ADOPTION OF REPORT
ADOPTION DU RAPPORT
APROBACION DEL INFORME

DRAFT REPORT OF PLENARY - PART I
PROJET DE RAPPORT DE LA PLENIERE - PARTIE I
PROYECTO DE INFORME DE LA PLENARIA – PARTE I

Paragraphs 1 and 2 approved
Les paragraphes 1 et 2 sont approuvés
Los párrafos 1 y 2 son aprobados

Paragraphs 3 and 4 approved
Les paragraphes 3 et 4 sont approuvés
Los párrafos 3 y 4 son aprobados

Paragraph 5 approved
Le paragraphe 5 est approuvé
El párrafo 5 es aprobado

PARAGRAPH 6
PARAGRAPHE 6
PARRAFO 6

G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): En el párrafo 6 quisiéramos agregar lo siguiente: Después de donde dice "Consejo Mundial de la Alimentación" seguiría: "y manifesto su satisfacción por los trabajos del Consejo Mundial de la Alimentación y su estrecha colaboración con la FAO''.

Hacemos esta propuesta porque la intervención del Sr. Presidente del CMA no aparece como Anexo del Informe, esto está bien para que no sea tan voluminoso,, y aunque en la nota 2 al pie de página indica que esa intervención está en las actas, tal vez no convendría hacer esa referencia de manera tan escueta.

Q.H. HAQUE (Bangladesh): I no doubt agree with the delegate of Colombia that the World Food Council should be appreciated but I was wondering whether this Council was competent to appreciate the work of the World Food Council, which is a United Nations body. I have no objection to the second part dealing with collaboration, but I am not so sure about the expression of appreciation or satisfaction.

CHAIRMAN: The Drafting Committee of course worked on the material available to them and perhaps the Chairman of the Drafting Committee may wish to say something on this before we hear other views.

M.-A. PAPAGEORGIOU (Président du Comité de rédaction): M. le Président, je voulais tout simplement vous dire que la déclaration du Président du Conseil mondial de l'alimentation figure dans le procès-verbal. Si le délégué de la Colombie insiste pour que l'on mette une petite phrase concernant la collaboration entre la FAO et le Conseil de l'alimentation, nous pourrions la mettre, mais j'aimerais que l'on s'arrête là pour ne pas s'immiscer dans la question concernant la position de notre Conseil vis-à-vis des autres organisations des Nations Unies.

RAMADHAR (India): This morning in the Drafting Committee we discussed the relationship of FAO with the World Food Council, so I think if we want to we can include the concept of cooperation. I had hoped it was already there this morning and that it would come before the Plenary. At any rate, it should be there, not here.

F. SHEFRIN (Canada): The delegate of Colombia is correct in that we should not merely have a flat statement to the effect that Mr. Tanco gave a speech. It sounds as though the Council did not know what to do with it and said: Mr. Tanco gave a speech. The words "express satisfaction'' do appear to the delegate of Bangladesh, though very often his satisfaction is not the same as my own. Then, the delegate of India referred interest in and support of the work of the WFC and its close cooperation with FAO, it makes more sense in that the Chairman of the Council spoke, and we showed an awareness.

So if the problems are with "satisfaction'', then we can say "expressed an interest in and support of the work of the WFC and its close collaboration with FAO''. There is nothing dangerous in that. This is one of the most innocuous statements we can make, so if the delegate of Colombia agrees to change "satisfaction'' to "interest'' to take care of the problems of the delegate of Bangladesh and use "support of the work'', I would be very happy.

I appreciate the point made by the Chairman of the Drafting Committee, but chairmen of drafting committees always have to oppose any additions to their reports.

CHAIRMAN: My attention has been drawn to the fact that we have paragraphs dealing with cooperation with WFC and perhaps the point now being made can be taken care of there.

J. IÑURRIETA RIGORES (Cuba): Precisamente nos queríamos referir a que en la mañana de hoy el Comité de Redacción estuvo trabajando sobre el discurso pronunciado por el Dr. Arturo R. Tanco, y una parte de un párrafo precisamente señala lo que acaba de mencionar el delegado de Colombia; por ejemplo, nosotros lo podríamos leer muy brevemente; hay una parte del párrafo que dice: "rindió homenaje a la Dirección de la FAO y expreso su confianza en la contribución que la acción conjunta de la FAO y el Consejo Mundial de la Alimentación puede aportar en .el próximo decenio a la solución de problemas de la alimentación ".

Entendemos que todavía, naturalmente, no se tiene este documento porque no ha sido presentado aún al Consejo, ya que se discutió esta mañana y la Secretaría no lo ha podido presentar.

C. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): En realidad, me satisface la aclaración que hizo el colega del Canadá; podría aceptar su redacción o también otra más simple que tal vez tenga cuidado de la preocupación del colega de Bangladesh. Podríamos decir simplemente: "... Presidente del Consejo Mundial de la Alimentación, y manifestó su satisfacción por la estrecha colaboración entre el Consejo Mundial de la Alimentación y la FAO.'' El resto de la idea originalmente expresada por mí la encontraremos más adelante, según ha indicado el colega de Cuba, cuando los miembros del Consejo dispongamos del REP. correspondiente.

A.J. PECKHAM (United Kingdom): I would just like to suggest that as you said originally the first page is rather short. I wonder if in fact paragraph 6 might not be a little warmer by saying ''the Council also heard with interest a statement by Mr. Tanco'' and we leave the matter of value judgement until the paragraph in which we reach it but this would be a short way of making paragraph 6 a little warmer.

I think there is a spelling mistake in paragraph 5, it is ''the text of this statement is given''.

CHAIRMAN: In fact we did not debate Dr Tanco's speech at the time he made it. Therefore the intro­ductory part of our draft report is all right except that, as Members have said, paragraph 6 might be expanded a little to make it a little warmer and both the Canadian delegate and the UK delegate can give a small draft to the Secretariat to that effect but that would not alter the fact that we did not debate the address by Dr Tanco at this stage and we will come on to it under Cooperation with the WFC.

Paragraph 6, as amended, approved
Le paragraphe 6, ainsi amendé est approuvé
El párrafo 6, así enmendado, es aprobado

CHAIRMAN: If this is agreed, we will go on to the next page, page 2 and start with the substantive items to the paragraph, starting with the State of Food and Agriculture.

PARAGRAPHS 7 to 18
PARAGRAPHES 7 á 18
PARRAFOS 7 a 18

Q.H. HAQUE (Bangladesh): A small correction before the last words ''New International Economic Order'', the ''a'' substituted by "the".

CHAIRMAN: Yes, this is the sort of correction which can be handed in. It is a matter of grammar, and so on. If there are no comments in paragraph 7, then we go to paragraph 8.

P. MASUD (Pakistan): In the sixth and seventh line of this paragraph, which reads "It felt that, although there had been a general easing of food supplies, and especially of cereals, there remained no grounds for complacency". The impression one gathers is that presently we are complacent and we should remain complacent for longer. I think it would be better if it were to read in the last few words "expecially on cereals, there were no grounds for complacency ".

CHAIRMAN: Can you hand that in to the Secretariat. Paragraph 9.

A.J. PECKHAM (United Kingdom): Again, a very small point but I think in the last line of paragraph 9 there is a reference to African swine fever in some countries of the Mediterranean. I think if we could substitute the word "certain" for the word "some", which is slightly more restricted, it is not in all countries of the Mediterranean. I think that might be more permissible.

CHAIRMAN: That will be taken care of. Paragraph 10.

Q.H. HAQUE (Bangladesh): Page 3, third line from the top, in fact in Africa the production declined in 1977, that concept is not there. So could we say, "after developing countries" "and declined in 1977".

CHAIRMAN: Well, this can be checked from the document which was submitted by the Director-General, the document on State of Food and Agriculture.

M. A. PAPAGEORGIOU(President du Comité de rédaction): Dans cette phrase, nous avons reproduit ce qui nous a été soumis dans le document du secrétariat; je. crois que la phrase est assez correcte et corres­pond à l'image donnée dans ce document.

CHAIRMAN: Bangladesh, are you satisfied?

B. de AZEVEDO BRITO (Brazil): If I have the correct figures I think the decline is in per caput pro­duction but not in overall production. Therefore, I think the amendment has to be drafted rather care­fully. I think as Bangladesh suggested it would suggest that there is a real decline in total terms, which I do not think is the case. I think the decline is per caput. I stand to be corrected. I see Professor Islam is nodding.

CHAIRMAN: Should we ask Professor Islam, Bangladesh?

Q.H. HAQUE (Bangladesh): I want it checked.

N. ISLAM (Assistant Director-General, Economic and Social Policy Department): This sentence refers to the recovery of production in 1978. It does not refer to 1977 and if you want to include another clause here for 1977 then what the delegate for Brazil has said is correct, that the per caput pro­duction in 1977 fell, but this does not refer to 1977. This refers to, although there was a recovery of production in Africa in 1978, compared to 1977. That is what it says here. If you want to include 1977 then you have to include it in the way the delegate from Brazil has just mentioned.

CHAIRMAN: I think if you agree, Bangladesh, the easiest thing to do is for the Secretariat to put in a correct reflection, because this is not a thing for real argument.

R. PERALTA (Panamá): Era en base a lo que plantearon los delegados de Brasil y Bangladesh. Aquí se hablaba de 1978 y no de 1977 y en 1977 había sucedido lo que ha presentado el delegado de Brasil.

W.A.F. GRABISCH (Germany, Federal Republic of): My feeling is we are just missing one word here. If you would introduce a word after 1978, "nevertheless the rate of growth" then I think it would make sense, and then it would be in accordance with what we heard from the Director-General. We could also say "nevertheless the rate of growth of per caput production in that region". So my proposal would be, after 1978, to insert words "nevertheless the rate of growth" and so on.

CHAIRMAN: This may be a short solution.

R.C. BREWIN (United States of America): A small point, I think, paragraph 10, the next but last line "African countries were to achieve any improvement" may I suggest there "an improvement".

CHAIRMAN: That will be taken care of. As I suggested, paragraph 10, there is really nothing in dispute. If the suggestions which have come from various Members, including the Federal Republic of Germany, can be taken into account in the re-drafting, that will probably satisfy Bangladesh who started it in the first place.

Q.H. HAQUE (Bangladesh): I am satisfied with your observations and it may be left to the Secretariat but I just wanted to draw the attention of the Council to the CL 74/2, page 3, Food and Agricultural Production, where you have, "results were again disappointing in Africa, where production declined in 1977." It is a flat statement.

CHAIRMAN: You are very good at references so we trust you must have seen it somewhere! In any case the point you made will be taken care of.

A.J. PECKHAM (United Kingdom): A very small point on drafting, on the last line it refers to "The situation in subsequent years is uncertain". That is a bit obscure, I suggest it reads "The situation in subsequent years remains precarious, despite increases in production". It is purely, I think, drafting.

CHAIRMAN: Yes, I think the Chairman of the Drafting Committee can accept this which improves the presentation.

M. A. PAPAGEORGIOU (Président du Comité de redaction): Je pense que l'on pourrait accepter cette formulation qui correspond plus à la réalité.

P. MASUD (Pakistan): Would the delegate of the United Kingdom please have another look at what we have suggested. It now suggests there was a recovery in 1976, particularly in these countries, the situation in subsequent years, that is talking about the future remains precarious, and then you go somewhere else because you are not talking about the future when you say this remains precarious.

CHAIRMAN: Unfortunately the delegate has left so can you hand in your draft as well so we can take it into account if he is going to change anything.

P. MASUD (Pakistan): I have a change, I said it remained uncertain, instead of remains precarious.

CHAIRMAN: We go on to paragraph 12 now.

I. OROZCO GUZMAN (México): Disculpe, pero tal vez por la rapidez en que se están examinando los párrafos, no señalé que deseaba hablar del párrafo 12. Es una cosa muy breve.

En el párrafo 12, en la tercera frase en español, quinto renglón, habla ahí de los países exportadores desarrollados en relación con la concentración de existencias, y habría que hacer un poco de justicia en cuanto a la información adicional de que uno sólo de esos países, el mayor exportador mundial conserva o viene manteniendo existencias que equivalen al 45 por ciento de las existencias totales. Es información que se encuentra en el documento sobre el estado mundial de la Agricultura y Alimen­tación en 1978. 0 sea, mi propuesta concreta es que después de: "países exportadores desarrollados" se dijera: "conservando uno solo de éstos el 45 por ciento de las existencias totales."

CHAIRMAN: It is a statement of fact. It can be included in the Report. Drafting Committee Chairman, do you have any objection?

M. A. PAPAGEORGIOU (Président du Comité de rédaction): Il s'agit d'ajouter un détail pour lequel je ne vois pas d'objection. Si vous croyez que cela est nécessaire, nous pourrions donc l'ajouter.

F. SHEFRIN (Canada): I have no trouble with the facts but I find myself sort of puzzled by what happened to the meaning. It says since one country has 45 per cent of all the stocks it could cause logistic problems in the event they were needed to meet a food emergency. Well, that may be true, it may be not true, because that country has a large shipping fleet, it has a lot of vessels floating over the ocean. That may be to the advantage rather than disadvantage.

I think the concept here was the concern among those countries that are the exporters. They are also the ones that are holding the stocks, and so the issue really is one which we have not discussed, that is how stocks should be divided. It does not really matter if one country has 45 per cent, because in the case of the 45 they are also the ones that have the boats and they also have money to distribute, whereas the others do not have the money to be so generous. If there are any comments from the U.S. delegation, which has not been mentioned by name, I have no problem.

I. OROZCO GUZMAN (México): Observaba que mi sugerencia se ceñía a los hechos; no se menciona ningún país por su nombre. Sin embargo, eso indica, realza la gravedad de una situación. Yo sólo quiero que se haga notar precisamente lo que eso puede traer como consecuencia. En lo que se ha referido, estoy de acuerdo, pero vamos, forma parte del problema que no se menciona aquí.

H. BAEYENS (Belgique): On pourrait peut-être rejoindre le point de vue de la délégation du Mexique en incorporant l'information sous forme d'une note en bas de page, ce qui aurait l'avantage de ne pas déséquilibrer la phrase.

R.C. BREWIN (United States of America): I am sorry to belabour this sentence, but I have one small observation. On line 4, "developed exporting countries, which could cause", might we not put "which might cause"? When we say "could" that is synonymous in context with "would". I do not think it necessarily follows one would happen automatically after the first; "which might cause serious logistic problems", if that is agreeable.

CHAIRMAN: Yes, thank you very much. If you can send in this language, then it can be looked at in context with all the other suggestions. We go on to paragraph 13 now.

G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Proponemos que la primera frase del párrafo 13 diga como sigue:

"El Consejo lamento que en 1977/78 la ayuda alimentaria tampoco había alcanzado etc."

Solamente cambiar las primeras palabras del párrafo 13 para darle un poco más de fuerza y hacerlo más claro.

P. MASUD (Pakistan): It is on no specific point, but I just want a clarification. You just now suggested that the United States of America would hand its amendment in and it would be seen whether it ties in with the rest and then proper action would be taken, so we are quite in the dark as to what has been decided. Therefore, I would be grateful if you would let us know whether the amendment has been accepted or not.

CHAIRMAN: May I remind Members of what the Chairman of the Drafting Committee suggested. Matters of language, matters of grammar and so on, spelling mistakes, should be handed in, but when there is substance, for example, Colombia said we should change the word "noted" to "regretted"; now this is a change and has to be agreed on. There is no change in anything by putting grammar right, so if you agree, we will proceed along the lines suggested by the Chairman of the Drafting Committee.

LE SECRETAIRE GENERAL: A ce stade de nos travaux, je ne voudrais pas avoir à prendre de res­ponsabilité dans la rédaction finale du rapport.

S'il y a des observations à faire sur le texte, que ce soit d'ordre grammatical ou sur la substance elle-même, il faudrait que le Conseil soit d'accord, parce que je ne voudrais pas qu'après le Conseil on vienne me voir et que l'on insiste pour insérer des textes. Je ne peux pas en prendre la responsabilité et je ne pourrai pas l'accepter.

R. PERALTA (Panamá): Con respecto a lo que acaba de decir el Secretario General, creo que es lo más justo definitivamente aunque haya aparentemente ciertas cosas que pueden parecer iguales en los idiomas, el hecho de hacer los cambios, como señala el representante de los Estados Unidos, o como señalaron, el cambio sugerido por la delegación de México, de poner a pie de página, y no de poner la frase explicativa; creo que como ha dicho el Secretario General, las cosas debieran quedar más claras en el Consejo y no notas enviadas a Secretaría General que posteriormente no se conocen y son pasadas por Secretaría General sin ser aprobadas dentro del Consejo.

W.A.F. GRABISCH (Germany, Federal Republic of): First, my delegation wishes to thank the Chairman and the Members of the Drafting Group for the good work that they have done for us. As far as we are concerned we see only a few cases where changes are perhaps needed to get a better clarification.

Having said that, my delegation, too, would prefer, as was said by Pakistan, that in these changes we agree here immediately and do not count on the Secretariat to check up and then when we go home at the end of the session, when we have taken all the notes, we can also pass the corrected version of the Draft Report to our different Agencies and then the Government, and once we go home we are asked to do so, so I would very much prefer that in all cases we could agree upon the wording here within the Council session.

CHAIRMAN: May I ask the Chairman of the Drafting Committee to read out what has been suggested for paragraph 12 before we go on to 13, so that everybody can hear it.

M.-A. PAPAGEORGIOU (Chairman of the Drafting Committee): I think that first we agreed to put a footnote to paragraph 12 concerning the suggestion made by Mexico, and then the United States of America suggested that instead of "which could cause serious logistic problems" in the forth line of paragraph 12, we should write "which might cause serious logistic problems" something which is already done.I think in the French text. This is only to put it in the English text.

(Continues in French)

Si vous me le permettez, Monsieur le Président, nous devons être d'accord ici sur les corrections á apporter.

Je voudrais ajouter qu'il ne faut pas non plus entrer dans le détail. Nous avons discuté le détail dans le Comité et nous avons essayé de vous donner le résumé des délibérations. Je reconnais que l'on pourrait ajouter bien des points à beaucoup de paragraphes, mais nous n'en finirions jamais. Je fais donc appel aux délégations pour qu'elles présentent les modifications les plus importantes mais qu'elles n'entrent pas dans les détails, même s'ils ont quelquefois leur importance.

CO. KELLER SARMIENTO (Argentina): Quiero apoyar plenamente lo que acaba de expresar el Presidente del Comité de Redacción y someterme a lo que fue su rolling al comenzar sus deliberaciones. Creo que es absolutamente imposible ir por cuatro o cinco textos tratando de anotar precisamente los detalles que se acuerden. En este momento, tenemos una vision que se refiere a la sustancia del párrafo y lo que Ud. justicieramente ha dicho es que debemos aprobar o no, pero hay una serie de terminología y una serie de giros de frases que, evidentemente, pese a no querer entrar dentro de las responsabilidades de la Secretaría, ésta debe asumir.

Yo creo que debemos, según lo que usted ha dicho, limitarnos a las observaciones de sustancia; por ejemplo, si yo hubiera seguido las observaciones en detalle, hay una serie de intervenciones que hubiera de haber efectuado sobre el texto en español. Yo quiero que las tareas del Consejo se lleven analizadas, y procedamos a trabajar con inteligencia, esto es tratando de encarar los temas en su importancia.

CHAIRMAN: We do not want to start a debate on this. I think everybody is agreed on where it is going to be and what is not going to be, and we will have to take the decisions properly so there should be no fear about this.

G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): La primera frase del párrafo 13 diría come sigue: "El Consejo lameó que en 1977/78 la ayuda alimentaria tampoco había alcanzado .... etc.", y el párrafo seguiría tal come está en el resto de su redacción actual.

Q. H. HAQUE (Bangladesh): I do not know whether my colleague from Argentina will consider this is a matter of susbtance or not. At the very end of the paragraph I just want to add some words, as the sentence does not balance: "... and the present balance was below 50,000 tons". This is very important, and it is factual.

A. J. PECKMAN (United Kingdom): I would hardly wish to dispute the facts, but it did occur to me that on the material point at the beginning when the suggestion was: "The Council regretted...." it might very well meet the interests of those who spoke to say "The Council noted with regret ..." etc

CHAIRMAN: It is better English, anyhow. If Members agree, we will stop there, and the facts as suggested by Bangladesh can be added. Paragraph 14 now.

F. SHEFRIN (Canada): I want to ask a question of substance dealing with the last sentence of paragraph 14 on page 4. I may be wrong in my interpretation so I turn to the Chairman of the Drafting Committee for guidance. If I understand the sentence correctly, what is implied here is that as food aid is reduced it becomes very difficult for countries to import capital goods, fertilizers, etc. We must increase food aid more and more. What I am concerned about Li there is a more important aspect of food aid. If we said "because of the difficulties of increasing agricultural production" and at the same time "because of the reduction in food aid" there is this problem - but to put the whole emphasis on food aid I do not think is the correct balance with capital goods, fertilizers, etc. I want to be clear about what it means. I think it is an unbalanced sentence as it stands.

CHAIRMAN: I would like to call on the Chairman of the Drafting Committee to reply to the delegate of Canada.

M.-A. PAPAGEORGIOU (Chairman of the Drafting Committee): I wonder if I have to give any clarification of this paragraph? I would like to know, first, what the delegate of Canada proposes instead of this formulation?

F. SHEFRIN (Canada): We are playing the game of "You first, no. vou first". My problem here is this: I do not think it is a balanced sentence to imply a reduction:of food aid, as such as this has ramifications on developing countries who import on capital goods, fertilizers, etc. If we had said we did not increase food aid rapidly - I do not think it sensible to say the food aid dit dot reach ....

CHAIRMAN: A point of order: Can you give us a precise suggestion?

F. SHEFRIN (Canada): "... particularly because of the inability of developing countries to increase the agricultural production rapidly enough and ..." and then go on to the rest of the sentence.

M.-A. PAPAGEORGIOU (President du Comité de rédaction): Je n'ai rien á ajouter. Si le Conseil en est d'accord, nous pouvons accepter cette modification, qui est plutôt de forme, du délégué du Canada.

P. MASUT) (Pakistan): I am sorry, but I am afraid I am not in agreement with what has just been stated. This paragraph relates entirely to food aid and the new establishment of increasing food aid production is being introduced. If Mr. Shefrin would read the second sentence on page 4 which starts: "Particularly because the role of food aid in meeting the rising import requirement had declined substantially since the mid-1960's, the increasing import of cereals...." the point is made quite clearly here that because food aid has declined, developing countries have to import more cereals. The concept of increasing food production is not included in this programme.

G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): En principio estoy de acuerdo con lo que acaba de afirmar nuestro colega de Pakistán; pero en el caso de que el colega Shefrin, de Canadá, insista en su enmienda, agradecería que su texto sea leído lentamente ya que nos ha sido imposible captarlo en su totalidad.

R.C. BREWIN (United States of America): Just one brief item. Let me first address myself to this point: with due deference to my colleague from Pakistan this sentence does deal with food imports in general and not just food aid, and therefore I would be supportive of my colleague from Canada including the phrasing he suggested - though I think we are referring to 1975 here and not 1875.

B. de AZEVEDO BRITO (Brazil): I have a suggestion which I think at least has the support of Mr. Shefrin. "The decline in the role of food aid in meeting the rise in food import requirements since the mid-1960's has contributed to meeting the increased imports of cereals..." and then continue. That is one factor, but obviously not the only factor. There are other factors as well.

C. BATAULT (France): Je voudrais vous faire part d^!une légère inquiétude parce que j'ai 1'impression qu'on s'écarte un peu de notre rôle qui est de voir s'il y a des erreurs dans le rapport dû Comité de rédaction. Or, ce rapport est excellent et je crois que nous sommes tous d'accord pour constater que son président et ses membres ont fait un excellent travail, mais j'ai l'impression que nous avons un peu tendance à refaire maintenant ce que nous avons déjà fait, c'est-à-dire à rentrer dans les débats du Conseil. Ce n'est pas notre rôle. Il est possible que nous désirions revenir sur ce que nous avons déjà dit en pensant: j'aurais dû dire cela, ce qui aurait été mieux que ce que j'ai dit pendant les
débats du Conseil. C'est tout à fait possible, mais ce n'est pas notre rôle de le faire maintenant, sinon nous en avons pour jusqu'au milieu de la semaine prochaine. Je ne désire pas du tout contredire mon ami, le délégué de la Colombie, quand il estime qu'il faudrait dire "regrette" ou "observe avec regret" plutôt que "observe".

Si j'en crois mes notes personnelles, je pense que le mot exact aurait été "le Conseil constate qu'en 1977 - 1978". C'est évident qu'il le constate avec regret, mais si on ne l'a pas dit au bon moment, pourquoi le dirions-nous maintenant? Nous n'avons rien a ajouter aux débats, nous avons simplement à dire si le travail qu'a fait le Comité de rédaction est bien fait ou non. Voilà mon avis. Si nous sortons de ces limites, nous risquons d'avoir des débats extrêmement longs et compliqués.

W.A.F. GRABISCH (Germany, Federal Republic of): With due respect to the Secretariat and the delegate from the United States, I would like to state that from my point of view the figure in the second line should be 1985! That is my first point.

My second point is perhaps the delegate of Canada or the Secretariat would be kind enough to read the amendment proposed by the delegate of Canada. I have full sympathy with the delegate of Colombia when he wishes to hear that again.

CHAIRMAN: I would like to call on the Chairman of the Drafting Committee to say if he has anything to suggest in the light of all these comments.

M.-A. PAPAGEORGIOU (Président du Comité de rédaction): M. le Président, vous me mettez dans une position délicate. Si un des membres du Conseil fait une proposition, c'est au Conseil de décider s'il l'accepte ou pas. A mon avis, je peux tout simplement dire que la proposition du Canada, avec une formulation un peu plus légère, pourrait être acceptée. La proposition du Canada est... (continue en anglais) "Particularly because of the inability of developing countries to increase agricultural production rapidly enough..." and then: "... the rising import requirement had declined substantially..." etc. I should perhaps, if you permit, Mr. Chairman, say "Because of the difficulties of developing countries to increase agricultural production..." because the word "inability" sounds a little bit... but on the substance, it is for the Council to decide.

CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Chairman of the Drafting Committee, I think you have something there.

Q.H. HAQUE (Bangladesh): I thought you were discussing the amendment of Brazil and Canada, and I withdrew my request for the floor only because I supported the request of Brazil. I am surprised the Chairman of the Drafting Committee is still on the proposal of Canada. The amendment by Canada is still there. I drew the attention of the Council to the factual situation. You may recall the introduction of the statement by the Director-General, in which he said "80 percent of the aid..." I support the proposal made by Brazil.

CHAIRMAN: You support the Brazilian amendment - is it very different from the Canadian one?

B. de AZEVEDO BRITO (Brazil): What I proposed in good faith was the following, to try to help you. "The decline in the role of food aid in meeting rising import requirements has contributed to increasing imports of cereals by developing countries, thereby reducing the ability of those countries..." and then it continues. I think that reads smoothly.

CHAIRMAN: Canada is next-door to you. The delegate of Canada wants to put a proposal first. Do you come to some compromise with this?

F. SHEFRIN (Canada): There is no compromise in the proposal made by Brazil but the delegate of Canada feels that he is just being extinguished. I. think there is a difference. I will quite frankly say that I do not intend to pursue this any further if it is going to cause difficulty. I think our point is a correct one in terms of balance. If the delegate of Pakistan finds it is giving him heartburn I am prepared to be extinguished.

CHAIRMAN: In that case we do not have any proposal.

I. OROZCO GUZMAN (México): Unicamente para insistir en la necesidad de que en el momento de hacer propuestas concretas, sobre todo teniendo en cuenta que tenemos intérpretes que traducen a los demás idiomas, estas propuestas se lean en forma lenta y correcta, indicándose donde se efectuarán deter­minadas correcciones, citando el párrafo y, si es posible, el renglón. Así ayudaremos a los intérpretes y evitaremos innecesarias intervenciones de los delegados.

P. MASUD (Pakistan): The suggestion from the dei 'gate of Canada does not give me heartburn. It gives me heartache, because I feel so upset that a gent "-ou s country like Canada should be so reluctant to accept a paragraph which is in accordance with the existing situation. He is talking about increasing food production. You will find that in paragraph 16 increasing food production is also dealt with.

CHAIRMAN: Canada has withdrawn, so there is no ed to go back to Canada anymore.

P. MASUD (Pakistan): I just wanted to make sure that it remained withdrawn.

CHAIRMAN: If Brazil also agrees, we will leave the paragraph as it is and move on paragraph 15.

Q.H. HAQUE (Bangladesh): I have a little addition. In line 4 of paragraph 15, after "Seed Improvement and Development Programme" add "and to the IFS scheme".

CHAIRMAN: That is an omission that you want to correct.

M.-A. PAPAGEORGIOU (President du Comité de rédaction): Pas d'objection.

CHAIRMAN: There is no objection?

R.C. BREWIN (United States of America): Could we have that repeated slowly? We did not get it in our draft.

Q.H. HAQUE (Bangladesh): Line 4, paragraph 15, after "Seed Improvement and Development Programme" add "and to the IFS scheme".

A.J. PECKHAM (United Kingdom): I just wondered whether on the fifth line the word "expressed" is really appropriate. Would it not be better to say "The opinion was also advanced"? Concern was expressed properly at the beginning of the paragraph, but I think it would be better to say "advanced" in the fifth line.

CHAIRMAN: Right. It does not change the substance, it improves it. On paragraph 16?

K. ITANO (Japan): I would like to propose a minor amendment to the last part of the second sentence in the paragraph. My proposal is that instead of the clause "World Food Council target figure" we should have the following clause: "the estimate mentioned in the Mexico Declaration of the World Food Council". The reason for my proposal is that this part is different from the figures mentioned in the Mexico Declaration and in the communique of the World Food Council. So I would prefer the word "estimate", because the figure mentioned in the Mexico Declaration is an estimate rather than a target.

CHAIRMAN: You are suggesting "estimate" rather than a firm figure.

M. HAMDOON (Iraq) (interpretation from Arabic): With regard to paragraph 16, instead of saying that the developed countries had a major role to play we should say "should play an important role in providing the necessary development aid".

With regard to the last sentence: "It also noted that donor countries..." we should say "It also noted that donor countries have reoriented part of their aid", because the donor countries have not shifted all their aid but only part of their aid, part of their commitments.

B. de AZEVEDO BRITO (Brazil): I also have a small suggestion for the last sentence. I would have preferred that the word "countries" in the second line from the bottom be replaced by "segments of the population" so that it would indicate "in favour of the poorest segments of the population and small farmers". Then, in order to be clear, it would be necessary to add the words "aid in agriculture" in the same line. The sentence would then read: "It also noted that donor countries had been shifting their commitments for aid in agriculture in favour of the poorest segments of the population and small farmers, and recommended..." That would be the preference of my delegation.

CHAIRMAN: Before we get lost, let us hear the proposals made by the previous speakers. Japan has made a proposal which is without any problems. Then Iraq made a proposal. Nobody seemed to disagree with him. Perhaps the Chairman of the Drafting Committee would like to speak,

M.-A. PAPAGE0RGIOU (Président du Comité de rédaction): Je suis d'accord avec vous: avant de passer à d'autres amendements il faut en finir avec la première proposition; cela faciliterait beaucoup notre travail.

Dans ce paragraphe, il faut nous mettre d'accord sur la proposition de la délégation du Japon. Je voudrais prier M. Sole-Leris de lire la proposition exacte de la délégation japonaise.

A. SOLE-LERIS (Secretary of the Drafting Committee): The Japanese delegation have very kindly sent us up their proposal on this amendment. This is paragraph 16, the second sentence, which begins: "In this connexion, the Council noted with concern that although there was an increase", and towards the end you say "the total commitments of external assistance for agriculture were little more than half of the World Food Council target figure." This is what is there now. The proposal of the Japanese delegation is to delete the words "the World Food Council target figure" and to have instead "the estimate mentioned in the Mexico Declaration of the World Food Council".

CHAIRMAN: You have heard the Japanese proposal. There is no objection to that?

P. MASUD (Pakistan): We have some serious reservations regarding the amendment proposed by the delegate of Japan. It may be an estimate but it has not been mentioned in Mexico. It has only been mentioned since 1974 when the World Food Conference took place. At best we could agree to "more than half of the World Food Council's estimated target figure". That is the only amendment we could agree. We agree that it is an estimated figure. Therefore instead of making this long amendment we could amend it to read "the World Food Council's estimated target figure".

CHAIRMAN: Will that satisfy Japan?

W.A.F. GRABISCH (Germany, Federal Republic of): Although I would like to be in agreement with my friend from Pakistan, I must say that in this case the World Food Council never estimated requirements. It was in Manila when the revised f igure of the previous estimate made by FAO was presented to the World Food Council. There the World Food Council took note of that. The same thing happened in Mexico. So I feel that the wording proposed by the delegate of Japan reflects truly what is stated in the World Food Council's report about the Mexico session.

CHAIRMAN: I do not think this is difficult. We can always look back into the report and reflect exactly what is in the report. If members agree, then we do not come back to this. This is something factual which can be checked and put down. If that is agreed, we go on to the proposal of Iraq.

M.-A. PAPAGEORGIOU (Président du Comité de rédaction): Je crois que nous n'aurons pas beaucoup à apprendre en regardant les documents, qui nous sont très connus. Personnellement, je ne vois pas beaucoup de différence entre la proposition du Japon et celle du Pakistan, je pense qu'il s'agit d'une question de formulation. Nous parlons de la même chose, il faut trouver la formulation appropriée; on parle d'un but estimé, estimated target, nous exprimons exactement ce que nous pensons. Ces chiffres ont été élaborés par le Conseil mondial de l'alimentation à Manille et à Mexico; naturellement, nous pourrions ajouter beaucoup de mots si nous voulions être plus précis mais le fond est là: nous nous référons aux estimations faites pendant les sessions du Conseil mondial de l'alimentation à Manille et à Mexico et aux recommandations de la Conférence mondiale de l'alimentation de 1974. Je fais appel au Conseil pour qu'il accepte une formulation parce que cela ne change rien au fond.

M. KRIESBERG (United States of America): In the interests of trying to find a quick solution, may I suggest that we use a phrase simply stating "the estimated target figure used by the World Food Council". It was an estimate which the Council used.

CHAIRMAN: Is this wording acceptable? Right, then we will go on to the suggestion made by the delegation of Iraq. Perhaps the delegate of Iraq would repeat his suggestion as we may have forgotten it by now.

M. HAMDOON (Iraq) (interpretation from Arabic): In the second line of paragraph 16, instead of saying "the developed countries had a major role to play in providing the necessary development assistance", I suggest that we say: "the developed countries should play a major role in providing the necessary development assistance", etc. At the end of paragraph 16, in the last sentence where it says "It also noted that donor countries had been shifting their commitments for agriculture in favour" etc., we would say: "It also noted that donor countries had been shifting part of their commitments" etc.

M.-A.PAPAGEORGIOU (Président du Comité de rédaction): Je suis absolument d'accord avec la première modification proposée par la délégation de l'Irak.

En ce qui concerne la deuxième modification, il est un fait que toute l'aide n'est pas encore envoyée; en mettant "une part" cela correspond à la réalité.

A.J. PECKHAM (United Kingdom): I could not agree. I made a very firm statement about United Kingdom policy, and I believe we are not alone in believing that a number of institutions and other bodies are moving very much in this direction. It is only right that it should be reflected. While I entirely agree with the first amendment by the delegate of Iraq, on the second one I really favour the suggestion made by Mr. Brito and I would therefore be much happier if the last sentence read: "It also noted that donor countries had been shifting their commitments in respect of aid to agriculture" etc. That is what we have been doing, shifting our commitments in respect of aid for agriculture in favour of the poorer countries. This is where I disagree slightly with Mr. Brito: I do not like to talk about sectors. We are concerned with human beings and we should refer to poor people and to the small farmer.

F. SHEFRIN (Canada): My problem with the delegate of Brazil is that since we sit side by side, we cannot see eye to eye. I agree with the United Kingdom delegate in part: if he had not tried to amend the last sentence it would have been a good proposal, but by amending it we weaken the proposal. Actually, countries are not shifting their commitments to the poor countries or to any segment, or to poor people. In making our contribution to poor countries it is up to governments to decide how the aid should be used. If they want to shift it to the poorest ones, it is their decision; if they want to shift it to the middle ones, it is their decision. But it is not our decision, so I think the sentence is correct and does reflect policies of many countries, including Canada, in their strategy for aid; and it is a full commitment we have made.

CHAIRMAN: There is some force in what the delegate of Canada has said: you deal with countries and if the delegates of Brazil and Iraq will agree, then I think the sentence should stand as it is.

P. MASUD (Pakistan): I hope Mr. Shefrin will not be too surprised, but I agree with him: it is to the poorest countries, and to restrict it to the poorest segments, as proposed by the delegate of Brazil, would not be quite right because the poorest countries then go on to distribute what they get among their own society and the decision is ultimately their own. I would therefore agree with the last amendment of Brazil, and I also support the first amendment of Iraq.

A.J. PECKHAM (United Kingdom): We will of course withdraw any suggestion that we depart from the original wording if there is a consensus on that. We talk about the poorest countries but I think it has to be made clear that there are commitments with regard to aid for agriculture.

CHAIRMAN: It is agreed, then, that we leave the wording in the paragraph as it is?

C. BATAULT (France): J'avais quelques observations à faire, notamment pour dire que j'étais d'accord avec l'amendement irakien et que je n'étais en revanche pas d'accord avec celui proposé par mon col­lègue et ami brésilien. Fn effet, c'est l'aide aux pays les plus pauvres qui est là plus importante; le reste est une question de souveraineté nationale; dans les pays en développement, les moins pauvres peuvent s'occuper eux-mêmes de distribuer l'aide aux secteurs les plus pauvres. C'est une question de souveraineté nationale.

H. BAEYENS (Belgique): Je propose un nouvel amendement à ce paragraphe 16, tendant à supprimer la phrase qui fait un appel à augmenter les ressources du Fonds international pour le développement agri­cole. A ma connaissance, il n'y a pas en ce moment un appel pour le renouvellement du Fonds qui ait été lancé; il ne le sera probablement que vers 1980, et même si certains membres ont parlé dans ce sens je leur demande s'ils ne consentiraient pas à ne pas voir figurer cette mention dans ce texte.

CHAIRMAN: Can you give a specific correction or amendment so that the Drafting Committee Chairman can consider it?

H. BAEYENS (Belgique): Je propose de supprimer la phrase: "Plusieurs membres ont en outre souligné la nécessité d'augmenter les ressources du Fonds international pour le développement agricole."

P. MASUD (Pakistan): On this particular suggestion, I think it should remain because the appeals to replenish the IFAD have been made even at the first Governing Council of the IFAD and so unless we set the machinery in motion right now, if we wait until 1980 it may not be possible to secure the level of the. replenishment that we seek. I therefore think this appeal should stand.

Q. H. HAQUE (Bangladesh): In the report we are trying to reflect what was said in the debate. If the delegate of Belgium has particular difficulties, we can retain this sentence by replacing the word "increase" by "replenish" and at the end add "in good time". I think that would put the matter in proper perspective: "several members also stressed the need to replenish the resources of the International Fund for Agricultural Development in good time."

CHAIRMAN: Does that satisfy the delegate of Belgium? (The delegate of Belgium nodded his assent.)

H. BAEYENS (Belgique): Merci.

B. de AZEVEDO BRITO (Brazil): I shall not insist on my amendment in the last sentence but in our understanding the reason for the amendment was that the poorest people should be helped wherever they are.

CO. KELLER SARMIENTO (Argentina): Precisamente es el punto que a mí me preocupa, y se refiere a la última frase del párrafo 16. Es cierto que el Consejo escucho a algunas delegaciones que, efectivamente, decían que los países donantes estaban orientando sus asignaciones, etc. etc., pero también es cierto que esta canalización de asignaciones hacia los países más pobres y hacia los pequeños agricultores no está unánimemente aceptada por el Consejo. Por lo tanto, lo que yo creo que debería tratar de incluirse es alguna frase que expresara un poco la sanción del Consejo y me permito sugerir qu.e después de las palabras "El Consejo tomo nota también" agregar: "de las declaraciones de varias delegaciones que los países donantes" y lo demás quedaría como está.

No sé si ha sido claro para la Secretaría; veo al Sr. Secretario que dice que sí, de modo que he terminado, Sr. Presidente.

M.-A. PAPAGEORGIOU (Président du Comité de rédaction): En effet, ce paragraphe reflète les déclara­tions qui ont été faites pendant le Conseil. D'après ces déclarations, on constate que les pays dona­teurs auraient orienté leur aide dans l'agriculture en faveur des pays les plus pauvres. Je ne vois aucun inconvénient à accepter la proposition de l'Argentine qui prend en considération le fait que cette réorientation a été annoncée et pratiquée par les pays qui les concernent.

CHAIRMAN: If it is agreed the various amendements which have been stated and properly recorded will be reflected.

We go on to paragraph 17.

Q.H. HAQUE (Bangladesh): At the very end, the fullstop be replaced by a comma and add "and there was also need to assist them in improving absorptive capacity".

M.S. ZEHNI (Libya): (interpretation from Arabic): My observation is: made in order to allay some confusion with regard to the Arabic text. We have an error in the enumeration of the paragraphs, paragraph 17 and 18 have been merged together and therefore when my colleague from Bangladesh referred to the end of the paragraph this could raise certain confusion because the Arabic paragraph 17 ends with the end of paragraph 18 in the English and therefore the last three lines of paragraph 17 in the Arabic text should become paragraph 18 and it will begin '" the Council noted FAO's efforts". This is paragraph 18 in Arabic. Both have been merged and then we would change the following numbers.

LE DIRECTEUR GENERAL (Interprétation de l'arabe): Je voudrais remercier Monsieur l'Ambassadeur de la Libye. Il a tout à fait raison. Il y a effectivement une erreur. Nous allons changer la numérotation de ces paragraphes. C'est la première fois que le rapport est produit en arabe, et cela explique peut-être que certaines erreurs aient pu s'y glisser.

CHAIRMAN: I will call on the Chairman of the Drafting Committee because on the English text anyhow, 17 and 18 stand aout separately.

M.-A. PAPAGEORGIOU (Président du Comité de rédaction): Le numérotage des textes anglais, français et espagnol est correct. C'est une petite erreur qui s'est glisée seulement pour le texte arabe. Mon collègue de Libye m'a devancé, je voulais l'annoncer quand nous avons abordé le paragraphs 17.

CHAIRMAN: The addition made by Bangladesh, is there any objection to it?

A.J. PECKHAM (United Kingdom): I also have a comment in the last sentence of paragraph 17. Perhaps I could give you that first before commenting on the proposal by Bangladesh.

I thought that the last sentence might read a little more effectively if it were as follows ''it emphasized that the problem of absorptive capacity in the developing countries notwithstanding, there was an urgent need for a greatly enlarged flow of external resources''. It is simply getting the point a little clearer and I have really taken out the word ''dwarfed''. That is simply my proposal.

I would appeal to Bangladesh to drop his suggestion that there be also "assistance in dealing with absorptive capacity". The force of this sentence is quite clear. It finishes as the Drafting Committee has it on a firm note, "directly enlarged flow of external resources" and if you then add to this you lose the effect entirely.

CHAIRMAN: Bangladesh, do you agree to withdrawing your suggestion?

Q.H. HAQUE (Bangladesh): I agree that the need for external is emphasized but you mention also a short­coming on the part of developing countries and the absorptive capacity, but there is still then a need to mention there is also need to improve the absorptive capacity in the developing countries to assist them in that regard. Even if we accept the amendment of the United Kingdom I feel it is necessary also to emphasize helping the developing countries to increase their absorptive capacity, even if they have the shortcomings of this absorptive capacity. Even if we accept the United Kingdom amendment it is necessary to have this.

A.J. PECKHAM (United Kingdom): I wanted to apologise, I had intended to explain that in fact the first two sentences spell out I think what most of us realize is the problem of absorptive capacity. I think the term of absorptive capacity in the last sentence is used as a shortening of all these things. There is no difference of opinion between our friend here or myself, we all agree it should be done. Since in fact this is clearly stated in the first part of the paragraph I would simply reiterate what I have said before, that we keep to the force of the paragraph, the force of the conclusion as it stands and not add further to the paragraph.

P. MASUD (Pakistan): I fully support the ideas stated by Bangladesh. I do not think that the place at which he has suggested it should be incorporated is quite the correct place and there I agree with Mr. Peckham, that if we were to include it at this stage the whole paragraph would lose its force, whereas presently it is quite forceful.

Q.H. HAQUE (Bangladesh): There could be two alternatives. The first is before this sentence begins we must state that there is also need to assist the developing countries in improving absorptive capacity. The alternative is after the amendment by Mr. Peckham, put a fullstop and then say ''there is also need to help the developing countries in helping to improve absorptive capacity''. It would be better to have it before the sentence starts as a separate sentence.

I. OROZCO GUZMAN (México): Parece que el párrafo 17 va dirigido a señalar esta necesidad. Creo que se refiere a este objetivo de mejorar la capacidad de absorción, es decir, todo lo que habla la primera frase del párrafo 17, va dirigida a mejorar la capacidad de absorción. Nos parece que sería más lógico que lo que se ha sugerido respecto de ese aspecto en el párrafo 16, se incluya en el párrafo 17 y se deje el párrafo 16 ya como ha sido examinado.

Concretamente, nosotros sugeriríamos que en el párrafo 17, después de la tercera línea que dice, la parte del final: "y proyectos de inversión agrícola", introduciríamos entonces esta idea: "con obje­to de mejorar su capacidad de absorción, para lo cual era necesario darles mayor ayuda." (Punto final).

No sé si esto contribuye a la solución o la complica, pero sí ha querido ser una contribución positiva.

CHAIRMAN: May I ask the Chairman of the Drafting Committee if this last proposal matches in with what we have already got. If it does then it seems to cover both the points made by Bangladesh, the United Kingdom and so on.

M.-A. PAPAGEORGIOU (President du Comité de rédaction): Je voudrais prier le représentant du Mexique de nous relire sa proposition.

I. OROZCO GUZMAN (México): Fri el párrafo 17, después de decir, hablo de la tercera línea del párrafo 17, que termina diciendo: "y proyectos de inversiones agrícolas", allí poner una coma, y aquí entra mi sugerencia. Leo "con objeto de mejorar su capacidad de absorción, para lo cual sería necesario darles mayor ayuda.''

Creemos que con esta sugerencia, saldría sobrando, porque además es un párrafo que no está bien redac­tado, la ultima frase de este mismo párrafo 17.

CHAIRMAN: We all heard what the suggestion made by the delegate of Mexico is. The United Kingdom did make an amendment to the last sentence which is now suggested to be deleted altogether, and also Bangladesh.

Q. H. HAQUE (Bangladesh): I would be happy if at the end of the first sentence, the third line, you have "and improving absorptive capacity". Then the amendment of Mr. Peckham is accepted.

CHAIRMAN: Mexico, you are trying to help. Now the Bangladesh delegate has come up with a suggestion which seems to be acceptable to the United Kingdom finally. If this is acceptable to the Council, the we go on to paragraph 18, noting that the Arabic text will be amended properly.

B. de AZEVEDO BRITO (Brasil): I feel that paragraph 18, which refers to the supply of information, this improvement of information should cover not only domestic investment but also the external flow of resources. Therefore I would suggest the following, " the Council noted that FAO's efforts to improve the supply of information achieved on external aid to agriculture as well as", and then would continue as before.

CHAIRMAN: Is there any objection to this?

Paragraphs 7 to 18, as amended, approved
Les paragraphes 7 à 18, ainsi amendés, sont approuvés
Los párrafos 7 a 18, así enmendados, son aprobados

PARAGRAPHS 19 to 21
PARAGRAPHES 19 à 21
PARRAFOS 19 a 21

LE DIRECTEUR GENERAL: Je ne veux pas intervenir sur le débat ni sur l'adoption du rapport. Je veux simplement me permettre de vous dire qu'il est 16 h 45, et que vous avez déjà passé une heure et quarante-cinq minutes pour approuver 18 paragraphes. Le nombre de paragraphes que vous approuverez, je l'espère, étant de 123, il faudrait 10 heures et demie de travail pour en finir avec l'adoption du rapport. Je crois que ce Conseil s'est transformé en comité de rédaction et je fais donc entièrement miennes les remarques de Monsieur l'Ambassadeur de France.

CHAIRMAN: I think this appeal has been made by the Chairman of the Drafting Committee and by myself and by the Secretariat so I would like again to appeal to Members to refrain from very minor details. We go on to paragraphs 19 and 20.

B. de AZEVEDO BRITO (Brazil): On this paragraph unfortunately I need to bring an amendment because it is a very substantive paragraph for us.

Firstly, in the fourth line is a typographical error, it is "exports" instead of "export". The next paragraph a small change in the English text, the sixth line, instead of "which could only be exported with", "which could be disposed of with the assistance of export subsidies" and then add the following to make a better balance of the second part of the paragraph, "in such a way as seriously to disturb normal trade patterns".

Finally, right in the end, an observation was made by Professor Islam and by a couple of others during the debate on the export of sugar to the effect that there was a net increase, in fact a doubling of export between 1977 and 1978 by the community, and that is a very important fact. Perhaps we can add at the end of the paragraph, "it was noted that the EEC net sugar export has doubled between 1977 and 1978". I think that was the case. I repeat a new sentence right at the end, "it was noted that the EEC's net sugar export has doubled during 1977 and 1978". If my assertion is not correct I will withdraw but I think, the assertion was made and I think it is correct.

CHAIRMAN: The factual part of it can be checked. Members, is this on Brazil's suggestions?

P. ELMANOVSKY (France): Je reconnais que les remarques ont été faites en séance, mais il me semble qu'il serait plus juste de mettre l'amendement du délégué du Brésil à peu près au milieu du texte, avant: "Certains autres membres ont toutefois fait observer" car tout ce qui suit est une réponse à ce que l'on a dit. Actuellement, on nous dit que les exportations de la Communauté ont doublé récemment. Or, dans la dernière phrase, nous lisons: "L'accroissement des exportations est dû à l'amélioration des rendements ......" ce qui est la réponse au fait qui a été signalé. Il vaut donc mieux que l'amendement brésilien ne soit pas à la fin du texte, mais qu'une nouvelle phrase soit ajoutée après: "….accroître leur production et leurs exportations agricoles," et avant la phrase qui commence par: "certains autres membres ...,.."

CHAIRMAN: Brazil, do you agree with the French delegate?

B. de AZEVEDO BRITO (Brazil): I am very happy to agree, M. Chairman.

W. A. F. GRABISH (Germany, Federal Republic of): I wonder whether it would be possible to spell out again Brazil's first amendment and then to indicate where the second amendment is finally being inserted.

B. de AZEVEDO BRITO (Brazil): In the second sentence, in the fifth line it should read as follows: "excess supplies which could only be disposed of with the assistance of export subsidies in such a way as to seriously disturb normal trade patterns". Then following the suggestion of France we could bring my second amendment as an additional sentence just before "Some other members", which could read precisely as follows: "It was noted that EEC's net sugar exports had doubled from 1977 to 1978", right before "Some other members".

CHAIRMAN: I think we have finished with Brazil's amendment. It has been accepted.

A. J. PECKHAM (United Kingdom): A very small point: I think at the opening of the paragraph, we should refer to "international trade policies". I wrestled with these things over many years in my life and I think it is not just one "policy" in singular, I think it is "policies".

CO. KELLER SARMIENTO (Argentina) : He seguido, con atención los debates en torno a este tema y creo que la cuarta frase del párrafo 20 cuando dice: "Algunos miembros, sin embargo, hicieron notar que sus importaciones de productos agrícolas'', no coincide con la realidad. Según con lo que yo recuerdo solamente el Observador de la Comunidad Económica Europea hizo esta aseveración. Estoy tratando de recordar si otros miembros habían manifestado esto pero, recuerdo solamente al Observador de la Co­munidad Económica Europea. Si ello es correcto debería dejarse perfectamente establecido a quién obedece esa observación.

CHAIRMAN: This can be taken care of by looking into the records.

M. KRIESBERC (United States of America): Mine is just a small point of fact,. Mr. Chairman, in paragraph 20, sixth line: "which could only be exported with the assistance of export subsidies", and my concern is that I suspect there is more than one way of dealing with surpluses at a given time. The "only'' seems to be unduly restrictive.

CHAIRMAN: Yes; Brazil suggested "disposed".

M. KRIESBERG (United States of America): That does not help because it retains the restrictive nature of it. It also contains the concept of "disposing" rather than "exporting" which is in this line.

CHAIRMAN: May I ask the Chairman of the Drafting Committee the actual sense of this particular word "export", so that it may be clarified.

M. A. PAPAGEORCIOU (Président du Comité de rédaction): Le sens de cette phrase, à notre avis, c'était en effet que ces quantités excédentaires devaient être écoulées à l'aide de subventions. Je ne sais quelle autre formulation on pourrait employer pour ce terms. De toute façon,je ne crois pas que l'on ait mentionné quelque chose pendant les discussion,, au Corate de rédaction.

CHAIRMAN: Thank you. If the USA has not really got some country proposal, then we can yes, United States of America.

M. KRIESBERG (United States of America): The word might be that it "may" rather than "could only". In other words, it is possible that this is what may happen but certainly is not the only procedure. As a matter of fact, that is all.

CHAIRMAN: Then you only want to put ''may'', if that is agreed.

W.A.F. GRABISCH (Germany, Federal Republic of): I wonder whether you wish me to give a reply to the question raised by Argentina. If it is the case that you wish me to do so right now, I will do so. Otherwise, I will wait until you have cleared up the other issues.

CHAIRMAN: Let us clear this particular issue. The proposal of Brazil is accepted with the amendment made by the USA just using the word ''may''. If that is agreed, then you can take the floor, Germany, on the Argentina point.

W.A.F. GRABISCH (Germany, Federal Republic of): My friend from Argent ina was correct in saying that the delegate of the European Economic Community has stated that the imports of the European Economic Community had been increasing. Now, as far my delegation is concerned, we stated under Agenda Item 4, State of Food and Agriculture, the following, and I repeat: "The Federal Republic of Germnay as the largest importer of food commodities has increased her imports from the developing countries again substantially. Meanwhile, more than 50 per cent of our total agricultural imports from the countries outside the European Economic Community came form developing countries. My Government continues to pursue a liberal trade policy. It advocates this course in particular in multi-lateral trade transactions which are about to reach the final stage."

CO. KELLER SARMIENTO (Argentina): Agradezco a mi gran amigo el representante de la República Federal de Alemania, GRABISCH, la aclaración que me formula y, en función de esa aclaración, creo que debería enmendarse el texto y en lugar de decir: "algunos miembros" poner: algún miembro hizo notar.

F. ELMANOVSKY (France): Je regrette beaucoup cette indication qui vient d'être donnée par le représentant de l'Argentine, parce que, lorsque le représentant de la Commission parle pour la CEE, il ne parle pas pour la Commission. La Commission en elle-même n'importe pas ou n'exporte pas, la Commission parle ici au nom de la CEE qui groupe neuf pays. Je veux bien qu'on dise éventuellement ''le représentant de la Commission'' ou ''l'observateur de la Commission'', mais s'exprimant au nom de neuf Etats membres et cela sera exact. Il ne faudrait tout de même pas oublier de reconnaître que lorsque la Communauté est critiquée, elle mérite parfois aussi d'être félicitée, lorsqu'elle a une politique constructive, par exemple lorsqu'elle met en vigueur le système des préférences. Ne disons pas simplement ''l'observateur'' en minimisant les choses, c'est vraiment la Communauté dans son ensemble.

CHAIRMAN: I think we will leave the text as it is if Argentina agrees, in the light of what we have heard.

M. HAMDOON (Iraq)(interpretation from Arabic): As regards paragraph 20, we all acknowledge that the Representative of the EEC referred to imports from developing countries, and this is the reason why I would suggest the following addition to the end of paragraph 20. We would say that ''the Council expressed the hope that re-exporting'' I would say - I think that some European countries re-export what they import from developinp countries, so I go back to my suggested amendment: ''The Council feels that the re-exporting of commodities should not be prejudicial to the commodities being imported from developing countries''.

P. ELMANOVSKY (France): Nous ne pourrons certainement pas accepter que ce soit le Conseil dans son ensemble qui dise ceci, car je vous ai rappelé, lorsque j'étais intervenu sur le sucre, que la Communauté de par sa production n'avait pas besoin de ce million 400 000 tonnes de sucre qu'elle importe des pays en voie de développement au titre de la Convention de Lomé; mais du fait même qu'elle le fait, et qu'elle le fait non pas au prix du marché mondial mais au prix intérieur communautaire très supérieur, puisqu'on nous a dit qu'il était très supérieur, au prix du marché mondial, c'est un bénéfice pour ces pays, et ce sucre il faut bien que l'on en fasse quelque chose. C'est l'objet d'ailleurs des conversations qui auront lieu à partir du 15 décembre à Londres avec le Conseil international du sucre où nous exposerons notre position. De toute facon je ne pourrai pas m'associer à une demande disant: ''le Conseil demande que les quantités ainsi importées des pays en voie de développement ne donnent pas lieu, sous une forme ou une autre, à une réexportation''.

CHAIRMAN: May I appeal to the delegate of Argentina not to press on this, so that we can leave this as it is. Can the Argentine delegate drop his objection to this?

CO. KF.LLEF SARMIENTO (Argentina): Para tratar de facilitar su tarea, Sr. Presidente, mi delegación no ha insistido en su enmienda; pero queda claramente establecido que la unica delegación que se refirió al problema de que habían aumentado sus importaciones de productos agrícolas alimentarios, fue la delegación de la República Federal de Alemania. De modo que lo que dice nuestro texto no es exacto.

Con respecto a lo que ha formulado el representante de Francia sobre la Comunidad Económica Europea, quiero recordarle que nosotros estamos reconociendo la presencia de Estados como miembros del Consejo y el resto son observadores.

A.J. PECKHAM (United Kingdom): I thought I should appeal for getting on with this, as I said, they would otherwise raise such questions, very difficult questions about the re-exporting of enormous amounts of commodities. We are getting in very, very deep water. Surely we do not want a debate at this late hour on who are the members of the EEC, and whether the Herman Presidency speaks on this behalf. Let us please get on. The text we have seems as clear as possible. I would suggest we drop these new points.

CHAIRMAN: I have already appealed to Argentina to drop his point. Do you agree? Thank you very much.

I. OROZCO GUZMAN (México): Es una pequeña cuestión respecto al párrafo 21.

Quisiéramos estar seguros de que, por lo general, las traducciones reflejan fielmente el texto del idioma básico sobre el que se trabaja porque por casualidad, viendo el texto en inglés, en el párrafo 21 se habla de una palabra "longstanding'' antes de ''problemas'' y esto puede tener importancia. En el caso concreto en español no se traduce la palabra ''longstanding'' y hay palabras a las que se puede dar una intención, se las puede calificar. Quisiéramos asegurarnos de que en general nuestros textos se corresponden.

CHAIRMAN: Mexico, you could put in the corrected translation. I do not think the Secretariat would object to that. I have had it pointed out this is a typographical error, but could I ask in such cases that Members could send in the corrected version?

Paragraphs 19 to 21, as amended, approved
Les paragraphes 19 à 21, ainsi amendés, sont approuvés
Los párrafos 19 a 21, así enmendados, son aprobados

PARAGRAPHS 22 to 31
PARAGRAPHES 22 à 31
PARRAFOS 22 a 31

P. MASUD (Pakistan): The second sentence of paragraph 22 is not quite clear to me, and if someone could enlighten me on what exactly is being said I would be grateful. My problem is that the second sentence is not quite clear to me. It talks about "increase in stocks, which continued the build-up which had occurred since 1975, was mainly concentrated in coarse grains in 1978." I am frankly not clear as to what the Drafting Committee wishes to state here.

CHAIRMAN: Have you any specific improvement or amendment to put here? If so, why do you not do it?

P. MASUD (Pakistan): "The build-up of stocks which commenced in 1975 continued but was mainly centred on coarse grains in 1978.''

CHAIRMAN: If there is no objection to this it will be put in. O.H, HAOUE (Bangladesh): On a different point: the first sentence. The last part of this is somewhat contradictory to the statement in the third sentence, so my suggestion is to put a period after "... 1977 and 1978 had improved ." Otherwise it is somewhat contradictory to the statement in the third sentence. So the first sentence would end after the word "improved''.

CHAIRMAN: If there are no objections - this is editing.

W.A.F. GRABISCH (Germany, Federal Republic of): I am a bit confused about the first amendment proposed to the first sentence of that paragraph. We must realise that also the food security situation has improved to some extent. It is necessary, therefore, that this should be left in. I wonder what the final position or proposal is on the first sentence of paragraph 22?

C. BATAULT (France): Je serai très bref sur les questions de grammaire. "Le vieux problème'' en français, cela ne veut pratiquement rien dire. Je vous proposerais, au moins dans la version française, de remplacer ces mots par "le problème traditionnel" La phrase se lirait ainsi: "Le Conseil note que l'on n'a guère à atténuer le problème traditionnel du commerce international des produits agricoles".

CHAIRMAN: That is no problem, delegate of France.

A.J. PECKHAM (United Kingdom): I will only announce that I had a specific amendment to the last line, but I pass it by in the interests of progress and will not make it.

CHAIRMAN: We will accept it in writing. I assure you of that. The delegate of the Federal Republic of Germany has objected to the amendment made by Bangladesh.

O.H. HAOUE (Bangladesh): I suggested the amendment because it is somewhat contradictory to the statement you have in the third sentence. The Council stressed: "the food security would remain precarious.'' so to say the food situation would have improved to some extent would be contradictory. And the same in the next paragraph, the question of the International Undertaking, and that sort of thing. That is why I tried to give it a better meaning.

CHAIRMAN: I would like to put this to the delegate of the Federal Republic of Germany. This is the explanation; is it acceptable to you?

W.A.F. GRABISCH (Germany, Federal Republic of): I would like to agree with my good friend from Bangladesh, but I think if we want to express what is really happening we would have to leave in the first sentence, that food production and stocks had improved the world food security situation to some extent, and if my memory does not betray me I do think we are with stocks of about 19 percent of what is being traded, so that is an improvement to some extent, this would not contradict the statement in the next sentence: "The Council stressed that food security would remain precarious until real progress has been achieved, or made.'' Some progress has already been made, because the stocks increased, so to some extent the situation has improved; therefore, I still have a feeling it would be contradictory to take it out.

CHAIRMAN: Before I give the floor to Brazil, I think the point made by the Federal Republic of Germany is valid, Pakistan, and if you do not mind we will leave it, it has improved it.

B. de AZEVEDO BRITO (Brazil)- I fully agree with Mr. Grabisch. I just think the last sentence could be made more clear if we indicated that what we are saying is "progress in food production in developing countries.'' If we sav in a last sentence "The Council stressed world food security would remain precarious until real progress had been made towards strengthening the food production base of developing countries so as to help eradicate hunger and malnutrition ..." - we just need more food aid production in developing countries, and that is enough, Mr. Grabisch is correct.

CHAIRMAN: So I think we have paragraph 22 straight, and we go on to paragraph 23.

M.-A. PAPAGEORGIOU (Président du Comité de rédaction): En effet, nous ne savons pas où nous sommes en ce qui concerne le paragraphe 22. Pourrait-on nous dire ce qui a été accepté finalement?

CHAIRMAN (Chairman of the Drafting Committee): I think Bangladesh made a point and the Federal Republic of Germany improved on it, and Brazil also came in. But if you wish the whole thing to be gone over again.

M.-A. PAPAGEORGIOU (Président du Comité de rédaction): Je crois que la dernière proposition du Brésil était d'enlever la phrase: "dans la voie de l'éradication de la faim et de la malnutrition dans le monde'' et maintenir le reste du paragraphe. Eh bien, est-ce que le Brésil voulait reformuler sa pro­position?

B. de AZEVEDO BRITO (Brazil) : I will just try to make it clear there is no contradiction by rephrasing the last sentence: "The Council stressed that world food security would remain precarious until real progress had been made towards strengthening the production base of developing countries so as to help eradicate hunger and malnutrition.''

CHAIRMAN: Is that clear for the Chairman of the Drafting Committee?

M.-A. PAPAGEORGIOU (Président du Comité de rédaction): Oui, Monsieur le Président et que fait-on pour la première phrase? On la laisse tout entière?

CHAIRMAN: Yes, we keep the whole sentence.

Q.H. HAQUE (Bangladesh): To leave it as it is would not actually be correct, but for the sake of my friendship with Grabisch I will agree.

CHAIRMAN: That is excellent. Now, Paragraph 23? 24?

Q.H. HAQUE (Bangladesh): The third line from the bottom of the paragraph, our intention is not only to request a resumption but also a successful conclusion. So after ''resume'' add ''and successfully conclude' '.

P. MASUD (Pakistan): If the delegate of Bangladesh could see the last words, it says, ''in order to bring them to a fruitful conclusion''.

A.J. PECKHAM (United Kingdom): I was going to make a proposal that there is one amendment only in paragraph 2 3, and that is the word in the fourth line from the end: instead of talking about "reserve stock" I think it should be "reserve stocks'', and a similar point in the fourth line of paragraph 24 refers to ''a coarse grain consultative arrangement'', which I think should be coarse grains''.

CHAIRMAN: These are valid editorial points which can be sent in on a chit. Nobody can argue with those.

C. BATAULT (France) : A la cinquième ligne du paragraphe 23, je crois qu'il faudrait dire, pour reflé­ter la réalité, qu'un accord international sur les céréales aboutisse rapidement pour que certains des objectifs de l'Engagement international ... . Je crois que si l'on dit ''les objectifs'', c'est trop vaste; en fait, étant donné la nature de la négociation, il faut dire: ''certains des objectifs''.

Au paragraphe 24, troisième ligne, je crois qu'il faudrait dire ''des progrès considérables ont déjà été réalisés''.

CHAIRMAN: These corrections will be made. Paragraph 25?

P. MASUD (Pakistan): Would you consider using the phrase " external assistance'' instead of ''outside assistance "?

CHAIRMAN: This is just a matter of words.

F. REDA (Egypt) (interpretation from Arabic): With regard to the Arabic text, we have an omission there. The last sentence does not figure in the Arabic text. We would ask the Secretariat to take this into due account.

CHAIRMAN: That will be done. Paragraphs 26, 27 and 28?

I. OROZCO GUZMAN (México): Tal vez mis observaciones son porque he leído precisamente esas partes acerca de los aspectos a los que se refiere; otros tal vez se me hayan escapado, pero en el párrafo 28 se habla asimismo de las políticas o prácticas de reducción de la producción de algunos países expor­tadores. De acuerdo con el informe del propio Comité de Seguridad Alimentaria es muy específica la mención de ese país que es el principal exportador de granos. Entonces, para que se ajuste ese párrafo en base a lo que dice el propio Comité de Seguridad Alimentaria.

CHAIRMAN: Could we hear your proposal?

I. OROZCO GUZMAN (México): Bueno, únicamente que se diga a partir del tercer renglón, donde dice "de la producción", "decretadas en el principal país exportador, el Consejo fue informado por el represen­tante de dicho país de que, de conformidad" y el resto continúa igual que en el texto.

CHAIRMAN: Are these proposals acceptable?

Then the comments made by Mexico will be taken into account.

M. KRIESBERG (United States of America): Could they be repeated, please?

I. OROZCO GUZMAN (México): Sí. En el texto expañol, en la tercera línea, después de "reducciones de la producción" agregar "decretadas en el principal país exportador de cereales alimenticios, el Consejo fue informado por el representante de dicho país de que," y el resto queda como está.

K. ITANO (Japan): I would like to propose an amendment to the second part of the first sentence in paragraph 29. I would like to propose the following words: "to establish the International Emergency Food Reserve on a continuing basis" instead of "a permanent element of world food security". My proposal comes from the wording used in the recommendation in the Mexico Declaration.

CHAIRMAN: If there is no objection to that, then we agree to that paragraph.

I. MOSKOVITZ (Malta): I would like to propose that we cut the third sentence into two and add a few words to it: "Attention was drawn to the importance of regional food reserves at a strategic point of food deficiency areas". Then "The Council was informed..."

CHAIRMAN: Are there any objections to this addition? If not, it is agreed.

Paragraphs 22 to 31, as amended, approved
Les paragraphes 22 à 31, ainsi amendés, sont approuvés
Los párrafos 22 a 31, así enmendados, son aprobados