Madam Chair,

1. I have the honour to speak on behalf of the Group of 77 and China on agenda item 143, entitled "Scale of assessments for the apportionment of the expenses of the United Nations" and on agenda item 154, entitled "Scale of assessments for the apportionment of the expenses of United Nations Peacekeeping Operations".

2. The Group of 77 and China thanks H.E. Bernardo Greiver, Chair of the Committee on Contributions, and Mr. Chandru Ramanathan, Controller and Assistant Secretary-General for Programme Planning, Finance and Budget for introducing their respective reports.

3. The Group reaffirms its longstanding position that the Organisation must be given adequate financial resources to fully implement its mandates. It is incumbent on all Member States to fulfil our legal obligations to bear the expenses of the Organisation in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, and pay our assessed contributions in full, on time, and without conditions. It is unacceptable for any member state to continuously demand more of the Organisation while unilaterally withholding contributions.

4. However, the Group also notes that there are special and genuine difficulties faced by some developing countries that temporarily prevent them from meeting their financial obligations. The difficulties of these countries should be acknowledged when considering their applications under Article 19. The Group therefore emphasizes the importance of dealing with the applications under Article 19 on an urgent basis.

5. On multi-year payment plans, the Group commends the efforts made by Member States who have honoured their commitments under those plans, despite the challenges they face. We reiterate that multi-year payment plans should remain voluntary. The Group encourages Member States with significant arrears to also consider multi-year payment plans in meeting their obligations to the Organisation. Madam Chair,

6. In successive Ministerial Declarations throughout the years, the Group of 77 and China has outlined our longstanding position on the scales of assessments.

7. First, the current methodology for the preparation of the scale of assessments reflects changes in the relative economic situations of Member States. We reaffirm the principle of "capacity to pay" as the fundamental criterion in the apportionment of the expenses of the United Nations. We note that under the current methodology, the collective assessment rate of developing countries has consistently and significantly increased over the past years. According to the data in the report of the Committee on Contributions, the share of the scale of assessments for the regular budget borne by members of the G77 and China in the 2025-2027 scale period will increase to 30.98%, which is more than three times the share borne by the Group just over 10 years ago. In the meantime, developed countries' scales of assessment continue to decrease, and the upcoming cycle is no different. That said, as responsible members of the United Nations, the Group of 77 and China has consistently fulfilled our financial responsibilities to the Organisation, and we once again reaffirm our commitment to do so.

8. We would, however, reject any changes to the elements of the current methodology and any other approaches for the preparation of the scale of assessments aimed at increasing the contributions of developing countries. Any attempt to change the methodology, to unfairly and further shift the burden of financing this Organisation to developing countries, will only generate unproductive discussions without consensual outcomes. Any attempt to do so during this period is particularly egregious, given that the base periods cover the COVID-19 pandemic which had disproportionately ravaged the economic and social livelihoods of many developing countries.

9. Second, the Group emphasizes that the core elements of the current methodology of the scale of assessments, such as base period, Gross National Income, conversion rates, low per capita income adjustment, gradient, floor, ceiling for Least Developed Countries, and debt burden adjustment must be kept intact. They are not negotiable. We believe that the scale of assessment should be based on reliable, verifiable, and comparable data, supported by verified statistics that reflect Member States' capacity to pay. Accordingly, the application of exchange rates should be meticulously and impartially selected, particularly in cases of excessive fluctuations and distortions in the income of some Member States, to ensure the fairest and most accurate assessments.

10. Third, the Group reiterates that the current maximum assessment rate or ceiling was fixed as a political compromise. It is contrary to the principle of the capacity to pay, and is a fundamental source of distortion in the scale of assessments. The Group notes that the ceiling has benefited only one Member State. The Group also notes that the rationale for reducing the ceiling to 22% in 2000 was to facilitate the payment of arrears, and thereby improve the financial situation of the United Nations. The Group recalls the severe liquidity crises over the past years, including the current one, and further recalls that these arrears were largely owed by a single Member State; the same which has consistently benefitted from the 22% ceiling. We urge the General Assembly to review this arrangement, in accordance with paragraph 2 of resolution 55/5 C. The Group will request detailed information on the history of payment of arrears, to determine whether this rationale has been met.

11. Fourth, the Group of 77 and China emphasizes that organisations which have an enhanced observer status at the United Nations giving them the rights and privileges usually only applied to observer states, such as the right to speak in the general debate of the General Assembly and the right of reply, should also have the same financial obligations to the United Nations as observer states. We urge the General Assembly to consider a decision on an assessment for such organisations.

12. In addition, the Group firmly rejects any attempt to unilaterally withhold contributions as a tool to pressure the United Nations. This is contrary to both the letter and spirit of the Charter, which upholds the principle of sovereign equality of all Member States.

Madam Chair,

13. On the scale of assessments for the apportionment of peacekeeping operations, the Group reiterates that peacekeeping is an indispensable function of the United Nations. We stress in the strongest terms that all peacekeeping operations should be provided with the necessary resources to implement their mandates. All Member States should fulfil their legal obligations to bear the expenses of the Organisation, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, and pay their assessed contributions in full, on time, and without conditions.

14. The Group of 77 and China reaffirms the principles that underpin the financing of peacekeeping operations, that this Assembly has adopted since resolution 1874 (S-IV) of 27 June 1963. At the highest levels, the Group has affirmed that the current principles and guidelines for the apportionment of the expenses of peacekeeping operations, approved by the General Assembly in its relevant resolutions, should constitute a basis for any discussion on the peacekeeping scale. The Group's Ministers have consistently stressed that the peacekeeping scale must clearly reflect the special responsibilities of the permanent members of the Security Council for the maintenance of peace and security. We recall that the economically less developed countries have limited capacity to contribute towards the budgets of peacekeeping operations. The Group emphasises that any discussion on the system of discounts applied to the peacekeeping scale should take into account the situation faced by developing countries, whose current positions must not be negatively affected. We stress in this regard, that no member of the Group of 77 and China that is not a permanent member of the Security Council, should be categorised above Level C. This particular point is a long-standing position of the Group and is not negotiable.

Madam Chair,

15. In view of their special responsibilities for the maintenance of peace and security, the Group of 77 and China calls for the permanent members of the Security Council to continue to shoulder their respective premiums of peacekeeping financing based on their capacity to pay as well as the agreed scale of assessments. Over the years, the arbitrary and unilateral withholding of assessments has led to shortfalls in liquidity for the Organisation which has forced the Secretariat to borrow from closed peacekeeping missions. This is not in line with proper budgetary practices. The challenges in cashflow due to the wilful withholding of assessments have also had a disproportionate impact on other member states especially troop- and police-contributing countries, who render the greatest service in the maintenance of peace and security.

16. The Group rejects attempts by developed countries to shift obligations to developing countries. Developing countries should not be arbitrarily targeted to move to higher levels or forced to accept reductions in their discounts for peacekeeping contributions.

17. The peacekeeping scale should also reflect the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities between developed and developing countries. Developing countries should not be assigned to the same level of contributions as developed countries on the sole basis of their per capita incomes. The exclusive use of this single measure ignores the difficult and unique circumstances faced by developing states which cannot be expected to contribute to peacekeeping operations on the same level as developed countries. Further, special consideration should continue to be given to Least Developed Countries, and they should continue to be assessed at the lowest level in the scale.

Madam Chair,

18. The Group recalls that the current levels of discounts for the peacekeeping scale were created in 2000 together with the 22% maximum ceiling for a single Member State. Developing countries were compelled to give up discounts of 80% or 90% overnight in order to accommodate these new levels. The category of Level C was created in 2000 to afford developing countries a minimum discount of 7.5% in the peacekeeping scale. The Group reiterates that developing countries are not in a position to agree to any further reductions in their discounts.

19. The Group is also concerned that developing countries, including Small Island Developing States, have been repeatedly allocated to Level B of the scale since 2000. This violates the principles underlying the 2000 agreement which created the 22% maximum ceiling and the current levels of discounts for the peacekeeping scale.

20. Finally, the Group of 77 and China emphasizes that negotiations on all Fifth Committee agenda items, including the present one, must be conducted in an open, inclusive, and transparent manner which upholds the legitimacy and competency of the Fifth Committee as the sole Main Committee of the General Assembly entrusted with responsibilities for administrative, financial, and budgetary matters. We affirm the unity and solidarity of all our Members on this item, and reiterate our strong opposition to decision-making in small-group configurations and we assure you of our commitment to work constructively on this agenda item.

I thank you.