Discurso do Representante Permanente Alterno, Embaixador Norberto Moretti, em encontro informal entre a Secretária-Geral Adjunta, Sra. Amina Mohammed, e embaixadores do Grupo de Países da América Latina e Caribe (GRULAC) sobre o financiamento do sistema de coordenadores residentes da ONU - 17 de novembro de 2023 (texto em inglês)

Statement by the Deputy Permanent Representative of Brazil to the United Nations, Ambassador Norberto Moretti, at an informal meeting between DSG Amina Mohammed and GRULAC ambassadors about the funding of the UN Resident Coordinators System
November 17th, 2023

Madam DSG,

We would like to reaffirm our steadfast support to the repositioning of the United Nations Development System (UNDS) and the reinvigorated Resident Coordinator System (RC System). Brazil is particularly keen on reform efforts geared towards more results-oriented actions by the entities of the UNDS and increased alignment between country programmes and the United Nations Sustainable Development Cooperation Frameworks – (UNSDCFs). They help program countries accelerate the implementation of the 2030 Agenda in line with national priorities, needs, plans and circumstances.

We also note the accomplishments in terms of greater coherence between and among agencies on the ground and efficiencies realized for the benefit of operational activities for development.

We also welcome the good results demonstrated by the Development Coordination Office (DCO) and the Resident Coordinator System thus far. As reported, the RC System is now fully deployed and is just coming to fruition. It has become particularly important to ensure that it effectively delivers on its mandate and that member states are able to review and monitor closely results achieved by the system.

The contribution by the Resident Coordinator in Brazil has been much appreciated. Ms. Silvia Rucks coordinated the working group in charge of the formulation of our national UNSDCF in a rather conscientious manner, with due regard to Brazil´s priorities and needs, while seeking to reconcile and integrate diverse views. Reports issued on the contribution of the UNDS to Brazil´s efforts at weathering and recovering from the pandemic are equally praiseworthy.- We are cognizant of the current financial outlook of the RC system. Accordingly, like others, we join in the choir for timely, needs-based and sufficient funding of the system, to balance out revenues and expenditures, taking into account different responsibilities and capabilities across Member States.

We cannot sweep under the carpet the fact that, when the system was conceived, donor countries agreed to its coming into being by means of extrabudgetary resources. Its mostly voluntary nature, which is true for the remainder of the UNDS, lies at its core and should be preserved as much as possible.

Many developing countries already co-finance their country programmes and contribute to the development of partners in the developing world through South-South and triangular cooperation. We are now faced with the stark socioeconomic consequences of the pandemic and other crises, which have brought about severe setbacks in our development trajectories as well as fiscal and financial constraints on our ability to finance our own development. 

One can´t overemphasize the fact that developing countries are the recipients of international cooperation for development. Therefore, we cannot be held accountable for shortcomings in the financing of the coordination function of the development system. Transferring the brunt of financing to program countries amounts to inverting agreed roles between donors and recipient countries. It would also subvert the voluntary nature of the UNDS, as agreed in the Quadrennial Comprehensive Policy Review (QCPR), while punishing developing countries with an increment in their contributions to the regular budget.

That would set a disturbing precedent and have negative systemic implications for international cooperation for development in a context of shrinking ODA and donations concentrated on humanitarian rather than development, including at the domestic level.

Therefore, even as a moral imperative, assessed for developing countries should be but the last ratio and marginal at best, after other options have been exhausted. We probably need to think along the lines of a blending of different elements that, when combined, would strike a more sustainable balance between revenues and expenditures.

Now on a more concrete and practical note, we might need to calibrate our expectations with regard to the total budget of the system. The 281 million figure has never been achieved and yet the system has been delivering positive results as showcased by resident coordinators on Wednesday. Given donors are likely to keep channeling resources towards humanitarian, we should be aiming for a realistic budgetary target for the coordination function rather than an ideal one in a context of declining global solidarity. The current picture is definitely not amenable to keeping on expanding the system. Last year´s record overall expenditure, USD 225 million, might provide a benchmark for that. In today´s context, the whole enterprise of defining a budget level for the RC System should be guided by principles of efficiency and necessity.

We also need more transparency and disaggregation on the expenditures of the system to be able to ascertain real needs, explore options for a better ratio between budget and expenses, and set budget at a level that corresponds to actual needs in light of agreed mandates. What is the outlook of RC offices at the global, regional and national levels in terms of staffing and other costs? How much is spent on staff, coordination support to countries, premises, materials, and so on and so forth?

On the expenditure side, there are options that could be scrutinized that would lead to more fiscal balance: room for further operational efficiencies; resizing RC regional and national offices as a function of actual needs of host countries and specific regions. Does the RC office need to have a fixed size and structure regardless of the region and the host country situation? We should also look into space for financial and human resource reallocations within the system. In some instances, secondments of host country government officials and of staff of UN country teams might also be helpful. We might also want to ponder prioritizing certain countries or groups of countries on a provisional basis, like the LDCs. And in the event that the assessed option might need to be eventually and marginally considered, then we should first assess ways to reallocate part of our current assessed contributions to the RC System, which in itself would avert transferring the burden to developing countries. And if it comes to that, then no decision on it should be taken solely in the ambit of the II Committee of the General Assembly. Experts from the V Committee of the General Assembly and ideally the ACABQ would need to get involved.

On the revenue side, one should not rule out an increase, even if it is temporary, in the levy on highly earmarked voluntary contributions, which was alone able to raise 50 million dollars last year. Also we would benefit from further clarification on the idea of a variable levy, as floated by Pakistan, to assess its effectiveness. The conundrum single entities of the UNDS are in has more to do with quality than quantity of resources cashed in. Total expenditure has been higher in funds and programs year after year, as the share of regular resources has been declining steadily. So the tendency is more and more highly earmarked resources are going to keep pouring into the system. By the way, the levy sends a positive systemic signal as it marginally redirects resources from donor country priorities to further alignment with host countries needs and plans and host country preferences with regard to the implementation of the 2030 Agenda. We should not discount either the possibility of convening an emergency pledging conference for short-term contingencies as we carry out our discussion in a rational and judicious manner, in pursuit of a better alignment between revenues and expenditures.

Madam DSG,

Those are just some initial thoughts on options for a way forward for increased financial sustainability for the RC System. We remain open-minded about considering alternative ways suggested by other Member States and committed to engaging constructively in finding solutions for the RC System financial framework.

I thank you.