Matthew P, I don’t agree with your assessment of Ms. Barcena’s performance in the briefing. I think Ms. Barcena made only four significant statements in her remarks, and you seem to have missed them all. Here are your comments, and my take on each

1. “98% compliance with financial disclosure forms” That’s nice. But will anyone other than the S-G ever make their own form public?

2. “Publication in iSeek of the compacts signed by executive staff, together with indiciators of performance”. Well, ISeek is not exactly the London Times. More importantly, Ms. Barcena omitted to say whether RESULTS will be posted on ISeek – only that OBJECTIVES will be posted. Perhaps that was only an oversight – but I wonder.

3. “Ms. Barcena’s active push behind the new system of internal justice” Whatever an “active push” may mean. I thought the most revealing statement Ms. Barcena made on this subject was “we’re having meetings”. Quite so.

4. “Substantive discussion of the recent and planned actions of the pension fund.” The most substantive comment I heard her make is “we need to have an investmant strategy.” I agree that’s a good idea, especially if UNJSPF doesn’t have one now.

5. “Issues related to the conflict of interest review and publication of financial disclosure forms.” Issues, we got issues. Here, Ms Barcena merely repeated that staff members are not required under current rules to release their disclosures – they are “private”.

So I must agree with Ms. Rosett that there was little to report EXCEPT that the briefing was poorly-planned.

Oh, and which of Ms. Barcena’s comments did I as a non-reporter think were significant?

1. There is still no head of the ethics office

2. There is still no head of the Capital Master Plan

3. There is still no chief IT officer

4. As to the pension plan “we need to have an investment strategy>

To me, these remarks speak to an organization that is in management free-fall. But other than that, I guess all the Turtles in the bay are doing swimmingly.