Contributions Matters
Contributions
Asuntos relativos a las cuotas
M. BEL HADJ AMOR (Président du Comité financier): Tout d'abord, je voudrais remercier, non seulement • au nom du Comité des finances, mais également au nom du Comité du Programme, en l'absence du Président de ce dernier Comité, tous les délégués qui ont bien voulu appuyer nos recommandations.
A présent, je voudrais me référer à la question qui nous concerne cet après-midi, à savoir la situation financière de l'Organisation. D'après le calendrier des travaux qui a été distribué sous la cote CL 80/OD/2, les délégués ont pu se rendre compte que cette question comporte plusieurs volets. Je vais essayer d'être le plus bref possible et le plus clair possible en les prenant dans l'ordre où ces volets figurent dans le document que j'ai cité. Comme je vais certainement monopoliser pendant un certain temps la parole, je demanderai bien sûr l'indulgence et la patience du Conseil.
Je commence par la question des contributions. Le Conseil est prié d'abord de se référer aux paragraphes 3.31, 3.40 du rapport du Comité des finances. Ce rapport est complété par un document qui a été distribué ce matin par le Secrétariat. Il s'agit du document CL 80/LIM/1. Ainsi le Conseil peut constater que le tableau qui a été présenté au paragraphe 3.31 concernant la situation des contributions courantes est mis à jour par le document récemment distribué par le Secrétariat. En effet, depuis le 24 septembre, le Secrétariat a reçu de nouvelles contributions mais je dois également compléter le tableau du dernier rapport présenté par le Secrétariat par trois toutes récentes informations que j'ai reçues cet après-midi. Il s'agit des nouvelles contributions reçues après le 31 octobre. Les pays concernés sont le Viet Nam, la Tchécoslovaquie et la Guinée. Bien sûr, avec les nouvelles contributions le taux de recouvrement que vous avez dans le premier rapport du Comité des finances a changé. Actuellement, ce taux s'élève à 72, 87%. Si nous comparons ce taux de recouvrement avec le taux de recouvrement des années précédentes à la même période, nous constatons qu'il reste plus bas. En effet, à titre de référence, je peux vous les citer très rapidement.
En 1977, année de Conférence, à la même période le taux de recouvrement des contributions s'élevait à 92, 30 pour cent. Cela signifie qu'il y a presque 20 pour cent en moins.
En 1979, toujours année de Conférence, le taux de recouvrement pour la même période s'élevait à 94, 83 pour cent.
Si j'ai insisté sur ces pourcentages, c'est que la question présente une grande importance, et c'est au vu de la gravité de cette situation que vous serez saisis tout à l'heure d'un ensemble de propositions qui ont été discutées par le Comité des finances et qui seront soumises à votre approbation. A la lumière de ces chiffres, le Comité des finances considère que le taux de recouvrement n'est pas du tout satisfaisant, et le Comité continue à se préoccuper très sérieusement de la gravité de la situation des contributions courantes, et des arriérés de contributions également, car cela pose d'énormes problèmes et cause à la trésorerie de l'Organisation et à l'exécution de son programme des répercussions très négatives. Le taux reste, comme je l'ai déjà dit, plus faible que la part proportionnelle des crédits budgétaires. A cet égard, et j'insiste sur ce point car la question a été longuement discutée par le
Comité des finances, le Comité souhaite que le Conseil partage vivement ses préoccupations et en fasse rapport à la Conférence, notamment à la lumière du paragraphe 3, 33 de son rapport, à la lumière de la nécessité du respect du Règlement financier de l'Organisation et à la lumière de la nécessité de ne pas constituer un fardeau supplémentaire aux Etats Membres qui font honneur ponctuellement à leurs obligations.
Le Conseil, de l'avis du Comité, est appelé à noter en particulier les efforts du Directeur général pour protéger les intérêts financiers de l'Organisation. Il est appelé à l'encourager dans cette voie, car cette situation - et j'insiste sur le mot - sans précédent met l'efficacité de l'Organisation en danger, ce qui a d'ailleurs amené le Directeur général à proposer au Comité des finances, et par le truchement de ce Comité au Conseil et à la Conférence, un ensemble de mesures qui, comme je l'ai dit tout à l'heure, est destiné à affronter ce genre de situation si jamais elle se répète.
D'ailleurs, cette situation, de l'avis du Comité, est d'autant plus préoccupante qu'un important bailleur de fonds a annoncé qu'il aurait l'intention d'envisager la modification des pratiques du versement de ses contributions, contrairement à ce qui est indiqué par le Règlement financier. En effet, et je dois le rappeler au Conseil au nom du Comité, toutes les contributions devraient être versées au plus tard au mois de février de chaque année. Le Comité insiste sur la gravité de la situation et espère obtenir l'appui du Conseil à ses recommandations.
A propos des arriérés de contributions, la situation n'est pas moins préoccupante. Le nombre des pays concernés est élevé et je crois qu'il est évalué maintenant à 22. Quatre d'entre eux, je dirais même cinq, risquent de perdre leur droit de vote lors de la prochaine Conférence. Il est à signaler à cet égard que la République Centre-africaine a fait une requête pour payer ses arriérés par tranches. Cette requête sera soumise a la Conférence dans les prochains jours.
Là encore, le Conseil, de l'avis du Comité, doit lancer un appel à ces pays pour qu'ils règlent leurs arriérés au plus vite. Il doit également demander au Directeur général de n'épargner aucun effort pour obtenir le versement de ces contributions.
Enfin, le Conseil voudra bien prendre note, aux paragraphes 3, 39 et 3, 40, des nouvelles demandes d'admission émanant de trois pays, et les propositions pour le taux de contributions à appliquer à ces pays, compte tenu des recommandations du Comité des contributions, lesquelles recommandations sont actuellement soumises à l'Assemblée générale des Nations Unies à New-York.
CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Chairman of the Finance Committee. The floor is open for discussion.
L. LAOWHAPHAN (Thailand): Having listened to the very clear and concise introduction made by the Chairman of the Finance Committee, and having read with great attention the excellent documents prepared by the Secretariat, my delegation would like to express its concern at the unprecedently serious position of contributions, despite the intensive and special efforts of the Director-General, This situation could lead to very serious consequences both for the Organization and for Member Nations, should the present situation be repeated in future biennia.
In this regard my delegation would like to appeal to Member Nations concerned to make every effort to effect payments without further delay. In this connection my delegation also endorses the draft resolution to be proposed to the Conference as related in paragraph 3.52 of document CL 80/4.
G. STREEB. (United States of America): I was going for once to save Colombia the difficulty of having to start the discussion for every one of these issues. From the latest information I have, all I can anticipate is that the FAO Representative in Washington has suddenly run off to Brazil with $13 1/2 million in the cheque that was given to him yesterday. In any case, my information is that, consistent with our policy of payments in the fourth quarter, we have passed to the FAO Representative in Washington approximately $13.7 million. While this may not be entirely satisfactory to everyone here, in terms of our approach at least for the table in Appendix A, it does alleviate considerably the arrearages that are in the second column and, to a considerable extent, those that are in the third column. I assume that the fact that we have made the bulk of our payment will now be reported in due course to the Secretariat here.
I do notice that there are quite a number of countries which have outstanding payments and I think our position and the rationale for our policy of gradually making most of our payments in the fourth quarter of a calendar year or the first quarter of our new fiscal year is quite clear. We have explained this several times in terms of our budget's scale. It is the only way that we can go to the Congress and specify exactly the amount of money that we need for the next year and to have
our payments match our own budget scale. I give this only by way of explanation. I understand and appreciate that there continues to be concern about this approach but it is a fact of life and we feel it is much fairer to the Organization to make it quite clear what the basis of our payments is and the timing of those payments. At the same time, however, I would probably be a bit remiss if I did not register some concern about the fact that our clear policy is criticized while the late payment of many other countries, which is not explained, is left uncommented upon, but I share the concern of the Chairman that at least by the end of this year as many of these arrearages as possible be cleared up and the account for the full year be brought into full balance.
RAMADHAR (India): I would like to support what has been said earlier by the delegate of Thailand, that the financial position of the Organization as spelled out by the Chairman of the Finance Committee is really a matter of great concern to all of us and this Council being the governing body of the Organization should take serious note of that.
We are not here to point accusing fingers at those who have defaulted in payment or to those whose policies, whatever those policies are, have led to this state of affairs but the fact remains that the Organization has very difficult times ahead so as far as the financial position is concerned and I do not know what we can do at this stage except that this Council should make a strong appeal to those, including the defaulters, as well as to such countries whose policies have created a financial position, to heed to it and to see that the payments are made in time and the arrears are cleared and even such countries that have their policies of making payments in contravention of the financial contributions of the Organization. They may like to have concern in view of the financial difficulties of the Organization for there is some need of flexibility in those policies.
K.R. HIGHAM (Canada): As a member of this Organization in good standing, financially at least, Canada can only support the pleas of the Chairman of the Finance Committee for all members to honour their responsibilities to this Organization and to the United Nations system as a whole. Canada, of course, has always accepted the rule of the majority on such matters and recognizes its share of the approved budgets by prompt payment. Approval and enthusiasm for budget growth carries with it we think similar responsibilities.
H.N. MUKUTU (Zambia): I would like to put on record the fact that Zambia sent its payment to FAO on the 19th of October 1981 through the Bank of Zambia to the Bank of England and that payment should have reached FAO by now. If it has not we will follow the matter up and see what has happened.
M. BEL HAD J AMOR (President du Comité financier): Avant de poursuivre, je voudrais faire un ou deux commentaires, à propos de cette question, sur les réactions de certains délégués.
Tout d'abord, je voudrais remercier le délégué du Canada de nous avoir rappelé la régularité du versement des contributions de son pays. Cela est vrai. Il n'y a jamais eu de critique concernant un retard de la contribution du Canada. Je voudrais le remercier au nom du Comité des finances.
La deuxième remarque concerne le Comité financier lui-même. Je n'avais jamais pensé que les appels du Comité financier pouvaient être parfois aussi efficaces. En effet, au moment où je vous lançais un appel au nom de ce Comité, une communication téléphonique venant de Washington, exactement à 14 h 50, annonçait le versement d'une grande partie de la contribution des Etats-Unis d'Amérique. Aussi je confirme ce que le délégué des Etats-Unis nous a dit, et je précise qu'il ne s'agit pas de 13 millions mais de 13 millions 735.112 dollars. Cela change le pourcentage du taux de recouvrement, qui devient ainsi 78 pour cent. Cependant, comparé au taux de 1979, année de Conférence, il y a encore une différence entre 78 et 94 pour cent.
Je remercie le délégué des Etats-Unis de nous avoir informé de ce versement et j'espère que d'autres efforts seront faits, non pas seulement pour ce biennium, mais surtout pour les bienniums futurs, car ce sont eux qui préoccupent le Comité des finances qui insiste pour que les versements soient faits à temps.
A propos de la remarque que le délégué des Etats-Unis a faite concernant les critiques, je tiens à souligner que le Comité des finances ne vise pas par ces critiques un grand pays mais qu'il s'élève toujours contre le principe même du retard des versements des contributions. Qu'il s'agisse de 10 000 dollars ou de 10 millions, pour le Comité des finances le principe reste toujours critiquable.
Mais pour être plus réaliste, les délégués des grands bailleurs de fonds doivent quand même reconnaître que dans la mesure où il y aurait un retard dans leurs versements, les répercussions sur la bonne exécution du programme de l'Organisation seraient plus grandes que s'il s'agit d'un pays qui ne verse que 50 000 dollars en deux ans. C'est pour cela que le Comité des finances se montre beaucoup plus insistant auprès des grands bailleurs de fonds, mais le principe reste le même; les contributions doivent être versées à temps.
Special Reserve Account
Compte de réserve spécial
Cuenta especial de reserva
Je voudrais passer maintenant à la deuxième question inscrite à l'ordre du jour concernant la situation financière de l'Organisation. Il s'agit du Compte de réserve spécial. Les paragraphes du rapport y relatifs sont 3.45 et 3.49. Plus spécialement, il s'agit de deux aspects de cette question: la situation de ce Compte et le mode proposé pour son réapprovisionnement.
Tout d'abord, le Comité souhaite rappeler au Conseil que ce Compte a été créé pour aider à protéger le Programme de travail et budget des effets des dépenses supplémentaires non inscrites au budget. De même, il faudrait rappeler que des propositions de modifications concernant le niveau et l'utilisation de ce Compte ont été examinées respectivement par le Comité à sa session de printemps et par le Conseil à sa session de juin. Il est inutile de revenir là-dessus.
A cette session, le Conseil est appelé à considérer la situation du Compte et son réapprovisionnement. Il faudra noter à cet égard, qu'en raison de l'écart favorable entre le taux de change de la lire utilisé pour le calcul du budget 1980-81 et le taux effectif des Nations Unies, le niveau du solde du Compte s'élevait fin août à plus de 14, 5 millions de dollars. Si cette tendance favorable se maintenait, le niveau du Compte de réserve spécial pourrait atteindre à la fin du biennium le montant de 19 millions de dollars, après financement des dépenses supplémentaires non inscrites au budget. Les modifications pour ce compte, telles qu'approuvées par le Conseil en juin dernier portent le niveau initial du compte de réserve spécial à 5 pour cent du budget opérationnel effectif. Au vu du niveau du budget proposé pour 82-83 à savoir 368, 016 millions de dollars au taux de 1 dollar = 1175 lires le niveau du compte serait de 18, 4 millions de dollars. En principe les fonds disponibles sur ce compte seraient suffisants pour réapprovisionner ce compte et le Comité soumet à cet égard une résolution au Conseil pour sa transmission à la Conférence. Il s'agit de la résolution … excusez-moi, j'ai confondu avec le fonds de roulement …
La dernière remarque concernant le compte de réserve c'est que le solde après réapprovisionnement du compte qui resterait de 19 millions de dollars serait viré aux recettes accessoires.
CHAIRMAN: Any comments on the Special Reserve Account?
W.A.F. GRABISCH (Germany, Fed. Rep. of): I just wish to recall that at the 79th Session my delegation was not in agreement with the proposed increase of the Special Reserve Account, nor with the change of the different rules which are therein.
G. STREEB (United States of America): Just simply to say that my position is the same as the Federal Republic of Germany.
K.R. HIGHAM (Canada): Just to ensure that what we send forward from Council to Conference leaves us fully flexible and free to discuss in complete depth this question when our specialist will be here and able to deal with it more completely.
CHAIRMAN: Whatever we send to Conference will be fully debated; there are no restrictions on it. If there is nothing more then, Chairman of the Finance Committee, can you go on to the next item.
Working Capital Fund
Fonds de roulement
Fondo de Operaciones
M. BEL HADJ AMOR (Président du Comité financier): Je voudrais seulement faire une précision. Je n'ai pas du tout oublié les positions de certains pays au dernier Conseil où nous avons étudié cette question et c'est pour cela, et je suis certain que l'interprétation est exacte, eue je ne la tiens pas pour argent comptant et la question sera rediscutée plus tard dans les commissions de la Conférence. A présent je voudrais aborder la question du fonds de roulement. La question du fonds de roulement aura deux aspects. D'abord la situation et la reconstitution du niveau actuel, ensuite il y a une proposition pour le relèvement du niveau de ce fonds. Je les soumettrai séparément.
D'abord en ce qui concerne la situation et la reconstitution j'invite le Conseil à considérer les paragraphes 3.50 - 3.52. Le Conseil se rappelle qu'il a accepté en juin dernier un prélèvement sur le fonds de roulement pour financer les dépenses supplémentaires non inscrites au budget. En raison de l'evolution du montant de ces dépenses le Comité a été informé que le prélèvement des ressources intégrales de ce fonds, à savoir, 6, 5 millions de dollars environ s'averera nécessaire. Au terme du règlement financier le mode de remboursement de ce prélèvement est déterminé par la Conférence. Avec un peu d'optimisme, on peut espérer que les pays membres paieront leurs contributions en temps voulu d'ici la fin du biennium. Si ce fait se vérifiait il en résulterait un excédent de trésorerie assez suffisant pour rembourser le montant prélevé sur le fonds de roulement. A cet égard le Comité recommande au Conseil de soumettre à la Conference pour approbation le projet de résolution figurant au paragraphe 3.52.
CHAIRMAN: This item is now open for discussion. There is a draft resolution to be recommended for the Conference if members agree.
G. STREEB (United States of America): We are having a little difficulty in understanding this resolution Not having been on the Finance Committee we do not have all the explanations. I am not sure whether it is appropriate to ask for those explanations here or if we do it in private. But given the fact that the issue of replenishment of the Working Capital Fund per se seems to me to be a very straightforward routine operation, I am confused first of all what it is about the regulations that does not make it straightforward, and secondly what the very last paragraph of the Resolution means, particularly the part 'notwithstanding the provisions of the Financial Regulations'. In reading that for the first time I have the impression that we are trying to change something and bypass some existing regulations, but I cannot figure out what it is. If it is possible to get an explanation on this now I would appreciate it, if it seems to be more appropriate to do it later on I agree, I could do it either way.
M. BEL HADJ AMOR (Président du Comité financier): Non, nous n'essayons absolument pas de détourner quoi que ce soit. Il suffit de voir ce qui est écrit dans les textes de base, dans le règlement financier, et vous trouverez exactement le libellé. Si mes souvenirs sont bons, tout excédent à la fin du biennium doit être reversé aux Etats Membres; dans la mesure où l'on fait une dérogation à ce règlement on est obligé de le dire, et de rappeler que cela n'est pas conforme aux dispositions. Mais cela a été une pratique. On a toujours utilisé, et ce n'est pas la première fois, une partie des excédents pour réalimenter des fonds de l'organisation ou des comptes spéciaux. J'ignore si le Secrétariat a quelque chose à ajouter à ce propos.
E.M. WEST (Assistant Director-General, Office of Programme, Budget and Evaluation): There is nothing unusual about this resolution. There are many many precedents over the years for such a resolution whenever it has been necessary to withdraw money from the Working Capital Fund for any purpose. In the past we have had to withdraw money to meet emergencies such as foot-and-mouth disease, we have had to withdraw money to finance the World Food Conference for example, which was an additional budget item, and in this biennium we have had to withdraw money to meet the unbudgeted costs. It is paradoxical that, as you have just heard, we have an enormous amount piling up in the Special Reserve Account which cannot be used to meet unbudgeted costs. Therefore we have to turn to the Capital Working Fund to meet these costs, but the Capital Working Fund has to be reimbursed at the end of the biennium and it is the prerogative of the Conference under the Basic Texts to decide how to reimburse it. If there were no cash
surplus it would have to vote an additional assessment. In this case there would be a large amount of money available from the currency gains and also from miscellaneous income. In order to tap that money, to use it, it is necessary to adopt a resolution which says in effect that whereas normally this cash surplus would be distributed to Member Nations in due course, on this occasion because we have to fill up the Working Capital Fund to its old level we are withholding that part of the cash surplus to do that. That is the only significance of the words 'notwithstanding the provisions of Financial Regulation 6.1(b)'. This is all foreseen in the Basic Texts and there are many precedents over a generation exactly on the lines of this resolution.
G. STREEB (United States of America): Let me assure you that I do not see anything sinister or devious in this. I know there is a very straightforward explanation. The third paragraph of the resolution says that if members pay their contributions promptly there will be a surplus. My simple accounting logic would tell me that if during the year you do not get contributions paid promptly and you borrow out of the Working Capital Fund, when those contributions are paid you refurbish the Working Capital Fund. So if in the last quarter of this year all the contributions are paid you will simply put the money back into the Fund that you borrowed in the first place because they did not pay. What I do not understand is what seems to be described by Mr. West as tapping the other funds. This is simply taking the new contributions coming in and funnelling them straight into the Working Capital Fund to reimburse it. It seems to me that it is obvious that you would do that. You do not need a resolution. So what is it that we are tapping that is different than contributions paid during the last quarter of the year?
E.M. WEST (Assistant Director-General, Office of Programme, Budget and Evaluation): The contributions are not paid into the Working Capital Fund. They are paid into the General Fund. If necessary we draw on the Working Capital Fund because of shortfall of contributions. We have not reached that point yet because our accounts do not close until the end of the year and we have money in hand. We will run out of money unless all the further outstanding contributions are paid. Then we might have the problem of drawing on the Working Capital Fund. Quite separately from that we have authority to withdraw $5, 425 million from the Working Capital Fund in addition to whatever might be affected by shortfall in contributions, and that $5.4 million has to be replaced. It will be replaced if you adopt this resolution, as in the past, from miscellaneous income. The extent of miscellaneous income depends on the payment of contributions because the greater part of it comes from interest accrued on contributions. So that is what we are going to tap, mainly interest accrued on contributions. I hope this is now clear.
CHAIRMAN: Is this clear enough now?
G. STREEB (United States of America): It is clear that they are tapping. It is not quite clear to me why they tapped the Working Capital Fund in the first place. What was the emergency that we tapped it for? You implied that it was not the shortfall in contributions that you tapped it for. It was for some emergency, which I assume had to do with inflation or a şpecial programme. Obviously it had nothing to do with the dollar, that we know.
E.M. WEST (Assistant Director-General, Office of Programme, Budget and Evaluation): As stated in the first paragraph of the resolution, it is not to cover any emergency except what you might call the emergency of inflation; it is to cover unbudgeted costs. This was decided by the Seventy-ninth Session of the Council. So that is what we are covering, unbudgeted costs.
CHAIRMAN: Then if there are no more comments we will forward this resolution as a recommendation to Conference.
M. BEL HADJ AMOR (Président du Comité financier): Puisque le fonds de roulement intéresse beaucoup le délégué des Etats-Unis je vais continuer la discussion sur ce point, mais cette fois-ci il s'agit d'une proposition pour relever le niveau du fonds de roulement. Le Comité estime que le Conseil doit considérer cette question à la lumière de la grave situation des contributions qui lui a été présentée tout à l'heure et qui crée des problèmes financiers à l'Organisation. Le Directeur général propose de relever le niveau du fonds de roulement de 6, 5 millions à 13, 25 millions de dollars. Le Comité a longuement discuté cette proposition et à la fin de ses débats il considère que ce montant peut se présenter comme raisonnable et recommande l'approbation de relèvement au Conseil pour les raisons suivantes. D'abord la situation du recouvrement des contributions reste inquiétante. Ensuite cette tendance dans le retard de versement des contributions risque de persister et de continuer à se manifester dans les années à venir. Troisièmement, le principal bailleur de fonds a informé de son intention de modifier les modalités de versement de sa contribution: cela entraînerait des retards dans le recouvrement de cette importante contribution et pourrait causer de graves difficultés de trésorerie. Quatrièmement, certains autres bailleurs de fonds pourraient être tentés de suivre cette tendance et ce en dépit des recommandations du Comité financier et du Conseil. En cinquième lieu, le Comité convient que ce fonds de roulement serait utilisé en premier recours pour faire face au déficit de trésorerie dû à des retards dans le recouvrement des contributions, car le compte de réserve spécial n'intervient qu'en second recours et sous réserve des ressources disponibles.
De même, le Conseil voudrait bien noter que le montant proposé est un montant fixe. Cependant, il représente un pourcentage d'environ trois pour cent du budget proposé. A noter que l'augmentation proposée du fonds pourrait être compensée en partie au moins par l'excédent de trésorerie susceptible d'être disponible en fin d'exercice.
Cependant, il faut être réaliste et penser à ce qu'un effort financier supplémentaire demandé aux Etats Membres reste toujours probable. Enfin, il y a deux précisions avant de soumettre au Conseil le projet de résolution. On se rappelle que dans les dispositions de la résolution qui a établi le fonds de roulement, il y a une autorisation de prélèvement jusqu'à un million de dollars pour financer des mesures initiales d'urgence contre les maladies du bétail et le criquet pèlerin. Ces dispositions restent inchangées.
Deuxièmement- c'est uniquement en réponse à une question qui pourrait être posée - le Comité voudrait rappeler au Conseil que le fonds de roulement a été relevé pour la dernière fois en janvier 19?6.
Enfin, j'invite le Conseil à considérer le projet de résolution qui fait suite au paragraphe 3.60 et à le soumettre à la Conférence.
CHAIRMAN: Again we have a resolution to recommend to Conference based on the explanation given by the Chairman of the Finance Committee.
P. ELMANOWSKY (France): J'interviens sur le projet de résolution qui nous est soumis concernant l'augmentation du niveau du fonds de roulement. Pour notre délégation c'est une chose nouvelle dont nous avons pris connaissance en recevant le rapport du Comité financier dont la dernière journée de réunion était le 1er octobre 1981 et lorsque j'ai quitté Paris le 2 novembre ces documents n'étaient évidemment pas parvenus. Nous n'avons donc pas pu consulter sur ce point nos autorités financières.
Aussi, je dois dire que, de manière générale, pour des questions aussi importantes que les questions financières - je sais que c'est difficile et que le Secrétariat rencontre toujours sur ce point beaucoup de difficultés pour les transmissions en temps utile - il faudrait que les documents puissent, si possible, parvenir 15 jours après la réunion. en particulier pour le Comité financier et qu'ils puissent être dans les mains des capitales intéressées dans ce délai.
Finalement je suis très embarrassé quant à l'augmentation suggérée de 6 500 000 dollars à 13 500 000 dollars. C'est pourquoi la délégation française est d'accord pour que cette résolution soit transmise par le Conseil à la Conférence tout en réservant la possibilité, pour nos représentants spécialistes en Commission II de la Conférence, d'indiquer ce qu'ils pensent du fond de cette résolution.
RAMADHAR (India): My delegation finds that this is a very straightforward, a very clear proposal, including the resolution, and we have again to remember when we discussed the first sub-item that this measure is being suggested by the Organization in view of the extreme financial difficulties envisaged
by the Organization so from that point of view we again support this, and we are glad that even some distinguished colleagues who have some problem at this stage do not oppose the transmission of this, and since we still have some time between now and when the matter will be taken up in the Conference, this should not pose any problems.
W.A.F. GRABISCH (Germany, Fed. Republic of): My government is of the opinion that there is no need for the raising of the level of the Working Capital Fund. My delegation can therefore not go along with the proposed resolution spelled out in paragraph 3.60 of document CL 80/4.
A.G. NGONGI NAMANGA (Cameroon): The Cameroon delegation finds that the reason for having a Working Capital Fund are quite clear and that a Working Capital Fund at a level of 3 percent of the budget is not really excessive. We therefore would support the draft resolution and recommend that it be transmitted to the Conference.
R. ROUPHAEL (Liban) (langue originale arabe): La délégation de mon pays estime que la proposition tendant à augmenter le niveau du fonds de roulement est une proposition logique et justifiée. Nous approuvons cette augmentation pour subvenir aux recettes accessoires et pour couvrir les retards dans les contributions.
G. STREEB (United States of America): In our case, if you look at the figures, it turns out that the additional assessment or the tapping of other sources that could be involved in expanding this fund would virtually come to the same level as if we approved the expanded budget of the Organization. If for no other reason, it should not come as any big surprise, then, that we would oppose the expansion of the Working Capital Fund, but beyond that, we ourselves do not see any justification or any need for such a doubling of the size of this Fund, and I must say that the previous discussion we had on the question of the Special Reserve Account or the replenishing of the Working Capital Fund now convinces me more than ever that we should not be in favour of expanding the size of this Fund.
M. GHASSI (Syria) (original language Arabic): My delegation supports India and Lebanon as far as concerns the level of the Working Capital Fund.
Sra. M. IVANKOVICH DE AROSEMENA (Panama): Durante la discusión del aumento del nivel del Fondo de Operaciones en el Comité de Finanzas, fuimos informados de la preocupante situación que se suscita por el retraso del pago de las cuotas de los Estados Miembros, y sobre el hecho de que se estaba estableciendo una nueva modalidad de pago de las cuotas de algunos de los Estados Miembros; modalidad que causo gran preocupación al Comité. Ante esta delicada situación, el Comité examinó la propuesta del Director General de aumentar el nivel del Fondo de Operaciones de 6, 5 millones de dólares a 3, 25 millones de dólares. Considerando que el Fondo de Operaciones debe ser la primera fuente de financia-miento de los gastos presupuestados, y ante la delicada situación por la cual atraviesa la Organización por la demora en el pago de las cuotas de los Estados Miembros atrasados, dimos nuestro apoyo al aumento del nivel del Fondo de Operaciones, aumento que representaría aproximadamente un 3 por ciento del nivel presupuestario para el próximo bienio.
En esta oportunidad, deseamos ratificar el apoyo al Proyecto de Resolución que se nos presenta para que sea enviado a la Conferencia.
H. MENDS (Ghana): My delegation is also quite satisfied with the justification provided for the raising of the level of the Working Capital Fund, and we therefore fully support the adoption of the Resolution for Conference approval.
M. F.H. JAWHAR HAYAT (Kuwait) (original language Arabic): My delegation supports the draft resolution before us in order to allow the Organization to overcome the difficulties which had been noted by the Finance Committee, and therefore approves this increase from 6.5 million to 13.2 million for the level for the Working Capital Fund.
T.C. RAJAONA (Madagascar): Ma délegation se joint aux autres delegations qui ont approuve la proposition de résolution et sa recommandation à la Conférence.
J. TCHICAYA (Congo): Le projet de résolution qui nous est soumis est clair. Les raisons évoquées, notamment celles relatives au retard de paiements des contributions, sont convaincantes. En conséquence, vous comprendrez aisément que la délégation de mon pays puisse appuyer ce projet de résolution et recommander qu'il soit transmis à la Conférence.
M. DESSOUKI (Egypt) (original language Arabic): My delegation would like to join all those countries which have approved the increase in the level of the Working Capital Fund. We also approve the explanations which have been given and which justify this increase.
Finally, we approve the submission of the draft resolution to the Conference.
P. KANGA (Angola): Ma délégation estime que l'augmentation à 13, 5 millions de dollars est justifiée. De ce fait, nous appuyons la résolution et approuvons qu'elle soit transmise à la Conférence.
H.L. CLAVERIE RODRIGUEZ (Venezuela): Venezuela es uno de los países que mantiene al día su contribución ante esta Casa en el pago de las cuotas que le corresponde a la FAO, pues considera que solo con las contribuciones de los países es con lo que la Organización puede mantener un estado financiero limpio y proclive a funcionar de la mejor manera posible para el cubrimiento de su presupuesto. Este es un principio que defendemos, y quisiéramos hacer un llamado general, aprovechando la ocasión, a todos los países para que ayuden a pasar el grave momento que nos indica el Director General, por el cual estamos atravesando la Organización. Esto lo traemos a colación porque no somos proclives a apoyar este tipo de principio como es el uso de recursos adicionales sustraídos por otros canales, como los que se están en este momento trayendo a discusión. Pero comprendemos a cabalidad, nuestro país, las razones que mantiene el Director General en esta vía y por lo tanto, nuestro país apoya la transferencia al Fondo de Operaciones que el señor Director General nos ofrece esta tarde. Nuestro país apoya la propuesta.
WANG SHOU RU (China) (original language Chinese): Concerning the question of the Working Capital Fund as raised by the Secretariat, the Chinese delegation is in agreement with the views expressed by the Programme and Finance Committees in order to ensure the smooth operation of the normal activities of this Organization in a time of temporary financial restraint.
We support the appropriate increase in the level of the Working Capital Fund.
CHAIRMAN: It looks as if we are going back to a long general debate and our time is very, very limited. Therefore, if everybody wants to speak on this, please be very brief.
A. ELKADIRI (Maroc): Vu les justifications que nous avons reçues nous pensons que pour améliorer l'efficacité des activités de notre Organisation ma délégation appuie amplement l'augmentation du fonds de roulement et appuie la transmission de la résolution à la Conférence.
K.S. BINGANA (Botswana): We support the increase in the level of the Working Capital Fund, and further ratify adoption of the draft resolution for consideration by the Conference.
M. ZYALIC (Yugoslavia): We approve the submission of the draft resolution to the Conference as contained in Document CL 80/4, page 28.
M. S. ZAFAR (Afghanistan): Ma délégation appuie fermement le projet de résolution et souhaite sa transmission à la Conférence.
E.M. WEST (Assistant Director-General, Office of Programme, Budget and Evaluation): I do not want to hold you up, but it is appropriate to make a couple of points because in fact we have been dealing with three arms or instruments, and unfortunately we have been dealing with them in the wrong order. We should have dealt first with the question of the Working Capital Fund, then the Special Reserve Account, and then with authority to borrow, because that is the logical sequence. The reason we have not done this is that the idea of the Special Reserve Account occurred at the last Council and not at this one. The Working Capital Fund is the normal resort in the first place for shortfall contributions, and it is this situation which will not go away.
Incidentally, I would like to confirm that our representative in Washington has riot gone to Brazil or any other country, but after he had recovered from the shock, he did let us know that the cheque had arrived!
The Special Reserve Account does mention contributions, but obviously from the beginning has been designed to cover the Programme against unbudgeted costs due either to inflation or adverse currency movements, and authority to borrow, which we come to next, is proposed as the last resort in case we get into a desperate position on contributions, which unfortunately might be the case in 1983, if not before. I am not pointing a finger at anybody, whether they are following a deliberate policy or whether they are affected by force majeure or civil wars or conflicts with other countries, or whether there are other reasons or financial difficulties which prevent them from paying on time, but it is very clear now that for the next few years we are going to have serious problems with delayed contributions. Therefore we have to be covered against these things if you want to preserve the Programme.
To those who want to cut the Programme I have nothing more to say, as their position is invincible, but as regards the need or otherwise the facts are there, both as regards delayed contributions and as regards the size of the Working Capital Fund. This is diminishing more and more in proportion to the effective working budget level.
I think we have been extraordinarily moderate. Some of you will not agree with me, and sometimes I think how daring I could be and I bite my hands and get moderate again. We have not proposed the percentage of the effective Working Budget, we have proposed a fixed amount, which is still rather smaller than is the case for the other international organizations. For those who say there is no need, I would ask them first to consider the actual situation we are going to be faced with on contributions, and secondly the fact that in other organizations the Working Capital Funds are considerably higher. In fact, in one, the provision for this is in the region of 14 percent of the Working Budget Level, so what we propose of just about 3 percent is very small indeed, and if the budget is larger in the following biennia that percentage will come down again, so what we are proposing is really rather moderate.
What we are proposing should be seen as the first arm; the Special Reserve Account has been dealt with as the second; and we are coming to the authority to borrow as the third resort in carrying out our programme.
CHAIRMAN: I think the Chairman of the Finance Committee and Mr. West have explained what the problems are. It is up to this Council to ensure the Organization runs smoothly, and these measures have been proposed in order to facilitate proper management, proper functioning of the Organization. There is nothing sinister about it.
In the debate the majority consensus is that this resolution should go forward to Conference. Some members do not agree. In our report we will reflect that some members did not agree with this, and then the decision is up to the Conference.
We will now go on to the next one, which is probably going to be worse for some people. The Chairman of the Finance Committee will go on to the subject of borrowing.
Authority to borrow
Autorisation d'emprunter
Autorización para tomar dinero a préstamo
M. BEL HADJ AMOR (Président du Comité financier): Avant de continuer sur la note pessimiste présentée par M. West, qui justifie d'ailleurs la proposition qui va être soumise maintenant au Conseil, je voudrais appeler mon collègue le Président du Comité des questions juridiques et constitutionnelles, car nous aurons également besoin de ses lumières.
Pour présenter cette question nous restons toujours dans la même atmosphère, à savoir l'atmosphère de la difficulté probable de trésorerie, de la dégradation de la situation quant au versement des contributions, malgré les recommandations du Comité et du Conseil.
Ce qui a déjà été présenté comme arguments pour la question du relèvement du fonds de roulement reste, de l'avis du Comité financier, toujours valable également pour cette question. Ces arguments sont encore beaucoup plus étoffés par le tableau qui apparaît au paragraphe 3.64 du rapport du Comité financier et qui illustre l'état de trésorerie probable en 1982-83, ainsi que les déficits possibles compte tenu d'un retard persistant dans le versement des contributions.
A la lumière de ces éléments, le Directeur général a demandé au Comité des finances, pour transmission au Conseil, qu'on lui donne l'autorisation d'emprunter.
Il faut préciser au Conseil que cette autorisation ne constituera que le troisième recours en cas de difficultés financières de l'Organisation, le premier étant le fonds de roulement et le second le Compte de réserve spécial.
Le Conseil voudra également relever que cette autorisation ne constitue pas une exception, qu'elle a été accordée auparavant à deux reprises, en 1964 et 1979, mais que le Directeur général n'en a jamais fait usage.
Le texte de résolution qui vous est soumis est sensiblement le même que celui des résolutions précédentes. Cependant, il y a deux nuances: il a été proposé qu'on supprime la limite de durée, de même on ne mentionne pas le montant, ce qui d'ailleurs aurait été difficile. Après un très long débat, après également avoir posé une foule de questions qui ont eu des réponses satisfaisantes, le Comité des finances a décidé d'appuyer la proposition du Directeur général et de recommander au Conseil le projet de résolution, objet du paragraphe 3.73 de son rapport.
Cependant, il souhaite attirer l'attention du Conseil sur ce qui suit: d'abord les sources essentielles devraient être internes, et vous pouvez vous reporter au paragraphe 3.69 qui vous donne un exemple de sources internes.
En second lieu, une grande rigueur dans l'utilisation du pouvoir d'emprunter devra être appliquée et on ne devra avoir recours à cette autorisation qu'en cas de stricte nécessité, et en tout dernier lieu.
En troisième lieu, l'autorisation devra être assujettie à un contrôle financier attentif. Néanmoins, le Comité a reconnu que dans certains cas indispensables une certaine souplesse pourrait s'avérer utile, sinon nécessaire.
Le Comité espère que sa recommandation du projet de résolution au paragraphe 3.73 soit appuyée par le Conseil.
Je vous remercie, Monsieur le Président.
CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Chairman of the Finance Committee. This item is now open for discussion.
P. ELMANOWSKY (France): J'ai entendu avec beaucoup d'intérêt les explications données par M. Bel Hadj Amor, Président du Comité financier, sur ce point.
Bien que l'essentiel soit dans le rapport du Comité financier, qui nous est parvenu avec retard, nous étions cependant avertis du problème car le rapport du Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques qui en avait traité auparavant quant à la forme, nous était parvenu en temps utile, et de ce fait il nous a été possible d'avoir des instructions précises.
Ces instructions, je ne vous cacherai pas qu'elles sont négatives et que du côté de la délégation française nous ne sommes pas favorables à une autorisation donnée de manière aussi large sans limitation de montant et sans limitation de temps.
Il ne faut certainement pas y voir une expression de défiance à l'égard du Directeur général, mais c'est au contraire la volonté de voir respecter les règles applicables dans les institutions au point de vue financier et budgétaire. Les gouvernements n'ont pas l'habitude de donner - j'allais dire -des chèques en blanc soit à leur ministre des finances soit aux organisations internationales. M, Bel Hadj Amor nous a dit que des précédents concernant l'autorisation d'emprunter avaient déjà eu lieu en 1964 et 1979 et qu'il n'y avait que quelques nuances avec le projet qui nous est présenté aujourd'hui. En fait, je crois qu'ils s'agit plus que de nuances, parce que ces précédentes autorisations indiquaient jusqu'à combien et pour combien de temps. Maintenant il n'y a plus rien. Ce n'est plus une nuance, c'est un fossé.
Mais nous comprenons aussi la situation délicate dans laquelle se trouve l'Organisation et qui peut conduire le Directeur général pour assurer la bonne marche de l'institution à trouver, si cela est nécessaire, de l'argent lui permettant de couvrir des dépenses réelles.
Dans ce cas, est-ce qu'il ne serait pas possible, je ne dis pas de convoquer le Conseil parce que la procédure peut être un peu longue et qu'il faudrait déplacer les uns et les autres, mais d'utiliser - et cela doit exister à la FAO comme ailleurs - des procédures de consultations écrites? Est-ce qu'il ne serait pas possible, lorsque le Directeur général estimerait que la situation le justifie, que l'on en saisisse immédiatement par écrit - et quand je dis par écrit, ce peut être la forme télégraphique - les membres du Conseil, en leur donnant un délai pour répondre, étant entendu que s'il n'y a pas de réponse de l'un ou de l'autre dans les délais impartis, le silence serait considéré comme un aquiescement?
Alors, Monsieur le Président, vous comprendrez après cette intervention que nous ne pouvons pas appuyer la résolution telle qu'elle nous est soumise, mais nous demandons au Président du Comité financier et au Secrétariat de voir si une autre procédure, qui serait à rédiger et à soumettre à la Conférence, ne pourrait pas être envisagée. C'est-à-dire que lorsque sera constatée la nécessité d'emprunter, le Directeur général saisirait immédiatement les membres du Conseil par la voie de la procédure écrite, en indiquant le montant qu'il envisage d'emprunter, la période de temps qui pourrait être nécessaire et fixer un délai pour la réponse.
T. GLASER (Président du Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques): Le Comité financier qui a traité cette question après le Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques a déjà tenu compte de quelques remarques de forme que notre Comité avait formulées. Elles sont incorporées dans a proposition de résolution que nous avons maintenant devant nous. Je peux donc me borner aux points suivants:
Le CQCJ a noté que si l'article 6.2 (2) (i) du Règlement financier prévoit que des prélèvements peuvent être effectués sur le fonds de roulement, les Textes fondamentaux ne contiennent aucune disposition autorisant ou interdisant expressément de recourir à des emprunts provenant d'autres sources. Le CQCJ est convenu que l'absence de toute limitation de durée ou de montant n'avait aucune incidence du point de vue juridique ou constitutionnel et qu'elle n'était nullement incompatible avec l'autorité du Conseil en la matière ni avec les Textes fondamentaux en général. A cet égard, le CQCJ a tenu compte du fait que, comme l'indique le paragraphe 5 du dispositif du projet de résolution du Conseil, le Directeur général serait appelé à rendre compte au Conseil de tout emprunt par l'intermédiaire du Comité financier.
Le CQCJ a également conclu que la résolution du Conseil, telle qu'elle est proposée, ne nécessite aucun amendement des Textes fondamentaux de la FAO.
En conclusion, le Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques est convenu que du point de vue constitutionnel et juridique le projet de résolution est correct quant à sa forme et que sa teneur est conforme aux Textes fondamentaux.
CHAIRMAN: In the light of that, can we continue the discussion?
M. GHASSI (Syria) (original language Arabic): I shall be very brief. The reasons mentioned for this resolution and the delays in payment of contributions to ensure the smooth running of the Organization lead my country to support fully the draft resolution. We would recommend that it be submitted to the Conference.
CHAIRMAN: Actually, the resolution is directed at us, it is not going to the Conference, if my understanding is correct.
C. LAMBERT (Canada): Excusez-moi, Monsieur le President, je n'ai pas compris si vous venez de dire que cette question allait à la Conférence ou si elle n'y allait pas.
CHAIRMAN: I will ask the Chairman of the Committee on Constitutional and Legal Matters what the recommendation is. I think it is not going to the Conference; it is for us.
T.T. GLASER (Chairman, Committee on Constitutional and Legal Matters): It is as you say, Mr. Chairman: it is for Council, it will not go to the Conference unless the Council decides otherwise.
C. LAMBERT (Canada): De tous les points qui nous sont soumis aujourd'hui, c'est certainement celui qui présente le plus de difficulté. Nous ne prendrons pas beaucoup de temps pour exprimer notre point de vue car le délégué de la France a très bien exprimé les raisons qui motiveraient le Canada à refuser cette résolution.
E. TIZOL MARTINEZ (Cuba):Al referirnos a este tema 14, en particular al Informe contenido en el docu-mentp CL 80/5, sobre el informe del Comité de Asuntos Constitucionales y Jurídicos, nuestra delegación desea expresar su apoyo al acuerdo de dicho Comité, que aparece en el párrafo numero 10 del mencionado documento y, en consecuencia, expresa su apoyo a la resolución que aparece en la página 32 del documento 80/4, sobre: Autorización para tomar dinero a préstamo.
M. ZJALIC (Yugoslavia): We would like to express our support for the adoption of the draft resolution contained in paragraph 3.73 of document CL 80/4 on page 32. I do not think that a long discussion or justification is needed. We understand it is a last resort and that before this resolution is put into effect, into practice, there are other ways and means to solve the financial problem. But we feel, such a resolution in this situation is really needed, and that is why we give it our full support.
K. CHOUERI (Liban) (langue originale arabe): Je crains que si nous nous opposons au principe de l'autorisation d'emprunter accordée au Directeur général cela ne lui permettrait pas d'agir. Le principe d'emprunter ne constitue donc pas un désir mais il est dicté par des raisons. Par conséquent nous appuyons les justifications présentées par le Comité financier et la possibilité de sources internes et de sources externes et le paragraphe 5 ne porte pas atteinte aux droits du Conseil car le Directeur général, conformément à ce paragraphe, doit consulter le Comité financier et le Comité financier est l'un des piliers du Conseil et il doit référer au Conseil lors de ses sessions. Par conséquent, nous approuvons le projet.
T.C. RAJAONA (Madagascar): Ma délégation estime que, compte tenu du risque de voir cette situation s'installer pour quelque temps, elle appuie l'adoption de résolution concernant l'autorisation emprunter.
N. RAMADHAR (India): I thought that this matter which has been carefully considered by the Financial Committee in depth and has been agreed to by the Finance Committee, was going to be a routine one, an obvious one, and should not take that amount of time. When I look at the whole portion, my delegation notes that there are a number of built-in controls in the proposal which this Council should take note of. We find from paragraph 3.67 that on two earlier occasions this support was given but it was not used by the Director-General.
Then again we find that the primary source of such loans should be internal funds as mentioned in the fourth sentence of 3.69. The next paragraph we note that the amount and the time of borrowing must be limited to the minimun possible. Then again we find that this has to be a last resort situation which could not be predicted in advance but might need to be dealt with immediately. Again in paragraph 5 of the Resolution, as pointed out by the delegate of Lebanon, there will be strict control by the Finance Committee on the whole operation and as far as possible the Director-General will consult the Finance Committee and where it is not possible he will apprise the Finance Committee to be so affected. So we feel that this proposal,: along with the draft resolution, is very much a necessity for the smooth and efficient functioning of the Organization and my delegation would like to reiterate"its strong support of this.
O. AWOYEMI (Nigeria): The Nigerian delegation supports the draft resolution seeking authority of this Council to borrow in cases of extreme financial hardship specially as the borrowing will mainly be from internal sources. The Council may wish to authorize the Finance Committee to impose some sort of ceiling on the amount that could be borrowed at any time or the period over which this borrowing could take place. So we are in support of this resolution, subject to this amendment.
S. MURTAZA (Pakistan): My delegation considers this resolution to be important enough to get our strongest support. This resolution seems to be the result of a particular situation in financial matters which exist or which can be perhaps foreseen or expected. There are sufficient checks within the resolution which will make it quite improbable or impossible that this resolution will be misused or could be to the disadvantage of anybody. As such my delegation strongly supports the resolution.
J.M. SCOULAR (United Kingdom): We acknowledge that there could be circumstances where the amounts available in the working capital fund and the special reserve account would be insufficient to meet a shortfall of income. We see this authority to borrow is what you might call the third leg in the series of defenses against inflation.We think also that with the growth in the capital fund, the need for resort to it should be quite rare if required at all. If we are to go along with it we would much prefer from the United Kingdom's point of view that there should be restrictions as suggested by Nigeria both as to amount and length of time.
M.M. SHANIN (Egypt) (original language Arabic): My delegation is fully convinced by the justifications provided as regards the needs to give the Director-General authority to borrow, especially following the views expressed by the CCLM. My delegation therefore wholeheartedly supports this draft resolution on authority to borrow.
J. TCHICAYA (Congo): Face à la situation financière créée notamment par les pays qui accusent des retards de contributions ou même qui modifient les modalités de leurs paiements, la seule solution qui reste est celle proposée par le Comité financier. C'est cette solution seule qui pourra permettre à notre Organisation d'accomplir son programme sur lequel nous sommes tous d'accord. Nous voudrions aussi saisir l'occasion qui nous est offerte pour lancer un appel pressant aux pays membres pour qu'ils s'acquittent de leurs contributions au plus tôt. En effet, ces retardsnon seulement entraînent des frais supplémentaires préjudiciables aux pays membres bons contributeurs mais également et surtout gênent l'exécution du programme. Nous sommes partisans de mettre les moyens utiles à la disposition du Directeur général pour lui permettre de s'acquitter correctement des tâches qui lui sont confiées. Après avoir appuyé la dernière résolution, ma délégation, qui reste logique avec elle-même, demande l'adoption de cette résolution permettant au Directeur général de la FAO d'emprunter, résolution qui s'inscrit dans le droit fil de la précédente avec suffisamment de garanties quant au contrôle que le Conseil par l'intermédiaire du Comité financier exercera dans le cadre de son mandat.
E.M. WEST (Assistant Director-General, Office of Programme, Budget and Evaluation): I asked to intervene because certain points have been raised and it might shorten debates if I could answer one or two of these before we go further. The first is the suggestion made that somehow or other we are asking for a blank cheque.
I would like to make it clear that we would never be able to borrow more than would take us above the approved budget level. There is no suggestion here of a power to borrow money which would enable us to spend more under the regular programme than we had been authorized by the Conference to spend. So there is an automatic limitation there.
Secondly, I would like to make it clear that it is not possible in the circumstances to put into the Resolution any fixed amount or time because what we are envisaging is a hypothetical case of nonpayment of a very large amount of contributions. Now we do not wish if we can avoid it to point the finger at the main cause of such a situation. We know it is going to happen, at least we have been told it is going to happen and we know what 25 percent of the effective working level of the budget is. Now if you work that out and divide it by two you get a measure of the minimum of the shortfall in contributions which may occur from 1983 onwards. I stress "may occur". I hope it will not. Now, if you make that little calculation you will see that if you wanted to insert the amount into the Resolution you would be asking me to put down a figure which would horrify your financial authorities much more than leaving it open like this and indicating that we would only borrow the minimum. It is not only with one contributor whose declared policy it is who may be involved. We had in the past something called the Helms Amendment that could also occur in the future; again I hope not. Then there are other countries, including some who have spoken on this point, who have only just paid up their full contributions, quite large amounts being involved. So the matter is really in your hands. If contributions are paid on time, even if the major contributor follows its policy, we may be able to avoid altogether the use of this authority. We cannot say how long it will be required for, except that if the policy is applied it may be required for at least one year at a time. Beyond that we cannot be more precise. However, as was already pointed out by some delegations, there are limitations in paragraph 5 of the Resolution which was amended in the form as a result of very long consideration of this precise issue by the Finance Committee. This is not the formulation proposed by the Director-General but one as amended by the Finance Committee. It envisages clearly that normally the Director-General will consult the Finance Committee in advance. The Finance Committee meets twice a year in the spring and in the autumn and we hope that we can foresee such a situation arising well enough in advance to put it to the Committee. But we may not be able to do so because quite apart from declared policies, other things can happen, as I have indicated. In that case you can be sure that the Finance Committee would examine any action very critically and would, in consultation with the Director-General, ensure that the situation was carefully controlled and then the Council would have the possibilities, either of itself considering a proposal in advance or taking a decision which would enable it to be sure that proper controls were being used and that the borrowing would cease at the earliest possible moment.
Consideration has been given to the idea of using the provision in Rule XXV.14 of the Basic Text. This is the one about consultation by post. Unfortunately that would not serve because it envisages a positive response within a certain time. It is not enough to say, if you do not reply by such and such date you may go ahead. The text does not envisage that and there is no other provision in the Basic Text which would enable us to take that course. In any case unless every member nation were to be informed of the reasons for such a situation arising, for example, the policy of the major contributor, and were in a position to do something about that policy there would be little point. I can imagine that without being so informed or even after being so informed a Member Government, France or any other, might say, "Well you cannot use your authority to borrow" but what would that serve the Organization, it would come to a full stop. We do not want to put Member Governments in the situation of having to take a position against its ally or friend. It is better to leave this to the Director-General and then having it put to the Finance Committee, but do you really want us to send you a message saying some Member Government is behaving not in accordance with the rules and do you approve of this or not. What could you say, that you do approve of it not behaving in accordance with the rules. This is not a real situation. What is real is that we might get into difficulties, the Director-General will consult the Finance Committee if it is humanly possible in the circumstance; the Finance Committee will take a position which is public and then the Council will review it. If we are near enough to the Council we will go to the Council so I really think that the Resolution from beginning to end is far from being a blank cheque. We do not want a blank cheque. We do not want even to use this ever, if we can avoid it. The Resolution provides all the safeguards that can be provided, given the circumstances, which unfortunately we are obliged, not of our own will, to envisage.
G. STREEB (United States of America): I certainly appreciate Mr. West's explanations and his attempt to be as balanced in his presentation as possible. As I indicated earlier on this while he referred to my country's policy of paying in the fourth quarter may be one of the sources, we are certainly not alone, and it is true that if all the other three-quarters of the membership paid up in the first three quarters there would be no problem., I am not saying that is an ideal solution, but since we are at most only -one-third of the problem of payments in the fourth quarter there is at least two-thirds of the problem somewhere in this room. Be that as it may, I understand his concern about the flow of funds into the General Account compared with the cash flow problem. What we are really addressing is the question of the principle under which you manage. We do two things in the Conference, we establish a programme and a budget. As is typical of any manager one is faced with the problem of do you adjust the budget to suit the programme during the period of one or two years, whatever your budget cycle is, or do you adjust the programme to the budget. This is where we have a bit of difference, I think. The idea of a blank cheque is not to exceed the authority but to guarantee through the three steps that have been established here that the Director-General never has to take a difficult decision. Every time he has an exchange rate problem, anticipated or badly predicted, every time he miscalculates or underestimates the inflation factor, he covers himself automatically through one of these elements. He has no problem whatever. I submit that every one of our budget managers should be thrilled to death to have such a system, but since we do not give our own budget managers or any one who has to live within an account that sort of flexibility it is a little difficult to see why we give this total freedom to the manager of an international organization.
There are other ways to adjust for these situations. I am sure it is well known to the members of the Secretariat what techniques can be used and have been used in the past to provide such adjustment.
Mr. West made a statement to the effect that the Organization could come to a fullstop. I cannot quite envisage the circumstances in which given the Special Reserve and the Working Capital available and the capacity to delay payments and so forth that the Organization would actually come to a full stop. That would indeed be a rather dire circumstance, totally unpredictable. But in any case I will acknowledge that there is a management problem that is created by the situation in which you get these irregular cash flows and payments through the months.
There has been some suggestion that there is a control and a check built into this resolution. I frankly cannot find it. There was a suggestion that paragraph 5 somehow provides a check. If you read it closely you will see that it provides no such check at all. The second line very carefully says that at his discretion he should keep the Committee informed and then that in his judgement if the circumstances and time permit he should consult the Finance Committee. But it does not give the Finance Committee any particular authority and in any case he would tell them after it was all over anyhow. So, if there are members here who see in paragraph 5 a check on the capacity of the Director-General to borrow, I do not see it. I am not saying this in any pejorative way to the Director-General but in any case there is no check built into the resolution. This is one of the concerns that have been expressed here consistently by various delegations. There is no real check in paragraph 5, there is no quantitative check, there is no time check. So while I agree that it is not a blank cheque in terms of exceeding the budget authority, it is in a sense a blank cheque to draw on the other accounts and then go to borrowing without having to take any very serious management decisions throughout the year in terms of the pattern of payments in order to try to compensate for the pattern of income from Member Governments' contributions.
Oddly enough, while perhaps it is not appropriate for me to make this point, since I have already expressed my government's position on this, there is a rather strange disincentive in this resolution, which is that there is every incentive in the world for all governments to pay in the fourth quarter of the year because they cannot possibly hurt the Organization. The Director-General can draw on funds and whatever he was short he can borrow. So there is no incentive and all those delegations who have been expressing the hope that there will be early payment, I do not see how this resolution will help them.
I will admit that there is one slight flaw in my argument, and that is that presumably from the basis of this resolution this is not all interest free, which of course causes a problem in terms of how those interest payments were made. From paragraph 4 it is quite clear that that will all come out of miscellaneous income so that for the year following the audit there will be an impact on Member Government contributions. But there is some penalty in that sense, but it is certainly not a penalty per se to the management of the Organization. Let me just finish on that line by saying that I, of course, support the view expressed earlier by the delegate of France both with respect to opposition to granting this authority and with respect to the suggestion he made for further study of the possibilities regarding such a resolution.
But going back to the point of interest, I am not familiar with all the various accounts that are specified in paragraph 3.69 which constitute the internal sources of borrowing. But I would like to ask if it is at all possible that the Director-General would have authority to borrow which would not incur interest costs. Are there ways to borrow from these internal sources without paying interest on them to at least avoid that problem?
CHAIRMAN: I think Mr. West can answer this last question.
E.M. WEST (Assistant Director-General, Office of Programme, Budget and Evaluation): Yes. There are one or two other points I would like to make as well. All the moneys we have except those which are required for day-to-day cash operations are invested at different terms and are earning interest, so there is no source of borrowing. In any case the loss of interest will accrue at one point or other to Member Governments, so it is as broad as it is long.
The United States suggested that we were asking for a total freedom which other organizations do not have. I would like to point out in this connexion that quite apart from our record over last six biennia which you will find in the explanatory notes to the Programme of Work and Budget about the cuts made and quite apart from the $7 1/2 million which we are saving this year we do not have the prerogative which other organizations, particularly the United Nations, have of coming annually for a supplementary estimate to cover cost increases. In the case of the United Nations the last time they asked for a supplementary estimate it amounted to more than $100 million. The United States opposed it but it was adopted. We do not have any such provision. So we have always been under a squeeze and always will be, and our record has nothing in it to suggest that we have suddenly gone mad and want to borrow money and spend it all over the place without regard to economy or without reference to the Finance Committee and the Council if at all possible.
It was also suggested that it was unlikely that we could come to a full stop because of all these other accounts. But in fact it is quite feasible that we could have a combination of non-payment of contributions, of adverse currency movements plus inflation way and above what we have provided for in the budget, plus this particular problem with the major contributor and perhaps others and it could add up to an awful lot of money and we would in fact be coming to a fullstop in such circumstances. There is no way in which we could save enough money to keep going if all those things happened. I am not suggesting that it is going to happen, I hope sincerely that it is not. This is a purely preventive measure which will only be used in the last resort and you can be sure that it will be used to the minimum degree possible because we do not want you to lose the interest on miscellaneous income any more than you want to lose it.
The moral, as I said before - and here I agree fully with the United States - is that all contributions should be paid on time. The significance of this resolution, however, is that there is only one government which tells us in advance that it has a policy of not paying on time and that government happens to be the one that accounts for a very large amount of money.
Other defaulters or sinners or unfortunates may be bad payers but what their little contributions which are not paid would add up to is a very small amount. We are not discussing very small amounts, we are discussing very large amounts. I do not want to get into a controversial situation but I have to make that point.
Sra. M. IVANKOVICH DE AROSEMENA (Panama): Por haber participado en las largas y complejas deliberaciones del Comité de Finanzas sobre este tema, y ante la explicación dada por el Presidente del Comité de Finanzas y el Presidente del Comité de Asuntos Constitucionales y Jurídicos, y del Dr. West a este Consejo, me limitaré a ratificar el apoyo de mi delegación al Proyecto de Resolución que aparece en el párrafo 3.73 del Informe del Comité.
Ms. L. LAOWHAPHAN (Thailand): As far as authority to borrow given by the Council to the Director-General is concerned my delegation fully recognizes the necessity of maintaining the sufficient cash flow to cover obligations and ensure implementation of the approved Programme of Work and therefore endorses the draft Resolution which appears on page 32 of the English text, paragraph 3.73.
Having heard the concern of some delegations my delegation would like to draw attention to the operative paragraphs 4 and 5, particularly paragraph 5, which has been pointed out by the delegates of Lebanon and India.
Furthermore, paragraph 4 indicates that any interest payable on such loans shall be charged to Miscellaneous Income. My delegation does not think that the Director-General will easily decide to borrow, if no real need exists, since it will have an effect on the Miscellaneous Income.
F. BREWSTER (Barbados): The Barbados delegation has some difficulty with this Resolution as it stands. It is our view that the level of borrowing which is permitted to the Director-General should not be allowed to exceed the allocation made in the Working Fund. We feel that this would offer some measure of protection against increases in allocations from Member States.
Secondly, we are of the view that paragraph 5 of the Resolution on page 33, as stated by the United States delegation, does not offer any binding commitment on the Director-General to consult with the Finance Committee. We feel that a modification of that should be made to make it binding on the Director-General before any such borrowing takes place that he must consult with the Finance Committee.
M. MUKOLWE (Kenya): My delegation notes the reasons given in document CL 80/4 on page 32 in paragraph 3.73 as considered by the Finance Committee and the explanation being given at this debate. Authority should be given to the Director-General to borrow so as to be able to operate smoothly and effectively. We support the authority to borrow.
W. A. F. GRABISCH (Germany, Federal Republic of): The Federal Republic of Germany holds the view that the financing of FAO should be ensured, as with all other international organizations, by the contributions of the Member States. The proposed authority to borrow therefore encounters our general reservation. The proposed measure would rather influence negatively the paying behaviour of Member States. Additionally the modalities of the envisaged authority to borrow are not sufficiently precise, namely the amount or the time are not defined, nor are the obligations of reimbursement of credits.
Finally, no sufficient provisions are foreseen for obtaining previous approval of the governing bodies.
For the reasons explained my Government opposes the draft resolution as spelled out in paragraph 3.73 of document CL 80/4.
A. F. M. DE FREITAS (Brazil): My delegation did not oppose the two previous resolutions regarding reimbursement of the Working Capital Fund and the raising of the level of the Working Capital Fund. We believe that those two instruments should be enough to help the Organization face unforeseen situations and unbudgeted costs.
As regards the resolution now under consideration, besides not having any instructions to approve it because of shortage of time, I tend to support the idea already put forward that it needs more consideration by the Council. I am not in a position to support it.
A. G. NGONGI NAMANGA (Cameroon): The majority of the members of this Council have supported the proposed Programme of Work and Budget. It has clearly been demonstrated by document CL 80/LIM/1 that the rate of payment of contributions is far from satisfactory. Indeed if the explanations given that there is a policy of paying contributions by some major contributors in the last quarter of each calendar year it clearly shows that the Organization will have some financial difficulties. The cash flow which is shown to us in the document is troubling. There is no need to have a number of projects which cannot be maintained in order to support the programmes which are approved by the Conference. It is clearly said in the Resolution and we do not think that the Director-General will use the opportunities available to have to go to borrow money. Clearly there should be some means of control. In a general manner therefore we do support the proposed Resolution and recommend that it be transmitted to the Conference.
A. NAGA (Japan): My delegation shares the view of the delegation of Canada. This resolution of authority to borrow should be taken after long and careful discussion. So my delegation thinks that this resolution should not be transferred to the Conference.
H. MENDS (Ghana): Like my colleague from the Cameroons we think that document CL 80/LIM/1 has amply demonstrated the need for the authority to borrow. For example, between 21 September and 1 October about $19 1/2 million had to be paid and soon we have quite a number of countries whose contributions are still outstanding to well over $46 million. Again I have listened carefully to the reasons advanced for holding the Resolution back and I really do not seem to see eye to eye with those peonie, because paragraph 1 clearly delineates that the Director-General must only resort to this tool in case of need. I think that is a sufficient check. Coupled with that is paragraph 5, and paragraph 3.67 has demonstrated that this opportunity offered to the previous executive heads of the Organization was not used. This maturity has been amply demonstrated and I think that with these checks and balances the Director-General will continue to exercise this maturity and experience. Therefore I wholeheartedly support the draft resolution and recommend that this Council adopts it for consideration by the Conference.
Ms. G. ROSSI PEROTTI (Italy): As Mr. West has said before, the logical order of the package of measures proposed is: first, enlargement of the Working Capital Fund; second, use of the Special Reserve Account; and third, the authority to borrow. We fully understand the preoccupation of FAO. Therefore we would like to announce that we can agree with the first two propositions that will be further discussed during the Conference, but on this particular issue we believe that the suggestion of the delegation of France should be given more detailed attention.
B. E. PHIRI (Zambia): I will say only a few words, that is to support the views expressed by those who support the Resolution and recommend that it goes forward to Conference. We have seen in the past that unbudgeted costs could arise and in the current biennium it was expected that about $18.5 million would have to accumulate as unbudgeted costs and that these would be paid from the Special Reserve Account, from the Working Capital Fund, and even from cutting the programmes.
We think that if authority to borrow is given it is a safeguard against any eventualities and particularly with a possible delay in the payment of significant contributions to the Organization. So without wasting time we wish to place on record that we support this resolution.
A. Z. M. OBAIDULLAH KHAN (Bangladesh): Although some members feel that the matter should be given some more consideration I feel that no such action is called for. The document amply explains the situation which might necessitate such borrowing. If we wish to allow this Organization to pursue its programme it should be possible for us to depend on the discretion of its functionaries. Without adding more to this debate I would simply say that my delegation supports this proposal.
G. KELLEY SALINAS (Mexico): La delegación de Mexico quisiera aprovechar la oportunidad para adherirse al proyecto de resolución que autoriza al Director General a pedir prestado en casos de necesidad. No quisiera abundar en esto, pero nos parece que es simplemente un asunto de consecuencia con la Organización. En principio, si como miembros de esta Institución aprobaMos el proyecto del Programa de Labores y Presupuesto, es necesario que demos a esta Institución las posibilidades de que lleve a cabo su función de acuerdo con ese presupues aprobado. Independientemente de las causas muy legítimas que puede que existan para que algunos países no puedan cumplir con sus cuotas a tiempo, es la posición de la delgacion de México que en esos casos hay que dar al Director General las armas suficientes y los elementos necesarios para que pueda cumplir con el mismo presupuresto que ha sido aprobado por todos los miembros de la Organización.
A. EL KADIRI (Maroc): Depuis ce matin nous parlons de Inefficacité des programmes. Nous sommes toujours d'accord pour que le Directeur général puisse avoir la possibilité d'agir suivant le programme tracé par la Conférence. Pour cela, if faut lui donner les moyens de le faire. La résolution telle qu'elle est rédigée dans les paragraphes 1, 4 et 5 nous donne les moyens d'agir puisaqúe dane le
paragraphe 1 il est bien dit que l'emprunt sera fait en cas de besoin, dans la mesure nécessaire, après avoir dûment recouru au Fonds de roulement et au Compte de réserve spécial. Et dans les paragraphes 4 et 5 nous avond encore d'autres possibilités. Ma délégation est donc pour l'adoption de cette résolution et son transfert à la Conférence.
J. ABEYAGOONASEKERA (Sri Lanka): As a member of the Finance Committee I never thought it would be necessary for me to take the floor at this stage to defend a resolution which we adopted at the last session of the Finance Committee. In fact, as was rightly pointed out by one of my colleagues on the Finance Committee, we did go through this resolution very carefully and every item was discussed at length. We should realize that the budget is prepared very much ahead of the two-year period. In fact the preparations take place one year ahead. We are asked to support a budget, where the Director-General has to be assured that the funds required to implement the programmes will be forthcoming. The assumption is that you accept the programme and expect the Member Nations, however big or small, to pay in their contribution in time.
The Rules, if I recollect correctly say the contributions for the two-year period should be paid, one-half within the first month of each year. Unless there is an assurance that the funds are available to implement the programme, how else can the Director-General implement the programme which had been approved by the Conference unless he has some other means of financing the programmes, such as borrowing? We have been told there have been two instances in the past where recourse to borrowing from outside was necessary, but this was not availed of as the contributions which had been delayed were in fact paid.
Even if there is an assurance that the full amount due for a biennium or half a biennium would be paid on a staggered basis, how could we implement a programme without a regular cash flow? In a way, what the Director-General has asked for and the Finance Committee has approved is to be given those measures in case of need only and with due reference to the Council where possible, but without waiting for a calamity where there would be a complete stoppage when he would have to go to the Conference and say that the programme could not be implemented fully.
Some means are necessary to give authority to borrow internally, which we can give without much discussion.
We must remember the Director-General, and the Secretariat who advise him, are responsible people. If we were thinking of a reckless hierarchy, we should not give this type of authority, I think no one would deny, as I mentioned in my first intervention, that we have confidence in the Director-General, and we feel he should be given these resources.
As one delegate mentioned, we are all members of a club, and we should all honour our bills and contributions. It is really a problem arising out of a situation which is beyond the control of the Director-General. If we pay all our contributions as good members of a club, there will be no problem. If the contributions which each member country has to pay each year are increased, however small or poor the country, or a food-deficit country, still that contribution should be honoured whether it is a few hundred thousand dollars or more. We are committed to a programme, and we should pay these contributions.
Countries like my own we have paid regularly although we know the difficulties we have in balance of payments problems, which are becoming worse each year. The problems are real. Still the fact that we have joined the club means that we should respect the rules.
We should respect the fact that FAO has a role to play and it is our duty to support it, and in this sense what we have been asked to support is a resolution which makes it possible for the Director-General to carry on his Programme of Work for two years.
I am sure members would all agree that we should assist the Director-General to have a Programme of Work which will benefit all mankind.
E. M. WEST (Assistant Director-General, Office of Programme, Budget and Evaluation): I wanted to intervene because two delegates since I last spoke referred to transmitting this to the Conference. I hope it is entirely clear, in fact, that the decision has to be taken by this Council, it is not going to be
the Conference. This Council has the power and the authority to adopt this resolution. Equally, in future if it is discontented with the use made of it, it can change this resolution. So T want to make it clear that it is for the Council to decide, and this is urgent as we are coming up to the next biennium and the Council will not meet again until November/December, 1982 and by this time we might have some problems we fear. We do not envisage it at the moment, and we hope not.
Secondly, I would like to refer to the point which was made - I am not sure if I understand it - but one delegate suggested borrowing power should be limited to the amount in the Working Capital Fund. At the moment this is limited to $6.5 million only and even if it is doubled it will only be $13.25 million. We are not referring to the declared policy of the major contributors. Let me draw attention to the document which you have already considered, 80/LIM/1 Appendix A, in which you will see three of the members who today have expressed reservations or who have opposed this resolution have outstanding contributions in the order of $1.9 million for Brazil, France $4.3 million, and Japan $10.26 million. So together they account for very much more than the level of the Working Capital Fund were it to be doubled in the next biennium. When they advocate delay apparently they are being consistent, as they are the ones who are now the major delayers in their contributions. If they are concerned that this authority might be used, it is up to them to prevent it being used by paying on time, '' which they have not yet done, and we are now nearly at the end of the biennium.
I am sorry to point the finger at this time, but the facts are here in black and white.
Lastly, on another point on this fixed question of control, why is it, I would ask, that on this third leg which we all hope will never be used, there is concern about introducing a check which it was not thought necessary to introduce concerning the use of the Working Capital Fund or the use of the Special Reserve Account. There is no requirement therein for the prior authority of the Council -I see there is some concern, but I am making the point that we have three legs here, two of which are in constant use, unfortunately, and one which we hope will never be used, and yet there is much more concern about the control here than there is about the other two.
Under paragraph 5 I have tried to explain that we have to keep open a loophole in which the Organization can survive a major financial blow until such time as the Council can meet and put the situation right. The intention is always to consult the Finance Committee and if possible also the Council in advance of its use. The situation would have to be so serious we would not want to just borrow, we would want the Council to do something about it and right the situation. We cannot close the door to having to take immediate action if you do not want the Organization to be completely paralyzed.
I am not talking about spending money beyond the level approved by the Conference. We cannot do that in any case, and we will never try to do so.
M. A. AZAMI (Afghanistan): I would like to be very brief. The delegation of the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan joins the other distinguished delegates to support the resolution to give the Director-General the authority to follow.
Afghanistan has already paid its contributions for the previous years as well as for the current year.
H.L. CLAVERIE RODRIGUEZ (Venezuela): Confieso que al inicio no tenía la cosa muy clara en relación con la complicación que se ha encontrado; quería dejar pasar la discusión del tema para tener mayores elementos de juicio que pudieran en este punto del temario encajar el espíritu de nuestras instrucciones con la realidad del problema que estamos atacando.
Entendemos que seríamos incoherentes entonces con el espíritu de nuestra intención, que ha mostrado la colaboración más amplia con la problemática presentada por el Director General, si no entendiéramos también el contexto general de la resolución que se nos presenta y la necesidad de acatar la misma.
En este sentido, y respetando totalmente y con el mejor entendimiento las razones que cada país tenga para aceptar o no la resolución en cuestión, nuestra delegación apoya la resolución que presenta en este momento el documento CL 80/4 y que autoriza al Director General a tomar dinero a préstamo en las condiciones que en la misma se están discutiendo.
A.P.D. TANOE (Cote_d'voire): Les différentes délégations qui ont pris la parole tout à l'heure ont précisé l'importance de ce problème. Evidemment j'ai été gêné, je ne savais pas du tout quels sont les moyens qui pourraient permettre à notre Organisation de pouvoir contrôler l'éventualité d'une certaine erreur. Les explications données par le Secrétariat me paraissent assez claires et c'est pourquoi ma délégation s'associe à ceux qui sont d'accord pour donner leur appui à l'autorisation du Secrétaire général.
Ms. F.H. YAWHAR HAYAT (Kuwait) (original language Arabie): The principle of authority to borrow we find in this resolution comes in third place in the number of priorities following, of course, the Working Capital Fund and the Special Reserve Account. For this reason this procedure would only be used in extremis. If we are obliged to resort to this, what measures are we going to adopt? Are we going to cease the Organization's work? Are we going to halt the Programme of Work? No, Sir, we should not fall into such an error. Therefore my country's delegation gives its approval to this principle of giving the Director-General this possibility, especially as the Director-General has on two previous occasions resorted to this same procedure which, would, of course, only be used when the Finance Committee is fully informed, as we read in paragraph 5 of the resolution.
ALHAMBRA RACHMAN (Indonesia): My delegation holds the view that the need to provide the Director-General with adequate means to manage properly the activities of FAO is clear and valid, especially after we follow with interest the presentation of CCIM and consult the status report on contributions as presented. Therefore my delegation endorses the proposed resolution as presented in paragraph 3.73 in document CL 80/4.
S. AIDARA (Sénégal): Le problème est important mais l'heure est tardive, beaucoup de délégations se sont exprimées sur cette importante question et je ne vais pas être long, d'autant plus que ma délégation partage les commentaires faits par le Secrétariat et reprend à son compte la déclaration faite notamment par mon collègue de Sri Lanka. Je me limiterai à apporter l'appui de ma délégation à ce projet de résolution.
P. KANGA (Angola): Comme vient de le dire le délégué du Sénégal il est tard et nous avons suivi avec beaucoup d'intérêt cette discussion qui me semble plutôt un problème très facile à résoudre mais nous nous sommes heurtés à beaucoup de complications et je veux bien m'exprimer en dernier lieu pour porter l'appui de ma délégation au paragraphe 3.73.
WANG SHOU RU (China) (original language Chinese): I wish to express the view of the Chinese delegation on this aspect of this item. In view of the financial situation of the Organization, my delegation aprees that we should grant the Director-General authority to borrow, subject to the conditions laid down in the resolution to be adopted.
F. PETRELLA (Argentina): Deseo expresar que he recibido instrucciones de asociarme con las delegaciones que apoyan el proyecto de resolución que figura en el documento 80/4.
CHAIRMAN: This concludes the first time round. I see that some delegates are asking to speak for the second time but I do not think it needs all this debate, because up to now nearly forty delegates have spoken and the trend is quite clear. However, in order to facilitate the debate I will ask the delegate of France to speak for the second time and then the others too, quickly.
P. ELMANOWSKY (France): J'avoue que je regrette de demander la parole une seconde fois sur ce sujet à cette heure tardive mais il me semble nécessaire de le faire car il y a plusieurs choses à préciser et malgré les réponses qui nous ont été données tout n'est pas parfait.
Tout d'abord, une fois de plus je le repète, de notre part, il ne s'agit nullement d'une question de défiance à l'encontre de qui que ce soit. En second lieu nous savons très bien que compte tenu des difficultés de versement rapide des cotisations, l'Organisation peut, peut-être plus maintenant que précédemment, avoir des difficultés. D'autre part, il n'a jamais été dans notre esprit d'envisager de compromettre le programme et le budget de l'Organisation quel que soit le montant du budget qui sera finalement adopté: ce n'est pas là la question. Je suis certain que comme tout bon gestionnaire M. West établit chaque année une sorte de planning mensuel des recettes reçues et des recettes escomptées et en face il y a très certainement les dépenses engagées et les dépenses à engager. De là apparaît une sorte de bilan équilibré ou deséquilibré, peu importe, compte tenu du retard dans les versements des cotisations et il est vraisemblable que, même avec les facultés données par l'utilisation, d'une part du compte de réserve et du fonds de roulement, il soit possible qu'apparaisse à un certain moment une prévision de déséquilibre. Ce que nous suggérons c'est que, dans une hypothèse de ce genre, puisqu'il est difficile de réunir le Conseil, le Secrétariat, au moment où il semble que cela va prendre mauvaise tournure ne saisisse les Etats Membres du Conseil d'une proposition du Directeur général qui pourrait avoir la teneur suivante: "Messieurs, la situation est telle que je suis amené à vous demander l'autorisation d'emprunter (disons un chiffre n'ayant aucun rapport avec la réalité) de 50 millions de dollars par exemple, et ceci compte tenu de ce que les versements que j'escompte n'interviendront pas avant six mois: est-ce que je puis emprunter 50 millions de dollars pour six mois? Les Etats ainsi consultés et suivant les règles et le règlement général seraient tenus de répondre par Oui ou par Non. Je suppose qu'à ce moment-là la proposition du Directeur général serait acceptée et si c'est non elle serait rejetée et effectivement cela poserait un problème au Directeur général. Je crois que dans un cas de ce genre il serait peut-être bon de convoquer une session extraordinaire. En tout cas, le chiffre de 50 millions d'était qu'un exemple. Il ne faut pas le considérer comme une limite. Il me semble que ces questions précises et ces exemples précis peuvent obtenir une réponse et on peut savoir si cela est faisable. On nous demande de prendre une décision au Conseil maintenant et effectivement c'est une affaire de gestion, mais n'oublions pas que nous avons la Conférence qui va nous occuper durant les semaines à venir et si le Conseil ne peut prendre une décision sur ce sujet aujourd'hui, je ne crois pas qu'il y ait une règle qui interdise à la Conférence, si le Conseil n'a pas pu se prononcer en temps utile, de prendre la décision elle-même.
Je ne sais pas si je me trompe dans mon interprétation mais c'est une question que je soumets au Secrétariat. Je voulais ajouter ceci: Croyez bien que nous sommes, en faisant cette proposition, tenus par des instructions précises de nos autorités financière et que vraiment nous essayongs, en vous faisant cette proposition de compromis, d'arriver à un résultat favorable.
CHAIRMAN: The Chairman of the CCLM told us clearly that this is a matter which is within the constitutional responsibility of the Council. Therefore there is no need to refer this matter to the Conference, and we shall settle it here, rather than take it up to the Conference, because it is within our own powers to do so.
G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Intervenimos por primera vez al final de un debate bastante prolongado con la esperanza de hacer una contribución que pueda producir una solución favorable para todos sobre el contenido de este debate.
Entendemos que aunque las apariencias sean contrarias, hay algunos argumentos esgrimidos en contra yen pro de este proyecto de resolución que se acercan bastante, sobre todo después de la última intervención del colega de Francia en la cual él ha reiterado cierto espíritu de aceptación a este proyecto de resolución, naturalmente con las condiciones que él ha enumerado nuevamente.
Con base en eso nosotros proponemos formalmente que esté proyecto de resolución pase al Comité de Redacción; en el Comité de Redacción están representados varios de los países que principalmente han intervenido en este debate y allí podría encontrarse una fórmula satisfactoria. Nosotros no pretendemos esbozar ahora esa fórmula porque comprendemos que una redacción no sería fácil de adoptar inmediatamente sobre un texto leído ahora al momento, pero el acuerdo podría consistir en reforzar el párrafo 5 del proyecto de resolución, por ejemplo suprimiendo las tres líneas centrales del párrafo 5, diciendo simplemente: "Pide al Director General que, sin perjuicio de hacer uso discrecionalmente de la
autorización otorgada en el párrafo 1 que precede'', suprimiría todo lo demás y continuaría "consulte de antemano al Comité de Finanzas sobre esta medida etc."
Creemos que esto sería viable porque el Comité de Finanzas se reúne dos veces al año, en primavera y en otoño, y suponemos que si una crisis se ha de presentar no sería con un carácter tan inmediato que no impida consultar al Comité de Finanzas. Además, en una ocasión anterior, por lo menos, el Comité de Finanzas fue convocado a una reunion extraordinaria, de manera que creemos que esta sería una solución que contemplaría en buena medida la inquietud de Francia. El Comité de Finanzas es un órgano asesor del Consejo y sus miembros son elegidos por nosotros, los miembros del Consejo.
CHAIRMAN: Colombia, are you making a formal proposition to amend paragraph 5? Because nobody has made any suggestion as to amendments.
G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): He hecho una propuesta concreta de que el proyecto de Resolución pase al Comité de Redacción a fin de ver si se encuentra una solución satisfactoria. Como base de ese posible entendimiento he sugerido una modificación al párrafo 5. Dije de antemano, y lo repito ahora, no pretendo que el Consejo discuta textualmente mi propuesta de enmienda al párrafo 5; la enuncié solamente para que si mi propuesta es aceptada, en el Comité de Redacción ese enunciado nuestro sirva de base a la discusión.
CHAIRMAN: But the Finance Committee is also a committee of this Council and I sat in during their discussions. I can tell you they spoke for many hours and this was not what the original proposal was from the Secretariat and the Finance Committee, after spending very many hours, came to this proposal that we have now. Therefore, to send it back to another committee I do not think is going to solve the problem.
A.G. NGONGI NAMANGA (Cameroon): We made an intervention under the mistaken impression that the matter was to be referred to the Conference. The Cameroon delegation supports the proposed resolution and the matter should be settled here at the Council and we propose that this resolution should be adopted.
M. GHASSI (Syria) (original language Arabic): I understood that the authority to borrow had to be referred to the Conference but I now understand that Council is authorized to adopt it and therefore I suggest that Council adopts this Resolution without reference whatsoever to the Conference generally.
G. STREEB (United States of America): I think we are in a different situation here than we were on the other agenda items. In those cases we all felt, well, we get one more chance in the Conference, so we can just pass the subject on and we do not have to intervene again but now we are being asked to take a decision it tends to change the nature of the debate a bit. I simply wanted to suggest that we have been focussing almost exclusively here oil the income side of the account and been paying very little attention to the expenditure side. Again, as I indicated before, while there are constraints on the Organization because of the sizeable percentage of its budget which goes to the salaries and expenses which cannot be so easily deferred there are other elements in the programme where if it appears that for a period of several months there will be a cash flow problem we could anticipate delays in payments, other kinds of techniques to get around that problem, plus having access to the other two accounts. In any case I hope it is clear that Mr. West's intervention regarding the why, he does not understand why we do not have the same position with respect to freedom of use of these funds; he recognizes that both the working fund and the Special Reserve is a fixed amount of money and therefore there is a limitation to the extent to which one can go to those funds, and as I have said before there has been some suggestion that one way perhaps some of their problems could be solved with respect to this Resolution is to look at the question of some limitation. Certainly it is true that the Director-General cannot exceed the total amount of his authorized budget but what does he do if he anticipates a certain flow of income and for a period of several months his revenues are lower than that and he begins to borrow. He still has to project down towards the end of the year what his revenues might be. What happens if his revenues are not that, not because of payments made in that quarter but because of
non-payment made at all? He has now got himself exposed in borrowing and the income is not even sufficient to repay the amount that he has borrowed at the end of this biennium because of governments 'non-payments. I do not see where that constraint comes in here because he could make a very, very legitimate projection which anyone here could have made, might have made ourselves, so that there is nothing that he did wrong or mismanaged. He simply anticipated legitimately a certain flow of income and it did not materialize. Which leads me to a final question to the Finance Committee, I am a little perplexed why there is not a statement in here regarding repayment and timing. I do not understand how you can grant somebody the authority to borrow without spelling out also the conditions for the repayment of the funds you borrowed. They specify that income must be paid out of the miscellaneous income but there is nothing to take care of this difference between income and potential exposure of borrowing if the two do not match, so I am a little puzzled as to why that is not in here.
It strikes me that irrespective of the fact that there may be a majority here who favour this resolution as it is and there are several of us who do not support it, there are also others who have questions and it may be advisable to refer this whole question back to the Finance Committee and have them address the questions, not necessarily mine, but others that have been raised by some other delegates here, to see what the possibilities are for tightening this Resolution up and address some of those concerns in the process and then take another look at the resolution a second time.
BEL HADJ AMOR (President du Comité financier): Depuis un moment, j'avais demandé la parole non pas pour critiquer bien sûr la position des délégués car je sais que le Comité des finances fait des recommandations mais qu'il appartient aux délégués de décider de l'adoption ou bien du refus de ces recommandations. Je respecte cette attitude mais j'ai voulu quand même éclaircir certains points avant de répondre à la question précise posée par le délégué des Etats-Unis concernant le délai de remboursement comme si on était déjà devant la banque pour encaisser le premier emprunt.
Tout d'abord je voudrais rappeler au Conseil que les sept Régions de cette Organisation sont représentées au Comité des finances. Ces délégués ont étudié avec beaucoup de sérieux et beaucoup de soin la proposition du Directeur général. Or, j'ai eu l'impression - et c'est pour cela que j'ai demandé la parole - que certains délégués ont pu peut-être douter de la manière dont le Comité a examiné cette question. Je tiens à préciser à cet égard que, du moins à notre avis, nous avons pleinement respecté l'orthodoxie et la rigueur qui doivent être de règle dans toute opération et toute gestion financières.
En recommandant ce texte, après l'avoir amendé, nous n'avons pas du tout l'impression d'avoir donné un chèque en blanc au Directeur général, qui, soit dit en passant et entre parenthèses, et ne l'oubliez pas Messieurs les délégués, a déjà la responsabilité de 300 millions de dollars. C'est le budget qu'il gère. Plus 370 millions, le budget qu'il va gérer pour le prochain biennium. Il a donc déjà la responsabilité d'une grande gestion. Après avoir longuement discuté - et nous nous sommes référés dans notre rapport au résumé des explications qui nous ont été fournies - si j'ai précisé cela c'est juste pour rappeler au Conseil qu'il n'y a pas seulement M. West qui vous a donné des explications. Il aurait suffi de lire ce qu'il y a dans le rapport pour avoir déjà réponse à de nombreuses questions que vous vous êtes posées. Là également je dois vous dire que, non seulement dans le rapport du Comité des finances, mais aussi moi-même dans mon exposé, nous avons dit également que cette autorisation ne constituera que le troisième recours. Donc, ce n'est pas seulement le Secrétariat que vous le dit, mais également le Comité des finances que l'a précisé en ce sens.
C'est pour vous dire que c'est avec beaucoup d'objectivité que nous avons étudié cette résolution et nous estimons profondément - ce n'est pas pour faire plaisir au Secrétariat mais c'est notre conviction -que cette autorisation sera nécessaire pour le Secrétariat et pour le Directeur général dans le futur car nous avons des prévisions dont vous avez uniquement un échantillon; et c'est à notre demande que vous avez le tableau concernant les éventuels déficits pour 1982-1983 mais la situation sera encore plus difficile.
C'est pourquoi à la lumière de ce qui s'est produit dans le passé, à la lumière de ce que nous avons vécu et de ce que nous vivons actuellement, pour 1981 il nous a semblé que peut-être il faudrait envisager un troisième recours et ce n'est que sous cet angle que nous avons décidé d'examiner la proposition du Directeur général concernant l'autorisation d'emprunter et également de la recommander pour votre approbation; mais dans l'esprit du Comité des finances cela ne signifie pas qu'elle sera automatiquement employée. Or, d'après les commentaires de certains délégués, j'ai l'impression que certains d'entre eux sont sûrs dès maintenant qu'ils ne vont pas payer leurs contributions en temps voulu. Donc, vous encouragez en réalité le Secrétariat à avoir recours à cette autorisation.
Deuxièmement, je ne suis pas de l'avis de ceux qui ont dit - parce que la question nous l'avons posée nous-mêmes - que si nous allons recommander cette autorisation tous les pays vont alors être encouragés à ne pas payer. Ce n'est pas vrai parce que tout peut se discuter.
Pour ce qui est du contrôle, d'aucuns ont dit: Nous ne voyons pas du tout qu'un contrôle existe. Le croyez-vous sincèrement? Parce que nous avons nous-mêmes posé la question du contrôle. Tout le paragraphe 5 a été entièrement conçu par le Comité des finances, c'est son libellé. Croyez-vous sincèrement qu'un Directeur général qui a la gestion d'un budget de 400 millions de dollars va s'amuser sans raison à utiliser une autorisation d'emprunt dès lors qu'il n'en a pas besoin? Je ne le crois pas. Du moins, quand je dis "je ne le crois pas", je ne le crois pas non plus au nom du Comité des finances et nous ne pensons pas du tout avoir péché par excès d'optimisme, de confiance ou autre en recommandant ce projet de résolution. Nous avons estimé que cette autorisation protégerait le Programme mais protégerait également les Etats Membres car le contrôle existe et je ne pense pas qu'il y aura un mismanagement pour l'utilisation de cette autorisation d'emprunter.
Pour ce qui est du délai de remboursement, c'est vrai, nous n'avons pas discuté du détail d'un délai de remboursement. On a discuté surtout du principe d'autant plus qu'il y a deux nuances. Je sais que M. le délégué de la France n'aime pas ce terme, mais je continue à l'utiliser. En parlant de nuances on ne cite pas de montant, on ne cite pas de délai. A présent je me réfère au paragraphe 3.69 où on dit que ce sont des sources internes qui doivent être utilisées. Je crois que le délai de remboursement ne se pose pas alors comme si l'on s'adressait à la Chase Manhattan Bank ou à une banque privée. C'est pour cela que nous n'avons pas discuté de cette question.
CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Chairman of the Finance Committee. I think the question is quite clear. We have discussed this matter, we have allowed a long discussion over this. As I said, the Finance Committee also discussed it. The positions taken are quite clear, and I do not think deferring this matter to next year will solve the problem. In the first place, this particular item, the resolution, came up in the interest of protecting the Organization's programmes. This has been explained by the Chairman of the Finance Committee, explained by everybody, those who spoke, especially the members of the Finance Committee.
When a situation like this arises, there is one way of solving it, that is going to vote. As you know, I do not like to divide this Council. There was only one occasion, I think, on which we had to divide. That was at our last biennium. If we divide from the trend, from the consensus, the result is quite obvious, because on my list that I have here, those who spoke in favour of the resolution are 28, and those who had some reservations are 10, and the list of the countries is there, so the conclusion is well known already.
Therefore, I suggest to you that you adopt this resolution by consensus and ask the Director-General, perhaps, to consult the Finance Committee before taking any decision in this respect. The resolution is here before you, and I suggest that you adopt it by consensus.
Yes, the resolution is adopted by consensus, bearing in mind all the discussions, all the objections, all the doubts that were raised, and which will be reflected in our report.
DIRECTOR-GENERAL: I have followed very carefully this debate from the beginning. I did not expect such a hot debate. The situation really is exceptional this year and will continue to be exceptional. I have enquired from my colleagues in other agencies. They have the same situation, in which a high percentage of contributions have not been paid and there are arrears. So, this year for the first time, I have allowed myself to address the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of all major contributors who were seriously in arrears, as well as Ministers in some developing countries. This is the first time that I have written such letters. My colleague, Mr. Skoufis, has asked all the permanent representatives in Rome of countries in arrears to see him. He was reporting to me every day about the payment of countries such as Switzerland, Germany. When I was visiting some countries, I also discussed the subject with Ministers. I think, however, that this trend will continue to be as such.
There are of course high rates of interest in some countries for dollar investments and countries apparently have preferred to delay the payment on this account. Some countries also have difficulties because of swings in the exchange rates of the dollar. Thus, some governments have provided in their budgets a certain amount to meet contributions to the FAO budget at a specific exchange rate for the dollar of their own currencies, but it has happened that the dollar has been revalued and they have found themselves unable to meet their full contributions in dollars entirely, at the right time.
We are living in a difficult economic situation. This is why I have asked the Finance Committee to give me this authority to borrow. We have had it before, but have never used it. When we were given this authority before, no one expressed concern on details such as modes of repayment. Those details are certainly important, but they were not raised then.
I can see that 75 percent of those who have spoken, i.e. 28 countries out of 38, have supported this Resolution. I know that 10 countries who represented 25 percent of those who have spoken are very important Member countries, for wellknown reasons.
I would be tempted by a spirit of conciliation to say I do not insist on having this authority, but in that case I would be giving up my responsibility and putting the Organization in a dangerous situation. We may already have a crisis, and everything shows that we are going to need this authority in the next biennium. The Council will not meet before a year from now. I do not think I have the right to take the risk to say let us discuss the matter again in a year's time.
I can however promise, formally, that for this biennium, I will consult the Finance Committee. They are going to meet in the Spring and Autumn. If between those two dates, there is something very urgent, I will still consult them by correspondence. I may even call for an extraordinary session of the Finance Committee.
I will do it. So, you can be assured that the Finance Committee will be consulted in order to give me prior authority for borrowing. I also would agree that the matter can be reviewed in 1983 in the light of a report I will make to you at the end of 1983 on how this authority has functioned if at all,
I do not want to have to use this authority. If, therefore, at that time it is true that there is no need, I myself can tell you to please cancel it or modify it.
I repeat that if I am not able to consult the Finance Committee between its sessions, I will, if necessary, call for an extraordinary session of the Finance Committee to put the matter before them. In fact, gentlemen, it means that this authority is given to the Finance Committee, not to me. I repeat, it will not be an authority given to the Director-General, since, if I have to go to the Finance Committee to ask their permission to allow me to borrow, the authority will not be given to me but to the Finance Committee. This is very clear.
It will cost money to have a small session of the Finance Committee, but if necessary, we will do it. Thus, you will have a guarantee that this Committee, which is elected by you, which has your authority to go through the financial questions, will be fully consulted and will be asked by me to authorize me to borrow, if need be. I hope not.
We will afterwards review our experience and next year I will make a report and we can see how we should proceed with this authority - if there is a need to keep it or if there is a need to take it away. In fact, what I am saying now, to conclude, is that I am passing on my authority to borrow which you are giving me, to the Finance Committee for this biennium.
CHAIRMAN: I think this is not a confrontation. I have made it quite clear. This is a matter of concern for the welfare of the Organization, so that is quite clear.
Now, the resolution is adopted by consensus, but as I said, all the fears, etc., expressed will be fully reflected in our report so that the situation will be presented as it is.
DIRECTOR-GENERAL: I want to put on record what I have said, that the Director-General, while thanking you for the authority which is given to him to borrow, will for this biennium undertake in any case to consult the Finance Committee before borrowing, even at the cost of calling a special session of the Finance Committee, and that I will report on the whole matter in two years' time, at the end of the next biennium, to see whether the authority is still needed or not.
G. STREEB (United States of America): We are just sort of mulling over what this implies. I certainly have no desire at all to upset the concept of consensus as you have described it and I appreciate why you want and need to pursue that approach. What I am not quite sure about is the relationship between the record of the Council and the Resolution. The Resolution will sort of stand in isolation and will be seen as a Resolution, but the fact that there had been reservations about this issue will be buried in the body of the report, and in the future there will be reference to the Resolution. The United States ---
CHAIRMAN: May I explain that there was a long debate for and against, and from the record I have, those who are in favour of the Resolution are more in number; if we have to vote, they will win, so what I am asking is that we adopt this Resolution, but all the debate will be reflected fully.
If you or anybody does not want to be associated with it, this can be reflected, this is something that we have done in footnotes, and so on. You can always explain you are for it or against it, but since we have not voted this is not brought into it at all.
G. STREEB (United States of America): I am not an FAO Parliamentarian, and as I said, I am not trying to provoke myself into a vote that I am going to lose, although I do not mind going on the record, frankly, but I do not like to upset your own desire to not have this sort of thing happen in this Council, and so out of respect for your desire to do that, that is why I want to avoid that.
On the other hand, when I get back home and my budget people raise hell with me for having joined in the consensus to give the Director-General the authority to borrow, I am going to have to say, "Well, if you look on page 13 of the report you will find that I had some doubts about it", and what I am wondering is where I get this cross-reference. If that is impossible, I will just go along with it.
CHAIRMAN: We have a verbatim record of Council proceedings, we have a verbatim record of what everybody said, and normally you check it. If you think you have been wrongly quoted, within a certain limited time they can correct it.
E.M. WEST (Assistant Director-General, Office of Programme, Budget and Evaluation): As you said, Mr. Chairman, we have a verbatim record, and even when the United States delegate coughed, that was taken down in the record. We also have the narrative of the report and the narrative will make clear reference to the views expressed by all delegates, not individually but the group of views, and then the conclusion will be that the Council generally agreed to proceed with the resolution. The resolution was adopted. If we use the word "generally" after that narrative part, together with the verbatim record, I think you can defend even your cough to your friends at home.
W.A.F. GRABISCH(Germany, Federal Republic of): My delegation welcomes the explanations given by the Director-General, and we see a certain inconsistency between what he said and what is written down in our documents about the resolution. We still wonder whether it will not be worthwhile to bring this into conformity, and to make an effort to re-draft, in view of what the Director-General said on para. 5 of the resolution. I think it might be worthwhile.
CHAIRMAN: We have concluded this, I think. It is late and we have not even concluded our morning agenda items.
The meeting rose at 18.00 hours
La séance est levee à 18 h 00
Se levanta la sesión a las 18.00 horas
