Previous Page Table of Contents Next Page


20. Report of the Working Party on the Composition and Terms of Reference of the Council, the Programme Committee, the finance. Committee and the CCLM : (continued)
20. Rapport du Groupe de travail sur la composition et: le mandat du Conseil, du Comité du Programme, du Comité financfer et du CQCJ: (suite)
20. Informe del. Grupo de Trabajo sobre la Composición y el Mandato del Consejo, el Comité de Programa, el comite de Filialisas y el Comité de Asuntos Constitucionales y Juridìcos: (continuación)

EL PRESIDENTE : Vamos a empezar la sesión de esta tarde como lo habíamos convenido esta mariana. Conviene que sigamos este punto que es importante y que pertenece igualmente a los dos informes, al del Grupo de Trabajo y al del CACJ. El aumento del numero de puestos del Consejo lo encontrarán en el documento CL 71/5, párrafos 33 a 35 y el del Grupo de Trabajo está en los párrafos 20 y 21, como ya lo dijo el señor Velay, Presidente en Ejercicio del Grupo del Trabajo. Notarán ustedes que en el párrafo 20 del documento 12 aparece la alternativa sobre el numero y Jistribución de los puertos del Consejo. Después de numerosas discusiones el Grupo resolvió como posibles medilas de compromiso, apoyar la solución que aparece en el párrafo 20 apartado D, o sea aumentar a 49 miembros el Consejo, con la distribución que aparece en el mismo apartado D del párrafo 20.

Una vez más les ruego que sean breves y concretos para ver si logramos evacuar este punto de la manera más rápida y constructiva posibleé

A.A.W. LANDYMORE (United Kingdom) : I shall be very much in line with what you have just. said.

The United Kingdoir, delegation lays a great deal of stress on keeping the Council to a manageable size. As a rule of thumb, we would have: considered that a Council should not consist of more than one-third of the members of the Organization. Thus, on.the present membership this would give the Council 44 members. The United Kingdom delegation believes that under that criterion a minimum of one more seat should go to the European region.

It would far prefer to go alorig with suggestion (c) in paragraph 20, but at the very most we can accept paragraph (d) which is the one to which you have drawn attention.

H. ABDALLAH (Egypt) (Interpretation from Arabic) : We share the view expressed by Mr. Landymore, the Representative of the United Kingdom. It is necessary that the Members of the Council be restricted to a minimum as far as possible, but in this context we would point out that the number of Members of the Council should be divisible by three, because every year a third of the Members of Council conclude their mandate. This is the reason why we think that paragraph 20(c) is in fact the most appropriate, as 48 is a number that is divisible by three.

It also seems that in (b), Africa 2, and Near East 1, it would appear that there is a mistake because in paragraph (c) it says that Africa has 3 seats and the Near East does not have a seat at all.

We think, then, that for paragraph 20 (a) there should be the following distribution : Africa 2, Near East 1, Asia and the Far East 1, Europe 1, Latin America 1.

Q.H. HAQUE (Bangladesh) : This particular issue has also been discussed at length before the formulation of these alternatives in sub-groups. We feel the same way as my colleague from the United Kingdom, that as far as possible the number of seats in the Council should be kept to the minimum and of a manageable size.

At the same time, however, we thought that East Asians should have representation in the Council in order to put forward their views. In that context, we are agreed on a number where each region should have at least one seat. We would go along with the alternative in paragraph 20 (b) which would increase the number to 49, giving at least one seat to each region.

J. BERTELING (Netherlands) : May I say very briefly on the subject of the number of Council seats that my delegation welcomes the normally very active participation of Observers in Council meetings, especially on important and substantive items.

It was mentioned just now that there should be not more than one-third of the Member States as Council members, and for these reasons and because the number of Council seats was accepted in 1971, my delegation has a strong preference for (c) which means no difference in the number of seats and no change in the regional distribution.

H. MAURIA (Finland) : We are also very much in favour of the wise words mentioned by the delegate of the United Kingdom as to keeping the number of seats in the Council at a manageable number. However, we know that there is also a need for a little enlargement, and for that purpose' we would be ready to go for alternative (c) in the report of the Working Group, or may be if needed even alternative (d), but we would prefer alterrative (c).

I.A. IMTIAZI (Pakistan) : My delegation supporta alternative (d) of paragraph 20 of document CL 71/12. In our view such an arrangement would lead to a more equitable geographical distribution of Council seats than at present.

J.L. TOFFIN (France) : La delegation française est d'accord sur le principe d'un élargissement du Conseil qui correspondrait plus ou moins à l'augmentation du nombre des Etats Membres de l'Organisation survenue au cours des dernières années. Quant au nombre et á la distribution des sièges supplémentaires, notre, préférence va à la solution (d) qui prévoit 49 sièges, avec la répartition qui est indiquée dans le document.

R, TANABE (Japan) : As to the number of members of the Council, my delegation also thinks that the increase should be as small as possible. However, it seems to my delegation that paragraph (c) or(d) would be most likely to be agréable to the majority, and we would have no difficulty in accepting this conclusion.

A. JANHA (Gambia) : As much as I would like to keep the Council to a manageable size, we would also like to see it being fully representative of the Governments which are represented at FAO. As a result, the Gambia delegation feels that the African group is under-represented, and as such we would like to see paragraph (e) adopted by the Conference. In the next three months we are expecting some new members of the Council most of whorc will be from the African region - Angola, Mozambique, Sao Tomé ect, - and we should like this to be fully reflected. Preference (e) will be quite acceptable to my delegation, therefore, but at the very worst; we would accept preference (d) .

C. HTCGINSON (United States of America) : This problem was given to the Ad Hoc. Committee on the restructuring of the Council emphasizing the importance of efficiency and effectiveness. If we use these two criteria in judging our position on this issue, a Council of 42 - in other words no change -is clearly more efficient than a Council any larger. Admittedly the African region does have fewer seats to their number of countries than other regions in the Organization and therefore alternative (b), which is the second smallest increase in the Council, should also be considered by the Council.

S. STAMPACH (Tchécoslovaquie) : Il est évident qu'à chaque augmentation du nombre de sièges au Conseil on renouvelle la discussion sur la justice d'une représentation géographique. Ma délégation pense ainsi que d'autres pays socialistes, que le plus important est d'aller dans le sens d'une demande de représentation géographique juste. Je ne voudrais pas proposer â notre Conseil de suivre l'exemple du Conseil mondial dans d'autres domaines, mais en ce qui concerne la représentation de notre sous-groupe des pays au Conseil mondial de l'alimentation des Nations Unies, qui parmi les 36 membres du Conseil compte cinq pays socialistes tandis qu'ici, malgré tous nos efforts et notre travail au Conseil, nous ne pouvons pas assurer la continuité du travail du Conseil parmi les pays socialistes.

En conclusion, nous sommes d'avis que le nombre de sièges au Conseil devrait rester limité au minimum pour que le Conseil puisse rester efficace mais, en même temps, un minimum qui permette d'assurer une représentation géographique équilibrée et juste. C'est pourquoi ma délégation suggère un siège au plus pour l'Europe, région où il y a plusieurs systèmes différents les uns des autres dans différentes organisations. Il est donc bien difficile de laisser représenter un sous-groupe par un représentant de notre système sous-régional.

En second lieu, nous sommes favorables à un usage qui assurerait, pour les pays socialistes, une représentation de demandes au Conseil.

C'est pourquoi notre délégation apporte son soutien (dans une mesure limite et même à titre exceptionnel) à la solution d) du paragraphe 20 du Rapport du Groupe de travail sur la composition du mandat du Conseil.

W.A.F. GRABISCH (Germany, Federal Republic of): In order to be brief and to help you, Mr. Chairman, I wish to state that my delegation shares the views expressed on the subject before us by the delegation of the United Kingdom.

A. DAS (India): As regards the number of seats of the FAO Council, our delegation feels that it is only logical and appropriate that the number of seats of the Council should be increased to reflect the increase in the membership of FAO which has taken place over a number of years. In this matter since we have to take a balanced view between the view expressed by some of the earlier delegates that it is necessary to keep the number of members of the Council to manageable proportions and also keeping in mind the need to allow at least one additional seat to the different regions, namely, Asia and the Far East, Europe, the Near East and Latin America and also at least three seats to Africa which is going to have a number of other countries coming in to that group of countries, our delegation is of the view that the requirements of both, that is keeping the number to the minimum and also providing the necessary absolutely essential increase for the different regions, can be met by alternative (d) in paragraph 20 of the Working Party's Report which would be the most appropriate and under which Africa would get three additional seats, Asia and the Far East would get one additional seat and Europe, the Near East and Latin America would get one additional seat each. In our view that would be the most appropriate solution.

N.M. MWAUNGULU (Malawi): With reference to the increase of seats on the Council, the question of equitable representation should be paramount. It is practical, of course, not to overly increase the size of the Council, but for the African region more countries are going to seek membership of the Council in the near future. That being the case, the Malawi delegation is of the view that at the least the option proposed in (d) is the most practical although we would really prefer the option proposed in (e).

E. HRAOUI (Liban) (Interprétation de l'arabe): Selon le principe de l'équité, nous voulons corroborer la proposition formulée par le délégué de l'Inde et nous voulons donner notre accord au sous-paragraphe d) du paragraphe 20 de ce document et ce,pour que toutes les régions soient équitablement et justement représentées.

J.S. CAMARA (Observateur pour la Guinée): J'espère que je n'abuserai pas de votre temps et que vous n'aurez pas à m'interrompre. Toutefois, si je dépasse le temps imparti, je vous prierai de me laisser continuer mon intervention car je ne parlerai pas seulement en mon nom mais au nom du Groupe africain que la Guinée a eu l'honneur de présider.

Lorsque nous avons fait cette proposition au nom de la région africaine, ce n'était pas parce que nous voulions limiter l'efficacité du Conseil mais parce que nous avions estimé que l'accord de forces nouvelles de pays jusqu'ici dominés par d'autres ne pouvait qu'être conforme à l'instauration du nouvel ordre économique, ordre dont tout le monde parle du bout des lèvres.

C'est pour cela que le Groupe africain estime que, même si l'on devait adopter l'une des propositions contenues au paragraphe 20, la région africaine ne serait jamais équitablement représentée autant que le sont les autres régions.

Dans l'un des documents dont est saisi le Conseil, il est dit que de nouveaux Etats africains, qui sont libérés de la domination étrangère, vont rejoindre la communauté des nations libres. Il y en a cinq. Ce qui fait qu'aujourd'hui, si nous sommes 37 dans notre région, nous serons 42 lors de la Conférence générale. Même si nous faisons une répartition actuelle, l'Afrique se trouverait très loin par rapport aux autres régions. La région qui se rapproche le plus de nous, c'est le Proche-Orient. Il est donc juste que l'Afrique exige qu'il y ait au moins quatre sièges supplémentaires au Conseil. Ce n'est pas le nombre de sièges qui reviendra à l'Afrique qui diminuera son efficacité mais, bien au contraire, c'est en entendant ses pays que l'on pourra connaître la réalité des problèmes qui se posent à notre continent. Car, comme tout le monde le sait, tout le monde ne peut pas parler à ce Conseil. Mais si nous arrivons à être 13 pays, nous pourrons refléter le même point de vue de tout le continent africain. Le Groupe africain demande donc au moins quatre sièges.

N'étant pas membre du Conseil, je n'aurai plus à intervenir mais les autres pays africains qui défendent nos intérêts au Conseil sont prêts à accepter un compromis qui ne limiterait pas la participation africaine au Conseil. Nous tenons à réaffirmer ici que nous rejetons les déclarations de ceux qui disent que le Conseil soit limité et le nombre de sièges ne soit pas augmenté car cela affaiblirait l'efficacité du Conseil.

Notre position est claire depuis fort longtemps. Nous voulons une représentation équitable, or certaines régions sont surreprésentées. Nous ne voulons pas les indiquer mais tout le monde les connaît. Nous ne pensons pas que ces pays aient le droit de dire ici que l'Afrique doit avoir une représentation juste et équitable conforme à sa participation dans l'Organisation. Sur ce point, nous sommes de l'avis que le Proche-Orient, l'Amérique latine et l'Afrique doivent avoir des sièges supplémentaires au Conseil car à l'heure actuelle ils sont sous-représentés.

S.A.H. AL SHAKIR (Observer from Iraq) (Interpretation from Arabie): I should like to take this opportunity of repeating the need to increase the number of seats on the Council because such an increase will, first and foremost, enable the Council membership to reflect the increasing number of FAO Member States. Secondly, such an increase is due to the expansion of the responsibilities of FAO. Thirdly, I would say that the mandate could be restricted and we could arrange for a faster rotation so that Member States could participate more frequently in Council. For all theses reasons we would support sub-paragraph (d) which would give three extra seats to Africa, one to Asia and the Far East, one to Europe, one to the Near East and one to Latin America.

Sra. I. DE GIOVAN DE SUAREZ (Argentina): Mi delegación desea expresar en nombre del Grupo Latinoamericano su apoyo a la iniciativa de aumentar el número de miembros del Consejo, a fin de permitir una adecuada representación de las distintas regiones que integran la FAO, especialmente atendiendo a las naturales aspiraciones de los países africanos.

Sin embargo, el Grupo Latinoamericano considera que la adecuada representación geográfica debe tener en cuenta no sólo el número de países que pertenecen a cada región, sino también una debida proporción entre las representaciones de las distintas regiones que constituyen la comunidad internacional. La preocupación de América Latina es que un excesivo énfasis puesto en el número de países que constituyen cada reglón signifique paralelamente la disminución o la minirepresentación de otras regiones, como es el caso de la nuestra.

Por eso consideramos que si bien estaríamos dispuestos a apoyar la alternativa d), es decir, tres para Africa, uno para Asia y Lejano Oriente, uno para Europa y uno para el Cercano Oriente, el Grupo Latinoamericano tiene la aspiración de que esta alternativa sea modificada y se otorguen tres puestos para América Latina. En este sentido, reitero que la preocupación de nuestra región es mantener una adecuada representación de las regiones, sopena de que el Consejo dé un espectro distorsionado de los intereses en juego.

EL PRESIDENTE: ¿No hay más oradores? Si nadie más quiere hacer uso de la palabra, creo, y la Secretaría parece confirmarlo, que la mayoría de las delegaciones que intervinieron estuvieron básicamente o como alternativa en favor de la propuesta del Gtupo de Trabajo, contenida en el Apartado ft) del Párrafo 20, o sea, en aumentar el número de miembros del Consejo a 49, con la distribución geográfica que aparece en ese Apartado(d). Naturalmente, las consideraciones adicionales que fueron hechas por otras delegaciones, podrán reflejarse en el texto del Informe. Entiendo que esta es la conclusión del debate sobre este punto.

Podemos ahora revisar un poco los dos documentos básicos de las discusiones de hoy.

19. Report of the CCLM (34th Session, Rome, Way 1977)
19. Rapport du CQCJ (trente-quatrième session, Rome, mai 1977)
19. Informe del CACJ (34° periodo de sesiones, Roma, mayo 1977)

EL PRESIDENTE: En primer lugar, el CL 71/5. Les ruego que lo tomen a la mano porque yo también estoy tratando de controlarlo. La Sección III del 71/5, Situación y uso de los idiomas de la FAO, ya fue tratada cuando discutimos el Tema 18 (si me equivoco le ruego al Presidente del COAC que me corrija). La sección IV, Mantenimiento en funciones de la dependencia común de inspección, entiendo que será tomado bajo el punto 14,(c); y, finalmente, la sección V, Enmiendas al estatuto del personal y al Reglamento General de la Organización, entiendo que se trató ya bajo el tema 18.

Si fuere así, en cuanto al CL 71/5 ahora, en este momento, no tendremos ya más que hacer y podremos ponerlo un poco aparte.

20. Report of the Working Party on the Composition and Terms of Reference of the Council, the Programme Committee, the Finance Committee and the CCLM: (continued)
20. Rapport du Groupe de travailsur la composition et le mandat du Conseil, du Comité du programme, du Comité financier et du CQCJ: (suite)
20. Informe del Grupo de Trabajo sobre la Composición y el Mandato del Consejo, el Comité de Programa, el Comité de Finanzas y el Comité de Asuntos Constitucionales y Jurídicos :(continuacion)

EL PRESIDENTE: Pasamos ahora al CL 71/12. Sobre este documento, tal como lo explicó esta mañana el señor Velay, tenemos varias partes. Tal vez conviene empezar por la Parte A, que es sencilla, al menos así lo espero. La Parte A del documento CL 71/12 que tiene por título Funciones de la Comisión del Pleno, espero que todos estén ahora identificados con el curso de nuestras labores y que si lo desean puedan hacer comentarios sobre esta parte A.

Sin embargo, como dijo el señor Velay esta mañana, se trata de recomendaciones que si son acogidas por el Consejo podrán ser puestas en práctica particularmente por el Director General y también por los futuros presidentes del Consejo. Si no hay ninguna observación sobre esta Parte A, creo que podríamos entonces adoptarla, y pasamos a la Parte B. La Parte B comprende esencialmente ahora, después de las discusiones de los miembros del Consejo, dos asuntos, pero creo que podrían tratarse conjuntamente con la esperanza de que no haya muchas discusiones y se pueda facilitar la conclusión de los debates.

Si están de acuerdo podríamos tratar ahora Conferencias Regionales, punto sobre el cual espero que no habrá mucha discusión y, al mismo tiempo, Comité del Programa, Comité de Finanzas y CACJ. Quienes intervengan conjuntamente sobre estos dos puntos les ruego lo hagan en forma breve, clara y concisa, que facilite el desarrollo de nuestros trabajos. Esta mañana el señor Velay, a nombre del Grupo de Trabajo, explicó el alcance de estas recomendaciones que espero aparezcan bien claras para que puedan ser consideradas por los miembros del Consejo. Entonces vamos ahora a tratar la Parte B del documento 12, o sea, de los párrafos 10 hasta el párrafo 13. ¿Quién desea intervenir?

I.A. IMTIAZI (Pakistan): My delegation has a few comments to offer on part B of Document CL 71/12. While we generally support the recommendations contained therein, in particular we should like to stress the need for letting the Regional Conferences play a more effective role than heretofore in formulating FAO's regional policies, programmes and priorities, and in promoting cooperation amongst Member States. We also endorse the view of the Working Party that participation in Regional Conferences should be confined to Member States actually belonging to that region, and that such participation should be decided by countries belonging to the region concerned at the 1978 Regional Conferences. We should, however, like to point out that in so doing the special situation of those member countries of FAO who are currently members of more than one region should be given special attention. Such membership is normally based upon the peculiar geographical location and ecological conditions of those countries and the existing flexible and practical arrangement in such cases must, in our view, not be disturbed because it is linked directly with a benefit that these countries expect to derive from the membership in the FAO and, as such, is in line with the objectives of the Organization.

As regards the Programme Committee, the Finance Committee and the Committee on Constitutional and Legal Matters, we support the view that a moderate increase in membership as recommended is desirable. We also agree to the formula proposed by the Working Party to ensure equitable geographical distribution of seats on these committees. However, one aspect that we should like to stress in particular is that my Government and my delegation are clearly and strongly of the view that these committees must be composed of the representatives of Member Nations rather than of individuals in their personal capacity.

A. DAS (India): We should like to make some observations both on parts A and B. As the report of the Working Party covered a large number of items, we shall give our comments on a few selected issues only. We should like to point out at the outset that a number of items which were originally included in the agenda of the Working Party but could not be covered due to shortage of time also deserve close attention, and we shall be interested in knowing how it is proposed to deal with them. Kindly allow us, Mr. Chairman, to endorse the conclusion of the Working Party concerning the method of selection of the Council members, and the Working Party's decision not to pursue the suggestion regarding alternate members of the Council.

Coming to part A of the report, we should have liked to get a better glimpse of the discussions regarding the role of the Secretariat and related services, and implementation of the decisions of the Council. These are important matters, most of which definitely lie within the responsibility of the Director-General. At the same time, the Council may wish to consider as to how its members could take a more active initiative in formulating the agenda of its meetings within the framework of the relevant Basic Text provision.

As regards implementation of the decisions of the Council, while we would support the present system of compliance reports, we would also urge that: 1) Thought should be given to further improve the quality and content of these reports which should be made available to the members much more in advance than is the case at present; and, 2) the Council's agenda should include a separate item specifically dealing with the matter, namely compliance with the decisions of the Council. We should also like to add that while we are not unaware of the tight schedule of the meetings of the subsidiary bodies of the Council, we feel that there is call for improvement in the timing of the circulation of the reports. We would particularly like to draw attention to the need for circulating the reports of the Finance and Programme Committees at least two weeks in advance of Council Meetings so as to enable the member countries to come here prepared to participate in fruitful discussions and give valuable suggestions.

With reference to part A of the Working Party's report, we would suggest that not only the Council but also its subsidiary bodies should formulate their decisions as clearly and concisely as possible. In this regard we would welcome the procedure adopted by the Committee on Food Security and certain other committees.

Coming to part B of the report with respect to the Finance and Programme Committees, we support the view that their membership should be increased and that these committees should be composed of representatives of the Member Nations.

J. BERTELING (Netherlands): My delegation thinks it would have been worthwhile if the Working Party would have reported on other solutions on the membership of the Programme Committee and the Finance Committee, especially what kinds of solutions were discussed and why they were found not to be acceptable. I would like to see the Chairman or Vice-Chairman of the Committee elaborate on these things.

What in our mind is more important for these Committees is preparing the work of the Council and the Conference in these two small expert groups. How then should the members be selected? Besides the solution proposed by the Working Party my delegation sees three other solutions. In the first case we can keep the present situation, that is clear enough. I have no need to elaborate on that. Secondly, the Council can select the Member States that have the right to appoint an expert. Of course, these States should have made known the name of their expert beforehand. Thirdly, one could give a right to appoint the Members of the Programme and Finance Committees to the Regional Conferences. They have the same right with the appointment of Members of the Consultative Group on Agricultural Research, and of Consultative Group on Food Production Investments. This possibility, which has not been studied very carefully as far as my delegation is aware, gives much more possibilities to select groups and representative experts for all regions. My delegation has some preference for the last solution and we should like to hear comments from the other delegations on this possibility.

Sra. I. DI GIOVAN DE SUAREZ (Argentina): Con relación a los temas de la parte B Conferencias Regionales y Comité del Programa, el Grupo latinoamericano ha pedido a la delegación de la Argentina que como su coordinador hiciese las siguientes observaciones respecto a las Conferencias Regionales.

El Grupo Latinoamericano ha analizado los párrafos 10, 11 y 12 del documento CL 71/12, relativo a Conferencias Regionales llegando a las siguientes conclusiones.

Primera. Está de acuerdo con lo opinado por el Grupo de Trabajo sobre la composición y mandato del Consejo en el sentido de que la participación en las Conferencias Regionales debe limitarse a los estados miembros que pertenezcan de hecho a las regiones en cuestión.

Segunda. Pide al Director General que a partir de la próxima Conferencia Regional para America latina se invite en calidad de miembro única y exclusivamente a los países que sean atendidos por la Oficina Regional de América latina, invitando a los otros países en calidad de observadores.

Tercera. Esta decisión no comprometerá en manera alguna el derecho de otras regiones respecto a la participación de los estados miembros a las Conferencias Regionales.

Con relación al Comité del Programa y Comité de Finanzas, el Grupo Latinoamericano se ha pronunciado favorablemente respecto al aumento de los miembros, haciendo presente su aspiración de que se tenga presente el criterio de equilibrio regional en el Comité del Programa.

Asimismo está de acuerdo con la fórmula contenida en el párrafo 13 en el sentido en que los candidatos al Comité del Programa deben ser presentados por sus gobiernos. Algunos países del Grupo Latinoamericano han indicado su preferencia en el sentido de que los miembros de los Comités del Programa y Finanzas actúen a título personal considerando que si representan a sus países en esos Comités, éstos se transformarían en una innecesaria duplicación del Consejo, pues los miembros del Comité del Programa y de Finanzas actuarían según instrucciones de sus Gobiernos y esto traería aparejado más rigidez y politización a cuerpos de expertos, como deben ser los citados Comités.

J.L. TOFFIN (France): Je voudrais parler tout d'abord de la question des conférences régionales. Cette question a déjà fait l'objet d'un long débat lors de la dernière réunion du Conseil, c'est pourquoi je serai assez bref à ce sujet.

Je rappellerai simplement que cette question a son origine dans une recommandation de la conférence des pays de l'Amérique latine qui a eu lieu l'an dernier à Lima. Il avait été proposé d'élaborer un nouveau règlement qui aurait réservé la participation des conférences régionales aux Etats appartenant exclusivement à la région en cause.

La proposition dont nous sommes saisis aujourd'hui, qui est celle qui a été défendue par la majorité du Groupe de travail, est légèrement différente dans la forme, en ce sens qu'elle vise à confier aux conférences régionales elles-mêmes le soin de décider de leur propre composition. Mais en fait, ainsi qu'il ressort du Groupe de travail, son objectif ne paraît pas avoir beaucoup changé; il s'agit toujours d'écarter de la participation à ces conférences, du moins de la participation à part entière, les Etats dont on estime qu'ils n'appartiennent pas effectivement à la région intéressée. C'est la raison pour laquelle la délégation française est obligée de maintenir les réserves qu'elle avait émises l'an dernier sur ce même sujet. Sur le plan juridique, je dirai simplement qu'il ne nous paraît guère justifié d'empêcher un territoire de participer pleinement aux activités de coopération régionale sous prétexte qu'il fait partie d'un ensemble qui déborde la région intéressée. Mais c'est surtout sur le plan pratique et sur celui de l'efficacité qu'il nous semblerait regrettable de refuser à certains Etats développés, tels que la France, dans le cadre de la Conférence de l'Amérique latine, une pleine participation à certaines des conférences dont ils sont actuellement membres, ces conférences constituent en effet les instances d'une organisation, la FAO, dont l'objet est avant tout économique et humanitaire et leur objectif essentiel est de contribuer à développer la production agricole et à lutter contre la faim et la malnutrition.

Il n'est pas douteux que les Etats développés qui en sont membres pourraient apporter, dans le cadre de ces conférences régionales, une aide utile en faveur du développement agricole et faire profiter de leur expérience les autres Etats Membres. A cet égard, nous ne voyons pas très bien l'intérêt qu'il pourrait y avoir à restreindre les possibilités de coopération et de dialogue entre pays développés et pays en développement qu'offrent aujourd'hui ces conférences régionales. Ce serait, à notre avis, aller à contre-courant des efforts qui sont accomplis un peu partout pour développer la coopération internationale, principalement entre pays développés et pays en développement, dont la nécessité apparaît toujours avec plus d'évidence dans le monde d'aujourd'hui.

Cela dit, nous reconnaissons bien volontiers que les conférences régionales peuvent avoir à débattre des questions qui intéressent de façon spécifique les Etats qui appartiennent exclusivement à la région en cause. Il en est ainsi en particulier, de tous les problèmes qui peuvent avoir un aspect politique. Nous comprenons très bien que les Etats en cause souhaitent rester entre eux pour en discuter, aussi la délégation française a déjà suggéré, au sein du Groupe de travail et reprend aujourd'hui cette suggestion, que les pays en développement, membres d'une conférence régionale, aient la possibilité de se réunir en formation spéciale pour traiter des sujets qui les intéressent spécifiquement et qui peuvent être, le cas échéant, de nature politique. Telle est d'ailleurs la politique suivie par la CEPAL (c'est-à-dire la Commission économique des Nations Unies pour l'Amérique latine). Nous pensons que les conférences régionales de la FAO, en particulier la Conférence de la FAO pour l'Amérique latine, pourraient utilement s'inspirer de ce précédent.

Telles sont les principales remarques que la délégation française désire présenter sur ce point et dont elle souhaiterait qu'il fut tenu compte dans le rapport du Conseil.

Quant à la question du mode d'élection et de la composition du Comité du programme et du Comité financier, la délégation française est d'accord sur les propositions du Groupe de travail, quant aux nouvelles modalités de la désignation des membres de ces comités, qui nous paraît réaliser un compromis heureux entre les nécessités d'une répartition géographique et les nécessités de faire appel à des personnalités qualifiées. Nous approuvons également l'élargissement des deux comités à onze et à neuf membres, respectivement, sur une base géographique équilibrée.

Sra. M. IVANKOVICH DE AROSEMENA (Panama): La delegación de Panama reitera su apoyo a la declaración hecha por la delegación de Argentina en nombre del Grupo Latinoamericano.

Mi delegación considera que las Conferencias Regionales deben preferentemente examinar y formular propuestas concretas relativas a las políticas regionales a fin de obtener un mayor desarrollo agrícola e incrementar la producción de alimentos en los países miembros de la región.

Estamos de acuerdo con que la participación de pleno derecho en las Conferencias Regionales deben limi-tarse exclusivamente a los estados miembros que pertenezcan a las regiones, tal como lo expresaron la mayoría de los integrantes del Grupo de Trabajo cuando examinaron el documento de referencia.

En relación con el párrafo 13 sobre los Comités del Programa, Finanzas y Asuntos Constitucionales y Jurídicos, estimamos que la función de los Comités deben permanecer invariables y que estos Comités continúen siendo órganos consultivos del Consejo y del Director General. Asimismo consideramos que las candidaturas deben ser presentadas por los Gobiernos a título personal, teniendo en cuenta una adecuada distribución geográfica.

Mi delegación no se opone a un adecuado aumento de los puestos en los Comités.

H. MAURIA (Finland): We are ready to support the proposed change in membership of the Programme and Finance Committees so that the members should be representative of Member Nations instead of serving in their personal capacities, as heretofore. We have nothing against a moderate increase in the membership of these Committees, according to the formula proposed by the Working Party.

C HIGGINSON (United States of America): .The United States has sympathy with a number of the arguments put forward by the delegate of France on the question of participation of non-regional members in FAO Regional Conferences. However, as most of the people in this room remember, this subject has taken up a considerable amount of time and therefore the United States accepts the view of the Working Party that the countries belonging to the region concerned should decide the participation in the respective regional conferences. However, the United States hopes that the regional conferences will follow the recommendations of the Working Party and (a) leave participation .open to other countries that wish to contribute to the study of development in the region and (b) establishment machinery which could be used when there are issues which the developing countries wish to discuss solely amongst themselves.

Now I would like to turn to the composition and size of the Finance and Programme Committees. The United States believes in general that the Finance and Programme Committees have served the Council well. We think this is because of their relatively small size and because their members participate in a personal capacity. The United States believes the recommendations of the majority of the Working Group would endanger the effectiveness of the Finance and Programme Committees. Eleven Programme Committee Members cannot possibly be as effective in reviewing detailed matters and reaching a consensus as can seven equally qualified people. Likewise, nine Fiannce Committee Members would have greater difficulty in examining in detail the many financial and administrative personnel issues which concern that Committee. My delegation hopes that these views will be taken into consideration by the Council.

We also believe it is unwise to recommend the election of government representatives rather than experts. Decision-making can only be more difficult under such a system, and we would have governmental representatives in the committees recommending to governmental representatives in the Council. In effect, the Committees as proposed would be mini-Councils. This would likely result in considerable duplication of effort.

As presently constituted, the Programme and Finance Committees can be compared somewhat to the heads of government advisory panels which render their judgment on matters within their competence but leave decisions to the Director-General and the Council.

B. de AZEVEDO BRITO (Brazil): As my delegation participated in the deliberations of the Working Group, I believe that I can be briefer than other members of the Council. However, I would like to elaborate on the two points which we are discussing.

First, on regional conferences: the recommendation made in the name of the Latin American Group already advanced the criterion which we believe should be applied in selecting the countries to be invited to the Conferences. May I just elaborate on the point by saying that such a criterion applies, in our view not only to the Regional Conferences of FAO but also to the regional conferences which are within FAO and are basically geared to the consideration of policy issues. There are other conferences which are convened within FAO which have rather a policy scope, and the same criterion should apply, in our view, for the selection of countries to be invited as full members to these conferences.

Coming now to the second point, the Programme and Finance Committees, we agree, as indicated by Argentina, with the criterion of the governments indicating representatives, in other words the representation of governments. We would also like to stress however - and this is the point I would like to put on record - that in our view the formula presented in Section A of paragraph 13 is a correct and balanced one, in the sense that governments would indicate beforehand whom they expect to appoint in case of election. By that formula we believe that we ensure at the same time governmental representation and what one can call technical capacity. Once the countries are elected and the representatives appointed, then, of course, we understand that such representatives are expected to transmit the views of their governments, and this is important. We believe that we have programmes of increasing complexity, that we have a kind of governmental screening in detail of all programmes and budgets.we believe that these government inputs in the Programme and Finance Committees are for the good of the Organization. These are the points of view of my delegation in this respect.

S. JUMA'A (Jordan)(Interpretation from Arabic): With respect to this question of regional conferences, I should like to point out here that my delegation is against the viewpoint stated that one may not invite governments to attend regional conferences as Observers. I am compelled to state that such a viewpoint and such a stand might lead to consequences which we certainly can do without, particularly as all countries of the world today are attempting to reach agreement and understanding, and particularly as there have been negotiations in the past with respect to cooperation among developing countries and developed countries.

I therefore think that obstacles are created concerning the participation of developed countries in regional conferences which group together as developing countries and might have a negative influence and consequences.

I also think that the world, or should I say the distances between countries of the world have grown smaller thanks to means of communication and transportation, and therefore it is not possible for any country whatsoever for any region to live in an isolated manner separately from the international community. Thus I note with regret that certain trends might be very negative for the Organization and far its activities in the future and might further create difficulties or confrontation between developing countries. We have already encountered this fact and we might encounter it again, but I think we should avoid it because we firmly believe in cooperation at all levels and in all situations. As I have said, no country can possibly live in an isolated manner, be it regionally or on a worldwide basis.

There have never been any purely regional problems, because even problems which could be described as being regional have consequences which directly influence the events occurring in other regions, and that is why we can never state that, for example, the increase in agricultural production in a given region is of concern only to that region. We know full well that the increase of agricultural production in a given region may be of concern both to developing and developed countries, be those in that area or outside that area, and that is why I would like to express the hope that the Council should not take a final stand on this subject, and that is why we should leave this point for further discussion in the regional conferences and thus the countries from each of these regions may be able to express their viewpoints very clearly on the matter.

I also think that the Council should not impose its viewpoint on the Member Countries of a region and that we should be enabled ourselves to discuss this problem regionally, and after that we can discuss the matter again in the Organization itself and in the Council. Now this is what I have to say on regional conferences.

Coming to the question of the various Committees, the Programme Committee, the Finance Committee and the CCLM, experience in the past has shown us that these committees have done work in a good manner, have successfully accomplished their tasks, and we know that the Programme Committee, the Finance Committee, and the CCLM have made efforts and have achieved very positive results. I recall that only yesterday there were many delegates who had expressed their thanks to the Members of the Programme Committee and the Finance Committee for the very detailed and objective reports which have been submitted to the Council by them. If we are pleased with the work of these two Committees, why are we asking for changes? Why are we asking for new structures?

Some Members feel that the increase in the number of members of these Committees might increase the efficiency of these committees, but I do not share that view at all. We also think that the members of the committees who were elected upon the basis of proposals of their governments would not work as independently perhaps as Members who are appointed on the grounds of their own personal qualifications. We know that it is in this second case that members of those Committees can work efficiently, whereas if the members are to merely represent their governments in the Programme or Finance Committee, that member or those members will perhaps run the risk of not being able to work independently. They will always be there as representatives of their governments and will not be really free to act. I therefore think that the proposals which have been made to us in this document are ones which we can neither accept nor reject.

However, we are ready to accept the following: increase in the number of members of the Programme Committee from seven to nine, and not to eleven, because we think that the figure of eleven is too large a figure for the Programme Committee.

We also accept an increase in the number of members of the Finance Committee from five to seven and not from five to nine, because it is difficult to find specialists in the financial field on a very high level and who could also represent the different regions and areas. We think that the proposed intermedairy solution would be seven, which could be an acceptable figure to everyone, but we accept the increase in the number of members of the Programme and Finance Committee only if the members of those two Committees continue to be members appointed on the basis of their personal qualifications and not appointment by governments.

We could also itate that this problem has already been debated more than once, and those who raised this problem were those who were candidate! to these different Committees and who never succeeded in being elected; that may be why the subject is being dealt with once again today. If there had not been these precedents and if there had not been the failure of these candidates who did not manage to get elected as members of these Committees -- I repeat if there had not been this failure of these candidates, perhaps we would not have to study the matter again, that is, the question of extending the number of members of the programme and finance Committees.

We think that if we go along those lines, this might be harmful to the Organisation, and I would like to call the attention of the Members of this Council to this harmful trend.

Q.H. HAQUE (Bangladesh): First, on regional conferences, we feel that regional conferences should have an increased role in the formulation of the programmes and policies of the FAO. We all know that in regional conferences the best solution is taken on a very high level. At the regional conferences that were held since July 1976, in most eases the delegates who attended were at the ministerial level and if one goes through the reports of these regional conferences, one is convinced of the amount of interest that was generated in these conferences• Each of these conferences came out with a declaration and very excellent documentai For this reason, we feel that the recommendations and viewpoints of the regional conferences should attract increased attention of the formulation of our programmes and policies.

As regards participation in Regional Conferences, we are of the view that while Member Nations in the regions have immediate and general interest in the conferences, at the same time other views may also help in formulating recommendations. This matter could be left, we feel, to the Regional Conferences to be held in 1978 to decide on this issue of who is to be invited to participate in Regional Conferences. In this regard we agree with the United States delegation.

Coming now to the composition and sise of the Programme Committee- as regards sise, for the same Jogle we had in the previous itsm where we have agreed to iitcreaea the number in Council, we believe that increasing the size of the programme and Finance Committees also demands attention and consideration.

We feel the size of both the Finance and Frogramme Committees should be increased to the extent that may be functionally fit. Increase of these Committees also involves finance. In that regard we are for a marginal increase of the sise of both the Finance and programme Committees. The recommendation of increasing the programme Committee by 4 to 11 and the Finance Committee by A to 9 could be approved, but if the Consensus is the lesser figures of 9 and 7 we would have no objection. We would even go along with 11 and 9.

As regards the method of election of members, whether they should be representing their governments or should be elected in their personal capacities, we feel there could be a synthesis of the two when considering certain candidates, their suitability for a certain committee, their merits for serving on the committee and experience should be taken into consideration. At the same time, the viewpoint of the Member Nations who are represented in this Organization should not be completely overlooked. In this connexion the recommendation in paragraph (a) has been formulated, and we are in support of this recommendation.

When the governments are considered for election the individual governments have to name the personalities they would like to be nominated for their representatives. That should be kept in mind when election takes place.

G. ESCARDO PEINADOR (España): Con respecto al primer punto Conferencias Regionales, entendemos que están perfectamente definidas en el párrafo 10 del documento 12,

Respetamos, como es lógico, el que sean los países componentes de la Región en sus respectivas Conferencias de 1978 los que regulen las modalidades de la asistencia de los Observadores, pero apoyamos lo expuesto por algún miembro del Grupo de Trabajo en el sentido de que las Conferencias Regionales debían estar abiertas a otros países que quisieran contribuir al estudio del desarrollo de la región.

En relación con los Comités del Programa, Finanzas y de Asuntos Constitucionales y Jurídicos, estamos conformes en que sus funciones deben permanecer invariadas y ser órganos consultivos del Consejo y del Director General. Entendemos que precisamente por ser órganos consultivos del Consejo y del Director General los miembros de los mismos no deben ser designados por los Gobiernos, sino que deben ser independientes de estos para que puedan estar por encima de los intereses particulares de los Gobiernos, Se trata de buscar unos expertos que conozcan perfectamente bien los problemas de los programas, de las finanzas y de los asuntos constitucionales de la Organización; y si cuando reunimos un grupo de expertos para estudiar determinado aspecto técnico se designan por sus méritos personales sin que entre para nada su país de origen, no veo por qué unos miembros de unos Comités eminentemente técnicos deben de ser propuestos por los Gobiernos y no elegidos a título personal.

Tampoco somos partidarios del aumento del numero de sus componentes. Los tres Comités han venido funcionando perfectamente hasta ahora; yo no recuerdo jamás una crítica a los mismos, siempre han recibido toda clase de felicitaciones, ¿por qué tratar ahora de mejorarlos? No olvidemos que el enemigo de lo bueno es lo mejor.

Estamos de acuerdo con lo que se expone en los apartados e) y f) del párrafo 13.

S. STAMPACH (Tchécoslovaquie): Ma délégation voudrait exprimer l'avis qu'une augmentation du nombre de sièges aux deux comités, selon la formule proposée par le Groupe de travail au paragraphe 13b) et c), permettrait une participation plus large des différents Etats Membres aux fonctions directives du Conseil et de ses organes subsidiaires, à condition que la règle de roulement prévue par la Constitution soit retenue par l'Organisation au cours des élections de Conseil et de ses organes subsidiaires. Le nombre total élevé proposé pour les sièges au Conseil, au Comité du Programme et Comité financier, ne représente pas moins de la moitié du nombre des pays membres de la FAO.

Cela veut dire que nous désirons prendre en considération l'ensemble de la représentation au Conseil et aux comités et peut-être, indirectement, même au Conseil mondial avant de poser les candidatures de chaque pays membre de l'Organisation, ce qui stimulerait sans doute une approche plus active et plus fréquente de tous les gouvernements membres.

En ce qui concerne les conférences régionales, la Conférence européenne y compris, nous sommes de l'avis que ce sont en tout premier lieu les pays membres de la région, qui sont responsables du développement de leurs régions respectives et c'est pourquoi il appartient à ces pays de décider du programme régional.

A.A.W. LANDYMORE (United Kingdom): The general views of the United Kingdom delegation are in principle very close to those expressed in the statesmanlike intervention of the delegate of Jordan. It seems to us he had an overall view which very much requires to be taken into account when looking at these questions.

First of all, if I may touch on the question of attendance at the Regional Conferences, the delegate of Jordan puts very well the concept of one world which even though we do have separate conferences must pervade our approaches to these things.

As far as the United Kingdom is concerned as a metropolitan power, we long ago solved this problem for ourselves unilaterally. As a matter of policy, the United Kingdom attends Regional Conferences other than those of the European region with only Observer status. In doing this, however, in attending with Observer status, the United Kingdom is able to include officials of those territories which remain dependent, to include those representatives as members of the United Kingdom delegation. I explained this point with some care at the last Session of this Council. I explained that the constitutional relationships between our dependent territories and the metropolitan power were very varied indeed, depending on the circumstances of the individual territories.

This is something which has obviously been understood by our friends from Jordan, and I hope will be particularly appreciated by the Members of this Council who also represent countries within the Commonwealth of Nations. This is of particular importance to us, because those individual constitutional relationships are heavily dependent not so much on the obligations of the territories to the United Kingdom as a metropolitan power, but more and more nowadays are related to our obligations, which are very real and which we take seriously, towards our dependent countries.

If the right to attend certain Regional Conferences as Observers is taken away from us, then we run the risk of losing the opportunity of having those territories explain their positions on matters of regional policy. Maybe it is not necessary to have those territories speak as members of the metropolitan power, but is is essential that these voices should be heard within the regions to which they belong, and we feel some arrangement must be made for these voices to be heard.

This is the position as far as we are concerned on the question of attendance at Regional Conferences. We do hope that this consideration will be taken account of by this Council very carefully, and we do feel that it will be preferable for this consideration and for the answers to it to be dealt with centrally by the Council. If it is the decision of the Council to leave matters for adjudication by each individual Regional Conference, then we do hope that this appeal will not go unheard by those Regional Conferences. This, we feel, is a question of fair play.

If I may now turn to the question of the Programme and Finance Committees, basically our position is very much in line, as I have said, with the position that has been enunciated by the delegate of Jordan and the other delegations. We recognize however that there are always compromises being made and that we may need to seek compromise. If the majority of this Council feels therefore that the actual functions of the Committees should remain unchanged and that they should continue to be consultative organs of the Council and of the Director-General then we would hope that that would be a unanimous view of the Council.

As regards a moderate increase in the membership of the Programme and Finance Committees, we can go along with that if that is a majority view, subject to one or two points of detail which I shall deal with in a moment.

As to the suggestion in paragraph 13(a) that the Programme and Finance Committees should be composed of representatives of Member Nations on the understanding that governments would indicate the qualifications and the name of the representative, then again we can go along with that with one proviso, and that is, that we feel that the Council if that decision is taken will have to give consideration to including a provision that should that representative cease to hold his position in his own government then that government should be able to change that representative again of course on the basis of appointing a properly qualified one and giving details of it to this Council.

As regards paragraph 13(b) we have the suggestion that the number of members of the Programme Committee should be increased by four, bringing the total membership to eleven including the Chairman. A similar provision is made for the Finance Committee to increase its membership by four, bringing the total membership to nine including the Chairman.

I have two points on this: the first is that we seem to be increasing the sizes of these Committees in order to make provision for some form or other of regional representation. On the whole we think that is putting the cart before the horse and it would be much better to keep the numbers smaller. But if it must be done, then there are two questions: the first is that we are told in sub-paragraph(g) that in electing the members of the two Committees, the Council should bear in mind the principle of securing an equitable geographical distribution on the Committees. To ensure this the Working Party proposed that elections to these Committees be conducted in two stages. Would the Chairmen of these Committees be separately elected as is the present case? That seems to us to be a vital decision in deciding on any two-stage process. I would suggest that we need a three-stage process if we do go into this -election of the Chairmen as at present and then for further elections as are proposed here. We do not like any of it very much but if it is to be done at all we would think there would for practical reasons have to be a three-stage process if in particular this question of some form of regional representation is to be observed.

The second point that I have to make about these totals is quite simply that we would not regard a representation of three for the developed countries as by any means adequate. This is particularly true if you have the case of eleven to three in the Programme Committee. We would feel that some increase in these ratios, particularly in relation to the Programme Committee, would only represent fair play.

I think that covers the points that we need to cover except that we would agree that no change should be made to the present membership and functions of the CCLM.

I am aware, of course, that sub-paragraph (f) of this paragraph states that the Council would first elect the Chairmen of the Programme and Finance Committees from among the candidates submitted by their governments. To that extent the question is answered but I consider that sub-paragraph (g) needs to be brought into line with what is said in sub-paragraph (f), in particular in its application to a three stage process for observing the principle of regional distribution.

A. CISSE (Niger): La delegation du Niger estime que la Conference régionale doit être ouverte aux autres pays, notamment aux pays donateurs qui participent à des programmes régionaux ou sous-régionaux du développement des pays en développement. Il en est de même pour un pays en développement qui souhaiterait s'inspirer de certaines expériences des pays développés. Il est tout à fait normal que ces pays en développement puissent être mis au courant des méthodes utilisées dans les pays développés.

Nous revenons au point a) du paragraphe 13, à savoir que les Etats Membres doivent désigner les représentants en fournissant le curriculum vitae de ceux-ci. En effet, ce n'est pas au Conseil qu'il nous est possible d'entrer dans le détail des comités techniques qui précèdent les réunions du Conseil. Il est nécessaire que les membres de ces comités aient l'aval des Etats Membres afin que les discussions en Conseil puissent être réduites au strict minimum. Et l'on discuterait encore beaucoup moins en Conférence, étant donné que les comités techniques auraient fait l'essentiel du travail. Pour nous dans la plupart des cas, il suffit simplement d'approuver l'excellent travail qu'ils ont effectué. Jusqu'à présent, nous n'avons qu'à nous féliciter du très bon travail exécuté par les comités techniques.

Le Niger pense donc qu'il n'est pas nécessaire de recruter des experts. Il est préférable que ce.soit les Etats Membres eux-mêmes qui désignent les représentants qui seront choisis au vu de leur curriculum vitae.

En ce qui concerne le nombre de sièges aux comités,nous pensons que s'il faut maintenir une augmentation, elle doit être très faible, étant donné qu'un trop grand élargissement du comité amènerait des discussions très longues. Il est donc préférable, pour obtenir plus d'efficacité, de s'en tenir à la proposition du point b) c'est-à-dire 11 membres.

M. BEL HADJ AMOR (Tunisie): Mon intervention va se limiter à la question qui concerne le Comité du Programme et le Comité financier. A cet égard, elle sera assez brève, surtout après avoir entendu l'excellente intervention de Monsieur le Ministre Juma'a, dont l'expérience pour plusieurs d'entre nous ne fait aucun doute au sein de cette maison.

Je voudrais ajouter uniquement ceci: il faut d'abord supprimer un quiproquo parce que plusieurs délégués ont parlé de représentants de gouvernements.

A cet égard, je voudrais préciser que les candidats qui ont été ou qui sont actuellement au Comité financier ou au Comité du Programme, sont présentés par leur gouvernement. Ce ne sont pas des gens qui se sont présentés chez nous par hasard. Leur candidature est approuvée par leur gouvernement et le Conseil les a élus. Donc, je ne vois pas bien la différence.

En second lieu, il faudrait surtout éviter de faire de ces deux comités techniques une sorte de comité Intergouvernemental. Cela pourrait réduire la technicité de ces comités et les politiser, surtout si les délégués ne parlent pas en leur nom personnel en utilisant leur qualité technique, mais s'ils parlent au nom d'un pays ou au nom d'une région. Il faudrait éviter d'accentuer ces aspects, de façon à ne rien enlever à l'efficacité de ces deux comités.

Pour finir, je réitère mon appui et mon adhésion à ce qu'a déclaré Monsieur le Ministre Juma'a, délégué de la Jordanie.

H. ABDALLAH (Egypt)(interpretation from Arabie): I should like first of all to say how much I support the proposal made by His Excellency Mr. Juma'a, Minister of Agriculture of Jordan who is at the same time a member of the Programme Committee.

As regards the regional conferences, we are of the view that most of the delegates here from developed countries have cooperation programmes, bilateral programmes, with our developing countries. In this context, therefore, contact is very important. Similarly, the new dialogue, especially the Euro-Arab dialogue, the Arab-African dialogue and the North-South dialogue, this new spirit that is in the air, is a means of ensuring that there is participation by all Member States whatever their technical standing. In this Case we must also coordinate activities between the national programmes and the regional programmes in order to make sure that we eventually achieve our aims.

In the same spirit the regional conferences are still independent and may, if they wish, hold exclusively regional meetings excluding outside observers.

But over and above this we come to the question of the two Committees, the Programme Committee and the Finance Committee and this brings me to speak first and foremost of representation in these two Committees. I think representation should be restricted. Representation should be either in a personal capacity or as a governmental representative. I would refer to Rule XXVI of the General Rules for the Conference which stipulates that this Committee shall be composed of six members and two Chairmen to be chosen by the Council and that they are to be chosen from among Member Nations which express the wish to participate or to be members of these Committees. Therefore, if a representative of a Member country wishes to be a member of the Programme Committee he is in that capacity a representative of his country. So any delegate here is representing his country because it is his country which gives him the mandate and sends him to attend the meeting; in other words, support of the government is implicit.

Now, as regards the personal merits of the candidates and their personal capacity, I would like to quote the example of Dr. Phillips, Chairman of the Programme Committee. We are acquainted with the United States position but the candidature of Dr. Phillips was a candidature in an individual, personal capacity. No one objected to the candidature of Dr. Phillips to the Programme Committee.

Again, we feel that the governments' support is implicit and personal merits should prevail in any question of selection of candidates. Again, we are convinced that the curriculum vitae of prospective candidates are of vital importance as enabling us to choose among candidates. We would agree to what was said by the delegate of Jordan.

A. E. HANNAH (Canada): My comments will be brief, as many of the other delegates have emphasized the points that we would have wished to make. With respect to the Regional Conferences, I would only wish to endorse the view that has been expressed so well by the delegate of Jordan, and that is the view of ''one world''. Regional Conferences are, of course, a communication mechanism but certainly if we wish to provide food for the world, it must be considered - as he has indicated so well - as ''one world''.

With respect to membership on the committees, it would be our preference that there be no change in the membership and that it be maintained at the same number. As has been indicated earlier, these people should be chosen for their qualifications and their respective merits to serve on those committees, and regional considerations should be secondary in this respect. However, if it is considered necessary by the Council that these committees be enlarged to work more effectively and to have effective activities within the membership of the committee, I would suggest that the proposal made by the delegate of Jordan is one which the Council could consider favourably, and we would support that move.

I should also like to suggest that the delegate of the United Kingdom has raised some very pertinent points which merit much further serious consideration, and we would like to support him in asking for this consideration.

N. M. MWAUNGULU (Malawi): As far as proposals concerning Regional Conferences go, my delegation supports the majority view of the members of the Working Party that Regional Conferences should broadly confine participation to the members of the region. At the same time we feel that it is important that Regional Conferences should be open to participation by other countries that can contribute and want to contribute to the delegations of the Conference, especially in the technical and professional fields. The manner or form in which this participation can come about or take place could be left for the Regional Conferences to decide.

My delegation also supports the proposals made by the Working Party to increase the membership of the Programme Committee and the Finance Committee. The proposed increases of eleven and nine respectively will enable more effective representation in the committees, we believe, by all the regions of FAO. Equitable representation does not and should not mean or imply a reduction in the efficiency of the working of the committees. It is clear that only properly qualified persons are appointed to serve on the committees.

H. L. CLAVERIE (Venezuela): Mi delegación no tenía la intención de intervenir en este tema, puesto que ya la señorita representante de la Argentina había comunicado a la sala la opinión del Grupo latinoamericano en relación con el tema que estamos tratando. Mi delegación, particularmente, respaldaba en todo la intervención de la representante de la Argentina; pero a lo largo de la fructífera discusión de esta tarde han sido traídos a la mesa algunos tópicos que a la delegación de Venezuela le ha causado preocupación por una parte y, por otra, le ha ampliado un poco el criterio en cuanto a los puntos que estamos tratando.

Pienso transmitir en estos momentos mi opinión humilde, la opinion de un delegado al Consejo de la FAO sobre materias que le son de interés específico, de una importancia radical; y estamos muy lejos de querer dar una lección magistral ya que creemos que las lecciones magistrales se deben dejar para otras instancias, las instancias universitarias y académicas y no aquí en que los gobiernos solo debemos ocuparnos del bienestar y del futuro de las poblaciones que estamos representando.

En ese sentido mi delegación tiene como cuestión de principio salvaguardar la soberanía, la independencia y la autonomía de unas regiones en temas que les son específicos, en materia que son objeto de su propia responsabilidad.

Posiblemente puede que sea que los latinoamericanos tenemos a flor de piel una cierta sensibilidad desarrollada por los acontecimientos históricos que para nosotros han sido particularmente dolorosos.

En este sentido el problema de las Conferencias Regionales se ha convertido para nqfotros en una cuestión específica. Venezuela lo hemos mantenido,y también lo expresó la representante de Argentina; en este momento no era su intención intervenir en la opinión de las demás regiones, hemos dejado bien claro que es la opinión de la región latinoamericana; cada región puede opinar lo que quiera y puede tomar la decisión que pueda ser del caso de cada región; pero en América Latina preferiríamos, preferimos y preferiremos que los asuntos de la propia región relacionados con la FAO sean tratados independientemente, en exclusividad por los países que pertenezcan a la Región.

La intervención de la representante de Argentina en nombre del Grupo Latino Americano, fue suficientemente clara y, por lo tanto, no voy a extenderme en este sentido; solamente quería dejar claro en este punto este principio venezolano en cuanto a que miembros de la Región latinoamericana han preferido y prefieren que en las Conferencias Regionales de América Latina no intervengan sino los países que pertenezcan a esta región y que se invite en otra instancia, a fin de oír su valiosa experiencia que no dudamos que la tengan, a aquellos países que tengan la voluntad de ayudar con su experiencia a los programas, a los proyectos que se puedan desarrollar en colaboración con América Latina.

Repito que no estoy dando una clase magistral, sencillamente doy la humilde opinión de mi delegación en este punto.

En cuanto a los candidatos a los Comités del Programa y de Finanzas, mi delegación considera que en realidad no hay candidatos personales; candidato es, de hecho, una persona que se presenta y se manifiesta como una persona que representa a su Gobierno ya que creo que no hay ningún caso en la historia en que se haya traído a una persona de la calle; creo que todos los candidatos que han gozado de pertenecer a los Comités del Programa y de Finanzas son miembros de esta Casa que están respaldados por sus Gobiernos, tienen su beneplácito y gozan de un curriculum que los acredita ante esta Casa y ante sus miembros para desempeñar el cargo que les ha sido concedido.

En cuanto al numero para aumentar dichos Comités, he oído diferentes criterios, uno de ellos es el de que ha venido funcionando bien hasta ahora con el número que tiene, ¿Por qué no puede seguir funcionando bien? ¿Por qué se va a mejorar lo que es bueno? Repito que la experiencia la tomamos como viene, como experiencia, pero no podemos pretender que sea el sumum de la lógica, ni el sumum de la verdad completa. La experiencia tiene un valor; pero creemos que todo es proclive a mejorar y si estamos aquí discutiendo, intercambiando opiniones, es porque creemos que hay algo que debe mejorarse y si hay algo que debe mejorarse tenemos la responsabilidad de mejorarlo y estamos llamados a mejorarlo. Por lo tanto no veo el por qué del aumento de cuatro miembros más en los Comités del Programa y de Finanzas, ya que induciría a pensar que la labor de estos Comités pudiera desarrollarse en un ambiente negativo, en un ambiente entorpecedor. Pensamos todo lo contrario y en ese sentido quiero manifestarlo.

No tengo más que decir en relación con este tema y le doy las gracias, señor Presidente por darme la palabra.

W.A.F. GRABISCH (Germany, Federal Republic of): Speaking on the issue of the composition and functions of the Programme and Finance Committees, my delegation is open to any good solution which would, of course, entail that the Council knows as clearly as possible on what the decision is being taken. Mr. Velay, when introducing the issue before us, recalled that the proposals put forward to us are compromise solutions, compromise proposals. Now, compromise solutions and proposals are generally good, but sometimes they tend to lead to a certain lack of clarity. This seems to be the case if we look at what is spelt out in the beginning of paragraph 13 and then compare it and look later on what is in the middle and at the end of that paragraph. Paragraph 13 says ''it was agreed that the functions of the Committees should remain unchanged and that they should continue to be consultative organs of the Council and the Director-General''. Now, if the function then is to remain, it is the view of my delegation that it would be necessary to keep on with the present system, and if any increase in membership were to be accepted at all, then it should be a very small increase in both Committees. Now if the Council and the Conference wish the two Committees to become intergovernmental bodies, then, their functioning will change.

I will try to explain that briefly, if you will allow me, on a personal basis, as I have been privileged to serve as a member of the Programme Committee to the Council. I must say here quite frankly that the acting of those members on a personal basis gave them the strength and the help to be as constructive in their technical advice to the Council and to the Director-General, and it is my feeling that if the Council were to change that system then it would possibly deprive itself of that function and that advice in the way it had received so far. In this context I would just like to recall that Committee members did not sit behind a flag but they were just sitting there as individuals, and they did discuss proposals and arguments put forward regardless by whom they were made; not put forward by regions or by individual countries, but just arguments and views which were considered on a technical basis, mostly until a consensus was reached. And if some positive remarks in the past had been made also at previous Council sessions about the functioning of these Committees, then I think one of the reasons was that in most cases they came out with a pretty good consensus and thus helped the Council because the Council, of course, could not take up many of those issues in a technical discussion.

Therefore, I do feel that these views which were also expressed by some other delegations, and in particular by the delegate of Jordan, should be kept in mind before a decision is being taken for a change.

Having said that on a personal basis, I would just end by giving you the view of my delegation that we could hardly agree to seeing the proposals which are made in a later part of that paragraph being pursued because they do seem also to us not to give enough representation to member states which belong to the so-called developed countries.

Now my last point on (h) of that paragraph is that we do feel that no change should be necessary as to the membership and functions of the CCLM.

M.A. PAPAGEORGIOU (Greece): As far as participation in regional conferences is concerned, we feel that regional conferences should remain open to other countries whish to contribute to the state of development in a region. We feel that, of course, collaboration is the best way to elaborate development.

As far as the increase of the membership in the Programme Committee and Finance Committee, we think there should be only a moderate increase in the membership of the Programme and Finance Committees. Of course, think that in electing the members of the two Committees, the Council should bear in mind also the principle of securing an equitable geographical distribution on the Committees. I wonder also if the members of these Committees should be exclusively members of the Council or preferably should not belong to the Council, in order not to influence twice the decision of the Council

I. OROZCO (Mexico): Mi Delegación desea ser muy breve acerca de los aspectos que estamos considerando de la parte B, a saber: Las Conferencias Regionales, y sobre esto no necesito extenderme demasiado puesto que ello está condensado en la posición del grupo Latino Americano que ha sido expresada por la distinguida Delegación de Argentina hace unos momentos. Consideramos que refleja un deseo justo e irre-nunciable de la Región Latino Americana que presenta características particulares y que seguramente todas las Delegaciones aquí presentes han apreciado.

En cuanto a la cuestión de los Comités del Programa, de Finanzas y del CACJ nosotros también deseamos decir lo que sentimos y lo que pensamos respecto de lo que constituye un mínimo de acuerdo acerca de las deliberaciones que llevó a cabo el Grupo de Trabajo sobre esta cuestión. Nosotros estamos de acuerdo con las conclusiones del Grupo que reflejan ciertamente nuestra posición, de que esos Comités deberían ser del mismo nivel que el Consejo en cuanto a la calidad de sus representantes, o sea, a nivel gubernamental; deberían ser Comités intergubernamentales. Pensamos que aquí se han referido y se ha hecho una superevaluación de las cualidades individuales que parecen convertir a todos sus miembros en unos superhombres; yo creo que aquí se ha menospreciado también un tanto la labor de la Secretaría, porque yo soy consciente, y estoy seguro que todos compartimos esta opinión, de que tenemos una Secretaría muy capaz y muy competente en todos los aspectos que se refieren a los Comités de Finanzas y del Programa,

Vemos cierta tendencia a un mayor énfasis en esta Casa a las personalidades, a las individualidades en cuanto que estamos aquí porque actuamos a nivel de Gobierno y con instrucciones de nuestros Gobiernos, siendo representantes intergubernamentales. Nosotros no negamos, obviamente, las capacidades técnicas, la experiencia de cada uno de los miembros de los Comités y de los que vayan a ser electos en el futuro; por tanto consideramos que debe mantenerse ese mínimo de representación intergubernamental que se refleja en el inciso a) del párrafo 13.

Igualmente, respecto del aumento, estamos de acuerdo en los aumentos propuestos y en la forma del procedimiento de elección que se menciona en el inciso g) de este mismo párrafo 13.

E. SAENZ (Colombia): En realidad, nuestra Delegación está muy de acuerdo, como lo ha estado desde el principio de la reunión del Grupo Latino Americano,con las palabras de la Delegación de Argentina como vocera del grupo Latino Americano en cuanto a la determinación de la Región Latino Americana, concretamente en lo que se refiere al parágrafo 11, parte B del documento 71/12, y no vemos por qué haya un temor y excesiva preocupación por una determinación de una región cuando, en realidad, nosotros decimos que a las Conferencias Regionales para América Latina se invite unicamente a los miembros de esta Región y como Observadores al resto de los países miembros sin que esta determinación de América Latina quiera decir que comprometa a otras regiones, como también se dice en el documento expresado cuando reza: ''Esta decisión no comprometerá, de manera alguna, al derecho de otras regiones para tomar decisiones respecto a la participación de los Estados Miembros en sus Conferencias Regionales''.

Nuestra Delegación hace un llamado especial al Consejo para que esta determinación de América Latina se cumpla y podamos llevar a efecto en 1978 las reuniones de Conferencias Regionales.

En cuanto al aumento de los miembros en el Comité del Programa y de Finanzas, estamos de acuerdo en que este aumento se lleve a cabo por cuanto un aumento en el número de miembros traerá mayores experiencias y conocimientos para todos. No se trata de un cambio de este Comité, sino simplemente de un aumento para llevar mayores luces a todos.

I. MOSKOVITS (Observer for Malta): The role of Observer is extremely difficult not only because you are giving them only five minutes but because when they are listening and following the discussions, nearly everything has been done and it is difficult to give additfional ideas to those which have already been given.

As regards the Finance and the Programme Committees, we see that there is a majority that wishes to increase the number of the members of the Committees and that it should become a governmental committee, there should be representatives of governments. In this respect we share absolutely the view of His Excellency the Minister Juma'a from Jordan, the maximum size should be given as he indicated it, an increased maximum by two.

As regards the governmental character of the Committees, I would like to draw your attention to the fact that in the paper there is no mention of whether the members of the Committee should be members of the Council or selected from outside the Council. In case those bodies are composed of members of the Council, they will have twice the opportunity of influencing the decisions of the Council, as has been rightly stated by Greece. Perhaps it would also be worthwhile to examine whether it would not be preferable to elect the chairmen of these bodies by the Conference itself in a personal capacity whereby, of course, the nationality would not be taken into account when the members of the Committees would be selected by the Council. We consider these bodies of the working mechanism of the Council of particular importance. They may eventually be constituted as an executive committee with strictly defined terms of reference from the large Council and to make work more manageable.

As regards regional conferences, we wish to point out only one issue. We consider the regional conferences as purely FAO conferences and therefore I think irrespective of which members of the Council are invited to regional conferences, they should be purely organized and run by FAO itself.

C. M. FOFANA (Observateur pour la Guinee): Ma delegation pense également, ainsi que l'a souligne le Groupe latino-américain, et en tenant compte de l'expérience que nous avons eue au niveau de l'Afrique pendant la Conférence régionale qui s'est tenue à l'Ile Maurice, que les conférences régionales devraient être réservées essentiellement aux pays membres de cette région.

Cela veut dire également que les pays qui voient leurs experts qualifiés transformés en observateurs, peuvent tout autant développer la coopération au niveau de l'expérience et des échanges des connaissances techniques avec la même région. Nous en avons eu l'exemple en Afrique et cela n'a pu que consolider les rapports nouveaux qui se sont institués entre certains pays et nous.

En ce qui concerne la qualité des membres du Comité des programmes et du Comité financier, nous pensons qu'ils devraient être des membres de gouvernement. Nous voulons rappeler l'exemple du Codex qui est un Comité hautement technique. Je crois qu'à ce jour tout le monde se félicite du travail que ces experts effectuent au niveau de ces comités. C'est pour cela que nous estimons qu'il serait bon de tenir compte de la représentation au niveau des gouvernements tout en soulignant à chacun des gouvernements les critères nécessaires pour assurer un travail efficace au sein de ces comités.

Aussi et enfin, nous souscrivons à l'élargissement au niveau d'une représentation équitable des différentes régions dans ces deux comités.

G.S. MAGOMBE (Observer for Tanzania): I want to apologise to the members of the Council, and as you have noticed it has been the practice of my delegation not to intervene in your deliberations because we strictly wanted to observe the role of being Observers, but I thought since you are discussing this very important issue which I hope will come to the Conference, there our delegation will have an opportunity to give its point of view in detail, but in spite of the fact that we shall give our position in detail at the Conference, I thought that since we are Observers and the matter is of grave importance, my delegation should give its preliminary observation on the matter.

First of all, on the question of regional conferences, we have had a number of regional conferences in Africa, and out of that experience we have always felt that the presence of Observers from other regions is of great importance, so my delegation in its Observer capacity will really appeal to those members, especially in the African Region, that we should invite as many Observers as possible.

My country is going to host next year's regional conference, and we are already preliminarily discussing the arrangements of the conference. Quite a few countries feel that at the regional conference, opportunity will be taken to have as much consultation as possible on a number of problems and even arrangements for providing for donor-recipient countries pledging the conference on a number of projects. Therefore we hope and we feel that Observers from other regions should be invited. This is the point of view of Tanzania.

Regarding the proposals on the Programme and Finance Committees, we tend to agree with the proposals which have been put forward. However, we are also a little bit cautious about allowing individuals who are not government representatives to take a very active part in some of the FAO Committees. We do realise that FAO was actually established a very long time ago, and probably the practice then was alright, but as time goes on we feel that there is a need for a fundamental change not only of other structures of the FAO but even of its own constitution. If we agree that FAO is an inter-governmental organization whose membership is of those of governments, my country would really prefer that all the important Committees of this Organization should draw their membership from government delegations. We would even go as far as saying that membership in these committees should be on a country-to-country basis, not on individuals, so as to avoid personalities, as one of the members of the Council has mentioned, and it should be the sovereign right of that member who has been elected as a member of the committee to designate and nominate its own delegation.

As I said, this might be a departure from the usual practice within FAO, but at the same time and as it has been agreed even during the last Conference, the establishment of this Working Party we believe has just touched some of the aspects which need change in this organization. We hope that at the Conference my delegation will be able to give its detailed views especially on the structure of the Organization and also on its own constitution. We strongly feel that there is a need and probably the time has come for a fairer, wider review of the structure and the constitution of the FAO.

As I said , I am sure I will never ask for the floor again and I will allow the members of the Council to finish their deliberations for the rest of the items on the Agenda.

EL PRESIDENTE: Este ha sido un debate intenso, variado y controvertido. Es difícil tratar de presentar un resumen porque algunas de las declaraciones que hicieron ustedes fueron amplias, como la misma naturaleza del tema, y son susceptibles de interpretaciones diversas. Tal vez por eso ahora invoque la disposición contenida en los métodos de trabajo del Consejo para recordar a ustedes que el resumen que voy a tratar de hacer no obliga al Comité de Redacción, sino que simplemente puede ser tenido en cuenta si así lo considera el Comité de Redacción, como una guía para preparar el Proyecto de Informe.

En el primer caso de las Conferencias Regionales, creo yo que los miembros del Consejo estuvieron de acuerdo en destacar la importancia de las conferencias regionales, especialmente en cuanto a su función esencial de formular políticas y de hacer recomendaciones de interés para los miembros de las regions y que consideraron conven:!ente que en esas conferencias regionales participaran como miembros u observadores representantes de todos los estados miembros de la FAO que crean poder contribuir a la solución de los problemas agrícolas y alimentarios de los países de las respectivas regiones.

La mayoría de los miembros del Consejo apoyo las recomendaciones del Grupo de Trabajo contenidas en los párrafos 10 y 11. Creo que todos sentimos respeto y simpatía por la posición particular expuesta por el delegado de Pakistán. Afortunadamente, el párrafo 11, en su parte final, reconoce que esas decisiones serán tomadas en las respectivas conferencias regionales del año entrante entre los países de cada region y teniendo en cuenta las características especiales de cada region. Espero que esto satisfaga al delegado del Pakistán y que los derechos de su país puedan ser salvaguardados.

Otras delegaciones, tal vez pocas, estuvieron también de acuerdo en que en el párrafo 12, que comienza por "Algunos miembros '' se exponía alguna opinion en relación con la participación de los Esta dos Miembros en aquellos asuntos de orden tecnico y economico.

El Comité de Redacción tratará de encontrar la manera de reflejar también esta opinion. En cuanto a los Comités del Programa y de Finanzas, creo que todo el Consejo estuvo de acuerdo en que debían hacerse esfuerzos para preservar la función seria, competente y adecuada de esos tres comités, incluyendo también el COAG. Que la condición esencial para ser parte de esos comités del Programa y de Finanzas en particular deberían ser las capacidades y los méritos personales. Hubo opiniones diversas sobre la representación a título personal, la representación a título de gobierno, el aumento limitado o sujeto a lo que recomiende el Grupo de Trabajo pero en mi opinión, y el Secretario lo confirma así, la mayoría de los miembros del Consejo apoyó las recomendaciones del Grupo de Trabajo. No quiero entrar en detalles que tal vez corresponderían al colega Velay, pero él se abstiene de intervenir por su discreción y por la misma competencia con que ha manejado este asunto, pero tal vez quisiera referirse a un sólo punto que fue suscitado por la delegación del Reino Unido en relación con las tres etapas que deberían adoptarse para la elección del Presidente y los miembros del Comité del Programa y de Finanzas.

Creo que el colega Velay esta mañana cuando hizo la presentación ya se refirió a esas tres etapas. En efecto, la etapa f), del Apartado f), que dice que los Presidentes serán elegidos de antemano, complementa las dos etapas a que se refiere el apartado g).

En cuanto a otro asunto, que también fue suscitado por algunas delegaciones si los miembros de esos comités deberían o no ser miembros del Consejo, éste es un asunto que no fue discutido en nuestro Grupo de Trabajo, y entiendo yo que en este momento todos estamos de acuerdo en que se mantenga la posibilidad de que los miembros de esos Comités puedan o no ser miembros del Consejo. Con respecto al CACJ, entiendo que no hay problemas en que se mantenga tal como está.

Sólo me queda agradecer muy cordialmente a los colegas y amigos, al señor Velay, Presidente en Ejercicio del Grupo de Trabajo, al señor Embajador Borin, Presidente del CACJ, por su valiosa colaboración para la discusión de este asunto; pero tal vez el Secretario me anota que estaba adelantando más de la cuenta. En realidad, todavía falta un punto que creo sea de menor importancia al final del documento 12, la parte c), Otros Asuntos. ¿Ningún comentario sobre la parte c), Otros Asuntos? Si no hay ningún comentario sobre esta parte entonces el Consejo toma nota de las opiniones del Grupo de Trabajo.


1. Adoption of the Agenda and Timetable (continued)
1. Adoption de I'ordre du jour et du calendrier (suite)
1. Aprobación del Programa y Calendario (continuación)

EL PRESIDENTE: Voy ahora a conceder la palabra al Secretario para unos asuntos y luego quiero agradecer a los miembros del Consejo la cooperación que nos han ofrecido hasta ahora a fin de evitar que tengamos sesiones extras, pues con la forma práctica y positiva como han intervenido están fa litando el desarrollo oportuno de nuestros trabajos.

Sin embargo, justamente para compensar esa posibilidad de retardo será necesario, muy a nuestro pesar, introducir algunas modificaciones en el calendario para los días que restan a nuestro actual período de sesiones. Les presentamos nuestras excusas por estos cambios, pero son en favor del funcionamiento del Consejo y, al respecto sobre los cambios en el calendario, el Secretario también los explicará lentamen te a los miembros del Consejo y mañana será distribuido un calendario que espero sea el ultimo, en el cual ustedes encontrarán el itinerario definitivo y final de nuestras sesiones.

SECRETARY-GENERAL: I will read slowly the proposed calendar schedule of meetings. To-morrow, Tuesday, the 14th June, in the morning we would begin with item 10, the report of COAG, and then we would continue as scheduled on document CL 71 /INF/12,. our revised calendar with item 14(a), (c) and (d). That is the whole of the remaining items on Inter-agency Relationships and Consultations.

In the afternoon we would take item 17 again as originally scheduled. This is the review of the Field Programmes.

On Wednesday, the 15th June, here are the big changes. In the morning we would take the whole of item 15, Preparations for the 19th Session of the Conference. This would be followed by item 12, proposal for an ''A. H. Boerma Activity'', and the rest of the one sub-item left of item 18, which is the Appendix E to document CL 71/4, the Report of the Programme and Finance Committees. Appendix E is the Draft Resolution on Authority to Establish a Special Reserve Account.

On the afternoon of Wednesday we would finish our Agenda by taking item 13, the World Food Programme, item 8, the report of COFO, item 9 the report on COFI, and two very short items, item 21, Any Other Business, and item 22 Date and Place of the next Council.

On Thursday, we can begin the adoption of the sections of the Draft Report. On Friday we would continue with the Adoption of the Report.

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

Previous Page Top of Page Next Page