10. APPPC Standing Committee meetings on IPM, Plant Quarantine and Pesticide Management

10.1 Standing Committee on Plant Quarantine

10.1.1 Attendance

The meeting was attended by following delegates:

10.1.2 Appointment of the Chairperson

The meeting was chaired by Dr John Hedley.

10.1.3 Programme of activities for the next two years

The meeting concentrated on considering items for the next biennial work programme.

10.1.3.1 Regional International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures

The Committee reviewed the lists of topics and priorities prepared by the ICPM and the APPPC ISPM review meeting. The group then prepared a list of possible topics for the APPPC priority list. These were discussed and then the group selected two/possibly three for recommendation to the session for the work programme for the next biennium. The list of possible topics included the following:

i. Specific standard on a group of pests, e.g. scales
ii. Specific standard, guidelines for micro-propagation material (tissue culture)
iii. Nematodes - detection in plant products
iv. Implementation of Plant Quarantine at Border Crossings
v. Emergency Measures
vi. Risks associated with non-agricultural items

The two topics selected were Specific Standard on a Group of Pests e.g. scales, and Emergency Measures. If additional resources are available for the construction of a third RSPM, the third priority would be Specific Standard, Guidelines for Micro-propagation Material (tissue culture). Australia has agreed to input resources into the standard on scales. China will draft the specification for the standard on Emergency Measures.

10.1.3.2 Review of ISPMs

It is expected that a meeting to review ISPMs will take place in the next biennium. It is likely that monies will be available through the IPPC Secretariat.

10.1.3.3 Training assistance

The Executive Secretary will arrange further meetings on PRA, the PCE or the IPP if funds become available.

10.1.3.4 Projects

The Executive Secretary will investigate the possibility of working the ASEAN Plant Health Programme.

10.1.3.5 SALB

The Standing Committee noted the progress with the PRA for South American Leaf Blight (SALB). A meeting is to be held in January to examine the latest information, collected by the expert who visited South America, for input into the SALB PRA. If possible, work on the production of the SALB standard will begin. It was noted that the standard would include training programmes for officials regarding detection, identification and control of the organism.

10.1.4 Discussions on the presentation

The Convention agreed that there was a need to give more attention to rubber, by improving training facilities and opportunities, as well as follow-ups to standards relating to SALB. Delegates were also informed that emergency procedures of SPS apply to all crops, including rubber.

10.2 Standing Committee on Pesticide Management

The meeting was chaired by Dr Gamini Manuweera.

10.2.1 Members of the meeting:

10.2.2 Recommendations of the meeting

The Committee referred to the recommendations made at the 23^rd APPPC on pesticide management and recognized that there were a number of important activities that needed to be refocused on during the next two years with more specific thrust areas. Among the major issues discussed included (not in priority order):

i. Poor progress on the initiatives of the efforts on harmonization of pesticide regulatory systems, standards, data requirements and protocols etc.

ii. Lack of information exchange among the pesticide regulatory authorities of member countries for efficient national, bilateral and multilateral pesticide risk reduction programmes.

iii. Further commitments on matters pertaining to ratification and implementation of the Rotterdam Convention in order to enjoy full benefits.

iv. Difficulties in promotion of biopesticides among farmers.

v. Disposal of obsolete pesticides.

The Committee was of the view that the activities to be identified for the next two years should be more pragmatic and focused, with achievable goals within the stipulated time period. Accordingly, the following recommendations were made as priority areas:

i. Ratification Rotterdam Convention

a) Member countries should report to the RC Secretariat with a copy to the APPPC Secretariat on progress and difficulties, constraints, if any, in ratification of the Convention as soon as possible, in order to identify areas for support, if any.

b) Member countries should organize national consultative meetings with the relevant stakeholders to initiate the ratification process and individual countries should consult with the RC Secretariat for technical assistance, if required.

ii. Implementation of the Rotterdam Convention

a) Member countries should report to the RC Secretariat with a copy to APPPC Secretariat on progress and difficulties, constraints, if any, in implementation of the convention obligations (e.g. import responses, notification of regulatory action).

b) Promote development of NIP and/or explore the possibilities of making use of existing inter agency coordination mechanisms for efficient implementation of the programme and include the RC in regular national meetings of the Pesticide Committee or similar bodies.

iii. Harmonization and information exchange of regulatory activities

a) FAO should consider prioritizing financial assistance to sub-regional activities pertaining to the topic.

b) National pesticide regulatory procedures and data requirements to be linked through the APPPC website; in countries where there is still no national website carrying the above information, soft copies should be sent to the Chairperson of the Standing Committee to incorporate into the APPPC website.

iv. Extension of TA programmes of FAO on management of obsolete pesticides in countries in the region should be extended.

v. The country representatives to the meetings of international instruments and conventions should ensure dialogue prior to the meeting for coordinated efforts in areas of common interest to the countries of the region.

vi. Some of the member countries expressed their willingness to explore the possibility of hosting or assisting any inter sessional meetings or programmes (bilateral, multilateral) to facilitate the above initiatives if need arises.

10.2.3 Discussions of the presentation

10.2.3.1 Pesticide Technical Cooperation Programme

The delegates were informed of the need to accelerate the pesticide technical cooperation programmes, stressing the key element of regulation enforcement.

10.2.3.2 Guidelines for the disposal of pesticides

FAO clarified that guidelines for the disposal of pesticides had already been published, and available on the FAO website.

10.2.3.3 Technical assistance for ratification

The representative from India offered technical assistance to other member countries of APPPC in connection with ratification of the Rotterdam Convention. FAO welcomed any form of assistance, and was willing to work out the details with the interested parties.

10.3 Standing Committee on IPM

The meeting was chaired by Dr Iftikhar Ahmad.

10.3.1 Attendance:

The meeting was attended by the following:

10.3.2 Appointment of the Chairperson and Rapporteur

Mr Paisan Ratanasatien from Thailand was appointed as Chairperson of the Standing Committee on IPM. Dr A.A.L. Amarasinghe from Sri Lanka was appointed as Rapporteur.

10.3.3 Review of the progress in Integrated Pest Management

The country delegates highlighted the key achievements in IPM, the details of which had already been presented in the general meeting under agenda item 8.

Delegates also reviewed the progress made against the recommendations proposed in the work plan of 2003-2005 of the 23^rd Session of the APPPC. In most countries, the achievements had been in line with the proposed work plan of the 23^rd APPPC.

The delegates, while reviewing the past efforts, recognized the achievements of the IPM implementation in the APPPC region using the FFS approach and pointed out various challenges for the region:

i. Safe food

ii. Increased farmers' income

iii. Protection of the environment

iv. Developing guidelines for applicability of FFS-IPM approach to all main cropping systems

v. Regional research on the role of GMOs in IPM

vi. Linking IPM and Good Agricultural Practices (GAP)

vii. IPM for invasive species

viii. Awareness about IPM and GAP

ix. Increased use of Biological Control in IPM and GAP

x. GAP Standards

xi Regional cooperation on monitoring and management of major migratory pests

10.3.4 Proposed work plan (2005-2007)

The Group recommended:

i. Developing programmes in participating countries to link IPM and GAP

ii. Research on GAP Standards according to relevant needs of countries in the region

iii. Organization of yearly workshop by APPPC Secretariat to share experiences of implementing GAP in member countries

iv. Approval of the FAO-ASEAN and FAO-SAARC initiative on Farmer Education in IPM and GAP

v. Introducing HACCP in horticulture

vi. Evaluation of the impact of GMOs

10.3.5 Discussions on the presentation

10.3.5.1 Position of transgenic crops in APPPC

The Convention duly noted the growing interest in transgenic crops, and would study its position in APPPC.

10.3.5.2 Regional Standards for GAP

The delegates were informed that there was no forum to establish regional standards for GAP.

10.4 The APPPC programme of work for 2006-2007

The APPPC programme of work for 2006-2007 was presented by Mr Piao Yongfan, Executive Secretary of the APPPC.

10.4.1 Discussion and identification of the programme of work for 2006 to 2007 and its financial resources

Three Standing Committees of the APPPC proposed a tentative work plan for the next two years based on group discussions. However, as the amended Article of Agreement for establishing the mandatory financial contributions by the members of the Commission has still not entered into force, the Secretariat of the Commission may have to make adjustments in line with the FAO regular programme budget, in the implementation of the following proposed programme of work for 2006 to 2007:

The secretariat will emphasize the following activities:

i. Regional Standard Setting including a meeting of the APPPC Standard Committee.

ii. Continue to carry out the Regional TCP "Pest Risk Analysis of South American Leaf Blight of Rubber". Effort for formation and implementation of other TCP projects during 2006-2007 will be made.

iii. Further improvement and enhancement of the plant protection information exchange among member countries through the IPP.

The following meetings have been identified and will be held subject to finance being available and according to the priorities identified by the Commission.

10.4.1.1 Consultations and meetings

i. Expert consultation on Draft Regional Standards for Phytosanitary Measures, in 2006, Bangkok, Thailand

ii. APPPC Standard Committee meeting on review of the draft RSPMs in 2007

iii. Regional meeting of review on Draft ISPMs (Seventh and Eighth in 2006-2007)

iv. Expert consultation on Pest Management in 2006

v. Workshop on Pesticide Management in 2006

vi. 25^th Biennial Session of APPPC in 2007

10.4.1.2 Training programme/workshops

i. Workshop on Pest Risk Analysis for South American Leaf Blight (SALB) of Rubber supported by Regional TCP project in 2006

ii. Training on Implementation of ISPM No.15 will be explored by seeking external budget from developed countries or other donor agencies and FAO's relevant project if appropriate

iii. Other training programmes according to member countries requirements in the field of plant protection based on availability of budget source

10.4.1.3 Assist in carrying out activities of the various working groups of the APPPC's Standing Committees based on available resources

Once the Commission has its own financial resources, it may wish to use the funds to carry out more development support activities of the Standing Committees. There is urgent need to accept the amended Article of the Agreement for establishing the mandatory financial contribution by the member states of the Commission.

10.4.2 General discussions of the presentation

The convention noted the need for better interactions among member countries to enable the working of the programmes. On the continual demand for funding and assistance, the convention agreed that there should be explorative efforts to secure financing.

10.5 Side event: Presentations of the Rotterdam Convention Secretariat

Three papers were presented and discussed:

i. Presentation by the Rotterdam Convention Secretariat on how the RC addresses countries' needs and real problems in pesticide management

ii. Presentation by Sri Lanka on the benefits of the Rotterdam Convention from an importing Party's perspective and the mobilizing of stakeholders to initiate the ratification process

iii. Presentation by Chinese DNA on the role of the Rotterdam Convention in the development of national policy on pesticide management, particularly from an exporting Party's perspective