Question of Palestine home || Permalink || About UNISPAL || Search

English (pdf) ||Arabic||Chinese||Français||Русский||Español||



Follow UNISPAL Twitter RSS

UNITED
NATIONS
A

        General Assembly
Distr.
GENERAL
A/C.5/61/SR.33
8 January 2007

Original: English

Official Records


Fifth Committee


Summary record of the 33rd meeting
Held at Headquarters, New York, on Friday, 15 December 2006, at 4 p.m.

Chairman: Mr. Yousfi .......................................................................................................................... (Algeria)




Contents

Agenda item 117: Programme budget for the biennium 2006-2007 (continued )

Programme budget implications of draft resolution A/ES-10/L.20/Rev.1: Establishment of the United Nations Register of Damage caused by the Construction of the Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (continued)


The meeting was called to order at 4 p.m.


Agenda item 117: Programme budget for the biennium 2006-2007 (continued )

1. Ms. Van Buerle (Director, Programme Planning and Budget Division), introducing the statement of programme budget implications of draft resolution A/ES-10/L.20/Rev.1 (A/C.5/61/13/Rev.1), said that the requests contained in paragraphs 3 to 5, 6 and 7, and 11 to 15 of the revised draft resolution would entail no change in the resource levels indicated in the original statement of programme budget implications (A/C.5/61/13; see A/C.5/61/SR.28, para. 5). While the details contained in paragraphs 5 to 8 and 10 to 15 of the original statement would remain unchanged, paragraph 9 of that statement, which covered the Verification and Assessment Unit, would no longer apply, as the posts referred to therein would not be required under the terms of draft resolution A/ES-10/L.20/Rev.1. Accordingly, should the General Assembly adopt that draft resolution, an additional appropriation of $2,344,700 would be required under section 3, Political affairs, and section 35, Staff assessment, to be offset by the same amount under income section 1, Income from staff assessment, of the programme budget for the biennium 2006-2007.

2. Mr. Saha (Chairman of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions), introducing the related oral report of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions and recalling its earlier report on the statement of programme budget implications of draft resolution A/ES-10/L.20 (A/61/614), noted that the requests contained in paragraphs 3 to 5, 6 and 7, and 11 to 15 of draft resolution A/ES-10/L.20/Rev.1 would entail no change that had an impact on the previously requested levels of resources.

3. Taking into account that the Verification and Assessment Unit would no longer be requested at the current stage, and that the General Assembly would request the Secretary-General to report to it within six months on the progress made in establishing the Register of Damage, the Advisory Committee reiterated the opinion it had expressed in paragraph 6 of its report (A/61/614) that every effort should be made to utilize existing available resources and that any savings should be reflected in the performance report for the 2006-2007 budget. The Advisory Committee recommended that the Committee should indicate to the General Assembly that, were it to adopt draft resolution A/ES-10/L.20/Rev.1, an additional appropriation of up to $2,344,700 would be required under section 3, Political affairs, and section 35, Staff assessment, to be offset by the same amount under Income section 1, Income from staff assessment, of the programme budget for the biennium 2006-2007.

4. The Chairman proposed that, on the basis of the statement submitted by the Secretary-General and the related observations and recommendations of the Advisory Committee, the Fifth Committee should adopt the following draft decision regarding the programme budget implications of draft resolution A/ES-10/L.20/Rev.1:

5. A recorded vote had been requested on the draft decision regarding the programme budget implications of draft resolution A/ES-10/L.20/Rev.1.

6. A recorded vote was taken on the draft decision.

In favour:

Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Austria, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Cambodia, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Estonia, Finland, France, Gabon, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lebanon, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Malaysia, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Monaco, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Romania, Russian Federation, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Serbia, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sudan, Sweden, Switzerland, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Togo, Tunisia, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Venezuela (Bol ivarian Republic of), Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

Against:

Australia, Israel, Micronesia (Federated States of), Palau, United States of America.

Abstaining:

Côte d’Ivoire.

7. The draft decision was adopted by 128 to 5, with 1 abstention.

8. Ms. Pehrman (Finland), speaking on behalf of the European Union, said that that group had supported the draft decision on the programme budget implications of the establishment of the United Nations Register of Damage caused by the Construction of the Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (A/C.5/61/13/Rev.1), trusting that maximum use would be made of existing resources. Any savings identified should be reflected in the performance reports for the 2006-2007 budget. The European Union regretted that the Committee had departed from its practice of reaching decisions by consensus. Every effort must be made to return to its long-standing working methods.

The meeting rose at 4.15 p.m.


This record is subject to correction. Corrections should be sent under the signature of a member of the delegation concerned within one week of the date of publication to the Chief of the Official Records Editing Section, room DC2-750, 2 United Nations Plaza, and incorporated in a copy of the record.
Corrections will be issued after the end of the session, in a separate corrigendum for each Committee.



Follow UNISPAL RSS Twitter