FINISHED FILEITU COUNCIL 2018

SC ADMINISTRATIVE STANDING COMMITTEEGENEVA SWITZERLAND

24 APRIL 20181430

Services Provided By:Caption First, Inc.P.O. Box 3066 Monument, CO 80132 1 877 825 5234 +001 719 481 9835 Www.captionfirst.com

***This text, document, or file is based on live transcription. Communication Access Realtime Translation (CART), captioning, and/or live transcription are provided in order to facilitate communication accessibility and may not be a totally verbatim record of the proceedings. This text, document, or file is not to be distributed or used in any way that may violate copyright law.

*** >> CHAIR: Good afternoon, everyone. Thank you for

returning for the ADM Committee. This is our last committee meeting of the ADM Committee. The agenda is in DT3 rev 5. So I put forth the agenda for your approval. Are there any comments on the agenda? Thank you very much. Seeing none, we can approve the agenda. So we want to start with agenda item 33, and we are going to have a report of the seventh annual report of the Independent Management Advisory Committee from Ms. Degan, the chairman of the IMAC. I turn the floor over to you, Ms. Degan.

>> BEATE DEGAN: Madame Chair, distinguished Council members, thank you very much for the kind introduction. I'm referring to Document C18/22 which is our seventh annual report of IMAC, and this tells you we are already in our seventh year with IMAC, which is honestly already quite a long time. I must say what I'm doing, as usual, is not going word by word through the Document, but rather focusing on the most relevant items for you and providing you background information which hopefully helps you to put our report and recommendations into perspective.

As the Chairman already indicated, after my session there will be a new IMAC member to be appointed which is the

consequence of the departure of Ms. Aline Vienneau who had to leave IMAC for personal reasons. Administrative items I would like to bring to your attention, I was personally re-elected as a Chair for the next two years, meaning the period of 2018 and 2019, so I guess you have to bear with me for another, for another Council meeting. What we always do is address all areas of responsibilities concerning our Terms of Reference, which addresses everything from financial resource management, ethics department, internal audit, of course, conversations with the external audit, strategic planning, membership department, and other management representatives, and amongst others. And I will spend more time on this later during my presentation regarding the new headquarter building. I would like to draw your attention to two Annexes to our report. Annex 2 presents a self-assessment which IMAC 3 includes our proposed amendments to the term of reference. We ask for Council's approval and submission to the plenipotentiary Conference.

If we go to Paragraph 2 T2, we commend Council to consider our actions and to implement IMAC recommendations. Now, let me start with the main topics of our report, and let me start also, I think as every year, with the financial management. So, of course, we looked at the planning, at the budgeting and also, of course, as the year end statement of ITU. We also provided advice on the statement of internal control for the management report. And let me explain a little bit why this is important. This sounds actually like a quite bureaucratic document to have an in-depth statement of control which is added to the annual report. However, what does it do? It in the end makes sure that every one of ITU's management says yes, whatever I do in my department in my area, whatever lies within my limits and I can control, I reassure the Secretariat and especially the Secretary-General and the Deputy Secretary-General that that I am doing everything to make sure ITU is in compliance with law and regulations, in compliance with own guidelines, making sure the accounts are managed correctly just to mention a few.

Therefore, the statement of internal control is not just an administrative letter. It gives assurance to the Secretariat. This is why we think it's important, and the financial management department has translated us in the very comprehensive and state of the art statement of internal control, which you find for the management report in 2017. We, of course, continues to look at ASHI, and in that context we advise ITU to establish a plan which will fund those liabilities for the future because here again we are talking about a quite big block of money which is required, and with the ASHI regulations and requirements, this is also something where management is very much in alignment with us that it's important

to consider this. And this is also our first recommendation to finalize,

first comment we would like to make here. Another area which I think already addressed first time last year respectively in my spring presentation to the Council Working Group is to implement a procurement manual. There is good progress being made, but we would really recommend to finalize and implement it as soon as possible, and to make also sure that previous recommendations, for example, as mentioned in previous audit reports are embedded in that procurement manual. ITU has already in several areas addressed areas of improvement or further areas for development within procurement, and, therefore, it would be quite beneficial to embed what is already there. In simple words, not to reinvent the wheel where you don't have to do it where people in the organisation have already identified certain aspects which could be of benefit for a procurement manual.

Let's go into risk management. Part of risk management respectively of strategic planning and in the context, of course, the assessment of risk was a first time so-called SWOT analysis. And I assume that everyone here in the room is necessarily that much familiar with the SWOT analysis, so I think it might be worthwhile to spend a minute to give a lot of background what was done there and what IMAC perceives this as state of the art and best practice from a very senior management perspective to take a look at that.

So SWOT stands for strength, weaknesses, opportunities and threats, and that's usually one of the core elements for an organisation to look at the strategy but also to figure out where are weak points? Where are we really strong at? Where do we see further opportunities for our organisation, but also where do we clearly see risks? This is a quite intense exercise to go through this and to really question yourself. That's very much questioning the organisation, questioning what an organisation is doing to come up with a distinct overview about the strength, weaknesses, opportunities and threats.

Now, I think the exam question is what do you do with a SWOT analysis? Just having the piece of paper with the four quadrants is not necessarily a next step. What is going to happen with the SWOT analysis that ITU will start to literally turn the different elements into actions. So if there is an opportunity to go in an in-depth analysis, what can we do with that opportunity? Can we translate it into something real for ITU? Or when there is a major strategic risk, what are we going to do about it? What are the plans? What is the timeline for that? So ITU will take it to the next level and go into a much more detailed what I would call operationalization of it.

Part of that SWOT analysis, and we mentioned that already

last year in our sixth report is that we as IMAC remain concerned that one of the major risks the organisation is facing a very high level of potential staff vacancy, and what makes it tricky? It's not find a one to one replacement for those employees leaving the organisation. What is more complicated is to find the right ones. And why do I say that? Given the speed of technological development, digitalization, ITU might need in five to ten years a different, a different group of staff members. So a one-on-one replacement might just not be the right thing for ITU to do.

And given the very high number of potential vacancies, it is very important to have a proactive forward-looking view on this, and not in the end, and I'm playing it a little bit black and white, but to make it tangible just replace one by one because that's the easiest way. So we are not saying it's easy to do that, but we see an importance which shouldn't be neglected by the organisation.

This was also addressed by the external auditor's report to the 2017 Council session. And that relates directly to point 3.9. We as IMAC believe that it's very important to what I would call to have a fit for purpose organisation which exactly addresses the future needs and skills of ITU. And, of course, Council and Member States can have very different perspectives of what that should be, and what that looks like. And, of course, this is neither IMAC's decision, not only the decision of ITU Secretariat, this is a joint exercise together with Council, together with the Member States to get a very good understanding how should the future for ITU given the fundamental changes I have just mentioned are arising.

We don't have an answer for that, but we really want to raise the awareness for that topic. And we are very much convinced ITU won't be the same in 10, 15, 20 years from now given change of technology, AI, digitalization, the different role of telecommunication. This results in our recommendation number 2. We recommend that ITU move towards an alignment of its operating model, the people strategy and the focus area with ITU strategic vision. And that ensures in the end a fit-for-purpose organisation. And as a personal comment to that, I'm pretty sure ITU is focusing on that in a very good way, very open to it, and also giving its best to make sure that the fit-for-purpose organisation is really fit for purpose. Moving onto the next point, external audit. We have developed a quite good and regular relationship and interaction with the external auditors. What we understand and also would like to note here is that the external auditor's report other than the financial statement were represented in the special Council session in the context of the plenipotentiary Conference in

October. So this is why you don't see this year a report from our

side on the external auditor's report with our commentaries since we don't have it yet, but what we will do is as soon as we have it, we will provide a supplement report which will be brought to your attention for the respective session in Dubai. Starting this year, ITU needs to set you a process for selection of a new ITU auditor, and the process will start in 2019. As always, there will be an appraisal committee in charge of the selection and appraisal for a new external auditor which will assure the evaluation of candidatures, and last but not least, making the recommendation here to Council. As you all know, the appointment of the external auditor is the responsibility of the Council and the Member States.

Nevertheless, our IMAC Terms of Reference allow us to provide advice input to the selection process and the evaluation criteria, which, of course, includes cost, scope and services to be provided. So we kindly advise, we kindly invite the Secretariat and the appraisal committee to consult with us as appropriate and to be reassured it will be also a fit for purpose and it won't be an administrative exercise for us. It's more kind of sharing a little bit of experience what we have in with the last two external auditors, and what we believe is important for ITU to work in the next period with a new external auditor.

Going now to internal audit, IMAC reviews regularly the audit report and we looked at quite a few in the last year starting with the audit of access security, audit of the sponsorship arrangements in ITU, audit of facilities management, the advisory report on level agreements, the audit of financial action data and the ITU evaluation study. The internal audit unit is submitting an internal audit report on an annual basis. I think this was Document C18/44, and I can only commend Council to take a look at that report. It's very comprehensive, very discretionary and provides quite good insight into those audits. It's definitely worthwhile reading it. If you don't have the time to go through all of those reports, I know all of you have to read quite a few quite lengthy documents. That comprised version provides a good and insightful overview.

In 3.16 we address a small concern we do have. And we know ITU, and we are fully aware of it, that ITU is dealing with scarce resources. ITU does not necessarily have an abundance of people in internal audit and in other functions, and there are topics where one can argue is this really a role of internal audit or should that be better conducted by other departments. And just to mention a few, this would be kind of a gender mainstreaming Document translation use of paper. We are not

saying these topics are not, the topics are not important for ITU. The question is more is the analysis of gender mainstreaming more a question for H.R. to be looked after or a question for internal audit given the risk exposure, because ideally internal audit focuses on the most risky topics for ITU.

Of course, one can always argue what is also the quantitative, qualitative risk of all of those topics, but I definitely want to raise that topic because the very skilled professional audit experience is quite scarce in an organisation of ITU's size. So perhaps in the future to take a look at and say is this really the main risk? Is really use of paper a main risk or Document translation or is it something another department could look after?

So but regardless of that, we all appreciate that these topics are important. The question is more what is the level of risk linked to it, and who should take care of it. Part of the job of internal audit is, of course, to monitor the successful implementation of their recommendations, and unfortunately, I must say, many of the agreed recommendations are still work in progress, and they are not fully implemented, and some of them unfortunately over a period of years. So we would like to reiterate that it would make a lot of sense to give a deadline or a timeline for those agreed implementations.

Notwithstanding that some of these recommendations may have become obsolete through other activities, but that it's important to note that and to make sure the item is closed with a respective commentary to that. Since I have mentioned earlier on the scarce resources in internal audit, I'm pleased to say that internal audit was able to recruit a new resource of AP3 post from September 2017. I think I mentioned it already in my presentation in January, but there was a feasibility study on evaluation that was carried out by an external evaluation specialist. And in our view, an evaluation is important especially in the UN context, however, we also believe if there is an evaluation, it should be appropriate to ITU.

Given, again, the size of the organisation and what you are doing, an evaluation function might be far smaller, not necessarily a full-time resource, full-time person to fill out that role. So, again, I think it's important to not neglect this is a good idea, and this is important to have that evaluation function as stated in that external report, however, do it in a way that it really fits the size and the needs of the organisation, which requires a little bit of, I would say simply, life experience and sensitivity, what makes sense here. Closing the section around internal audit, there is one clear recommendation which I explained already earlier on, which is that IMAC recommends that the management responsiveness in

implementing agreed internal audit recommendations needs to be speeded up.

Next point is ethics. Let me start with the last point on ethics 3.22. The ethics officer post will soon fall vacant, and ITU management is, of course, in the process of identifying a successor. And, of course, it would be good to fill that position on short notice, but let me also allow to say big thanks to the departing ethics officer who did a great job in the short time he was at ITU and was able to set a quite good foundation for ethics within ITU. And it would be great, and my view goes to the Deputy Secretary-General to fill that position shortly to continue with the work the ethics officer has started to do.

Next is compliance of fraud risk management. I think there is no day in today's time where you open the papers and you don't find a case on compliance of fraud across the world. It's an extremely important topic and very sensitive, and especially for organisations who rely on money from governance and money from Member States because any case there could immediately damage severely the reputation of an agency like ITU. So several departments starting with the head of the legal affairs unit, the ethics officer, chief of the financial resource management department, head of procurement and the internal auditor, they are working together to develop a joint compliance and fraud policy. So there is already a draft policy in place, and there is also a draft investigation guideline for ITU.

What we also note in there is that several functions are quite prominent in that guideline in that process starting with the ethics functions in the antifraud arrangements, fraud reporting and carrying out initial investigations. Again, we think it's important to have such a guideline in place, and consequently, of course, to make sure everyone within ITU understands it. It sounds very simple, but I think in the end, all of these guidelines are only as good as implementation and behavior in an organisation later on show. 3.25, if you look at it's a quite long Paragraph, and I try to do my very best to explain in more simple words what this is about. In the very unlikely case -- I feel like a bit of a flight attendant. In the very unlikely case that the Secretary General comes under allegations, who is going to start an investigation?

Right now, the process looks like that I think it's the internal auditor has to ask the Secretary-General for approval for an investigation, which I believe is a little bit tricky when the alleged person is in that very unlikely case the Secretary-General himself. So it's a little bit of a tricky situation because the process in normal works quite well, and we know it works well at ITU, but what is the solution for that?

So the process is set, someone goes to the Secretary-General, the Secretary-General then reports to the Chair of the Council and then starts an investigation. How should that be kind of set in a different process where in that case something is against, up against the Secretary-General?

So what could be a solution is on the one hand side, the ethics officer is approaching the Chair of the Council. The Deputy Secretary-General is going to Council who has been informed, let's say, by internal audit or the ethics officer or the Chair of IMAC. So there are several solutions about it. It sounds very bureaucratic, but to have that process clear, it would be ideally one of the three solutions to be decided for. And we offer ITU to provide further advice in the ongoing process of finalizing that process respectively guideline.

As I already briefly mentioned in my intro is the headquarter construction project. We stay in close contact with the project lead, and in a nutshell, I can only say the project is going very well. The organisation has it under, I would say control, set up quite good first steps for it. However, there is one point which is 3.29 where I would like to draw your attention. As I said, ITU is already doing a great job, but in 2016 we already made a recommendation, which is recommendation number 13, to make sure there is also external advice included. This project is very important for ITU. It costs a lot of money, and that external advice with the very specific expertise in that area is what I would say an extent risk mitigation measure and absolutely worth the money.

And Deputy Secretary-General, perhaps you can elaborate on that a little bit further later on. But IMAC thinks it's very important to reconsider our recommendation number 13 as of 2016 to make sure resources are made available for that, because I'm repeating myself, that's proactive risk management to avoid higher costs than planned and to, and to not ensure, you can never ensure this with such a big project, but to set up a system with people who help to keep the risk as low as possible that the project runs out of time and budget.

So I come to the end of my report. Thank you very much to ITU to all of the stakeholders we are constantly interacting with where we get support from, where we get information from, where we have in-depth, sometimes really almost enthusiastic, discussions, if I may say that. And it has been, again, a real pleasure to work with ITU's team in the last year with this. I would like to conclude. And in case you have further questions to the Annexes, then I would kindly ask you to raise them during the Q and A. Thank you.

>> CHAIR: Thank you, Ms. Degan for the comprehensive report. The floor is open for comments on Document 22. Yes, I

have Germany asking for the floor. Germany, you have the floor, please.

>> GERMANY: Thank you, Madame Chair. Good afternoon. And thank you, Dr. Degan, for your explanation of the report which is appreciated as always. I have two matters with regard to this report. The first is when you talk about procurement, I remember a discussion in your committee a few years ago whether or not or who should be in charge in ITU for the Special Service Agreement, the SSA. So a Special Service Agreement is a contract modality which is mainly used in the United Nations system, and it establishes a contractual or legal relation between the organisation and an individual where the individual is a contractor or a supplier of services rather than a staff member.

Many years ago there was a proposal, at least this was discussed in your committee, whether taking into account this definition it would be better in the sense of more transparent if SSAs in ITU will be gathered by procurement, and the related later procurement rules rather than done as present be managed by the human resource management department. Apart from this, the procurement application, the SAP procurement application used in ITU would allow efficient cost control of this kind of agreement. This is my first question whether you have in the recent years thought about this or you may think about this in one of your future meetings.

The second remark is with regard to the building project. As you mentioned, your recommendation 13 from the year 2016, so two years ago at Council, was in fact to reinforce the work force for this project by contracting internal and external advice. The internal advice, if you wish so, was finally contracted 1st of March this year. After the conclusion of the architecture competition for this project and with regard to the external advice the ITU is investigating at present, the best solution in order to implement this recommendation.

There is another issue with regard to this project that the Secretariat is providing information to your committee, to the Geneva group and to the MSAG and to others, maybe even to other entities, for example, the liaison committee they have with the host country. As chairperson of the MSAG, I am convinced that for a successful project we need to coordinate ourselves a little bit better between all of these entities that have a certain or an oversight function with regard to this project. With regard to MSAG, of course, we are entitled to get information that not everybody is entitled to get because we all have signed confidentiality agreement, but nevertheless one of the first steps that could be envisaged would be to organize MSAG meetings back to back together when discussing this

construction project. This is a proposal which your committee would think about. Thank you, Madame Chair.

>> CHAIR: Thank you very much, Germany. Russia, you have the floor.

>> RUSSIAN FEDERATION: Good afternoon, Madame Chair. Thank you. We greatly commend the work of IMAC and Ms. Degan's personal contribution to this work. We believe that, thanks to IMAC's efforts, the efficiency and effectiveness of the ITU is enhanced. We have no questions on the report itself on the IMAC activities. However, we do have some concern about the draft decision which we find in this Document Number 22 on Annex. It's in Annex 3 Page 22 in the Russian and English texts. In this Annex, on behalf of IMAC, proposals are made to improve IMAC Terms of Reference. This is proposed that together with the report a decision will also be taken about information on the changes made to this Document, and this is part of resolution 162, and it is assumed this decision will be made before the Plenipotentiary Conference. Now, have we the right on behalf of the IMAC proposals to bring anything at all before the Plenipotentiary Conference for its information or should we invite Member States to take account of these proposals which the Member States are working on resolution 162.

It's neither in resolution 162 nor in the standing orders of the Council or Rules of Procedure of the Council have we been able to find an answer to this question. We ask either the Secretariat or even the legal adviser of the ITU to explain this to us. Have you understood my question? I hope so. Thank you.

>> CHAIR: Thank you, Russia. I think I understand your question. Your question is can Council propose edits to resolution 162 or can it encourage Member States to make, to take into account the Council documents? I will ask the legal adviser to weigh in on this question.

>> Thank you, Madame Chair. Perhaps I can clarify that in one certain sense, probably that was my mistake in not being precise enough. We don't want to have a decision now. What we would like to ask Council to bring it forward to the Plenipotentiary for decision, because you are absolutely right in what you are saying. We want to make sure it is brought up properly at the Plenipotentiary Conference, and again, we can't carry it there. We need your help that a decision there can be made. So we only want that Plenipotentiary considers this and then a decision can be made or not.

>> CHAIR: Thank you, Mr. Orno. Will you take the question from Russia, please?

>> Thank you, Madame Chair. Yes, in as far as I have understood it, I think that it's a procedural matter. So if the question from Russia is whether or not the Council can make

proposals to the Plenipotentiary Conference with regard to this question, the response is, no, only Member States can make proposals. Of course, the Council can formulate recommendations for the Plenipotentiary Conference in order, if necessary, to modify the part of the provisions in resolution 162. But if I extrapolate a little, with regard to the discussions that I have had with IMAC, I think that the aim is that we draw the attention of Member States to the fact that the IMAC's Terms of Reference could, according to the members of IMAC, be added to usefully. And Member States could make proposals there on potential to the Plenipotentiary Conference. And I'm, of course, speaking subject to the Chair of IMAC on that. Thank you, Madame Chair.

>> CHAIR: Thank you, Mr. Orno. Russia, does that address your question?

>> RUSSIAN FEDERATION: Thank you, Madame Chair. We have received an answer, and that was how we imagined it would be. This is what we imagined the legal adviser would say, but, therefore, we will have to change the wording in the decision. We don't want this to be from IMAC a direct indication how to change the Terms of Reference of IMAC. Just as it was with the resolutions in the working party on the strategic plan, we have to put this too in an information Document with a request to Member States to pay attention to this idea and this need to change the Terms of Reference. And then, of course, if it's a reasonable idea, then everybody will agree with it. Thank you.

>> CHAIR: Thank you, Russia. The Deputy Secretary-General would like the floor. Thank you.

>> DEPUTY SECRETARY-GENERAL: Thank you, Madame Chairman, and good afternoon, everybody. On behalf of Secretariat and the Secretary-General thank, Ms. Degan, and the IMAC for all of its work and the excellent collaboration it has with the Secretariat. And our commitment to implement the recommendations of the IMAC, including the three in this Document, assuming that Council approves them. And we very much appreciate IMAC's contribution to our efforts to improve internal management and control processes in the ITU.

With regard to the recommendation on the new building, which we discussed at the last IMAC meeting, and as we discussed last week under the item on the new building, we will be seeking to place a contract with an external consultancy company to help with management of the project, risk assessment and technical advice. So we will be doing that. And we look to, as I said last week, we look to IMAC to provide us with advice on the governance of this project, which is the biggest project ITU has ever had. So we appreciate that. We see it as quite distinct from the advice we get from MSAG, and as I mentioned last week,

we provide information to the Geneva group, but the Geneva group is not directly providing advice to the Secretariat on this project, although it may do so through its members on the MSAG. So I hope that clarifies that particular issue. So, once again, thank you very much, Ms. Degan and IMAC, for its great help in us improving our internal functioning.

Thank you very much.>> CHAIR: Thank you very much. Are there any more

requests for the floor? So with that, I would like to approve the report, the IMAC report, but Annex 3 will go into an information Document forwarding to the Plenipotentiary encouraging Member States to take into account this Annex when developing their proposals. Any objection to that course of action? Germany, you have the floor.

>> GERMANY: I don't have any objection. I just would like to get the answers to my two questions from the chairperson of the IMAC. Thank you.

>> CHAIR: I'm sorry, Germany. I forgot. It's my fault. Ms. Degan, can you please address Germany's questions, please? I apologize for that.

>> BEATE DEGAN: Madame Chair, thank you. Starting with recommendation 13 in the headquarter and the question regarding MSAG, and I think it's a great idea to coordinate meeting. I think the one challenge we might have is to find the right timing for it, but I'm more than happy to exchange dates. And if there is an overlap and we can collaborate close on that, I think on behalf of my colleagues that is a good idea, so let's see how we can balance through our Secretariat and also see what is doable on this side. And as already described in more detail by the Deputy Secretary-General. We think it's really important given the size and the underlying risk of such projects to make sure very competent external advice especially or support for the management of such a large project is provided.

Regarding procurement and the FSAs, yes, you are right, we discussed it already a couple of years ago, and this also refers to the category to make sure a lot of the topics which have been discussed around procurement are taken into consideration. And I'm more than happy to take aback to IMAC and to have another look at it and to see how this, or if it should be embedded and how. I hope this answers your questions. Thank you.

>> CHAIR: Sorry about that. As I stated previously, I would like that we approve the IMAC report, however, Annex 3 will be put into an information Document and sent to Plenipotentiary encouraging Member States to take into account the recommendations when they are formulating their proposals to PP-18, and I would -- so include Germany's comments and our report to Council. With that, can we approve this course of

action? Thank you very much. So done.Thank you, Dr. Degan, very much for that report. Now I

would like to call on Mr. Petri to introduce Document 73. Mr. Petri, you have the floor.

>> It is my pleasure to present to you a document on behalf of the selection panel for the appointment of the replacement of resigned members of IMAC. The selection panel is composed of members from the following regions, the Americas, Europe, CIS, Africa, Asia, Austrail-Asia and the Arab states. The selection panel was informed that a member of IMAC Mrs. Aline Vienneau from Canada had resigned from her function. As a consequence, the selection panel reviews the pool of the two suitable qualified candidates for the replacement of Mrs. Vienneau and inquired about their availability to serve the IMAC for the remainder of IMAC's term. From this list, only one candidate was fully available to fill the vacant IMAC post. On the basis of due process, the selection panel unanimously agreed to recommend to the ITU Council Mrs. Sarah Hammer-Williams, a national of the United States of America, for membership of the IMAC for the remainder of the resigned member's term.

The recommended candidate has been identified as suitably qualified along the following required criteria. There is no other IMAC member from the same member state, representation of the geographical regions is continued, the balance between developing and Developed Countries within IMAC is retained, gender balance is retained, and both public and private sector experience is assured in the case of this candidate. A CV of Mrs. Hammer-Williams is attached to our report, and finally, I would like to, and on behalf of the selection panel, I would like to thank the ITU Secretariat for its assistance in providing support for this process. Thank you, Madame Chair.

>> CHAIR: Thank you very much. The floor is open for discussion on Document 73. Any comments? I see none. Kenya, you have the floor.

>> KENYA: Thank you very much, Chair. I'm sorry to ask for the floor when you seemed to have closed it, but I think the report is too good to let go without a comment, and so I want to thank the Chair of the panel for an excellent presentation on behalf of the committee. Chair, in particular, I would like to bring it to your attention that the committee was extremely efficient and did all of this online. The sort of work that we would like to see a bit more in how ITU conducts its business. Chair, it's been a great experience working with the panel. On a more substantive note, I'm sure the Secretariat may have done this, but I think it would be good for the record of the Council through you, Chair, that we express appreciation for Madame Vienneau from Canada for her work and devotion to the course of

the Union. It's rather unfortunate she had to leave in the middle of

her term due to other commitments. The Chair of the selection panel has done this, but I think there is no harm to add the support that we have received from the Secretariat in particular, Mr. Vagalese, for his devotion to the course of IMAC.

Chair, as we head towards the Plenipotentiary, we also would like to place on record our thanks to the Council for the opportunity to Chair, I mean, to work in the panel because I think there may be changes post the Plenipotentiary, the membership of the panel, and so it's appropriate and apt at this time to thank the Council through you for the opportunity to serve in the selection panel. Thank you very much, Chair.

>> CHAIR: Thank you very much, Kenya. Yes, I would, I would ask through, ask the Secretary-General, he is not here, but I can ask Deputy Secretary-General if we could send a letter to Ms. Vienneau of Canada from the ITU, and I'm not sure if it comes from the Secretary-General as well as the Council of the Chair Council, but I do believe that that can be done. And I think that's what you were asking, correct? Yes. I would also put in the record the appreciation of the panel working online to get its work done, and make note of this to PP-18 as you have suggested.

And Document 73, there is a decision. I would like to move to that now. Is there any objections to approving the decision in Document 73? So there is no -- so -- thank you for that. We will forward this to Council for it to approve. Thank you. Okay. With that, I would like to turn -- I think Deputy Secretary-General would like to say a few remarks. Next item, okay.

Moving onto Document 318/39, Deputy Secretary-General Johnson, thank you very much.

>> DEPUTY SECRETARY-GENERAL JOHNSON: Thank you very much. I can confirm that Deputy Secretary-General did send a letter of appreciation to Ms. Aline Vienneau as suggested. Madame Chair, turning to Document 39, it's my pleasure to introduce on behalf of the Secretary-General. So this is a status report on the implementation of the recommendations from the Joint Inspection Unit following the review of management and administration in the ITU that was carried out in 2015. As Council is aware, the Secretariat accepted all of the formal and the informal recommendations made by the JRU and considered that the recommendations will continue to improve and further strengthen ITU's administrative and management processes.

You will see in Document 39 the Secretariat reports to the Council on the overall implementation status as well as specific

progress related to each recommendation. Out of the 11 formal recommendations addressed to the ITU Secretariat, all of them have been implemented and the detailed information can be found in the Annex 1. The 12th formal recommendation from the JRU is addressed to the ITU Governing Bodies for consideration at the Plenipotentiary Conference.

Looking at the 47 informal recommendations, 39 have been implemented, 6 are on track for implementation as per the plan provided in the Annexes 1 and 2, and three recommendations that have been addressed to the ITU Governing Bodies are for consideration also by the Plenipotentiary Conference. The Secretariat remains at the disposal of the Council to provide further information. Thank you, Madame Chair.

>> CHAIR: Thank you very much. The floor is now open for comment on Document C18/239. Canada, you have the floor.

>> CANADA: Thank You, Madame Chair. Thank you, Deputy Secretary-General for the presentation of this Document. Madame Chair, we didn't have the opportunity of address finalizing our intervention in regards to the issue of gender parity in the previous session of the plenary, but I would like to profit from this opportunity to refer to some of the recommendations, particularly recommendation 8 that although does not specifically address the issue of gender parity, of course, it touches on the issue of gender balance within the ITU. We say that there has been substantial progress in implementing the recommendations back then from the Joint Inspection Unit of the United Nations, and we very much look forward to be able to continue this dialogue, particularly in light that the very good recommendations presented in Document 63 during the plenary were only summarily addressed and will be sent to the Plenipotentiary Conference. We do sincerely hope that the Plenipotentiary Conference, the same recommendations are not sent to Council 2019 for further analysis.

Thank you.>> CHAIR: Thank you, Canada, thank you for that. Mali,

you have the floor. >> MALI: We thank the secretarial for the JRU

recommendations. Two questions, first, what is meant by informal recommendations and formal recommendations? What is the difference between them, please? And now, in the list of recommendations, does this aspect find it's reflection? Second, IMAC has just been mentioned and discussed, and now we are talking about JRU. There are other internal control mechanisms so is there an interaction and synergy between all of these control and supervisory bodies? Do we know if they are all working along the same timelines or is there any dissent, perhaps, between them or maybe they don't have the same right of

access to information and the same possibility of action? Thank you.

>> CHAIR: Thank you, Mali. Then I will take Germany, you have the floor, and then we will give the floor to Mr. Johnson to answer the questions. Germany, you have the floor.

>> GERMANY: Thank you, Madame Chair. And we would like to thank the Deputy Secretary-General for this report which shows that at least from the formal recommendation that concerns the competence of the ITU Secretariat to implement that all of them are implemented. I took the floor to speak about recommendation 12 which is the recommendation of the JRU with regard to the regional presence. And I want to recall that there was a Document, Document 99, in front of this Council from Mexico which referred among others to this recommendation. The Document was presented. It's not that clear what's going to happen with this Document, but I would at least encourage Mexico and other countries interested where reference to recommendation 12 of the JRU to present this kind of proposals to the Plenipotentiary Conference for discussion at least decision in the area of regional presence usually are very difficult to take in this Union.

Just to recall that there was a Document presented to Council that addresses recommendation 12, and we are looking forward to discuss this matter further at the Plenipotentiary Conference. Thank you very much, Madame Chair.

>> CHAIR: Thank you very much, Germany. I would turn the floor over to Mr. Johnson to answer the questions. Thank you.

>> DEPUTY SECRETARY-GENERAL JOHNSON: Thank you, Madame Chair. With regard to the question from earlier about the distinction between formal and informal recommendations, in the inspection of ITU's management during 2015 in the report that was produced by the JRU, they listed these 12 formal recommendations in a box, and the recommendations addressed to the Secretariat actually proposed a time scale for their implementation to which ITU Secretariat committed itself to implement them on, according to that time scale.

These recommendations are supplemented in the report by what we call informal recommendations because they are just to be found within the text. They weren't put into a box and listed amongst the formal recommendations, but the Secretariat going through the report identified these additional recommendations which were to be found within the text. And then we produced in Annex 2 our own status on the implementation of those informal recommendations because we also committed to implement them. So that's the distinction. Basically the formal recommendations were very clearly identified in boxes in the text, and the other were to be found through detailed

reading of the report.So I hope that explains that, but nevertheless, we, as I

said, we intend to implement all of the recommendations, the informal ones as well, and have done so in most cases as can be seen in Annex 2. Also, of course, the Joint Inspection Unit, the inspectors when they were at ITU, and they were here for the best part of the year, had meetings with the IMAC, and Ms. Degan might like to give further information on that, but there was close interaction between the IMAC and the JRU inspectors. And we don't see any conflict between the recommendations of one or the other. They are both aiming towards the goal of improving ITU management processes. And note the comment from Germany recommendation 12 which, of course, is not addressed to the Secretariat. Thank you, Madame Chair.

>> CHAIR: Thank you very much. With that, there are no more questions. I would like to note this Document. Okay. We have noted. Moving onto agenda, still on agenda item 34, Document C18/20, and Mr. Ba will introduce that Document. Thank you, Mr. Ba.

>> MOHAMED BA: Thank you, Madame Chair. Ladies and gentlemen, Distinguished Delegates, on behalf of the Secretary-General, it is my honour to present C18/20 regarding transparency framework. This Document follows recommendation of JRU of 2015. It was presented at the Council session in 2017. Last year at the 2017 session we presented to you the first implementation of the recommendation of JRU on this point.

This Document is intended to show progress in implementation of the JRU benchmark nor the accountability framework. The ITU's accountability framework is based on the following three pillars. Pillar number one, covenant with Member States, sector members, associate academia and pillar number two internal controls and risk management, pillar 3, complaints and response mechanism. ITU's accountability framework will be reviewed periodically in order to strengthen the organizational capacity of the organisation and to ensure continued relevance. It will be updated to reflect new requirements or improvements arising from new initiatives or lessons learned.

ITU will ensure that the accountability framework remains relevant to the mandate and objectives of the Union. ITU will also continue to ensure that the Union's accountability framework responds to evolving circumstances and takes into account best practices in the UN system. The table reflected in the Annex provides an update of the progress achieved towards the implementation of the JRU benchmark concerning this accountability framework as it is seen in the three pillars. Council is requested to take note of this Document. Thank you.

>> CHAIR: Thank you, Mr. Ba. As Mr. Ba has stated, Council is requested to take note of this Document. This Document is open for comment. Any comment on Document 20? I have Japan. Azerbaijan, you have the floor.

>> JAPAN: Thank You, Madame Chair. Let me say thank you to Mr. Ba for presenting this Document. Japan would like to express sincere grateful to hard work of Secretariat for progressing the ITU benchmark. Regarding pillar 1 and 3, most of the benchmark progressed, however, regarding the pillar 2, 10 tools within 33 tools in progress ongoing. Therefore, please let us know the reason of remaining many uncompleted tools in pillar 2. Thank you.

>> CHAIR: Azerbaijan, you have the floor, please. >> AZERBAIJAN: I would like to say thank you for the

report. Now, we see that there are two notes about fraud and about training which are in progress. I don't know, could you explain what this means that they are in progress?

>> CHAIR: Thank you. Before I give the floor back to Mr. Ba to answer any questions, I would like to close the list. If you would like to take the floor now, please do so on Document 20, otherwise I'm closing the list. And I will ask Mr. Ba to answer the questions from Japan and Azerbaijan. Mali. Anyone else? Okay. The list is closed. Mali, you have the floor.

>> MALI: Thank you, Madame Chair. We thank the Secretariat for this report and the efforts made to implement this practice within ITU, particularly the practice of combating corruption. In Paragraph 14 it says not applied, in number 14 in benchmark 14, not applied. What does this mean? Does it mean it doesn't apply or that nobody has done anything to implement it? Please explain what is happening with benchmark 14.

>> CHAIR: Thank you, Mali. Now, I turn the floor over to Mr. Ba to address the questions. Thank you.

>> MOHAMED BA: Thank you, Madame Chair. First, I thank Japan for their questions, especially about pillar 2. It says it's in progress. That means the process of implementation has been begun, but it isn't yet completed, and that means that we considered that so long as this isn't totally implemented, we can say that it is in progress. So we preferred to put those words, in progress. And this also is in line with what we are doing. We are developing a policy for fraud and corruption. This is a Document which is very important within the organisation and it's currently under internal approval process. Once it's approved, it will be implemented, and that's why at this stage of this year, we can't say it's fully implemented.

It's partially implemented. We wanted, therefore, to say that it's in progress. As regards training from, this was

another part of the question from Azerbaijan. Yes, we are encouraging training for these three pillars in order to draw attention of staff to the risks they are exposed to in daily life. And the human resources department has centralized training budget, and we will continue to ensure that all efforts, all tools are made available to staff in this area.

As regards Mali, the question about 14, I think that would be still pillar 2. Pillar 2, benchmark 14, these mission contracts and tools are -- I better look at this with my colleagues so that I don't say something which is erroneous, and then I will get back to you at the coffee break. Thank you.

>> CHAIR: Thank you very much. With that, I would like to note this Document. Thank you. This Document is noted. And we will now proceed to our coffee break, but before we do that, I would like to give the floor to the Minister of Uganda to make a few words. Thank you. Uganda, you have the floor.

>> UGANDA: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Colleagues, ministers, the ITU Secretary-General and elected officials, heads of commissions, heads of delegations and distinguished colleagues, good afternoon. I bring you all warm greetings from the Government and people of Uganda. I wish to take this opportunity to convey special gratitude to the leadership of the Union exhibiting steadfast leadership in steering the destination of the Union. I believe the Union more than ever before has been faced with great challenges in the face of rapid technological advancement and global dynamics on a range of issues. I thank you for keeping true to the principles of your mandate for the benefit of all humanity.

I would also like to thank the membership of the Union for debates on some of the contentious issues and agreeing on the conscious way forward. We have been experiencing tremendous changes caused by global advancement in technologies. We have made alignment in to reflect this dynamism. ICTs have affected positive growth to the economy. I believe together in such global Forum like the ITU, we shall always unanimously agree to a range of mechanisms to overcome some of the cross-jurisdictional challenges in the best way forward. This year 2018 marks 20 years of regression of the communication sector by the independent unit in Uganda. As a country, we have planned in combination with a series of actives to take stock of where we have come from, how far we have achieved, our target, goals and what we ought to do going forward. We would like to together with you, members of the ITU and shall extend invitations to some of you to share experience with us.

At this occasion, we are the first coming ITU Plenipotentiary during October 2018. Uganda has submitted our candidature for reelection to the Council representing region D,

Africa. Colleague ministers and heads of delegations, I have personally written to you on this matter, and I am respectfully requesting for your support. I once again like to implore you to consider Uganda a candidacy favorably. We will be coming to a tea break in your honour at this auspicious session of the 18 of the Council. This will be the last Council for the cycle. It is befitting to host councilors for tea or coffee break and say thank you for your hard work and contribution to the working of the Council. Uganda and in Africa at large, we express our gratitude to friends by hosting them to a cup of tea and share the memories of our friendship looking forward to better relations. Lastly, I wish the 2018 session of Council good deliberations as we conclude this cycle. I look forward to meeting you again at the Plenipotentiary Conference. Thank you for your attention.

(Applause).>> CHAIR: Thank you, Uganda, and please enjoy a cup of

tea. We will see you back at 4:15. Thank you.(Coffee break). >> CHAIR: Good afternoon, and thank you very much, Uganda,

for the wonderful afternoon tea. I would like to turn to agenda item 35. I will ask Mr. Sap to introduce C18/44.

>> FRANK SAP: Thank You, Madame Chair, ladies and gentlemen, Distinguished Delegates, it's my pleasure to introduce on behalf of the Secretary-General Document C18/44 which presents the report of the internal auditor on internal audit activities coughing March 2017 to March 2018. The Document contained elements related to the orientation and the scope of internal audit activities as well as an overview of the insurance engagements that were cob ducted in the time period reported on in line with the internal audit charter the internal audit programme was reviewed by the IMAC in March 2018 and subsequently approved by the Secretary-General.

It was also communicated to the external auditor an effort to promote efficiency and coordination. The orientation of the audit work was mainly towards the areas of assurance engagements. For 2017 two audits were carried forward partly into 2018. While one audit was not conducted because in July 2017 the Secretary-General asked for an additional topic to be audits. The issuance of final reports include the comments of the managers concerned and copies of the final audit reports were systematically forwarded to the IMAC and to the external auditor. In addition to assurance engagements, internal audit is also tasked with fraud or mismanagement related investigations and with internal advisory engagements. A facilitated mechanism for Member States delegations access to internal audit report is in place since October 2015 via the

Council website. Based on the assurance performed, internal audit concluded that overall there is a need to improve governance and risk management of the processes reviewed and to render the controls more effective in the various areas audited.

Improvement in these areas would allow internal audit to provide to the Secretary-General reasonable assurance that there is adequate governance in risk management and that controls are effective. Recommendations made to management are being actioned with the support of the Secretary-General, and this will further strengthen ITU to fulfill its mandate. Internal audit performs on a regular basis a follow-up of the implementation of pending recommendations and has noted only limited progress in the course of 2017 and the beginning of 2018 which was also emphasized by IMAC in its report to Council that was presented earlier to you today. With this, I remain available for any questions there may be and thank you, Madame Chair.

>> CHAIR: Thank you, Mr. Sap. The Document C18/44 is open for comment. Are there any comments on Document C44? Canada, you have the floor.

>> CANADA: Thank you, Madame Chair. I would like to thank the Secretariat for their presentation of the Document. Just another comment and question, following up to my previous comments and questions in regards to the issue of gender equality and mainstreaming. It seems to be under point 12 the second and third bullet that particularly the third bullet that the audit that the male and female staff are not represented equally in the staffing and groups of the Union and it continues with providing some facts resulting from the audit. So the, again, more of an issue is a comment as it regards to Document 63 in terms of the implementation of the gender parity strategy, I would like to know if there is going to be any follow-up actions from the perspective of auditing that would take into consideration the United Nations Secretary-General strategy on gender parity and what the audit can do in terms of ensuring that some of the recommendations stemming from Document 63 may be put into practice. Thank you.

>> CHAIR: Thank you, Canada. I will ask Mr. Sap to respond after we have received all of the comments from the floor. Philippines, you have the floor, please.

>> PHILIPPINES: Thank you, Madame Chair. The Philippines would like to thank the Secretary-General and the internal audit for coming out of this report. The Philippines has the different assurance engagements conducted by the internal audit under the controlling supervision of the Secretary-General and to name some, the corporate fraud risk assessment, audit of gender equality and mainstreaming, and audit of financial

transactions data. Based on the said report, we have taken note pointed out on number 38 that there is no critical recommendations of high importance from before 2012 were left unimplemented and for this reason, the Philippines would like to congratulate the ITU for the job well done. Since the findings and recommendations may contain different levels of importance or impact, the Philippines suggest on the table shown on number 37 of the said report which shows the total number of findings and recommendations.

Now, that report will be submitted to the Council should reflect or show the number of audit recommendations that pertain to critical or high, medium and low impact findings and recommendations with particularity. For example, out of 27 recommendations for the year 2017, how many were classified as high importance or critical and how many were classified as medium or low importance? This presentation would provide clearer view for the Council in order to arrive on the sound judgment or advice. Thank you, Madame Chair.

>> CHAIR: Thank you, Philippines. As I have no requests for the floor, I'm closing the list and asking Mr. Sap to respond to the questions. And then we are considered, we are going to note this Document. Mr. Sap.

>> FRANK SAP: Thank you, Madame Chair, thank you the delegate of Canada and the delegate of Philippines for the comments or questions. We do regularly a follow-up of the internal audit recommendations. As you may remember, Council 2017 the Secretary-General already mentioned that this audit had been undertaken, but we were last year not in a position yet to provide you with the final version of the report or any final conclusions. These have been addressed to a great extent in Document 63 which has been presented to you, and we will continue to follow up on this in the course of the year.

With respect to the gender parity policy issued by the United Nations Secretary-General, I would not be in a position at this point in time to comment on that, and I would prefer that colleagues from the SPM department take that on board. With respect to the delegates of the Philippines comments we will strive to include in next year's report a breakdown of the criticality of the various recommendations that are still pending, and we think that would be useful indeed for your information. Having said that, the IMAC receives at every meeting a detailed list of the various degrees of criticality of the recommendations that are still pending or that have been implemented. So based on their assessment, we also take further actions to encourage management to implement the high risk or high priority recommendations as the first priority. I hope this, with this I have clarified the requests from the Honorable

Delegates.Thank you, Madame Chair.>> CHAIR: Thank you for that. Thank you, Mr. Sap. We are

going to note C18/44. Any objection to that? Seeing none, it's noted. Document, agenda item 36, C18/67, it's Mr. Sap again, Mr. Sap, you have the floor.

>> FRANK SAP: Thank you, Madame Chair. It's my pleasure to introduce on behalf of the Secretary-General Document C18/67, and as already indicated by the Chairman of the IMAC earlier this afternoon, a process for appointing a new external auditor is being considered and being actioned on. At the January 2018 meeting of the Council Working Group on financial and human resources, the Chair called for an expression of interest for six individuals to volunteer and serve as a member of an appraisal committee to be established by this Council, and the appraisal committee would shortly after the meeting of the Council 2018 undertake the tender process or start the necessary actions for identifying a supreme audit institution of an ITU member state that best meets the criteria to be set out in request for proposal for auditing the accounts of the Union.

And to that effect, the Secretary-General had on the 6th of February 2018 sent to the six regional telecommunications organisations a letter calling for these nominations. As you will note in Paragraph 4, the outcome of the consultation led to a list for which the five of the six regions have provided an individual, and we had expressed some preference for the individual to be based in Geneva, although this is not a must, and we can definitely take on board the concept of a remote participation and participation by email.

It is expected that the committee would meet two or three times in a first instance to define the criteria and then a second instance to assess the proposals that have been received. And the ultimate goal is that the appraisal committee makes a report for the Council of 2019 which will allow the Council to appoint the new external auditor as of 2020 annual accounts. And through you, Madame Chair, I would like to call upon the representatives of the Arab states to yet still submit the name of the individual that we may include in the list so that the appraisal committee can be in its full composition adopted by this Council. Thank you, Madame Chair.

>> CHAIR: Thank you, Mr. Sap. This Document 67 is open for comment, and I would ask coordinator for the Arab states to provide a name if possible to be included in the list of names to be adopted by Council. Thank you. Tunisia, do you need the floor? Document 67 is open for comment. Okay. I see no one asking for the floor. So, Azerbaijan, you have the floor, please.

>> AZERBAIJAN: Thank you, Madame Chair. We are grateful for this information. As the nominated individual from the RCC has here and we are prepared to help ITU as much as we can on this issue because the external auditor is the person who independently assesses all of the functions and activities of ITU, how ITU works and how it carries out its activities and how efficient it is, so we will be very happy to assist as best we can. Thank you.

>> CHAIR: Thank you, Azerbaijan, for that. What I would like to do now is to adopt the list of names in number 4, and section 4 of the report and ask the Secretariat to coordinate with the Arab states to get a name for the external auditor panel. So with that, any objections to that course of action? I see none, so we will do that.

Next on our agenda is agenda item 37, and we will start with DT7 first, and I will ask Mr. Vallett to take the floor to introduce this Document and on the reference decision 482 I would like to apologize to the Council, DT8 was posted and it wasn't fully coordinated to I apologize for that and I understand that there has been a coordination with nose all interested and we will project the changes to DT8 and Canada will introduce those changes but first we will go to Mr. Vallett. Mr. Vallett you have the floor.

>> MR. VALLETT: Thank you very much, Madame Chair. First, this Document DT7, can it contains the proposed revision of decision 482. This proposal is based on discussions which this committee had on Friday. It was then decided to implement procedure A proposed in Document 36, C18/36. This revision of decision 402 is based on the Annex to Document C18/75 presented by Canada to this Council. Canada was proposing implementation of procedure A and presented a proposal to this end. As you will see, the main modifications are as usual when there is a change of a decision on page 3 in the decides section. Decides 2K is decided to say it will apply on or after first July, 2018. That's when the decision will apply, then decides 12 Page 5 is modified. Also to take account of the fact that the new decision will apply as a first July 2018 and then the very heart of the modification can be found in the Annex. That's on page 6, line 2, coordination. There is a note which has been added to say that we will now be applying procedure A. On this basis, Madame Chair, this Document is here by submitted to you for the consideration of the committee. Thank you.

>> CHAIR: Thank you Ms. Valete. With that I submit DT7 for approval to be considered to forward to Council for approval. Seeing no one asking for the floor, we will forward this to Council. Thank you. Now, for those of you that were late, we are going to turn to DT8 and I'm going to ask the

Secretariat to project these modifications to the DT8 on the screen, please. Canada, can I turn it over to you to introduce the modifications. Thank you.

>> CANADA: Thank you, Madame Chair. However, what is projected doesn't include the modifications. It's the original. So I don't know if you can find the other version, but while you do, maybe I can say a few words to explain the changes that we have made that you will see in a moment. Essentially there were two things, the changes were concentrated on point 3 which you will see in a moment. We wanted to ensure that the Terms of Reference would be very clear on the need to deal with cost recovery model for non-GSO systems before dealing with complex GSO cost recovery issues.

And as a result, we made changes to reflect that.>> CHAIR: Could you hold on one second? We are having a

technical difficulty here. Sorry about that. I'm sorry about that, Canada. Councilors, DT8, the revisions are posted on the screen for everyone to see. Okay. Canada, please proceed.

>> CANADA: Thank you, Madame Chair. So as I was saying, there were two key changes that we made to the Terms of Reference that were in the original Document. One was to ensure that the, that we really consider changes to or dealing with GSO, complex GSO cost recovery issues only after the expert group would complete its group on non-GSO satellite filings, cost recovery issues. As a result, we change the order as you see of the terms of the reference, and we also said that because we don't have, because the issue associated with complex GSO filings is not yet documented, it's going to be very important for that information to be provided before we consider also that issue. So as a result, you see that what was previously item 3 has been moved as item 4, and has been expanded to reflect those two notions I mentioned.

And we also reflected the fact that by complex GSO satellite filings, we mean filings that require a significant amount of additional time and resources to process. There were also some minor changes made to what you see now currently as item 3, essentially to reflect that we expect the Council Working Group on financial and human resources to consider the information, well, the work that will be done by the Council expert group on this decision 482 for information, and that is the Council 2019 that will take action on this.

So you will see that in the new item 4 we make it clear that the expert group will consider dealing with GSO, complex GSO satellite filings only when studies of complex non-GSO filings have been completed and subject to providing information to this Council expert group which support the need to take action. So we will consider them whether the approach of

procedure should be applicable to the cases of complex GSO satellite filings. And as I mentioned in brackets, there is a description whether we mean by complex GSO satellite filings. So that concludes the introduction of changes in the reference which were made by the smaller group which included representatives from Saudi Arabia, Spain, U.S.A., Canada, Russian Federation and Mexico as well. So I thank them all for their collaboration, and I offer this Document to you for consideration by Council. Thank you.

>> CHAIR: Thank you, Canada. This Document DT48 is open for consideration. I have Saudi Arabia asking for the floor. Saudi Arabia, you have the floor.

>> SAUDI ARABIA: Thank you, Madame Chair. First, we would like to thank the Secretariat for preparing this Document. Also, we thank the administration of Canada which has proposed this immediate solution to get over the difficulty -- intermediate solution to get over the difficulty. We would like to add something to Paragraph 4 to make sure the situation is described correctly. At the end of the sentence after the brackets, we would like to add, if the application of this measure seems relevant to complex notifications, complex non-GSO notifications, this will be submitted to Council asking for modification of decision 482. We would like to add words to that effect at the end of Paragraph 4. Thank you.

>> CHAIR: Thank you, Saudi Arabia. Any objection to the inclusion of that text that was just read out by Saudi Arabia? Okay. So as I had Mali on the list before Saudi Arabia read out its text, let's park the addition to the text and let's hear the intervention from Mali and then come back. Okay? Is that okay, Saudi Arabia? Yes. Mali, you have the floor.

>> MALI: Thank you, Madame Chair. I thank the Delegation of Canada for preparing the Document. We would like for our information to have these points which have been modified translated especially point 3 which was modified and point 4 which has been added. We ask really, please, do have these translated into all of the languages for us before we take a decision. Thank you.

>> CHAIR: Thank you, Mali. Yes, what we can do is we can send this attach this to the report of the ADM Committee and let the Chairman of the Council know that we did not approve this Document. I now have Mexico asking for the floor. Mexico, you have the floor.

>> MEXICO: Thank You, Madame Chair, and thank you to the Secretariat, the administrations that were involved in the discussion of this text. We would prefer this analysis be conducted within the working parties of the ITU-R, but in order to achieve a compromise, we believe the establishment of this

expert group.>> CHAIR: Thank you. U.S., you have the floor.>> UNITED STATES: Thank you, Madame Chair. And Madame

Chair, we would like to thank the BR for developing these Terms of References and the administrations involved that got together over the last couple of days and trying to find some consensus text. Our views are aligned with the administration of Mexico that we would prefer to have the text as is, and it would have been quite beneficial if Saudi Arabia would have noticed to make those changes when we met in the group.

So, Madame Chair, to give the benefit of the doubt, we would like to see those words written, but I would reiterate that we would prefer to have the text as is. Thank you.

>> CHAIR: Thank you, U.S. I now have Spain asking for the floor. Spain, you have the floor.

>> SPAIN: Thank you very much, Madame Chair. Thank you to the Secretariat for preparing this Document and to Canada for its presentation. We agree with what was said by the Distinguished Delegate from Mali. We understand that it hasn't been possible due to the lack of time, but it would be desirable that this text be available in the special languages of the plenary. The preference of the Delegation of Spain would be that we wouldn't reference GSO orbits because in decision 482 this really is a decision that is very complex and it's very complicated to achieve a consensus. But in order to find a consensus, we would be ready to adopt the text as is on the screen, and in this sense, we align ourselves with the statements given by the U.S. and Mexico. Thank you, Madame Chair. Dictation speed to that the Secretariat could capture the text online, please.

>> Thank you, Madame Chair, I shall reread it in Arabic. And if it is agreed that it is, that is advisable to implement this measure for complex GSO satellite networks, the Working Group will submit this justification to Council with the amendments proposed which could then be incorporated to modify decision 482. Thank you.

>> CHAIR: Thank you, Saudi Arabia. As requested by Mexico and the U.S., the text is on the screen. Colleagues, I know that this has been under discussion -- I'm sorry. BR Director, you have the floor.

>> BR DIRECTOR: Thank you, Chairman. I understand the intent of Saudi Arabia, and as it stands now, the text implies that expert group does the work, but does not report to the Council or to this committee. I would like to suggest a simple approach to go with this, which would be number 4, take out to consider and we put in later. So number 4 would start with one studies and go on until the end of the second line, and then you

would say to consider, as part of this report, et cetera. So then it means that it's part of the report also to have this consideration and the conclusion of whether or not the approach would be applicable in this case.

So if Saudi Arabia will accept that, I think it will be an easy fix to the problem that Saudi Arabia has identified after the discussion. Thank you.

>> CHAIR: Thank you very much. Saudi Arabia, you have the floor.

>> SAUDI ARABIA: Thank you, Madame Chair. I would like to thank Mr. Rancy for this proposal. Saudi administration would like to accept by what has been presented by Mr. Rancy. We do accept it.

>> CHAIR: So can we delete the text, the new text that was just included, yes, delete that text. So councilors, we are looking at the addition of number 4, are there any comments on the text as proposed on the screen? United States, you have the floor.

>> UNITED STATES: Thank you, Madame Chair. Madame Chair, we have heard from other administrations that they would first of all like to see the text in their own language before they can accept what's on the screen, so that way it would also give us enough time to consider this new text and allow us to come back to it in your meeting. Thank you, Madame Chair.

>> CHAIR: Thank you, United States. Here is what I propose will councilors, this is the last meeting of the ADM Committee, and I will propose that we put the square brackets around the entire text as not approved to submit to Council as for consideration and Council would need to adopt the text. But in doing so within the square brackets, you have the other familiar number 4 and the number 4S proposed by Mr. Rancy, the edits proposed by Mr. Rancy, so you have two number fours, the original that was projected the number 4 with the said its proposed to take into account Saudi Arabia's consideration, and in my report, I will indicate that there was concerns that the original text worked out by the small group was preferable, however, no decision was made by this committee. Is that an acceptable way forward, Mr. Rancy?

>> FRANCOIS RANCY: Thank you, Madame Chairman. I guess what is the square bracket is relevant part that is modified, which is as part of this report. The rest is not changing the meaning of the sentence, just makes it easier to read. So in brackets is only as part of this report.

>> CHAIR: Thank you, Mr. Rancy. I understand that, however, I do have, I want to be responsive to everyone in the council, so my preference would be to have both the original and the new text in square brackets. The reason I'm putting the

entire text in square brackets is because this has not been translated into the six languages of the Union. So I completely understand. I just think that this is a very neutral way forward. Any objections to that approach? Okay. With that, we will take that course of action. Thank you very much. The final agenda item is agenda item 38, and is DT9. Can I have Mr. Torigoe take the floor, please.

>> YUSHI TORIGOE: Thank you, Madame Chairman, I'm pleased to introduce DT9 on behalf of Secretary-General. DT9 has been prepared in response to the comment by distinguished councilor yesterday. DT9 was prepared based on Annex 1 to Document 65 and added two Paragraphs. One Paragraph is starting noting that -- thank you, could you scroll? Go down, please. The Paragraph starting noting the Document C12/25 establishing a standard structure for regional and area offices. And adding another Paragraph, new A starting to approve proposed structure for the ITU regional office for the CIS region.

Any further modification to structure should be made in accordance with applicable procedures. And we retain the, another Paragraph starting to approve, and we number as B, B bracket. Editorial change was added to the title of the regional office, ITU regional office for the CIS region. This is a correct one. Committee is invited to consider this submission to plenary, thank you, Madame Chairman.

>> CHAIR: DT9 is open for comment. Germany, you have the floor.

>> GERMANY: Thank you, Madame Chair. We believe that the new text provides clarity about how this procedure should continue and as we believe that Council will approve this decision, we would, however, note or would like you to note in your report, Madame Chair, that with this decision by Council, the financial plan of the Union in number 3.2, then regional office in Moscow new structure should, the sum should be allocated to this decision and should read 280,000 Swiss francs. You can also note that the remaining 720,000 Swiss francs could probably partly offset the 3 million that are going to be probably allocated to the regional initiatives. So it's just a request that you note in your report that with this decision that our financial plan should be aligned. Thank you.

>> CHAIR: Thank you Germany. I will note your comments in the report. Azerbaijan, you have the floor.

>> AZERBAIJAN: Thank you, Madame Chair. As you know, all participants in Council know this issue is left over from Council 17. We have spoken several times on this issue. It's a very important one to us. And now it's being discussed in Council 18 and there have been comments and I think that now we have a good text and I propose that we adopt this Document.

Thank you.>> CHAIR: Thank you, Azerbaijan. So I put this -- I see

no one else asking for the floor. So if there are no objections, we will forward this decision to Council for adoption. Thank you for that. So colleagues, it is 5:10. I'm going to yield back 20 minutes to you. This is the last meeting of the ADM Committee. And I want to thank you very much.

(Applause).It has been a pleasure and you have all been wonderful.

Thank you for supporting me and supporting the United States that we can trust to lead this group. I cannot say that you have helped, all of you are leaders, I could not have done it without all of your support, so I thank you very much. And I will see you at Council. Thank you.

(Applause).(Concluded at 17:10)

***This text, document, or file is based on live transcription. Communication Access Realtime Translation (CART), captioning, and/or live transcription are provided in order to facilitate communication accessibility and may not be a totally verbatim record of the proceedings. This text, document, or file is not to be distributed or used in any way that may violate copyright law.

***