Antonio Guterres said the organisation was at risk of “imminent financial collapse” and could run out of cash by July.
He blamed unpaid fees and a budget rule that forces the global body to return unspent money, according to a letter seen by Reuters on Friday.
The UN has struggled for cash after the US – its largest contributor – cut voluntary funding to the body’s agencies and refused to make payments to its regular and peacekeeping budgets.
Earlier this month, Washington announced the US would withdraw and cease funding for 31 UN entities, including a climate treaty and body promoting gender equality.
Guterres told Washington at the time that it had a legal obligation to pay its contributions to the budgets.
“The crisis is deepening, threatening programme delivery and risking financial collapse. And the situation will deteriorate further in the near future,” Guterres wrote in a letter to ambassadors dated January 28th.
“Decisions not to honour assessed contributions that finance a significant share of the approved regular budget have now been formally announced.”
It was not clear which members he was referring to and a UN spokesman did not immediately respond to the Telegraph for comment.
Guterres urged all member states to “honour their obligations to pay in full and on time” or to “fundamentally overhaul our financial rules to prevent an imminent financial collapse”.
Worth reading in full.
Dr. Will Jones is Editor of the Daily Sceptic. He has a PhD in political philosophy, an MA in ethics, a BSc in mathematics and a diploma in theology. This article was first published HERE
10 comments:
Excellent news. About time this far left, biased, anti west organization was gone. Start again and get rid of the far left component and it will become effective again. Good riddance.
For those that are concerned with the demise of the UN should read “Shake Hands with the Devil” The failure of humanity in Rwanda. A more inept world entity would be hard to find. Coupled with the IPCC waffle, it’s total closure, would not be missed.
Trump wants the UN building in New York to convert into another Trump Tower to complement his proposed Trump developments in Gaza.
Clever scheme - defund the UN, watch it collapse, do a deal with the building, and yahoo another few billion dollars.
Thats the Art of the Deal !!
To anon @9.37. lol. I'm guessing your comment was tongue in cheek. I think it's more about what the UN actually stand for now days. Rockerfeller (who gave the UN the land) would be turning in his grave if he knew what the UN were doing.
To Anon 11.43
Yes, I was being absolutely tongue in cheek !
I should have said so.
However, I visited the UN a few years ago which confirmed everything i had thought about them - full of great honest intentions but utterly useless bunch of self important people who couldn't do anything useful in an emergency.
An ideal job for Jacinda.
And that's tongue in cheek!
Can I ask, is the UN run like some of the NZ Maori entities that have 'serious' inward cash flow, but the 'outgoing' exceeds the income.
And when "asked" to explain said expenditure -
- for NZ Maori with the continued Govt "donations" (calling it a revenue flow would be deemed racist)
- being unable to account for any $$$ spent
- for the UN, with all Nations giving money, and then being asked to explain revenue expenses > such as
> flying delegates around the World
> attending meetings in the main have nothing to do with UN Policy or direction
> the WHO, located in the very expensive Switzerland, but does nothing outstanding
> spending money on relief programs (that never get delivered [think Gaza - the stock pile of food etc was beyond belief, much of it rotting in the sun] )
- the expense of setting up a UN outpost, with all the office mod cons, personnel communication devices, new vehicles to drive around in (Timor, Sudan) and exclusive accommodation for staff
- ongoing expense just to maintain the HQ in NY City.
Yup can see why the UN has money issues, suggest they get in contact with Willie Jackson (or his wife) and/or John Tamihere.
Mind you - Shane Jones is known to "splash the cash" maybe he could help?
Just like most publicly funded organisations, their usefulness is far exceeded by their members (usually senior ones) ego's and own self importance
From direct experience: UN agencies have been very aware of management standards and practices since the 1980s when the US and the UK left Unesco over the specific orientation of the programme related to media accreditation .
As Western countries usually pay their contributions, they can level the criticism. Key posts in finance, oversight, legal affairs and personnel are very often held by staff from OECD countries. An External Auditor, appointed by the Management Board of each agency, always approves the books. Countries lose voting rights if they do not meet financial obligations or are in arrears. Every effort is made to satisfy the management standards of " first-world countries" including transparency criteria.
The overall plan to streamline UN agencies would, in theory, reduce duplication and running costs, while ensuring greater efficiency and programme impact. A draft plan, UN80, outlines this process.
Politically, the composition of the Security Council, including veto power for 5 countries,
dates from 1946. This is criticized as needing restructuration to reflect the geopolitics of the 21st century. This diplomatic area is much more complex and sensitive than management .
Anon@8.36 very fair questions. Perhaps we could incorporate anon@5.13 suggestion and put comrade Ardern in their ranks. That will expedite their demise.
To above: SG Guterres ( former Portuguese PM) is closely politically aligned with Ardern. This UN crisis may ensure Ardern is sidelined from the SG post.
Post a Comment
Thank you for joining the discussion. Breaking Views welcomes respectful contributions that enrich the debate. Please ensure your comments are not defamatory, derogatory or disruptive. We appreciate your cooperation.