At UN, $1850 Fee for Tips on "Revenue Generation," N. Korea Talks Not Covered

Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at UN
www.innercitypress.com/unop1i2i060809.html

UNITED NATIONS, June 8 -- There is a two day event held in the UN's basement for which $1850 is being charged. It is called Incentive2Innovate. At the UN's June 8 noon media briefing, UN Associate Spokesman Farhan Haq plugged the event, implying it was about how to achieve the Millennium Development Goals. Video here, from Minute 12:01.

Inner City Press asked why it costs $1850, and where the money goes. Faq said he wasn't aware of the charge. Video here, from Minute 18:54. But it is right on the online registration form, click here.

To learn more, Inner City Press went down to the basement and stood in the back while a panel of five, including Marthin de Beer from Cisco and Filippo Passerini from Procter & Gamble, Arianna Huffington and a gold miner spoke, in essence, about how to make more money.

In the brochure, they call it "revenue generation." There is scant mention of any of the MDGs, unlike in the UN News Services' plug for the conference under the Millennium Development Goals rubric. In the Updated Conference Program, the only Millennium of any kind mentioned is the Millennium Plaza Hotel, where breakfast will be served on June 9. One wag said, it better be caviar."

Again the question: why is this being held at the UN? As one wag put it, they are people seeking to make more money -- but it is at the UN, it has the veneer of public spiritedness. Keynote speaker and Wikinomist Don Tapscott, after screening two television ads for Doritos corn chips, praised a financial services firm, VenCorps, in which to his credit he disclosed he has a stake.

The only UN department that links to the event is the UN Office of Partnerships, set up with money from another innovator, Ted Turner. Its one page in the inches of material given out or sold at the conference quotes Secretary General Ban Ki-moon that in "addressing global challenges... through partnerships... we increase our chances of success."

But will the UN partner with just anyone? What other than $1850 are the criteria? Other companies listed in the brochure range from WellPoint to the BT Group, insurance companies to Google, which is sponsoring a prize for a team that lands a robot on the moon. It's part of the X-Prize Foundation, a sponsor of the event.

They call it, "the confererence you cannot afford to miss this year!". But for most, they can't afford the $1850 conference at all.

While Don Tapscott took some questions, he only called on those sitting in the front of Conference Room 2, with name plates in front of them. Perhaps that was part of the $1850 charge -- the name plate, and the ability to ask questions.

Perhaps a more productive question, with these executives in the House, would be how these innovative "Web 2.0 ideas" might be applied to the UN itself, or at least to the Security Council, where for example the Permanent Five members along with Japan and South Korea have for two weeks like dinosaurs been negotiating a response to North Korea's second underground test of nuclear bomb.

On June 5, Inner City Press obtained and put online the most recent draft resolution, for all the world to see. This seemed very Web 2.0. Since then, Inner City Press has received push back from various quarters. Certain Western P-5 Permanent Representatives are described as being incensed, starting a witch hunt to find who, from what Mission to the UN, leaked the draft to the Press.

Even one non-Permanent Five member of the Council opined what it would have been better, as he said, to described the draft without actually uploading it. He considered this too graphic.

Might one call it diplomatic pornography? But why as an Internet publication would one describe a document without putting it online, as PDF or otherwise? "By now, you'll be believed that you have it if you say you have it," the Ambassador said. But still: why not put it online?

A Permanent Five Ambassador explained that once the actual draft is out, it is hard for the negotiating countries to go backwards. So "you are slowing things down," was the accusation. But that can't be the Press' criterion to publish or upload such a document.

Trust the people -- what's what they were teaching down in the basement of the UN, for $1850 a pop. There will be a reception - perhaps partially explaining the hefty cover charge -- and a second day, including "breakout discussions" on "creating an innovative culture in your company" and X-Prize CEO Peter H. Diamandis.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/unop1i2i060809.html

UN Peacekeeping Gives CISCO Access to Its Cairo Meetings, Roots of No-Bid Contracting

Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at UN
www.innercitypress.com/un1cisco052108.html

UNITED NATIONS, May 19 -- A U.S.-based computer company with, already, $90 million in UN business was allowed exclusive access to a recent Peacekeeping Information Technology conference in Egypt, rather than being referred for performance review or investigation, it has emerged.

In what some attendees call a junket, UN peacekeeping's Department of Field Support earlier this month held a conference about information technology in Cairo, Egypt. Sources told Inner City Press they were surprised and troubled at the high-profile presence including as a provider of entertainment at the intra-UN meeting of the large contractor, CISCO, via its global account manager to the U.N., David Andemicael. Such corporate access would not be allowed, at least under the rules, by the UN's Procurement Division. So why does UN Peacekeeping -- or its Department of Field Support -- allow it?

Inner City Press sent this question to DFS's information technology chief Rudy Sanchez as well as to the new head of DFS, Susana Malcorra. The first day passed without response. But on May 20, DFS spokesman Nick Birnback provided a lengthy response:

"Hi Matthew, Ms. Malcorra asked me to get back to you on your queries of yesterday. The United Nations Secretariat has a direct contractual agreement with CISCO Systems. This agreement was developed in compliance with United Nations Financial and Procurement rules and regulations and has been in place since February 2004. The Secretariat has standardized the use of CISCO products and technology for Network equipment used in field mission’s Local Area Networks (LANs) and the DFS Wide Area Network (WAN). Field mission Information and Communications Technology (ICT) personnel indicated that one of the most pressing technical issues was network performance related to the transmission of voice, video and data over mission LANs and the WAN, and the optimization of CISCO technologies currently in use.

CISCO representatives were therefore invited to the conference to provide technical briefings to the UN participants on the utilization of CISCO technologies that would mitigate performance degradation associated with the high-latency, low-bandwidth infrastructure in use in field operations. CISCO engineers also provided technical briefings on how their equipment could best be leveraged in support of field ICT operations. CISCO representatives only participated only in this phase of the conference.

While there were no other non-UN participants in attendance this year, major UN contractors/technical service providers have participated on an issue-specific basis in previous conferences. "

This answer, while appreciated, raises more questions. Sources tell Inner City Press that CISCO's "network performance," now proffered as the rationale for its exclusive access to decision-makers, is a performance issue, which should have been referred to the Procurement Division. What CISCO provides, they say, is often incompatible with UN Peacekeeping missions.

How long has CISCO worked for the UN? Since at least 1992, Inner City Press is told, beginning with routers costing (then) $30,000. But CISCO was soon made the UN de facto standard, so that other contractors could not compete. It has been, in essence, no-bid ever since, culminating in being invited to UN Peacekeeping's own information technology conference. It is credible that CISCO will be subjected to legitimate competition for UN contracts going forward? What do the powers that be at the UN have to say about this?

Footnotes: it's now said that the acting chief of the Procurement Division, Paul Buades, may not in fact get the post, that "an Australian from UNOPS" is now in line, and even Buades' Ukrainian deputy is on the rocks, his partying picture circulating through capitals of the countries for but not in which the UN buys millions of dollars of goods.

Meanwhile, the UN has erroneously jumped the gun on promising Spain that its Peacekeeping Information Technology unit will be in Valencia -- without Budget Committee approval of any kind. Hopefully that Committee will look into Valencia, and also into this. We'll see.

Finally, insiders describe a trend in which information technology staffers of UN Peacekeeping now Department of Field Suppport leaves and go to work with the companies which contract with the UN. Where are the safeguards? Partying with CISCO...

And see, www.innercitypress.com/un1cisco052108.html

UN Procurement Dominated by Developed World, U.S. Grabs 25% Not Counting Lockheed Martin, France and Italy over 10%, Reports Misleading

Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at UN
www.innercitypress.com/un3procure042108.html

UNITED NATIONS, April 21 -- Despite talk of increased diversity in the UN system's procurement, developed countries like the United States, France, Switzerland, Italy and even Monaco continue to hold most of the systems contracts for the UN's peacekeeping operations, an Inner City Press analysis has revealed. Of $2.3 billion spend on contracts for all peacekeeping missions in the past two years, U.S.-based firms grabbed $541 million or 23% of the business. While this includes for example a $90 million contract for Cisco Systems, it does not include Maryland-based Lockheed Martin's $250 million no-bid contract since it is only for Darfur and not other missions, nor does it include food supplies other than a $15 million joint venture with Esko, which is located for tax purposes in Monaco, and got 17.18% of the contracts.

While France got over 11% of the contracts, including a $115 million contract with Renault, and Italy over 10%, including Agmin's $100 million contract for pre-fabricated buildings, China received less than two percent, and South Africa less than half of one percent, for only two items, barbed wire and UN caps. India-based companies got even less: a single $1.5 million contract for sandbags.

The largest contract to a China-based firm, $34 million in generators from Zhejiang Kangle Group, is being contested within the UN, and may be re-awarded to Italy-based Intertrade International, which already has a $25 million contract with the UN.

The UN General Assembly in 2000 directed the Secretary-General to take steps to diversity contracting to the developing world. After some steps were taken in that direction, Inner City Press' sources in UN procurement say, the developed world contractors, and governments on their behalf, fought back. The UN stood steps that disfavored smaller bids, such as requiring pre-bid trips to New York and trips to Brindisi, Italy, both of which require visas, and requiring the posting of bonds, even though the UN pays three to six month after work is completed. Insiders describe a confidential report to UN on its air chartering business by an external consulting find that the UN's bidding and awards process is overly complex. But this complexity favors sophisticated developed world companies.

To deceive the General Assembly's interest member states that progress is being made, the Secretariat has filed a report on "UN Procurement Activities," A/62/525, which lumps together the UN Secretariat's purchasing, through its Procurement Division, with the purchases of funds, programs and agencies, which are donor-funded and sometimes required to go to specific contractors. Since the Secretariat and the funds and program have different procurement systems and vendor lists, there was no basis to lump them together, except to create misleading numbers, sources say. Whether in the upcoming May session of the General Assembly's Budget Committee these issues will be addressed remains to be seen.

While Australia receives only 0.73% of the UN's systems contracts, it was all in one $17 million deal for radio equipment, with Barrett Communications.

Austria-based Rosenbauer International got a $14 million contract for "Rapid Intervention Vehicles."

Canada's Newcon Optic sold night vision binoculars; Czech SVOS sold $26 million of armored "VIP vehicles."

Denmark's DAN Office is well known for dominating IT business at the UN, as Denmark wins UN sub-headquarters such as UNOPS slush-fund fuels move to Copenhagen.

France, which is said to be in line for a big Darfur contract, including by having the Request for Proposals changed at the thirteen hour (click here for that), had its Renault selling $115 million in heavy-duty trucks to the UN.

Germany's Fleischhacker GmGH sold $15 million in medical equipment, while India sold only $1.5 million of sandbags.

Ireland's MMI Group sold $2 million of medals -- not metals, but medals.

Israel's Odis sold water plants. Italy's Agmin sold over $100 million in pre-fabricated buildings.

Japan's biggest contract is with Nissan, for 4 by 4s which Toyota also sells.

South Africa's big items are UN Caps and concertina wire. Uganda made the list for a single contract, Entebbe (airport) Handling Services, a fraction of Lockheed Martin's PA&E contract in the Congo.

The UK's Jankel sold $27 million in armored VIP vehicles to the UN.

The U.S. makes out best: $93 million to Motorola, $90 million to Cisco Systems and, understated, the $15 million joint venture between Monaco-based Esko and Lockheed Martin.

Footnote: on the UN's no-bid $250 million Darfur infrastructure contract to Lockheed Martin, sources say that 28 new auditors have been brought in under a "Letter of Assist" with Spain. But as reported last week by Inner City Press, in Darfur the UN's international staff are living in containers far from toilets, click here for that. Where did the Lockheed money go? And what of the inquiry by the Office of Internal Oversight Services which the General Assembly demanded last December? Developing.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/un3procure042108.html