Previous Page Table of Contents Next Page

IV - PROGRAMME, BUDGETARY, FINANCIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS
IV - QUESTIONS CONCERNANT LE PROGRAMME, LE BUDGET, LES FINANCES ET L'ADMINISTRATION
IV - ASUNTOS DEL PROGRAMA Y ASUNTOS PRESUPUESTARIOS, FINANCIEROS Y ADMINISTRATIVOS

16. Summary Programme of Work and Budget, 1978-79
16. Sommaire du Programme de travail et budget 1978-79
16. Resumen del Programa de Labores y Presupuesto para 1978-79

EL PRESIDENTE: En primer lugar voy a conceder la palabra al doctor Phillips, Presidente del Comité del Programma.

R.W. PHILLIPS, (Chairman, Programme Committee): Mr. Chairman, I will keep in mind your admonition of this morning for us to be brief in introducing items. At the same time, I hope you will judge my brevity in relation to the importance and complexity of the item and perhaps allow me somewhat more time than would normally be taken to introduce an item since this is, in the minds of most, the most important item on the Council Agenda.

I would also recall that owing to the timing agreed upon for.the various meetings this year there was a fairly short gap between the completion of the meetings of the Programme and Finance Committees and the present session of the Council. Therefore, the document reporting the two Committees' work, CL 71/4, was available to most only at the beginning of the Council session. In the haste there were some errors and I would recall that those are noted, at least so far as the Programme Committee's report is concerned, in Corrigendum 1 to the main document.

I might refer first to the observations of the Joint Meeting of the Programme and Finance Committees which is on the first page of the document and which occupies only half a page, where you will find that the two Committees endorsed the Summary Programme of Work and Budget as a satisfactory basis for the preparation of the final Programme of Work and Budget and have for the most part supported the substantive proposals also since the projected cost increases were about the minimum that could be anticipated to maintain the integrity of the Programme and that the overall budget level was, in the eyes of the Committees, something which the Council might endorse.

The two Committees also looked at the question of whether or not the institution of a summary programme should be continued and, as you will see in paragraph 1.2, felt that this did provide a very useful and flexible indication to the Council of what might be in the final Programme of Work and Budget in the formative stage, and while there obviously were disadvantages because it did not contain all the information that some might wish to see and have in hand, it still provided a degree of flexibility, and at the same time an indication of proposed changes, which was useful and should therefore be continued.

On the subject of brevity I think it is worth recalling that this half page report may well set some kind of a record in FAO annuals for brevity. I would also recall that at the time of our Joint Meeting when we approved this report and also dealt with one other item, we convened for a total of eight minutes.

Turning now to the Programme Committee's report, for which the same degree of brevity cannot be claimed, I will run through it as quickly as possible just highlighting some of the points which are perhaps worth mentioning for those who have not had a chance to study the document in great detail. I will skip over the section called ''General" which is paragraphs 2.6 to 2.9 because basically it says the same thing as the joint report. Under "World Background", paragraphs 2.10 to 2.13, I would just recall that in the Committee's view FAO should continue to be the leading Organization for multilateral policy development and for multilateral assistance in the fields of food and agriculture, and that it should concentrate on measures for food production, food aid and food security. At the same time, the Committee felt that the long-term problems should not be neglected and that the Organization must continue to give careful attention to the basic technical and economic problems of agricultural, fisheries and forestry development throughout the world.

The Committee also concurred in the Director-Generai's view that the movement towards greater individual and collective self-reliance on the part of developing count i íes was a necessary and a welcome trend.

Under the heading ''Strategy for 1978-79" which is paragraphs 2.14 through 2.17, I would highlight the point in the second of those paragraphs that the Committee agreed with the Director-General's aim of continuing the process of the review of programmes, so as to ensure the most effective use of the Regular Programme for the benefit of ail Member Nations. It also welcomed the Director-General's intention to apply a zero-base rather than an incremental approach. It also agreed that the organizational changes should be kept to a minimum.

I should perhaps also mention paragraph 2.17 where the Committee, taking note of the emphasis on cooperation in paragraph 3.6 of the Summary Programme, pointed out that while in appropriate areas joint action was desirable, responsibility was clearly individual and unique to each organization except for those cases where joint responsibility was shared by two or more, and some examples are given. It also emphasized that full partnership with the United Nations Development Program remained important and should be maintained.

So the point the Committee really wanted to make is that cooperation was highly desirable where it increased effectiveness but it should not be pursued for its own sake.

Under Framework, I would mention only the final sentence of paragraph 2.20 where the Committee welcomed the intention of the Director-General not to expand the Programme and Budget unduly and to reduce the number of Headquarters posts.

With regard to investment under the Field Programme heading, you will note that the Committee found it very difficult to predict the demands for investment and, pre-investment work. I will not go into the details of that paragraph, other than to flag the point that the World Bank had given some rather clear indications of its intention to increase loans to agriculture and, in view of the various demands, including IFAD and other funds, there was general support for the Director-Generai's intention with regard to strengthening the investment activities.

Regarding trust funds the Committee noted with approval the recent improved procedures which had been recently instituted to ensure the coordinated and planned approach in the appraisal and approval of trust fund project proposals and in the monitoring of the Organization's overall Trust Fund programme.

Regarding UNDP, that has already been discussed; you will find some figures in paragraph 2.25 regarding the shift in the number of experts, but I will not dwell on that. In general at the end of that section you will find in paragraph 2.27 an indication - really a reminder - that the full Programme of Work and Budget would contain information on the magnitude and trends of the field programme and support costs and estimates by programmes of extra-budgetary as well as Regular Programme resources, including Integrated narratives covering Headquarters, regional and field programmes and their interrelationships. I would caution against expecting too much here because, in view of the differences in programming schedules, obviously we have to underline the word 'estimates' in that paragraph because that is all the Organization can hope to give at the time the full Programme of Work and Budget is prepared as far as the field programme is concerned.

Turning to the section on priorities, I will just flag two points. First, in paragraph 2.29 the Committee noted that the section did not distinguish between objectives, strategies and means of action, and that it dealt not only with priorities but also with some other programme changes. That is just by way of comment, looking to future documents in this series.

In paragraph 2.31 you will see that the Committee supported the general approach of paragraph 6.1 and stressed its general agreement with the detailed changes which were clearly in line with the decisions of the 69th Session of the Council. Under Objectives of Expenditure and Cost Increases, which is a matter falling largely within the purview of the Finance Committee, I would only note that with regard to documentation and meetings the Committee supported the proposed further reductions as being in line with the Council's decisions, but it cautioned against carrying this proceess too far, particularly in regard to useful technical publications. As regards travel in paragraph 2.37, while the Committee also supported decreases in certain kinds of travel, it flagged the need for increases if FAO was to serve adequately what might be called its world parish.

I will now move over to the programme changes and these, as you will see at the bottom oi page 6 of the English version, refer to the material contained in the Annex of document CL 71/3. Many of these I need not mention but here I should point out that you have two sets of numbers: the heading numbers are those referring to the programme format as reflected in the Annex; the paragraph numbers are, of course, a continuation of the numbers in the document itself.

In paragraph 2.44 you see reference to the importance the Committee attached to the work on post-harvest losses. I will not go into that because it has already been discussed in detail under another item. Under Livestock, paragraph 2.45, you will see that the Committee expressed some concern because of the limited progress that had been made in mobilizing extra budgetary resources for the programme for the control of African animal trypanosomiasis. Also in paragraph 2.48 these is something of the same kind of concern in regard to the meat and dairy schemes, although here the concern was that there had been rather strong initial support for those activities, but the extra-budgetary resources support had tended to fall off, even though the pipeline was still quite full with projects.

Earlier, I mentioned that there was a corrigendum for the section, and one of the large omissions happens to be in paragraph 2.49. I would suggest that you look at the corrigendum before you try to interpret what that paragraph means because a whole phrase got left out, so it does not make sense unless you insert the corrigendum. I will not comment further than that.

Under Research Support, I will only mention that the Committee concurred in the transfer of the research development centre to the Office of the ADC, Agriculture Department and that with respect to CARIS, it welcomed the Director-General's rather cautious approach since obviously the value of that programme would be to a large degree dependent on the extent to which the national and regional programmes were developed both to provide material for CARIS and to make use of the output.

Under Rural Development, I think I, might just pause for a moment and point out that in paragraph 2.54, where the Committee expresses some concern over use of the term 'rural development' as a title for this programme, it was not because the Committee had any concern with the importance of rural development; it was rather that the terms used here covered only limited aspects of that subject and so, what the Committee was suggesting was that there should be found some different terms to cover these rather limited aspects of the whole subject, and that the subject itself, Rural Development, be used to cover the broad scope of activities which legitimately come under that heading.

Under Nutrition, paragraphs 2.57 through 2.61, you will recall there was mention this morning of some changes in the Committee's structure within the United Nations system. These are noted in paragraph 2.58, the establishment of an ACC Sub-Committee on Nutrition and the substituion of the Protein/Calorie Advisory Group by an Advisory Group on Nutrition, both of which would have their Secretariats located in Rome and administered by FAO. Those are things that have to be taken into account in evaluating the nutrition activities of the Organization. Also, in paragraph 2.60 you will find reference to the fact that the Ad Hoc Committee on Food and Nutrition Policies which this Council set up and which the Council decided should meet in association with Council sessions, is not actually having the session which was supposed to have been held just at the beginning of this month, before the Council convened. So the Committee, taking into account the various circumstances, spelt out, felt this was an acceptable procedure, but that the Council should be aware that this was not in accord with its earlier decision. On paragraph 2.61 you will note that the Committee recalled that

both FAO and WHO proposed to provide the same level of support as in the past biennium for the joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme.

Under Food and Agricultural Information and Analysis, paragraph 2.62, we just flagged the fact which has already been brought to the attention of the Council, that the Committee on World Food Security had considered the progress of the Global Information and Early Warning System and had found it satisfactory.

In regard to Food and Agriculture Policy, you will see from paragraphs 2.65 to 2.69 that there is considerable reorientation of this programme, a reduction in certain types of planning assistance, the discontinuation of the country perspective studies as such and also, in paragraph 2.68, reference to the contribution FAO might make towards the United Nations exercise called ''Agriculture-Towards 2000" which is, in a revised form, the old Perspective Study on Agricultural Development.

In regard to Fisheries and Forestry, I think I need only point out that there was general agreement with the priorities planned for those two areas of work, and while there are some detailed comments, I think I need make no special mention of them here.

Under Investment, to which I have referred already, you will see in paragraph 2.82 a reference to the increase to $1.5 million for the Investment Centre, primarily to expand cooperation with IFAD, area banks and other lending institutions. Also in paragraph 2.83 there is a reference to the Committee's agreement that the regional consultant funds earmarked for investment should be transferred to the Investment Centre, since in fact they had always been-administered by that Centre.

This brings me to Country Offices, paragraphs 2.84 to 2.86. The situation as it was known at the time of the session is recorded in 2.85 but the Director-General gave an up-date of that information in his opening statement. The Committee agreed that the scheme was well under way and - also in paragraph 2.86 - noted that where there would be no FAO representatives, there were several temporary options that would be pursued.

Regarding the Technical Cooperation Programme, there is only one brief paragraph, 2.87; the .Committee merely provided some information regarding the extent of the staffing of the TCP Liaison Unit.

Under Support Services, I will refer only to two points. In 2.88, there is a reference to AGRIS where you will recall there was to be an evaluation before the Conference in the fall. The Committee was informed that that evaluation report had been received and that it would be made available to the Council prior to the Conference, presumably the autumn session of the Council; but that in general the report concluded in favour of the continuation of AGRIS.

Then the Committee was also assured that the resources which were provided in the Summary Programme for the purchase of books and periodicals were adequate to maintain the David Lubin Memorial Library at a satisfactory level of acquisition,

M. BEL HADJ AMOR (Président par intérim du Comité financier): Je vais essayer de suivre l'exemple de M. Phillips et d'être le plus bref possible. Bien que le sujet soit très important, je me contenterai d'attirer l'attention sur certaines recommandations du Comité financier.

Tout d'abord, l'impression générale qui s'est dégagée des débats du Comité financier est que le Comité! a estimé le budget proposé réaliste et d'un niveau raisonnable, et ce, bien sûr, en tenant compte des décisions des organes directeurs de l'Organisation et de la suite qu'il faudrait leur donner, des problèmes de l'inflation, de la situation économique des Etats Membres et des tâches qui leur incombent, et également des efforts qui sont déployés par le Secrétariat pour réduire le nombre de postes et d'activités non indispensables.

Le Comité a également tenu compte du contexte mondial dans lequel il a fallu tracer les grandes lignes de ce sommaire du programme de travail et budget pour le prochain biennium,A cet égard, on notera au paragraphe 3.7 que le Comité a donné son approbation pour le rôle de la FAO,tel qu'il est défini dans les paragraphes 2.9 - 2.12 du document CL 71/3.

Pour ce qui est de la stratégie, le Comité, tout en approuvant les grandes lignes politiques qui ont consisté à contenir autant que possible le budget, a relevé que le Directeur général a suivi les instructions données à la 69ème session du Conseil ainsi que les avis des conférences régionales. Ces avis et ces recommandations, a constaté le Comité financier, ont servi a l'établissement des grandes lignes du programme qui nous est soumis.

Toujours dans le cadre de cette stratégie, le Comité a relevé avec plaisir l'intention de continuer à réduire le volume de la documentation et le nombre des réunions. Il a apprécié à leur juste valeur les efforts qui sont accomplis pour la réduction du nombre de postes, spécialement au Siège.

De même, le Comité a approuvé le renforcement proposé des bureaux régionaux, afin de fournir le soutien technique nécessaire aux bureaux de la FAO dans les pays. A cet égard, le Comité a remarqué que la proportion des dépenses supportées sur le terrain pour l'action de terrain augmentera avec la poursuite de la décentralisation.

Finalement, vous trouverez au paragraphe 3.12 que le Comité a donné son approbation pour les réorganisations qui sont jugées nécessaires et qui sont proposées aux paragraphes 3.15 à 3.17 du document CL 71/3, d'autant plus que ces réorganisations n'entraîneront aucune dépense supplémentaire.

Concernant le cadre pour 1978-79, vous remarquerez au paragraphe 3.16 que le Comité a decida de recommander au Conseil d'approuver le niveau proposé du budget, à savoir 206,8 millions de dollars. Le Comité a estimé que le chiffre de budget proposé est raisonnable. Là, il /?/ remarquer qu'il été retenu un taux de change indicatif et provisoire de 900 lires au dollar E.-U., mais il reste entendu que c'est à la Conférence de décider du taux de change définitif.

Le Comité a réitéré, toujours dans le cadre pour 1978-79, sa satisfaction pour l'effort déployé pour la réalisation des économies par la réduction du nombre des postes.

Il y a un point qu'il faudra souligner au paragraphe 3.15 où, d'après les informations et les éclaircissements obtenus, le Comité a noté que le chiffre de 206,8 millions de dollars ne laissait aucune marge de sécurité. Il est arrivé à la conclusion que toute réduction de ce chiffre pourrait avoir des conséquences pour le programme.

Si on se réfère au programme de terrain, paragraphes 3.17 à 3.19, je n'aurai pas beaucoup de choses à ajouter à ce qui a été discuté ce matin, puisqu'il s'agit là des relations avec le PNUD. Il s'agit également des frais généraux pour le soutien de projets financés par des fonds fiduciaires ainsi que des relations avec le FIDA.

Tout ce que je pourrai indiquer c'est que, comme vous le remarquerez dans les deux derniers paragraphes 3.18 et 3.19, le Comité ne cesse de manifester sa préoccupation chaque fois qu'il constate que les frais généraux de soutien risquent de peser sur le budget du programme ordinaire. Il n'a pas cessé de le répéter tout au long des débats.

A présent, je voudrais aborder le chapitre qui concerne les priorités.

Vous constaterez que le Comité a examiné ces priorités parallèlement à l'annexe du document CL 71/3. Il a formulé certaines observations concernant quelques points précis. Le premier point concerne les représentants et les bureaux régionaux de la FAO.

Au paragraphe 1, vous constatez qu'étant donné que les représentations sont considérées comme une prio rité, il y aura une augmentation de 5,1 millions de dollars. Le Comité a approuvé cette augmentation, tout en tenant compte du fait que, dans la préparation de ce budget, il a été pris en considération les contributions gouvernementales.

Le Comité note, au paragraphe 2, qu'auparavant il était prévu un nombre de postes organiques de 62. Pour le biennum 78-79, il a constaté avec plaisir que ce chiffre sera réduit à 47.

Finalement, pour les services de soutien technique aux représentations au niveau des pays, le Comité a relevé qu'il y aura un certain renforcement pour les bureaux régionaux, avec une modeste augmentation de 1 million de dollars.

Concernant le sous-paragraphe ii) '' programme de coopération'', le Comité a considéré l'augmentation proposée de 1,5 million de dollars. Il a posé des questions concernant la procédure et les méthodes de travail et d'exécution concernant ce programme. Le Comité a obtenu énormément d'éclaircissements, mais il reconnaît que le programme a démarré assez tard, c'est-à-dire, d'après les renseignements qui lui ont été fournis, vers le mois de novembre, et qu'au moment où le Comité siégeait, c'est-à-dire au mois d'avril, il n'était pas possible d'avoir une idée très précise des activités du programme.

Cependant, vous avez au paragraphe 1 quelques indications concernant le nombre de projets exécutés jusqu'à fin avril 1977, ainsi que le chiffre des sommes dépensées. Sur la base de ce qui a été communiqué au Comité, il a été noté qu'il y avait une dépense à peu près d'un million de dollars par mois et il nous a même été indiqué qu'une fois on avait dépassé ce chiffre. D'après les renseignements recueillis, c'est un programme qui répond à de nombreux besoins de pays membres. Le Comité a décidé de recommander également l'augmentation d'un million et demi pour ce programme. D'après ce qui nous a été communiqué concernant les activités, il semble que le chiffre de 20 à 24 millions de dollars pour la période biennale prochaine sera à peine suffisant.

Concernant les investissements, le Comité relève également une augmentation d'un million et demi de dollars. Là également, il a donné son approbation étant donné l'importance de ce chapitre et l'importance et le volume des activités que les services des investissements doivent fournir.

Au paragraphe 2, quelques explications concernant ces activités nous sont fournies.

Pour le chapitre "pertes après récolte", je ne vais pas du tout m'étendre, étant donné que nous avons discuté de cette question quand nous avons abordé le problème du fonds spécial.

Je désire seulement préciser qu'aux paragraphes 2 et 3, on notera que le Comité a eu une clarification concernant les fonctions et les objectifs de ce fonds, étant donné qu'il estime que ce fonds ne doit pas faire double emploi avec les autres activités des postes "pertes après récolte" qui sont inscrites dans le programme ordinaire.

A propos des autres priorités, il n'est pas nécessaire de m'étendre sur les diverses sous-rubriques. Je peux donner comme idée générale que les augmentations sont assez modestes. Ces augmentations sont proposées en tenant compte des priorités décidées par les Etats Membres et surtout des ressources limitées de l'Organisation.

Je me permets seulement d'attirer l'attention sur le développement rural où l'on constate qu'il y a une réduction pour les réunions et les documents, alors qu'on note un accroissement pour la formulation des projets.

A propos de "administration et soutien", j'attire l'attention sur deux ou trois points. D'abord, concernant le coût d'interprétation, au paragraphe 5, le Comité a de nouveau manifesté sa préoccupation pour le coût de l'interprétation des réunions des représentants permanents; il a constaté que des crédits supplémentaires ont été nécessaires et là il rappelle sa recommandation qui a été mentionnée dans le document de la soixante-neuvième session du Conseil (CL 69/4 par. 3.49). Il estime qu'il faudrait vraiment faire preuve de modération concernant ces réunions.

Sur le par. 8, je ne vais pas m'étendre, étant donné que nous aurons à discuter de cette question. Il s'agit du budget du Corps commun d'inspection, budget qui va connaître une augmentation que le Comité a jugé assez élevée. Je peux vous dire également que le Comité est assez inquiet au sujet de cette augmentation qui, à son avis, n'est pas du tout jugée indispensable.

Au par. 12, il faut noter que le chapitre Imprévus n'aura pas à prévoir pour 1978-1979 le montant de 600 000 dollars qui était affecté au coût de soutien pour le Conseil mondial de l'alimentation en 1976-1977. Je l'avais déjà mentionné ce matin - étant donné que ces coûts seront dorénavant à la charge de

l'ONU.

Enfin, j'arrive au dernier point qui concerne l'objet des dépenses. Vous constatez également ici l'approbation et l'appui du Comité concernant l'intention de réduire le nombre des postes au Siège. Au par. 3.23, on remarque qu'il y aura une augmentation concernant les crédits pour les services de consultants. Des renseignements assez étoffés ont été fournis au Comité à cet égard et tout particulièrement sur le coût des consultants. Il ressort des chiffres et de l'analyse qui a été faite que ce coût est inférieur à celui des fonctionnaires titulaires de l'Organisation. Il a été noté aussi que les services accomplis par les consultants, ne sont pas normalement assurés par les fonctionnaires de l'Organisation.

En ce qui concerne les voyages, là encore le Comité, tout en reconnaissant la nécessité des voyages pour la nature des activités de l'Organisation, n'a pas pu quand même s'empêcher de mentionner que des mesures de contrôle rigoureuses devraient être maintenues et que les dépenses devraient, autant que possible, être réduites,particulièrement celles afférentes aux réunions de niveau international.

Enfin, pour l'augmentation des coûts, d'après les informations qui ont été communiquées au Comité, ce dernier a conclu que les crédits prévus pourraient ne pas couvrir les augmentations de coût étant donné le taux d'inflation qu'on ne peut pas contrôler.

Enfin, j'attire l'attention sur le fait que le Comité a donné son approbation pour le choix d'un chiffre arrondi provisoire de 900 lires/dollar pour le taux de change pour calculer le projet de budget qui vous est soumis; comme je l'ai déjà dit auparavant, c'est à la Conférence de fixer le chiffre définitif.

Ceci dit, je suis prêt à répondre à toutes les questions et à donner d'autres éclaircissements si nécessaire:.

EL PRESIDENTE: Vamos ahora a iniciar la discusión de este Tema. Como lo anoto el Presidente del Comité del Programa, y como creo que todos lo reconocemos, se trata de un documento breve, conciso y muy concreto, por lo cual propongo al Consejo que tratemos conjuntamente la totalidad de documentos. Naturalmente, aquellas delegaciones que consideren necesaria una segundo oportunidad para hacer referencias específicas a ciertos puntos, podran hacerlo si como lo espero el tiempo nos lo permite, puesto que se trata de un punto fundamental del actual período de sesiones.

J.C. VIGNAUD (Argentina): Sr. Presidente, antes de referirme al tema que nos ocupa quisiera que rae autorizara a hacer un brevísimo anuncio que se refiere al proyecto de resolución sobre cooperación técnica entre países en desarrollo, que fue circulado ayer en ingles, en francés y en español a todos los miembros del Consejo y también a los Observadores.

A este respecto deseo que usted me autorice a anunciar que ese proyecto de resolución debe ser considerado como presentado por todos los países que integran América Latina, lo cual, por cierto, en modo alguno excluye que otros países extrarregionales puedan sumarse para copatrocinarlo.

Dicho esto, deseo ahora referirme al tema que nos ocupa.

En primer lugar, deseo señalar que los informes que nos han presentado el Comité del Programa y el Comité de Finanzas constituyen un análisis muy completo de las propuestas que se nos han presentado en relación al Programa de Labores y Presupuesto.

Afortunadamente la naturaleza de ese examen es tan completa que creo que nos releva de la necesidad de profundizar demasiado en cada uno de los capítulos en que se ha dividido el documento básico preparado para este tema de la agenda. Por ese motivo mi Gobierno desea señalar que apoya el informe de la reunión conjunta de los Comités del Programa y de Finanzas en tanto ese informe precisamente resume lo que ha sido materia de debate entre los dos Comités.

La decisión de mi Gobierno de apoyar ese informe conjunto se basa precisamente en el hecho de que, a su juicio, los lineamientos generales del programa para el bienio 78/79 siguen las nuevas políticas establecidas por la Conferencia en su 18° período de sesiones y los objetivos que se nos propusieron y que fueron ya endosados por el Consejo.

Las orientaciones dirigidas a dar preferencia a las actividades de carácter práctico y a corto plazo tendientes a obtener resultados concretos, la obtención rápida y flexible de soluciones a las necesidades urgentes, la descentralización y el acercamiento de FAO a las actividades de campo están, en general, reflejadas en la propuesta del Programa de Labores y Presupuesto.

Vemos con agrado el incremento en las inversiones totales del programa ordinario referidas directamente en/o las actividades de campo y tomamos nota con satisfacción del propósito de profundizar el proceso en esta dirección en el futuro. Es preciso que los Estados Miembros perciban directamente y en la forma más inmediata posible los. resultados derivados de la acción de la FAO para que la cooperación sea vehículo de solución y no la ocasión de ejercicios abstractos, estériles y frustrados.

Es importante resaltar la disminución del cinco por ciento prevista para los gastos totales de documentación y reuniones, en cumplimiento de las recomendaciones de la Conferencia en su 18° período de sesiones, así como la reducción de los gastos en los puestos de plantilla con relación al presupuesto total y que arroja el índice más bajo del presente decenio. Particularmente, por lo que estas propuestas revelan como reversión de la tendencia en un contexto especialmente difícil caracterizados en la inflación generalizada y los aumentos de costo.

Lamentamos, en cambio, por las mismas razones, los aumentos de costos del programa de actividades interorgánicas, lo que implica la desviación de fondos hacia tareas superburocráticas que no contribuyen a la consecución de los objetivos específicos de. la Organización.

Las reducciones previstas no contemplan los gastos que se derivarán del establecimiento de los 47 puestos de representantes que se proyectan establecer para fines de 1979, ni los 170 puestos de apoyo que los mismos requerirán; pero resulta imporcante remarcar que esos gastos se inscriben en la saludable política de dedicar menos recursos a las actividades de carácter burocrático y aunento del personal de la sede, y en cambio, otorgar mayor apoyo a la acción en los países y mejorar la vinculación entre las actividades de campo y el Proclama Ordinario, promoviendo una mayor efectividad de este ultimo.

Deben fortalecerse, asimismo, aquellas actividades de las divisiones técnicas, en apoyo de programas de campo y en cumplimiento de la Resolución 17/75 de la Conferencia, incluir en el Programa de Labores y Presupuesto información relativa a la magnitud, características y tendencia de los programas de can-pO'y costos indirectos. El Programa de Labores y Presupuesto debe responder adecuadamente a las aspiraciones de los países miembros y la estrategia definida por el Director General en cuanto al roi activo de la FAO en el campo y como catalizador de la acción de otros organismos y la cooperación entre países.

La utilización de las instituciones nacionales, la equitativa distribución por regiones de los fondos asignados a los programas de campo y la consideración de los requerimientos manifestados por las Conferencias Regionales deben ser, a nuestro juicio, pautas constantes en la confección y ejecución del programa.

H. ABDALLAH (Egypt) (interpretation from Arabic): First I should like to thank Dr. Phillips and the Chairman of the Finance Committee for the two reports which they have just presented which are precise and which set forth the Programme of Work and Budget very clearly.

We should also like to thank the Director-General for the Programme of Work he presented, which is a balanced programme, and in accordance with the recommendations of the regional conferences, the Council and the general Conference.

We should also like to support the new trends and the new dimensions of the proposed Programme in a general way, and will also support the way in which the documents have been presented to us this time, and we should like to 3ee the Secretariat continue to present the Programme in this summary form, taking into account, of course, the intentions of Member Countries.

We hope in future the Secretariat will make sure that the documents will have a table of establishments. We also agree with the priorities laid down by the Director-General, as shown in paragraph 6.1 of the Report, and we are very glad to see the definition of these priorities, which is a new idea. We should like the Programme of Work and Budget to be defined always in relation to these priorities.

We should also like to support the Technical Cooperation Programme which was created to meet the needs of Member Nations, and we should like to see the activities of this Programme be evaluated, first countries who are interested and involved in that Programme to give their point of view after the progress of the Programme so that the countries can benefit as much as possible from the Programme itself.

We also support the principle which was applied by the Director-General in the strengthening of the Consultants and the investment in these activities.

We agree with what Dr. Phillips said as to the Programme Committee's agreement with changing the structures in the Organization, but we feel there are some difficulties in the Agricultural Services Division. This Division when it was set up, was to include agricultural activities in general, mechanization of agricultural industries, and this has been done for years.

We think Agricultural Services - at least as far as concerns our understanding of this terminology in Arabic - includes rural activities of FAO, and that given that work coming to the era of mechanization of agriculture, and industrialization becoming an essential factor of agricultural development in developing countries, the Director-General should take this into account so that this Division should include all these activities, and get the name of Agro-industries Division.

Now I should like to mention organization at the Regional level, and as the host country of the Regional Offices and member country of the Near East Region we should like to say how pleased we are to be able to report that our relationship with the Regional Office is very satisfactory. We should like to make some comments on the organization of the Regional Offices in a general way. We would like to see relationships between the Secretariat and the Regional Offices clarified and better defined, and we should like the relationships between Regional Offices and country offices and country representatives defined much more clearly, given the importance which the Director-General gives to the role which representatives should play in the countries.

We should also like to see closer cooperation between Regional Offices on the one hand and country offices on the other.

As to the Regionalisation, which we support very strongly, when we consider the problem of decentralization we should take into account the fact that certain distinctions between Headquarters and Regional Offices should be very clearly made so that the Regional Offices should be able to develop according to a policy planned by Headquarters. Therefore disciplines concerned with strategy should be at Headquarters, such as Economic Analysis, Recearch, Planning, Investment Activities and Programming Activities and so forth.

All this comes under general strategy of the Organization, and the Director-General has already stressed the need for Investment Activities to be defined at Headquarters level. Therefore everything concerning strategy should be under headquarters auspices, but as regards tactics this comes within the aegis of Regional Offices.

I would like to give an example. As far as Animal Health is concerned, there is only one post covering livestock production and animal health. The post should in fact, be filled by two officers and not just one. I should like these comments to be taken into account so that Regional Offices can play their proper part concerning these very specialized activities.

Finallly, I should like to say that we support AGRIS, the project which is very important; I would also encourage the Director-General in his support for this, because our country has derived more benefit thanks to the cooperation we have from the International Development Research Centre of Canada.

We should also like to ask that the number of meetings at Regional level and the Regional Commissions should be cut, particularly because there are many countries which cannot afford to send delegates especially if these Regional Commissions are held every two years; they may meet every three or four years and we hope the Director-General will soon present a full document on the decentralization policy in more detail.

C.R. FRANK (United States of America): The United States agreed to many of the priorities established in document CL 71/3. We believe these priorities complement the efforts of the Director- General, which we wholeheartedly support, to increase productivity, reduce unnecessary expenditure and guide FAO programmes towards more action-oriented activities. We believe the practice of preparing a summary of this sort should be continued so that member governments could render advice on the proposed trends before the full document is prepared.

We recognize the present summary presents a compromise between full information and flexibility to render advice before the programming process moves to a point where any major changes are difficult. We would urge, however, that the Programme and Finance Committees' reviews of the Summary and full Programmes of Work and Budget be held sufficiently far in advance of the Council or Conference Sessions to assist member governments in preparing their positions.

The new format for the Programme of Work and Budget as reflected in the Annex to document CL 71/3 is a substantial improvement over the one followed for several recent biennia because it relates more nearly to the structure of the Organization. We believe, however, that further improvements are possible.

Now allow me to turn to the substance of the Programme of Work as set out in the Annex of CL 71/3. With regard to rural development, 2.1.5, our delegation believes that the Organization should, as in other programmes and projects, attempt to ensure a high level of participation of rural people, both as decision makers and beneficiaries in the development process. In this connexion, and in particular as regards the increased priority to activities benefiting women, page A7 of document CL 71/3, our delegation believes FAO should assist governments in developing programmes and programme resources to enhance the role of women in the household, in agricultural production and distribution and in other development activities.

Of more general concern regarding the work encompassed under Rural Development, I must record our impression that the Programme content and results achieved over the years have been less than satisfactory. In our view, there is need for a clearer definition of what FAO should be doing in this area, to address the question of how these activities may be pursued with greater effectiveness, and for a more forward-looking programme. We believe the Director-General should conduct a careful study of these matters, within the House, and arrange for an in-depth discussion of his findings by the Programme Committee in the autumn. In saying this, I want to make it clear that the United States supports the Director-General's efforts to give work in this area greater vitality and relevance, with a view to improving conditions of rural life generally and especially conditions for the small farmer and rural worker.

Regarding CARIS (Current Agricultural Research Information Service), we support the cautious approach being taken by the Director-General. The future value of the work will depend largely upon the extent to which internal and external funds lead to the development of effective regional and national support, and to effective use of the output.

Nutrition, paragraph 2.1.6, is another programme area with which we have been less than satisfied in recent years. The United States supports the establishment of a new nutrition advisory group to replace the Protein Calorie Advisory Group and the provision by FAO of the Secretariat for the new group. We welcome the moves anticipated at the World Food Council in Manila /?/ assign higher priority to nutrition activities, and to FAO a leading role in relation to nutrition efforts in the United Nations system. Regarding the FAO Council's Ad Hoc Committee on Food and Nutrition Policies, we regret its repeated postponement, but can concur that the next session should be held as early in 1978 as possible, and hope that the Committee will have a review of the nutrition implications of all FAO's programmes.

We feel that the work of the draft FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme, conducted under the Codex Alimentarius Commission, is proceeding satisfactorily and should continue.

Regarding the Fisheries Programme 2.1.7., we concur generally in the priorities for investment and assistance to small-scale fishermen and to aquaculture. We support assistance to developing countries to improve capacity to negotiate bilateral and regional agreements arising from the Law of the Sea negotiations and extended jurisdictions. We feel it is also important to assist developing countries in improving their capacity to manage rationally the Fishery Resources within their zones of jurisdiction.

Regarding Forestry, we concur in the emphasis upon tropical forestry and on enhancing forestry's contribution to rural employment and rural development. We would appreciate hearing something of the FAO Secretariat's plans for work in the Agro-Forestry field, on which we place importance.

We note the steps being taken in the setting up of FAO Country Representative Offices, and the close cooperation with UNDP in this regard. During the transition period we hope FAO will be adequately represented in the field to participate effectively in the UNDP Country Programming Process. We are particularly interested in the Director-General's plan for cooperation between Country Representatives in Latin America and the Institute of Agricultural Sciences. We should also appreciate detailed information regarding the financing of the Country Representatives.

We note that a planned evaluation of the agricultural information system has been completed and favours continuation of the project. We hope that the evaluation report will be made available to Member Governments well in advance of the forthcoming FAO Conference. Pending an opportunity to carefully study that report, the United States wishes to reserve its position on this issue.

Concerning the Technical Cooperation Programme (TCP) the United States will support a continuation during the biennium 1978-79, notwithstanding our concern about a policy of using assessed budget funds to support technical assistance programmes. Our concern derives from the fact that we think the TCP could be detrimental to our overall support for development assistance efforts of the UN system in the long-term which would not be in the long-term interests of developed or developing countries.

We should recall that the TCP began at a time when the resources available from the UNDP were suddenly reduced. It also arose from the legitimate need of the Director-General for some amount of resources to meet unforeseen emergency needs and for quick reaction programmes in developing countries.

My Government believes matters have changed significantly since the TCP originated. UNDP resources which were so uncertain in late 1975 and early 1976 are once again increasing and the prospect for further growth is good. Many of the administrative shortcomings of the UNDP have been corrected, or soon will be, and improved management is evident. My Government plans to continue to increase its contribution to the UNDP and to encourage other donors to do so, while at the same time supporting FAO as the main executing Agency for UNDP-financed assistance in the fields of agriculture, forestry and fisheries.

I must say that as we have sought legislative approval for our assessed contributions to FAO and other Agencies and our voluntary contributions to the UNDP, we have encountered strong criticism of the proliferation of funding for technical assistance services. It is clear to us that if we are to be able to convince our legislature that part or all of the TCP is worthy of future support, we must find a way to take a look at how the TCP is operating, what is being accomplished, and how the TCP fits into the overall developmental effort.

We were very much pleased by the Director-General's statement of last Monday. We welcome his plans to use greater portions of TCP for emergency purposes and for quick-reaction projects in the forthcoming biennium. This undoubtedly reflects the improving.financial situation in the UNDP.

We were also pleased to hear the Director-General propose an evaluation of the TCP. We believe this would be useful in helping to crystallise our thinking concerning the continuing need for a technical cooperation programme in FAO. We wholeheartedly support his efforts. We hope he can suggest procedures leading towards a Council report which will satisfy all governments that the evaluation was objectively carried out. This might best be accomplished by some combination of experts and FAO staff, but this is a matter which the Director-General will study.

We should imagine that to be most useful the evaluation would have to be completed in time for consideration by the 74th FAO Council in November 1978. Should our thinking be roughly in accord with that of the Director-General, perhaps he could advise us at the 72nd Council which meets just prior to the Conference in November, of his detailed planning for the evaluation. He wisely provided us in 1976 with criteria for the implementation of the TCP, so there is a basis to look now at what has been accomplished.

I have not mentioned a budget level for 1978-79 because we wish to give detailed study to the programme and sub-programmes of the final Programme of Work and Budget proposals which we understand will not be available until September. We will be prepared to address the budget level issue at the 72nd Council and in the Conference in November.

E. SAENZ (Colombia): En primer lugar, la Delegación de Colombia desea manifestar su apreciación positiva por la presentación del Documento Programa de Labores y Presupuesto para el bienio 1978/79 que, como se dice en el parafo 1.3 de la Introducción corresponde al resultado de la revisión de los programas, estructuras y política de la Organización que había sido aprobada por ese Consejo en julio del año pasado.

Sobre la parte segunda, la situación mundial, aparece evidente que si bien esa situación ha mejorado relativamente, persiste una continua preocupación sobre todo por las tendencias negatives a largo plazo.

Además, el párrafo 2.3 indica que siguen sin solución los problemas a largo plazo de los cuales se ha venido ocupando este Consejo.

El crecimiento de la producción alimentaria de los países en desarrollo es insuficiente, la reciente tendencia del mercado mundial es desfavorable para los países en desarrollo. En el párrafo 2.4 se indica que la tasa de crecimiento agrícola en los países en desarrollo es muy inferior a la de los países desarrollados; todo ello conduce a dar fundamento al sentido de frustración a que hace referencia el párrafo 2.6.

Es que, Sr. Presidente, el segundo decenio de las Naciones Unidas para el Desarrollo está para terminar sin que se haya logrado la meta del 4 por ciento que fué fijada para ese decenio y ahora aparece otro objetivo del 6 por ciento, inalcanzable en las condiciones actuales, lo cual debe llevarnos a todos nosotros al interrogante de qué podía hacer la FAO para contribuir a resolver el problema alimentario mundial si los países desarrollados,, que tienen los medios y los poderes, no cumplen los compromisos que adquieren.

En los párrafos 2.7 y 2.8 se habla de la constitución del FIDA. La Delegación de Colombia espera que el Fondo InternacLonal de Desarrollo Agrícola sea una realidad antes que concluya este año. Consideramos que la FAO debe intensificar sus esfuerzos para asistir al FIDA en su importante tarea, y particularmente ofrecer asistencia a los Gobiernos en la intensificación y preparación de buenos proyectos que puedan merecer rápida aprobación.

En el párrafo 2.10 hay una afirmación enfática que nos preocupa. Al final de la primera frase de ese párrafo se dice: ''otras formas de asistencia destinadas a atender la necesidad de los países menos desarrollados y más gravemente afectados". Nuestra Delegación no se opone a que esos países sean atendidos prioritariamente, pero sí nos preocupa el hecho de que con esa redacción parece que se trata de excluir de esa asistencia a otros países que, como el nuestro, y la gran mayoría en América Latina, han alcanzado ya un grado intermedio de desarrollo pero que aún requieren apoyo externo para complementar el propio esfuerzo interno. Por ello consideramos que el efecto final del programa de labores y presupuesto debería modificarse en la redacción expresándose que ''se ofrecerá esa asistencia prioritariamente a los países menos desarrollados y más gravemente afectados, pero que igualmente otros Estados que no estén catalogados dentro de estas condiciones deben también beneficiarse de asistencia adecuada''.

En el párrafo 2.11 aparecen los principios que fundamentan la política del Director General. En cuanto al Programa de Cooperación Técnica nuestro país ha comenzado a beneficiarse de este Programa mediante asistencia rápida con efectos concretos y positivos. Nuestro Gobierno apoya firmemente la continuación y consolidación del Programa de Cooperación Técnica que debe ser un hecho irreversible para el beneficio de los países en desarrollo.

En cuanto a la descentralización, en el pasado mes de marzo firmamos en Colombia el acuerdo por medio del cual se estableció en nuestro país la primera oficina propia de la FAO en América Latina. El Gobierno de Colombia considera que esa Oficina propia de FAO con sede en Bogotá contribuirá a estrechar más los contactos que existen entre nuestro país y la FAO. Consideramos que en esa forma la FAO ha comenzado a actuar en nuestro país con imagen y nombre propios, aunque dentro de la acción conjunta de que habla el párrafo 3.4 de la parte 3.

Apoyamos el nivel presupuestario propuesto de 206,8 millones de dólares que aparecen en el párrafo 4.9 de la sección 4.

También apoyamos la reducción del personal en la sede y el desplazamiento progresivo de los funcionarios hacia los países.

Para terminar, nuestra Delegación reitera su apoyo al capítulo 6°, prioridades, porque esas prioridades corresponden a la posición que los representantes de nuestro Gobierno han venido asumiendo en los últimos años en los Órganos Rectores de FAO.

O. BORIN (Italie): Monsieur le Président, je crois que l'on peut dire en toute sincérité que le document qui vient de nous être présenté est un document remarquable.

En le lisant, on s'aperçoit que nous sommes en présence d'une conception unitaire, d'une vision cohérente de la fonction de la FAO. Bref, on détecte, dans le sommaire du programme du budget qui est soumis à notre réflexion, une ligne politique de cohérence et de pragmatisme réalistes.

D'ailleurs, le Comité financier et le Comité du programme ont fait un examen long et détaillé du document qui a abouti à des remarques largement positives sauf sur des questions mineures, ce qui est parfaitement normal. On ne peut pas être d'accord sur tout. Cela vaut pour nous aussi.

Mais avant d'entrer dans certains détails, je voudrais rappeler que nous sommes parfaitement d'accord avec les principaux objectifs politiques indiqués par le Directeur général et avec la nouvelle orientation qu'il entend donner à l'activité de la FAO sur le terrain en vue d'en faire un instrument plus efficace au service des pays membres.

D'autre part, nous nous rendons compte que le changement envisagé ne peut pas se réaliser d'un jour à l'autre et qu'il faut donner l'espace et le temps nécessaires pour permettre à l'action du Directeur général de déployer toutes ses implications. C'est pour cette raison que nous comprenons certaines lacunes et certains silences du sommaire qui après tout - et nous en sommes conscients - n'est et ne reste rien de plus qu'un sommaire.

Si nous avons bien compris le sens de ce que le Directeur général veut réaliser, on pourrait le résumer en disant qu'il s'agit de la projection de la FAO vers le terrain et sur le terrain, au lieu de favoriser les études comme il en a été question jusqu'à maintenant. C'est le passage de la théorie à l'action, et cela est rendu évident par les propositions qui nous sont soumises, en particulier le programme de coopération technique, la décentralisation et la réorganisation des services du Siége, le niveau du budget.

Je parlerai tout d'abord du programme de la coopération technique pour lequel on nous demande d'accepter une augmentation.

Lorsque le Directeur général, au cours de la 70ème session, nous a proposé ce nouveau programme, nous avons été parmi ceux qui ont considéré positivement sa requête. Nous disions alors que tout en appuyant le programme, nous craignions le double emploi et le manque de coordination avec le PNUD.

Le Directeur général, dans son allocution introductive à la présente session, a dit des mots rassurants sur ce point et nous en prenons acte avec satisfaction, en espérant que les préoccupations à ce sujet que nous partageons avec d'autres délégations soient présentes à l'esprit.

Il est certes prématuré de dresser un premier bilan de programme de coopération technique, mais il faut souligner que pour pouvoir juger de son utilité et en évaluer l'efficacité réelle, il n'est pas suffisant de disposer des données quantitatives qui nous ont été fournies. Il est indispensable, à notre avis, d'avoir plus d'éléments d'information pour permettre au Conseil de se prononcer en toute connaissance de cause.

Nous prions donc le Directeur général de bien vouloir soumettre à la session,de novembre du Conseil un rapport complet et aussi détaillé que possible sur le CP en vue d'en consentir l'évaluation et ob tenir des éclaircissements sur Certains points d'interrogation qui planent encore sur le programme. Il sera alors plus facile de donner une réponse au Directeur général sur sa requête d'augmentation de l'allocation nécessaire.

A ce sujet, je dois dire que nous voyons avec préoccupation pour l'avenir uae expansion graduelle et indéfinie de la somme allouée au programme au titre du budget ordinaire de la FAO.

J'en viens maintenant à un autre point qui qualifie la politique du Directeur général; la décentralisation et la constitution d'un réseau de représentants de la FAO dans les pays.

J'ai déjà eu l'occasion d'exptimer sur ce point l'opinion de la délégation italienne et de faire état de ses préoccupations. Je ne le répéterai pas. Je dirai simplement que la difficulté que l'on éprouve à trouver des personnes- réellement qualifiées - difficultés mises en lumière Par le secréta-riat lui-même - est bien la preuve que nos préoccupations étaient fondées.

Mais si ce réseau une fois établi,prouvera son utilité pour les pays membres, nous serons les premiers à nous réjouir et à nous féliciter avec le Directeur général qui l'a conçu.

Pour l'instant, nous pensons que ce réseau entraînera dans l'avenir la mobilisation d'importantes ressources financières et d'un nombre croissant de personnel, deux facteurs que nous voyons avec préoccupation •

Pour ce qui concerne la décentralisation en général, je voudrais dire simplement que c'est à notre avis un aspect d'un processus plus large qui est celui de la rationalisation, et nous voudrions souligner davantage l'opportunité d'un effort ultérieur en vue d'une rationalisation accrue des services et de l'utilisation du personnel, tant au Siège que sur le terrain.

Ce processus pourrait amener à d'autres économies, et je citerai en exemple le secteur des voyages pour lequel on nous propose une augmentation. Cela nous paraît en contradiction avec la décentralisation et l'exigence d'un meilleur emploi de ce personnel de haute qualité dont dispose la FAO, deux objectifs qui semblaient avoir dans l'esprit du Directeur général une grande priorité.

J'en viens maintenant au niveau du budget. Personne, je crois, ne peut s'attendre à ce que nous disions que nous sommes heureux et que nous acceptons avec joie les augmentations proposées, puisqu'en réalité c'est le contraire. Il y a en effet un problème de caractère général auquel nous sommes très sensibles, problème qui concerne les augmentations de budget de toutes les organisations internationales. Bien que nous reconnaissions volontiers que le Directeur général ait fait des efforts pour contenir ses requêtes à un niveau raisonnable, le problème concerne également la FAO.

En termes généraux, nous croyons qu'il faudrait renverser la tendance actuelle d'une augmentation indéfinie des budgets des organisations pour arriver à leur consolidation et à leur stabilisation à un niveau acceptable.

Nous aurions plusieurs remarques de détails à faire, telle par exemple la question du taux d'inflation en Italie qui est pris à la base du calcul, mais je vous en ferai grâce à ce stade, puisque je dois, en tout état de cause, réserver la position de la délégation italienne, sur ìe niveau du budget proposé et renvoyer à un examen ultérieur de la question notre attitude finale.

Nous ne manquerons pas d'autre part, dans un esprit de coopération, de prendre en considération pour cela également le consensus général qui, éventuellement, pourrait se dégager au cours de la prochaine session du Conseil quand nous disposerons de plus d'éléments d'information.

G. SATARI (Indonesia): I want to express clearly at the beginning that I have been instructed by my Government to support the main aspects of the summary Programme of Work and Budget and that the summary forms a satisfactory basis for the preparation of the final Programme of Work and Budget. We support the substantive programme proposals and consequently the overall budget level of $206.8 million.

Our support for the proposed programmes and budget level stems from the following consideration: first, that it was fully in line with the new policy orientation taken by the Director-General and approved by the 69th Special Session of the Council on behalf of the Conference and with the conclusions of the medium-term objectives; second, that the emphasis was on concrete action at the country level, reorienting towards the felt needs of the developing world to combat poverty, hunger and malnutrition and the search for equity, fairness and justice; third, that it reflected the thrust of the integrated policies of investment, technical assistance, decentralization at country level including the general establishment of FAO representatives and the use of national institutions and the reduction of meetings, publications and the number of new posts; fourth, that the increase of the budget in real terms was relatively small.

We understand that the new policies have been introduced and implemented during 1976-77 and that the time has come for consolidation. We agree with the Director-General that the new Programme of Work and Budget for 1978-79 should consolidate the main features of the new policies and programmes, particularly with regard to the Technical Cooperation Programme, decentralization to country level and investment; and to take concrete steps towards the implementation of a New International Economic Order, particularly by concentrating on priorities of greatest relevance in the sphere of food and agriculture development such as investment in food production, strengthening of work on commodities and trade, support for the UNCTAD Integrated Programme for Commodities, support for integration schemes and economic cooperation among developing countries and support for food security.

Let us first consider the Technical Cooperation Programme. We can talk about it because Indonesia is one of the countries that will soon benefit from it. This is for the purpose of training for transmigration. The Indonesian Government has projected to move 50 000 people per year from the densely populated area in Java to the outer islands. The Indonesian Government considers the programme for transmigration as one of the top priority programmes aiming at speeding up the development of the islands outside Java, and secondly, increasing food production, farmers' income and job opportunities. The TCP will enable FAO to give great and flexible assistance to immediate and short-term needs of member countries, to fill gaps and stimulate the flow of investment and aid from financing institutions and other sources. We are glad to be informed that already fifty countries from all regions benefit from the TCP in the form of 86 projects involving a total of $6.5 million, which have been committed to emergencies for missions and activities in direct support of investment for small scale, gap-filling and training. The subject matter covered includes, for example, seed production, land and water development, plant protection, animal health and training of extension agents.

Further, this kind of technical assistance programme is also available in proportionately large amounts in other specialized agencies and does not duplicate UNDP or other activities. My delegation therefore cannot go along with the view to dismantle the TCP. Rather, we are of the opinion that it is necessary to consolidate further its activities. The programme has just started and the Director-General is wise in proposing a very modest increase for TCP for the next biennium.

My delegation is happy to hear of the speedy progress made in the establishment of FAO representatives; 47 official requests have been received, including one from Indonesia, and 12 agreements have been concluded and will very soon be filled with qualified and acceptable persons. There is no need for us to elaborate further on this matter. We hope that gradually and smoothly it can replace the Senior Agricultural Adviser through FAO Country Representatives and that the process of decentralization at country level and the use of national institutions can be fully implemented.

The strengthening of the investment activities of the Organization will have our support, particularly with the addition of several mission leader posts and associated travel and consultants. The increased activities of the World Bank and the new activities of IFAD should be fully matched by FAO if the Organization is to play a significant role in stimulating a substantial flow of resources to food and agricultural development in developing countries. In this regard my delegation agrees with the Finance Committee to the request of the Director-General to assist further the Preparatory. Commission of IFAD to the extent of $60,000 during 1977.

On post-harvest losses we only wish to reiterate our support for the strengthening of activities to reduce harvest and post-harvest losses, and the establishment of a special fund to reduce food losses. The urgency and importance of implementing as soon as possible the programme of action agreed by the Council considering its emphasis and impact on the availability of food for human consumption and savings need not be further elaborated.

With regard to fisheries, in view of its increased importance as a source of animal protein and of export, my delegation concurs with the view of the Committee on Fisheries on the summary Programme of Work and Budget and its agreed priorities for the major programmes. We wish that more attention be given to fisheries exploitation and utilization particularly in increasing productivity and earnings of small-scale fishermen.

On Forestry, we support the views of the Committee on Forestry that the Forestry Department should concentrate on tropical forestry. Hence ,the priority proposed in the Summary Programme of Work and Budget to assist member nations receives our support, particularly in improving the productivity, management and utilization of tropical and sub-tropical forest and related resources, and the stimulation of investment and promotion of trade in tropical forest products.

With regard to programme increase in the programme on agriculture we are generally in agreement with the Committee on Agriculture. Some activities however should be more exposed and stressed-, particularly when they relate to increasing the food production and improvement of export earnings from developing exporting countries. The stress on increasing the productivity, the expansion on land and water resources and the provision of agricultural inputs and technology receives our support.

On the sub-programme for natural resources, we understand that the objectives are to improve the assessment of land and water resources and their development within the framework of appropriate farming systems. Indonesia has vast unexploited land potential which should be brought into productivity. We agree with the report of the Programme Committee that work under this programme should be directed as much as possible to achieving results for the benefit of countries.

On crops, we would like to underline the activities on reduction of post-harvest losses and seed industry development.

The sub-programme's Rural Development which contains education, extension and training, rural institutions and employment, home economics and social programmes, marketing and credit, receive our support and we wish that allocation for these activities would in the sub-programme be increased. We further wish that more attention will be given in assisting small farmers development.

On food and agriculture policy we concur with the Programme Committee that resources resulting from reorientation of the activities be used to increase work on policy studies in the framework of New International Economic Order, cooperation between countries, particularly economic cooperation among developing countries. Work on "agriculture - toward 2000" to be vigorously continued. There we see the projected benefit for member countries, including use for international agricultural adjustment.

With regard to other sub-programme changes we associate ourselves with the view of the Committee on Agriculture.

With respect to the regional offices, we noted the net increase proposed of nearly US$ 1 million and agree that this enables them further to provide the necessary technical support to FAO country offices and for enhancing the economic cooperation, particularly in the sphere of food and agriculture in the region.

S.S. MAHDI (India): I have listened with considerable interest to the rather comprehensive statement which has just been made by our neighbour Indonesia and our delegation finds itself in agreement with most of the things that have been said. It is not my intention to repeat the specific points which have already been covered and with which we mostly find ourselves in agreement.

The Indian delegation would like to congratulate the Director-Gene ral and his colleagues for the valuable document which has been presented for discussion this afternoon. During the past two years the Director-General has made an intensive review of the priorities of FAO's work and has instituted new approaches. We broadly agree with the revised priorities and especially with the continuation of the Technical Cooperative Programme.

My delegation agrees with the conclusion that short-term improvement in the world food situation should not distract attention from the continued unsatisfactory nature of the long-term trends. The proposed annual increase of 4 percent will need tremendous effort both at the national and international levels. The important components of the programme needed to expand production are, new investment, technological advice and supporting activities.

With regard to the first, no doubt at the national level for agricultural development needs increased investment. However, for achieving the required rate of growth national efforts of the developing countries will have to be supplemented by international assis tance. We welcome the stepping-up of efforts on the part of FAO to achieve this objective.

Regarding technological advance, we appreciate the importance of international and national institutions and we feel that FAO can play a very important role in providing coordination, linkages and exchange of technical information. We consider also that it is necessary to test the findings of research under field conditions and suitably modify before these are passed on to the farmers in the form of practical recommendations for improving productivity. Therefore we would welcome more emphasis given in FAO on adaptive research.

On the specific items included in the Summary Programme of Work and Budget which has been presented to us I would like to emphasize the subject of water resources. As you know, India has a vast untapped potential. We have the technical knowhow and the manpower to exploit it, but the most important constraint is the lack of financial resources. International assistance in this respect would be most fruitful. Even in the high rainfall areas of the country, control over irrigation water is necessary for rapid increase in productivity. It may, however, be mentioned that both extension work and better management of resources is a prerequisite for improving the benefit of the irrigation water and in this respect the FAO priorities that have been presented to us in the documents are most welcome.

As regards the supporting activities, we feel that credit and marketing should receive adequate emphasis. Agriculture in general is starved of investment and the small and marginal farmers are practically neglected. Unless it is possible to create and improve the basic infrastructure, these small farmers will find it difficult to improve their productivity. We find that credit supply is basic and we attach great importance to mobilizing credit from finance institutions both nationally and internationally.

My remarks about seeds and fertilizers will be very brief. We are in full agreement with what has been said in the document and we feel that regular supplies of these inputs at reasonable prices is very important. We also attach importance to the introduction of seeds and new planting material and training of personnel in this field. FAO can assist the developing countries, including our own country, in our need to find planting material of certain fruits and vegetables which can be introduced for improving their quality and productivity.

Now with regard to the food and agricultural products processing we should like to emphasize that FAO should continue to play an important role in this field in view of its rich and varied experience. Our delegation has already dwelt at some length on the. subject in the course of our intervention with reference to post-harvest losses. What we would like to emphasize today is that agro-industries should receive greater attention in the activities of the Organization and this emphasis should be reflected in adequate allocation of resources for this purpose. According to our estimate about less than 3 percent of the Regular Programme Budget is devoted to this purpose out of which 0,5 percent is spent on conservation of food which constitutes over 80 percent of the diet of people in developing countries. We would wish that this percentage of 0,5 percent be increased, perhaps it could be made at least one percent.

We also feel that there is urgent need to strengthen the competence of developing countries in the selection and transfer of appropriate technology and we feel that FAO could make special efforts in this direction, it is fully equipped to do so and it could improve the capabilities of national institutions in this regard.

Now coming to rural development including agrarian reforms, we are fully in agreement with the emphasis given to the small farmers and the role of women in the development of agriculture and their training. We support the proposed activities of FAO in this regard and we feel that the problems of the rural poor which includes the small farmers and marginal farmers and agricultural labourers, should receive due attention. We would like to emphasize in this regard that small farmers do not lack enthusiasm in adopting modern agricultural practices, it is the want of organized services and supplies, of inputs, particularly lack of credit in time which proves to be the main obstacle in their efforts.

Coming to the question of decentralization we welcome the initiative which has been recently taken in the establishment of FAO country offices and I would like to inform the Council that India is one of the countries which has requested an FAO country representative. We hope to benefit from this arrangement and therefore we would fully support the policy in this regard.

Now finally, regarding the Technical Cooperative Programme, we strongly feel, that if this programme was needed in July of 1976 it is much more needed in June 1977 and it will be still further needed in future years. When the subject came up for discussion in the last Council our delegation was one which supported it very enthusiastically and we did not support it as a one-time effort because that would have been very inconsistent and would not have been conducive to deriving full benefits from a programme of this nature. The Council has already noted that even in this brief period, about 81 projects of a total value of $6 million have already been approved and in this regard I would like to emphasize particularly the pain that has been taken in launching this programme. Very close attention has been given to its performance and I understand that the Director-General has been taking a very personal interest in each and every one of the schemes that have been approved. So in spite of all this caution if we find that so many projects have been approved we can only congratulate the FAO Secretariat for this. Hope has oeeu expressed That by the end of 1977 about $15 million of the resources will be committed for this purpose, and this is by no means a '"small achievement in view of the innovative nature of the Programme. We are fully aware of some of the constraints in many of the developing countries in formulating the projects. Many of these countries might even need the assistance of experts in formulating the TCP project. The Programme has gained momentum and my country has no reason to doubt that the major amount of the budgeted money will be committed by the end of 1977. The question has been raised as to whether these programmes are duplicating the UNDP activities. From our brief experience we can say with conviction that such is not the case. There are a number of emergency situations which vary in type and duration as well as in size, and not all of them can be met immediately by the current machinery available in UNDP, WFP or OSRO. Therefore,we feel that there is a definite need for TCP. There is a veriety of needs ranging over assessment missions, individual specialists, modest supplies of inputs, etc., which arise in such situations and call for immediate short-term responses. There are also a number of vital gaps in the on-going programmes of the developing countries which would not be otherwise met from any other source. It is in this context that the TCP of FAO plays a significant role.

My delegation would therefore wholeheartedly support this programme included in the Summary Programme of Work and Budget, and would further urge that if possible, the allocations under this Programme should be increased, keeping in mind the variety of situations in which the developing countries could call upon the FAO to assist them.

A comment has been made about the increase. In our view, the present increase proposed by the Director-General is not excessive. I think in fact it is very modest and almost insignificant.

Another point has been made about the evaluation of the TCP. Now, we entirely agree that the evaluation of innovative programmes like TCP should be made, but we would also like to emphasize that perhaps we should wait a little longer before we can evaluate a programme of this nature, and in any case, we feel that the deadline which has been given for presentation of a preliminary evaluation is rather early. We should realize that this is a programme which is different from the UNDP type of activities. It is a programme which is still evolving, and at least some time should elapse before a full evaluation is launched. All this does not mean we are not in favour of evaluation, we are very much in favour of it, but all we plead is that at least some more time should be given before to the programme to show its full potentials.

M. G. WEILL (France): Le document CL 71/3 permet une bonne appreciation des efforts déployés par le Directeur general pour adapter l'Organisation à ses tâches et en accroître l'efficacité. Sous la forme naturallëment concice sous laquelle il se présente, ce document permet au Conseil de préparer le débat de la Conference en ce qui concerne le programme de travail et de budget.

Quant au niveau du budget,il nous est proposé pour le prochain biennium de le porter à 206,8 millions de dollars, soit une augmentation de 23,8 pour cent. Nous savons que ce budget est affecté par des éléments sur lesquels le Directeur général n'a pas de prise, tels l'inflation qui sévit en Italie sans que celle-ci n'ait malheureusement le monopole de ce dérèglement économique. Je dois cependant rappeler que la rigueur budgétaire à laquelle nous sommes nous-mêmes contraints de nous soumettre dans notre pays conduit à adopter la même attitude en ce qui concerne les budgets des organismes internationaux auxquels nous participons, à savoir une augmentation maximum de 10 pour cent par an. Sur cette base, Monsieur le Directeur général, le budget de l'Organisation pour le prochain biennium passerait de 167 à 202 millions de dollars.

Je souhaiterai dire quelles sont les réactions de ma délégation sur le programme lui-même qui nous est soumis. D'une manière générale nous souscrivons aux priorités proposées et nous approuvons les restructurations qui figurent dans le document et qui se rapportent à la recherche agricole, aux engrais, et à la télédétection. Nous pensons que les mesures que propose le Directeur général vont dans le sens de l'efficacité et nous le suivons tout à fait dans ses propositions.

Je ne peux manquer de mentionner également le programme de coopération technique. Ce programme, les différentes délégations précédentes en ont parlé, n'a été institué qu'il y a à peine un an et constitue d'ores et déjà un outil d'intervention important de notre Organisation dans le cadre retenu par le Conseil, en accord avec le Directeur général. Ce programme de coopération technique tient aussi d'ores et déjà une place importante dans le Programme de travail et budget du prochain biennium. Le sommaire du Programme de travail et budget prévoyait en sa faveur une augmentation de 1 500 000 dollars. En accord avec les autres délégations qui se sont exprimées dans ce sens, nous souhaiterions, pour éclairer le Conseil et la Conférence, que le Directeur général soumette à la soixante-douzième session du Conseil un premier rapport circonstancié sur la mise en oeuvre du Programme et les opérations réalisées. Disant cela, ma délégation se gardera d'entrer dans le débat assez formel qui porte sur les modalités de l'évaluation. A ce stade, nous ne demandons pas une évaluation avec les sens divers que telle ou telle délégation attache à ce terme, mais nous demandons à disposer d'un maximum d'informations sur la façon dont ce programme a été mis en oeuvre depuis le mois de juillet, avec les indications sur les opérations et les modalités selon lesquelles elles ont été réalisées.

Nous savons les efforts qu'a fait le Directeur général pour contenir le budget. Pour attester combien nous apprécions la rigueur dont il a fait montre, je relèverai simplement l'action énergique qu'il a menée et qui doit être poursuivie pour réduire le nombre des réunions, les voyages, et pour pratiquer une politique plus sélective des publications. Nous félicitons le Directeur général de l'excellent bulletin de santé de l'Organisation que constitue à nos yeux la réduction, depuis sa prise en fonctions, du pourcentage des dépenses consacrées aux postes ouverts par rapport au budget total. Le paragraphe 7.5 du sommaire du programme et du budget, donne en effet dans ce sens des chiffres qui méritent d'être rappelés: en 1974-75, le pourcentage des dépenses consacrées aux postes ouverts par rapport au budget total était de 77,2 pour cent; durant le biennium qui s'achève, ce pourcentage est descendu de 77,2 à 63,8 pour cent et nous saluons pour le prochain biennium la continuation de ce mouvement avec une prévision de 62,5 pour cent pour 1978/1979.

C'est dire que nous savons la rigueur qu'apporte le Directeur général à une gestion de l'Organisation allant dans le sens de l'efficacité.

Quoi qu'il en soit, nous aimerions que, dans les mois qui nous séparent de la Conférence, le Directeur général, dans le sens de nos préoccupations quant au programme et au budget, veuille bien porter, entre autre, son attention sur les trois domaines suivants que je vais développer quelque peu:

Je parlerai de:'' l'Agriculture-Horizon 2000", C'est à dire le sous-programme 3.2 "investissements'', et enfin le sous-programme 3.4 "bureaux dans les pays''.

"l'Agriculture-Horizon 2000": il est difficile au stade actuel de nos informations de disposer de beaucoup d'indications sur ce que l'on entend par là; cependant, le Comité du Programme y consacre deux paragraphes, les paragraphes 2.68 et 2.69. Ces paragraphes indiquent que le projet dont il s'agit, "l'Agriculture-Horizon 2000", là, je cite une partie du paragraphe du rapport du Comité du Programme: "ce projet "Agriculture-Horizon 2000" prolonge sous une forme modifiée l'étude prospective du développement agricole mondial le fameux EPDAM.

Ce n'est pas tellement pour nous rassurer car nous avons déjà eu, lors de sessions antérieures du Conseil ou de la Conférence, à formuler des doutes, exprimer des craintes ou des réserves sur l'intérêt pratique et sur l'impact de l'EPDAM.

Ce Comité du Programme nous apprend que cette étude "Horizon 2000" sera menée avec l'avis d'un groupe de consultants de haut niveau en envisageant deux ou trois scénarios. Le sommaire du Programme du travail et budget rattache d'ailleurs cette étude à celle qu'effectuent les Nations Unies sous la direction du professeur LEONTIEF, sur l'économie mondiale de l'an 2000. Cela est mentionné au paragraphe 2.

Quoiqu'il en soit, tout en rappelant la vocation privilégiée de la FAO d'entreprendre des études dans un domaine de son ressort, notre délégation à maintes reprises, a mis en garde contre le développement d'études de caractère trop académique, grandes consommatrices de temps, d'efforts et d'argent.

Le sommaire du Programme de travail et budget au paragraphe 2.11 rappelle d'ailleurs la réticence du Directeur général à l'égard, et là je cite: "des études théoriques diffuses et de longue haleine" ce sont les propos du Directeur général.

C'est dans cet esprit que nous attirons son attention sur le développement au sein de cette Maison, sur l'étude de "Agriculture-Horizon 2000".

Le second secteur sur lequel je voudrais attirer particulièrement l'attention du Conseil et, s'il le veut bien, du Directeur général, c'est le sous-programme 3.2 "Investissements". En ce qui concerne les investissements, l'on nous propose de procéder à une certaine restructuration du Centre des investissements en justifiant cette restructuration par le développement des activités du FIDA. Cela est mentionné à l'annexe A15 du Sommaire du Programme de travail et du budget où on lit par exemple: "l'Accord portant création du Fonds international de développement agricole prévoit une coopération étroite entre ce dernier et la FAO. Cette collaboration implique la participation du personnel technique de toutes les unités de la FAO. Avec le Centre d'investissement comme point de convergence, il faudra donc renforcer, déployer les ressources du Centre d'investissement, etc.". Un peu plus loin, on peut lire "afin de remédier au déséquilibre marqué dans la structure organisâtionnelle du Centre d'investissement, essentiellement tournée vers la Banque mondiale, Banques régionales, Banques nationales de développement, dans le cadre du programme FAO/Banques, Fonds arabes, etc. et pour tenir compte du travail supplémentaire au titre du FIDA, il sera nécessaire de restructurer le Centre en y créant un troisième service en transférant à un budget ordinaire le poste du Directeur et de sa secrétaire actuellement pris en charge par la Banque et en créant, au titre du programme ordinaire, un poste P-4 et deux postes d'employés de bureau''.

Je voudrais simplement dire que nous avons conscience de l'importance de la collaboration de la FAO avec le FIDA. Nous savons ce que peut apporter en effet le Centre d'investissement au FIDA mais nous demandons si, véritablement, tant d'accroissement de travail dont fait état le sommaire du Programme de travail et du budget doit être supporté par le budget de notre Organisation? Nous aimerions que notre Conseil prenne une position à ce sujet, à savoir que c'est le FIDA qui devrait supporter les accroissements de dépenses qui s'avéreront nécessaires pour le Centre d'investissement et nous suggérons que le Conseil donne mission au Directeur général de négocier les arrangements appropriés en ce sens avec le FIDA.

Le troisième point que je voudrais reprendre après nombre d'autres orateurs, a trait au sous-programme 3.4 "Bureaux dans les pays". Ainsi que le rappelle le Directeur général, (cela figuré au paragraphe 2.11 du Sommaire du Programme de travail), le Conseil lors de sa soixante-neuvième session, a entériné ses propositions et a retenu comme ligne d'orientation dans ce domaine qu'il convient de s'attacher à décentraliser les systèmes de l'Organisation, notamment par l'affectation progressive de représentants dans les pays, plutôt, a déclaré le Conseil à sa soixante-neuvième session, que de développer les bureaux régionaux.

Il n'est pas question de revenir sur cette orientation. Mais il convient de s'interroger sur le rythme de l'évolution que cela implique en relation tant avec la situation des actuels conseillers agricoles, principaux représentants dans les pays, qu'avec la structure et les activités des bureaux régionaux. Actuellement, coexistent en effet les conseillers agricoles principaux représentants dans les pays selon un dispositif mis en place il y a plusieurs années, et les représentants dans les pays "nouvelle formule", nous avons en effet entendu que les négociations ont heureusement abouti avec un certain nombre de pays pour la mise en place de ces premiers représentants.

Chemin faisant, je note qu'il serait sans doute intéressant de disposer des observations des autorités gouvernementales des pays auxquels les conseillers agricoles principaux "ancienne formule" ont été affectés afin d'en dégager des enseignements s'agissant de l'orientation de la nouvelle organisation. Quoiqu'il en soit, le Sommaire du Programme de travail et budget 1978/1979 dégage les faits suivants et les chiffres suivants: il y a actuellement 62 postes de conseillers agricoles, principaux représentants dans les pays, pris en charge aux deux tiers par le budget du PNUD. Ils devraient cesser d'exister durant 1979.

La FAO propose de mettre en place, au titre du programme ordinaire, sur le biennium 1978-79, 47 représentants dans les pays, secondés par 170 agents des services généraux.

Le montant supplémentaire pour les bureaux dans les pays a plus que doublé de 1976-77 à 1978-79 passant de 4 731 000 dollars à 9 831 000 dollars, avec une augmentation de 5 100 000 dollars.

Simultanément - cela est dit au paragraphe 2 - le renforcement des bureaux régionaux se traduira par une augmentation de près de 1 million de dollars.

Sans doute, Monsieur le Président, l'augmentation du budget annoncée tient-elle, dans une large mesure, au fait que la FAO renonçant à l'arrangement actuel avec le PNUD, s'apprête à financer seule, sur le budget du programme ordinaire, le coût des représentants dans les pays.

Au paragraphe 3.12 du sommaire du programme de travail et budget, il est écrit: "...on reconsidère d'un oeil neuf et encore plus attentif le rôle et les fonctions des bureaux régionaux, afin de poursuivre ''la débureaucratisation" et la décentralisation à partir du Siège et de renforcer l'impact des activités au niveau des pays".

C'est en fait l'objectif que le Conseil a admis dès sa 69ème session.

Cependant, tant du fait des réaménagements envisagés à l'échelon des bureaux régionaux que de l'ampleur de la reconversion en cours en ce qui concerne les représentants dans les pays et de son impact à la fois sur les structures et sur le budget, il nous semble que la mise en place du nouveau dispositif ne pourra être que progressive. De ce fait, l'augmentation de crédits pour le prochain biennium, à savoir 5 100 000 dollars, plus 1 million de dollars, pourrait sans doute être modérée.

Je n'ai pas abordé la question que le Président du Comité financier a touchée lors de sa présentation du rapport du Comité financier. Je n'ai pas parlé de la question du compte d'attente, car je pense en effet qu'elle fera l'objet d'une discussion sur un autre point de l'ordre du jour.

Je voudrais maintenant conclure en disant,au nom de la délégationique je souhaite que le Directeur général prenne en considération notre préoccupation de limiter à 10 pour cent par an l'augmentation du budget, et les observations que lui a présentées en ce sens ma délégation.

Nous serions heureux que le Directeur général puisse tenir compte de nos préoccupations et les traduise dans le programme de travail étudié qui sera soumis à la Conférence, de façon à en faciliter l'approbation par la délégation de la France à la prochaine session de la Conférence.

H. MAURIA (Finland): In the first place, I want to say on behalf of my delegation that we regard document CL 71/3 as a good Summary document. It is brief, concise and clear, and has been of great help to our delegation.

To begin with I can say that the Summary Programme of Work and Budget for 1978/79 does not actually require lengthy comments on our part, as so much has already been said by other delegations.

We notice with satisfaction that the Director-General's strategy for the next biennium has been shortly indicated and that the general approach to programme priorities has been stated in the document. We welcome the Director-General's intentions to continue the process of concentrating on priorities as stated in paragraph 6.4 by ensuring feed-in from the evaluation process.

Regarding the feed-in from the so-called "technical committees'', we would like particularly to ask the Secretariat to consider in which way and by what means the impact of these committees - I mean COAG, COFO, COFI and so on - on the formation of the medium-term projections could be improved and to take appropriate steps in this matter.

Regarding one of the important new priority areas, the Technical Cooperation Programme, we have noted the number of requests and commitments in progress. We welcome the information already received and are anticipating the first review of the Programme during the Conference next November. Under these auspices we are ready to support the increase proposed for the Programme.

The information concerning field programmes given in the summary document is of importance to Member Countries. The views of the Secretariat on the likely future development of the extra-budgetary financing of field programmes are likewise informative. As the final document, the review of field programmes, is not yet available we intend to save our comments in this matter for the Conference. At this stage we just want to announce our agreement with what is being said in paragraph 5.12 of the summary document about the spirit of participation of the UN system.

With these rather general remarks we are ready to endorse the Summary Programme of Work and Budget for 1978-79 as a basis for the final Programme of Work and Budget.

G. ESCARDO PEINADOR (España): Permítame ante todo felicitar a los Comités del Programa y de Finanzas por el sucinto, claro a la par que denso, informe que nos ha presentado. El Programa de Labores vemos que se ajusta a las nuevas directrices que orientan la política del Director General, por lo que nuevamente le felicito por ello. Desde el primer momento hemos apoyado los esfuerzos de descentralización que lleva a cabo el Director General. El reforzamiento de todas las oficinas regionales es fundamental, a las que se les debe dar el énfasis correspondiente y proporclonalmente a los fines que ha de llevar a cabo la Organización.

El Programa de Cooperación Técnica lo consideramos un acierto y encontramos que esos programas habrán de apoyarse siempre en las sugerencias de los delegados en los países y de las oficinas regionales.

Apoyamos las prioridades citadas, nutrición, pesca, montes; lo indicado por el delegado de Egipto en relación con la mecanización y lo expuesto por otros delegados en relación con el problema de los riegos. Con respecto a éste, mi país, que la base de su regadío le fue dada por la civilización árabe de lo que nos sentimos orgullosos, está siempre dispuesto a través de la Organización a devolver a éstos y otros países lo que nosotros de ellos recibimos, y creo que hemos mejorado.

Los programas de investigación subrayan lo dicho en el párrafo 251 del Informe en cuanto a las actividades de las oficinas regionales, en cuanto al establecimiento y coordinación de las redes de investi-gación ya establecidas o que se creen en lo sucesivo; pueden a su vez establecer los suficientes contactos entre unas y otras regiones en relación con estos programas.

En cuanto al volumen del presupuesto encontramos que se ajusta en principio de una forma muy objetiva al Programa de Labores presentado; misión nuestra, mejor dicho de mi país, es luchar ahora con nuestros respectivos ministerios para hacerlos comprender su nueva, actual misión que deberemos desarrollar a partir de este estudio en su día y que lo expondremos en la Conferencia próxima.

Y siguiendo sus instrucciones de brevedad, le doy las gracias.

CHIN FENG-CHU (China) (interpretation from Chinese): On the Programme of Work and Budget of this Organization the Chinese delegation thinks that in the light of the developing situation, items of work and the allocation of funds between them should be adjusted from time to time involving both increases and decreases. For the last year and more the proposals of the Director-General, the numerous meetings and documentation of the Organization, as well as the large increases in the staff have been cut down and this change has been welcomed by the majority of Member Nations. Certain items which are not of much practical significance to the promotion of food and agricultural production in the Third World have been appropriately reduced. This is also necessary. We shall support the Director-General in putting forward further suggestions and proper measures along these lines.

On the other hand, it is also in accordance with the requirements of the Third World to increase items which are of true benefit to the developing countries while reducing as much as possible all expenses which are not really indispensable.

Document CL 71/3, for example, lays emphasis on items concerning the establishment of a new international economic order in the field of food and agricultural development. In our opinion this accords with the present situation as well as the desire of most Member Nations. The Chinese delegation therefore endorses paragraph 3.5 of this document which gives the main priorities for the work of the Organization to the promotion of food, production in developing countries, strengthened work on commodities and trade, support to the integrated commodity programme and cooperation between developing countries.

We also think that as FAO already covers a wide range of work at present, it would be desirable to concentrate its manpower and material and financial resources to a still greater extent on the above-mentioned crucial items which are urgently needed by the developing countries.

As for items of lesser urgency it would be advisable to postpone them wherever feasible. This would surely give quicker results without, unduly increasing the budget level.

It is our consistent stand that international organizations should be as economical as possible in their financial budgets and as compact as possible in their administrative organization and staff. As regards the budget "for 1978-79 we consider that the level as stated in document CL 71/3 could be used as a basis for further study.

At the 69th session of this Council on the proposals of the Director-General and also with the support of the developing countries, this Organization established a Technical Cooperation Programme. We consider that the items envisaged by the TCP were of greater practical value to the third world countries than the items where expenses were to be cut down in accordance with the Director-General's proposal. So we spoke in favour of this Programme. As for future technical cooperative programmes, we think that the level should not be raised unduly, we should think, by reducing those items which are of little practical value to the promotion of food and agricultural production in the developing countries. In this way necessary manpower and material and financial resources would be provided for the gradual implementation of technical cooperation projects. At present this TCP is being carried out. It has won the approval of developing countries. In the Programme of Work and Budget for 1978-79 proposed by the Director-General the marginal increases envisaged for the TCP are acceptable.

A.A. SENEINA (Sudan) (Interpretation from Arabic): In the name of my delegation I should like to thank the Chairmen of the Programme and Finance Committees for having presented these documents which are under discussion. I should also like to express our appreciation for the new orientation which the Director-General is giving to the policy and activities of our Organization, as it appears in the Summary of the Programme of Work and Budget for 1978-79.

I should like to make some comments on some points which my delegation considers very important. The firts concerns the creation of offices for the Country Representatives. This is a very positive initiative which will have very considerable results because this will enable the Organization to have more direct contact with the countries which the Organization is helping and it will also help the Organization to take into account the hopes and aspirations of developing countries.

The second point on which I wanted to make some comments concerns the Technical Cooperation Programme. It seemed very clear to me that the Committee hesitated as far as the Technical Cooperation Programme is concerned but I do wish to say that this Programme is a new initiative for us which is not yet very clear, nor am I exaggerating when I say that it will have a great future for us because this is the first time that we can feel that our Organization has become capable of acting, and acting swiftly, and of reacting as swiftly to requests made by developing contries, particularly in emergencies. However, I am sorry to have to say, - and in this I agree with the delegate of India - that the amount of $20 to $24 million is a sum which will not meet the needs of the developing countries, and if the Programme is to have special funds allocated to it, or extra-budgetary sources, this might damage the Technical Cooperation Programme which should, therefore, have guaranteed and permanent funds.

Finally, I would like to make some comments on what was stated by the delegate of Italy when he expressed his fears regarding the increase in the budget being at a rate greater than 20 percent. My delegation appreciates the Organization's difficulties, particularly the considerable rate of inflation which the Organization has to take into account, and other economic difficulties in the world situation; all these facts have forced it to increase its budgets, and the increase suggested by the Director-General seems a very modest one. While we are in agreement with him on the initiative aimed at covering the Organization's spending and making its activities more directly concerned with developing countries and to turning them into profitable activities, we think the Organization should have the means in its new policies to achieve these targets. That is why I should like to say that my delegation and my Government agree with and endorse the summary Programme of Work and Budget as proposed.

O. BORIN (Italie): Je voudrais corriger l'impression fausse qui a pu être donnée par l'intervention du délègue du Soudan. Ce n'est pas ma délégation qui a parlé d'une réduction maximale du budget de la FAO à 20 pour cent, c'est la délégation de la France. Quant á nous, nous n'avons rien proposé.

EL PRESIDENTE: Mañana por la mañana empezaremos nuestra sesión con el calendario previsto y seguiremos en primer lugar con la conclusión del Tema 16 que hemos empezado esta tarde, para continuar con el Tema 18.

The meeting rose at 17.35 hours.
La séance est levée à 17 h 35.
Se levanta la sesión a las 17.35 horas.



Previous Page Top of Page Next Page