TNAG-1277-FCO40-1627-Resettlement-of-Vietnamese-refugees-from-Hong-Kong-1983 — Page 61

RESTRICTED

-

- 15-

come up in the Sub-Committee were raised again, eg recruitment, career development, promotion, staff rotation, training and geographical distribution of staff. The G77 made their normal play for more places for their nationals but this was firmly countered by donor countries reminding the Office that efficiency, competence and integrity must always be the first requirement.

40.

They

The Dutch were the main critics of the Office.

suggested many points concerning administration including the need for field experience to be a prerequisite for promotion. They also asked for a reduction in the 15 or so posts in Geneva which were not subject to staff rotation. Their main thrust, however, was to ask for a list of all the UNHCR staff currently in Geneva showing the date on which they started their current tour at headquarters and details of their previous overseas service. This was deliberately aimed at some of the senior staff who have been in Geneva for years and have never, or only rarely, served abroad. The US kept up the pressure by saying that rotation to the field should include all D1 and D2

officers.

41. The improvement in the quantity and quality of documentation was recognised. Many thought a peak had now been reached. Others thought that a small informal working group might be set up to see whether or not further changes should be made. There was some opposition to the UNHCR decision to abolish the post of Co-ordinator in South East Asia. Thailand, Japan and Australia regretted the decision and asked what would happen to the D2 post concerned. There was no reply on this point.

RESTRICTED

/42.

}