08 Nov 2011
STATEMENT BY AMBASSADOR ALBERT CHUA, PERMANENT REPRESENTATIVE OF SINGAPORE TO THE UNITED NATIONS, ON AGENDA ITEM 30, ON THE REPORT OF THE SECURITY COUNCIL, 8 NOVEMBER 2011
Mr President,
1 My delegation joins today's debate on the Security Council's annual report for 2011 with mixed feelings. We see encouraging steps in some areas. We find it useful, for one, to have separate discussions on the Council's annual report, and on Council reform in general, including its working methods. These topics are linked, but distinct. Differentiating one from the other allows us to focus on the substantive elements of the Council's work. We thank Portugal for its initiative to request a separation of these discussions.
2 However, the proof of the pudding is in the eating. While this year's pudding is not completely inedible, it remains disappointingly bland. Much has been said about how the Council's report could be more analytical. It should be more than just a laundry list of what statements were issued, and when decisions were made. The hows and whys are also important. We understand the practical concerns of going into detail on Council dynamics and individual Council Members' positions. But this does not preclude the Council from making an effort to help Member States understand how decisions were made, and the process by which the Council reached its conclusions. We could start with more analytical monthly assessments by the respective Council Presidencies. Progress in this area would do much to improve transparency. This would also increase accountability for the vast resources channelled to the Council, and aid digestion of the Council's decisions.
3 It was unfortunate that there were missed opportunities for regular dialogue with the wider membership during the preparation of this report. We thank Germany for continuing the practice of informal consultations with the wider UN membership before the drafting of the report, but we reiterate that it would be useful to also hold such consultations on the completed draft before its adoption. This would help the Council to take account of Member States' views in finalising the report. Sustained and candid interaction between the Council and other Member States would have helped to sharpen the focus of deliberations, bring clarity to many of the issues at hand, and build trust between the Council and the General Assembly.
4 Nonetheless, the report before us is not without its merits. We appreciate efforts to improve its content, such as highlighting priority issues, and giving a sense of the Council's next steps. We are also encouraged by the inclusion of two paragraphs devoted to specific measures the Council has taken to improve its working methods.
5 On the other hand, the section on the implementation of Note S/2006/507 could have featured more detailed analysis of what has been achieved and what more needs to be done, rather than restating or paraphrasing what was already said in the introduction. It would also have been useful if the section on the annual report included some insights as to how the report had been prepared and improved, in view of previous suggestions from Member States. The chapter on the work of the Informal Working Group on Documentation and Other Procedural Questions (IWGD) simply lists the Group's main activities, without going into its actual deliberations or conclusions. Given that the IWGD plays a key role in the improvement of the Council's working methods, we would welcome a more substantive and analytical account of its work. It might also be helpful to consider involving the IWGD in the preparation of the annual report, since the report is one of the primary tools for documenting the work of the Council. This would bring greater continuity to the annual reports, which otherwise vary from year to year.
6 We urge the Council to continue striving to improve the annual report, and reiterate our belief in the need to take a less somnambulant approach to change. It is all very well to speak of improving transparency, increasing accountability, and building trust through interactive partnership. But fine principles must be translated into concrete action and the annual report is a good place to begin. As I said earlier, the proof of the pudding is in the eating. In New York, it is not uncommon to have an overhyped and overpriced meal. One hopes the next Council report will not follow the local example. Thank you.
. . . . .