LE PRESIDENT: Je suis reconnaissant à ceux qui savent être à l'heure d'être ici. Moi même, je suis allé à la cérémonie papale, mais je suis à l'heure. J'insiste auprès de vous pour être vraiment ponctuellement à l'heure et éviter ces dix minutes d'attente avec les interprètes qui sont présents et ne peuvent pas travailler.
Nous avons encore 19 orateurs qui doivent parler du Programme à moyen terme de la FAO. Je vous propose donc, étant donné la longueur des interventions de ce matin, que chacun s'en tienne à une déclaration qui ne dépasse pas cinq minutes, et surtout que ces déclarations ne répètent pas ce qu'il y a dans le document.
Il y a deux points à aborder. Il y a d'abord la question posée par le Secrétariat et le Directeur général d'avoir un document tel que celui qui nous a été présenté pour six ans, qui sera remis à jour tous les deux ans. Il faut donc que tout le monde s'exprime sur ce point. En second lieu il faut indiquer, sur la substance, les points ou les orientations nouvelles par rapport au document, et non pas répéter ce qu'il y a dans le document car nous perdons du temps.
Concernant la réunion informelle qui se tiendra dans la salle de Malaisie après cette séance de la Commission II, la composition de ce groupe doit être équilibrée, ce sera le reflet des positions prises au Conseil, l'objectif étant de trouver si possible un compromis avant l'ouverture officielle de nos travaux sur le point 16.
J'insiste sur les limites de temps impartis pour les interventions et je ne voudrais pas être obligé de jouer le rôle impopulaire du président qui coupe une intervention si elle est trop longue.
Je vous remercie de votre attention.
Je donne la parole au représentant de la Mauritanie.
Sy ADAMA (Mauritanie): Monsieur le Président, vous me permettrez, à l'instar de mes collègues, de vous adresser mes félicitations ainsi qu'aux membres du Bureau.
Le document élaboré par le Secrétariat nous permet d'apprécier les efforts et les performances remarquables que l'Organisation a su manifester récemment, et nous met en confiance pour les performances futures et pour la justesse des orientations et des mesures d'assainissement que le Directeur général et son staff ont pris.
S'agissant du Plan à moyen terme, ma délégation souscrit aux grandes orientations et programmes soulignés par le document et ma délégation est solidaire avec la définition des enjeux et des missions de la FAO à l'aube du troisième millénaire.
Ma délégation reste cependant convaincue que la lutte contre la pauvreté doit demeurer un axe fondamental des enjeux car en fait, au-delà des ressources de base nécessaires à la production agricole, le droit à l'alimentation et à la sécurité alimentaire reste un problème de revenu. Ce faisant, les différents programmes devront inclure cette préoccupation et cette donnée fondamentale et l'intégrer dans un objectif, particulièrement dans la zone sub-saharienne.
Le même souci se traduira par un élargissement des programmes spéciaux tel celui sur la production alimentaire mais aussi celui sur l'EMPRES. En cela, nous aurions souhaité que le rôle catalyseur et mobilisateur de la FAO en faveur de la lutte contre les fléaux soit renforcé.
Ma délégation souscrit également à l'élargissement du mandat de la Commission des ressources phytosanitaires pour englober l'ensemble des ressources phytogénétiques.
Elle estime cependant que des programmes plus hollistiques au niveau régional, voire continental, seraient de nature à mieux asseoir une gestion pleine et satisfaisante des ressources naturelles, compte tenu de la complémentarité et de l'interdépendance qui les animent.
Au regard des axes stratégiques, ma délégation souscrit aux axes identifiés et croit fermement à la possibilité et à la priorité qu'il faut accorder à la sécurité alimentaire, à la nutrition, et dans ce cadre il est nécessaire de renforcer et adopter rapidement le Code de pêche responsable.
De même qu'au niveau des axes stratégiques sur l'agriculture et le développement durable, les actions dans la zone critique doivent être renforcées parce qu'elles contiennent beaucoup de populations dites marginales.
Ma délégation, enfin, croit fermement indispensable de créer autour de la FAO un élan de solidarité et de confiance comme cela sera concrétisé au Sommet mondial de l'alimentation, prévu en 1996. A cet égard, nous invitons les uns et les autres à une mobilisation sans commune mesure avec les Conférences précédentes pour faire de ce Sommet une renaissance, un nouveau départ pour une coopération franche des intéressés, responsable parce que plus humaine.
E. Wayne DENNEY (United States of America): Thank you very much Mr Chairman. We thank the Secretariat for providing us with a Medium-term Plan for 1996-2001, recognizing that the tasks of restructuring the Organization and reorienting its programme focus made it more difficult to prepare a strategic forward-looking document. We agree with much of what is said in the document. Its brevity is a positive feature. The Director-General's ideas of looking at cross-sectoral approaches building on partnerships, recognizing comparative advantages and reflecting on what FAO's roles should be without dwelling on budgetary aspects are all ideas we support.
We largely agree with the main priorities indicated but the document also has a number of shortcomings in our view. It focuses too much on FAO's top priorities and restates much of what we see in the current PWB. In future Medium-term Plans we would like a document that is about the same size as this one, but one that is more comprehensive and forward looking, one that deals with the PWB without restating it. One way to achieve this goal is to merge the medium-term plan with the PWB. This would of course lead to a large document but it would also result in a tighter fit. We also support a two-year update of the Plan. Chapter 1 provides a very interesting and necessary overview to the document. FAO has many challenges and several of them are mentioned. We agree with concerns expressed about the continual high population birth rate in certain regions and the lack of adequate agricultural research expenditures and the importance of upgrading human capital through education and training. We also view the spread of IPM and IPN techniques as important areas for FAO to be involved in to promote sustainable agriculture. The trade-offs between increased production and environmental protection that are referred to in paragraph 16 are important to know about and we believe that FAO can help identify them.
We believe it is too early to be ascribing likely future production benefits from the Special Programme on Food Production in support of the food security in Low-Income Food-Deficit Countries. This Programme is still in its infancy. When mature it may realize potential but it is too early to judge the impact the Programme will have on a country's agricultural output.
The Section on the mission of FAO is very useful and informative. We largely concur with what is said. Improving fundamental data collection capacity at the national level is a role FAO will always have. Streamling governments' arrangements and curtailing publication costs as outlined in paragraphs 44 and 45 are important areas to pursue to make FAO more efficient. We appreciate some of the efficiencies achieved in making more lean country offices, given the expanded role accorded to regional offices and sub-regional offices under the restructuring scheme, but we question the very existence of many country offices, especially in regions where other organizations also have country networks in place. While we appreciate the increased collaboration between FAO and the Inter American Institute for Cooperation in Agriculture (IICA). This remains an example of how FAO's activities in country offices overlap with work being performed elsewhere. A consolidation of FAO and IICA country offices should be explored following a similar initiative adopted at last month's ministerial meeting of the Inter American Board of Agriculture.
Noting the regional patterns of FAO's work is useful and informative. While these bear overtime it is important to recognize the demands placed on the Organization for services and technical assistance are multi-faceted. In future medium-term plans it would be useful to have an update on how regional programmatic thrusts are changing. It is unfortunate that FAO's extrabudgetary resources have gradually declined in recent biennia and we hope that major Trust Fund contributors will find it appropriate to increase their Trust Fund contributions, but with most countries facing budgetary constraints, reversing this downward trend may pose a significant challenge. The strategic thrusts outlined in Chapter 2 are generally on target in our view. As noted earlier much of what is found here is a little more than rephrasing of what can be gained by the PWB. The importance of nutrition, food security, pest and disease eradication and genetic resources conservation are well recognized. We are pleased to see an increased emphasis on small-scale low-cost farmer-managed irrigation projects. We fully support FAO's thrust on trade-related activities including the development of scientifically based standards under the CODEX Alimentarius Commission and the International Plant Protection Convention. Increased collaboration with the World Trade Organization will become more important. FAO's projections of the implications of the Uruguay Round should be extended to the year 2010 and serve as an input to the World Food Security Summit. Paragraph 114 provides an excellent overview of the kind of policy advice and technical assistance FAO can provide to help developing countries.
Improvements in data quality and management and greater utilization of electronic communications via the World Agriculture Information Centre (WAICENT) is a positive and long-awaited development. As the document notes, this should be especially useful in communicating information to and from the field. We are somewhat confused by the paragraph 129 reference to joint departmental management of WAICENT and would appreciate Secretariat clarification on this.
In the area of sustainable agriculture and rural development we are pleased to note the interdisciplinary approach that FAO plans to follow. The redirecting of subsidies from fertilizers and pesticides towards IPM and IPN appears to be moving in the right direction. We agree with the use of market mechanisms to determine prices. The statement that use of improved genetic material can increase risks for farmers may be a bit misleading. The definition of "improved", in our view, relates more than to merely increased yearly potential.
Finally the section on Plant Genetic Resources gives an upbeat scenario on what the revised international undertaking will do about the likelihood of using it as a protocol to the Convention on Biological Diversity and the ability of the World Information and Early Warning System to play a significant role in developing periodic reports on the state of the world plant genetic resources. We admire the Secretariat's optimism but question whether or not these events will occur as described. We are pleased with the increased FAO focus on animal genetic resources and are convinced that the domestic animal diversity information system will be extremely useful in helping countries introduce national action plans and establish national networks.
XU NANSHAN (China) (Original language Chinese): Mr Chairman, the Chinese Delegation has closely studied the Medium-term Plan 1996-2001 of FAO. We find that the programme is very well drawn up, it lists the different challenges that the Organization will have to confront and indicates the historic tasks that have been put upon its shoulders on this threshold of the third biennium. The current situation and its prospect have been studied in detail in this document. Stress is laid on the strategy to be followed in the efforts of the following areas: food security, efforts towards nutrition, sustainable development for agriculture and rural areas with many different partners. This is why we believe that it is essential while putting the accent on these points that that meets the criteria of different and diverse countries.
FAO has adopted a series of important measures aimed at ensuring food security. Above all, it has taken the initiative of supporting special projects for cereal production in different countries. These programmes, which are deployed with no hindrance in China, are supported by local government up to central government in some instances.
Many different technicians and farmers have now been trained. FAO on three different occasions has sent working groups into the field to provide assistance. We fully believe that these different projects, these special programmes, will be crowned with success. We would like to see more budgetary resources used to complete the ordinary budget which are limited in scope.
The Government of China, like other governments, is very interested in sustainable development in agriculture. We hope that FAO will assist different governmental organizations in our country with a human resources policy and in working on their institutions on the management of inputs and agricultural output.
In conclusion we would hope that FAO and the governments of other countries will work together. We are ready to work and cooperate with FAO to help achieve this Medium-term Plan and are ready to make the contribution required of us.
Lothar CAVIEZEL (Suisse): Au nom de la Suisse, j'aimerais remercier le Secrétariat du rapport qu'il nous a préparé. C'est avec un très grand intérêt que nous avons examiné ce rapport concernant le Plan à moyen terme pour la période 1996-2001. C'est un plan glissant sur six ans qui, à notre avis, doit être mis à jour tous les deux ans. Ce plan doit nous permettre de placer les activités de la FAO dans le contexte d'une stratégie claire et réaliste qui répond aux principaux défis qui concernent notre Organisation, à savoir l'élimination de la faim, de la malnutrition et de la pauvreté dans le monde. Face à ces défis il est utile et nécessaire de poser, de temps à autre, et particulièrement à l'occasion de la Conférence bisannuelle, les questions sur notre Organisation.
Notre première question concerne des priorités accordées aux activités de notre Organisation. La FAO doit elle accorder la priorité à l'établissement et à la dissémination de normes concernant l'agriculture et le développement rural y compris la forêt et la pêche ou doit-elle plutôt l'accorder au maintien de l'extension des activités d'assistance technique? A notre avis, il faudra chercher une réponse à cette question en ayant à l'esprit l'avantage comparatif de la FAO par rapport à d'autres organisations internationales de même que par rapport aux agences bilatérales, aux ONG et au secteur privé.
Ayant bien écouté ce qui a été annoncé hier par notre Directeur général Adjoint, M. Hjort, nous restons néanmoins convaincus que la FAO devrait avant tout se concentrer sur le rôle normatif et que l'assistance technique devrait surtout servir à renforcer ces activités normatives. Grâce à son rôle normatif, la FAO est d'abord un centre d'information sur l'alimentation et l'agriculture y compris pêche et forêt. Son rôle est de collecter, d'analyser et de diffuser ce type d'informations aux pays membres. La FAO est en outre une tribune où les gouvernements peuvent oeuvrer ensemble en vue de rechercher des solutions viables aux problèmes communs. Elle peut également donner des avis indépendants sur les politiques, les lois, les stratégies et l'assistance technique. C'est en fonction de ce rôle premier que la FAO devrait fixer ses priorités et réorganiser l'Institution.
En ce qui concerne les projets de coopération, nous nous apercevons que la mobilisation de ressources extrabudgétaires semble devenir de plus en plus difficile. A notre avis, ceci s'explique en grande partie par les nouvelles orientations de bon nombre de donateurs qui estiment, comme la coopération Suisse, que les projets de coopération technique sont surtout l'affaire des institutions financières internationales. Ces dernières s'occupent également des pays les plus pauvres par l'intermédiaire de leurs fonds tels que l'IDA et les fonds des banques régionales de développement de même que le Fonds international de développement agricole, le FIDA ici présent à Rome. C'est donc avec ces fonds que la FAO devrait améliorer sa collaboration en vue d'y apporter toute sa connaissance spécifique sur l'alimentation et l'agriculture. Nous sommes aussi d'avis qu'elle devrait également renforcer sa coopération avec les ONG et le secteur privé.
Pour les pays les plus pauvres, en Afrique et en Asie, nous encourageons la FAO à renforcer ses activités normatives qui seront d'un plus grand bénéfice pour ces pays que quelques petits projets par-ci par-là. Notre Organisation devrait apporter ses analyses spécifiques tout particulièrement dans sa collaboration avec la Banque mondiale aux quatre niveaux suivants: premièrement, l'élaboration et la mise en oeuvre des programmes d'ajustement structurel concernant le secteur agricole. Deuxièmement, la participation aux diverses initiatives régionales de coopération et d'intégration économique et l'harmonisation correspondante des politiques. Troisièmement, la participation aux réunions d'examen des politiques - ce qu'on appelle communément le "Policy dialogue" - aux tables rondes et aux réunions consultatives sectorielles où d'importantes négociations entre gouvernements donateurs et organismes de financement multilatéral ont lieu. Quatrièmement, ce qui nous tient tout spécialement à coeur: le renforcement des capacités locales. Dans cette nouvelle optique, nous soutenons l'effort promis de réduction des coûts des publications qui devrait en même temps permettre une amélioration sensible de la qualité des informations fournies. Cette réduction des coûts sera certainement facilitée par l'utilisation d'INTERNET avec ses autoroutes de l'information et elle devrait
aboutir à une meilleure dissémination des normes alimentaires et agricoles en vue de promouvoir un développement économique durable dans le monde.
Georg NIELSEN (Denmark): The Danish Delegation would like to commend the Secretariat on the format and presentation of the document in front of us. We like the short presentation. We perceive the Medium-term Plan as an important mechanism in improving the dialogue among member countries within the priorities of the Organization.
In our view the priorities in the Medium-term Plan for 1996-2001 are able to form the basis for further discussions on the relative importance attached to various programmes. We appreciate that the Plan identifies the two major themes, food security and nutrition, and sustainable agriculture in rural development. We have considered whether this document should have been presented in the technical committees, COFI and COFO and COAG, before it discussed here at the Conference but have come to the conclusion on this issue must take place in the superior body of FAO rather than in the technical committees since it is a matter of priority setting for the future PWBs.
Amongst the challenges presented in the document, FAO in the planning period first of all has to face its main task of helping to ensure humanity's freedom from hunger. The result of the Uruguay Round will start to have an important influence on agricultural production and trade and therefore also on food security. The elaboration of standard regulations regulating trade will be important.
Sustainability will, no doubt, still be the key word in the planning period. A condition for maintaining the momentum for the enhancement of sustainability is that we will have to be able to increase production in the critical areas of the world. As stated in paragraph 14, future yields or gains are likely to be based on evolutionary rather than revolutionary changes and will require more support and adaptive research.
Denmark agrees with the basic roles of FAO as presented in paragraph 38. With 175 Members and a heavier demand on the Organization in a time of tight budgets in all international organizations, we, the Member nations, and the Secretariat have to agree on the main areas where FAO will play its role and set the agenda. Savings will have to be made in the programmes financed from regular budgets in order to free financial resources for their new tasks which have higher priorities. It should be possible to reduce the number of meetings even further and to reduce the cost of meetings and documentation for these.
The number of committees and commissions has to be reduced in this period. We would also ask the Secretariat to look into the possibilities for further privatization of FAO's documentation services.
The Danish Delegation agrees with most of what is said about direct services to Member Nations and supports the view that the Organization needs to give priority to those countries which are likely to require direct assistance in tackling their present problems in food and agricultural development.
As for the field operations, it is important to maintain a balance between the core activities and the field operations in order to achieve an optimal synergy between the two. The Technical Cooperation Programme has been shown to be a good programme that should be continued but, with priorities we have to make, we must make better use of the programme within the limits of the last few years.
As stated at the beginning of my intervention, the Danish Delegation appreciates that the plan identifies the major themes of food security and nutrition and sustainable agricultural in rural development. We support the statement in paragraph 85 that food security is FAO's priority. That leads naturally to a close link of this priority with the work in all categories of lower income food-deficit countries, not least those poorest in natural resources.
We are able to support what is stated on nutrition and would like to point out that FAO has a particular role in food safety and quality. This is an area where FAO's comparative advantage should be used in the period, for example, in assisting developing countries to implement effective quality control measures. We support the text on policy analysis assistance and advise and hope that there can be savings in the budget within the period as modern technology develops worldwide.
With regard to sustainable agriculture and rural development, we would like to stress paragraph 150 and support FAO's priority on further development in biophysical, social and economic indicators for agriculture in the rural sector, especially the integration of the information for the sake of land uses and policy makers. The paragraphs on biological diversity are also pointing at problems where FAO has comparative advantage in exploring and coordinating the work of the coming six years.
Mr Chairman, we see the world of fisheries as an excellent example of the leadership role FAO can play. We would like to see a similar role within forestry and agriculture in general.
We have a comment about what is stated about people-centred development. Rural partners, both men and women, must become actively involved through organizations of their own choice in shaping low production technologies and also in determining the scope for their sharing of benefits from global policies. The FAO Plan of Action for Women in Development should be continued in the period. Considering the crucial role that women play in efforts to achieve food security, especially at the household level, Denmark believes that this role should have been emphasized more strongly throughout their whole Plan.
Finally, this statement has been prepared in consultation with the other Nordic countries, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden.
LE PRESIDENT: Je vous remercie de cette déclaration qui recouvre, en effet, les préoccupations de nombreuses délégations. Qu'elle ait été un peu plus longue s'explique donc.
P. PRUVOT (France): A l'instar de nombreuses autres délégations, la délégation française salue tout d'abord l'effort du Secrétariat. Celui-ci nous présente, en effet, un rapport clair et concis, articulé autour d'une analyse transectorielle selon deux axes stratégiques: la sécurité alimentaire et la nutrition, d'une part, et le développement durable, d'autre part. Nous relevons que les tableaux synoptiques permettent un croisement très profitable et très utile avec le Programme de travail et budget.
Pour ce qui concerne l'analyse générale, nous voudrions faire quelques observations. Si le choix de l'Horizon 2010 se justifie, en effet, pour la fiabilité des statistiques, il nous paraît en revanche trop proche pour faire se dessiner les tendances lourdes. A cet égard, l'Horizon 2025 ou 2030 semblerait plus justifié. On aurait pu alors mesurer les conséquences de la poussée démographique par rapport à l'évolution de la production agricole et alimentaire et faire apparaître de grandes zones de péril en Afrique et en Asie du Sud tandis que d'autres zones - l'Inde ou la Chine, par exemple - seront de moins en moins autosuffisantes.
J'aborderai maintenant très rapidement les enjeux qui sont développés dans ce document. Ils sont, dans l'ensemble, très clairement exposés. Cependant, l'analyse des perspectives mériterait d'être plus fouillée en ce qui concerne l'évolution des besoins des zones urbaines. De même, dans les secteurs de l'agriculture, des forêts et des pêches, il convient de ne pas viser seulement à développer l'exploitation, certes durable, des ressources mais également et surtout à corriger les politiques et pratiques actuelles. Les tendances dans ces secteurs risquent, en effet, d'accélérer le processus de dégradation des ressources et de réduire d'autant les chances de succès d'une révolution doublement verte, dont nous avons déjà parlé.
A cet égard, pour reprendre ce que vient de dire notre collègue du Danemark, le plan à moyen terme ne nous paraît pas aborder suffisamment les éléments sociologiques à prendre en compte pour que les acteurs du développement - les agriculteurs, les ménages, les femmes surtout et aussi les groupes les plus vulnérables -puissent être associés à la définition des politiques de redressement, point particulièrement évoqué à Québec.
Sur le chapitre des missions que s'assigne l'Organisation aux paragraphes 38 à 72, les préoccupations budgétaires sont partout présentes et sous-jacentes, et l'appel indirect aux fonds extrabudgétaires tel que mentionné, en particulier, au paragraphe 43 nous semble une menace pour le mandat de l'Organisation. Celle-ci n'est en effet ni une agence de développement ni une organisation capable d'accepter de "travailler à la carte".
Enfin, en ce qui concerne le contenu technique des deux axes stratégiques, nous sommes d'accord avec l'analyse proposée, notamment sur les forêts. Un point d'une importance particulière nous semble être celui
des ressources phytogénétiques et animales. Nous voudrions, ici, soutenir l'idée de rendre cohérents les conseils aux politiques nationales et les conventions et accords internationaux pertinents qui auront été améliorés ou conclus entre-temps.
Pour terminer, nous approuvons la proposition d'un plan tel que proposé sur six ans et nous considérons qu'une mise à jour tous les deux ans serait la solution la meilleure.
Miss Fatimah HASSAN J. HAYAT (Kuwait): My delegation is most pleased to see in general terms how clear and brief this report has been. My delegation is also in agreement with the proposal to review the content of this plan every two years. The tasks included in the first chapter are in the view of my delegation of the utmost importance. FAO should continue to invest its analytical efforts in order to help to develop national and international policies for sustainable agriculture. FAO should continue to pioneer the effort to integrate the important elements that bear an impact on the development of agriculture and all the private sector enterprises involved in that sector. FAO must take into account the real needs of all Member States. It must also bear in mind the estimates of potential resources and lay out plans to optimize the use of existing resources.
As regards the Middle Eastern Region, we have urged the Organization to set out given priorities for our region such as water and irrigation and better use of marginal lands. Unfortunately the present Plan has given no degree of priority to these proposals.
The programmes aimed at fighting locusts have not been given a high priority either. We believe that consultative groups should be convened as soon as possible in order to consider the fight against locusts, as was done in the case of other pests.
As for desert locust, we will go into this problem in a working group and we will be expressing our opinions through the delegation of Algeria in relation to that particular point.
There are two priorities that were adopted in the framework of our strategic thrusts, food security and nutrition on the one hand and sustainable agriculture and rural development on the other. We quite agree with these thrusts.
As regards food security, my delegation considers that an holistic approach must be adopted in order to solve these problems, be it in relation to the different factors and the way they interact between them. We also would like to express our full support of the Special Programme regarding the strengthening of food production in low-income food-deficit countries. This is a decision which was adopted by the last June Council and it is part of the major objectives that was laid out pertaining to food security. We also agree with the emphasis that has been laid on the EMPRES project.
We would also like to associate ourselves with the call launched by the Director-General to all Member States so as to mobilize extrabudgetary resources enabling the Organization to increase the allotments to these projects and extend their coverage. We would also call upon Member States to grant this assistance in good time in order to grant a greater flexibility to the Organization.
Hyun Woo CHO (Korea, Republic of): My delegation would like to present its compliments to the Secretariat for preparing the concise and to the point document C 95/9 for this important session of the Conference.
Generally, my delegation believes that the Medium- and Long-term Plan of FAO will contribute to FAO's activities positively as a guideline during the coming six years, and my delegation supports the proposal that it should be updated every two years.
My delegation would like to express its support for the activities of FAO in trade-related issues as outlined in paragraph 114.
As indicated in paragraph 113, my delegation would like to express its concern about the impact of the Uruguay Round which is likely to lead to somewhat higher prices on world markets, particularly for basic foodstuffs and unstable agricultural commodity markets. As described in paragraph 12.13, food-importing countries are likely to face higher costs considering the fact that the population growth in developing countries and the unpredictable variables such a weather will exceed the food production increase.
In this context, my delegation would like to support the FAO in giving high priority to studies and information on the impact of the implementation of the Uruguay Round Agreements, which focuses on the need to assist developing countries in preparing for the next round of trade negotiations on agriculture, especially including sustainability and environmental issues.
My delegation would like to cordially request FAO, as a way of assisting developing countries in sustainable agriculture, to launch a study on the impact of small-scale farming in relation to food security and sustainable agriculture.
LE PRESIDENT: Je vous remercie de cette courte intervention qui contient une ou deux idées innovatrices.
Alan AMEY (Canada): The Canadian Delegation welcomes the opportunity to comment on the contents of the Medium-term Plan. This is an essential framework tool which should complement the other three planning documents and help FAO focus on its medium-term priorities extending beyond the Programme of Work and Budget.
A principal role of FAO is to document, articulate and bring to the attention of policy-makers the problems associated with finite natural resources in the context of expanding human needs, increasing environmental degradation and still shocking levels of poverty, hunger and malnutrition.
The 50th Anniversary ministerial meeting in Quebec City was only the start of a process leading to the World Food Summit intended to raise the consciousness of world leaders to the problems associated with the growing conflict between resource needs and availability. The challenge facing us in the period to the end of the millenium and beyond is to put into place sustainable ways in which to address food security issues that will have positive effects on growth, incomes, trade, environmental protection, population and prevention of genetic erosion. We look to FAO and other international institutions to help provide operational leadership on these questions within the scope of their respective mandates.
Canada is in broad agreement with some of the key factors that will influence the natural resource situation as outlined on pages 3-8. Some of the figures might be subject to debate but perhaps in a more specialized forum. In this respect, we note that a critical omission among the key factors identified at the outset is the national decline in resource allocations to agriculture in many countries, which doubtlessly dwarfs the fall-off in ODA flows.
As has been mentioned by Germany and Venezuela, there is a well-focused programme of continuing assistance to the Intergovernmental Panel on Forests by FAO in terms of its UN system task managerial role in UNCED follow-up. Core priorities within the Regular Programme should include qualitative improvements to world forest resource assessment and the state of forest reports, assistance to countries in the implementation of national forest strategies and increased emphasis on implementing a community forestry programme. FAO has a critical role to play in assisting the development of criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management. There is also a need for greater international consensus on voluntary, non-legislative schemes for certification of forest products from sustainably managed forests.
While we understand the generalized resource constraints that face multinational and multilateral institutions, we are not in agreement respecting the claims of resource stagnation on the Regular Programme. We believe that resources have been more than adequate on the Regular Programme for FAO to fully perform its core functions as defined in paragraph 38. It is primarily in the effective discharge of its advocacy role and not via the capture of extrabudgetary funds for project implementation that the FAO maximizes its influence and the multiplier effect of its own efforts in attracting resources to agricultural uses. On this point, we would draw attention to the fact that the attraction of extrabudgetary resources, advocated as a concerted effort in
paragraph 42, is not without opportunity costs for the Regular Programme, which currently provides an important subsidy to the implementation of extra-budgetary projects.
We agree with the broad strategic outline contained in the Medium-term Plan and with the emphasis accorded to food security and nutrition. On this point, we would recall the first principle of the successful pursuit of the food security objective. As affirmed by the International Conference on Nutrition and repeated in this document, the primary responsibility for protecting and promoting food security and nutritional well-being of populations resides with individual national governments and it is for each government to prioritize and implement a coherènt set of policies and actions suitable to that end.
We would also note that, as recognized by the Quebec City ministerial meeting and in the paper itself, food security is a multi-faceted problem encompassing not only production but also access, distribution and stability in respect to each of these. It is important to recognize that other UN bodies, national governments, the private sector and NGOs all have valuable roles to play in attaining food security. As recognized in paragraph 23, increased production alone is not sufficient for attaining food security. If FAO is to specialize in the food production aspects, it will be vitally important to involve and also be involved with other actors in the necessary process, which is multi-dimensional and multi-institutional, so that their respective specialties can be invoked and concerted in a coherent and comprehensive approach to food security. We welcome in this regard the indication of FAO's seriousness of approach to partnerships as contained in the Medium-term Plan.
Regarding the Special Action Programme on food production in support of LIFDCs, pilot projects must be designed with a critical eye for potential for replicability and sustainability in the local environment. Like the United States we think that before embarking on an expansion phase it is essential to first determine whether they meet the tests of replicability and high returns. In this regard, irrigation is a potential key component of increased production. However, there have been both successes and failures in this regard. Water management as endorsed by the Programme Committee might be a better focus. We agree that food safety and quality are also important aspects of international food security and the movement towards harmonization of import and food standards will benefit consumers and international trade. Other trade-related aspects of FAO work are also beneficial to these ends.
Concerning SARD, we are in general agreement. However, in paragraph 170 there is a reference to the revised international undertaking as a protocol to the Convention on Biological Diversity. Since this item is still under consideration within the Commission, it is premature to speculate as to the ultimate legal form the undertaking might take.
Chapter 3 highlights, however summarily, an important aspect of FAO's work, that is, partnership with other organizations. We are pleased with the emphasis given to this aspect and we look forward to fleshing out the details implied by this section.
At the Eighth regular meeting of the Inter American Board of Agriculture a resolution was passed encouraging FAO and IICA to work even more closely together. We support that resolution.
While we find this Medium-term Plan to be an interesting departure from its predecessor, there are some shortcomings which we would like to note. Firstly, the scope of the document is narrower than in the past. This may have a certain benefit in terms of brevity but some important topics may have been left out. Perhaps Chapter 3 could be omitted in future documents and the current topic, FAO in partnership, could be covered by collaboration with the UN system later on in our agenda.
The second problem we find, like the United States, is that much of the content tends to overlap the Programme of Work and Budget, which dilutes the message to be delivered. Finally, we would like to see this document issued on a two-year basis in the future.
Stelios PAPACHRISTODOU (Cyprus): Mr Chairman, the Medium-term Plan for the period 1996-2001 submitted to the FAO Conference analyses carefully the present situation and proposes future strategic moves. We wish to commend the Secretariat for having prepared such a concise yet clear and comprehensive Plan. The first impression of meticulous work is given by the Director-General's foreword where he proposes some innovations and singles out the key points of the Plan that could be used as a base for FAO's course in the
next few years. With reference to the practice of preparing and submitting the Plan at less frequent intervals, we wish to propose that such an arrangement could be examined on a trial basis.
The emphasis placed on poverty, chronic undernutrition and food insecurity is appreciated, having in mind the still increasing population trend. We agree with the analysis of the quantitative and qualitative features concerning food and agriculture and welcome the role of FAO in assisting the Member Nations to tackle their relevant pressing problems.
The detailed examination of the dimensions of Sustainable Agriculture and Rural Development and of the factors affecting food security and nutrition, two top-priority themes, meets with our full agreement. Similarly, the proposed actions for the protection and promotion of food security and the nutritional well-being of people are endorsed. Cyprus places particular importance on the contribution that information collection and dissemination makes to policy-making, and welcomes the deep involvement of FAO in direct assistance to strengthen national capacities for policy analysis.
The special reference made to "partnerships" is justified and this feature should be considered seriously having in mind the budgetary stringency we are facing.
Finally we wish, once again, to express our delegation's support for this Plan and our belief that it will serve as a guideline for FAO to formulate strategies for the future in pursuing its mandate.
José ROBLES AGUILAR (México): En primer lugar deseamos señalar, como lo han hecho varias delegaciones, el adecuado formato del documento que está bajo nuestra consideración. El plan presenta un claro panorama sobre los desafíos que la Organización enfrenta en el mediano plazo.
Coincidimos con las prioridades establecidas, en particular con el objetivo de la seguridad alimentaria. Estimamos válidas las propuestas actividades para mejorar la calidad y cantidad de alimentos en el mundo.
De igual manera, deseamos poner de relieve las tareas de asistencia técnica al desarrollo que se proponen. Consideramos que estas acciones deben seguir constituyendo, como hasta ahora ha sido, un aspecto clave de las actividades de la Organización. Ello, sin detrimento de las acciones normativas.
Finalmente, queremos destacar algunos aspectos de especial interés para mi país, que nos gustaría que se vieran reflejados en el documento, en particular por lo que se refiere al fortalecimiento de las actividades de la Organización en el manejo del agua de riego.
De igual manera, deseamos expresar nuestra particular atención en que la FAO enfatice sus actividades en el uso intensivo de la ganadería, en especial por lo que se refiere al papel que esta importante actividad cubre en el plano alimenticio.
Nos gustaría también ver reflejadas en el texto, las acciones que competirá a la Organización realizar a la luz de la próxima aprobación por esta Conferencia del Código de Conducta para la Pesca Responsable.
Marcos I. NIETO LARA (Cuba): Señor Presidente, mi delegación tiene la complacencia de saludar a la Secretaría por este documento tan bien elaborado que nos ha presentado. En dos períodos anteriores había sido examinado con mucha pertinencia el Plan a Plazo Medio y también se señaló en reiteradas ocasiones el efecto sinérgico que podía producir con otros documentos que son objeto de examen en la Conferencia. Me refiero al PLP y me refiero también a la Ejecución y evaluación del programa. Creemos que este conjunto de documentos refuerza nuestra capacidad de análisis y refuerza la calidad de nuestras deliberaciones. Por eso apoyamos el trabajo de la Secretaría.
Mi delegación desea apoyar firmemente, las prioridades establecidas por la FAO y quiere hacer hincapié en el trabajo de asociación que pueda establecerse con otras instituciones para buscar los efectos sinérgicos y aprovechar eficientemente y con mayor amplitud las ventajas comparativas que posee la FAO.
Quisiera además, dentro de este marco, del marco de la cooperación y de la asociación, reconocer la validez del Programa de Cooperación Técnica entre Países en Desarrollo. Creo que esto es algo que habrá que seguir intensificado en etapas futuras, porque cada día los países en desarrollo demuestran que avanzan y que tienen cada día mayores capacidades para poder complementar esfuerzos, necesidades y ventajas comparativas entre ellos, y la FAO sería, naturalmente, el hilo conductor para poder aprovechar mejor esas capacidades.
Nosotros tenemos que lamentar que estamos hablando de un plan estratégico, un plan que se encuentra en el umbral del siglo XXI, donde todavía no se vislumbra con claridad la solución a los problemas de la pobreza y el hambre. Por eso nos permitimos hacer un llamado para que no escape a ninguno de nosotros la necesidad y el compromiso universal que tenemos todos de contribuir con el financiamiento, con nuestro trabajo y nuestro esfuerzo para que la Organización siga ocupando el lugar de liderazgo que le corresponde en el siglo futuro.
Larry FERGUSSON (New Zealand): I have a few brief comments. First, some general comments. We believe that the Medium-term Plan sets out clearly the Secretariat's views of the environment in which it will be operating and the priorities it will have to pursue. We agree that this Plan needs to be a living document and regularly reviewed and updated so as to provide the strategic direction for the Organization and to provide us, the members, with the ability to make informed decisions about the proposed Programme of Work and Budget. There is, however, room for improvement in this document if it is not to be a mere list of platitudes. It concentrates on the activities the Organization will undertake. It does not set out the goals and objectives it wishes to achieve. This body should be concerned with what is to be achieved, not with mere "busy-ness".
Some specific comments: we note the reference to the Cairo Population Conference and the focus on integrating the population dimension into FAO's policy advisory work. We would note that reference could usefully be made to the population issue in paragraphs 78 and 81. We agree with the importance of developing indicators of sustainability for land management. We stress the importance of developing measures in partnership with local land managers so that they can be effectively used by those land managers. With respect to food security, we wish to state our strongly held view that national food security is not an end in itself. In particular, it should not be used as a reason to protect national agricultural industries.
The best guarantee of food security will come through a free and fair international trading environment and policies which promote efficient resource allocation across the whole of an economy - policies which seek to maximize sustainable production in all areas of the economy. With respect to fisheries we agree it is necessary to put greater effort into fisheries research, data collection and advice on effective and efficient fisheries management to enable developing nations in particular to maximize sustainable production from their fishery resources.
With respect to forestry, we make a plea that the Organization does not overlook the opportunities available through plantation forestry.
Finally, and by no means least, we refer to the food standard setting activities of this Organization. We reiterate the importance of the work of Codex and IPPC in ensuring fair, efficient and safe international trade in food and food products. With an increasing world trade in agriculture, and in particular with greater involvement by developing nations in that trade as both importers and exporters, this work will become more and more important.
C. DE MARCIN (Belgique): Nous avons lu avec intérêt le Plan à moyen terme présenté et nous l'approuvons dans les grandes lignes.
Nos remarques iront au Programme Spécial évoqué aux paragraphes 87 à 90.
Nous ne pouvons qu'approuver ce Programme dans la mesure où il a pour but d'accroître la production et la productivité alimentaire au plus vite dans les pays à faible revenu et à déficit vivrier, et ce en mettant l'accent sur les zones à haut potentiel.
Il n'en reste pas moins que la méthodologie adoptée nous semble toujours comporter quelques risques sur plusieurs aspects. Il est notamment impératif dans cette action de tenir compte du feed-back des autres projets
qui ont été menés dans la région par d'autres organismes ou ONG. Si ce point est mentionné dans le Programme de travail et budget, il n'apparaît pas dans le Plan à moyen terme. L'élément nous semble cependant suffisamment important pour qu'il soit mentionné dans le Plan à moyen terme et ce d'autant plus que cet aspect des choses n'apparaît pas dans les Plans d'opérations que nous avons été amenés à examiner. Il est pourtant impératif que la phase pilote repose sur les expériences acquises dans le passé. Il serait en effet regrettable dans cette phase pilote de recommencer des actions maintes fois entreprises et par lesquelles les goulots d'étranglement sont connus. A ce sujet, il serait peut être souhaitable de renforcer les capacités d'analyse des équipes nationales qui élaborent les Plans d'opérations.
Enfin, tenant compte des difficultés financières prévisibles, et l'incertitude de disposer suffisamment de fonds extrabudgétaires pour le Programme, il serait hasardeux de se lancer dès à présent dans de nombreuses missions d'exploration et de missions de formulation sans avoir la garantie de disposer de ressources suffisantes pour assurer la phase d'expansion.
Il conviendrait peut-être à ce sujet d'établir une nouvelle priorité dans les pays bénéficiaires en privilégiant les pays les plus pauvres qui pour la plupart sont situés sur le continent africain.
LE PRESIDENT: Je vous remercie de ce commentaire qui a porté sur un point particulier. C'est le genre d'approche qui doit être fait ici.
Mrs Laura DI BELLO (Italy): Thank you, Mr Chairman. The Italian Delegation wishes to congratulate the FAO Director-General for the concise document "Medium-term Plan 1996-2001", which takes into account the important contributions given this year by the FAO technical committees. We appreciate that the Director-General has based this Plan on in-depth analysis of the challenges that FAO has to face in today's world and on appropriate description of the roles that FAO has to play in accordance with its mission. We are aware that the main challenges that FAO has to face are the great numbers of people who are still affected by hunger and malnutrition, the low rate of increase of agricultural production, especially in sub-Saharan Africa and in southern Asia, the growing degradation of natural resources, the extension of desertification and the overexploitation and irrational management of fisheries.
We can agree with the tasks described in paragraph 38 that FAO has to carry out in order to meet successfully these challenges. Moreover, it is necessary to meet adequately the specific needs of all the regions of the world, including Central and Eastern Europe, where some countries need technical assistance in the process of privatization of the agricultural sector.
We agree with the intersectoral priorities illustrated in Chapter 2 which are focused on two fundamental subjects, food security and nutrition and agricultural development, which constitute the heart of FAO activities. We appreciate that FAO is willing to take into consideration the agricultural needs of the regions where less-endowed lands exist, such as dry and mountainous land, and of the small island states.
This delegation shares also the concern expressed by FAO for the possible boycott of some forest products which reflects similar issues in the agricultural field. We think that afterwards we should reinforce the instruments of interdepartmental cooperation in order to face the problems of restrictions on international exchanges and the commercial aspects of ecocertification.
Now we would like to make a suggestion which has been formulated by our financial authorities who are worried about the possibility of implementing this plan in the current situation which is characterized by the restrictive financial policies of the principle contributors of the Organization. Notwithstanding that, we are aware of the difficulties of forecasting, with great precision, the activities of FAO for the three bienniums covered by the Medium-term Plan, we would like to advise FAO Secretariat to examine the possibility of adding another chapter to this Plan showing possible indications on the forecasted programmes for the next three biennia. This chapter might include, if possible, indicative figures of the maximum and minimum amount of resources required by FAO in order to implement this Plan.
We think that these further indications which could be presented next year to FAO technical committees, would be timely and could help the main contributors to allocate the resources required.
- 68 -
In conclusion, we approve the Medium-term Plan 1996-2001 and we hope that further efforts will be made with the purposes of improving this plan.
R. FOX (United Kingdom): Thank you Mr Chairman. Can I open by saying that my delegation agrees that this document should be reviewed and up-dated on a regular basis. We would like, however, future revisions of the Plan to refer back to previous plans and to give some comment on how robust the previous analysis has proven to be.
Mr Chairman, in order to devote our brief statement primarily to strategic issues my delegation will avoid dealing with much of the detail contained in the Medium-term Plan presented as C 95/9. We would however, like to emphasise in particular our strong support for FAO's work in connection with implementation of the Code of Conduct on Responsible Fisheries, and for its normative functions in relation to forestry issues. We would also like to stress the importance we attach to completion of work on the WAICENT system, including that element of the programme that supports national capacity development.
Mr Chairman, turning to more strategic issues my delegation is bound to say that we are somewhat surprised and a little disappointed with this document as a medium-term plan. This disappointment arises mainly from what is not in the plan rather than with what it contains; as it stands the paper attempts to describe future workplans and in some cases to outline performance measures. We very much welcome this format although more work on objective setting appears to be needed. However, Chairman, I would like to highlight a few examples of what my delegation believes to be omissions from the paper.
First, a medium-term plan could usefully reflect where an organization expects to be at the end of the planning period in terms of its work programmes. The analysis should encompass a view of the situation likely to exist at that stage. The present plan perhaps describes the situation that FAO expects to confront both somewhat briefly and narrowly. For example, there could be more indication of how the growth - that we can expect to continue - of private sector enterprises, and of the community-based sector, will shape FAO's future programmes.
Second, Mr Chairman, there are rather too few numbers in the plan. Future resource levels cannot of course be predicted, but percentage allocation shifts, related to the analysis of future needs I have referred to, could well have formed part of this plan, as for example could any foreseen shifts in regional focus.
There is similarly, we feel, rather too little information on the organization's main resource which is its staff. Restructuring and decentralization are underway now, but are we to assume the changes now in hand are believed to be sufficient and final? How is the staff resource expected to continue to develop? Training, career development and succession planning should form a key section of a plan such as this.
Finally, Mr Chairman, we are also rather concerned at the relative lack of analysis of how developing and developed country, and international agency capacity, is likely to change. The plan presented suggests essentially that FAO will continue to fulfil simply the same functions, in the same proportions, as it does now. Instead, we would hope to see that FAO will look for opportunities to narrow, focus and refine its activities, in particular as developing country capacity increases. The full range of activities described in the present plan may be necessary, but a much clearer and more convincing needs analysis might have been given.
Overall, Mr Chairman, my delegation believes that the analytical capacity, that we know to exist within FAO, is not as well reflected in the present Plan as it might be, and we look forward to receiving a clearer picture of future intended change.
Mohamed Joe BANGOURA (Guinée): J'aimerais tout d'abord remercier Monsieur le Directeur général adjoint pour son excellente introduction à ce point de l'ordre du jour.
Monsieur le Président, ma délégation vous félicite pour votre élection et remercie le Secrétariat pour la documentation. Le Plan à moyen terme doit nous permettre de placer les activités de notre Organisation dans le contexte d'une stratégie qui répond aux principaux défis. Nous savons tous que le Directeur général était en
conformité avec le Conseil en préparant le Programme de travail et budget sur la base d'une croissance zéro et en valeur réelle.
Ma délégation apporte son appui au Directeur général pour sa proposition de budget de six ans et sa révision tous les deux ans.
H. MONGI (Tanzania): Thank you Mr Chairman for giving me the floor at this time. Like other previous speakers my Delegation would like to thank FAO for a relatively short and concise document.
Mr Chairman, Tanzania supports the Medium-term Plan as presented in document C 95/9.
With regard to food security, my delegation commends FAO for according priority to food security and nutrition and we accordingly support the major actions proposed in paragraphs 84-86.
As to the Special Programme on Food Production in support of Food Security in Low-income Food-Deficit countries my delegation fully supports FAO initiatives made so far and the planned strategy towards implementation of the programme. Tanzania is one of the countries implementing this programme. We in Tanzania feel the programme which is still in its pilot phase will be successful given that its in-built participatory approach of small homogenous farmers groups has raised the farmers' response and increased their expectations.
Mr Chairman, Tanzania supports FAO's initiatives towards ensuring sound water management as contained in paragraphs 91-94. Water management is very crucial for countries which face frequent droughts.
Mr Chairman, Tanzania supports EMPRES project and commends FAO for giving it high priority. Similarly, my delegation endorses information monitoring. We believe this is very important especially in countries like Tanzania which has liberalized crop marketing and should adopt new methodologies for monitoring production and market information.
We endorse the document on the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries and hope that FAO and donor nations and agencies will ensure its full implementation. Tanzania has many widespread inland and coastal fish resources which are an important source of both rural employment, income and animal protein for the rural population as well as the majority of the poor.
Mr Chairman, as regards forestry we endorse the proposal and believe success in sustainable management of trees and forests, will depend on the use of proven forestry practices and indigenous knowledge. New practices being developed by various countries would be tested and proven to be effective before they are applied internationally. We propose that credit and rewards should be given to professionals who develop indigenous ways of managing forests and trees sustainably.
Mr Chairman, Tanzania supports FAO proposals put forward for trade and trade-related activities. We know less developed countries stand to gain little from the Uruguay Round Agreement but we hope in future this trend might improve. In this respect FAO could assist these countries to develop agricultural policies that are geared towards this success.
Mr Chairman, like other delegations we endorse the Medium-term Plan of six years to be reviewed every two years.
F.I. SORIBE (Nigeria): Mr Chairman, thank you very much. The Nigerian Delegation commends FAO on the Medium-term Plan document. We endorse the six-year Rolling Plan to be reviewed every two years.
The Nigerian Delegation wishes to support the emphasis given to the crucial role of water in agriculture given in paragraphs 91-94.
As we are most aware a great number of sub-Saharan African countries cannot support the growing population in the next century based on low technological input rainfed agriculture. The role of irrigated
agriculture cannot therefore be over emphasized. This is more so because of the continued threat of drought and desertification, particularly in Sahelian regions.
We urge FAO to pay careful and special attention to capacity building and institutional strengthening in Sahelian countries giving emphasis on participatory development.
Ms Malgorzata PIOTROWSKA (Poland): Mr Chairman, it is indeed sad to see the columns depicted on the first page in the document before us and to have to admit that in spite of all our efforts over 50 years to overcome hunger and malnutrition, we still have nearly 800 million people suffering from chronic undernutrition. This justifies a priority purpose in the Medium-term Plan for FAO to erase hunger and malnutrition in the world, to bring all those black columns in the graft down to the zero line. We find the presentation and analysis of the situation in this document highly accurate and relevant leading to consistent operative conclusions in the medium term for several reasons such as the rate of population growth in the poorest countries is the highest while the rate of food production increases is the lowest. The Special Programme on Food Production in support of food security in low-income food-deficit countries deserves our strong support. These countries must be shown that we do have the technology to vastly increase the indigenous food production to keep pace with the population growth. Having said that we strongly agree with the concerns raised in the document concerning the steady erosion of the natural resource based for food and agriculture production and the emphasis put on the primary importance of sustainability. Unfortunately it is difficult to say how with presently known technology we can drastically increase food production in sensitive areas without impinging on our natural resources and fragile environments.
Turning to the medium-term outlook for fisheries, it is indeed alarming to see that continued overfishing of the largest species is gradually leading to a serious decline in fish capture. In this context the future policies must emphasis serious restrictions on ocean fishing and a call for international agreements on responsible fisheries in international waters. In this context the plan rightly underscores aquaculture as a fast growing complement and supplement to the world's fish production.
Turning to forestry which is a priority area for Poland, it is indeed alarming to see the enormous annual waste of deforestation in the developing world primarily as a result of clearing agriculture production. The Pope rightly points out that in the long run, increased agricultural activity will save the forests from total destruction. World food security and sustainable development are thus inseparable.
With budgetary constraints the governing bodies and the Secretariat of FAO will have to seek ways to attain the set goals. In the long run, forestry analysis, assistance and advice combined with normative functions may well become in the long run the main pillar of the Organization. Steady efforts should be made to consolidate FAO's comparative advantage and improve cooperation with other UN bodies to reduce overlap.
Indeed FAO must be a universal agency as special efforts should be made to make its activities including formation, detailed analysis and publications directly useful for the end users. In Europe FAO has not offered an orchestrated coherent response to the needs of its more and more numerous members from central and eastern Europe. Without relating the value of assistance rendered to these countries, Poland included, there has been so far a trend to enhance the scope of this assistance not to identify clearly the FAO role and involvement in this sub-region. Taking into account the activities of other international organizations and financial institutions in this area it is to be hoped that the long awaited establishment of sub-regional offices for central and eastern Europe will organize FAO for greater involvement in farms which should in no way divert FAO's attention from its global commitments.
In summary Mr Chairman, we find ourselves in agreement with the analysis and actions envisioned by FAO for the medium term until the year 2001.
Jaime GARCIA Y BADIAS (España): Felicitamos a la Secretaría por el documento presentado y por las mejoras que presenta con relación a documentos anteriores y de conferencias anteriores.
El Plan a Medio Plazo refleja las prioridades de la Organización, sobre las cuales deseamos manifestar algunos comentarios.
Respecto al Capítulo 1, apoyamos su enfoque y sus desafíos, que creemos reflejan la misión de la Organización y su empeño en la lucha contra el hambre en el mundo.
Entendemos que conviene resaltar la especial importancia que el papel de la mujer juega en ofrecer la posibilidad del cambio en la familia, en el acceso al crédito, en la educación y en la propiedad de la tierra. Para nuestra delegación, tanto el papel de la mujer como la posibilidad de potenciar y mejorar la formación de las poblaciones, son elementos básicos en el esfuerzo para aumentar la participación popular en el proceso de desarrollo.
El equilibrio en el medio ambiente, basado en un desarrollo sostenible, es básico. La FAO debe, efectivamente, mantener la prioridad acordada hasta ahora en las actividades de seguimiento de los acuerdos adoptados en la Conferencia de Río.
España se felicita en particular de las prioridades acordadas en y sobre la seguridad alimentaria tal y como reflejó la Declaración de Barcelona sobre los derechos alimentarios del hombre. Esta debe ser una prioridad permanente en la Comunidad Internacional. En ese contesto la FAO debe, efectivamente, incrementar sus esfuerzos para el alivio de la pobreza. A finales del Siglo XX, se hace imperativo el asegurar los aportes nutricionales y vitamínicos mínimos para aproximadamente un tercio de la población mundial que sufre en la actualidad deficiencias básicas en su dieta.
Nos felicitamos de todo el proceso por el cual parece que la puesta en marcha del Código de Conducta para una Pesca Responsable, será pronto una realidad. Deseamos indicar que la aplicación del Código de Conducta debe favorecer ante todo y primordialmente el control de los recursos pesqueros y debe favorecer unas prácticas sostenibles de las capturas. Esperamos y deseamos que este ejemplo de la pesca sirva de modelo para otras áreas de actuación de la Organización.
Creemos, señor Presidente, que el Plan a Medio Plazo, debe ser en toda Organización una previsión de trabajo de gran utilidad que permita estimar las prioridades, orientaciones y previsiones de futuro y que, en esta ocasión, creemos que es ponderado y bastante bien elaborado.
José Manuel DE MENDONCA LIMA (Portugal): Monsieur le Président, je peux vous assurer que je serai très bref. Qu'il me soit permis, d'emblée, de féliciter le Secrétariat pour la qualité du document. Il examine effectivement plusieurs questions importantes pour l'avenir de l'agriculture mondiale et la satisfaction des besoins alimentaires. Il est concret et précis.
Nous attendons avec une attention particulière les résultats des objectifs déjà consignés dans la déclaration à présenter au Sommet de 1996, notamment en ce qui concerne la nutrition et la sécurité alimentaire.
Le rôle de la FAO et son programme d'action sont clairs. Le document définit avec précision les objectifs de l'Organisation. A cet égard, ce qui est particulièrement important pour nous, ce sont les questions relatives à la gestion des marchés et aux échanges commerciaux, à la sécurité alimentaire, comme nous l'avons déjà dit; c'est aussi la priorité accordée au développement durable en tenant compte des implications environnementales, la préservation des ressources naturelles, notamment les ressources hydriques, forestières et halieutiques, et enfin, les orientations en ce qui concerne les codes de conduite, notamment dans le domaine de la pêche. A cet égard, il convient de faire des efforts plus efficaces dans le domaine du Codex alimentarius, de la protection et des ressources phytogénétiques.
En conclusion, cette politique et ces orientations doivent être évidemment en accord avec les politiques des programmes nationaux ainsi que le renforcement des organisations non-gouvernementales.
LE PRESIDENT: Il reste trois orateurs: l'Indonésie, le Pakistan et le Brésil. Je me permettrai ensuite de faire un résumé de la discussion et M. Wade répondra aux questions qui ont été soulevées.
Herijanto SOEPRAPTO (Indonesia): Mr Chairman, first of all I would like to extend our appreciation to the Director-General of FAO for preparing the Medium-term Plan 1996-2001. This Plan reflects the
importance given by FAO to future activities dealing with the food and agricultural situation in the world. It is the duty of FAO to accord a high priority on the international agenda to the solution of food and agricultural problems and advocate the adoption of discussions by member countries that would contribute finally to the solution of the problems in the world.
A recent global gathering revealed the profound extent to which both developed and developing countries need to commit themselves seriously to work on the basis of shared responsibility.
Having said that, it is my delegation's view that the Medium-term Plan should take into account the recent outcome of international conferences.
We welcome some elements in this Plan which have taken into consideration the outcome of those conferences, such as the World Summit on Social Development, the International Conference on Population and Development and the World Conference on Women.
Along these lines we would like to draw the attention of this meeting to next year's World Food Summit. We hope that FAO can anticipate the outcome of this Summit in order that the idea of the Summit can adequately be reflected in the Medium-term Plan.
My delegation would like to see more emphasis given to South-South cooperation, with a view to achieving the greater collective self-reliance of the developing countries, including in the field of food and agriculture.
Moreover, whilst we welcome FAO's technical cooperation, paragraphs 71 and 72, my delegation would like to refer to the new direction of TCDC adopted by the high level on TCDC in its meeting in New York in response to the UN General Assembly Resolution 49/96. The new direction call is for TCDC to be reoriented so as to enable it to focus on strategic initiatives that would have a major developmental impact on food and agriculture in a large number of developing countries.
My delegation would like to see South-South cooperation and TCDC being given more attention in the Medium-term Plan.
LE PRESIDENT: Je remercie le Représentant de l'Indonésie pour cette idée qui, en effet, pourrait être développée.
Shahid RASHID (Pakistan): Like others, we applaud the preparation of the 6th year Medium-term Plan for consideration. This Medium-term Plan is of particular significance because it covers the period of transition to the 21st century, a century which is also the beginning of a new millennium.
We are pleased to note that the main strategic thrusts have been clearly identified in the Plan -- food security for all and the elimination of malnutrition. These matters must remain central themes for FAO activities.
The focus on providing special support for food production in low-income food-deficit countries is one that we all whole-heartedly endorse. In this regard we would, however, like to stress that an increase in productivity should be sought within the context of conservation and the sustainable use of natural resources. We must pursue plans which avoid the pitfalls of our past action in this regard when there were numerous negative side-effects.
Problems like waterlogging and salinity, soil erosion and land degradation should be addressed but alongside any programme seeking the enhancement of food productivity. The approach, therefore, has to be a comprehensive one. The focus on the water and irrigation sectors is most important. We hope it will receive the attention it deserves. The overall approach towards sustainable agriculture and rural development was a key feature pertaining to poverty alleviation, forestry conservation, responsible fishing and the preservation of biodiversity, which we fully endorse.
One area in which FAO would be required to play an increasingly active role is in agricultural trade. This subject is closely linked to the larger question of food security as policy measures, following the agreement on agriculture, will have to be taken with a view to seeking the greatest benefit from trade liberalization.
Many developing countries are still uncertain about the long-term effects, effects which may be adverse or beneficial and require policy assistance from FAO. FAO should strengthen its capacity in this respect.
We would also like to see the strengthening of FAO's Investment Centre services which will have a key role in future programme activities.
In concluding, Mr Chairman, we would also like to endorse the fact that the Medium-term Plan should be prepared on a six year rolling basis and up-dated every two years. It should take into account the changing needs of different regions.
Nedilson RICARDO JORGE (Brazil): I have brief comments regarding the substantive content of the document, its format and periodicity. As for the format of the document, we find it adequate. In fact, there is no need to repeat in the Medium-term Plan all aspects which have already been mentioned in the Programme of Work and Budget. We think that inserting references to the Programme of Work and Budget wherever appropriate is an adequate way to shorten the document while maintaining the depth of its contents.
As to periodicity, we would be prepared to accept reviewing the full document of the Medium-term Plan at every other conference and in between the FAO Secretariat could prepare a very short document containing only the changes to the last approved Medium-term Plan and other useful information related to it. We will, however, join the consensus formed in the Commission on this matter.
As to the contents of the document, we support the range of ideas expressed therein, in particular Chapter 2, the main strategic thrusts. We fully agree that food security and nutrition should be the highest priority for FAO. We consider that providing food for all is, in fact, the most important objective of our Organization.
We think that indicative budget percentages and/or indicative budget trends should be mentioned in the Medium-term Plan. These percentages or trends might even consist of a separate annex that would not be approved or endorsed by the Conference but would still provide useful data to understand the priorities of the Medium-term Plan.
Although the document is very good in general, Mr Chairman, there is one aspect of it where we see room for improvement. We consider that on some occasions the document lacks certain precision when dealing with very important issues. It is possible that the FAO Secretariat did not have much time to consider the relevant divisions of FAO and that more careful consultation could have led to an even more finely-tuned document. One striking example of what I am mentioning is found in paragraph 170 where it says that the revised undertaking is expected to become a binding instrument, probably as a protocol to the Convention on Biological Diversity. The question here is "by whom?", since this has not been discussed in the Commission yet. We think that, despite this last comment, the document is of high quality, the general thrust of which we are pleased to support.
Pinit KORSIEPORN (Thailand): Briefly, in principle my government supports the Medium-term Plan.
I merely want to highlight one point which is related to paragraph 152. May I give you an example? As you may know, rice cultivation in wetlands normally contributes significantly to global warming through the emission of methane and carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. The rising world temperature will have unfavourable implications for rice growing countries, especially in the tropical and equatorial belt, where the bulk of the world's output originates. These findings are not contradictory to the report recently released by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
According to this report, the scientists believe that the earth has entered a period of climatic change that is likely to cause widespread economic, social and environmental dislocation over the next centuries if emissions of heat-trapping gases like carbon dioxide and others are not reduced. Furthermore, natural ecosystems being
untended, it would be even more vulnerable than cropland. Some forests would disappear, crop yields would reduce and plant growth would stunt.
This issue which I have raised in relation to rice-growing countries needs more attention not only from the world community but also international organizations including FAO. We strongly feel that it is essential that FAO, the only UN specialized organization in food and agriculture, should be alert at all times to the changes that might cause undesirable effects to food and agriculture. It is in this connection that I think this paragraph needs to be clarified. Another question is how the FAO will cope with this in view of the climate change related to food.
LE PRESIDENT: Je remercie le délégué de la Thaïlande de son très intéressant commentaire qui fera partie de la liste des éléments nouveaux ressortant du débat.
Si vous me le permettez, je vais maintenant essayer de procéder à une sorte de résumé de ce que j'ai retenu de cet intéressant débat.
Première constatation, tout le monde a salué le caractère concis et utile du document qui nous a été présenté. Je n'ai pas non plus entendu d'objection à l'idée du Directeur général de présenter un Plan à moyen terme de six ans actualisable tous les deux ans. A cet égard, certains délégués ont indiqué que les Plans de six ans en six ans devraient faire l'objet d'une évaluation comparée, et certains ont même dit de ne faire apparaître que les éléments nouveaux par rapport au Plan ancien.
La question d'un Plan à long terme a été évoquée par certains délégués. Il faut reconnaître que cette idée a un certains nombre de mérites, car il y a des facteurs lourds d'évolution, comme celui que vient de mentionner notre collègue de la Thaïlande sur le réchauffement climatique, il y a des facteurs lourds comme la démographie, il y a enfin les négociations internationales, comme les Négociations d'Uruguay, qui ont des effets qui dépasseront la période de six ans.
La question de l'opportunité d'un Plan à long terme s'enchaînant sur un Plan à moyen terme reste posée. Je pense que tout le monde trouverait avantage à avoir ces perspectives à long terme, puisque l'horizon 2025-2030 permet à certains facteurs d'évolution d'apparaître clairement.
Sur le fond, ensuite, j'ai noté plusieurs remarques. La première est une exigence d'équilibre des fonctions décrites dans le mandat de la FAO entre les aspects normatifs, y compris d'ailleurs à l'avantage des plus défavorisés, et l'assistance technique qui ne doit pas être trop dispersée et qui n'aurait alors aucune valeur.
J'ai noté également que, tant en matière de pêche que d'agriculture et de forêt, pour ce qui concerne la durabilité, la notion de normes d'indicateurs de gestion et la relation de ces normes de capacités de gestion avec les opérations de terrain devraient être soigneusement élaborées pour permettre un prolongement de la fonction normative vers les fonctions de terrain. A cet égard, certains ont insisté, encore que ce soit fait dans le document, sur la nécessité de rappeler d'une manière très précise les objectifs de la Commission du développement durable. Certains ont souligné la nécessité d'une approche intersectorielle, notamment en ce qui concerne la forêt et l'agriculture, où il faut avoir une approche globale.
La question de la maîtrise de l'eau a été soulignée par différentes délégations et les projets de petites irrigations, par exemple, cités comme un exemple d'activité possible pour la FAO.
La question de l'adaptation au rôle que va jouer le marché, à la suite des Négociations d'Uruguay, et la problématique de la modernisation des marché dans les pays les moins développés ont été soulignées par de nombreux orateurs, qui, a côté d'aspects proprement techniques, souhaiteraient qu'il y ait des politiques d'assistance aux politiques nationales pour favoriser l'accès au marché mondial de leur production et les aider aussi à supporter les conséquences des Négociations d'Uruguay.
Beaucoup d'intervenants ont aussi appuyé la dimension humaine du développement, et notamment réclamé une approche non pas simplement générale mais détaillée des problèmes microsociologiques, qu'il s'agisse par exemple des associations d'agriculteurs, qu'il s'agisse des femmes, qu'il s'agisse de l'accès à la terre, qu'il s'agisse du rôle du crédit rural.
Enfin, quant à l'élargissement du partenariat, le rôle du secteur privé et des ONG a été rappelé comme le fait le rapport, mais certains ont beaucoup insisté en articulant leurs raisonnements sur la manière de coopérer avec les institutions financières internationales qui doivent prendre leur part du développement rural et du développement agricole.
En matière de recherche, l'obligation de la rendre accessible au plus grand nombre de pays possible et de faire suivre pays par pays les efforts entre pays développés ou au sein des pays en voie de développement par des actions de formation et de vulgarisation, a été largement soulignée.
Des problèmes plus précis ont été soulevés qui n'entrent pas dans le cadre de ces idées générales: les problèmes de la coopération Sud-Sud. Comment est-ce-que l'Organisation peut favoriser cette coopération Sud-Sud?
La question des petits ensembles insulaires et des équilibres propres à ces petits ensembles géographiques a été soulevée.
La question de ce que peut faire la FAO dans les pays d'Europe orientale qui sont en voie de transition a été évoquée pour regretter que l'action de la FAO ne soit pas assez dynamique.
La question de la production dans les zones périurbaines a été soulevée par quelques délégations. Il est vrai que c'est un problème très important, avec le phénomène d'urbanisation.
Enfin toute une série de problèmes sur le plan administratif et budgétaire ont été abordés. Certains ont demandé que l'on mesure les effets de la décentralisation qui est sensée apporter des économies à l'Organisation, pas seulement la décentralisation du Siège vers le terrain et les bureaux régionaux et locaux, mais aussi voir s'il n'y a pas double emploi entre les bureaux régionaux et les bureaux locaux pour faire des économies administratives à ce niveau.
La question des frais de documentation a été indirectement posée a propos des possibilités qu'offrent aujourd'hui l'information et les réseaux internationaux de communication qui sont en train d'émerger. Je pense qu'on avait à l'esprit Internet, etc.
Certains ont dénoncé le recours trop souvent systématique à un appel aux ressources extrabudgétaires qui ont tendance à alourdir le Programme ordinaire au détriment des fonctions principales de l'Organisation.
Dans le même sens, certains ont appelé l'attention de l'Organisation sur la nécessité, dans le Plan à moyen terme, voire à long terme, de fixer des objectifs en ce qui concerne les différents types d'actions non pas en terme financiers mais de pourcentages respectifs. C'est en effet une idée assez intéressante. Il faudrait voir avec le Secrétariat si une telle présentation est possible.
J'espère que je n'ai pas oublié quelque chose d'important. Je vous remercie du débat qui pour ma part m'a apporté beaucoup. Je vous remercie des apports complémentaires au rapport que vous avez de la sorte apportés.
Je donne la parole à M. Wade, il est prêt à répondre aux questions directes ou indirectes que vous poserez au Secrétariat.
T. WADE (Officer-in-Charge, Office of Programme, Budget and Evaluation): It was a very interesting debate and a great deal was said but most of it, of course, was an expression of response to what we had put in the Plan. As far as I could see, there were only a couple of areas which needed some further clarification on our part. Both of them relate to areas where neither the Medium-term Plan nor the budget go quite far enough in explaining where we are going, principally because when we prepared the documents we had not taken these to the extent that we now have.
The first concerned a question from the distinguished delegate from the United States of America on paragraph 129 of the report and what we meant by the idea of Technical Departments joining forces, it being an inter-departmental arrangement and how it was going to work. In fact, of course, the World Agricultural
Information Centre is one of those topics which is supremely cross-sectoral; there is no department that it does not touch. The big problem in creating a successful information centre was to try to find a way of getting all the various sectoral interests to work together. In fact, you need the substantive know-how of the data, you need statistical knowledge to be able to produce good standards and common methodologies, and nowadays you need a great deal of technological skill in the use of computers and communications. We also need to instil the sciences of classification and categorization, the library sciences, etc., to produce a composite which will function.
The technique originally was to establish an inter-departmental working group which eventually became the Steering Committee for the World Agricultural Centre chaired by the Deputy Director-General with the membership of all the Assistant Directors-General of the Technical Departments plus, of course, Administration and Finance because of the Computer Division, and the General Information and Affairs Department because of the Library.
That probably sufficed during the development phase, but what we are now doing is looking at what structure is needed to maintain this thing from now on. It is not in the documents yet, or at least it is only very partially in the documents, because it is still under review, but I think it is starting to become clearer.
The first major group is the WAICENT Coordinating Group which would remain administratively within the Statistics Division of the Economic and Social Department but which would be its own separately identified group in the organigrams, and in fact that is starting to appear in the document already, but it reports to the Steering Committee, it does not report to the Director of the Statistics Division except for administrative matters.
That means it receives input not only from the Economics Department but from Fisheries, Forestry and ESC for Early Warning Data, etc. The second structural aspect is to establish within AFC a technical applications branch that is largely directed towards providing the necessary level of state-of-the-art technology support for WAICENT. As you probably know, we have gone for a form of client server. We are using a very portable code. We expect that code to be available to national institutions and statistical bodies so that they use exactly the same processes to develop the data to a consistent quality and standard.
Finally, the third group, which does not appear at all in the document, is within the GI department. Under the GI restructuring one of the points that have been brought very much to the surface is the importance of that department taking a role in corporate communications and information. It always had, in a way, but it had a very traditional view of it: a library with books and so on. In fact, they have a magnificent store of data, much of it in electronic form. It seems that really that belongs in WAICENT too. If you think of AGRIS and CARIS and FAO's library itself, most of which is at least referenced electronically, all this belongs in WAICENT. Added to that, the General Affairs and Information Department also has the primary responsibility for the dissemination of information products, so you can see how the connection comes in.
So the three major organizational groups are the WAICENT coordinating group within the Statistics Division, the technical applications group within the Computer Services Division, and finally a group as yet unnamed which will consolidate the technical capacity in the libraries of FAO to provide the FAO information input into WAICENT.
The only other related question, Mr Chairman, that is worth mentioning is privatization possibilities, particularly in the area of publications.In fact, part of the restructuring effort of GI is also looking at the financial frameworks within which GI would operate. I think we are all agreed internally that we will try very hard to set up an internal financial framework which, first, does not trap the resources for use by the GI department without the divisions who are producing publications making free decisions about whether they produce or do not produce and, second, we want to set it up so that the divisions have the choice as to whether they use the internal resources to produce or they go outside to produce. That way we feel that the mechanisms for efficiency, will start to come into play more firmly than they have in the past.
Mr Chairman, there was a very wide range of interventions but I do not think I should get into discussion on them. We have taken note of them. We will take them into account in the next effort we make on this Plan and we thank everybody for their very kind comments.
T. WADE (Officer-in-Charge, Office of Programme, Budget and Evaluation): First of all, I almost do not wish to make an introduction at all. You have the document. You know the history. We started with the outline at US$731.7 million. The Programme and Finance Committees urged us to bring that down and we brought it down to US$704 million in this Summary Programme of Work and Budget. The Programme and Finance Committees and the Council urged us into maximum absorbtion of cost increases and you can see in this document that we have done that and we are down to US$697.8 million. We did report on what cost increases were being absorbed. We also reported on what efforts were being made on costs savings and where we were on additional costs savings but, rather than repeat that, Mr Chairman, I will refer distinguished delegates to the verbatim for the Council. It is document CL 109/PV/1. In fact, there is a Revision 1 version but it does not affect this. You will find that my introduction there is excessively long but it covers all the issues that would otherwise have to be repeated here. On that note, Mr Chairman, unless there is something specific you would like me to address, I will stop and we can get on with it.
LE PRESIDENT: Je dois dire que votre introduction est un peu courte car je crois qu'un certain nombre d'Etats Membres avaient souhaité bénéficier de votre compétence technique pour voir quelles étaient les marges d'économies possibles d'abord sans toucher au programme et puis éventuellement en réexaminant le programme. Je pense que c'était là une demande vigoureuse de la part des Etats Membres et comme nous arrivons à l'échéance des trois jours et qu'il va falloir se décider, je voudrais vous demander des informations supplémentaires sur ce sujet ou bien des fourchettes de chiffres qui puissent être présentées à l'ensemble des membres de la Commission II. Certains avaient parlé de la nécessité d'un meilleur recouvrement des coûts d'appui. Certains ont évoqué aujourd'hui encore la réduction des frais de publication et de distribution de la documentation, d'autres ont parlé des voyages et d'autres enfin des possibilités d'économie à travers la décentralisation et visant les doubles emplois soit entre le Siège et le terrain, soit sur le terrain entre les bureaux régionaux et les bureaux locaux. Enfin, d'autres ont signalé que dans nos réunions de direction de "Government Bodies", il y avait certainement redondance de documentation et des sessions trop longues et qu'il était certainement possible d'économiser dans ce domaine.
Pouvez-vous nous éclairer sur ces différents aspects afin que nos débats soient facilités? Je pense être le porte-parole de tout le monde malgré l'existence des trois grands regroupements d'opinion que nous connaissons.
T. WADE (Officer-in-Charge, Office of Programme, Budget and Evaluation): Chairman, if you would like me to go into some more depth on that issue, I will do so. The discussion since the 108th Session of the Council has been-about what further savings could be made. As you will see in the document itself, there is already very extensive information on the savings that have been made out of the restructuring process. If you look at paragraph 124 and following there is a list of the cost benefits of the process that we are undergoing at the moment. Of course, these are estimates of what we expect to save. Some of them are very solid, such as the savings on NPOs versus International Programme Offices. Some of them are not so solid, for example, the consequential savings of the new arrangements for obtaining human resources, for example academics in research institutions, TCDC and so on. These will depend on the speed with which we can implement these modalities. However, these are the savings that the Director-General felt he could commit himself to making and to using in the budget document to fund the priorities that had been approved in the 106th Session of the Council. Those major priorities are also listed in the following section, so you can see a rough balance sheet of resources, income and expenditure.
However, coming out of the subsequent programme and Finance Committee meetings and the 109th Session of the Council, we have of course some ideas which could result in further savings. I will go through each of those now with a view to trying to give you a feel for scope. In many cases I cannot give you a figure on
what the savings will be, simply because we are in a position of researching each of these issues now, and we do not yet know what the final benefits will be. Let me try and see if I can be of assistance.
The first one that was mentioned in the reports was savings on travel. This does seem to be an area of hope. We have had an internal review of our travel arrangements and we have examined that report. The Director-General has now asked us to go ahead and look at the precise financial consequences for each of the recommendations. It is rather complicated because it involves moving away from a single contract with an international travel agent, who gives us a substantial discount on all services which are put through that agent, to something more diverse. It could involve changes from non-endorsable tickets to endorsable tickets. It could perhaps involve changes from contracts with a travel agent to contracts with airlines. It could involve decentralization of procurement of travel. We believe, for example, that there are opportunities to purchase tickets in the countries in which we work which might be more economical than purchasing here in Rome.
What are the savings you can make on this exercise? Let me give you a feeling for the total figures. In 1994 the Regular Programme funded travel for about US$33 million. Of that amount, 55 percent was for fares and the balance was for Daily Subsistence Allowance. Daily Subsistence Allowance is not something where there is much scope at all. In fact, there is not really any scope because the rates are set by the International Civil Service Commission under Article 11 of the statutes of the Commission and we are obliged to follow. So it not as if we can change the rates of DSA that are paid. Therefore, when it comes to savings, we are dealing with the fares content of travel, and in a biennium that would be about US$36 million, based on the statistical data of 1994. That US$36 million is the figure after we have received the discount from the travel agent. What one has to do then is look at the extent to which one could save on the US$36 million. This is where we get into very deep water because there is some capacity for a percentage saving on that US$36 million, noting that there is a saving already in there because of the discount. What is the percentage that would apply? Is it 5 percent? Is it 10 percent? I am afraid I have to leave the guess to you because we are not in a position to advise you on what that figure is. The Director-General's instructions to me are that we are not to give the governing bodies guesses on which they will make decisions if we are not confident that we can support those guesses. So the guess is yours, ladies and gentlemen, not mine.
I will move to the important issue of Field Programme support.
The argument that has come up is to say there is a large contribution from the Regular Programme in support of Field Programme activities.
Now, I will not go into the polemics about which way that contribution is running. Is it the Field Programme that is supporting the Regular Programme? Or vice-versa? Let me just deal with the arithmetics of it, the financial figures. The argument is derived from the Programme Implementation Report which you discussed on Saturday and in fact there is a particular table in that report. We are talking now about C 95/8. In paragraph 43 there is a table 2.7, which suggests that in 1994 total support costs exceeded the reimbursements from the various donors by US$49 million - in other words there is a US$98 million contribution from the Regular Programme in support of the Field Programmes. It sounds good. If we can get rid of that, that is US$98 million more in the Regular Programme but we have to be very careful with that figure. It would be completely misleading to tell you that. The first point is that that figure refers to the cost of all Field Programmes so the first difficulty we face is that it includes UNDP, Trust Funds and TCP; and for UNDP we specifically have no control over the extent of support costs levied. In fact it was UNDP's Governing Council that changed the rate from 13 percent project-servicing cost to an average of about 10 percent on all of IPF projects.
At the same time they added a small facility for technical support to projects, which is worth so far around about US$2 million a year - very much less than the cost of that process when you see from Table 2.6 that technical support services are actually running at around about 10 percent of the value of the project's input. Actually US$2.5 million is very, very much less than 10 percent so we are losing not only on the administrative and operational support at 10 percent, but we are also losing on the technical support.
The problem here I am afraid lies with Member Nations. It is Member Nations that accepted these particular proposals. It is yourselves that proposed in fact the changes in the UNDP governing council arrangements, and we have no option but to follow so we have to exclude that part of the arithmetic from the US$98 million
saving and I do suggest that if you feel that this is the right way to go, i.e., that there should be greater recovery, then you also have to act in the UNDP Governing Council to do something about it.
If we deal now just with Trust Funds, which would appear from what I have heard to be the target for increased recovery of support costs then we are talking about 58 percent of that programme in 1994. Now that 58 percent itself will consist of two elements: administrative and operational support and then what we call technical support. In the case of administrative and operational support, you will see again from that same document and from the table above that the cost of providing administrative and operational support is about 16.8 percent of project inputs. The standard recovery rate is 13 percent, so you see you have a gap. I have to say the average is not 13 percent because emergency projects get special treatment. There are some exceptions to the rule but if we can get the 13 percent mandated in the rules presently we would have a 3.8 percent gap versus cost.
At the last Conference the Secretariat proposed some substantial changes to the recovery mechanisms which also involved recovering more of the support costs but there was not consensus and the Director-General was asked to consult with Member Nations to try and see what could be done. He did that. He carried out informal consultations in 1994 and the conclusion he came to was that consensus did not exist. The preconditions did not exist and furthermore the Organization could not afford to lose the benefit of Trust Fund work as it was of benefit not only to Member Nations but also to the normative capacity of the Organization. So his conclusion, which incidentally was endorsed by the 106th Session of the Council, was that we would not increase the support cost rate of 13 percent but rather we would identify ways of reducing the 16.8 percent and that is now under implementation at this time.
A major aspect of that is decentralization of operations. Why does decentralization of operations save money? Everybody knows decentralization costs you more, or at least in the normal environment it can cost you more. We have, however, a very special situation which is that we run our operations from Rome and much of the operational support is not actually Professional staff but it is General Service support staff who carry out all the personnel actions for field personnel, do all the procurement actions, and who generate the enormous amount of paperwork that goes into supporting this very large programme. On average, across the regional offices, those support staff will cost something like 40 percent of the cost of the same staff in Rome, even if you don't change efficiencies and you just keep the same numbers. You have what is effectively a 60 percent reduction in the cost of that particular category. I estimate that this change alone will take us from 16.8 percent cost to between 13 percent and 14 percent so here we can see a major improvement in the relationship occurring.
Now, given that this approach has been approved, Mr Chairman, the Director-General's view is that now is not the time for him to propose a change in rates. He, first of all, should implement what has been decided to test and see whether in fact these forecasts turn out to be true and move along from there.
In the budget for 1996-97 you have the first stage of implementation in the form of an operations unit being shown in our Bangkok office. This is the trial one. We hope to develop and adjust all the necessary procedures and the infrastructural support needed for decentralized operations and, given successful implementation of that, apply it to Africa, Latin America and to the Near East.
This leaves us, Mr Chairman, with technical support to projects. Now here there seems to be more consensus. That is, recipient governments, donors, and the Organization all agree that technical support is essential. All of our evaluations show we should be putting more money into technical support to projects and it is clear that it needs to be paid for. The Director-General therefore intends that there should be a process of improved planning for technical support services in project documents and in project budgets such that we agree with donors what services will be provided and what missions will be mounted, etc., what reviews, appraisals, evaluations will be carried out, so that we have them in the project budget and then charge for that cost. Charging for that cost will reduce the cost to the Regular Programme.
What is the scope for savings arising from these charges? If we assume that the entire amount of technical support services which is included in that table in the Programme Implementation Report, that is US$28.4 million, is potentially chargeable as a starting point, and we say that 58 percent of it is from Trust Funds, (and remember we cannot do anything about the other aspect), then we see we have got a figure of US$16.5 million that might be recoverable in a biennium. However, the definition of technical support
services includes items such as project identification, technical monitoring and backstopping at Headquarters. Various things like the project task force meetings at Headquarters, and a series of things that either are very difficult to charge, (i.e. meeting times at Headquarters for a project task force are a little bit difficult to check and rather difficult to convince donors they should pay for), or project identification, which many people would say are part of our Regular Programme activities. If you exclude the ones I mention, the US$16.5 million comes down to about US$9 million. So the potential we see at this stage is about US$9 million.
Bear in mind (and I am sorry about all the caveats but it is my job as budget person to give you the realities) that the current situation is that we have projects of, say, an average three years' duration in progress at the moment and it is unlikely that donors are going to completely revise those agreements and sign new ones so any implementation of this process has got to be gradual. You can see, therefore, that you are not going to produce US$9 million overnight. It is going to be over a period of years that we improve that situation. How much of the US$9 million is getting into the realm of guessing, which is not my job.
Mr Chairman, further restructuring is an area which people have considerable hope for, and we too. We have two major areas under consideration at the moment, the effects of which are not included in the document.
The first is the Department of Administration and Finance. This a longer-term effort, of course, because it requires certain things to be done in terms of policy process and procedure, before you can deal with structure. In fact they have done a great deal of work. They have produced a major report on streamlining - a 130-page report of detailed recommendations to avoid duplications in the processes as they occur now. There has been very heavy involvement of the departments. They have provided 34 pages of detailed analysis of departmental comments. As a consequence, we felt we were in a better position to implement the new management support unit structure. This involves delegations from the AF Department, the Administration and Finance Department, to the Assistant Director-Generals of each of the departments who have their own management support unit to carry out the administrative actions that are necessary. So this is, in effect, a decentralization of the authority to get on with things. It means the departments do not have to go back to the central unit for approval for everything. They can take responsibility and accountability for their own actions. Revisions of further delegations for the field are in progress. However, there is a necessity to create a supportive infrastructure that allows the Director-General to make those delegations. One of the most important ones that the Director-General has approved and is in the process of being implemented is the implementation of local audits of the field offices in the sub-regional offices and the provision or decentralization of some of our internal audit staff to the regional offices. Once that control or monitoring function is well in place, the Director-General will then be in a position to delegate a great deal more to the field so that if things do go wrong he finds out quickly and can take corrective action and can of course maintain the accountability that is necessary for any form of decentralization.
The other major work that is underway, of course, Mr Chairman, which is a prerequisite for the restructuring of the AF Department is FINSYS. There, as I think you have been informed, and I will cover it very briefly, we are in the process now of going out for tender for a new package solution. It has got to be tried and tested. It has got to run on existing hardware. We hope to procure the package by the end of this year assuming all goes well. We have the assistance of Coopers and Lybrand, one of the big eight accounting firms, in developing the specifications that assist us in evaluating which package would best meet the rather different needs of this Organization in terms of currencies and the international setting in which we operate.
Now, it is a rather long cycle of implementation for these sorts of changes. These are not the sorts of changes you make overnight so there is a problem with saying that in 1996 to 1997 the costs of that department will come down in an extraordinary way. In fact, if anything, our problem will be to support the implementation sufficiently strongly so that FINSYS II is not like FINSYS I and is a successful implementation which results in improved information flow and reduced administrative costs. I should add that AF Department has made an extraordinary effort in this budget. They are down by 12 Professional posts and 67 General Service posts. Admittedly some of that is to do with the NSU structures but there are real reductions in that department in 1996-97.
The GI Department is further ahead with its organizational restructuring. It has issued a report which has come out very recently under the title of "Proposals for a Corporate Communications Policy and for the Restructuring of the GI Department". That has been subject to extensive consultation internally. It has, I think, been accepted in principle by the Director-General although he now wants to see the financial
- 81 -
implications of the new structure. The report was more about the policy issues than the financial consequences, so we in Budget are now working very closely with GI trying to work out the sorts of financial frameworks I have referred to under publications so that we can have a more competitive environment.
There are no estimates of the savings from that process, but just to give you a little bit of the feel for the possibilities, Publications itself is in the budget document about US$33 million. It already shows a programme reduction of US$4.5 million so we have not failed to do something. The GI Department itself, as an organizational unit, has a budget of some US$50 million. So that is the base. What the savings will be, I simply cannot say yet. There is not enough work completed on the process, which actually is a very complex one.
The next category of savings was the regrading of Professional posts. Paragraph 114 of the document describes the fact that the Director-General was specifically trying to improve the structure of posts so that we could attract younger Professionals with state-of-the-art qualifications; in fact, in the document you already see a decline in the number of P-5 posts, but at the time of preparation we were not able to complete the work that we have been doing all through the structure; so there are a further 25-32 downgradings from P-4 to P-3 still subject to work on applying the International Civil Service Commission's Classification Standards. However these are likely to produce savings of about US$1.3 million.
Measures to increase income was another area which was suggested. One which may yield some resources is the incentive scheme. If Conference decides to eliminate the current incentive scheme whereby a discount in effect is paid to those Members who pay their assessed contributions before 31 March. There miscellaneous income will rise by that amount. I am not quite sure about the exact figure but I think it is about US$1.2 million.
There are other suggestions, there quite a few of them, in fact, such as selling the information products we have and selling the electronic information we have. These are being investigated but we are a long way from being able to know how likely it is that this will generate a great deal of extra income. Fund raising through joint ventures with the private sector and NGOs possibly is another source. We have talked about technical support services and increased earnings from that area and maybe there are possibilities from the sale of FAO items such as the UNICEF example of Christmas cards. Can I say, mind you, that in my personal view the scopes for big money in this area is not that enormous. I do not think that this is going to resolve our budgetary problems. The next area is non-staff human resources and what possible savings we can make in that area. Two suggestions were made by the Committees. The first concerns the accelerated applications of the new agreements. We are talking about the use of retirees, the use of academics from research institutions, the use of TCDC experts and TCCT experts. The Director-General has instructed that we should accelerate the implementation of these new arrangements and he is very determined. This is despite some difficulty in the implementation process, not so much the retiree scheme, which is going well or the academic scheme which looks it will take off well, but with the other two schemes that require rather a lot of coordination between the contributing government and the recipient government. The modality is harder to manage and we have to look at that.
I am reluctant to suggest that there will be much greater savings in this area. Why? Because the budget already identifiesUS$8.4 million worth of savings. If you take out more than that, we may be deluding ourselves about the rate of implementation of these schemes. It is possible that we can do better but I am not confident about it and I am just giving you a straight view of what I feel about the capacity of implementing these new arrangements.
The second suggestion in the same area was to reduce the reliance on staff and increase the reliance on consultants, so change this ratio of staff to consultants. Consultants, generally speaking, are cheaper than staff. There is scope here and in fact we have already built into this budget quite a switch in this ratio and you can see that by looking at the amounts of budgeted resources. You find in 1994-95 that we expected to spend about US$3.5 for staff against each dollar spent on consultants. That is a global ratio; I am talking about all staff, General Service and everything. This is not the ratio of Professional staff to consultants.
In 1996-97, that figure has fallen to three dollars so you have a 16 to 17 percent improvement in terms of lowering the ratio relationship of staff to consultants. Now we have to do more work on this and we have agreed that it requires a review to come up with what is possible and what is not possible. There are issues.
Clearly the quest for economy drives you to push the ratio down, whereas the quest for effectiveness, which demands adequate supervision from staff, drives it in the opposite direction. A balance has to be found. We also have to bare in mind that one of FAO's great comparative advantages is the length of experience, the broad experience of its staff so we do not want to throw that out of the window.
Cost of governance, Mr Chairman, you mentioned. Yes, here I have to say the situation is a little confused because in a way it depends a great deal on what comes out of this Conference in terms of changes or in terms of its delegations to the Council to make future changes. The Director-General has made proposals to reduce the length of meetings as you can see by this meeting itself and the previous Council meeting, also the Programme and Finance Committees have been trimmed back, documentation and rules have changed. There is a ceiling of 6 400 words on all documents. If we want to get an exception to that, we have to go to the Deputy Director-General and get him to sign off. Even in the big documents you will see that we have reduced the Programme Evaluation Report, we have reduced the size of the Medium-term Plan. We are under instruction to make very specific efforts to save money in these areas. Those savings are there in the budget now. However, there are other suggestions coming from various delegations about improvements in governance and I think that they will generate some savings and we will work with you as you crystallize your ideas to try to put a figure on those savings. The only one I am aware of specifically, no there are two actually - is one Finance Committee Member proposed that the Summary Programme of Work and Budget be eliminated and replaced by an Outline Programme of work and Budget document slightly expanded, of course, and that the Joint meeting in January be taken out of the system. That has some savings but not very large. The cost of the meeting is about US$82 000. The cost of the summary Programme of Work and Budget is US$186 000. We would guess that the savings would be about US$50 000 being that you still want an expanded version of the Outline.
The suggestion on Verbatims, that needs some more analysis but Verbatim recording costs us about US$1 000 a day. It would depend on how widely it is applied, but it gives you a figure on which you can work plus anything else that you yourselves come up with in reducing Governance.
There have been some suggestions on reducing the number of Commissions and Statutory Bodies. This, of course, is again something for the Governing Bodies and not the Secretariat, but we do have analysis of which one seems to have become defunct and we will eventually be able to produce some information on possible opportunities to at least streamline the list of them even if they do not save much in costs.
Mr Chairman, that just about covers the scope for savings and in the Council. We did of course draw your attention to the risks that exist in this budget, I will mention them very briefly rather than go over it in detail, as it is in the Verbatim. Briefly the risks are that cost increases of around about US$19.5 million are not foreseen in this budget document even though we now know they may occur. This of course includes the International Civil Service Commission's recommendation for increases in the salaries of Professional staff which may or may not go through the General Assembly. In fact, we know there is some resistance about those recommendations. However, if they went through, it be a part of the extra US$19.5 million.
Please recall that this document is prepared at 1665, the previous budge rate so that the comparisons are valid. If the exchange rate is Lire 1 600 on Friday when you vote then that is US$9.1 million of bad news.
These are issues which should be taken against potential savings so that you do not create a situation where you believe you have kept the budget purely on a cost saving basis but actually you are damaging the programme. If you have to take a reduction in the budget, please do recognize what it means and we should be able to come back to you and say well, what it meant was this, we have reduced these programmes based on the criteria that are established for setting priorities.
Mr Chairman, I am sure now that I have overstayed your invitation and I will stop there.
LE PRESIDENT: Je remercie M. Wade de cette tentative d'explication. Je souhaiterais qu'il nous donne ces explications par écrit car je vois qu'il a un texte écrit et je pense qu'il serait utile à tous les membres de la Commission d'en disposer.
Là s'arrête le rôle du Président car je vois que le représentant de l'Australie demande la parole. Mais il y a un deuxième aspect qui n'a pas été mentionné, et je le rappelle pour mémoire: si l'on est obligé de réduire le programme autour de fonctions essentielles de la FAO, quels seront les critères à prendre en compte pour ces réductions de programme? M. Wade a abordé cette question vers la fin de son exposé et je le mentionne simplement.
John Bruce SHARPE (Australia): Thank you Mr Chairman. I do not wish to make my delegation's intervention on this item at this time, but I would like to take the opportunity of thanking Mr Wade for that information. I thought it would be opportune to ask now do we have a figure, a total figure? He has gone through quite a bit of information. I realize that some of it is still in the process of being considered and we cannot expect to have figures for those areas. However, 'if you are excluding the possibilities of the salary increases that are likely to come through and exclude things like the exchange rate, what is a ball park figure taken right at the lowest end. Have we got a figure, a minimum figure on what all of those cost declines are going to come to or likely to come to.
Thank you.T. WADE (Officer-in-Charge, Office of Programme, Budget and Evaluation): I guess the answer is no because there are too many of them that are at the level of being guesses. What I am saying is that it is improper for me to guess a figure which you will use for your decision-making if I cannot be confident, as a professional officer of this Organization, that that is a reasonable estimate, and I cannot. There are some figures which we have quoted, as you have heard, which are firm. I am not saying that all the figures are in that situation but the big areas, which are possibly technical support services, GI and maybe AF (but AF is really 1998-99) and some of the other ones I went through, are at the stage where it is a guess and I just cannot tell you a reasonable figure at this time.
Inside and outside these meetings I have been under great pressure to give that figure because it would be very easy if I could say, "Well, we could do cost-savings of US$50 million and we do not have any problem; it will not hurt the programme", but it is an illusion. There is not a great deal of movement in the programme in the short term. We have taken so much out in this budget - US$43 million is quite a lot of money - that you must not have the illusion that it can be done so easily. You see little bits and pieces, US$1 million here, US$3 million there, maybe US$5 million here, etcetera, but you are taking in those sorts of ball park figures, not the figures of US$40 million, US$50 million or, as the Distinguished Delegate from the United States of America would like to see, US$100 million. You are not going to get those sorts of figures without programme reductions. I am afraid the answer is no. I am not being uncooperative. Believe me, I am being professional in giving you what is proper advice at a time like this.
LE PRESIDENT: Nous vous remercions. Vous allez nous distribuer votre commentaire - et pour une fois je ferai dérogation à mes principes - en langue anglaise.
Je pense que l'autre versant des choses, qui est de trouver un programme finançable, doit également être envisagé dans nos discussions. Nous ne pouvons pas commencer maintenant, parce qu'il est cinq heures et demi, mais l'idée de retenir quelques critères généraux, pour définir quels sont les programmes réellement prioritaires de la FAO, est un deuxième versant de discussion qu'il faut avoir, en même temps que l'aspect des ressources, pour voir où nous nous situerons.
Je vous remercie en tout cas pour vos explications, pour la distribution de votre document, pour tous les efforts que vous avez faits aujourd'hui. Je clos la séance en demandant à chacun de se préparer pour demain.
The meeting rose at 17.45 hours.
La séance est levée à 17 h 45.
Se levanta la sesión a las 17.45 horas.
