Other programme and budget questions
(A) Budget formulation and adoption
(A1) At the 66th session (March-April 1987) CCAQ(FB) reviewed the conclusions, in so far as they were relevant to the organizations generally, of the Group of High-Level Intergovernmental Experts to Review the Efficiency of the Administrative and Financial Functioning of the United Nations (the "Group of 18"), which had reported to the General Assembly at its 41st session. It was noted that UN had already introduced a series of measures affecting the functioning of its Secretariat, including a series of economy measures. A significant innovation resulting from the recommendations was the enhanced role to be played by governments, through CPC, in the process of programme budget formulation. These new arrangements had been supported by all major contributors. The Committee was informed that similar approaches had been made in several other organizations, which were studying how to ensure greater participation by governments in the budgetary process through existing governing bodies (ACC/1987/6, para. 41).
(B) Financial implications of action by central intergovernmental bodies and their subsidiary organs
(B1) At the 50th session (March 1979) several organizations voiced concern at the administrative costs of implementing changes in staff entitlements and procedures; the Committee expressed the view that before new personnel measures were recommended a report on their practical feasibility and the system-wide financial and administrative implications of implementing them - and not only on the direct additional expenditures involved - should be available to proposing and reviewing groups for examination (ACC/1979/R.11, para. 44).
(B2) At the 55th session (September 1981) the Committee exchanged views on the problems posed by decisions of central intergovernmental bodies which involved expenditures on the part of organizations other than UN; this problem had already been brought to the attention of ECOSOC, which had made no comment. On the whole the Committee thought that existing consultative procedures functioned satisfactorily where proposals involving expenditures for other organizations were known sufficiently far in advance of their submission to central bodies. In other cases it was for the UN Secretariat to draw the attention of these bodies to the possible cost implications for other organizations and the difficulties that they might encounter in obtaining supplementary estimates. It would also be for the UN Secretariat to alert the organizations concerned to the action under consideration (ACC/1981/30, paras. 8-11).
(C) Sharing of the cost of conferences
(C1) For budgetary arrangements for conferences involving more than one organization, see Section 16.6.
(D) Synchronization of budget cycles
(D1) For planning cycles, see section 16.1.
(D2) The Ad Hoc Committee of Experts to Examine the Finances of the United Nations and the Specialized Agencies recommended in its second report (A/6343) that organizations should adopt biennial budgets. At its 37th session (March 1973: CO-ORDINATION/R.985, paras. 33-36) CCAQ recognized that the constitutional problems of some agencies made it difficult for them to follow the Ad Hoc Committee's recommendations at an early date. It agreed on the desirability of a common two-year budget cycle, but felt that the system was workable only if it permitted the presentation, in the intervening years, of any supplementary estimates which might be necessary. CCAQ noted that organizations which had adopted such budgets applied different techniques in administering them. Discussion showed that, for the most part, the procedures followed by the organizations concerned were consistent, and any apparent lack of uniformity related more to the procedures of governing organs than to budget practices.
(D3) At the 42nd session (September 1975), in connection with the provision in budget documents of improved information on extrabudgetary activities, CCAQ recommended that ACC should request the executive heads of the funding agencies to seek the agreement and co-operation of their governing bodies with a view to the early development of common programme budget cycles and the harmonization of planning procedures (CO-ORDINATION/R.1114, para. 10). ACC subsequently formulated a request in these terms (CO-ORDINATION/R.1130, para. 22).
(D4) Reverting to ACC's request at the 48th session (March 1977: CO-ORDINATION/R.1211, para. 6), the Committee, having regard to the need for UNDP to adhere to the Consensus and in view of its willingness to assist the organizations as far as possible in forecasting the resources likely to be available to them from UNDP sources, agreed that as much progress as possible had been made in this area. ACC reported on these developments to ECOSOC in its annual report for 1976-1977 (E/5973).
(E) Publication and distribution of budget documents
(E1) At the 35th session (March 1972) (CO-ORDINATION/R.930, para. 22), CCAQ decided that it was premature to consider the possibility of achieving a common practice with respect to the means of publication and distribution of budget documents.