveys the wide-ranging nature of the investigative function within the office. Many of the alleged incidents in the report are truly shocking and go against everything the UN stands for. It is imperative that the organisation has the capability to identify and deal with those who abuse their positions. We welcome the office's proactivity in building partnerships with other agencies and enforcement authorities and the proposed outside peer review of the Investigations Division to be conducted by the Anti-Fraud Office of the European Commission. But investigations alone will not suffice. The organisation must have the capability and willingness to take swift action against those found to have stolen from it or worse. Both the OIOS and the Board of Auditors in their respective reports comment on cases where, although the offences took place some time ago, action against the individuals responsible seems still to be pending and they continue in their employment. This state of affairs is damaging to the credibility of the organisation both externally, and to its own staff.

OIOS Self-assessment

Mr Chairman,

7. We thank Mr Nair for having conducted the office-wide review aimed at taking stock of its activities. This review was very useful in identifying some key areas where the operational independence for the Secretariat could be strengthened. Central to this is the question of budgetary independence for the Office. The EU appreciates the important role that the Department of Management plays through the Budget Office, in ensuring that individual departments' proposals are realistic and consistent within the overall budgetary framework. However, we are attracted by the argument that the OIOS should have the independence to submit, through the Secretary-General, its proposals directly to the ACABQ and the 5th Committee, which will, of course, continue to be able to exercise full scrutiny and budgetary discipline as is now the case. This is consistent with practice in other major organisations and is also in conformity with Resolution 48/218 B that established the office so we should be interested in pursuing this in informal discussions.

8. We agree with the view that the increase in specific requests from Member States for OIOS studies is evidence that Member States find the information useful for decision-making processes. We would support direct access by Member States to a broader range of OIOS reports, whilst ensuring that proper safeguards are in place in cases where the Office feels that confidentiality is required. This is not to say that the General Assembly should consider all OIOS reports, but it would help member states to identify areas where follow-up or further action were required or where obstacles have appeared to the implementation of recommendations. We also believe it would help improve the timeliness of reports reaching the Assembly for consideration.

9. The EU is prepared to take decisions at this session on these issues of transparency in reporting and budgetary independence.

10. We note that the Secretary-General in his covering note to the report has suggested a comprehensive external review of the Office. We do not find this proposal especially timely, since GA resolution 54/244 expected us to take decisions on these issues in the current session. However, we might consider an external review, which focused specifically on validating and developing the conclusions drawn by the self-assessment on the performance of the OIOS and, crucially, the follow-up within the Secretariat to OIOS' work. This might include proposals on establishing the follow-up mechanism to which we referred earlier. In any event, such a review should have, in our view, clear terms of reference, be conducted by external experts with experience in assessing inspection bodies and the ensuing report be made available in its entirety to the General Assembly.

11. We also have before us report A/58/785, the OIOS audit of the regional commissions. The EU finds many of the recommendations constructive and concurs with the need for the regional commissions' annual and biennial sessions to be harmonised with submissions of the biennial programme plan. We are pleased that in almost all cases the regional commissions have accepted and are implementing the recommendations and look forward to discussing these in more detail during the informal consultations. We note that ESCWA did not accept the office's recommendation to review the need for a separate statistics division for the reason stated in the report. We would be interested to know what the next steps will be in resolving this difference of view.

12. Finally, Mr Chairman, the EU would like to pay tribute to Mr Nair for his outstanding leadership of the Office over the past five years. He has guided the Office in an exemplary way and further established it as a vital and fundamental part of the UN Secretariat. It is very encouraging that, as the annual report notes, the Office is now seen as a partner by staff across the Secretariat and that oversight is seen as complementary to the management function. This is in large part thanks to Mr Nair's tireless efforts. He will be missed and we wish him well in his future endeavours.

Thank you, Mr Chairman.

| Top |