TNAG-0975-FCO40-1194-Resettlement-of-Vietnamese-refugees-from-Hong-Kong-in-other--1980 — Page 64

1

CONFIDENTIAL

-3.

U

Resettlement

10. Though there is a separate paper on this subject (A/AC.96/580) there is no separate agenda item and it is traditionally lumped together with the Assistance item. There is some feeling that it should be dealt with separately and also that the UNHCR's internal arrangements for dealing with it be studied. Otherwise the main thrust of the debate seems likely to be exhortation from UNHCR for us all to offer more places and issue new quotas for South East Asians etc.

Assistance

11. In another letter to Caroline Anderson of 12 September, David Snoxell drew attention to pages 156-158 of document A/A¤.96/577 which explains that Hong Kong's share of the 1981 cake is to be $7.5 million. Last year we included in the UK general debate speech a plea that the Hong Kong 1980 share should be higher than that proposed by UNHCR. We shall require instructions on whether to make any comment this time.

12. In the debate various recipient countries are likely to ask for greater shares of the cake, particularly those from Africa. Some Western Missions feel that the bulky document 577 should be split into two in future years, ie first the main central part on programme allocation and secondly the more generally interesting introduction and concluding passages; those deal with administrative and management matters, including liaison with the other Agencies. The new Schedule B on page xxx of the introduction is a good definition of what UNHCR mean by assistance although some of us think it embraces too wide a field. Administration and Finance

13. There are various financial decisions to be taken. The Germans are worried about the proposed amendment to the financial rules in document 584. Under this instead of only being able to spend the $10 million of the working capital fund in advance of contributions coming in, the High Commissioner would be allowed to spend up to 50% of pledged contributions. Personally I think this is all right because pledges are virtually always honoured within a reasonable period of time; without this greater flexibility UNHCR's operations tend to grind to a halt at the beginning of each calendar year.

14. Some delegations will no doubt go to town on the auditors' report (document 576) which appears to indicate a considerable amount of waste. I suggest that as in the past the UK's criticisms be couched in the positive sense of "we are glad the UNHCR recognises the problems and trust they will continue to improve procedures so as to avoid them" We will also wish to encourage Heidler's PPU to do more on internal evaluation etc and improve management arrangements. But we must recognise that all this may require extra posts. The study requested last year on the principles for transferring voluntary-funded posts to the UN regular budget is not due to be completed until next year, but I imagine we favour transferring as many of these posts as possible (and thus incidentally getting non-contributors like the Russians to

pay a bit towards UNHCR).

/Durable Solutions

CONFIDENTIAL