text: informed decision, and the suggestions made by the representative of the United States should help it to consider that issue in greater depth. In any case, his delegation was opposed to the retroactive application of the formula adopted. While accepting the general plan proposed by the Advisory Committee and the principle of an increase in the health insurance contributions paid by the Organization, his delegation felt that ICSC should be encouraged to continue to study every possible option so as to ensure that the final decisions were not detrimental to either the Organization or the staff. 12. Mr. MERIEUX (France) wondered whether the measures suggested by ICSC really responded to the problems posed in connection with health insurance finaocing. He drew attention to the hybrid nature of the ICSC proposal, which made a distinction between New York -where the ceiling on the staff contribution would be set at 3.8 per cent for staff with dependants and at 1.9 per cent for unmarried staff - and the other duty stations, where the fifty-fifty cost-sharing formula would continue to be applied. In his opinion, the new system would necessarily create inequalities, and he asked whether, in keeping with the logic behind the ICSC proposal, the same ceilings should not be applied in every case. As currently worded, the ICSC proposals would, in any event, raise a number of questions. In particular, he wondered whether, one year later, when the average contributions paid by the staff as a whole were again calculated, the rates might not be lower than 1.9 per cent and 3.8 per cent, sioce the measures currently proposed would result in a reduction of the real costs borne by the staff in New York. He also asked whether New York was the only headquarters location where the ratio of staff contributions to net remuneration was higher than the average. 
analysis: The text appears to be discussing a proposal related to health insurance contributions paid by staff members of an international organization. The discussion revolves around the fairness and potential impact of the proposed changes on staff members, particularly in different locations. The language used is technical and financial, indicating a focus on the economic aspects of the proposal.