Norway welcomes the proposals put forward by the Secretariat, including the definitions, the introduction of a split between “infrastructure and administrative support” and “stewardship and governance” as well as introducing a separate category for the latter in the 16-17 budget.
Considerable work has been invested in bringing more clarity to the complex issue of financing of administrative and management costs for the organization. This has brought us new valuable insights to the financing of the organization. But as we earn insight, also new questions arise.
In that regard, I have a slightly technical question for the Secretariat, so please bear with me:
The report under this item tells us that 580 million USD was spent for infrastructure and administrative support in 2012-2013, which is proposed to become integrated into the programme categories for the next biennium. When voluntary contributions - from where overhead costs will be drawn - constitute approx. 3 bill USD over a biennium, 13% overhead on voluntary contributions will not cover the full cost of infrastructure and administrative support under the new model. Even if the 8,5% post occupancy charge is continued, we do not believe this will cover all the costs for infrastructure and administrative support service costs. My delegation therefore wonders how you foresee to cover the remaining costs for infrastructure and administrative support under the new model? From where will these resources be drawn?
Finally Chair, we are happy to see a reference in the report to the need for constantly seeking efficiency gains. This is a necessity for any modern organization. In the document on reform implementation plan and report, administration and management costs are said to have been reduced by 10% over the 12-13 biennium. In the work ahead, we would welcome that the Secretariat sets concrete benchmarks and efficiency targets across the organization in this regard.