- 1 -
/ INTERNATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATION UNION / Document 6-E7 March 2002
English only
INFORMAL GROUP ON THE DRAFT ITU STRATEGIC PLAN 2003-2007
geneva — 7-8 March 2002
Germany
Contribution for the Council Group onthe Strategic Plan for the ITU
2003 - 2007
Comments on the Strategic Plan Draft of December 1, 2001
Introduction
The Council Working Group chaired by Ms. Kathleen G. Heceta has presented a draft of the Strategic Plan for the ITU for the 2003 - 2007 period. Germany thanks the Chair for having submitted the draft. For only with a concrete draft is a discussion possible that can move the issue forward. Germany particularly appreciates the fact that the Draft attempts to outline the facts briefly and concisely, and that it offers clear instructions for the future, defining the Plan's priorities and providing the necessary orientation for tasks having contradictory objectives.
Comments on the Plan
As regards the ideas expressed, Germany deems it important to make clear which strategic elements are addressed to the General Secretariat (and the bureaus) with the respective service responsibilities, and which elements result in a specific position or approach to be taken by the Union in the light of its membership.
On the individual elements of the Plan as presented, we should like to make the following remarks and suggestions as to how the Plan could possibly even better achieve the objectives set forth. Our remarks are organized according to the numbing of the "Draft Strategic Plan of the Union" of December 1, 2001.
1The mission and nature of the Union
Germany believes that the Plan should begin by introducing contents such as in Number 1.3; byway of explanation, origins and mandate should be quoted from the appropriate sources.
With regard to explaining the mission, Germany believes the Plan should either only cite the appropriate sources in the Constitution and the Convention or quote in full the relevant wording. Every abbreviated excerpt creates unnecessary need for further explanation of why some parts are quoted and others not.
Contents such as 1.2, with a reiteration of the status quo or with the wish for changes in the status of the Union, should not be included until after considering the present situation with its possible strengths and weaknesses. Opting for such a course as early as the opening statement would not be helpful in terms of trying to ensure a logical organization of the Plan.
The changing environment and its implications for ITU
In displaying statistics to illustrate the changing environment, the Plan should restrict itself to showing the development and not make any statements about the future; for the dynamic development of telecommunications has regularly proven predictions wrong.
Under Number 2.4, emphasis should be placed on the fact that the already accomplished privatization of telecommunications companies in the corresponding countries has had the result that government has withdrawn to the field of regulating telecommunications. Measures must, however, be taken to make sure that former public monopolies do not become private monopolies. At the same time, competition should be fostered to allow citizens to enjoy its benefits. This also applies to radiocommunications, where government is no longer the most important user of the frequency bands and limits itself above all to managing the band range in the public interest.
In evaluating the ITU's reaction to changes under Number 2.5, the Plan should thus try to determine where the Union has adapted to the changing environment by altering its structure and way of operating. With no change in responsibilities, adaptation to a larger work volume by expanding capacities would appear to be of less significance in terms of the Strategic Plan's contents.
- Strategies and goals
Once again in this section, it would appear to be important to try to clearly distinguish areas where there are strategic orientations for the Union and its members and where the Plan seeks tooffer orientation assistance for the activities of the General Secretariat and the bureaus. In our view, consideration should be made as to whether only orientations for the member and for the Union as a whole should be listed here, while shifting the statements for the bureaus and the General Secretariat in Part II to the respective sections on the Sectors and the General Secretariat.
In this connection, the attempt should also be made to establish clarity as to what is meant by the term "customer" in each and every case. We view it as irritating when the Members - both Member States and Sector Members - who create the products by participation in the bodies of the Union are at the same time referred to as customers, who are to be satisfied while at the same time being the productive forces who are alone participating in the work and are responsible for bringing about results. The situation is different in the field of services by the Secretariat, where the Secretariat provides the services and must try to satisfy the demands both within and outside the ITU.
Should the majority of the members, however, think that the ITU Secretariat should provide independent services in the fields of developing standards and of frequency management, there should also be statements indicating where the necessary operational capacities are to come from.
If the list of goals is to remain in its present form, Germany believes that a uniform structure should be aimed for. The form that has been selected, with some goals given an explanatory introduction and others not, would appear to us to be irritating. General introductions as found in3.3 and 3.4 would appear to us to be unnecessary.
But in our opinion, good reasons should be given for repeating, word-for-word, some goals from Article1 and listing the corresponding sub-points by way of reinforcement, while other elements from Article1 remained unmentioned, although it is our understanding that the basic goals of the Union, as a whole, are not questioned. Making such a selection without providing reasons creates more room for interpretation than clear orientation assistance.
Part II: The Sectors and the General Secretariat
Also in the parts referring to the individual sectors, we would be pleased if the Plan were restricted to statements that are as brief and precise as possible. Each of the Sectors' advisory groups have independently prepared drafts, some of which are more comprehensive and detailed than others. We think the Working Group should agree on a uniform structure so that the overall Plan makes it possible to undertake a comparative evaluation of the Sectors and their priorities.
Since there is no advisory committee for the General Secretariat, the Council is called on to voice its opinion here. For this task, a comprehensive report on the General Secretariat's experience would be helpful; such a report should outline that body's experience and detail possible alternatives for action, as called on under Article5, 1c of the Convention. This would include, not least of all, statements about experience and requirements in recruiting and managing Union staff.
It should also be obligatory for the listing of the tasks of the General Secretariat that either all of the details are quoted from the Constitution and Convention or merely their sources in the text. Selecting only some would again leave the door open to a wide range of interpretation possibilities, which we do not think would be helpful.
8.The Financial Plan, and linkages between strategic, operational, and financial plans
In the section on the finances of the Union, we now find only a list of facts about the financing sources as contained in the Constitution and Convention. We would like to see an indication of what the Members think of the basic strategy in financial terms. Is it the main priority of the Union to fulfill its obligations, naturally by the efficient use of available funding? This could mean that the volume of funding would have to expand when obligations increase. Or is the decision going to be that the obligations to be fulfilled by the Union will in the long run have to be oriented to the funding available, and thus requirements for which no funding is available will in the long term not be met? Or is it even conceivable that, if public funding declines, the Union must also anticipate a decrease in budget funds, thus meaning that measures will have to be individually reviewed to determine whether or not they are of indispensable importance for the Union. To keep the Union's financial basis sound, it would also be useful if there was some statement about the level of arrears in contributions and how these arrears are to be reduced.
We also believe that it would be constructive if the elements of the Operational Plan and the desirable link between the strategic, operational, and financial plans were again incorporated into the Strategic Plan. Alongside the fundamental wish for correlating these elements, as contained in Minneapolis Resolution72, the scheduling requirements for these Plans should be drafted to ensure that they are available in a timely fashion prior to when they are to become effective.
Germany believes that the Strategic Plan that has been submitted is a good start and that this draft is an excellent trigger for improving the continuing discussion at the upcoming working meeting, in which Germany will actively participate.