CHAIRMAN: The meeting is called to order. Mr. Director-General, distinguished delegates, ladies and gentlemen, I wish to welcome you all to the 80th Session of the Council. I am happy, as usual, to have the Director-General with us. I realise that he will not be able to stay with us all the time when he is so heavily involved with the preparation of the Conference, and of course, this time there is not going to be a statement from the Director-General as we usually have, unless it becomes necessary for him to address us or intervene on any item.
No new members of the Council have joined us at this Session. However, 16 members will vacate their seats in the Council at the end of this Session. We may say 17 because I am going to vacate my seat at the end of this Session as well.
I am pleased to inform the Council that in addition to Bhutan, Equatorial Guinea, Tonga and Zimbabwe, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines have now also applied for membership in the Organization and this fifth application will also be submitted to the Conference next week.
Traditionally, the Session of the Council which immediately precedes the Conference is short and merely devoted to the preparation of the Conference. This Session is no exception. We shall meet for only three days, but as you will have noticed, our agenda is quite heavy and includes a number of important items. In view of the little time at our disposal, I would ask all of you to limit the length of your interventions so that we can conclude our business in the short time available.
Now I would like us to go straight into the Order of the Day, which has been circulated.
You will note that the Provisional Timetable CL 80/INF/1 now shows three sub-items under Item 17, "Any Other Business". The first of these is scheduled for the end of this afternoon and concerns the Draft Conference Resolution on the World Food Programme Pledging Target for 1983/84.
As was explained in a circular letter from the Director-General early in October, this was the accepted outcome of the Twelfth CFA Session of last October under the statutory item.
In addition, you will note under item 9 two of the Joint Inspection Unit Reports are not yet available for consideration by the Council, and have thus been deleted.
Lastly, you will also note that the third sub-item of item 16 which is for information only should now read: "Changes in the representation of Member Nations on the Programme and Finance Committees."
It will be further noted that a number of documents listed are Conference documents. In this connexion, I would ask you to keep them for the forthcoming Conference in order to avoid duplication of distribution. The Provisional Council Agenda as amended, as well as the proposed timetable are now open for discussion.
Are there any comments on this? If not, then these documents are adopted.
Because of the very short time available to us, I suggest that we meet daily from 9.00 until 12.30 hours, and from 14.30 to 17.30 hours. If these hours are agreed upon, I would appeal to you to be punctual and keep to these hours rigidly so as to avoid night sessions, because if we do not finish in the three days available we will have to go into night sessions because of the approaching Conference. As you may know, the Friday just before the Conference is usually reserved for meetings of the Nomination Committee for the Conference, and that day is therefore not available to us, even though we may want to meet on that day.
G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Me complace muy de veras presentar como candidato para una de las vicepresi-dencias al colega y amigo Embajador Pedro Morales Carballo, Representante Permanente de Cuba ante la FAO. Hago esta propuesta a nombre de los nueve miembros que representamos a América Latina y el Caribe en este Consejo, seguros de que será acogida generalmente por todos ustedes, dada la amplia experiencia y profundos conocimientos, así como la inteligencia que distingue a nuestro colega.
Estoy seguro de que en el Embajador de Cuba como Vicepresidente, tendrá usted, señor Presidente, un válido colaborador en el período de sesiones que hoy se inicia.
CHAIRMAN: I now have a proposal from Colombia nominating Ambassador Carballo of Cuba to be one of our Vice-Chairmen.
O. AWOYEMI (Nigeria): On behalf of the African group, I wish to support the nomination of the Ambassador of Cuba and Permanent representative to FAO as one of the Vice-Chairmen of the Council,
M. IVANKOVICH DE AROSEMENA (Panamá): Es también para mi' motivo de placer el ratificar el apoyo a la candidatura del Embajador de Cuba, representante ante la FAO, Pedro Morales Carvallo, para ocupar una de las vicepresidencias del Consejo en este período de sesiones.
A.J.M. ISSA (México): Ratifico la adhesion de México a la candidatura del Embajador de Cuba, represen-tante permanente ante la FAO, señor Pedro Morales, quien estoy seguro será de gran ayuda para las tareas que usted, señor Presidente, tiene enfrente como Presidente de este Consejo.
T.C. RAJAONA (Madagascar): Ma délégation propose et soutient le délégué de Cuba au poste de Vice-Président.
CHAIRMAN: We have now got nominations and support of the Ambassador of Cuba to FAO as one of our Vice-Chairmen.
H.L. CHAWLA (India): The Indian delegation has great pleasure in supporting the election as Vice-Chairman of His Excellency the Ambassador of Cuba.
CHAIRMAN: I take it the Ambassador of Cuba is unanimously elected.
It was so decided
Il en est ainsi décidé
Así se acuerda
DATOSERI RADIN SOENARNO bin RADIN SOENARIO (Malaysia): The Malaysian Delegation would like to propose the leader of the Australian Delegation, Mr. T. Kelly, be made Vice-Chairman of this Council. He has been associated with the work of this Council for a number of years. I am sure with his vast experience he can contribute to the successful conclusions of this Council.
CHAIRMAN: We now have a proposal for Mr. Kelly, the Representative of Australia, to the position of Vice-Chairman.
W.A.F. GRABISCH (Germany, Fed. Rep. of): My delegation takes great pleasure in supporting the proposal that Mr. Kelly be elected as one of the Vice-Chairmen of the 80th Session of the Council. He is very well acquainted with FAO affairs, and will, without any doubt, assist you, Mr. Chairman, in your responsible task.
H. MENDS (Ghana): I am very willing to support the nomination of Mr. Kelly, who is very well versed in our affairs, for the position of Vice-Chairman.
CHAIRMAN: Now, Mr. Kelly, the Representative of Australia, has been nominated and supported. I now put Mr. Kelly's candidature to you. He is elected unanimously.
It was so decided
Il en est ainsi décide
Así se acuerda
P.S. McLEAN (United Kingdom): I hope I have not anticipated you, Mr. Chairman, because I believe we have the responsibility to elect another Vice-Chairman, and on behalf of the European Region and with great pleasure I would like to propose as one of the Vice-Chairmen, Mr. Stefan de Mare, the Secretary-General of the Swedish National FAO Committee and the representative of Sweden at this 80th Session of the Council.
CHAIRMAN: I have now got Mr. de Mare of Sweden who is proposed as one of the Vice-Chairmen by the United Kingdom. Are there any seconders?
M. ZJALIC (Yugoslavia): My delegation has the pleasure of supporting the candidature of Mr. de Mare as a Vice-Chairman of this Council.
TCHICAYA (Congo): Je vous remercie Monsieur le President. Je voudrais simplement dire que la délégation de mon pays appuie la proposition faite pour élire le représentant de la Suède comme vice-président du Conseil.
F. PETRELLA (Argentina): Para asociarme muy calurosamente a la elección del señor De Mare, de Suecia, corno vicepresidente de este Consejo.
A. CONTE MAROTTA (Italy): My delegation supports very strongly the nomination of the Swedish delegate, Mr. de Mare.
N. CARRASCO SAULNIER (France): Nous voulons joindre notre voix à ceux qui se sont exprimés avant nous pour soutenir également la candidature de M. de Mare à la vice-présidence du Conseil.
CHAIRMAN: Mr. de Mare of Sweden has been proposed and seconded to the position of Vice-Chairman, and he has been unanimously elected.
It was so decided
Il en est ainsi décidé
Así se acuerda
CHAIRMAN: Now we are also to designate the Chairman and Members of the Drafting Committee. As you know, normally it takes some consultation, and I understand consultations are still going on, but this, of course, will not stop us from getting on with the rest of our agenda items. When nominations for the Drafting Committee are ready, we will announce it so that it will be done with your approval.
A.M. de FREITAS (Chairman, Committee on Commodity Problems): As Chairman of the Committee on Commodity Problems I am pleased to introduce the report, document CL 80/6, of the 53rd Session of the Committee on Commodity Problems which held its session from 14-18 September, 1981. The Session was well attended: 60 members of the Committee and 6 observers from other Member Nations participated, and 8 intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations were also represented. The meeting provided a very good opportunity for governments to review and reach conclusions on several problems of serious concern to both developed and developing countries. In its customary review of the world commodity situation and outlook, the Committee noted that world agricultural trade continued to rise substantially, but pointed out that in real terms trade values had stagnated. It expressed concern that many commodities faced depressed market conditions, mainly because of the worldwide economic recession.
The CCP paid special attention to the three principal problems: the limited market growth for many commodities; the widespread decline and high volatility of prices and the lack of growth in export earnings of developing countries. Recognizing the complexity of these issues the Committee has requested the Secretariat to continue its study of commodity problems including causes and possible solutions.
On specific commodity matters the CCP reviewed the work of 7 of its intergovernmental groups on jute, oil seeds, meat, bananas, hard fibres, grain and rice, as well as of the working party on statistical intelligence for hides and skins, and endorsed their recommendations. An important policy issue which arose from the review of the reports of the intergovernmental group on oil seeds and fats concerned the possiblility that the EEC might impose a tax on imported and domestic vegetable oils. The Committee noted that no proposal had so far been made by the Commission of the EEC but that such a tax was being considered as well as several options to several problems of the olive oil sector within the EEC, particularly in the context of the enlargement of the community to include Spain and Portugal. Delegates of exporting and a number of other countries reiterated their view that such a tax would be a protectionist move and contrary to international agreements and commitments. They regretted that the EEC was not yet in a position to state categorically that the matter had been finally dropped and appealed to the EEC to abandon all ideas of imposing any such tax. I may add that since the Committee met it has been reported in the press that the EEC Commission has further discussed the matter and that it has decided not to make a proposal for a tax on vegetable oil. The Commission has apparently established a six-point strategy of other action and negotiations aimed to solve the problems of olive oil in the enlarged Community. However, press reports suggest that the strategy still includes the possibility of a tax on vegetable oil being prepared towards the end of the transitional period following Spain's entry, depending on the results of the other action and negotiations.
The Committee also reviewed the work of its sub-committee on Surplus Disposal Tax (CSD). During the discussion several delegates pointed out that the monitoring of food aid transactions now more than 1 000 millions a year should not obscure attention to the wider aspects of the CSD s original mandate as new competitive trade measures are being adopted. The delegate of Canada suggested that the CSD should examine all practices that could have harmful effects on trade and it should consider whether in that context the FAO principles of surplus disposal and consultative procedures required any revision. Most delegates favoured this proposal but EEC member countries reserved their position. The Committee therefore decided to bring this question to the attention of the Council for its consideration, together with the views expressed by the delegates. Discussion on this issue is reported in paragraphs 58-60 of the report of the Committee. The Council s decision and/or guidance on this matter will be forwarded to the Washington sub-committee for further action.
The CCP also reviewed international action relating to agricultural commodities in other fora, especially in UNCTAD and the Common Fund. In discussing the role of FAO it gave its full support to collaboration between FAO and UNCTAD in the implementation of the integrated programme for commodities. It also stressed that pending the conclusion of the protracted negotiations under the integrated programme it would be desirable for FAO commodity groups to continue their useful work of reviewing the market situation and outlook, analysing commodity trade problems and examining possible solutions. The Committee was unanimous in its desire that full use be made of the technical expertise of FAO and the intergovernmental groups in future operations of the new common fund. In this context it welcomed the technical assistance already provided by FAO in advance identification of priorities and projects for selected commodities for possible financing by the second account of the Common Fund as also the provision made in the 1982 biennium for collaboration with the Common Fund.
The Committee also considered the Secretariat report on the follow-up action to the Conference Resolution 2/79 on commodity trade protectionism and agricultural adjustment. It recommended that, to the maximum extent possible, all countries should avoid erecting new barriers and new types of restrictions to trade and should minimize existing barriers as far as and as quickly as possible. It asked the Secretariat to prepare for its next session a further review of the follow-up action to Resolution 2/79 and it encouraged the intergovernmental groups which had not already done so, to carry out as quickly as possible, the work entrusted to them under this resolution.
The Committee also reviewed progress under the existing international agricultural adjustment guidelines. The purpose was to assist the Conference discussion of this item. The Committee agreed that while there had been some positive developments in the directions indicated by the policy guidelines of international agricultural adjustment, progress had been uneven, unbalanced and had been seriously inadequate. It also agreed with the need to improve the paucity of data if the monitoring exercise was to be worthwhile.
Finally, the CCP discussed the Organization's commodities Programme of Work for 1982 for 1982/83. It valued and supported FAO s objectives, commodities intelligence work, welcomed the proposed resumption of the per caput fibres consumption survey and appreciated the assistance given to developing countries in formulating commodity policy at the country level. It agreed, however, with the economies proposed to release resources into higher priority activities.
To sum up, this was the 53rd Session of this old-established Committee dealing with the world's commodity problems. It was in my opinion a useful session. It enabled FAO Member Nations to consult together on a wide range of complex issues affecting world agricultural trade which is so very important for so many countries, both developing and developed, especially those heavily dependent on commodity exports for their foreign exchange earnings and development. I hope that the Council will endorse the CCP's report and provide guidance on the future work of the Committee.
CHAIRMAN: Thank you. The report is now open for discussion.
Sra. D. SANCHEZ (Colombia): Al intervenir sobre el tema 6, la delegación de Colombia desea señalar los elementos principales que, a nuestro juicio debe destacar sobre el documento CL 80/6. Pensamos que en el documento que se presento al Comité, el Director General hizo un buen trabajo sobre la aplicación de la Resolución 2/79 de la pasada Conferencia. Estamos de acuerdo con el Comité en que es necesario continuar examinando sistemáticamente las novedades en materia de proteccionismo, y por ello, apoyamos la solicitud a la Secretaría de preparar otro estudio al respecto, teniendo en cuenta las novedades que se produzcan en el GATT, la UNCTAD, otros foros internacionales y las conclusiones de los grupos intergubernamentales.
La delegación de Colombia piensa que debemos lamentar la situación preocupante de la reducción de los excedentes agrícolas en los países en desarrollo, y deplorar que sigan prevaleciendo los principales factores que impidieron, particularmente el año pasado, las exportaciones agrícolas de los Estados del Tercer Mundo.
Será necesario insistir ante todos los gobiernos para que resistan seria y positivamente a las presiones en favor del incremento del proteccionismo y que hagan todos los esfuerzos para reducir las actuales pesadas barreras comerciales.
Sobre el párrafo 77, donde aparecen explicaciones de algunos gobiernos, esperamos que ojalá superen las dificultades que representan los factores sociales y políticos actuales para que esos Estados puedan convertir en realidad el compromiso que adquirieron en la Cumbre de Otawa, a cuya declaración se hace referencia en el párrafo 73.
El Consejo podría transmitir a la Conferencia la esperanza de que el pronto funcionamiento del Fondo Común contribuiría a estabilizar los precios de los productos agrícolas; solo los precios remunerativos y estables así como acceso garantizado a los mercados, podrán contribuir al mayor aumento de la producción que todos deseamos.
La delegación de Colombia apoya la preparación del estudio detallado sobre los principales problemas de productos básicos solicitado en el párrafo 87 del documento 6. En relación con el párrafo 58 sobre la violación de las reglas del GATT por parte de la Comunidad Económica Europea, declaramos que la misión de Colombia ante el GATT nos ha confirmado que dos paneles que estudiaron sendas quejas de Australia y Brasil, se ocuparon de la posible violación de las reglas del GATT, al otorgar la Comunidad Económica Europea enormes subsidios a la producción de azúcar, lo cual ha constituido un factor de perturbación e inestabilidad en el mercado, párrafo 75 del documento 6, con grave perjuicio para países que, como Colombia, somos productores y venimos respetando las disposiciones del comercio del Convenio sobre el Azúcar.
Los nuevos elementos que se han introducido en la política azucarera de la Comunidad Económica Europea, a los cuales se hace referencia en el párrafo 76, parece que serán igualmente negativos o aún peores que los anteriores. Mientras se cultivan las remolachas en mayor o menor cantidad. De todos modos aceptamos la explicación de que se está en una fase experimental y abrimos un compás de espera hasta conocer las conclusiones del Grupo de Trabajo designado en el seno del GATT para estudiar el asunto, conclusiones que se conocerán en marzo del año próximo.
Proponemos que el Consejo ratifique la Resolución 30/80 del 16 período de la Conferencia Regional de América Latina y tantas otras solicitudes en el mismo sentido sobre la necesidad de que la Comunidad Económica Europea adhiera al Convenio Internacional sobre el Azúcar, o en cualquier otra forma positiva racionalice su política azucarera para evitar la prolongación de la deplorable situación actual del mercado del azúcar.
Hace dos semanas, una misión colombiana de alto nivel visitó la Comunidad Económica Europea en Bruselas, para gestionar el acuerdo técnico planteado entre el Grupo Andino y la Comunidad. Esperamos que ese acuerdo se firme antes de finalizar 1981, y que signifique un primer cambio de la política de la CEE, política que en su forma actual excluye de sus, beneficios a la gran mayoría de los países de América Latina.
Nuestra adhesión a la posición unánime de los países latinoamericanos y del Caribe, asumida en la pasada Conferencia Regional de La Habana. La actuación franca y decisiva de la misión de Colombia ante el GATT y la respuesta que nuestra misión ànte la CEE en Bruselas, obtuvo del Encargado de la Comunidad para Asuntos de América Latina, confirman que la; posición de Colombia en la FAO es plenamente coherente. Sobre las Negociaciones Comerciales Multilaterales estamos de acuerdo en que los resultados globales para el comercio agrícola han sido muy limitados. Las negociaciones Comerciales Multilaterales no han contribuido a eliminar las barreras no arancelarias ni han aumentado el flujo de divisas para los países en desarrollo.
La delegación de Colombia apoya la elaboración de un programa de acción para liberalizar el comercio de los productos agrícolas con base en la Resolución 2/79, y apoya la decisión de que los Grupos Intergu-bernamentales continúen examinando todas las formas de proteccionismo y sus repercusiones en el comercio internacional.
Apoyamos la propuesta de Canadá contenida en el párrafo 59. Este Consejo debe lamentar que no haya existido consenso para reanudar las negociaciones acerca de un Convenio sobre el Comercio del Trigo y hace un llamado urgente a la comunidad internacional a fin de que realice un esfuerzo conjunto para que se superen las dificultades y se logre cuanto antes ese convenio.
En relación con el programa de trabajo de la FAO en el campo de productos básicos, apoyamos la necesidad y conveniencia de que esta Organización continúe e intensifique el apoyo técnico que viene ofreciendo a la Organización Internacional del Café, al Consejo Internacional del Azúcar, al Consejo Internacional del Trigo y a las demás organizaciones que se ocupan de problemas que interesan a los países en desarrollo particularmente. Consideramos acertado que las actividades de la FAO en esta materia se adelanten en plena y estrecha cooperación con la UNCTAD, el GATT y los demás Organismos Internacionales competentes.
M. ZJALIC (Yugoslavia): First of all I would like to point out that we participated in the work of the Eighteenth Session of the Committee on Commodity Problems and my delegation is pleased to support and endorse this report.
Briefly I would like to make just a few comments, that the discussion during the Committee's session revealed an unfortunate fact, that agriculture exports from developing countries declined in real terms by 3 percent, though they increased by 6 percent in nominal terms; that the Committee noted lack of growth in export earnings of developing countries and further deterioration of the economic condition and deterioration in the terms of trade, particularly when we take into account that the agricultural input of developing countries rose by 23 percent. We are convinced that persisting recession in developing countries is one of the serious reasons for this unfortunate and unfavourable situation of developing countries but also we must not only mention but underline the fact that protectionism on the side of developing countries is one of the mean reasons for the deterioration in the terms of trade and the situation with export earnings of developing countries. Also that was in our view insufficient progress in implementation of the agreements reached in the multilateral trade negotiations.
My delegation supports the Canadian proposal contained in paragraph 59 and also we endorse the future Programme of Work of the Committee.
A. J.M. ISSA (Mexico): Hemos tomado nota con preocupación de las condiciones adversas que privan en los mercados de exportaciones agrícolas de los países en desarrollo; la persistencia de los bajos precios y la debilidad de la demanda afectan gravemente la situación de los productos mismos que se acentúa como consecuencia de las prácticas proteccionistas de los países desarrollados. La situación que se describe por el documento del Comité amplia y detalladamente, que nos ocupa, refleja plenamente la distancia que tenemos todavía que cubrir para alcanzar los objetivos del reajuste agrícola.
Los países subdesarrollados debemos reorientar nuestros esfuerzos. No podemos continuar vendiendo cada vez más barato nuestros productos para importar alimentos cada vez a precios más caros. Debemos, siempre que sea posible, diversificar nuestros productos y aumentar nuestra suficiencia alimentaria. Para lograrlo, tendremos que proteger a nuestros sectores agrícolas, subvencionando a nuestros productores. Este curso de acción podrá coadyuvar a mejorar la situación de los países en desarrollo más afortunados en cuanto a climas y tierras. Otros, sin embargo, tendrán que mantenerse especializados en la producción y exportación de un pequeño numero de materias primas y productos agrícolas. Para estos países es urgente encontrar garantías de acceso de sus productos a los mercados de los países desarrollados, mecanismos que permitan estabilizar, aumentar los ingresos que obtienen de las exportaciones. Debemos recordar que estos ingresos son vitales porque permiten comprar los alimentos que no pueden producir.
Nuestra delegación lamenta los escasos logros que en materia de comercio resultan del esfuerzo común. Es de gran importancia para todos el pronto funcionamiento del Fondo Común de la UNCTAD. Es también imprescindible superar el estancamiento del Convenio Internacional del Trigo, pero quizás lo fundamental resida en que el compromiso para resistir las presiones proteccionistas, conduzcan a los países desarrollados a aplicar medidas prácticas que significativamente sean adversas en esta materia. Apoyamos plenamente lo contenido en el párrafo 27 referente a la necesidad de que el Comité de Problemas de Productos Básicos cuente con un análisis profundo de las causas que determinan los fenómenos que estudia.
A esa sugerencia deseamos añadir otra de que el Comité cuente con una serie de sugerencias práticas que podrían coadyuvar a resolver los problemas de los productos básicos, las mismas sugerencias que solicitaría adoptar a las instancias que corresponden. Consideramos que un análisis a fondo sobre las causas de los problemas y una serie de medidas sugeridas para corregir los dichos efectos, podrían hacer más util el trabajo del Comité.
Sra.M. IVANKOVICH de AROSEMENA (Panamá): Pasaremos en seguida a referirnos al tema 6 del Programa sobre el Informe del 53 período de sesiones del Comité de Productos Básicos formulando algunas consideraciones.
El Capítulo II del documento 80/6 nos habla de las principales cuestiones relativas a la situación y a las perspectivas mundiales de los productos básicos. A este respecto expresamos nuestra marcada preocupación por la negativa y persistente baja de los precios de productos, como el azúcar, café, cacao y otros productos de origen tropical, aparejadas estas bajas a aumentos en los precios de productos como el trigo y cereales secundarios exportados, principalmente por países desarrollados, tal como ocurrió en 1980 y como se expresa en los párrafos 13 y 17 del documento 80/6.
Tenemos que señalar que en el caso del banano, el alza de precios del presente año como consecuencia de una brusca disminución de la oferta, obedece fundamentalmente a catástrofes naturales. A este señalamiento debemos agregar las consideraciones que sobre las barreras comerciales se formulan en el párrafo 21, y más adelante en los párrafos 74 y 75, en el sentido de que el alto nivel de los precios de sustentación de algunos países desarrollados, estimula la producción nacional a un alto costo, tanto para los
consumidores y contribuyentes de los países con políticas proteccionistas, con las funestas consecuencias para los países exportadores, que ven así disminuida su producción y sus ingresos en divisas; de aquí que nuestra delegación considere que no está de más insistir en que aquellos países que tienen alto nivel de protección examinen su política teniendo presente la necesidad de ajustes estructurales y requisitos de eficiencia, así como los objetivos de la Estrategia Internacional para el Desarrollo y de un Nuevo Orden Económico Internacional.
Por otra parte, dada la coincidencia a que se llega tanto en los debates nacionales como internacionales donde se analizan los problemas agropecuarios en general y, muy particularmente, el de la producción alimentaria en lo referente al deterioro de las relaciones de intercambio de muchos productos básicos unido al significativo aumento de los costos de producción, a los altos tipos de interés y a los incrementos de los costos de transporte, consideramos válido lo expuesto al final del párrafo 23, en el sentido de que deben señalarse en forma cada vez más exhaustiva las dimensiones, causas y efectos de estos productos.
Por ultimo, queremos referirnos en forma muy especial al banano. Lo hacemos por la importancia que este producto tiene en el conjunto de las exportaciones agrícolas, no sólo de nuestro país, sino de otros países de la región latinoamericana y en otras regiones. Al respecto, queremos manifestar, conviene que mientras se logran las adecuadas perspectivas para los elementos de un acuerdo internacional sobre el banano, el Comité de Productos Básicos reanude su examen de los hechos relacionados con la economía mundial del banano, con análisis detallados de las perspectivas a corto y mediano plazo para la oferta, la demanda y los precios. Este examen es de vital importancia para los países productores exportadores de bananos.
F. PETRELLA (Argentina): Permítame, señor Presidente, que en primer lugar felicite al Presidente del Comité por su Informe y por la claridad con que nos ha presentado las dificultades que afectan a la temática de los productos básicos. Es por eso importante respaldar la continuación de los estudios en la búsqueda de soluciones en especial de aquellas que afectan a los productos básicos especiales. En igual contexto, resulta de suma importancia, destacar otra vez el efecto negativo de las prácticas proteccionistas sobre el comercio de productos básicos. En cierto modo, parece alentadora la información que nos transmitiera acerca de las gestiones en la CEE respecto de los aceites. Resulta, pues, evidente que la cuestión de las prácticas proteccionistas debe ser mantenida dentro de los temas fundamentales del Comité.
En tal sentido la filosofía imprimida por la FAO en documentos y declaraciones oficiales deberían servirnos de inspiración fundamental.
Las gestiones de las que nos ha informado hace pocos momentos la delegación de Colombia, nos indican que debemos acentuar nuestra diligencia individual para alcanzar los objetivos fijados, particularmente los que interesan a América Latina.
Antes de concluir deseo respaldar el contenido del Informe que tenemos a nuestra consideración, así como el plan de tareas futuro del Comité.
T. AHMAD (Pakistan): Since we participated in the deliberations of the Committee, I would like only to endorse the main points and highlight the main issues.
My delegation regrets that the main factors which constrained and hampered the growth of the trade of developing countries in 1980 still prevail. The prices of major commodities continue to fall and they remained low in 1981.
We would strongly like to voice our concern about the protectionism measures, tariff and non-tariff barriers, and we endorse most of the findings and the recommendations of the Committee, particularly those contained in paragraphs 27 and 74.
I strongly urge that our governments should resist pressures for increased protectionist measures and make all efforts to reduce existing trade barriers, particularly those affecting the exports of the developing countries.
We strongly support the need for continued and systematic review of developments in protectionism, particularly in the agricultural trade.
DATO'SERI RADIN SOENARNO bin RADIN SOENARIO (Malaysia): My delegation would like to compliment the Chairman of the Committee on Commodity Problems for his summary of the deliberations of the Fifty-Third Session of the Committee.
I would like to refer this meeting to paragraph 43 of the Report. We have been closely following the proposal by the European Economic Commission to impose tax on vegetable oils. In line with this conclusion in paragraph 43 I would appreciate if the Secretariat could inform this meeting of the latest developments. It is understood that the EEC discussed this matter at this meeting on 8 September 1981. Could we be informed of the conclusions or decisions taken regarding this matter ?
Malaysia would like also to support the proposal of Argentina that protectionism be kept as an item during this Session.
P.S. MCLEAN (United Kingdom): The Chairman of the Committee mentioned in his introductory statement paragraphs 58 and 60 of the Report concerning the European Economic Community's position on the Canadian proposal in paragraph 29 and as we undertook to do, this matter has been reviewed. I think it might be helpful to the Council to hear a short statement on this point by the representative of the European Economic Community on behalf of its ten Member States. I would ask, Mr. Chairman, if you would agree to give him the floor.
B. SÜSSMILCH (EEC): I would like to speak to two positive developments in the Community. First I would like to repeat what we have said about our sugar policy in the CCP. That means that we have introduced the so-called correspondability which asks the producers for a fee of about 39.5 percent if they do not follow the discipline of the regulations.
Second, on 26 October, there was a decision of the Council of Ministers in Luxembourg that the Community should take up discussions with the representatives of the International Council to review the possibility of the eventual accession of the Community to an improved International Sugar-Agreement .
So far as the Committee on Surplus Disposal is concerned we had a coordination meeting in Brussels and we came to the following conclusion: first, that the Community is of the opinion that the CSD has fulfilled to role to mutual satisfaction; and second, therefore, there is no need to enlarge the present mandate.
G. STREEB (United States of America): I just want to make three brief comments with respect to the report, which we find very helpful and quite a laudable document.
With respect to the Canadian proposal that has been mentioned several times this morning we do not favour Council endorsement of this proposal or the need for revision. We believe that the FAO principles have served the international community well for over twenty-five years and therefore do not believe that an exercise looking towards revision or renegotiation is desirable.
Regarding the question of the adoption of this report the delegates will have noted the reservation at the bottom of page 11 which we introduced with respect to paragraph 70 on the Wheat Trade Convention. It is our assumption that when we adopt the report the United States reservation will continue to be reflected on this matter.
Finally, on the subject of protectionism we share this concern that many delegations have expressed this morning regarding protectionist measures and perhaps lack of significant developments during the MTN in the agricultural sector. On the other hand, I think that no delegation here is immune from criticism on this point. I have noted that there have been significant developments in agricultural production in a number of developing countries. Some of these were highlighted at the Cancún Conference. I think what has evolved is a recognition that in several key sectors trade barriers even in the developing countries themselves are serving as an impediment to the expansion of trade among developing countries. So I think this is indeed a subject which we all want to be quite alert to, continuing the activities towards reducing protectionism. I think this is a global problem and one which is not confined only to the developed countries markets.
H.L. CLAVERIE RODRIGUEZ (Venezuela): La delegación de Venezuela se asocia complacida a la satisfacción con que ha sido acogida por este Consejo la presentación sencilla y clara del Informe sobre el 53° período de sesiones del Comité de Problemas de Productos Básicos y desea felicitar al señor representante del Brasil por las explicaciones que nos ha extendido sobre las acciones de dicho Comité.
Una revisión de las intervenciones sobre este tema en esta mañana, da la medida de cómo específicamente la región latinoamericana es sensible al grave problema del proteccionismo y al problema de los subsidios que continúan afectando tan seriamente el comercio internacional y, especialmente, las relaciones comerciales latinoamericanas.
La delegación de Venezuela hace suyas estas observaciones, e invita a este Consejo a que eleve una vez más sus acciones en el sentido de que se limiten sus dañosas acciones. Al mismo tiempo, apoyamos la proposición de Canadá, contenida en el párrafo 59 de este Informe y extendemos igualmente esta aprobación a la materia contenida en el Informe de este Comité.
M. MUKOLWE (Kenya): I just wish to make a very brief intervention on this matter. My delegation would like to endorse the Report of the 53rd Session of the Committee on Commodity Problems. We would like particularly to underline the concern expressed by the Committee that many commodities of export interest to us in developing countries are faced with depressed market conditions which restrict the growth of our exports.
We also endorse the Committee's view on protectionism and hope that their slower trend to reduce the tariff and tariff barriers will be increased. We wish to particularly endorse the Committee's concern at the slower pace at which negotiations were proceeding on commodities covered by the UNCTAD Integrated Programme and hope that these negotiations would be expedited.
Finally, we endorse the FAO Commodity Programme of Work for 1982/83.
P.A. MORALES CARBALLO (Cuba): Solamente quiero expresar la satisfacción por haber sido elegido vicepresidente de este Consejo.
Nuestra delegación quiere sumar su voz a la de los numerosos delegados de países que han expresado su preocupación por el constante deterioro del comercio de los productos agropecuarios de los países en desarrollo, que son, como bien se sabe, la base de sus respectivas economías.
Subrayamos igualmente nuestra preocupación por la constante tendencia de las medidas proteccionistas, que afectan gravemente las economías de los países subdesarrollados.
Deseamos también reiterar nuestro apoyo a la Resolución 2/79, e insistimos en que se continúen los esfuerzos para ponerla en práctica.
Igualmente consideramos que el tema del proteccionismo debe ser el tema constante dentro de los del Comité de Productos Básicos.
CHAIRMAN: Any more speakers? Now, then, this subject has been discussed; the Report of the CCP has been well received. The debates, although brief, are very helpful both to the Committee and to the FAO Secretariat. The reservation raised by the United States on the Wheat Trade Convention is already reflected in the Report.
N. ISLAM (Assistant Director-General, Economic and Social Policy Department): There is a question regarding the latest situation on tax on domestic and imported vegetable oils by the EEC, whether the Secretariat has any latest information. The latest situation regarding the possibility that the EEC might impose a tax on domestic and imported vegetable oils was summarized in the introduction by the Chairman of the Committee on Commodity Problems earlier this morning. However, the request was made by Malaysia that the Secretariat can give a somewhat more detailed account, although the Committee will note that this is based mainly on press reports and not on official information published by the EEC Commission. After discussion of the matter, the Commission has apparently decided not to propose a tax on imported and domestic vegetable oils as one of the solutions to the problems which would result from the enlargement of the Committee to include Spain. The Commission has elaborated an overall
strategy to safeguard provisions, to maintain the balance between supply and demand for olive oil within the EEC, to limit the increase in budgetary expenditure while taking into account the interest of supplying countries of other vegetable oils.
This overall strategy is based on the following elements: introducing provisions to ensure that the ratio between the consumer price of olive oil and the competing seed oil is reduced and does not exceed the ratio of two to one, exploring with the other countries concerned all possible means to ensure maintaining the current balance between the consumption of olive oil and other oils and fats, introducing methods to promote the conversion of olive oil areas to other crops, making the transitional period for adjusting the Spanish import regime as long as possible.
When Spain enters the EEC, negotiating within Article 24.6 of the GATT, changes in the EEC import regime for oils and oil seeds, the need for the introduction of a tax on vegetable oils will be decided depending upon the results of the various other actions envisaged when the full financial effects of the Spanish entry emerge.
The Secretariat is proposing to prepare a paper for the Inter-Governmental Group on Oil Seeds on this subject later.
CHAIRMAN: I do not think it needs any more comment. In thanking Mr. de Freitas for his valuable assistance we adopt this report.
N. ISLAM (Assistant Director-General, Economic and Social Policy Department): The Third Progress Report on monitoring the progress of international agricultural adjustment in the light of eleven policy guidelines, document C 81/24, will be discussed by the Conference under Agenda item 7.1.
As you have seen from the CCP Report which has been before you, the Committee discussed progress in agricultural adjustment so as to help Conference discussions. The Committee's discussion, however, was based on a short summary of the Conference paper. Nevertheless, the views of the Committee, as expressed in paragraphs 89-91 of its Report do give some guidance to the Conference. I assume the Council may wish the Secretariat to table in Commission I the relevant section of the CCP as a paper in the Conference Room sessions. I do not know whether at this stage the Council wishes to undertake a substantive discussion of this document C 81/24. The highlights were discussed by the CCP, and the full paper will be examined by Commission I of Conference later this month.
The structure of the paper is straight forward, guideline by guideline monitoring plus an overview. The first three guidelines are concerned with production, outputs, inputs and incentives. Progress has been mixed, the four percent target still eluding countries where some 60 percent of developing country populations live. While the evidence is rather weak, it does seem as if pricing policies which result in insufficient incentives and lack of sufficient investment are two of the underlying causes of the overall relatively low growth of production. There has been progress, but it is patchy. There are considerable regional differences. The African situation is of particular concern. Developing countries have become more dependent on imports as a source of food calories. The self-sufficiency ratio for cereals for developing countries as a whole has gone down. In fact, it has gone down from 96 percent in 1977 to 93 percent in 1980. The fall has been much steeper for the middle income countries because they can afford imports. FAO has been active in what is in practice a new phase, introducing nutritional considerations in agriculture and rural development projects. Guidelines 7, 8 and 9 refer to trade and trade-related aspects. From the viewpoint of international agricultural adjustment, progress in trade is inadequate. For developing countries the basic picture is one of fast imports and slow exports. The evident need for improvement in world food security remains. There have been a number of achievements at the international level which are well known to the Council. The Common Fund for Commodities, the extension of the International Monetary Fund, Compensatory Facility are two major examples, but overall, much more remains to be done.
In production, there is little indication as yet of any significant opening-up of markets of agricul tural exports, including processed products of developing countries.
As regards assistance, the subject of Guidelines 10 and 11, the position is that the level of transfer of resources and technology referred to in Guideline 10 has not been reached. The shortfall in 1979 was over 40 percent. There has been a small increase in the share of the agricultural sector in total official external assistance.
As is well known, the target of 10 million tons of cereals as food aid has never been reached. A share of imports of cereals of the lower-income countries which are covered by food aid has steadily declined since 1976/77. The essence of any overview must be that whilst there have been some positive development indicated by the Guideline, it has been both uneven and seriously inadequate.
CHAIRMAN: We now have this item to discuss. As Mr. Islam said, it is going to the Conference, and there will be another opportunity to discuss there as well, but the subject is now open. Does anyone wish to speak?
D. SANCHEZ (Colombia): Trataré de ser mas breve esta vez.
Para una intervención tan breve como ésta, ya a las puertas de la Conferencia, este tercer informe, después de que en 1975 se aprobaran las orientaciones para el reajuste agrícola internacional, la opinion de la delegación de Colombia podría sintetizarse en parte de la afirmación que se hace en el resumen del documento C 81/24.
Durante los dos últimos años los progresos encaminados a alcanzar los objetivos del reajuste agrícola internacional fueron limitados y poco uniformes; ademas, es indudable que los temas contenidos en las once orientaciones se relacionan muy directamente con los de otros asuntos que vamos a tratar en la próxima Conferencia; de allí, que nos vayamos a limitar a hacer algunas breves consideraciones sobre ciertas orientaciones.
Orientación numero uno: Aumento de la producción alimentaria en los países en desarollo en un 4 por ciento. Ese mismo 4 por ciento fue fijado en Estrategia para el Segundo Decenio; es el mismo objetivo incluido en la Resolución l de la Conferencia Mundial de la Alimentación celebrada en el lejano 1974; y es el mismo 4 por ciento que de nuevo encontramos ahora en la Estrategia Internacional para el Tercer Decenio.
En el cuadro 1.1 del documento C/81/24 aparece el aumento limitado al 2, 4 por ciento entre 1978 y 1980 para la producción de alimentos en los países en desarrollo. Es decir, poco mas de la mitad del 4 por ciento previsto.
El amplio contenido de la orientación 3 pone de manifiesto la necesaria interdependencia en la agricultura mundial. Desafortunadamente, los países desarrollados, en muchos casos, no han disminuido, sino aumentado los incentivos a sus productores, lo cual ha creado factores de perturbación e inestabilidad en el mercado. En cuanto a los países en desarrollo, en esas condiciones resulta evidente que no están en situación muy favorable para dar incentivos adecuados a los agricultores a fin de aumentar la producción, porque sin precios remunerativos ni estables, ni acceso garantizado a los mercados los productores de países en desarrollo carecen de todo estímulo.
Orientaciones 10 y 11. Las orientaciones 10 y 11 siguen estancadas. Aún continuamos hablando de cifras correspondientes a 1974. No se han alcanzado las metas fijadas hace tantos años; se han hecho progresos muy limitados en el aumento de la producción de la agricultura; en el total de los compromisos oficiales exteriores en términos reales los compromisos multilaterales de asistencia a la agricultura aumentaron muy poco en los últimos años.
J. SCHERER (Germany, Fed. Rep. of): My delegation would like to thank the Secretariat for the detailed and informative Third Progress Report on International Agricultural Adjustments. It supplements the Secretariat's Report C 81/2 in an excellent way. Because of the connection between the individual subject matters, there are many overlappings with the discussion of agenda item 6 of the 21st Session
of the Conference. We agree that a substantive discussion on the subject before us should take place at the 21st Conference. I would like to make some remarks, nevertheless.
When the Guidelines for International Agricultural Adjustment were adopted, we were fully aware of the fact that the objectives and measures envisaged are ambitious reference points and do not claim absoluteness. Under this aspect, my delegation is of the opinion that agricultural adjustment is on the whole proceeding in a positive way.
This already applies, for example, to the implementation of Guideline 1, the increase in production by 3.3 percent in developing countries in the 1970s, is an important performance which of course can be evaluated if two meagre years are picked out.
In its comment on Guideline 2, the FAO Secretariat points out that a higher agricultural production requires above all an expansion of investment. I would place the accent otherwise. First, the agricultural policy conditions must be favourable, then investment can also be made properly. Unfortunately, there is a great number of countries where increased investment fizzles out because of an inadequate agricultural policy.
The recent World Bank Report on World Development points out clearly: "Many developing countries pursue a policy which neglects farmers." This thesis is then specified on the basis of a price policy which impedes performance. This leads me to a few remarks about Guideline 3.
I would have appreciated it if the Secretariat had pointed out more clearly to what extent developing countries have used price policy as an incentive, or not.
The comments of the Secretariat on Guideline 4 quite rightly point out the problem of food losses. The estimated loss for cereals alone amounting to 250 million tons points to action to improve the food situation of developing countries.
Allow me still a few remarks about Guidelines 7 - 11. My country considers agricultural trade a normal case of partnership cooperation with developing countries in the agricultural sector. In my comments on the results of Guideline 7, I do not want to deal with the market organization of the EEC. This is within the competence of the Community institutions. This trade system, which was commented on in point 6 which is allowing the Federal Republic of Germany to be a big importer of agricultural commodities from developing countries in 1980/81, cannot be considered a protectionist one. In 1980/81 we imported food commodities DM. 9.7 billion from developing countries which means 45 percent out of all our food imports from so-called third countries.
In its assessment of the results of implementing Guideline 8, the Secretariat quite rightly points to the stagnation of negotiations on an International Wheat Trade Agreement. Almost ten-year-efforts were unfortunately not successful to conclude a new effective agreement which would contribute, apart from its stabilization function, also to an improvement in world food securityo
To conclude, let me say a few words about Guideline 10, Agricultural Development Aid. As a positive factor it should be outlined that the official development assistance has increased since 1975 in favour of the agricultural sector. The underlying priorities for this development are part of our cooperation with developing countries.We will explain further details about this policy at the forthcoming Conference.
KONG CAN DONG (China) (original language Chinese): The Chinese delegation would like to thank the Secretariat for its report on the progress in the international agricultural adjustment in the past two years. The document provides the governments with an important clue for their discussion of problems in the development of world agriculture as it comments briefly on every item in accordance with the eleven guidelines, and in the light of the long-term development trends of international agriculture.
However, the document also indicates that for a long period of time only limited and sporadic progress has been made in the international agricultural adjustment. This is cause enough for concern.
We endorse the submission of the report to the Conference for consideration, and will be presenting our views then.
Sra. M. IVANKOVICH DE AROSEMENA (Panama): Nos referiremos en esta oportunidad al tema 7 de propresos del reajuste agrícola internacional, recogido en el documento CL 81/24 consecuente con lo que esta delegación ha expresado, tanto en este Consejo como en otros debates sobre el tema. Tenemos que expresar nuestro desaliento y preocupación por el hecho de que los progresos del reajuste agrícola hayan sido desiguales y en conjunto gravemente deficientes. Mi delegación está muy de acuerdo con el razonamiento de que la clave para lograr de manera más satisfactoria los objetivos del reajuste agrícola internacional, reside principalmente en un incremento más rápido de la producción alimentaria en los países en desarrollo. En esto influyen tanto factores externos como internos.
Sobre los factores externos, nos hemos referido en nuestra anterior intervención. Con relación a los factores internos, estamos muy de acuerdo en que es esencial incentivar a los productores para incrementar la producción conforme a la orientación 3 del reajuste agrícola internacional, que señala además aspectos que tienen que ver con un adecuado uso de tecnología, con una concepción de equidad social, una plena integración de la población rural, un adecuado uso de los recursos naturales, teniendo en cuenta los particulares intereses de los países en desarrollo.
Nosotros queremos destacar la relación existente entre los objetivos de esta Orientación y el Reajuste Agrícola Internacional y lo aprobado en la Declaración de Principios y Programas de Acción de la Conferencia Mundial sobre Reforma Agraria y Desarrollo Rural, celebrada en esta sede en junio de 1979. De acuerdo con esta Orientación, podemos expresar a este Consejo, que Panamá se empeña actualmente en una incentivación a la producción, tanto agropecuaria como agroindustrial y forestal, mediante el establecimiento de tasas preferenciales de interés, el establecimiento de mecanismos nacionales de captación de recursos financieros. Estos acuerdos con las ventajas que nos da nuestro principal recurso natural que es nuestra posición geográfica. Los incentivos a que hacemos referencia, cubren aspectos tales como el de exoneración a los gravámenes de importación sobre insumos agropecuarios, así como exoneraciones de la renta gravable generada por la producción agropecuaria dentro de estos márgenes, los mismos que las tarifas preferenciales en la instalación y consumo de energía electrica a utilizar en actividades productivas agropecuarias, y básicamente en aquellos dirigidos a la producción de alimentos, sin excluir los asuntos reglamentarios afines a la utilización y uso adecuado de las tierras.
Con relación al contenido y objetivos de las restantes diez Orientaciones del Reajuste Agrícola Internacional, esta delegación ha expresado en etapas anteriores, la aceptación de las mismas en términos generales. Igualmente, a la luz de los progresos alcanzados en estas directrices, subrayamos e insistimos en los insatisfactorios logros alcanzados sobre todo en el marco internacional con relación a los adelantos de la orientación 7. Sobresale el hecho del lento crecimiento de los mercados para productos tropicales así como la competencia de las exportaciones procedentes de los países en desarrollo, a menudo ayudadas por subsidios y continuas restricciones a la importación en los principales mercados de los países desarrollados, así como en otros países en desarrollo. Así lo expresa el párrafo 60 del documento C 81/24.
Por otra parte, refiriéndonos a la orientación 8 sobre Seguridad Alimentaria sobresale igualmente el hecho de que al término de los años agrícolas nacionales 1980/1981, los remanentes de cereales descenderán probablemente a 220 millones de toneladas, lo que equivale a aproximadamente el 14 por ciento del consumo anual. Cuando la secretaría de esta Organización lo estima en un 17-18 por ciento, como queda expresado claramente en el párrafo 69.
Es frente a estos indicadores negativos que mi delegación destaca con satisfacción la adopción del Convenio constituyente del Fondo Común, el cual tiene como uno de sus objetivos básicos el logro de precios remunerativos para los productos, y justos para los consumidores; esto a través de su primera y segunda cuenta. Esperamos por tanto el feliz inicio de las operaciones de este Fondo.
Finalmente, tal y como se señala en el informe final de la Consulta Gubernamental sobre la Revisión y actualización de orientaciones para el reajuste agrícola internacional, nuestra delegación realmente cree que estas directrices constituyen un marco normativo de carácter global que, en un mundo obligatoriamente interdependiente, deben tener en cuenta con países al decidir sus propias políticas nacionales. De aquí que nuestro Ministro de Desarrollo Agropecuario tendrá muy en cuenta el contenido y objetivo de estas orientaciones como referencia en su declaración-informe que hará en la 21 Conferencia de esta Organización.
M. DE LOS SANTOS (Mexico): Debemos reiterar el agradecimiento al excelente análisis presentado por la Secretaría. Como es necesario, se ha buscado identificar las causas de los fenómenos facilitando a las delegaciones la comprensión y situación que prevalece en relación a la aplicación de las directrices del reajuste agrícola. Nuestra delegación sólo desea hacer un comentario especial con relación a los últimos indicadores que se refieren a la cooperación internacional.
Un fenómeno que sigue preocupando es el que se presenta en relación a la Orientación 7, el lento crecimiento de las exportaciones agrícolas de los países subdesarrollados, si se le compara con el de sus importaciones de alimentos. A nuestro entender, esto refleja una compleja situación que es necesario modificar en la medida de lo posible aumentando la diversificación de la producción en los países pobres, y dando pasos efectivos para garantizar el acceso de los productos de estos; países a los grandes mercados, y así estabilizar e incrementar los ingresos que obtienen de la exportación.
La situación comercial de los países subdesarrollados ha venido empeorando, según se nos informa en los comentarios a la Orientación 9. La erosión del valor adquisitivo del excedente comercial pone a los países pobres en una de las situaciones más difíciles de los últimos años. Preocupa aún más el que se trate en este caso de una tendencia que se viene acentuando año con año. Es difícil hacer un balance equilibrado de la aplicación de las orientaciones, si bien hay que reconocer progresos en algunos campos. Nos parece que la situación general aún deja mucho que desear. Esto queda confirmado por el rezago de los países menos desarrollados y por la persistencia del hambre. Las orientaciones mismas no establecen compromisos que sean imposibles de cumplir, pero si en estos años no logramos aplicarlos, seguramente en el futuro deberemos revisar las orientaciones elevando las metas porque no habremos logrado vencer el rezago.
O. AWOYEMI (Nigeria): My comments will be addressed mainly to Guideline l where it appears that reports from various sources have indicated that there is a steady increase in food imports, there is a decline in local food production and we find that one of the difficulties which some developing countries face with respect to international agricultural advancement has to do with prices of imported food versus the price of locally produced foods. We find that foods which are produced at highly subsidized rates in developed countries are exported to developing countries at fairly low prices and thus present problems for local producers who find themselves unable to sell their locally produced foods at the imported price. While this may be a short-term advantage to urban dwellers who may have access to cheap foods, it is in the long run a serious disincentive to local production.
I therefore think it is necessary for a means to be devised by which developed countries work closely together with developing countries to ensure that foods locally produced, as well as imported, are adjusted, to the extent that locally produced foods do not face any serious disabilities as a result of importation of food from advanced countries.
G. STREEB (United States of America): Again, we would like to compliment the Secretariat on the useful analysis contained in document C81/24 and I presume that it will be possible to go into this problem in much greater detail during the Conference.
There are several points we would like to make regarding the document at this time. One in particular is that we think it is unfortunate that the analysis does not cover the centrally planned economies of Eastern Europe. It is well known that the grain import requirements of this region have, in particular since 1973 and 1974, continued to have a major impact on trade and on world stock requirements; and it seems to us that any attempt to analyse policies of international agricultural adjustments must take into account the import requirements of the major region. In a similar fashion we do not think that the data adequately cover the changes in the higher-income developing countries. National economic development here has emphasized exports of non-agricultural commodities, which in turn facilitates the purchase of foodstuffs. I recognize that there are concerns that have been expressed here this morning regarding import levels as compared to exports. I am reminded of a recent report by the Secretary General of UNCTAD in which, in one part of the report, he praised the fact that the relative share of manufactures in LDC exports had increased significantly, and in another part lamented the fact that the relative share of agriculture went down. You cannot get both, so one has to go up at the expense of the other reality.
I think that there are good economic cases in which, in developing countries, the food self-sufficiency per se would not make for good policy. I am not saying that we do not appreciate the concerns that have been expressed for many countries here, but I do not think one can generalize too much about the situation for all of the developing countries, and I think that is highlighted particularly in the report where the issue of the world food problem is identified as one that is particularly a serious situation for the less developed countries of Africa. The recent Conference on the Least Developed Countries held in Paris appropriately focussed attention on these countries and the requirements for national and international action to improve the situation in this region.
We would like to note that that part of the analysis which compares the given performance with multilateral institutions of funding agricultural projects with the lagging bilateral activities in this sector as a principal contributor to the multilateral institutions. My government has been very much in the forefront and particularly in the last several years, in urging that these institutions give much higher priority to the food and agricultural projects and in our own Aid Programmes we now allocate almost 50 percent of our resources to food, nutrition and agriculture in rural development projects.
On the question of stocks of grain and their adequacy, I would like to point out that we have urged other countries to build and carry reserve stocks as called for by the FAO 5-Point Plan of Action. The United States now has adequate carry-over stock level with about 12 million tonnes in the farmer owned reserve and we consider these as important reserves for commercial transactions and as bulwark against wide swings in prices. The government owned wheat reserves amount to about 4 million tonnes. These are used to back up our Food Aid commitments.
With respect to the observations of some of the guidelines; I did not know that this item would be on the agenda this morning and I do not have my documents with me and the notations I made on it. One general observation I do recall is that there are many aspects of this report which point to the inadequacy of data and yet an attempt is made to draw conclusions based on this data and I think it is a very shaky analysis upon which to base conclusions and I would be much more reserved in some of the conclusions that have been drawn in this report, particularly with respect to national nutritional levels and so forth where it is quite clear that the data are simply too weak to support conclusions and I think this similar conclusion can be drawn with respect to the adequacy of investment.
Finally, let me just endorse the comments which were made by the delegate of the Federal Republic of Germany in his opening point in which he pointed out that the guidelines must be seen as reference points rather than taken as absolutes.
P. ELMANOWSKY (France): Mon intervention sera brève sur ce point car, effectivement, les points de l ordre du jour 6 et 7 de la Conférence vont nous absorber longuement. Simplement, les remarques que j aimerais faire au sujet des progrès sur l'ajustement agricole international c'est que tout d abord nous n'avons pas de surprise particulière en lisant le document C 81/24, nous en avons déjà largement parlé il y a un peu plus d'un mois au Comité des produits et la situation, évidemment, n'a pas changé depuis lors.
La seule remarque que je ferai touche un peu au fond et concerne les lignes d'orientation elles-mêmes; c'est que, lorsque ces lignes d'orientation avaient été adoptées en 1975, si je me souviens bien, on pensait qu'elles seraient en quelque sorte un guide pour les pays pour développer et mettre en oeuvre leur politique agricole en particulier et leur politique alimentaire également. En fait, au fil des années, on s'aperçoit que ces lignes d'orientation ont moins servi en quelque sorte de lignes directrices pour définir les politiques des uns et des autres pays développés ou pays en développement, mais que leur principal intérêt maintenant est en quelque sorte de permettre d'essayer de dégager des indicateurs pour mesurer les progrès établis d'une conférence à l'autre et, comme le disait déjà le Secrétariat lui-même dans le document qui nous avait été soumis lors du Comité des produits, l'évaluation des résultats est handicapée (c'était dans le paragraphe 3 du document du Comité des produits) par la pénurie de données dans nombre de domaines sur lesquels sont axés les lignes d'orientation, en particulier pour la nutrition, pour les groupes vulnérables, pour la consommation, pour les investissements et il apparaissait qu'en fait les données sont tellement floues que les conclusions qu'on pouvait tirer sur ces points ne pouvaient être qu'approximatives et n'avaient donc qu'une valeur toute relative.
Je me souviens qu'au Comité des produits une délégation - je ne sais plus laquelle - avait été amenée à exprimer des doutes sur l'utilité de consacrer des ressources à la surveillance des progrès si. comme l'indiquait le Secrétariat, il était si difficile et môme impossible, de voir, pour certaines lignes, de réunir les données de base à partir desquelles des conclusions pourront être dégagées. Cette remarque était peut-être un peu excessive mais je vous la rappelle pour vous mettre en garde contre une confiance absolue dans ce qui a pu être essayé d'être mesuré.
Mais il y a aussi une chose qui était importante et qui avait été dégagée par le Comité des produits en ce qui concerne son jugement sur l'ajustement agricole international comme moyen du développement agricole, c est que le point essentiel était une croissance plus rapide de la production alimentaire dans les pays en développement pour permettre de mieux réaliser les objectifs de l'ajustement agricole international. Tant que l'on n'aura pas commencé par développer véritablement la croissance de la production alimentaire, les résultats sur les autres points de i'ajustement agricole international seront difficiles à réaliser et à partir de là, bien évidemment, il y aurait certaines conséquences, peut-être pénibles, il prendre pour les pays en développement eux-mêmes.
Nous reviendrons en détail lors de la Conférence sur le document lui-même. En effet, ce document sur l'ajustement et sur l'examen de ses progrès a servi en définitive à préparer toute l'analyse de la situation mondiale de l'agriculture et de l'alimentation inscrite au point 6 et il inspire une grande partie de ce qui sera discuté au point 7: "Stratégie internationale du développement de l'alimentation et de l'agriculture". Nous en reparlerons donc à ce moment-là.
S. MURTAZA (Pakistan): We join the other delegates who have already expressed their appreciation of the document C 81/24 which reflects the progress on agricultural adjustment.
A careful study of the document brings out the fact that in spite of a lot of effort in the past at national and international levels to improve the food and nutrition situation there are still areas where almost no improvement has been recorded, while in other areas the same has not been up to the mark.
The 11 guidelines adopted by the FAO Conference for 1975 still seem to be far from having been fully implemented or achieved. We consider it appropriate that the progress as indicated by the documents should be discussed in detail by the 21st Conference. We are certainly of the view that the monitoring which has resulted in the production of this document should continue. In whichever context such documents are utilized in future may not be important, the most important fact which we can assess at present is that production of such documents shall certainly be in the interest of us all, by providing important information.
S. AIDARA (Senegal): Ma délégation a eu l'occasion d'étudier ce document, ce troisième rapport sur l'ajustement agricole international. Nous voudrions d'ailleurs à cet égard remercier le Secrétariat. Comme nous le savons, le problème est très important, notamment pour les pays en développement, singulièrement en Afrique au moment où la plus haute priorité est accordée à l'agriculture et ceci d'ailleurs depuis déjà quelques années, au moment où également tous les efforts dans les pays en développement tendent vers l'autosuffisance alimentaire nationale, comme collective du reste, sur la base de réserves nationales et de réserves régionales. Je voudrais tout simplement donner à cet égard l'exemple du CILS.
Mais mon intention n'est pas ici d'entrer dans les détails, ma délégation aura l'occasion d'examiner toutes ces lignes d'orientation au cours des débats en Commission lors de la Conférence générale. Je voudrais tout simplement remercier le Professeur N. Islam qui a introduit cette question et je pense que le texte de sa déclaration pourrait constituer une bonne base de référence pour les futures discussions en Commission au cours de la Conférence générale. C'est pour cela que je proposerai que le texte de son introduction soit distribué.
H.L. CHAWLA (India): We greatly appreciate the effort of the FAO Secretariat, particularly Professor Nurul Islam, to give us an idea of the progress in regard to this important subject of international agricultural adjustment. The Indian delegation in the FAO Conference will like to go into details and here, due to the time constraint, I will highlight only two or three points in this regard.
As regards this call for a faster and more stable rate of growth in world agricultural production, I must say that India, which started its struggle for self-sufficiency in food, right from the beginning of the 1950's, has achieved a considerable degree of progress in this direction. Our food grains production around 1950 was 55 million tonnes. It increased to about 90 million tonnes in 1965 and now we have it around 130 million tonnes. The highest achievement on record has been 132 million tonnes per year. Particularly in the case of wheat it may be worth mentioning that whereas in 1950 we had less than 7 million tonnes and in 1965 slightly below 12 million tonnes, the latest production in the year 1980/81 has
been of the order of 36.46 million tonnes. I do not want to burden this meeting with figures but in the case of rice the level of production has risen by almost 2½ times over the 30 years, and by and large India is self-sufficient in foodgrains. At the same time for raising nutritional levels and to cope with the rising demand, efforts for raising production are being continuously stepped up.
It will be worth mentioning that in our sixth five-year plan for 1980/85 agricultural and allied sectors are being provided with over 12 500 crores of rupees of outlay, and irrigation another 12 160 crores of rupees. In irrigation our target is to achieve an additional irrigated area of 2.8 million hectares per year or 14 million hectares over five years.
I join some fellow delegates who have mentioned some of the worries in regard to prices of fertilizers, energy, and so on. Those constraints are there and I think that in the later detailed discussions these will be brought out.
On the item incentives, I just want to mention that price policy has been a positive input in our agricultural policy with effect from the mid-sixties. The whole framework of price policy, marketing support and new production strategy was taken up simultaneously in the mid-sixties and this policy has generally produced good results. In more recent years we have particularly seen to it that in the face of rising costs of inputs the producer is not put to loss and he must be able to recover his cost of production and slightly more in order to keep up the incentive for the adoption of new technology.
In the case of paddy, for example, the price per quintal was rupees 74 in 1976/77 and it is rupees 115 per quintal in the current year. Similarly, in the case of wheat the price was rupees 110 per quintal in 1976/77 and it was rupees 130 last year. For the current years crop the price has still to be fixed.
I may also add that there is a continuous monitoring over the cost of production in India and every season when this procurement or minimum support price is fixed, we do take into account the rice in the cost of inputs so that the farmer is assured of a certain minimum price for the increased production which he is trying to achieve.
An important item in this IAA strategy is the rising share for developing countries in a general expansion of agricultural trade. Many of our friends from South America have already spoken in the context of the previous item on the need for expansion of agricultural exports. I would like to join them in saying that the world community must give adequate attention to this matter.
Aid and trade are the two means which enable the developing countries to earn foreign exchange or to be able to have the resources to import their needs. These needs include energy, fertilizers, machinery and many other things today.
Unfortunately it so happens that when the climate is difficult for aid it is also difficult for trade. But it is an occasion when one has to think that if aid cannot be stepped up, particularly in real terms, then trade must fill the gap. The efforts of UNCTAD, the Commodities Fund, etc. have given hope to developing countries. I wish to stress that the problems of the trade of agricultural commodities should not only receive attention, as they are receiving, but quick attention, so that the developing countries are in a better position to have exchange earnings and to accelerate their own development and gradually come to a level at which they do not need aid and are able to help each other better.
CHAIRMAN: That exhausts the list of speakers. We will come back to this item in Conference; therefore, those of you who have anything more to add will have an opportunity to do so.
The meeting rose at 12.30 hours
La séance est levée à 12 h 30
Se levanta la sesión a las 12.30 horas
