Fifth Committee

1       Thank you, Mr Chairman.  I also thank Chef de Cabinet of the Secretary-General, Ms Susana Malcorra, and Chair of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions, Mr Carlos Ruiz Massieu, for introducing their reports, and Mr Ian Richards, Vice-President of the Staff Management Committee, for his statement.

2       I make this statement on behalf of the ten member states of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), namely Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam.

Mr Chairman,

3       We align ourselves with the statement made by Fiji on behalf of the Group of 77 and China.  We also thank the Secretary-General for his report A/68/358 “Towards a global, dynamic and adaptable workforce”.  This report spells out both a refined and an alternate version of the Secretary-General’s proposal for mobility contained in report A/67/324 Add. 1.  We note that these proposals were made in response to member states’ request in UNGA Resolution 67/255.

4       ASEAN supports the principle of mobility.  A well-designed framework can shape and deploy the United Nations’ workforce to serve the Organisation’s growing needs.  However, we need to know exactly what mobility entails in several key areas.   First, scope.  Report A/68/358 states broadly that mobility will apply to around 14,000 staff of Professional grade and above.  However, it also states that the reconfiguration of job networks and families to ensure more consistent distribution of staff and positions has not yet been done, and that approximately 200 non-rotational positions have not been finalised.  We urge the Secretariat, in its review, to continue allowing candidates to cross between job families in order to build up a truly versatile workforce.

5       Second, geographic representation.  Resolution 67/255 calls for equal treatment of external and internal candidates.  While such an approach may be prima facie less efficient than prioritising internal candidates, it is necessary in order not to limit the ability of the Organisation to select the best candidates on as wide a geographical basis as possible.  Under-represented nationalities, particularly those from developing countries, must be given a fair chance.  We urge the Secretary-General to ensure that external candidates are not disadvantaged and will be given the chance to apply for every job opening. 

6       Third, cost.  Report A/68/358 does not contain a detailed breakdown and projection of the costs of implementing mobility.  It only provides an estimated cost for one move as an illustration.  It also mentions that average future costs would be broadly the same as that incurred by staff movements today, and indicated that the mobility proposal is “not about increasing the number of moves but making them more strategic”.  We would appreciate elaboration on what this means.  We also note that under both the revised and alternate proposals, staff can apply to move after one year.  This may not be optimal both in terms of cost and building institutional capacity.

7       Lastly, we concur with ACABQ that successful implementation of any mobility policy will largely depend on improved forecasting of staffing needs.   We hope to see detailed information on measures taken to improve workforce planning including through full implementation of UMOJA and INSPIRA.

8       ASEAN reaffirms its support of the principle of mobility and the Secretary-General’s vision of a dynamic and mobile workforce.  We look forward to receiving more details in the areas outlined above in order to make an informed decision in the long-term staffing interests of the Organisation so that it will have a versatile and dedicated workforce to carry out the mandates of its Member States.

9       Thank you, Mr Chairman.

.  .  .  .  .