Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,
Let me first welcome the spirit of good cooperation and frank dialogue between the MRC member countries and its development partners. As long-term supporters of the MRC, we reiterate and support the strategic importance of the MRC for the sustainable development of water and related resources for countries' mutual benefit and people's well-being. The MRC has significant technical expertise and offers a needed dialogue platform for governments and stakeholders of the region.
As has been the tradition since two thousand five, we met yesterday and discussed priority issues. Our Joint Statement outlines what we find to be key current issues for the MRC, notably:
We warmly welcome the stronger spirit of cooperation and dialogue that has emerged in the past year. Openness, transparency, constructive dialogues -even if sometimes controversial- forms the basis for a professional organization. Involvement of a wide range of stakeholders in important events and dialogues is essential for achieving understanding, credibility and recognition of MRC as an influential and effective regional and trans-boundary river basin organization. The positive developments in this respect are highly appreciated.
We also appreciate the ongoing work to implement most of the thirty eight recommendations provided by the Independent Organisational, Financial and Institutional Review. The Joint Contact Group has met regularly to assess progress of the reform. It provides a unique forum for open and informal debate about different options to develop and strengthen the MRC. We encourage even more use of this forum for genuine and early consultation before decisions are taken by the MRC.
A number of decisions on the recommendations have been made. However, the management, process and timeline for addressing the remaining issues cause some concern. The last Joint Contact Group Meeting agreed to an Assessment of Progress in implementing reforms to be undertaken later this year. We look forward to discussing the results of this assessment.
We highlight the importance of the clear commitment of MRC member states to a revised schedule of contributions, in order to take over full funding of an enhanced Operational Expenses Budget which covers the long-term core functions of the Secretariat.
We welcomed the opportunity to contribute to the Mid Term Review of the MRC's Strategic Plan. Our contribution focused on strategic level considerations, based on a strong belief that the commitment by MRC Member States is paramount to the future of the MRC. We acknowledge that there is positive progress on many elements of the Strategic Plan. However, progress in many programme areas appears slower than envisaged.
MRC does not have a systematic method for gathering and sharing information on the results, performance, outcomes and impacts of its activities and programs. Reporting is often only narrative activity-based reports, with progress measured by budget expenditure, and without proper assessment of outcomes. The development of an effective Monitoring and Evaluation system, with clear impact oriented indicators, is required.
We further highlight the following priorities:
Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,
With the large number of plans for hydropower dams, also on the Mekong mainstream (eleven are currently identified for the lower Mekong Basin), we stress the importance of member countries applying the procedures for notification and prior consultation enshrined in the nineteen ninety five Agreement. Within this context, we request information about how the Member Countries are complying with the commitments made in this regard.
The efficiency of the MRC and its Secretariat is of key importance. Therefore, the question of the permanent location of the Secretariat is crucial. We maintain the position that one permanent location of the MRCS is the optimal solution for an effective and efficient MRCS. This was also strongly emphasized in the organizational review.
We stress that splitting the MRCS in two locations, over and above making permanent the location of the programmes already managed from Phnom Penh, would undermine recent efforts to ensure a more efficient, cost effective and well managed Secretariat.
In our view, the core management functions of the Secretariat, namely finance, human resources and the CEO office, must remain intact and in one location. We draw the attention to the potential damage to the credibility of the MRC of a decision to the contrary.
We urge decisions on this issue are taken with careful consideration of the consequences for the support to the MRC. We would understand a need to delay a decision on this issue to two thousand nine, to ensure an optimal and sustainable solution to this issue.
Finally, we take note of the recent progress in promoting harmonization of the external support to the MRC and wish to extend our support to the process.
We look forward to a constructive discussion of these and other issues during the course of the day. This statement is supported by the Asian Development Bank, Australia, Denmark, FAO, Finland, France, Germany, Japan, Sweden, USA and the World Bank.
Thank you for your attention.