Item 3: Refined Operating Model

Norway on behalf of the two constituencies, which include Denmark, Finland and Norway, as well as Switzerland, Sweden, Austria and Iceland.

I am speaking on behalf of the two constituencies, which include Denmark, Finland and Norway, as well as Switzerland, Sweden, Austria and Iceland.

We commend the efforts by the Global Review Panel that - in a short period of time - came up with solid recommendations that can both transform the Joint Programme to new realities, but also build on and consolidate its strengths and successes.

On that basis we welcome the strong and renewed commitment by the UNAIDS Secretariat and the eleven Cosponsors to the joint refined operating model that is now being presented to the PCB.

We welcome that the recommendations are based on the UNAIDS Strategy 2016-2021 and the Political Declaration 2016, Further, we welcome that the recommendations are aligned with the QCPR 2016, the reinvigorated UN reform agenda by the new UN leadership as well as the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and its call for more cross-sectoral and integrated approaches.

Let me highlight a few areas that our two constituencies find particularly relevant:

First, the enhancing of country level operations that we believe is a key feature of the refinement. We agree with the importance of improving the linkages between the country, regional and headquarters levels. We also believe that it is important to recognize that there is no one-size fits all for the Joint Programme and the UN at large at country level. The refined operating model identifies well, for example, the different needs for UNAIDS presence in fast track countries, compared to other countries. It is crucial that these differences in presence also become reality in the implementation of the refined model.

Second, the differences in presence at country level reflects the importance of joint working.  It requires that the full capacity of the Joint Programme is being used, and that the comparative advantages of the Secretariat and the eleven Cosponsors are both identified and implemented. We also fully agree with the refined operating model that the right capacities and competencies must be in place for the different parts of the Joint Programme.

Realizing that country envelopes funding is limited, we look forward to receiving more information about how these funds are allocated by the joint programme in fast-track and non-fast-track countries. This allocation should be based on needs of priority location and population and not necessarily on current presence.

Three, we strongly agree that reporting and accountability is a key aspect of the refined model. It is clear that our repetitive messages on this issue have been heard. We welcome simplified and harmonized systems for reporting and accountability, and the new mind-set required, such as incentives and sanctions. We also welcome the clear message that this is not only about activities financed by the UBRAF, it is about the entire Joint Programme. In the same sense, we welcome the planned refinement of the division of labour.

Four, we support the idea of an increased multi-sectorial and multi-actor dialogue. We can understand that the Joint Programme at this time and with the challenging funding environment hesitate to launch a formal partnership forum as proposed by the Review Panel. At the same time we also see merit in all relevant actors continuing to meet and discuss in a holistic way strategic matters at hand. We encourage the Joint Programme, if possible also in cooperation with the Global Fund and other relevant partners, to explore possible opportunities to strengthen such discussions at global as well as country-level.  

Five, the refined operating model has a lot to do about coordination and coherence. We strongly support that more can be done in this regard, within and between secretariats, and at governing bodies, and welcome the actions proposed. In particular, the CCO must develop a stronger and deeper relationship, to strengthen the collective decision-making character of the Joint Programme. The responsibility for this rest with the UNAIDS Secretariat and the leadership of the eleven Cosponsors but also, not least, with us Member States. There must also be a follow-up to the decisions taken by this Board in the Board of the Cosponsors.


Six - and last, the crucial matter of funding. On resource distribution, the proposed revised operating model meets the most crucial needs, and it was developed by and is supported by all the organisations of the Joint Programme. We therefore support it. At the same time, CCO needs to develop scenario planning to prepare for positive or negative changes to the funding situation. We agree and are concerned about the lack of coherence between political signals and funding efforts. These should go hand in hand, and there needs to be a better recognition of the need for a fully funded UBRAF. We also welcome the proposals to allocating more funds to country level, based on needs. An important challenge is to make sure that all these parts of the HIV and health architecture are complementary and sufficiently funded.

Finally, we would like to repeat that we are ready to endorse the operating model and the action plan.