Geneva -- The Clinton administration says it welcomes a decision by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) to initiate a study of its space requirements before going ahead with construction of an expensive new building.

The WIPO decision "is a victory for U.N. reform. It sustains the general movement toward greater transparency within the United Nations," said Ambassador Daniel Spiegel in a statement issued by the U.S. Mission in Geneva September 11.

Following is the text of the statement:

(begin text)

The United States welcomes the September 11 compromise decision by World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) member states to initiate an independent inquiry on all possible options for meeting WIPO's additional office space requirements before constructing an expensive new building.

"Today's unanimous decision by WIPO's Budget and Premises committees is a victory for U.N. reform. It sustains the general movement toward greater transparency within the United Nations," said Ambassador Daniel L. Spiegel, U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations and Other International Organizations in Geneva.

"It sends an important signal to other United Nations bodies whose fiscal situations are currently much more difficult than WIPO's, as well as to member governments whose citizens support the work of the U.N.," he said.

WIPO members at the September 11 joint meeting of the Budget and Premises Committees decided unanimously to delay by six months their decision on a new building pending completion of a study based on information from independent experts.

Ambassador Spiegel said he was "delighted to see that this U.S. initiative received broad support from countries in all regions of the world."

"It was a clear demonstration of the desire of WIPO's membership to see greater transparency in the United Nations as a whole, and an example of partnership between developed and developing nations in the service of U.N. reform," he said.

The decision asks WIPO's Director General to appoint "an independent consultant" who will "identify, evaluate and report on rental, purchase and construction options in Geneva available to WIPO for meeting its premises and conference facility needs."

It also states that the consultant is to have access to financial, architectural and real estate expertise, and shall submit his report in time for the two committees to consider it by mid-March 1997 at the latest.

Ambassador Spiegel said he was looking forward to working with other committee members to identify "top-flight professionals" to study WIPO's premises options.

As part of the September 11 compromise, member states authorized WIPO to proceed with an international architectural competition for constructing a building on the "Steiner" lot adjacent to WIPO's current building. Invitations for submission of projects will not be sent prior to the approval of the two committees. WIPO and Swiss authorities said that such a competition would help provide a more accurate assessment of the costs of this proposed option.

However the decision also states that "the competition and its results shall not prejudice in any manner any decision" about how to address WIPO's premises needs.

WIPO's Budget and Premises committees were originally scheduled to take a decision September 9 on WIPO's proposed new 96 million Swiss Franc building.

But the United States protested that other options had not been evaluated, the construction arrangement under consideration did not appear sufficiently competitive. Other nations joined the U.S. at the September 9 meeting in asking that WIPO provide more information before any decision was taken on the new building.

Ambassador Spiegel said the outcome was proof that member governments intend to play an active role in monitoring WIPO's use of funds, even though the organization receives a substantial amount of its resources from the private sector through the fees it charges private entities to process international patent and trademark applications.

"The U.S. and other WIPO member states strongly reject the concept that since these funds come from corporations rather than governments, we should exercise a lesser degree of oversight in how they are spent," he said. "If we do not consider all alternatives, we fail in our responsibility to the firms, the consumers and the taxpayers who pay WIPO's expenses."

(end text)

NNNN