Statement of the G77 and China during the Meeting of the Working
Group on TC Project INT/0/085, delivered by H. E. Ambassador Taous Feroukhi,
Permanent Representative of Algeria on 26 April 2010
The Group of G77 and China welcomes your appointment as the Chairman of this Working Group and assures you of its full support and cooperation. The Group thanks you for preparing the revised project proposal.
The Group would have preferred consultations conducted in an open-ended manner in finalizing your proposal. Nevertheless, we welcome your proposal as it addresses several of our concerns and note with appreciation that it has rightly placed the "project design and management" exercise as a member-state driven process, based on their self-identified national priorities. The Group has the following additional comments on your proposal:
The requesting Member State is the only entity which can determine its national programme under the Agency's TCP, and these projects must be designed and implemented in accordance with agreed guidelines and criteria for the provision of TC, as contained in INFCIRC/267. As provided for in the already existing PCMF platform, the requesting member state shall then monitor the results, and measure the intended outcomes. In this context, the Group believes that the current guidelines and practices continue to remain sufficient and effective, and that there is no need to introduce additional mechanisms.
The Group stresses that the project proposal should be based on the understanding that:
a. The inter-regional project, INT/0/085, is not an exercise aimed at altering the nature of TC programme and the manner in which the Agency has been successfully providing TC for decades.
b. The Agency will continue to focus only on responding to the technically feasible project requests of Member States. The measurement of impacts/outcomes and project monitoring should be the sole responsibility of Member States, and only if the recipient Member State so desires, the Agency may provide the requested assistance.
c. Notions like "measurable outcomes", "partnerships" and "monitoring for results" should neither create an impediment in getting TC projects in the future, nor be used as pre-requisites for approving TC projects. In any case the Agency supported project may only be an enabler and is usually only a small part of a larger long-term national undertaking.
In order to facilitate the discussion, the Group would appreciate an explanation as to why there is still a need for a separate INT project if the training material that has been developed by the Secretariat can and is already being delivered to Member States through active regional activities.
The Group believes that the proposed level of resources dedicated to the project is still high. We wish to receive further details on its financing including a detailed breakdown of the envisaged costs. It is also the understanding of the Group that the expected savings from downsizing the project will be reallocated to footnote/a projects.
The Group supports all efforts aimed at improving the effectiveness and efficiency of all Agency programmes, including the Technical Cooperation Programme (TCP). The Group stresses that TCP is not based on a donor-recipient relationship geared on development aid criteria; it is a mutually beneficial partnership among member states for the fulfillment of Agency's main statutory objective i.e. the promotion of peaceful uses of nuclear science and technology.
Finally, Mr. Chairman, the Group believes that your proposal can form the basis for further discussions in the working group meeting. We look forward to a fruitful exchange of views and sincerely hope to arrive at an early consensus decision albeit without the constraint of artificial deadlines.