Mr. Chairman,
I have the honor to speak on behalf of the 19 member States of the
Rio Group.
We wish to thank the Chairman of the Committee on Contributions, Mr.
Ugo Sessi, for introducing the report
now before us. We ask that he convey to the other experts on the Committee
our sincere appreciation for the
work they have done. While we would have preferred a larger number of
recommendations and an agreed
collection of data to facilitate our work in the Fifth Committee, we
are aware of the difficulty of the task that has
been entrusted to the Committee on Contributions, to fulfil a mandate
in which the Committee was requested to
make recommendations based quite unusually on 12 different proposals.
Mr. Chairman,
Allow me to mention a number of aspects, which the Rio Group considers
to be of fundamental importance to the
task upon which we are embarking today and aimed at the adoption of
the next scale of assessments:
As members of this Committee will recall, the Rio Group has always
been concerned at the negative effects
of the discontinuity experienced by two groups of States: those moving
up through the low per capita
income threshold between scale periods, and the member states just above
the threshold. On previous
occasions, the Committee on Contributions has agreed with us that this
situation was "clearly inequitable". It
is the responsibility of the General Assembly to take corrective measures.
To this end, formulas have been
proposed with various options that deserve our support. These range
from establishing a grace period for
those countries crossing, the threshold to new formulas for calculating
the low per capita income threshold.
As we stated a year ago in this same Committee, we believe that the
time has come to address this situation
and to approach the problem from a perspective that takes 'into account
the -experience of the World
Bank in establishing income thresholds. o In this connection, we note
with satisfaction that proposal "C"
adopts this approach. The General Assembly should consider in an open
and constructive spirit the option
described in this proposal for basing the low-income threshold on a
method that has the advantage of
being, based on reliable data and detailed consideration of 'the economic
realities of developing countries.
In considering the low per capita income adjustment, account should
be taken of the context in which the
earlier negotiations on the scale took place. It should be recalled
that this adjustment was reduced in the
scale of assessments for the period 1998-2000 from 85% to 80%. In our
view, the conditions do not exist
for this decline to continue and he current percentage should therefore
be retained.
As regards the base statistical period, we wish to reiterate our view
that it would be best to maintain the
current period of six years as a mechanism that could go some way towards
neutralizing the effect of
excessive fluctuations in the income of Member States during the base
period. Here, we must agree with
those delegations that have pointed out that the proposal to automatically
recalculate the scale each year is
in open contradiction to rule 160 of the rules of procedure of the General
Assembly, which clearly states
that the scale of assessments shall not be subject to a general revision
for at least three years.
The Rio Group is in favor of maintaining the debt burden adjustment
methodology, based on the "debt
stock" approach. In our view, since the debt burden is one of the
priority issues on the international agenda
in the new millennium, in considering the item of the scale of assessments,
the General Assembly of the
United Nations can ill afford to ignore the impact which the debt burden
has on the economics of
developing countries. A simple reminder of this is the fact that of
the 189 Member States of the United
Nations represented here today, 46 of them are currently categorized
as highly indebted.
Allow me to state also, that one of the main problems which the Committee
on Contributions will have to
resolve concerns on those cases in which the gap between inflation rates
and exchange rates is excessive. It
is important to avoid excessive distortions that neglect the real growth
in the economies of countries and
affect their capacity to pay.
The report of the Committee on Contributions states that several experts
had raised the specific problem of
variations in the increases in contributions of more than 50%, which
bear no logical relationship to the real growth
in the economy of those countries and their economic and social situation.
This problem affects a large number of
countries in Latin America, but the lack of flexibility in dealing with
a situation that requires more equitable
treatment has blocked any initiative that might have prevented our continent
from being affected.
We regret that attitude and have difficulty in understanding why,
if the report clearly stated that exchange rates
should be set in order to correct the data of States that experience
significant fluctuations (paragraphs 85 and 38)
and some experts drew attention to this particular situation, which
resulted in excessive increases in assessed
contributions, the Commission did not take these ideas on board in order
to avoid the possibility that our region
might be severely affected in terms of its capacity to pay and why it
did not make any recommendation on the
matter.
Is it perhaps because economic growth in the developed countries declined
so precipitously and Latin America
enjoyed economic growth in real terms of more than 50% that the results
of some of the proposals are justified?
No, this is clearly not the case.
In addition, we see in paragraph 96 that the Committee logically decided
to replace the MER by the PARE in a
number of specific cases, but do not understand why this cannot be done
also in the case of countries in Latin
America, such as Colombia or Cuba, among others.
We also wish to recall that during the decade of the 90s our region
experienced its worst financial crises, from the
"tequila effect" to the devaluation of the real. Moreover
these countries are still experiencing the devastating effects
of hurricane Mitch and the phenomenon known as "El Niño".
Mr. President,
As regards the compilation of statistical dam the Rio Group is of
the view did no effort should be spared to ensure
complete transparency. The process must guarantee access by States Members
to their data, a chance for States
to give their opinions on the data, and, in particular, for them to
receive convincing explanations where
discrepancies are noted. It is essential to maintain a balance in the
process in which transparency is not thwarted
by a questionable concept of confidentiality.
Permit me to state, lastly, that, even though the conclusions of the
report of the Committee on Contributions are
that most of the proposals will result in significant increases for
a large number of States in our region, the
commitment of the delegations of the Rio Group is to make every effort
possible to achieve a consensus solution,
which all Member States can accept and honor.
Thank you very much.
