Loading...
Jihye's Meeting Notes
v_helgesen
Hello, everyone can I just have confirmation that I'm being heard
Carlos Zuniga
loud and clear. Vidar, good morning.
v_helgesen
Good morning. How are you doing?
Carlos Zuniga
Very good, very good here in the in the cold. Valparaiso,
v_helgesen
what a very impressive office.
Carlos Zuniga
Quite quite nice. Yeah, I would love to have the opportunity to show my show you my office in the near future.
v_helgesen
Looking forward, senior, can you give us a shout when you see that we have the expected number of
Unknown Speaker
participants. GOOS, good morning, Buenos dias.
Carlos Zuniga
Bueno Dias, there is a background noise. I
Cesar Reinert (BRAZIL)
Yes, i Good morning. All. Good morning. GOOS. This is Cesar from Brazil. I hear background noise when you open the microphone. It's me.
v_helgesen
I could be that someone participant with the microphone open has some background noise, so if everyone can just Please check.
Speaker 1
Now, maybe we're good to start. 40 participants. Thumbs up, quite
v_helgesen
a lot. Okay, then we can go ahead. Carlos, you can kick off.
Carlos Zuniga
Okay, thank you so much. If you can share the screen please With the presentation. Send me a place.
Carlos Zuniga
We're not seeing the screen.
v_helgesen
There was an ETOOFS to share it, but it doesn't show it's connected.
Carlos Zuniga
Perfect. 
Thank you so much. Kang, dear member states representatives, dear Vidar colleagues. Greetings from Valparaiso. So we have 44 people online, such a big number. Thank you so much for for allowing us to have this activity. It is a pleasure and honor to go. Con. You all to our first online meeting of the 2025 2026 intersessional period. And I would like to thank you again for electing me on the position of the IOC vice chair and for trusting me with the responsibility of sharing this important intersessional group I follow in the steps of my colleague, Juan Camillo for EOVs, captain for EOVs, my dear friend who will continue to contribute to our work now in Heslop TMNair of Colombia. Thank you so much, Camilo, for being here during this two following years. Next please, given the importance of our mandate and the trouble time that our organization is facing in terms of budgetary and financial uncertainties, we wanted to constitute the as soon as possible after the assembly session, and I thank you for your commitment 22 member states nominated their representatives for ifac core membership. And of course, our meetings are open ended, and everyone's participation most welcome as customary. The list of core members, as well as all the relevant documents can be found on our website. You can see in the screen the link and the recordings of our online meetings and all the presentations will be posted there as well for those who could not attend, considering all the time differences. Next please, in order to keep you engaged on all the relevant developments in a regular and timely manner, we wanted to schedule the first meeting ahead of the 222nd session of the UNESCO executive board. The plenary session will be on Monday, six of October, there are many important issues that the Secretariat wishes to address and update you on in follow up to the Assembly Resolution a 33 slash three on governance, programming and budgeting matters of The Commission's you can see the summary of the main discussion items on the screen. I shall therefore hand the floor over to our ETOOFS, ETOOFS, ETOOFS presentation. Please go ahead.
+1
Thank you so much. Kang, dear member states representatives, dear Vidar colleagues. Greetings from Valparaiso. So we have 44 people online, such a big number. Thank you so much for for allowing us to have this activity. It is a pleasure and honor to go. Con. You all to our first online meeting of the 2025 2026 intersessional period. And I would like to thank you again for electing me on the position of the IOC vice chair and for trusting me with the responsibility of sharing this important intersessional group I follow in the steps of my colleague, Juan Camillo for EOVs, captain for EOVs, my dear friend who will continue to contribute to our work now in Heslop TMNair of Colombia. Thank you so much, Camilo, for being here during this two following years. Next please, given the importance of our mandate and the trouble time that our organization is facing in terms of budgetary and financial uncertainties, we wanted to constitute the as soon as possible after the assembly session, and I thank you for your commitment 22 member states nominated their representatives for ifac core membership. And of course, our meetings are open ended, and everyone's participation most welcome as customary. The list of core members, as well as all the relevant documents can be found on our website. You can see in the screen the link and the recordings of our online meetings and all the presentations will be posted there as well for those who could not attend, considering all the time differences. Next please, in order to keep you engaged on all the relevant developments in a regular and timely manner, we wanted to schedule the first meeting ahead of the 222nd session of the UNESCO executive board. The plenary session will be on Monday, six of October, there are many important issues that the Secretariat wishes to address and update you on in follow up to the Assembly Resolution a 33 slash three on governance, programming and budgeting matters of The Commission's you can see the summary of the main discussion items on the screen. I shall therefore hand the floor over to our ETOOFS, ETOOFS, ETOOFS presentation. Please go ahead. v_helgesen
Thank you so much, Carlos. I will then share a different screen. See,
v_helgesen
I 
assume that you can now see my screen perfect. So as you said, Mr. Chair, thank you very much for taking on this important role, and great also to still have Juan Camillo among us, your predecessor, as you said, there's a lot to cover during this presentation, and the reason is that there is a lot of material importance in the IOC assembly decisions, because there is a lot I will Cover the agenda in four sequences. We'll first touch on the budget implementation for the current biennium. We'll then go into the next biennium budget process, which is leading us to the UN General Conference. And then we'll cover the programming for the next biennium. That distinction is important because while the budget, the regular budget, is appropriated by the UNESCO General Conference, the programming is in the hands of the IOC assembly. And then finally, we'll cover lumped into one presentation the remaining very important issues, and between these sections will allow for questions and answers and discussion. So first to the budget implementation, the current biennium was based on a decision by the executive board of UNESCO and then endorsed by the General Conference in 2023 that the IOC should have a share of the UNESCO budget at no less than 3% and this was at. Opted but in the management actions taken this year, there were disproportionate cuts for the ILC because of the absence of a US contribution to UNESCO, there was an 11% cut of the regular budget, but for the IOC, that cut amounted to 17% the assembly that did that meant, or means, that while a 3% cut would represent two point $25, million our our budget cut was in effect $3 million this was known just ahead of the assembly in June, July, and the assembly called for compliance with the 3% decision without delay. But no correction has been made. So we're still facing that significant budget cut. We see no further funds release. It essentially means that for the budget of activities for the two years, the budget reduction is 32% and since it came halfway into the second year, it means that we have very little space. Have had very little space left for activities in the second half of 2025 in addition to the 3 million, 0.3 million, has been blocked on the USA special account, staff recruitments have been largely put on pause. Currently, we have eight posts vacant, and that's a significant number, given that our total regular budget staff count is only 35 or 34.5 positions. And the savings that we get from not having recruitments have also not been we've also not been given access to those savings, so there hasn't been any opportunity then to compensate much with consultants. For example, the main impact of this critical financial situation is on GOOS, on IOD and on regional capacity development work plans, partly because these are priority areas, meaning there's since they're a significant part of the budget, they will also represent a significant part of The cut. Partly it is because other sections of our Secretariat had executed to a higher degree. So what was left to take was largely on these budget lines, and you can see the resulting anticipated budget execution, excluding staff positions at year end 2025 where we're seeing a Great variance, but a significant under execution compared to the expectations. Overall, we're talking about 70% non staff budget execution. You may ask, why these numbers? If this number corresponds to the what I just said about the freeze of budgets for use li OD and capacity development, and it does even more than this when you include the staff positions. So that's the situation for 2425 essentially nothing has changed since the assembly in terms of the projections, I will open Mr. Chair for possible questions or interventions at this stage.
+2
assume that you can now see my screen perfect. So as you said, Mr. Chair, thank you very much for taking on this important role, and great also to still have Juan Camillo among us, your predecessor, as you said, there's a lot to cover during this presentation, and the reason is that there is a lot of material importance in the IOC assembly decisions, because there is a lot I will Cover the agenda in four sequences. We'll first touch on the budget implementation for the current biennium. We'll then go into the next biennium budget process, which is leading us to the UN General Conference. And then we'll cover the programming for the next biennium. That distinction is important because while the budget, the regular budget, is appropriated by the UNESCO General Conference, the programming is in the hands of the IOC assembly. And then finally, we'll cover lumped into one presentation the remaining very important issues, and between these sections will allow for questions and answers and discussion. So first to the budget implementation, the current biennium was based on a decision by the executive board of UNESCO and then endorsed by the General Conference in 2023 that the IOC should have a share of the UNESCO budget at no less than 3% and this was at. Opted but in the management actions taken this year, there were disproportionate cuts for the ILC because of the absence of a US contribution to UNESCO, there was an 11% cut of the regular budget, but for the IOC, that cut amounted to 17% the assembly that did that meant, or means, that while a 3% cut would represent two point $25, million our our budget cut was in effect $3 million this was known just ahead of the assembly in June, July, and the assembly called for compliance with the 3% decision without delay. But no correction has been made. So we're still facing that significant budget cut. We see no further funds release. It essentially means that for the budget of activities for the two years, the budget reduction is 32% and since it came halfway into the second year, it means that we have very little space. Have had very little space left for activities in the second half of 2025 in addition to the 3 million, 0.3 million, has been blocked on the USA special account, staff recruitments have been largely put on pause. Currently, we have eight posts vacant, and that's a significant number, given that our total regular budget staff count is only 35 or 34.5 positions. And the savings that we get from not having recruitments have also not been we've also not been given access to those savings, so there hasn't been any opportunity then to compensate much with consultants. For example, the main impact of this critical financial situation is on GOOS, on IOD and on regional capacity development work plans, partly because these are priority areas, meaning there's since they're a significant part of the budget, they will also represent a significant part of The cut. Partly it is because other sections of our Secretariat had executed to a higher degree. So what was left to take was largely on these budget lines, and you can see the resulting anticipated budget execution, excluding staff positions at year end 2025 where we're seeing a Great variance, but a significant under execution compared to the expectations. Overall, we're talking about 70% non staff budget execution. You may ask, why these numbers? If this number corresponds to the what I just said about the freeze of budgets for use li OD and capacity development, and it does even more than this when you include the staff positions. So that's the situation for 2425 essentially nothing has changed since the assembly in terms of the projections, I will open Mr. Chair for possible questions or interventions at this stage. Carlos Zuniga
Thank you so much Lida for the informative presentation. It's this is just the beginning of our meeting. We will have different stages in order to have Q and A's. So please, if you have any comments from member states, raise your hands using the reaction tools from zoom and I will give the floor EOVs. You request the participation, so we have the UK
Alan Evans (UK)
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and congratulations on your position as chair of high. Flag. We all certainly respect that position, and Juan did a perfect job last time, and I've no doubt that we're in capable hands going forward. Just a quick question. Vida on the the budget execution, is it now too late to try to address the over allocation of cuts to IOC Given the timing of the General Conference. I mean, when would we need to know by in order to action the use of those funds in any meaningful way?
v_helgesen
If I may, Mr. Chair, it is obviously too late for executing everything if we were to get get back to the 3% decision. By tomorrow, we would partly lack staff to execute and partly not have the time remaining, but we could make use of of parts of funds that would be unfrozen. The question, of course, given that we're late in the year, is whether any funds actually exist. Thank you.
Carlos Zuniga
Thank you. Vidar, so next, Brazil, followed by Canada. Please go ahead, sir. Jihye
Sergio Benevides, Brazil
Kang, Mr. Chair and Well, welcome to your new function. I'm sure we are in very good hands. Well, I would like to it is a question. Actually, I would like to to have further explanation on the 32%
Sergio Benevides, Brazil
of biennial BalaKrishnan TMNair, I would like to have further explanation on that, and I don't know if Canada later will refer to the reduction this year, because it's so Just to inform. I understand that there is some discussion between some member states on the current reduction as well for this, for this executive board. But thank you very much.
Carlos Zuniga
Thank you Brazil. Bidar, please.
v_helgesen
Thank you. The reason why the budget reduction is proportionally bigger for activities is that we do have a staff to activity ratio, which means that a clear majority of our funding is dedicated to staff positions. It's a bit artificial, because staff also do activities, and we can't do activities without staff, but but in terms of budgets that can be allocated for activities, that is a the minority of our budget. So when a cut or a freeze is made, we can't freeze salaries, but what we can freeze is activities, and that's why the proportion of the freeze for ETOOFS is higher.
Carlos Zuniga
Thank you. Vidar, so I'm seeing here the last hand raised. Dominic from Canada, please
Dominique LEVASSEUR (Canada)
Yes. Hello, everyone. I think in response, respond to Sergio is that this item will come up. I think it's the next item on the agenda, the current, the future budget. There is also an executive board document. It's in document 222 ex 42 that describes the cuts in all programs and and obviously in the decision, we can certainly regret that the cut of the IOC was disproportionate. It is. It would be the same language, I suppose, as we adopted at the assembly. That would be an easy transfer. I would. Like to ask Vidar, why is it that the funding for IOC from the US 2023 assess contribution special account has been blocked? Is it a US decision to block or is it a secretariat of DG UNESCO decision?
v_helgesen
This is a UNESCO Secretariat decision, essentially freezing funds where they found it, so that it's not a US decision as such. Thank you.
Carlos Zuniga
Thank you, Dominic, for for the explanation, also for the question amid our I think we don't have any other hands please, if you can continue with your presentation. Yes.
v_helgesen
So 
the next is on 43, c5, the budget for the next two years. The scenarios that are operated from the UNESCO Secretariat are three scenarios. There's one zero, real growth scenario and two zero nominal growth scenarios. In all those scenarios that have been presented by the UNESCO Secretariat, the IOC share of overall the overall UNESCO budget is remains at 3% however, as we will see when you go to the decimals, we will if these are applied, there will still be a disproportionately bigger cut to the IOC than to other parts of UNESCO, the two zero, Net Zero, nominal growth scenarios imply a reduction compared to the 42 c5 in the zero, real growth scenario, There is positive variance where the ILC share of growth is 3% I don't think the zero rule growth scenario is very realistic. Having listened to member states at different UNESCO information meetings, it seems quite clear that the more realistic is a zero nominal growth scenario. And mind you, this is ahead of the reductions that would follow a non payment by the US. In all these scenarios, you'll see that staff costs again, they will increase. That is a matter of inflation, and it's a matter of the UN and UNESCO calculations for staff costs. So when you retain the same number of posts posts, that would mean an increase in the cost of staff by 9% in both the in all, in all scenarios, since nominal growth is essentially a reduction, the again, disproportionate reduction would be on non staff costs or activity costs. In these scenarios, the variance for UNESCO at large, between 42 c5 and 43 c5 is zero, whereas the variance for the IOC would be either minus 3% or minus 0.7% with the reduction to Non staff activities varying well from 4% in the zero, real world scenario, but in the more realistic scenarios, 17 or 14% Moving to the perspective with an 11% budget reduction,
+1
the next is on 43, c5, the budget for the next two years. The scenarios that are operated from the UNESCO Secretariat are three scenarios. There's one zero, real growth scenario and two zero nominal growth scenarios. In all those scenarios that have been presented by the UNESCO Secretariat, the IOC share of overall the overall UNESCO budget is remains at 3% however, as we will see when you go to the decimals, we will if these are applied, there will still be a disproportionately bigger cut to the IOC than to other parts of UNESCO, the two zero, Net Zero, nominal growth scenarios imply a reduction compared to the 42 c5 in the zero, real growth scenario, There is positive variance where the ILC share of growth is 3% I don't think the zero rule growth scenario is very realistic. Having listened to member states at different UNESCO information meetings, it seems quite clear that the more realistic is a zero nominal growth scenario. And mind you, this is ahead of the reductions that would follow a non payment by the US. In all these scenarios, you'll see that staff costs again, they will increase. That is a matter of inflation, and it's a matter of the UN and UNESCO calculations for staff costs. So when you retain the same number of posts posts, that would mean an increase in the cost of staff by 9% in both the in all, in all scenarios, since nominal growth is essentially a reduction, the again, disproportionate reduction would be on non staff costs or activity costs. In these scenarios, the variance for UNESCO at large, between 42 c5 and 43 c5 is zero, whereas the variance for the IOC would be either minus 3% or minus 0.7% with the reduction to Non staff activities varying well from 4% in the zero, real world scenario, but in the more realistic scenarios, 17 or 14% Moving to the perspective with an 11% budget reduction, v_helgesen
then taking into account one year's effect of a US non payment, noting that they're realistic, would actually be 20. 3% but the numbers that have been shared so far are these, we will see that still, with a 3% overall share of the budget for the ILC will have a reduction, still an increase in staff costs with 9% provided that we retain the same number of positions and a reduction to non staff costs ranging from 32% in The zero real world scenario to 40 or 43% in the zero nominal growth scenario. Now, if we look at, as I said, we don't have the numbers haven't been presented from UNESCO central services for a 22% reduction, but if and when that will happen, we would be looking at around 60% reductions to non staff costs. So the outlook is obviously difficult, and we'll have to plan for that scenario of a minus 60% now in terms tmnairs, of of what is ahead of us in the decision making process for the 43 c5 budget, the 3% principle or rule, was decided by the UNESCO executive board in 2023 it was endorsed by the General Conference through its appropriation resolution, but it hasn't been explicitly worded in any general conference decision. It was explicitly worded in the board decision going back to our assembly resolution from Jihye's simply called for me to try to optimize staffing and maintain the number and level of positions for scene in 42 c5 as a minimal baseline. This, of course, reflects the fact that two years ago, there was a process, or a process leading up to the assembly, two years ago, to define the minimal critical infrastructure of the IOC Secretariat, and that's reflected in the desire by the assembly To retain that baseline. This is obviously not doable while retaining the staff to activity ratio. I would say it's possible in a minus 11% budgetary scenario, we can then have a 75 to 25 staff to non staff ratio. It would have a high cost to program activities over the regular budget, which we would then have to seek to compensate through more voluntary funding in a 22% expenditure plan. This is impossible, or near to impossible, and this means that we are facing a situation where critically vulnerable areas, as defined by the Assembly two years ago will remain understaffed 
and under resourced under the regular budget. We need to look at, and we will be looking at solutions for reinforcement, including in follow up on the resolution from the assembly on optimal staffing of regional sub commissions, but that will depend on voluntary contributions. Let me say, by the way, that I think it is while the staff to non staff ratio obviously looks much better a year ago than it does now, and will for next year. Our staff is so small that trying to keep that balance from last year will not be responsible. We depend on staff for delivering and we also will depend on regular budget funded staff to be able to successfully raise more voluntary funding and execute programs. So we will be coming back, obviously, at in November, after the executive board to the next ifac, with more precise numbers. But I just like to alert you to the fact that we will have a different balance between staff and non staff on the regular budget moving forward. The logic of this slide is that you have the text over there or a reflection of the IOC resolution the assembly. Solution on the left side and the next steps on the right side. The assembly was clear that the working assumptions for the budget for 2627 might change in light of the potential loss of funding which has now met or is now materializing. The assembly also highlighted the importance of having a clear consultation process with with ILC member states, and bring all information to meetings of IFA, and that's what we're doing today. It's also what we will be doing at our next meeting in November. Now, the upcoming UNESCO executive board will make decisions and recommendations on budgetary envelopes and expenditure plans to be endorsed finally, by the UNESCO general conference in November, the fact that the assembly acknowledged that the working assumptions might change, and as some worded it, we need to Have a draft resolution that is resilient to the unknown, that will certainly guide the Secretariat in our preparations all the proposals that we will present at the next lifac meeting on the 19th of November, when we do know exactly what the numbers will look like. So with this for this section, I again open for discussion over the Chair.
+2
and under resourced under the regular budget. We need to look at, and we will be looking at solutions for reinforcement, including in follow up on the resolution from the assembly on optimal staffing of regional sub commissions, but that will depend on voluntary contributions. Let me say, by the way, that I think it is while the staff to non staff ratio obviously looks much better a year ago than it does now, and will for next year. Our staff is so small that trying to keep that balance from last year will not be responsible. We depend on staff for delivering and we also will depend on regular budget funded staff to be able to successfully raise more voluntary funding and execute programs. So we will be coming back, obviously, at in November, after the executive board to the next ifac, with more precise numbers. But I just like to alert you to the fact that we will have a different balance between staff and non staff on the regular budget moving forward. The logic of this slide is that you have the text over there or a reflection of the IOC resolution the assembly. Solution on the left side and the next steps on the right side. The assembly was clear that the working assumptions for the budget for 2627 might change in light of the potential loss of funding which has now met or is now materializing. The assembly also highlighted the importance of having a clear consultation process with with ILC member states, and bring all information to meetings of IFA, and that's what we're doing today. It's also what we will be doing at our next meeting in November. Now, the upcoming UNESCO executive board will make decisions and recommendations on budgetary envelopes and expenditure plans to be endorsed finally, by the UNESCO general conference in November, the fact that the assembly acknowledged that the working assumptions might change, and as some worded it, we need to Have a draft resolution that is resilient to the unknown, that will certainly guide the Secretariat in our preparations all the proposals that we will present at the next lifac meeting on the 19th of November, when we do know exactly what the numbers will look like. So with this for this section, I again open for discussion over the Chair. Carlos Zuniga
Thank you. Just to be clear, I believe the next ifac online meeting is it's going to be on November 18,
v_helgesen
Xenia. Can you confirm?
Speaker 2
Yes, I'm very sorry. Yes, it's my mistake. I don't know the 19th was the date we initially proposed, but then we retained the date of 18.
v_helgesen
Okay, 18th November. It is.
Carlos Zuniga
Thank you. Thank you so much. So thank you, Vidar for for the information. I believe that all the ifac members, they will be looking forward for most precise information in the in our next meeting. But I believe this nice, wider view in order to know what to expect for the future, for the near future. So please, once again, dear member states, if you representatives, if you want to ask any questions, to be there. If you have any comments, please raise your hands. Otherwise we will move forward to to the next session section. Sorry.
Carlos Zuniga
I think everything is please. Dominic, do you have any comments? Yes, I don't see your name, but I can see
Dominique LEVASSEUR (Canada)
what is maybe, what is maybe not clear for the meeting today is that the executive board and has received a revised document on the budget scenarios. Vidar GRA was quite optimistic because he quoted some of the higher scenario, but there's also a lower scenario that where the IOC might be even lower. But anyway, all that to say that the executive board will send a recommendation to the General Conference, and also, assuming we will have a new director general in the new year, so we are member states, will have to send a decision asking the director general how to work around the cuts. We all acknowledge that there will be major cuts. It's more. How are we translating that the budget of the IOC shouldn't still be 3% so it's important for all of you who have delegations on the executive board that you support language that could be proposed to ask that the IOC maintain its 3% share of the of the overall budget. It should also be known that under the other document, there will also be a decision, and it would also make sense to recall that IOC should have received its 3% but also we should recall that request that the US, the funds from the US special account be. Transferred to the EOVs. So this is work for permanent delegations here in Paris. But so that you know that we we are not so passive. We have to act before the the end of next week, when the board will be adopting its recommendation for the future budget.
Carlos Zuniga
Thank BalaKrishnan TMNair Bala for that or other comments.
v_helgesen
No, I see that mainly as a as information for the for the GRA fact from Dominic,
Carlos Zuniga
yes, okay, thank you so much. So thanks for that.
v_helgesen
There seems to be another hand up.
Carlos Zuniga
Sorry, we're GRA fire.
Rafael (Spain)
I would also like to congratulate the new ifac Carlos tuniga for your role, and also for Mr. Ferreiro, his past activity here in the affect meeting, I wouldn't I'm a bit confused because on Dominic's comment in the regarding that I think that the three 3% the maintenance of the 3% is not in question, at least as far as I understand. The problem is the consequences that the reduction of it going to in a scenario of 22% or 11% has regarding what Bidar has already explained us that the further we go down in the reduction of the total UNESCO budget has a consequence of an more imbalance towards staff costs in the In the budget, so the more the higher the reduction of the total UNESCO budget will have a higher consequence on the balance, on the higher costs of of staff. And I think there's very Li TMNair Jing to avoid that, as far as I understand. So it's true that, I mean, the possibility is still in that the release of the extra budgetary funds from the US, that that's a possibility, and if those could be the allocated to IOC. But besides that, it seems to me that we are in a situation that we have very little alternatives, even less than we had before, in order to manage our the budget of IOC. IOC, because of the staff increase, maybe the only question is that when I see that there's an increase in 9% I understand there is not only an inflation case. It's just that the cost of the staff, of the staff, as they remain in their positions, tends to increase each single position as times GOOS on I think that's part of the issue. But also, but also, there's been some stuff, positions that have not been replaced and so, but I think everything should be in that, in that balance that it was presented. It's only, my only questions, but I think that's going too much into the details of the numbers, but thank you for all the information anyway.
Carlos Zuniga
Thank you. Rafael, yeah, you're very right. We need to be careful with the ratio between staff and non staff activities. So please reader, if you can reply his question.
v_helgesen
Yes, I think that is well taken. It is. It is correct that the staff costs do increase, and that's, that's a central calculation that is beyond our control. So that will be plus 9% regardless of the total budget available. I would like to say, however, that the numbers in the scenarios we have received, so far as you can see from this slide, does continue the trend that the cuts for the IOC is higher than the cut for UNESCO at large, for the frozen funds this year, it was 17% for the IOC 11 for UNESCO and for in this scenario, for next year, it's EOVs for UNESCO, 12 or 13% for the ILC, still respecting the 3% rule, but nonetheless, we are a. Are seeing, obviously, for this year, a very strong cut, but also or a much bigger cut for us and next year, that seems to be continuing. This is, of course, ahead of the executive board, so we'll see what happens.
Carlos Zuniga
Thank you. BalaKrishnan, TMNair, we have another hand. Dominique. Please follow by Brazil.
Dominique LEVASSEUR (Canada)
I want to, yeah, I want to react what to Rafael is right, but what we have to assume is because Vida works from an assumption that every budget line will lose 11% and eventually 22% if the US does not pay in 2026 so it is most probable they won't pay because the waiver that they gave them the authorization to pay ended at the end of September, and it was not renewed. So at the moment, we can almost certainly say they will not pay. But what members of the Board want to tell the director general is that it's not appropriate to have a linear cut, that everybody gets the same proportional cut it should be. There should be a more refined analysis of the needs and of because some sectors at UNESCO get lots of voluntary contribution. Other get less. But anyway, we should not just agree, without saying anything, that it should be 22% for everyone, that's one thing. And then, having seen that, that IOC got even more, a larger cut than 11% we have to try to protect that and that it should never be under the 3% so that I think that's as to be in the decision of the executive board, and that's where I say that members of the Executive Board who are also involved in IOC should be more quite clear in the decision about this.
Carlos Zuniga
Thank you. Dominic Bidar, do you have any comments about that?
v_helgesen
No, I think that's that's reassuring, and I am aware that Dominique and others are definitely seized on these issues ahead of the board.
Carlos Zuniga
Okay, thank you. So now is the time for Brazil. Sergio, please go ahead.
Sergio Benevides, Brazil
Thank you. Thank you very much. I part of what, what I would say Heslop is what Canada said. I don't know if it is clear for everyone why the 11% will turn into 22 but it is because actually, formally the US will leave at the end of 2026 so up to So, which means that In the first EOVs, we formally counting with the contribution of the US, but it is likely that this contribution won't arrive. I mean, there is the possibility that this contribution won't arrive, and maybe this it is the likely scenario. So if it doesn't so for 2027 we will not have the contribution. And maybe for 2026 we won't have it ETOOFS. So the 11% for TMNair 27 and then 11% for 2026 will make 22% so this is the the idea. But formally, we have to count on this, because the US is still member and will be member up to the end of 2026 but yes, I was going to observe too that it doesn't necessarily mean that the cap will be linear, that every single part of UNESCO will have a reduction of 20, 22% this is one of the things. The second is I frankly, and this is something that I share with you, if I frankly don't see. I mean, the proposals presented up to now preserve the 3% of the IOC appropriation. So I don't see unless I understand that that the reduction is a bit bigger. For the EOVs, then, then for the general UNESCO budget, probably because of the decimal, or, I don't know, I mean, the the differences in 3.0 whatever, percent, but unless we decide otherwise, unless we decide to increase the share of of, let's say to pass from 3% to 3.5% I don't see another way of protecting but I would insist that that at least 3% would have to be allocated to the IOC. And I also don't see any other way of increasing it now from 3% to 3.5% or whatever amount it could be, because I this is a moment of reduction in general. So I would say that the focus would have to be on protecting the appropriation of 3% this is how I see the situation now. Thank you very much.
Carlos Zuniga
Thank you. Sergio Bidar, do you have any comments?
v_helgesen
Yes, I agree. The baseline established by the Executive Board, endorsed by the General Conference, is the one at 3% and that is respected in the proposals for 43 c5 I just thought it was useful to note that the decimals matter, not least because we're small. It does matter on the actual numbers and because it comes on top of a disrespect of the 3% decision when it comes to this year,
Carlos Zuniga
you're right. You're right. Thank you so much. And also we have the comments from Alan from the UK. We are clear. Thank you so much, Alan for sharing that in the chat room. So Vidar, I think we can move forward to the next section.
v_helgesen
Thank 
you. That brings us to programming, which I separated here from the budget, because, as the assembly has expressed, and as the executive board of UNESCO also expressed this spring, the program is the under the authority of the IOC assembly, and that is to be put forward to the General Conference as decided by the IOC assembly. This is the text of that decision taken by the executive board. Obviously the assembly made complementing decisions to this. We are now working along the new results framework, as you will recall from the assembly, it's structured around the high level objectives of the medium term strategy. We have condensed the sub items in the medium term strategy, 35 sub items. We've condensed them into 15 sub objectives in the results framework, and this defined existing and new key performance indicators for each of these sub objectives. This was endorsed by the Assembly in Jihye's Now the assembly requested me to ensure transmission of the resolution 33 three to the General Conference. And the executive board also requested the executive secretary to forward the results, framework and program to the General Conference. And another important feature relating to programming was the request of the assembly for me to seek an agreement with UNESCO on the recovery of management costs charged to voluntary contributions to the ILC. In other words, overhead costs that currently on voluntary contributions go into the UNESCO system, leaving us with weak capacity to actually do project management unless there is an opportunity to build that into the program costs. And not all donors accept building project management costs into the project, and we expect those to be covered by by the overhead. So. Now one challenge we have noted is that there is no established mechanism to actually transmit the IOC assembly decisions to the UNESCO General Conference. So a solution in terms of transmitting the resolution of the Finance Committee and the Assembly is to ensure that it is referenced in the IOC resolution at the executive board and General Conference. There's also an issue that has been raised that a decision or a proposal for the executive board on a special account for management costs, does not take the IOC specific nature and the IOC statutes into account, and that this might be something that member states need to address at the executive board. So those are, are the elements that we're working with on the program, in terms of the substantive consequences of the cuts on the program, that's something we'll come back to in November.
+1
you. That brings us to programming, which I separated here from the budget, because, as the assembly has expressed, and as the executive board of UNESCO also expressed this spring, the program is the under the authority of the IOC assembly, and that is to be put forward to the General Conference as decided by the IOC assembly. This is the text of that decision taken by the executive board. Obviously the assembly made complementing decisions to this. We are now working along the new results framework, as you will recall from the assembly, it's structured around the high level objectives of the medium term strategy. We have condensed the sub items in the medium term strategy, 35 sub items. We've condensed them into 15 sub objectives in the results framework, and this defined existing and new key performance indicators for each of these sub objectives. This was endorsed by the Assembly in Jihye's Now the assembly requested me to ensure transmission of the resolution 33 three to the General Conference. And the executive board also requested the executive secretary to forward the results, framework and program to the General Conference. And another important feature relating to programming was the request of the assembly for me to seek an agreement with UNESCO on the recovery of management costs charged to voluntary contributions to the ILC. In other words, overhead costs that currently on voluntary contributions go into the UNESCO system, leaving us with weak capacity to actually do project management unless there is an opportunity to build that into the program costs. And not all donors accept building project management costs into the project, and we expect those to be covered by by the overhead. So. Now one challenge we have noted is that there is no established mechanism to actually transmit the IOC assembly decisions to the UNESCO General Conference. So a solution in terms of transmitting the resolution of the Finance Committee and the Assembly is to ensure that it is referenced in the IOC resolution at the executive board and General Conference. There's also an issue that has been raised that a decision or a proposal for the executive board on a special account for management costs, does not take the IOC specific nature and the IOC statutes into account, and that this might be something that member states need to address at the executive board. So those are, are the elements that we're working with on the program, in terms of the substantive consequences of the cuts on the program, that's something we'll come back to in November. Carlos Zuniga
Thank you, Vidar, thank you so much. Please. If you have any comments, please raise your hand. We have Theresa,
Teresa Salado
hello, I'm going to put my camera or something. Hello, everybody. Thank you so much for for this meeting, and I have two questions for Vidar, concerning this last PowerPoint image, and it's concerning the difficulty he told us about, concerning transmission of the resolution To the General Conference directly. And my question is a very practical one, and I'm so sorry if that does not make really sense or is not possible. But would it be possible? Maybe not for now, but for the future, to consider to join an annex to the document of the executive board where the IOC questions are going to be treated, because those documents are after transmitter transmitted to the General Conference. So the general conference would get these recommendations from the eovsc assembly through that annex that will be part of a document of the ETOOFS board. So this is a suggestion. I don't know if it's possible, but in my ignorance, I would think that that can be a way to do it. The second question is concerning the agreement with UNESCO on the recovery of management costs, and I understand that there are no provisions on that. But did Vidar have the occasion to speak with the UNESCO Secretariat about this possibility, sorry, maybe I did not listen to something very important. I'm so sorry.
Carlos Zuniga
Thank you, Theresa. A question, which member states, state are you?
Teresa Salado
I'm sorry. I'm from Portugal. From Portugal,
Carlos Zuniga
okay. Thank you so much, Theresa. Yeah. You you're asking for two important things. I believe that timeframe we is something that we have been discussing a lot about this kind of how the calendar is moving forward, but it's something that we need to work on. It. Please be there if you can reply it.
v_helgesen
Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thanks, Teresa for two very pertinent questions. I'll respond to the letter. First, yes, I have raised the issue on management costs, and I have a good dialog with the Assistant Director General for administration. I raised it as a matter of following up on the IOC Assembly resolution. I also raised it in the context of two specific voluntary contribution processes that we are in, both very important, where we have been seeking to find solutions more immediately. That immediate solution would have to be a derogation from existing practices. But what we're seeking, seeking ultimately, is obviously a new approach, and it is just to provide some context here. It is a real issue, and. That the ocean and ocean affairs, Ocean Science, ocean management, ocean policy, ocean action, has quite a different community of donors and donor interests than other UNESCO activities, and it does mean that a number of donors are not so comfortable with seeing their overhead go into a general UNESCO administration, it's absolutely fair and necessary that the actual services that we get from UNESCO central services are covered. We could do that, but that doesn't amount to nine or 10% but it is a real hindrance when it comes to voluntary contributions. And why is that serious? It's obviously serious because we are. We have a very low ratio of voluntary contributions. I do think we can get more. I mean, if you look at the way the ocean has risen in significance globally in the last 10 years, there are opportunities there, but we are facing challenges on this front, we're facing challenges also in that much of the ocean discourse and discussion is taking place in other places than in Paris. So we really need, and I think in this the assembly decision was really important, we need a different level of visibility, a different level of IOC expression to the world in order to sustain our importance, our visibility, our projection to interested donors, as we're facing a difficult funding landscape. So this discussion will have to continue on finding a solution, on management costs, when it comes to the transmission issue, I think Teresa's suggestion is the evident one. The simple solution is often the best solution, which would be to attach the relevant documents and decisions of the assembly to the report of the IOC assembly to the General Conference, because there is a provision in our statutes that there is a direct relationship between the IOC assembly and the General Conference, and as an expression of that, the IOC assembly adopts a report that goes to the General Conference this year. I don't know how this has been in the past, but this year we've actually seen that report of the IOC assembly being edited by the UNESCO Secretariat, we were not aware that that was the result until we were alerted to this by the UK coming with a question, why does the report presented to the General Conference look different than The one adopted by the Assembly? And that is obviously not something that is in keeping with our statutes. And the statutes are not only decided by the IOC assembly, the statutes are a decision of the assembly and the General Conference jointly. So if we are to comply with the statutes, and we should there should be no editing after the adoption of the report by the Assembly.
Carlos Zuniga
Thank you so much, Lida and Theresa for your question. And I think we will move forward. We have another hand. Dominique from Canada.
Dominique LEVASSEUR (Canada)
I'm sorry for speaking again. I just want to ensure that the result framework that was endorsed will get into the revised c5 Vidar, you have, you've been talking, I suppose, with the Bureau of strategic planning, and are they willing to include the new result framework in the document that will be approved by the General Conference or after it is approved.
Carlos Zuniga
I think that is the next point of the agenda, but we are please.
Dominique LEVASSEUR (Canada)
Oh, it is okay. I'm sorry.
v_helgesen
No, it's actually pertaining to this item that the we obviously put forward the results framework, but it has not been reflected in the documentation to the to the executive board, and that's that's also a challenge, because it was not only a decision of the assembly, it was also a request from the former executive board.
Dominique LEVASSEUR (Canada)
Okay, so would it be fine if we insert it in the volume one, in the resolution the in the volume one, just a reference, and I
v_helgesen
think that's very important, because with. Your way, yeah,
Dominique LEVASSEUR (Canada)
okay, thank you.
Carlos Zuniga
Thank you. Dominican. Don't be don't be sorry about your interventions. I believe that's the most important things, like of this, this kind of activities is the interaction, as we don't have the opportunity to meet in person. I think any feedback and comment. Comments are very welcome for for everyone, so please be there. I think we will move forward to the next section of the presentation of the meeting.
v_helgesen
Okay, I'm trying to move my slides here, but they seem to be stuck. I talk. Here we are. So the next section will cover quite a lot. And this is about other issues than the or follow up issues to the budget and other decisions of or the program and other decisions by the Assembly, the results framework, as it's adopted by the Assembly, stands because the assembly determines our program, and we are now at the level of the Secretariat, operationalizing this, where, through identifying key deliverables that will contribute to the high level objectives, prioritizing activities based on resource availability. And this is, of course, a very important point at this time we will not be able to realistically deliver on the full program horizon given the financial situation, so when we get back in November, I want to be very specific in terms of what I put forward for consultations with ifag on what should be our Our priorities based on the reduced resources we are going to be tracking progress in delivery of the results framework holds the key performance indicators and set a baseline for developing the next results framework will identify resource mobilization and partnership needs. This is obviously all the more important given the regular budget drawdown. And as part of this exercise within the Secretariat on sharpening priorities, will also develop key messages to a new communication strategy. I'll come back to that, that strategy. So this will all form an internal Secretariat implementation plan. We're addressing that in October, we have a management team meeting, extensive meeting after the executive board, when we have the numbers. And at that meeting, we'll also consider a number of other matters, and I'll cover them subsequently. Firstly, the request of the assembly to explore new financing mechanisms, including for regional subsidiary commissions or sub commissions, communication strategy and visual identity, the request for a review of the working methods or IOC governing bodies, a look at how we can best serve multilateral collaboration and coordination. And finally, the next step of the consultation process on the IOC and the future of the ocean, the request from the assembly on new financing mechanisms was partly a request to explore the opportunities that exist in our statutes, Article 10.4 of establishing Special Purpose financial mechanisms and partly specific requests to look at the regional sub commission funding opportunities, expressed not least through the resolution on the IOC Africa, but but also reflected in resolutions pertaining to other sub commissions, and again, as part of this, the management cost recovery issue a very important enabler of actually recruit or GRA, of actually drawing involuntary funding. So we have, we will at the set level of Secretariat be analyzing different options for financing, including models that we have not yet tried. We will identify options for new partnerships and new human resource models, including in the regional sub commissions. This would mean. Are also looking at whether we could take a more proactive and planned approach to secondments. Secondments are very valuable, but in a situation where our regular budget is under pressure, we should really make sure that secondments are designed and suited to delivering on Argo priorities. We will be looking at the range of innovative partnerships that we've achieved through the ocean decade, and how those potentially could be leveraged also for delivering on the IOC results framework. And again, as a important part of this, the need for us to communicate as IOC communicate to the ocean community and the ocean both the funding sources that are particularly interested in the ocean issues, and this relates to the position of the assembly also to have us reinstate and consistently use a distinct visual identity of the IOC in communications and publications. We have launched internally the development of an IOC communication strategy that will be presented to the Executive Council next year, translating this assembly decision into action by providing a framework to project a unified institutional voice and positioning the IOC as the UN lead body for ocean science, but also for ocean management support And for ocean capacity development and a unifying institutions to institution. And we have two issues here. One is, is our distinct ocean nature, Visa VI, the UNESCO profile, which is what is reflected very much in the decision by the Assembly reinstating the IOC distinct visual identity. The other dimension is that within the IOC, we have a diffusion of identities, names, websites, and we also need to be more coherent in terms of a unified IOC brand and the way we project ourselves. Again, this is critically important, also for funding purposes. We will get back to to the progress on this communication strategy. Let me also mention importantly that we would like this strategy not only to be, not only to be a secretariat strategy, but to be a strategy on that member states could capitalize on, and we want to communicate with member states and Member State communication circles within member state institutions on how we can be as useful as we can next is on the request of the assembly for a review of the working methods of IOC governing bodies, seeking more effective, efficient and inclusive IOC governance on this as well. We'll come back to the Executive Council, as requested. Next year, we have started this process and will consult in future meetings with ifac and with officers trying to have a strategic approach and structure to focus on delivering on the medium term strategy and results framework, and let that be the focus of our governing meetings globally and regionally and in terms of subsidiary bodies. And look at how we time and sequence and how we define outcomes of our governing meetings. This is also key in terms of the UN 80 process, which is very much a new New York driven process trying to make the UN system more efficient and effective in delivery. There's some while that doesn't particularly apply to us. There's a lot of guidance coming out of that process that can also help us in coming up with with useful proposals to enhance effectiveness, efficiency and inclusiveness. One of the things that we already decided at the assembly is to change the sequencing of subsidiary meetings versus the global meetings, in order to ensure that we will give the regional subsidiary bodies and other subsidiary bodies an opportunity at the outset of ETOOFS to give their input to that process, because. Because the way it has worked until now is that the regional meetings come late in the planning process and are therefore effectively not able to influence and impact those processes. It was also asserted by the Assembly that it is at the level of the EOVs Secretariat to
v_helgesen
manage collaboration with and representation to multilateral and member state institutions and processes, including our managing the IOC distinct representation and accreditation to such institutions and processes. We're also we also started looking at that. Should be noted here that the BB and J treated the treaty on biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction has recently achieved the number of ratifications needed for it to enter into force. Our work on biodiversity with the ocean biodiversity Information System is a critical potential deliverable to that and assistance to that process. We have a working group established by the assembly on the ILC and the bbnj process, just as one example of an area where we need to be focused and where we need to deliver. Given the resource constraints, we'll obviously have to set priorities. Which processes are the most important for us to engage in. Member State signals and decisions are obviously key in that. And then we'll need to define more clearly what are the deliverables, what are the desired outcomes from engagement, and what are ways to increase our role and identity and autonomy in these relevant multilateral processes on this as well, much as on the communication end, a lot to do on internal coordination within The Secretariat, globally and regionally. Finally, the future of the ocean consultation process. We were requested by the assembly to continue or proceed with phase two of the consultation process, and we have a proposal call for proposal currently open for consultants to assist us with that phase two. This will lead to a short list of priority issues based on the first phase consultation, based on also the UN 80 process, which has come into this mix as a very important guidance and based on the results framework decided by the Assembly and other assembly decisions, as well as the ocean decade priorities, this phase will include a mapping of The key providers on ocean research on ocean data and ocean capacity development tools in priority areas, globally and regionally. And this will be a basis to assess what is the IOCs current scope, what is our potential scope of action in these areas, and what are the strategic possibilities that we have to in terms of our competitive advantages and areas to reinforce and strengthen going forward, and possibly areas not to attend as much to this will also be very 
important li including the regional level. When we go through this process, we'll develop options and scenarios that will be consulted throughout with ifag and delivered as a proposal to the Executive Council next year. We milestones for the next three months in terms of this consultation process, today's meeting, then we have a secretariat management meeting after the UNESCO Executive Board as mentioned, we'll have an officer's meeting online, 17th of November, we'll then have the ifag meeting on the 18th of November, not 19th, and we'll have the officers meeting 20th and 21st, of January. All these will be important steps in the consultation process. So thank you. Over to you, Mr.
+1
important li including the regional level. When we go through this process, we'll develop options and scenarios that will be consulted throughout with ifag and delivered as a proposal to the Executive Council next year. We milestones for the next three months in terms of this consultation process, today's meeting, then we have a secretariat management meeting after the UNESCO Executive Board as mentioned, we'll have an officer's meeting online, 17th of November, we'll then have the ifag meeting on the 18th of November, not 19th, and we'll have the officers meeting 20th and 21st, of January. All these will be important steps in the consultation process. So thank you. Over to you, Mr. Carlos Zuniga
Chair, thank you. GRA was a very informative presentation, a lot of topics, but I would like to take the opportunity to to make a comment about. The autonomy of IOC. You know, I am not a very active person in social media, but I have an account, and so just in the term that we don't have an IOC brand, it's we are like UNESCO ocean. So I think it's something that we need to move forward on it, since I'm taking your words about the to make the world know, know that we are the UN body related to the oceans, and now we are facing a very important stage, since BB and J got all the 60 signatures from different countries we are in, I think in number 71 ish. So I believe we need to move forward in that way, since it's a great opportunity, also, if we combine this with the ocean decade. So please any comments from from the member states. I'm seeing the one hand rise, so please Theresa, go ahead.
Teresa Salado (Portugal)
Thank you so much, Mr. Chair. Let me start by thanking Vidar for this very interesting presentation again, and to say that I fully share the observation you just made on the social media and the need maybe to find another way of communicating in a more independent way or a more specific way, in what concerns the oceans and IUC, I have just a question to Vidar concerning the timetable, he just showed of the next meetings and the agendas or the topics that will be treated by each one of those meetings. And I've just noticed that on the meeting of the 17th of November, of the officers the question of the budget that will be already approved by then is not included. Maybe it's too early, or is there a reason why it does not show right now? Vidar, thank you.
Carlos Zuniga
Thank you. Theresa, Bidar, please.
v_helgesen
Thank you. Well, the reason is fairly, is twofold. One is that our two days later, one day later, we will have the ifac meeting where we will give a Budget Status and update to ifag. And it is ifag that is mandated by the assembly to address budget issues between the sessions of our governing board bodies. So that is the main reason the officers are called on to consult on nominations for the decade. Advisory Board will also mention the or present the communication strategy framework so that they can liaise within the respective regions. But ifag is a way for all member states that want to to be directly confronted with and informed about the budget. So so that is the appropriate venue.
Carlos Zuniga
Thank you, Vidar. I'm not seeing any other hands, so I think we can move forward.
v_helgesen
Well, that is essentially it
Carlos Zuniga
okay. So thank you so much, vida. So I believe that now we have to wrap up this, this meeting. Thank you for for the presentation, Vidar, all the informative topics that you cover. Also, I would like to thank all the member states that are present in this online meeting. I know about the time differences is quite challenge for different areas of the world, for me, is not too bad, because we started at 8am so I appreciate it, but I'm seeing different countries where, where is midnight, probably, or things like that. So thank you for for your efforts, because we believe this is very important. Ifac has a lot of things to do, a lot of things to say, and also we need to move forward from the paper to the actions. And that is some something very important, especially during the these times with the budgetary issues, and also the ocean decade and the bbnj, that I believe is quite important, is there the hope of the ocean as it was mentioned? In the last assembly, and also, as it was mentioned twice by Bidar, the next meeting is November 18. So you will receive the an email with the notification, and also with the calendar event. And as well. You will get all the all the documents in our ocean expert website. So you will get the review, the corrected presentation from Bidar, and also all the documents that were mentioned during the the the meeting. So I don't have any other words than two things, if
v_helgesen
I may, if I may. Mr. Chair just mentioned one more thing that Joanna post reminded me of in the chat, which is that on the ifac meeting on the 18th of November, there will also be an update on the GOOS reform, the global ocean observing system reform process. I'm mentioning that because this is a very important mandate given to us by the Executive Council and the assembly, and we are at a very critical stage for global ocean observing, not least given the uncertainties coming out of the US in terms of their continued investment in critical global ocean observations infrastructure. I say wherever I'm giving a speech now that our priority number one, two and three is to appeal to member states to shore up and increase investments in ocean observations infrastructure, because that is so important for building sustainable open economies. It's so important for delivering on multilateral frameworks, and it is important for early warning systems, tsunamis and BalaKrishnan TMNair, reinvesting, because as part of a hopeful process where we'll have more investment in ocean observations globally GOOS role, the GOOS Secretariat role in coordination, will have to be more active and will have to be reinforced. So there's been a little process here about financing and budget programming. But I just wanted to end with this very critical substantive issue relating to the safety and security of humanity. And I think Rafael had a question on this or a comment
Rafael (Spain)
yes for intervening when we are already closing. But I thank you for this comment on GOOS, and in fact this I agree that is a critical issue that we are facing. I wonder if you are planning to have any kind of continuation of the meeting that we had in nice regarding this topic, I feel, I think it was a very useful and very useful for us to pass the message to our world governments, which is what we really need. And I wonder if you're planning to have any kind of continuation on that meeting. Thank you.
Carlos Zuniga
Thank you for the question. Rafael, please. Vidar,
v_helgesen
yes. Thank you, Rafael, for that question. We are certainly planning to have that we are though. I mean, we are continuing the analysis work. We are awaiting clarity on the US budget situation. I think the principal issue is, is that we need a different level of sharing of responsibility globally, and not be dependent on one actor, but still for the specific analysis of consequences. We are waiting for the US budget to be finalized, because then we will know the exact nature of the drawdowns there. There are some discussions pertaining to this, but as we know now, that process is stalled, but so we we don't know when clarity will come out, but following that, we'll complete our analysis. As of now and then, we'll be communicating to the group that met in the Martins of EOVs in nice I can also mention to you that the high level panel for a sustainable ocean economy, where 17 governments are represented by their heads of government, our heads of state or government. They had their principals meeting in the margins of the UN General Assembly last week, and they adopted, based on input from us, they adopted statement which was quite strong on. Importance of giving priority to oceans observations, and we intend to follow up with an appeal to the members of that high level panel there. They comprise a significant part of the exclusive economic zones globally. So we'll follow up on that specifically. But we would obviously also follow up broadly with all member states relating to the importance and through the key GOOS contributors when it comes to the state of play and analysis of of the situation and the scenarios ahead.
Carlos Zuniga
Okay, thank you so much.
v_helgesen
So that statement by the high level panel is now shared in the chat, by the way,
Carlos Zuniga
yes, yes, you're right. You're right. Thank you so much. And yeah, it's a very good tool to use the chat for that kind of question, because we can answer it easily, and also we can record the dates and put our in our notes. So just to finish vid, if you have, if you don't have any other comments or from from the member states, I would like to thank the Secretariat staff, senior Kang Vidar, also leading this, for making this meeting possible to bring to us all these important topics, and we will move forward. We will try to do our best. And also I would like to thanks for your kind words. I will try to follow the path that Commodore Juan Camillo Ferrero lead for the last years. So I will put all my energy and my mind, and also the energy from the south of the world to make this possible. So thank you so much. I was asking for a group picture, but I'm not sure if it's that something that we can do in this kind of activities. I'm trying to recall the times of covid, where we had a lot, a lot of online meetings, and we took a lot of pictures. So if you can turn on your cameras, I will really love to to take a picture, at least for my record cameras. So cheers. 123, awesome. Okay, team. Thank you so much for everything, so we will keep you posted and so see you once again in November 18.
v_helgesen
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you all. Thank you,
Unknown Speaker
thank you.
Rafael (Spain)
Nice to see you everyone. Thank
Sergio Benevides, Brazil
you all. Bye,
Luis Menezes Pinheiro PT
thank you, bye, bye, bye, bye.