Первый комитет, 29-е пленарное заседание - Генеральная Ассамблея, 81-я сессия Генеральная Ассамблея Date: 3 November 2026 Language: English Transcript: https://transcripts.un.org/ru/ga/c1/81/29?lang=en Transcripts available through this tool are created by using automatic speech recognition and are not official records nor official documents of the United Nations. Official records and official documents are available on the Official Document System of the United Nations. --- 1st Committee · Chair [27:27]: Good morning, Excellencies, distinguished delegates, colleagues. The 29th meeting of the Disarmament and International Security Committee of the 81st. Session of the General Assembly is called to order. Distinguished delegates, You would recall that yesterday the Committee completed its considerations of all draft proposals before it. Our last order of business is to adopt the draft provisional programme of work and timetable of the First Committee for 2027. It is contained in document A/C1/81/CRP4. /REB 1, which distributed last night to all the delegations. As delegations are aware, this program of work and timetable is considered under agenda item 124, revitalizations of the work. Of the General Assembly. The revised draft program of the work for 2027, which you have before you, is based on the programme of the Committee this year and last year. It comprises one organizational meeting, which will take place on Thursday, 30 September 2027, and will be merged with discussions on working methods of the Committee and programme planning; nine meetings for the general debate; 12 meetings for the thematic discussion segment, and 6 meetings for the action phase. I would like to remind all delegations that the First Committee shares its conference facilities and other resources with the Fourth Committee. Consequently, the draft provisional programme of the First Committee for 2027 which we are considering now, has been prepared in consultation with the Secretariat of the Fourth Committee. The two committees will continue to coordinate their work and maintain a sequential pattern of conducting their meetings in order to maximize shared resources. The provisional programme of work under consideration will, of course, be finalized and issued in its final form before the First Committee starts its substantive work at its next session. The revised version of the programme of the work is being introduced after extensive consultations with the delegations to address their concerns and strike a balance, as discussed in an extended Bureau meeting with the participation of all regional groups, held yesterday. The revised proposal contains a footnote indicating that the programme of work is put forward for planning purposes, and the Bureau took upon itself to facilitate informal discussions on working methods, including all the issues of concern of all delegations. Additionally, an important change was introduced in the note on the second page that the committee will exercise flexibility not only during the last weeks, but during the entire session. As indicated, the Bureau will conduct intersessional meetings to further consider this program of work. It seems that consensus is not within reach. With that, I would like to continue consultations with a view to reach consensus on the revised programme of work of the First Committee for 2027. For this, I suspend the meeting until 11:00 AM. Excellencies, distinguished delegates, the meeting is resumed. The meeting will continue the considerations of the revised programme of the work as contained in A/C1/81/CRP/Rev.1. May I take it that the Committee wishes to make these recommendations to the General Assembly? I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of the Russian Federation. Russian Federation [1:37:18]: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The Russian Delegation attaches great importance to the work of the First Committee, where there's considerations of critical issues of disarmament and international security. We think that this is the reason why the UN was founded, and given the growing conflicts among countries, then a space for dialogue on equal footing that is offered by the First Committee is of greater significance. We think that all these States and the Secretariat have the duty to ensure that the opportunities for such dialogue are maintained. When preparing the next session, we have to consider the lessons of the current session. As we see it, ensuring a substantive and professional conversation that would allow us to make headway toward finding viable solutions to security systems has not entirely come to fruition this year. The voting modalities were ineffective and even harmful. We think it's important to avoid repeating this sort of experience going forward. The intersessional period must be used to conduct intensive consultations with participation of all Member States on developing parameters for future work that are acceptable to all delegations, such as the duration of statements. We think that based on the results of this session, it's important to agree on a programme of work that would ensure the necessary foundations for such discussions. As we see it, the document CRP4 Rev 1 does not meet this goal. Not only does it not ensure the due quantity of sessions, but it doesn’t address the duration of statements. Considering what we’ve said, the Russian Federation has submitted its consideration to improve the document, circulating a proposal to amend it. We would propose at this very preliminary stage, two working days and two meetings on Thursday and Friday, on the 3rd and 4th of November, with the addition if needed. And we're also going to put the date of the 3rd of November to the 5th of November for voting, and the number of meetings from six to eight. We want to underscore that at this stage, we did not correct the distribution of the meetings by date, that is, to facilitate the work of voting. We believe that the footnote about the flexible nature of the schedule throughout the session will allow us in the intersessional format to additionally apportion the time for the meetings, as the African Group has done and other delegations, and we have time to do so. Our approach will provide the necessary freedom of movement in these informal consultations when organizing the modalities of the 82nd session of the First Committee of the UNGA, and it will maximally consider the interests of all delegations. We’d also like to underscore that this doesn’t run counter to the budget for 2027, which is agreed upon in May of this year, where to hold the committee on the first committee, there were 32 sessions. If now we agree on a different approach, then increasing the duration of sessions and the number of sessions will be practically impossible, even if there's full consent on the part of all Member States, because by that time, we'll already have adopted the traditional UN General Assembly resolution on the plan for conferences based on the report of the Committee on Conferences. And it will adopt a plan for the events of the First Committee based on the dates that we are going to preliminarily agree upon now. We think it's our duty to do our utmost to ensure that we're efficiently using the First Committee to carry out its mandate in terms of fostering international peace and security and resolving issues that have to do with arms control, disarmament, and nonproliferation. We urge all delegations to support our amendment and to adopt it by consensus. I thank you, Mr. Chairman. 1st Committee · Chair [1:42:00]: In accordance with rule 130, the Committee will first consider the amendment submitted by the delegation of the Russian Federation. The Committee will then consider the provisional programme of work and timetable of the First Committee for 2027. The Committee will now consider the amendment, which reads as follows: The last two lines in the second column on page 1 would read as follows: “Monday, 25 October to Friday, 5 November.” The corresponding number of meetings in the action phase in the third column on page would read as follows: “8.” The week of 1 to 5 November on page 2 would read as follows: 1 November morning, 2 November morning, 3 November morning with an asterisk if needed, 4 November morning with an asterisk if needed, and 5 November morning with an asterisk if needed. Now I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Algeria. Algeria [1:43:19]: Thank you, Chair. Good morning to everyone. First, I would like to thank you, Mr. Chair, as well as the other members of the Bureau for your tireless work in steering this session of the First Committee. My delegation was ready to support the revised draft provisional programme of work and timetable for 2027. put forward by the Bureau, which indicates that the document is for planning purposes, that the Bureau would facilitate intersessional informal discussions on working methods, including time limits, and that the final decision would be taken by the Committee at its 82nd session. At the same time, we are also ready to support the amendment submitted by Russia. As we understand it, The Russian amendments move the indicative calendar from 28 meetings, by meeting I mean half-day, plus one meeting if needed, to 29 meetings plus two meetings if needed. We do not see those additional meetings as necessarily serving the action phase on draft texts, as reflected in the table. For us, the distribution of meetings and the overall spread of the session are matters to be discussed and agreed upon during the inter-sessional period. The modest extension proposed by Russia is not incompatible with the African Group’s submission. Indeed, it is consistent with it. Our submission seeks, among other things, clearer and slightly more generous speaking time limits for the general debate, and the thematic discussion. And of course, we will also need to reduce the density of consecutive full-day meetings during the thematic phase. Such a redistribution is imperative for small delegations, as explained in the African Group’s written submission. By comparison, in the period prior to the liquidity crisis, the 2023 session of the First Committee held 30 formal meetings, while the 2022 session had 32 meetings. Having consulted my colleagues covering fifth committees, and there are two, I'm the only one in the first committee, and noting that the UN financial situation has now improved, we see no reason not to include the additional meetings in the draft program of work, to which the first committee is entitled. Doing so keeps the doors open for all options in the intersessional discussions and gives the Committee the flexibility needed to address the practical challenges faced by smaller delegations. Finally, with regard to the reference in the footnote to intersessional discussions on working methods, including time limits, I would like to clarify that for us, the question of time limits is mainly limited to the general debate and the thematic discussion, as set out in the African Group submission. Again, we support the amendment proposed by Russia. We hope they will be adopted by consensus. We believe this committee has experienced too much voting. We should strive to take decisions by consensus whenever possible. I thank you. 1st Committee · Chair [1:46:42]: I thank the distinguished representative of Algeria. Now I give the floor to the distinguished representative of the United States. United States of America [1:46:52]: Thank you, Chair. The United States thanks the Bureau and the Secretariat for preparing the provisional programme of work for the first committee at the 82nd session of the General Assembly. We support the Chair and Bureau's proposal as a starting point for intersessional discussions, in line with the Committee's practice. In the context of those discussions, We will continue to make the point that the Committee can and should do more to streamline its session in line with the UN80 reform efforts. Recent sessions have made one thing clear: this Committee can effectively complete its work in four weeks. Consider this year. Had we kept discussion of organizational matters to the organizational session as planned, we could have comfortably finished our work on October 30th, amounting to only 19 working days. Instead, many delegations had to pay thousands for lodging and per diem for four more days. That money could have gone to better purposes. Every additional day carries a significant cost, especially for First Committee, which, unlike the other committees, features numerous representatives traveling from Geneva or other capitals. This discussion is not about procedure for its own sake, nor is it merely about cutting costs. It's about matching our practices to our actual workload, respecting the time and resources of Member States, and helping build a more effective and accountable United Nations. To that end, we look forward to engaging constructively in intersessional discussions to find ways to make our working methods more efficient and fit for purpose. Reform is not a one-time change. We should build on it each year as we get back to basics, and we can do so without reducing Member States’ meaningful participation. The United States stands ready to engage on this in the coming months. And we encourage everyone to reject Russia’s amendment for what it is: an attempt to undermine the compromise starting point presented by the Bureau and Chair for further intersessional consultations. We place our trust in the chair to continue such consultations based on his proposal, and we encourage others to do the same and vote no on the Russian amendment. Thank you, Chair. 1st Committee · Chair [1:49:25]: I thank the distinguished representative of United States. Now I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Nicaragua. Nicaragua [1:49:36]: Thank you, Chair. For Nicaragua, the point of departure when we examine the programme of work for the First Committee for 2027 is the sovereign equality of States. In a committee that deals with disarmament and international security, this principle requires that each delegation has the time necessary to express their position, present their initiatives, and participate in negotiations of the decisions, which are decisions to be taken by all of us. Looking at the calendar of meetings for the Committee, it's important to take into account the effective, meaningful participation of all delegations, and we share the concern about the load of work with morning followed by afternoon, and how difficult that is to staff those meetings. Equal participation of each delegation means that we have the same opportunity to take part in the debates and negotiate resolutions that we have to vote on a couple of days later. Therefore, we very much welcome that the calendar does make it possible for us to have these meetings, including additional meetings that can be used if necessary. We also believe it's indispensable to leave enough time for consultations between the thematic debates and the other meetings. That will make it possible for delegations to carry out the necessary consultation and coordination. With regard to national interventions and group interventions, Nicaragua is in favor of keeping the speaking time from previous years, both in the general debate as well as in the thematic debates. We recognize the financial difficulties that the organization is facing. However, having said that, a budget reduction should not translate into a reduction of the substantive work of this committee. We have said that if necessary, if the cuts have to be made, then we could look at internal costs and try to find savings in those activities that are not a priority for member states. But to cut speaking times or reducing the time needed for negotiation would affect the work that our countries have entrusted to this committee. Nicaragua is prepared to work on a program that we can adopt by consensus that will guarantee every state has the time that they need to be heard and contribute to our meetings. Thank you. 1st Committee · Chair [1:52:09]: Thank the distinguished representative of Nicaragua. Now I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Cuba. Cuba [1:52:20]: Thank you, Chair. Cuba believes that the preparations for the next session of the First Committee should be carried out accurately to ensure that these are inclusive, transparent, and based on consensus. that makes it possible for all delegations to participate on an equal footing. In this regard, we believe that the work modalities for the Committee, including its programme of work and calendar, should be subject to informal consultations between Member States during the intersessional period, without preliminary proposals in any way prejudging the outcome of those deliberations. And we'd like to thank the Chair and the members of the Bureau for the flexibility that they have shown during their mandate. We are concerned that there is an attempt being made to progressively reduce the working time available for debates and for interventions of delegations. The international situation in the area of peace and security has not improved. On the contrary, we are seeing a growing militarization and increase in tensions and new challenges to international security. In that context, what we need is more dialogue, more deliberations, and greater opportunities for Member States to express their positions, not less. Therefore, Cuba believes that the days assigned should not be cut, because that would not be justifiable. It would prevent delegations from being able to speak on items of the agenda sufficiently. We also believe that we need to take a good look at the proposals made by the African Group and Russia as a viable alternative for our Committee, and we regret that the Committee has not been able to reach an agreement in a consensual manner on this matter. Cuba remains committed to participate in consultations to achieve an agreement that will preserve the inclusive, intergovernmental, multilateral nature of the First Committee so that we can effectively fulfil our mandate. Thank you. 1st Committee · Chair [1:54:27]: I thank the distinguished representative of Cuba. Now I give the floor to the distinguished representative of China. China [1:54:37]: Thank you, Chairman. The Chinese delegation would first like to thank you and the other members of the Bureau for guiding our work in the past four weeks. which has greatly facilitated the smooth conducting of the work of the First Committee. Over the past two days, the Chinese delegation has carefully studied the Bureau's PoW for next year, as well as the amendment proposed by the Russian Federation and the amendment proposed by the African Group. In our view, the amendment from the Russian Federation includes both the African Group's initiative of extending the duration to facilitate full consultation among member states and full participation of all member states, and provides good opportunity for Member States to conduct inter-sessional consultations to determine the number of meetings. This proposal includes flexible space. It must be pointed out that in the practice over the past two years, was under It was against a backdrop of financial difficulties in the United Nations. This is a kind of practice that we have to take in order to adapt to the situation, but this does not constitute a precedent. It must also be pointed out that the reforms in the United Nations are not a one-way lane. The considerations cannot be focused only on financial situation. The UN reforms should help to enhance the role of the United Nations, rather than to do the contrary. The First Committee has deliberations on important items such as international peace and security and disarmament. With the setbacks in the entire landscape of international disarmament situation, the role of the First Committee is getting increasingly important. Our view is as follows. That is, Member States should be able to sufficiently and adequately express their views in the First Committee, and through meaningful interaction and discussions, express their views on issues relating to international peace and security and disarmament, and reach agreement on those matters. In view of the above, The Chinese delegation hopes that the Chair will fully consider the amendments from the Russian Federation and from the African Group, as well as the demands and opinions from other Member States. Based on further consultations, a proposal that includes the demands of all parties will be put forward so that an agreement can be reached. Thank you, Chair. 1st Committee · Chair [1:58:36]: I thank the distinguished representative of China. Now I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Kingdom of Netherlands. Netherlands (Kingdom of the) · Head of delegation; Ambassador for Disarmament Affairs [1:58:47]: Thank you, Chair, for giving me the floor. And I must say I have no printed speaking text like some of us in the room, because we thought that yesterday in this extended Bureau meeting, which not only Bureau members, but also most interested delegations, there was agreement reached. Agreement reached on something you put on the table, something you gave a lot of thought. And that was also your attempt, your best efforts to accommodate concerns of certain groups and of smaller delegations with regard to conducting our work here in the best possible way. Like the distinguished representative of the Russian Federation, also the Kingdom of the Netherlands attaches great importance to the work of the First Committee. And that is also why I am still sitting here as the head of delegation after more than four weeks. And we would like to have that also in the future, that also my successor, the head of delegation, the Ambassador for Disarmament Affairs, will be in the chair for the full period. This is not something just to be delegated down. This is something we have to take serious by being present in the room. And I think also, like Algeria, we should indeed have fewer votes. And for that reason, we also, we are only called to vote on one resolution. And we are very hesitant to call a vote today. But I say hesitant, that doesn't mean that we cannot be forced to do so. Having carefully looked at the proposal tabled by the distinguished representative of the Russian Federation, we see that in the schedule, that would mean two more days for voting. Well, there's no need for that. We were perfectly able to vote within the time allotted for that. And we could have finished already last week if we would have started our general debate on the first day of the first committee, and we were all ready for that, and we had our speaking text in front of us. And I think also, looking forward already, to our modalities, and let me be clear, we are not yet talking about the modalities, but it was already raised by certain delegations, we might be able also to get a little bit more speaking time in clusters if we will be more efficient with regard to the rights of reply. I'm not naming any delegation. But some work has been done already, and it seems that one delegation had 80 interventions, also because of having multiple rights of reply, sometimes on the same topic. So let's also keep that in mind. And then the issue of UN80 was raised. The Netherlands has a clear position on UN80. We don't like it as a bookkeeper's exercise. For us, Multilateralism can have a price, and we are prepared to pay for that, to pay for that in time and in full, so that we can have meetings as scheduled. But on the other hand, UN 80 is also important to consider whether what we are doing in the UN disarmament machinery is still fully appropriate, is still up to speed, and whether it's fit for purpose. And during this week, we heard also a number of oral statements that were always conditioned whether we could do the things in that resolution, the operative paragraphs, because money is still scarce. And we have to be aware of that. And if we, for no real need at all, have extra meetings scheduled for this committee, we are just precluding other important discussions that need to take place, where we need rooms, where we need interpreters, and where we need translators to translate the documents tabled. So having said that, as I said already before the suspension of this meeting when we had a bilateral discussion, my delegation stands ready to support your proposal, and if that means calling for a vote on amendments, we stand ready to do so with a clear aim to defend the balanced proposal that you put on the table. I thank you for your attention. 1st Committee · Chair [2:04:26]: I thank the distinguished representative of the Netherlands. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Islamic Republic of Iran. Iran (Islamic Republic of) [2:04:35]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. The experience of this year and the previous year has demonstrated that the programme of work proposed by the Bureau does not adequately address the concerns of delegations, particularly those of smaller delegations with limited resources. Rather than facilitating their effective participation, the proposed arrangements risk placing them under undue pressure and imposing an additional burden on their already limited capacities. These concerns are clearly reflected in the proposal put forward by the African Group. If the objective is genuinely to enhance the effectiveness of the First Committee, the focus should be on enabling delegations to participate more effectively, not on limiting their opportunities to do so. This requires creating an enabling environment that ensures all delegations, irrespective of their size and available resources, can participate actively and meaningfully, without being subjected to undue pressure and stress arising from unrealistic meeting schedules, insufficient time to prepare and present substantive contributions. In view of these considerations, we support the amendments proposed by the Russian Federation on the programme of work and encourage all delegations to support these amendments to ensure equitable opportunities for all delegations, particularly those from developing countries, to participate meaningfully. I thank you, Mr. Chair. 1st Committee · Chair [2:06:13]: I thank the distinguished representative of Iran. Now I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Pakistan. Pakistan [2:06:21]: Thank you, Chair. I have asked the floor to make a few observations. First of all, we would like to thank you as Chair and the Bureau for steering our work for the past few weeks. We really appreciate your efforts. And we also appreciate your efforts for the program of work for the next session. I also appreciate the inclusion of inter-session consultations, something that our delegation had proposed in our earlier interventions during the session. We had also proposed that the Secretariat may consider preparing a conference room paper to facilitate our inter-session consultations. And as per my discussion with the Secretariat, this is something that could be done. So hopefully it will be helpful for Member States, for delegations in facilitating our work for the intersessional consultations. What is required for all of us is to have strategic discussions to develop common understanding on what exactly we want to achieve in the First Committee. I think this is important because we have heard in the room from many delegations that they attach a lot of importance to the work of the First Committee. So I think this should be preserved. From our side, Pakistan has been leading by example, and we have contributed to the efficiency drive. As you know that we have biennialized our two resolutions, and we will certainly contribute to the efficiency drive. But we have said it previously that the efficiency should be taken into account with the very important discussion and deliberations that we have in the First Committee on substantive issues. And for us, it's very important that we preserve consensus. The situation that we have had earlier during the session to vote on the programme of work should not be taken as a precedent, and we will call on all delegations to work in the direction to preserve consensus on the programme of work. I thank you, Chair. 1st Committee · Chair [2:09:00]: I thank the distinguished representative of Pakistan. Now I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Senegal. Senegal [2:09:09]: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Senegal fully supports the measures aiming to streamline the work of the First Committee. The Committee can do better, but not at any price, not at the price of inclusion or substantive discussions on essential questions regarding international peace and security. Financial difficulties are a reality, but they're not an excuse to jeopardize this Disarmament Forum. Senegal is disturbed about the shrinking space of the work of the First Committee. There's a deadlock in the Conference on Disarmament, and Mr. Chairman, many delegations have spotlighted statistics among various sessions, but statistics don't say one thing. That is the impossible sacrifices that small delegations need to make in order to optimally follow our work. The statistics don't capture the reality of our discussion. They don't capture the imbalance between effectiveness in terms of the inclusiveness in our work, in keeping with the spirit of UN80 and the discussion of our working methods. We congratulate you for your work, Chair. and for your shepherding of our informal talks about the revitalization of our work. Like the other members of the African Group, we're going to vote in favor of your proposal. As of the amendment proposed by Russia, Senegal sees there's an opportunity to carry out our main goal, which is to avoid overburden for small delegations. This proposal is not incompatible with that of the African Group, because we proposed adding two additional days to provide us with the space in order to ensure our work is done. That’s why we welcome this amendment. Chairman, in order to optimize the efficiency of our deliberations, it seems essential to foster informal talks on working methods. We need more consensus and more constructive approaches. But the position of the delegations that went shorter sessions are well understood and well heard, but we need more time to do our work, and that's not being heard. To be truly effective, our work should also prioritize informal consultations while avoiding duplication. We – certain delegations are being heard to the detriment of others. We’re talking about some delegations that have several experts, and we are a small delegation. We hope the inter-sessional meetings will allow us to deepen our discussions. Several proposals are on the table, in particular about the time limits and others. Senegal will be eagerly awaiting all of these proposals, but only if they strengthen the effectiveness and inclusivity of our multilateral discussions. Thank you. 1st Committee · Chair [2:12:27]: I thank the distinguished representative of Senegal. Now I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Germany. Germany [2:12:38]: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, like my Netherlands colleague, I don't have a prepared statement because I thought and I hoped we would not be in this situation this morning. First of all, let me thank you and the Bureau's tireless efforts during these whole weeks, but also your efforts during the past days to get us on a good way to the first committee of next year. You have spent a lot of time in extensive consultations with the delegations on the next program of work. And I have to speak on a point of principle. We've heard from a number of delegations their point of view. I think that, first of all, your proposal represents a very good compromise that asks concessions from all delegations and does not unilaterally benefit one or the other delegation. Like at the start, this good compromise elaborated by the Bureau is now challenged by one individual delegation through an amendment. And now again, we are in a situation where we are prolonging our debate, not on substance, but on procedural issues. That is a feature that, coming from Geneva, we all know all too much. One of the good traditions of this Committee is that we expect the Chair and its Bureau to take care of the interests of all delegations and come up with a proposal that would accommodate the needs of all delegations. And I see that type of proposal in your proposal CRP.1/rev1. Therefore, we could not possibly support the amendment proposed by one delegation now. Your proposal, in its current state, leaves the necessary flexibility to, in the inter-sessional process, improve the working methods of this Committee to allow for a more balanced allocation of speaking time, for national statements in the general debate, on the different clusters, in rights of reply and in voting. So therefore, we have to vote no on the Russian amendment. We look forward to constructively engaging with delegations in the intersessional time on making the work of the First Committee better and to use the time that we have at our disposal more effectively, to have a real debate and not only to hear from several delegations exercising their right of reply. Thank you very much. 1st Committee · Chair [2:15:37]: I thank the distinguished representative of Germany. Now I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Cameroon. Cameroon [2:15:49]: Mr. Chairman, thank you for giving us the floor. I'm going to deliver a monologue, but it's an important monologue. But in speaking alone, this makes me somewhat downcast. I'd like to say that I've heard all of those who spoke before me. Having done so, there's one thing that is certain: all of us want to discuss. We want to work together. The heads of delegations have said something fundamental. and that's that the issues analyzed by the First Committee are particularly sensitive and important, they're too important to be delegated. That's true, and it's profound because it calls for reflection. What can we do to ensure that everyone is present? That's the question. That's the question we need to address. And sometimes it's dismaying that we start very complicated discussions when just looking at things head-on would allow us to arrive at solutions that would be amenable to everyone. So the question of dialogue and multilateralism is an issue. In my vision, in my vision, in my village, rather, if you can call upon a child, but that doesn't stop them from crying. And so if you can't speak, things become very complicated. I would say that speaking at the UN allows us to dispel the negative energy that can exist. It allows us to talk, because if that doesn't happen, where are we going to lay out our viewpoints? Let's recall that multilateralism is like going fishing, where everyone brings their resources. Somebody has a boat, somebody has a motor, and somebody has their manpower, their strength. Some of them even have a line. Well, you understand what I'm talking about. So in this context, everyone needs to have a voice. If that doesn't happen, then some people will die of hunger. And so this is the advocacy that I am making. Thank you. 1st Committee · Chair [2:19:36]: I thank the distinguished representative of Cameroon. Now I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Mexico. Mexico [2:19:45]: Thank you very much, Chair. My country would like to thank you and thank you for presenting this programme for the 82nd session of this Committee. I think the discussion has shown that we need to continue consultations on this in the inter-sessional period, so that we can pull together the various ways of looking at this. In particular, my country notes that the total number of meetings for the First Committee has been progressively reduced without that being the result of a substantive discussion being held between Member States on whether or not this should become a permanent arrangement, this issue of reductions of meetings, that is. However, Mexico can go along with your proposal. But any adjustment to the length of our work needs to be a collective decision and not just about consolidation of measures that related to exceptional budgetary conditions at a point in time. We feel that the discussion this morning must be consistent with the whole disarmament infrastructure. For example, we don't see similar interest being expressed with regard to the length of sessions of the Disarmament Commission or the Disarmament Conference that Mexico, where Mexico's made proposals in those meetings. As regards the intercessional periods, we feel that we should use those to try to improve the efficiency of our work, and I'm referring particularly to general statements, explanations of vote, and the rights of reply, which sometimes reiterate arguments that were already expressed. For example, there were meetings during this cycle where the rights of reply occupied 30% of the meeting time. Mexico believes that this is exactly the kind of issue that we need to address collectively so that we can rationalize our work without limiting the opportunity for Member States to make substantive contributions to the meetings. Mexico shares the concerns of the African group and other countries, particularly those that have small teams, with regard to how difficult it is to have meetings concentrated in one day, morning and afternoon. It's in that regard that we think it would be good to have some meetings in the week of the 1st to the 5th of September -- November. Mexico will be participating constructively in these negotiations because we feel that it needs to be the process of negotiation and not just about reducing the meeting time that we have available to us. Thank you. 1st Committee · Chair [2:22:58]: I thank the distinguished representative of Mexico. Now I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Algeria. Algeria [2:23:08]: Thank you, Chair. So a distinguished representative mentioned the name of Algeria. This is not a right of reply. I have to clarify so that my quota is not used for the time limit. This is just to say that, yes, some have had not printed statement, but prepared statement, some written on laptop, some even written handwritten on books, so the account also has prepared statement. I have to say that the two additional days that we have seen proposed, our understanding won't be dedicated to the action on the draft resolution and decisions. From our perspective, the issue of the spread out of the session, but also how we are going to dedicate the meetings per day, one or two meetings per day, will be discussed and agreed upon during the inter-session. Thank you. 1st Committee · Chair [2:24:03]: I thank the distinguished representative of Algeria. Now I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Thailand. Thailand [2:24:15]: Thank you, Chair. Thailand thanks you and the Bureau for guiding the work of the First Committee. Before the vote, we wish to share some considerations guiding our position on draft PoW. Thailand welcomes the ref 1 and your efforts. to reflect the views of delegation, but we also see value in the amendment proposed. And we share what the colleague from Algeria said, that the two additional days, we don't see it as adding to the action phase, but to make sure that The meeting is a little bit more spread out so that we allowed member states to deliberate on our work more efficiently. So I have a few points to share. First, while financial constraints require efficient use of resources, they should not be the sole basis of reducing committee meetings. Thailand supports practical efficiency measures such as earlier circulation of drafts, concise interventions, and reduced frequency of certain resolutions, provided that they do not affect substantive deliberations. Second, we shared a concern of many delegations, particularly from developing countries and small missions, that shortening the session and the meeting time may constrain the ability of Member States to fully participate in the deliberations and present their positions. Efficiency must be balanced with equal participation and confidence in the work of the Committee. Third, Thailand understands that the adjustments made at the 80th and 81st sessions were a necessary response to the liquidity situation and recognizes that improving our working methods is necessary. These adjustments should, however, be seen as exceptional rather as a model for future sessions. Long-term decisions would benefit from a systematic review of their impact on our deliberations, participation, and outcomes. In this regard, Thailand supports convening an intersessional session on the working methods of the First Committee. As a principal forum for disarmament and international security, the First Committee is vital for building trust. Decisions on its working methods should be neither rushed nor prejudged, but taken through an inclusive and transparent process. Thailand remains committed to working constructively with all delegations towards a balanced approach that ensures both efficiency and the right of every Member State to be heard. I thank you, Chair. 1st Committee · Chair [2:26:39]: I thank the distinguished representative of Thailand. Now I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Colombia. Colombia [2:26:50]: Thank you, Chair. Colombia would like to express our concern about the growing difficulty in achieving consensus in this forum, and we reiterate the importance of safeguarding and strengthening the multilateral institutional nature of our work, including the programme of work. We believe in an inclusive multilateralism that's based on respect for international law, but above all, that is effective and efficient and that will translate into tangible results for our peoples. That's why we support the proposal as presented by the Chair, because we feel that this accurately guides the work of our Committee to an efficient use of resources. We would urge a renewal of political will and cooperation between States in order to revitalize multilateral disarmament and non-proliferation mechanisms, and we hope that the procedural debates won't take us away from that final goal that we have. Thank you. 1st Committee · Chair [2:28:02]: I thank the distinguished representative of Colombia. Now I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Brazil. Brazil [2:28:10]: Thank you, Chair. First of all, I would like to thank all your efforts and the Secretariat for proposing the programme of work for 2027. My delegation, like others, was ready to support, especially the number of sessions for us. Our experience here in last year and this year is an evidence that the current number of sessions is adequate for our work. But we also share the concerns that the African Group posed for us with the paper they circulated yesterday. We thank them for that, especially when we consider the works of the First Committee from the point of view of a small delegation. And as things stand now, we understand that the proposal, the amendment proposed by Russia would allow us to properly consider the concerns that were pointed out by the African group. So we don't want to prejudge the results of the working methods discussions or how we will proceed until next year. But now, we must have the proper space to have the discussions and to ensure that we can have a different result than the one that was proposed by the Bureau. I'm talking specifically about the spread out of sessions to the fifth week, because that's something that we could support, even if we keep the number of sessions that, as I said, we consider an appropriate amount of sessions. So, in light of that, we want that the timetable approved here should give the right signal to the future work and the actual work of planning for next year's session. So, we must also consider that we have a footnote that speaks about flexibility. And we want to ensure that the flexibility is real. And so we expect to see further discussion on that and on several working method aspects that merit analysis. And we have the France and Germany proposal. I think we have many things to explore there, and other aspects of the African group proposal that should also be considered carefully. So, in the spirit of this flexibility and to preserve the actual debate on the allocation of sessions, my delegation is willing to vote in favour of the Russian amendment. I thank you, Chair. 1st Committee · Chair [2:31:27]: I thank the distinguished representative of Brazil. Now I give the floor to the distinguished representative of the United Kingdom. United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland [2:31:35]: Thank you, Chair. We listened to you earlier when you were setting out the rationale for the proposed programme of work. You said that you'd based your consultations on what we experienced in 2025 and what we experienced this year in 2026. You also had a consultation with First Committee and Fourth Committee together to figure out how we could timetable things for next year, and all of that seemed a sensible approach to us. We may have wanted it to go further and be more efficient, but we were prepared to accept your proposal as the middle ground. Adding in extra days at this late stage, more revisions, different amendments. It doesn't seem to respect the Bureau process, and so for that, we will not be voting for any amendments made here, but we can support the programme of work that you've circulated. Thank you, Chair. 1st Committee · Chair [2:32:29]: I thank the distinguished representative of the United Kingdom. Now I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Indonesia. Indonesia [2:32:39]: Chair, Indonesia firstly appreciate your efforts to present the Rev 1 of the program of work, provisional program of work. We also appreciate your efforts to bridge the different views and the effort to improve the working methods of the First Committee. We fully support the efforts to make the Committee more efficient and effective in conducting its business. However, for Indonesia, efficiency should not be only measured by merely reducing the number of meetings or speaking time, But also, we have to ensure that the quality of our deliberations and our ability to build consensus are preserved. Meaningful deliberations, we understand, require sufficient time to understand each other’s positions, particularly on sensitive and politically significant issues that we discuss in the First Committee. In this regard, we also, similarly to other delegations who spoke before our delegation, that we share the concerns expressed by the African Group. regarding the proposed timetable and also for the concerns of small delegations, which sometimes do not have the luxury of having extensive support from capitals or even additional colleague support. For us, time is not a luxury, but it is a necessity for meaningful participation. We therefore can see the merits to allocate two additional days. in this regard, while we have to also ensure sufficient time for informal consultations on draft resolutions, preferably at the earlier stage, and this is part of the broader discussion that we need to have regarding the working methods of the First Committee. We are open to gradual adjustments to the working methods, and also we would encourage perhaps some insights and and analysis from the Secretariat to have more comprehensive indicators of efficiency beyond procedural adjustments alone. We recognize that not every issue can be resolved during the session, and we remain open to engage and to continue discussions on the programme of work during the intersessional period, which will allow us to address outstanding differences without disrupting the Committee’s ongoing work. I thank you, Mr. Chair. 1st Committee · Chair [2:35:05]: I thank the distinguished representative of Indonesia. Now I give the floor to the distinguished representative of South Africa. South Africa [2:35:13]: Thank you, Chairperson. Like other delegations, we would like to, first of all, appreciate the efforts by the Bureau in putting together revised version 1 of the programme of work. And as indicated by other delegations, we were also ready to support this. However, with the Russian amendment, we also do see value in that, and that is something that as South Africa, we can support because it will allow us the necessary flexibility to consider the issues that we have raised as the African group, including looking at spreading out the session but also the discussions that we will have during the intersessional period on other issues, including time allocations. Therefore, we would be ready to support the Russian amendment. And lastly, we also want to lend our support to further deliberations during the intersessional period on working methods. as this would also allow us to agree on how we would want to proceed as the First Committee on the working methods. I thank you, Chair. 1st Committee · Chair [2:36:46]: I thank the distinguished representative of South Africa. Distinguished delegates, since an objection has been raised to the amendment submitted by the Russian delegation, we will take action on the amendment. I should like to remind that, pursuant to rule 128 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Assembly, after the Chair has announced the beginning of the voting, no representative shall interrupt the voting except on a point of order in connection with the actual conduct of the voting. I now open the floor to delegations that requested to explain their vote before the vote. So I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Russian Federation and for the point of order. Russian Federation [2:38:07]: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to clarify that we didn't hear any delegation that just spoke put this amendment to a vote, so we can't start the vote. And as we see it, no one's put this to a vote, so we can still adopt it by consensus, in our view. Thank you. 1st Committee · Chair [2:38:37]: I believe that objections has been raised by some delegations, and on that, I think we need to go to the vote. I give the floor to the Russian Federation again on the point of order. Russian Federation [2:39:03]: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We would like to explain the issue of who put this to a vote. If some delegation did that, Then I would like you to name the delegation. If you're the one doing it, then I would like to ask you to clarify that as well. Thank you. 1st Committee · Chair [2:39:44]: Now I give the floor to the distinguished representative of the Netherlands. Netherlands (Kingdom of the) · Head of delegation; Ambassador for Disarmament Affairs [2:39:49]: Thank you, Chair, for giving me the floor. Let me deliver us from evil, and let me ask for a vote so that we can move forward. 1st Committee · Chair [2:40:08]: So a recorded vote has been requested on the amendment submitted by the Russian Federation now. And so I now give the floor to the delegations that requested to explain their vote before the vote. Now, there are those in favor of the amendment to the provisional program of work and timetable of the First Committee for 2027. Please signify those against and abstention. 1st Committee · Secretary [2:41:03]: The committee is now voting on the amendment. The committee is now voting on the amendment. submitted by the Russian Federation to the provisional programme of work and timetable of the First Committee for 2027, as contained in document A/ Sorry. Speaker 49 [2:41:24]: I put the provisional programme of work, not the amendment. 1st Committee · Secretary [2:41:28]: No, you should have put Yes. The Committee is now voting on the amendment submitted by the Russian Federation to the provisional programme of work and timetable of the First Committee for 2027, as contained in document A/C1/81/CRP4/Rev1. The voting machine is unlocked. Delegations are kindly requested to indicate their votes on the board. Will all delegations confirm that their votes are accurately reflected on the screen? The voting has been completed. Please lock the machine. 1st Committee · Chair [2:43:33]: Now the result of the voting is as follows: 48 in favor, 58 against, and 36 abstain. The amendment to the provisional programme of work and timetable of the First Committee for 2027 is rejected. Now, may I take it that the Committee wishes to adopt the draft provisional programme of work and timetable of the First Committee for 2027? It's contained in document CRP4/Rev1. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Russian Federation on a point of order. Russian Federation [2:44:47]: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have taken the floor not on a point of order, but to say that we are not prepared to coordinate on the document in the preliminary program of work and document CRP4/Rev.1. 1st Committee · Chair [2:45:08]: I don’t understand. Can you repeat again what was the company? Russian Federation [2:45:20]: Sorry, Mr. Chairman. You asked a question about whether the company is prepared to adopt CRP4 Rev 1. And when asked that question, I'd like to answer in the negative. Thank you. 1st Committee · Chair [2:45:44]: I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Denmark. Denmark [2:45:49]: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm not quite sure I heard the right message. Do I hear that Russian Federation is calling it for a vote? Thank you. 1st Committee · Chair [2:46:29]: So can I ask the Russian delegations that you are calling for the vote on this? Russian Federation [2:46:39]: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. No, I’m not calling for a vote. I wanted to say that we don’t see that around your document there’s a consensus, and we’re prepared to continue consultations so as to find this consensus. Thank you. 1st Committee · Chair [2:47:01]: I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Netherlands. Netherlands (Kingdom of the) · Head of delegation; Ambassador for Disarmament Affairs [2:47:07]: Chairman, could I ask you to clarify whether Russian Federation is proposing a no-motion action? 1st Committee · Chair [2:47:46]: I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Ireland. Ireland [2:47:51]: Thank you, Chair. What I just heard was that there was a delegation that did not want to put this to a vote, but questioned whether there was consensus, despite not wanting to call a vote. The easiest way to prove consensus is if you let us adopt it by consensus. So certainly if we proceed to adopt the text now, we'd probably be well able to do that. So I would encourage you to do so. Thank you. 1st Committee · Chair [2:48:20]: I thank the distinguished representative of Ireland again. May I take it that the Committee wishes to adopt the draft provisional programme of work and timetable of the First Committee for 2027 as contained in document CRP/4/Rev.1? give the floor to the representative of Russian Federation. Russian Federation [2:48:48]: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We don’t see that this document proposed by the Bureau CRP4/Rev.1 enjoys consensus. We would propose continuing discussion and arriving at an option that could garner consensus. Thank you. 1st Committee · Chair [2:49:10]: So can I ask the Russian delegation that you have moved that no action be taken on the programme of actions A/C1/81/CRP.4/Rev.1 under 116? Could you please give the mic to the Russian Federation? Russian Federation [2:49:43]: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. we believe that we have not yet exhausted opportunities to find a compromise. We don't call for withdrawing this issue for consideration. We want to find a solution that would satisfy the interests of all delegations, including those voiced today in this hall by a large number of speakers. Practice of the First Committee is that we try to find an agreement on all the issues, and let's try to find this consensus. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 1st Committee · Chair [2:50:23]: I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Libya. Libya [2:50:35]: Mr. Chair, at the outset, Please allow me to congratulate you on your successful stewardship of the work of the First Committee of the General Assembly at the 81st session. We thank the Secretariat for preparing the draft program of work for 2027. Mr. Chair, unfortunately, this year, we commenced our work by voting, and today we conclude our work by voting. It seems it's hard to reach consensus in this hall. We abstained from voting on the amendment because we are keen to maintain consensus. This also reflects our commitment to the following principles: First, we must reach consensus first. We always give priority to consensus in adopting programme of work and timetable. Second, we support flexibility and distribution of work. We must allow enough and flexible time for all discussions and debate, which will allow all members, member states to express their positions. Three, we must accommodate the small delegations, mainly in submitting draft resolutions and in voting. This will allow all delegations to engage effectively in the work. Thank you. 1st Committee · Chair [2:51:54]: I thank the distinguished representative of Libya. Now I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Denmark. Denmark [2:52:00]: Thank you, Chair. I very much agree with our Irish colleague here that we propose to you to move forward on adopting this. I just want to draw people’s and colleagues’ attention to footnote 1, that this draft provisional programme of work is put forward by the Committee for planning purposes, with understanding that the Bureau would facilitate inter-sessional informal discussions. I think that’s worth noting. The second The point is that I heard our Russian Federation colleagues say we should try to find consensus on this document. We fully agree. That is why the Danish delegation is very puzzled about the Russian Federation proposed an amendment that had no consensus. So I think, Mr. Chair, I think we can move forward with this program of work that the Bureau and you have so eloquently drafted. Thank you. 1st Committee · Chair [2:52:59]: Based on these discussions, may I take it that again the Committee wishes to adopt the draft provisional programme of work and timetable of the First Committee for 2027 as contained in document CRP/4/Rev.1? I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Russian Federation. Russian Federation [2:53:26]: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm compelled to repeat our position. We believe that opportunities for discussion have yet to be exhausted. Not only the Russian stance was outlined in this hall, and the option of the text that is. Up for adoption does not consider the opinion of a substantial number of delegations of the First Committee. In our view, we can still find an opportunity based on proposals of other delegations, so as to find the solutions that will help us, number one, to adopt the document by consensus, and number two. To ensure intercessional work that will allow all delegations, with no exceptions, to champion their priorities and their approaches. So as to find the modalities that will allow us to ensure. Effective holding of the meetings of the First Committee next year. Thank you. 1st Committee · Chair [2:54:33]: I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of the Netherlands. Netherlands (Kingdom of the) · Head of delegation; Ambassador for Disarmament Affairs [2:54:38]: Thank you, Chairman. I was hesitant to take the floor again, but I think – let me just say this. It's simply impossible to make us all happy. That won't work. Because we have heard the arguments across the room. Some want fewer meetings than you have proposed, others want more. You were the one to strike a balance, and you were the one who tried to make us equally unhappy. And that is probably what we will have to take home. I think, indeed, as my Danish colleague already said, we were also puzzled to have a delegation in the room that on the one hand is pleading that we should continue discussions and continue striving for consensus, but then coming up with an amendment. To be honest, I think you already went the extra mile. If I consider the very long Bureau meeting also that you held yesterday, and at the beginning of the meeting, you suspended the meeting to again try to find consensus. I think what you have put on the table is still the best we can take home. I think we have also a responsibility to take certain decisions now, and what has also been laid out already by others, this is not a definite decision, this is a way forward. Let's at least agree on our last day together that we need a way forward for this committee. You put something forward, we are not happy with it, but we can live with it, and we will work with it. Thank you very much. 1st Committee · Chair [2:56:32]: I thank the distinguished representative of the Netherlands. Again, distinguished delegates, and you know that this I have reached in the past week, even yesterday, and I met so many delegations in a group and individually, and we listened as a chair, also as a bureau. We had a lot of consultations. Even in the morning, I tried my best to force consensus on this program of work. Unfortunately, we could not agree on that. But we have already agreed yesterday that in the intersessional there will be a more constructive dialogue and deliberations how we can make the program of works, overall working methods of the Committee more effective, more efficient, in the interest of all the delegations. On that, again, I request all the delegations to support this programme of work, which has already been submitted to you by the Bureau, considering the concerns of all the members and the group of the States. And so that’s why, again, I propose that the Committee let’s proceed. To adopt this programme of action. And if not, then I will ask against the if the delegations wishes to go to the vote, and then let's go to the vote. And then can I again, may I take it that the committee wishes to adopt the draft provisional programme of work? and the timetable of the First Committee for 2027. It’s contained in the document CRP4/Rev.1. Russian Federation. Russian Federation [2:58:59]: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The Russian amendment is not the only option of how to extricate ourselves from this situation. and the version in Rev 1 is not the best exit from this situation. There are other options, and we could do what we did in previous. Sessions when we had a broader framework in our preliminary program. And this allowed us later on to take the decisions that were taken. Whether they were good or bad, that’s another issue. But the framework for the intersessional discussions has always enabled for carrying out these discussions in full measures. Let’s do what we did in previous sessions, because the document that we have on the table now does not fully reflect the needs of a substantial number of delegations. Thank you. 1st Committee · Chair [3:01:20]: Distinguished delegates, now I have seen this distinguished representative of Iran. Iran (Islamic Republic of) [3:01:32]: Thank you, Mr. Chair, for giving me the floor. My delegation shares Russia's assessment that the result of the voting clearly shows that a significant number of delegations don’t support the programme of work proposed by the Bureau. This delegation should not be enforced and confronted with a take it or leave it situation, and therefore we believe that the Russian proposal to pursue further consultations on programme of work is the best way to overcome the current impasse. I thank you, Mr. Chair. 1st Committee · Chair [3:02:10]: I thank the distinguished representative of Iran. Distinguished. Delegates, I said that we adjusted our efforts to forge a consensus, and then we have a lot of consultations. And since time is running out, we have 10, 15 minutes, and I don't think that we will have again more time to consultations in order to reach to the consensus right now. That's why I again request the delegations to adopt this program of work by consensus and move to the intersessional later on with a very open mind, more inclusive process, so that we can discuss everything there. I give the floor to the Russian Federation. Russian Federation [3:03:15]: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We welcome your efforts to adopt the document and to succeed in doing this within the time limits that have been allotted to us. Nonetheless, we understand that we have not exhausted all of our opportunities. And so, as the distinguished representative of the Secretariat explained, If we're not able to finish on time, we have the opportunity to extend the session if needed, and we're ready to take that step. But we don't think at this juncture that the document CRP4/Rev1 has garnered consensus support. Thank you. 1st Committee · Chair [3:04:06]: I thank the distinguished representative of Russian Federation. Now I give the floor to the Distinguished representative of Netherlands. Netherlands (Kingdom of the) · Head of delegation; Ambassador for Disarmament Affairs [3:04:15]: Thank you, Chair. What my distinguished Russian colleague tries to do is to have the cake and eat it. She wanted a different programme of work, came with an amendment. The amendment was defeated. The programme of work stands. So, we now have the opportunity to support you with the programme of work you proposed. And first trying to change it and to force upon us an amendment, then we have a vote on it, the vote defeats the amendment, and then we can now not move forward with your proposal, it's a bit strange to me. And especially, well, according to my Russian colleague, we have not yet exhausted all options. I must say, I myself, I am exhausted. And I think most of the people in the room. And what you also, in an ultimate, ultimate, ultimate attempt to create a good atmosphere in the room and to create also a good atmosphere for start for next year's session, to continue the discussions on the basis of the programme of work, of course, that we still think are going to adopt today, was what we could do at this moment. But simply saying, no, one delegation doesn't have its his way, and now we can't move forward, that is not how we do business here. That would also be strange if we vote on resolutions and a resolution there's an hostile amendment, the amendment is not carried, and then you should withdraw your resolution to have further consultations. That's also not how we work. So let's stick to what we are used to do here. And if the Russian delegation is not pleased with what you propose, and if it's so much displeasure that it cannot accept to work on that basis in the coming months to prepare for next year, then they should do what you have to do in such a situation, but not keep us here busy while we have the best possible proposal on the table, what we can have, because otherwise If there are other proposals, why has the Russian delegation not proposed them? They came up with something that was clearly then the best they could offer, and it was defeated. So now, please, let's move on. 1st Committee · Chair [3:07:09]: The distinguished representative of Netherlands. Now I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Czechia, followed by Algeria. Czechia [3:07:18]: Thank you, Chair. Just echoing my Dutch colleague, I am indeed very confused why we are stuck in this circle, and I feel like a little bit of a hostage at the moment. And you put forward ref 1, this is very clear, you want it adopted by consensus. If there is a delegation that is objecting to this motion, they very clearly can call for a vote. I don't see any other way out of this, and this just needs to be confirmed from the side of the Russian delegation. And I would therefore like to ask again to confirm that this is being put to question and hence defying your intention to go by consensus. Otherwise, mindful that we have 12 minutes left, we might be here stuck forever on no program of work. If this is the wish of the delegations as well, we might go forward with that. Thank you. 1st Committee · Chair [3:08:09]: I thank the distinguished representative of Czechia. Now I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Algeria. Algeria [3:08:16]: Thank you, Chair. I very much agree with the distinguished Ambassador from the Kingdom of the Netherlands. We are exhausted. And I would like to add we are also hungry, very hungry, especially mentioning the cake and eating the cake. I just wanted to say that I think the Russians colleague have concerns that express the concerns of many delegations in this room. You see many empty seats. I would like to flag that I think they would have supported the amendment if they were present in the room. So just to say that these are substantial real concerns, I invite everyone in the room to take them into account during the intercession. Having said that, the programme of work is for planning purposes only, so it doesn't pre-empt the outcome. We look forward to a constructive engagement during the inter-session. Thank you. 1st Committee · Chair [3:09:13]: I thank the distinguished representative of Algeria. Now I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Mexico. Mexico [3:09:20]: Thank you very much, Chair. We have been listening very carefully to this interesting debate. but we don't have a lot of time really to contribute. The proposal that we'd like to make is in the proposal that the Bureau is now putting up for consideration, that the footnotes make it clear that this proposal is still under discussion and that during the intercessional period, a decision will be taken as to whether we increase, reduce, etc., etc. Would that perhaps be solution for colleagues who are a little undecided if they could support this proposal. So, the Bureau commits to circulating the three proposals that were circulated as non-papers, that of Russia, of the African Group, and Germany and France, together with the programme of work. And there could be discussion in the intersessional period, and that would give people more time. to look at the proposals on the table, so that we have a and that now we consider a structure, so we at least have a structure for next year. Thank you. 1st Committee · Chair [3:10:55]: I thank the distinguished representative of Mexico. So I will give the floor to the Secretary now. 1st Committee · Secretary [3:11:19]: Thank you, Chair. With regards to where do we stand now, the revised programme of work was distributed to all delegations last night as an outcome of extensive consultations. convened by the Chair and the Bureau. Subsequently, an amendment to the revised programme of work was submitted by a Member State. And then earlier today, an amendment has been put to a vote and was rejected. So now there is the revised programme of work before the Committee, on which there is no consensus. We have heard that one delegation’s One delegation is against its adoption by consensus, but we haven't heard any request for a vote. So if it goes like this, in five minutes, the meeting will be adjourned. The committee will have its entitlements exhausted, and we will end up by having no program of work, provisional program of work adopted for 2027. Subsequently, the General Assembly will have no recommendation from the First Committee to have its programme of work adopted for 2027. That’s where we stand now. Chair, back to you. 1st Committee · Chair [3:12:54]: I thank the Secretary. Now I give the floor to the distinguished representative of the United States. United States of America [3:13:00]: Thank you, Chair. In the spirit of efficiency, the United States requests a vote on the provisional programme of work. Our intention is to support the Chair and Bureau's proposal, which is a starting point for further deliberations during intersessional discussions. We look forward to engaging in those discussions constructively and, of course, in good faith. 1st Committee · Chair [3:13:25]: I thank the distinguished representative of United States, distinguished delegates. A recorded vote has now been requested. on the provisional programme of work and timetable of the First Committee for 2027. It's contained in A/C1/81/CRP4/Rev.1. The committee will now vote on the provisional programme of work and timetable of the First Committee for 2027. It's contained in the document A/C1/81/CRP4/Rev.1. We will now begin the voting process. Delegations in favour of the adoption of the programme of work, please signify, against and abstention. 1st Committee · Secretary [3:14:21]: The Committee is now voting on the programme of work as contained in document A/C1/81/CRP4/rev 1. The voting machine is unlocked. Delegations are kindly requested to indicate their votes on the board. Will all delegations confirm that their votes are accurately reflected on the screen? The voting has been completed. Please lock the machine. 1st Committee · Chair [3:15:04]: The result of the vote is as follows: in favor, 130; 4 against, and 7 abstentions. The provisional programme of work and timetable of the First Committee for 2027 is adopted. Distinguished delegates, the Committee has now concluded its considerations of the last item on the agenda for today. This year, the Committee finished its work after having to forego three formal plenary meetings due to budgetary constraints. Excellent time management allowed us to proceed efficiently to conclude in a timely manner. During the session, 160 delegations made statements within the general debate segment, while an impressive 482 interventions were made during the thematic discussion segment, compared to 471 in 2025. During that action phase, the committee adopted 70 draft resolutions and decisions, 58 of which were adopted by recorded vote, with 170 separate votes requested. Twelve draft proposals were adopted without a vote. Distinguished delegates, allow me to offer a few final remarks as the Chair of the Committee. This session of the First Committee has taken place against a complex and evolving international security landscape. In such circumstances, it is essential that we remain pragmatic, focused on our shared responsibilities, and guided by our common objectives of advancing international peace and collective security. We must continue to strengthen multilateral cooperation and preserve the Committee’s role as a forum for constructive and inclusive dialogue. As broader efforts to review and enhance the effectiveness of the United Nations’ mandates continue, I remain committed to working closely with all the delegations to further streamline our working methods, improve efficiency, and facilitate the building of the consensus wherever possible. Allow me to conclude by expressing my sincere appreciation to the members of the Bureau, the Secretariat, the interpreters, and all those dedications and professionalisms and have supported the work of the Committee throughout the sessions. Their contributions have been indispensable to our success. Most of all, I thank all the delegations for a very constructive approach during this session. Distinguished delegates, the main part of the 81st session of the First Committee is thus concluded. The Committee shall reconvene sometime next year to, inter alia, elect its Chair and other members of the Bureau for the 82nd session. Let me conclude by remarks by wishing all those who are leaving a safe trip back home, back to your stations. Thank you so much again, and the meeting is adjourned.