EB UNDP,UNFPA and UNOPS, second regular session 2014, Agenda item 14 Implementation of the QCPR (joint statement NL Canada Italie USA)
Executive Board of UNDP/UNFPA/UNOPS, Second Regular Session, 2- 5 September 2014, New York Joint Statement on Item 14: Implementation QCPR Funding issues
Thank you Mr. Chair for giving me the floorand thank you Ms. Clark for your introduction to this session. Allow me to deliver this statement on behalf of Canada, Italy, the United States and the Netherlands. This statement addresses Item 14. Implementation of the QCPR.
• Our countries consider appropriate funding of UN agencies as crucial for long-term financial sustainability. The development of the integrated results and resources framework and a new cost recovery methodology, which were adopted last year are important steps in this direction.
• We welcome the current discussion in the Board on funding and on the concept of critical mass as well as the consultative process that preceded it.
• Likewise we appreciate the joint efforts of the New York-based agencies to identify a number of basic principles that can guide the discussion on critical mass of funding and on strategies to achieve it.
• We recognize the usefulness of these principles and we appreciate the attempt to refine the concept of critical mass of resources, based on the common understanding of this concept and also taking into account the specificities of each agency and the need to demonstrate results as part of their resource mobilization efforts.
• With respect to UNDP in particular, we appreciate the proposals presented in the document before us, as they reflect efforts to translate the QCPR’s call for enhancing overall funding and improving the predictability and quality of resources into concrete actions.
• While we are generally sympathetic towards UNDP ‘s presentation of the concept of Critical Mass Plus we would appreciate clarifications regarding the assumptions that formed the basis for the calculation of the estimated target of 11.9 to 13.9 billion USD of required Critical Mass Plus for the current Strategic Plan.
• In this regard, we would like to understand how you arrived at these figures and which of the funding modalities as identified in Annex 1 are included in this amount? We also appreciate to hear your views on how contributions to One UN funds, which are earmarked for specific countries but at the same time allow flexible and strategic allocation of UN resources at country level, could fit into this concept of Critical Mass Plus.
• We recognize that the range of required Critical Mass Plus could evolve over time. We expect that the structured dialogues will address such an evolution of estimates over the course of implementation of the SP.
• We also expect the structured dialogues to go beyond 2014, and we would suggest annual discussions, potentially at the same time as the annual reviews of the financial situation.
• Changing the current funding trends is challenging. We recommend that UNDP continue consultations with member states in order to maximally take into account their information on possibilities to adopt more flexible funding approaches.
• Proposals for encouraging more flexible funding should be as realistic as possible and take into account Member States’ internal decision-making models and the influence of national, formally approved budgets and guidelines.
• We also encourage UNDP to continue to exchange with other agencies on good practices for improved and better quality funding, whether it is core or non-core in nature.
• Let me end by encouraging UNDP to work further on developing incentives and new funding modalities as well as a strong narrative in favour of core and other quality funding in order to move towards a larger share of flexible, predictable and less earmarked funds for the implementation of the strategic plan, 2014 – 2017 and beyond.
• We stand ready to continue the dialogue on this important issue.