STATEMENT BY THE PERMANENT REPRESENTATIVE OF SINGAPORE AMBASSADOR BURHAN GAFOOR AT THE GENERAL DEBATE OF THE AD HOC WORKING GROUP ON THE REVITALISATION OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY 2 MARCH 2020
2 March 2020
This article has been migrated from an earlier version of the site and may display formatting inconsistencies.
1 Co-Chairs, I join previous speakers in congratulating you on your appointment to lead the work of this Ad Hoc Working Group during the 74th session. I acknowledge the presence of the President of the General Assembly and commend him for his continued commitment and leadership on this very important issue of the revitalisation of the work of the General Assembly. I also endorse the statement delivered by the Permanent Representative of Algeria on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement.
2 The revitalisation of the work of the General Assembly is an important issue for Singapore. The General Assembly is the main policy-making and representative organ of the United Nations. It is the only UN organ with universal representation, where all member states big or small have an equal voice. This is the reason why Singapore, as a small state, has been a strong supporter and advocate of a more effective and accountable United Nations, and of a revitalised General Assembly.
3 The commemoration of the 75th anniversary of the United Nations is a timely opportunity for Member States to renew our commitment to multilateralism and to the international rules-based system. It is therefore imperative that we redouble our efforts to reinforce the role and authority of the General Assembly; enhance its effectiveness; and increase the transparency and inclusiveness of its work.
4 Over the last few years, our efforts to revitalise the work of the General Assembly have produced tangible and encouraging results. These have included for example: (a) improvements in the selection and appointment process of the UN Secretary General; (b) strengthening the continuity between Presidents of the General Assembly; (c) making the elections process more efficient and equitable; (d) improving communication and understanding between Member States and the UN Secretariat through regular informal dialogues; and (e) also making UN meetings more accessible for persons with disabilities.
5 We can be proud of what we have achieved over the last few years. But the task ahead for revitalisation is more challenging. We have no choice but to build on the progress we have already made and tackle some of the more intractable issues before us. The first thing that we can do and need to do is to continue to streamline and trim down the revitalisation resolution. Last year, we made good progress in making the resolution more concise, forward-looking and result-oriented. We look forward to working with all delegations to build on resolution 73/341 to produce an even more streamlined and concise resolution this year that focuses on concrete and meaningful outcomes. In our view, there is no need to repeat paragraphs for the sake of documenting previous agreements. We should focus the resolution on new and additional elements on which we can reach or on which we have reached agreement. In fact, let’s be bold. Let’s aim to reduce the length of the resolution by half from 60 to less than 30 paragraphs. I think this is feasible and possible if we all work together in a constructive spirit of give and take.
6 My delegation wishes to identify the following issues as areas where we hope to make collective progress by working with all delegations:
7 Number One, we must take concrete steps to preserve the primacy of the General Debate during the High Level Week. Every year, delegations complain about the number of parallel meetings and side events taking place during High Level Week. This problem of a proliferation of high-level meetings and side events is particularly acute for small countries with small delegations, who are most affected and disadvantaged by this kind of schedule. It is the smallest countries that pay the biggest price of a proliferation of meetings during High Level Week. It is therefore high time to get serious about this issue.
8 My delegation’s view is that before any high-level meetings during the High Level Week are planned, whether they are mandated or non-mandated, all such meetings should be presented for discussion in an open meeting of the General Committee under the chairmanship of the President of the General Assembly. Our view is that the General Committee, in an open-ended setting, can be a useful platform to maintain an overview of the entire programme of official meetings during the High Level Week. There should also be a discussion in the General Committee and in the General Assembly about how to rationalise and limit the number of high-level meetings and side events held in parallel with the General Debate. Singapore is prepared to support initiatives that will streamline and limit such side events, including proposals to develop a set of clear guidelines to manage the overall activities in a manner that will benefit all Member States. In fact, we would like to propose that the President of the General Assembly prepare and put forward a set of draft guidelines for further discussion in the General Committee. The idea of adopting a set of draft guidelines is one area that we think would benefit from more informal discussions, perhaps in a retreat-like setting, involving Permanent Representatives from as many as delegations as possible.
9 Number Two, we must continue to have a serious discussion on the rationalisation and streamlining of the agenda and the number of resolutions being adopted by the General Assembly. This is important and necessary, as the continued proliferation of agenda items and resolutions will lead to an unmanageable and unsustainable volume of work that will dilute the focus, effectiveness and efficiency of the General Assembly. In this regard, I am of the view that the Ad Hoc Working Group must lead the way and set a good example to all the Committees and other processes as to what is possible.
10 Therefore, I would like to propose that we consider biennialising the resolution on the revitalisation of the General Assembly. Rather than expending considerable time and effort negotiating minor incremental changes to the resolution each year, let us consider more significant and substantial updates every two years. In the year where there is no resolution, the Ad Hoc Working Group will focus on monitoring progress of the implementation of the existing resolutions. We can also continue our informal dialogue with the UN Secretariat on thematic and other relevant issues on an annual basis. This will allow us to get updates from the Secretariat on the implementation of the resolutions on an annual basis. In other words, moving to a biennial cycle for the revitalisation resolution does not mean that we should stop our annual discussions or dialogue on revitalisation or other thematic issues of importance. The key difference would be that we would not need to negotiate and adopt a resolution every year but give ourselves more time to work on substantial updates very two years. We hope all delegations will consider favourably our proposal to biennialise this resolution.
11 Similarly, we call on sponsors of resolutions to review the periodicity of their resolutions and consider the intervals at which they are brought before the General Assembly for consideration. Given that this is the 75th anniversary of the UN, I think it is a good opportunity for each delegation to look through their own lists of resolutions and put forward one or two resolutions that could be considered for biennialisation or triennialisation. I think that would be a very concrete and constructive proposal from each delegation to improve the work of the General Assembly. Of course, the final decision to biennialise or triennialise an item or resolution, or to introduce a sunset clause, is the prerogative of the main sponsors. They retain the absolute sovereign right. But my delegation hopes that every delegation will take the opportunity of the 75th anniversary to review their various resolutions and consider what they can contribute to the collective good of revitalising our agenda and streamlining our work in the General Assembly.
12 Number Three, as part of efforts to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the General Assembly, Singapore continues to support bringing forward the date of the start of future GA sessions if this can be done in a reasonable and logical manner. As noted previously, we believe this will give incoming Presidents of the General Assembly, the Main Committee Chairs and Bureaux more time to plan, prepare and coordinate their work ahead of the High Level Week. Singapore looks forward to continuing the discussion on the feasibility and implications of the three options for alternative start dates presented in the Secretary General’s report A/73/273. We are also prepared to consider any other alternative options that are put forward. In the meantime, we would support consideration of bringing forward the opening of the General Assembly by at least one week to the Tuesday of the second week in September as an interim solution.
13 Co-chairs, my delegation will elaborate our views on these and other issues during the thematic discussions. In the meantime, I assure you of Singapore’s full support and commitment to engaging constructively with colleagues to achieve a set of concrete and meaningful outcomes that will contribute to the further revitalisation of the work of the General Assembly. Thank you.
. . . . .