U.N. Breaks Ground on Renovations to Headquarters, But Will it Break the Bank?

[GaryC 7]

NEW YORK — Donning blue U.N. hard hats and carrying shovels, officials broke ground Monday on the $1.9 billion renovation project to revamp the organizations' world headquarters in New York City, which some critics warn may cost American taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars.

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and 16 other senior U.N. officials and diplomats used shovels to turn over dirt, marking the start of the project.

"Today we turn the soil which the U.N. stands on to mark the rebirth or renovation of our headquarters," Ban told those gathered for the ceremony on the North Lawn.

Built nearly 60 years ago, the U.N. complex is badly in need of repairs. The original structure was designed for 70 member-states — a figure that has nearly tripled over the years. The glass-and-steel headquarters, worn down by decades of wear and tear and plagued by leaks, asbestos and faulty wiring, now violates New York City safety and fire codes.

The first phase of the project will include the construction of a temporary conference building, aimed at making the U.N. complex safer and more modern. The building will house offices until the restoration of the nearly U.N. skyscraper is completed in five years.

The repair costs is budgeted at around 1.9 billion dollars, to be paid by member nations based on their percentage of annual dues.

For example, China will contribute $39 million, Russia $21 million and Iran will contribute less than $3 million. The U.S. — which funds about a quarter of the U.N.’s budget — will contribute $400 million — more than any other country.

But U.N. critics worry it will be much more.

Niles Gardiner, director of the Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom at the Heritage Foundation, said the renovations could cost American taxpayers millions of dollars in overspending.

“The United Nations is incapable of running a high school musical effectively and efficiently; there is no reason to suggest that the U.N. is able to run a large-scale renovation project of this kind on budget and on time," Gardiner said.

Congress has already expressed concern about the project, especially in the wake of the Oil-for-Food scandal, the humanitarian aid program to trade oil for money that was subverted by Saddam Hussein's government to prop up his regime.

Confidence in the project was further shaken after real estate developer Donald Trump testified the renovation was certain to cost more than its initial budget. Trump suggested it would be better to just abandon its current location and relocate to new offices.

But during Monday's ceremony Patrick Kennedy, Under Secretary of State for Management, praised the planned renovation while emphasizing the need for proper management.

“We appreciate secretary general Ban’s efforts to convey timely information to member-states on the progress of renovation, keeping key stakeholders abreast of developments and minimize the concerns that naturally arise in a project such as this," said Kennedy.

He noted that the new complex "will see a 40 percent increase in overall energy performance and reduce water consumption, generating savings and significant resources for all."

The renovations come as the U.N. tries to combat what it calls a "silent tsunami of food shortages in the developing world". Critics say that while headquarters is badly in need of repair, they ask if that cause is worth the cost.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,354228,00.html

[natty bumppo 297]

The UN should be taken out of NYC ... and a new building constructed in a lower cost country. Think of the benefits ....

[Ban Hammer 13,651]

The UN should be taken out of NYC ... and a new building constructed in a lower cost country. Think of the benefits ....

[almaty 19]

theUN really should have been in geneva or a netural country..like the league of nations or was that the justice league..??

sidenote...that black canary needs a well earned spanking

[sara..... 371]

The UN should be taken out of NYC ... and a new building constructed in a lower cost country. Think of the benefits ....

well that makes a lot of sense.......look at how many people that could have been fed with the money they are waisting in a useless property that is looking to me like its all for status and not really meant for anything other than that......sure nyc is a great place for business in most cases but this is suppose to be something for helping people if nothing else put it in the middle of nev....or even Idaho cost of property there is pretty cheap......but i like ur idea better moving it to a lower cost country..............

[GaryC 7]

It was kind of silly to put the UN building in a city with some of the highest real estate values in the world. Stick them in Darfur where they can be close to the action.

[Scott & Lai 12]

It was kind of silly to put the UN building in a city with some of the highest real estate values in the world. Stick them in Darfur where they can be close to the action.

But then where would all the blue helmets flee to?

[Ban Hammer 13,651]

It was kind of silly to put the UN building in a city with some of the highest real estate values in the world. Stick them in Darfur where they can be close to the action.

then those delegates can go out and do some real work

[Saddle Bronc 124]

It was kind of silly to put the UN building in a city with some of the highest real estate values in the world. Stick them in Darfur where they can be close to the action.

But then where would all the blue helmets flee to?

Eh, they can always flee to Kinshasa where they've been running rackets.

[Scott & Lai 12]

It was kind of silly to put the UN building in a city with some of the highest real estate values in the world. Stick them in Darfur where they can be close to the action.

But then where would all the blue helmets flee to?

Eh, they can always flee to Kinshasa where they've been running rackets.

Ok, as long as they don't have to face any danger like real soldiers

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

It was kind of silly to put the UN building in a city with some of the highest real estate values in the world. Stick them in Darfur where they can be close to the action.

Baghdad, perhaps. Where we paved the ground for a few trillion dollars. Oh wait, that might still not be such a saver seeing that the US embassy there cost a billion bucks and counting to build. Talk about how many people could have been fed on a few trillion...

[GaryC 7]

It was kind of silly to put the UN building in a city with some of the highest real estate values in the world. Stick them in Darfur where they can be close to the action.

Baghdad, perhaps. Where we paved the ground for a few trillion dollars. Oh wait, that might still not be such a saver seeing that the US embassy there cost a billion bucks and counting to build. Talk about how many people could have been fed on a few trillion...

You have Bush bashing on the brain R. Every subject always comes back to that for you. Sounds like your obsessed with him.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

It was kind of silly to put the UN building in a city with some of the highest real estate values in the world. Stick them in Darfur where they can be close to the action.

Baghdad, perhaps. Where we paved the ground for a few trillion dollars. Oh wait, that might still not be such a saver seeing that the US embassy there cost a billion bucks and counting to build. Talk about how many people could have been fed on a few trillion...

You have Bush bashing on the brain R. Every subject always comes back to that for you. Sounds like your obsessed with him.

Not more so than your fetish with the UN. I'm just putting things into perspective.

Edited May 6, 2008 by Mr. Big Dog

[natty bumppo 297]

The UN should be taken out of NYC ... and a new building constructed in a lower cost country. Think of the benefits ....

well that makes a lot of sense.......look at how many people that could have been fed with the money they are waisting in a useless property that is looking to me like its all for status and not really meant for anything other than that......sure nyc is a great place for business in most cases but this is suppose to be something for helping people if nothing else put it in the middle of nev....or even Idaho cost of property there is pretty cheap......but i like ur idea better moving it to a lower cost country..............

Even land in Idaho is more expensive than in Lower Cost Countries ... Why build in the US at all ?

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

FukTheUN