- Personnel Matters (continued)
Questions de personnel (suite)
Cuestiones de personal (continuación)
- World Conference on Fisheries Management and Development (continued)
Conférence mondiale sur l'amenagement et la mise en valeur des pèches (suite)
Conferencia Mundial sobre Ordenación y Desarrollo Pesqueros (continuación)
- Use of Consultants 1980-81 (continued)
Emploi de consultants en 1980-81 (suite)
Empleo de consultores en 1980-81 (continuación)
- Import Licenses for Equipment for Official Use (continued)
Licences d'importation de matériel et fournitures à usage officiel (suite)Licencias de importación de equipo para uso official (continuación)
D.H.J. ABEYAGOONASEKERA (Chairman, Finance Committee): To begin with I should like to draw the attention of the Council to the two Reports of the Finance Committee which I shall be constantly referring to during the course of my introduction as well as later on when the substantive items come up for discussion in the agenda. The document CL 82/4 refers to the Forty-ninth Session of the Finance Committee held in the spring of 1982. Document CL 82/11 refers to the Fiftieth Session of the Finance Committee, held in the autumn of 1982. The table of contents appearing on page (i) of document CL 82/4 and page (iii) in CL 82/11 gives the order in which the items were dealt with. You will notice that they conform to the same pattern in both sessions, we have taken the budgetary matters first, financial matters, personnel matters, organizational matters, and other matters for information. Under each category the subjects dealt with are also listed, those matters which are for discussion and/or for decision by the Council are shown separately in a caged page. Your attention is drawn to these items particularly.
Since our reports embody our views, recommendations and decisions on these important issues at this point I should like to refer to a few of them briefly, even though some of them are listed as separate items on your agenda. When we refer to the financial position of the Organization we are basically talking about contribution matters, the cash position of FAO, the present level of contributions achieved on the current year of assessment and of the possible consequences to the Organization resulting in delayed payments of contributions. Since this item will be dealt with when we take up item 13.1 I will be presenting to you the Committee's views and recommendations at that stage.
At the Forty-ninth Session we reviewed the financial position of the Separation Payment Scheme Fund as at January 1981, together with the report on it by the actuary. In order to meet the Organization's liabilities under this scheme for staff paid under Regular Programme and under Extra-Budgetary Funds the Committee has made specific recommendations. These appear in paragraph 37 of our Report in document CL 82/4.
During our Fiftieth Session on the financial matters we considered the audited accounts for the Regular Programme for 1980/81, UNDP 1981, and World Food Programme 1981, along with the External Auditors, report on these. Our notes appear in the relevant paragraph 2.36 to 2,53 of our Report. Since this item appears separately under the Council's agenda item 13.2 I shall be presenting to you our recommendations on these audit reports when that item is taken.
Under Personnel Matters at our Forty-ninth Session we were informed of changes necessary in the payment of dependency allowances between salary surveys in accordance with the International Civil Service Commission's recommendations. We were also informed of adjustments necessary in the rates of allowances for dependent children of staff in the general services and related categories with effect from the 1st July 1982. Since these changes involve substantial cost increases for 1982 in the payment of these allowances under the Regular Programme and support Costs, the Council's attention is drawn to paragraphs 48 and 50 of our Report of the Forty-ninth Session.
At the Fiftieth Session we were informed of certain changes in salaries and allowances for staff in the professional and higher categories. We were also informed of the approval by the United Nations General Assembly at the Thirty-Fifth Session of a dual system of pensionable remuneration for staff in these categories which have been recommended by the International Civil Service Commission. I am getting on to technical matters but I hope you will forgive me, as this is inevitable in discussing
this item. Since a distinction was made between pensionable remunerations for benefit purposes which is presently adjusted on the basis of the US Consumer Price Index and a pensionable remuneration for contribution purposes which should continue to be adjusted on the basis of the weighted average of post adjustments, in the calculation of separation payments which is now being adjusted only on the weighted average post adjustments and not of movements of the Consumer Price Index, changes in the FAO Staff Regulations to provide for using gross salary adjusted by movements of the weighted average of price adjustments, less staff'assessment, for calculating separation payments would become necessary. The approval of the Council to change staff regulations 301.155 and 301.162 and authorize the Director-General to amend staff regulations to give effect to these changes in salaries and allowances, therefore, is necessary.
In this connexion I wish to draw the attention of the Council to paragraphs 2.51 and 2.63 of our Fiftieth Report.
In regard to the General Service Category II, the International Civil Service Commission has made certain recommendations on the methodology for between survey adjustments at headquarters duty stations. These are referred to in paragraph 2.64, 2.68 in our Fiftieth Report.
Since the item on personnel matters is listed separately in the Council agenda under item 15, I shall be drawing your attention to the relevant decisions at the appropriate time.
Under Organizational Matters we reviewed eight Joint Inspection Unit Reports presented to us at the last two sessions and since we have already dealt with this item last Friday I will not dwell on it.
Also on Organizational Matters, at both sessions of our Committee we discussed and reported at length the present situation regarding Headquarters Accommodation or rather the inadequacy of facilities in order to cope satisfactorily with the demands made on the FAO and also in having to operate in two places, thereby incurring additional expenditure. Since most Council Members are conversant with the problem, I will not go into details at this stage. I shall only say that the situation remains unchanged. The Committee's views appear in the paragraph that follows this item in the Report. In view of the delays encountered we are making certain specific recommendations and these will be discussed when we take up item 14. At that stage the Secretariat will also report to you the latest position regarding the negotiations with the host government on this matter. I might add, however, that our concern on this matter took a serious turn in view of another development. I refer to the litigation with the landlords of Building F. Since this subject is being dealt with separately under item 18 when we take up the Report of the CCLM I will be referring to the possible financial implications of an unfavourable court decision at that stage.
Under Other Matters, during both sessions we were verbally informed of delays and refusals in obtaining duty free import licences for equipment and materials which the FAO had been regularly importing for official purposes. The Director-General also referred to these rather annoying and irritating instances which amount to a violation of certain articles which are in the agreement. The Committee felt that any increases in expenditure arising unnecessarily as a result of such developments would have to be reported to the Council immediately. The Council would be provided with more information on this matter, particularly in regard to the recent discussions that FAO has had with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Permanent Representative of Italy when this subject is taken up under item 15.
Under the heading 'Matters of Information' I wish to draw attention to two items which are of considerable importance, namely our consideration of a report submitted to us on duty travel in the 1980/81 biennium and the report on the use of consultants in 1980/81. Your attention is drawn to paragraphs 2.4 - 2.7 and paragraphs 2.10. - 2.12 of our report of the 50th Session.
At the 42nd and 46th Sessions of the Finance Committee the Committee considered the report on duty travel for the biennia 1976/77 and 1978/79. Since they provided useful information the Committee had requested the Director-General to submit at regular intervals similar reports on duty travel relating to costs incurred by the various branches and to analyse the frequency of travel. It is well known that air travel costs have risen tremendously over the years. Therefore the need to keep travel under control becomes more important.
We noted that most of the travel had been undertaken by departments entrusted with the programmes of development. The Department of Agriculture has taken up almost 50 percent of the total amount of travel costs. The bulk of the trips under the regular programmes have been undertaken by P4s and P5s. We should also notice that the key activities each year could change and in the 1980/81 biennium the highest expenditure on travel has been for animal disease control.
The Committee was also informed of the recent arrangements made with the travel agencies which have resulted in the Organization making savings through reimbursements made by the travel agency in the volume of travel involved. We were informed that this had resulted in FAO increasing savings from $517 000 in 1980 to $978 000 in 1981. Incidentally I may mention that an inspector from the Joint Inspection Unit had mentioned that FAO was the only organization which had this kind of arrangement. Any savings from travel will be credited to miscellaneous income and this would ultimately go to the Member Nations. The present savings constitute around 7 percent of the Working Capital Fund.
On the use of consultants by FAO, since we have a separate item I shall not be discussing this item at this stage.
In conclusion I would like to say that in presenting this introduction to the two reports of our Committee I have tried to be as brief as possible. Since we will be taking up some of the more important items this afternoon in items 13, 14 and 15, more information will be provided at that stage.
Before I conclude I wish to state that my Committee had the fullest cooperation in our work from the Director-General, the Deputy Director-General and the Directors and from all the senior and secretarial staff during our sessions. The Director-General addressed us on two occasions at the Joint Sessions of the Programme Committee and the Finance Committee when very important subjects such as contribution matters or headquarters accommodation issues were discussed. The Executive Director of the World Food Programme and his staff were very cooperative and patient with us during the session on the World Food Programme work, particularly in discussing the external auditors' reports and supplementary budgetary estimates for 1982/83.
Mr. Chairman, you yourself, by attending our sessions when important issues were being discussed, lent us valuable guidance and assistance drawing on your own experience in these matters. On behalf of the Committee I wish to express our deep appreciation. We look forward to working in the future sessions of our Committee with equal dedication.
CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Chairman of the Finance Committee, for this very lucid and succinct report on a number of complicated issues which you presented with a great deal of clarity. We are grateful to you and members of your Committee.
A. DOUEDARI (Syria) (original language Arabic): I apologize if I repeat something which has already been said. This is due to the fact that I was not present at all the sessions because I have been called out. I did so much wish to be able to be here so that I could benefit from the experience and ideas of all the other members.
I would like to say briefly that the Syrian delegation is very satisfied with the report on the World Food Programme. I would like to thank Dr. Ingram and congratulate him on the very successful work he has been carrying out, particularly over the few years that he has been working with it. We are sure that the World Food Programe will continue to expand its activities despite the problems that it is facing primarily due to the lack of financial resources.
I have noted the document of the CFA and we would approve all the recommendations in it. We also support the proposal of the Director-General aiming at reconsidering the concept of food security. We would particularly like to render homage to the Director-General for the great efforts he is making in this field.
We would also like to express our support for paragraph 16 of this report in which it is stated that one-third of the commitments should be made in cash for the IEFR. My country has a particular interest in the World Food Day and we would like to congratulate FAO for the work that it has done in this regard. It has been able to make world opinion more aware of the problems of hunger and malnutrition and its effects throughout the world.
I would like to take this opportunity to associate myself with what has been said by all the other delegates in regard to the recommendations of the Finance and Programme Committees as well as to give our support to the medium-term-objectives as presented by the Finance and Programme Committees. I also agree on the insertion of the document on medium-term-objectives in the report of the two committees in order to avoid duplication and make savings.
I pay tribute to the two committees for their efforts and reserve the right to discuss other items of the agenda later.
A.F.M. DE FREITAS (Brazil): According to the decisions finally reached in the Council as regards the agenda, with your permission, Sir, I am going to make a general statement on the report of the Programme Committee now under discussion.
My delegation reserves the right to intervene again on the different points included in this item if it thinks it is necessary.
My delegation would like at the outset to express its position regarding the present organization
of the work of the Programme and Finance committees. We believe that the existing four-year cycle of reviews as established by Rule XXVI 7 (a) (ii) of the General Rules of the Organization is less than fully satisfactory, and that there is room for improvement in this important activity. In fact my delegation would like to see more time of the non-Conference year session of the Council which is usually held in the autumn of the even years being devoted to a more comprehensive and better review of the Programme of Work and Budget. The autumn session of the even years, like the one we are presently holding, should allow more time to discuss and review the performance of our Organization according to the Programme of Work and Budget approved by the previous Conference. If we analyse our agenda we will see that out of 19 working meetings only one of them is scheduled for a proper discussion of the Programme. Except for a few items, like ones dealing with the world food and agriculture situation, the World Food Programme, world food security and forestry, substantial subject matters are not presented in such a way as to occupy the relevant part of our time. JIU reports and sundry matters of form, not of substance, like the format of documents, the question of unscheduled and cancelled meetings, World Food Day activities, legal matters, important as they may be to the functioning of FAO, if taken individually seem to demand a disproportionate space in our agenda, and may take an undue amount of time. My delegation believes that the presentation of the agenda itself should be such as to follow the general priorities recommended in the Programme of Work and Budget. In the present arrangement, under which the Programme and Finance Committees are now working members of the Council, they will hardly have the opportunity to read reports or discuss the implementation of the so-called major programmes, not to speak of the other programmes, approved by the previous conference before the new Programme of Work and Budget comes up for consideration and decision. My delegation believes that a number of distortions could be avoided, and a better allocation of resources accorded to the approved priorities could be established, if the Council had a fuller opportunity to follow the implementation of the programme previously approved. My delegation is ready to consider any proposal on this matter. We are willing to take part in any discussion which would aim at redefining the present rules so that the Council may have an adequate opportunity to renew the approved Programme of Work and Budget before taking up the new one.
Coming to the documents containing the Programme and Finance Committee reports that we must examine in this session, we see some interesting features. I will limit my remarks to the reports of the Programme Committee, of which I am a member. In the report of the spring session we see a curious thing. According to the traditional summary presented in the first cr second page of the document there are no matters requiring decision, nor even discussion, by this Council. Yet the Committee reviewed the programmes concerning natural resources, crops, livestock, research and rural development, the very essence of the agricultural effort undertaken by FAO in the developing countries. Are we all happy with the way that these programmes were conceived and are now being implemented? Is everything perfect in such crucial areas as these mentioned? Have all the members of the Programme Committee expressed their full satisfaction with these programmes? I doubt it, Mr. Chairman. But let us go to the next report, the report of the autumn session of the Programme Committee. What are the matters set out for discussion or decision by this Council? Except for the establishment of a Regional Commission for Food Security for Asia and the Pacific we are invited to decide on the question of the format of documentation, the question of duties for the Conference on Fisheries Management and Development. One might wonder whether the Member Nations are really taking this Organization as seriously as they should. My delegation is not arguing that we should shun our duties and not take the decisions that are required from us. But is that all, Mr. Chairman? Do we not have any substantial theme for the Programme to discuss, to try to improve, to change, to suppress?
With your permission I will make a few comments on some of the Programme matters included in both the reports of the Programme Committee, even though we are told that in one of them there is no matter requiring discussion.
Brazil being a member of the Programme Committee, I can tell you that there are matters for discussion. There was even a lively discussion in the Committee even though it was decided that the report would make no mention of such discussions, though discussions were centred on the question of allocation of resources to the different programmes, even though there was no question, of course, of revising the budget, A number of delegations, including my own, expressed concern at the unsatisfactory level of resources allocated to some technical and economic programmes, like natural resources, crops, livestocks and others. When compared to certain other programmes which do not contribute directly to increases in agricultural production nor to improvements in agricultural productivity, such deviations from the approved priorities become even more apparent and are therefore even less acceptable. We, the Members of the Council, and as Members of this Organization in general, know we are not perfect. Therefore, we are likely to take decisions sometimes which may be improved later on or which should be subject to revision on a next occasion. A number of factors may contribute to that effect. We become conscious of them when we recall the busy and exciting days of the regular Conference. We may not have access to all the facts either because of lack of time, because they require a great amount of reading to be understood, or simply because the information was not easily available.
Our Programme of Work and Budget is a 300-page book stuffed with figures and tables. It requires careful reading in order to enable a delegate to perceive all its implications to analyse and compare programmes not only on a cost-benefit basis but from the viewpoint of the main objectives and priorities of the Organization. Very often enough time is not available. Not all countries can afford an expert programme analyst in their delegations, and above all, in practical terms it is almost impossible for a group of interested delegations to prepare and submit any substantial proposal which might imply any change in the Programme of Work and Budget.
In the opinion of my delegation, this situation increases the practical responsibilities of the Council. We believe that the Council should take advantage of the non-Conference year session in order to go back in a deeper and more extensive way to the Programme of Work and Budget. This effort will certainly be favoured by the absence of time pressure in the discussion differently from what happens during the Conference. We believe that the Organization as such has only to gain from this constant checking of the approved programme against the different stages of its implementation. This method might also facilitate a closer following of the changing reality of the developing countries in the agricultural sector. It may eventually allow a better analysis of the support that FAO is bringing them. It is in this spirit and in order to illustrate some of the remarks just made that my delegation will offer in connexion with the reports under consideration a brief analysis of the programme of work which is being implemented in the present biennium.
Let us first take a look at the original document, CL 82/3. This is the basic document containing the Programme of Work and Budget for the present biennium. In paragraph 5.4 of the explanatory notes, we see a diagram which represents the distribution of resources among the different chapters. According to this diagram, 44.7 percent of the budget is distributed to the technical and economic programmes, while 55.3 percent of it is distributed to the remaining chapters. A first look at this distribution could dispel our fears as to a reasonable allocation of resources in the regular budget, but a deeper and more careful inspection of the document is more likely to show us that this distribution can be improved in many ways. If we utilize the approved priorities as a yardstick to evaluate the allocation of resources in the budget, we may discover some disturbing deviations. They should deserve the attention of this body so that in a constructive way this Council may help the Director-General with suggestions and recommendations in the drafting of the next Programme of Work and Budget. It may also help enlighten the Member states for its discussion.
It is the view of my delegation that too much time is taken during the Conference by the discussion of the level of the budget so that too little time is left for the analysis of the structure of the budget itself, and little or no time in practice remains for any meaningful proposal to redistribute resources from one programme to another, from one chapter to another.
The case of the programmes that require our attention in this Session of the Council could be illustrative. I refer to the basic programmes which were reviewed at the spring session of the Programme Committee, namely natural resources, crops, livestock, research support and rural development. If we compare each one of these fundamental agricultural programmes to the programme called General Policy and Direction, we will see that each one of them is allocated much less resources than General Policy and Direction. In fact, the allocation for natural resources is half the allocation distributed to General Policy and Direction. Crops is barely two-thirds, livestock is a little more than one-third, not to speak of research support, which receives only one-sixth of the amount distributed to General Policy and Direction.
I am not going to deal with other so-called major programmes like fisheries and forestry. The allocation for fisheries is only three-fourths of that of General Policy and Direction. The one for the whole of forestry is barely half of it. Those programmes might well be called minor programmes. The only really major programme in the budget seems to be the Technical Cooperation Programme, which has the biggest single allocation in the whole document. One might think that the Programme entitled Agriculture gets the biggest allocation, but in fact agriculture is divided into nine programmes, and none of them gets as much money as TCP or General Policy and Direction. The second biggest single allocation in the programme is for FAO Representatives, and the third is for the programme entitled Support Services Administration. Moreover, if the delegates take the trouble to study carefully the different components of the technical and economic programmes, in particular the ones included in the spring report of the Programme Committee, they will easily see that non-substantial items like food policy, food information and programme management are responsible for a sizeable proportion of the allocation in that chapter. This situation corroborates one's concern that in fact the original document mentioned earlier in my intervention should be redesigned. There are reasons to indicate that the resources allocated to programmes which contribute directly to increase in agricultural production and to improvements in agricultural productivity amount only to about one-third of the budget and non-substantial activities may amount to about two-thirds of the budget. When I say non-substantial activities, I am not saying they are irrelevant, I am saying they should be the object of a very close examination by this Council and by the Director-General in order to try to establish the right balance among the different chapters, keeping in mind the approved priorities as well as the need for the indispensable emphasis on the technical and economic programmes.
My delegation would like to underline that it offers the present remarks in a very constructive spirit. Our comments on the allocation of resources arises out of our deep respect for the tasks
and the responsibilities of the Director-General. My government recognizes the enormous efforts undertaken by FAO under the Director-General's guidance in order to accomplish its duties in the developing world. It is precisely in order to facilitate this task that my delegation would like to propose that in the non-Conference year session of the Council, more of its time should be reserved for a broad general debate on the programme. My delegation believes that such a debate would allow Members of the Council to participate in a more concrete way in the preparation of the new Programme of Work and Budget. The different Committees of the Council like the Forestry Committee, the Agricultural Committee and the Fisheries Committee should study and discuss the technical and economic programmes of the Organization, but at the same time, my delegation believes that it is the constitutional obligation of the Council to take an active part in keeping the Programme of Work and Budget under constant review and in making the recommendations it deems convenient for its permanent adjustment to the approved priorities and, if necessary, for a timely correction of course in the next Programme of Work and Budget.
K. HADDAD (Lebanon): I have listened with interest and some bewilderment to Brazil. I would like to know why he has prompted this far-reaching intervention. We have heard the Chairman of the Programme Committee and have the Committee's report. There was no issue arising from the Programme Committee which has warranted this wide-ranging intervention. We do not need to tax our memories unduly to recall that our Conference and this Council have clearly and vigorously approved the priorities and strategies of the Organization, particularly as they have been identified and pursued since our Sixty-ninth Session in 1976.
Before the debate proceeds any further, I would strongly suggest, Mr. Chairman, that you request the Director-General to offer us his views.
DEPUTY DIRECTOR-GENERAL: Like you and all Members of the Council trying to follow what Brazil was saying with close attention and noting the motives which have prompted him to put this forward, as he explained them, and the constructive spirit in which he said he was doing it, it seemed to me that essentially his intervention falls into two parts. The first is one of procedures as established by the Basic Texts or by the Council itself, and the other was in essence a preview of the next Progamme of Work and Budget, at least the Brazilian delegation's views thereon. They are, however, connected to some extent, as I see it and as I will try to explain.
On procedures, what you have before you is the report of the Programme Committee on its review of some of the programmes in the Programme of Work and Budget. Under the Basic Texts the Programme Committee has from time to time to review the long-term objectives of the organization - not programmes or priorities as such. As part of that, it has for many years now, fifteen at least I think, undertaken a four-year cycle of reviews, taking sections of the Programme of Work and Budget at different sessions over the four-year cycle.
so, inter alia, this means whilst the Programme Committee as an institution goes on, the members change even during that process.
It was established at least ten years ago that these reviews should be mainly for the benefit of the education of the Programme Committee, and subsequently of the Council, in order to see how the programmes were working and what activities were going on, to achieve a better understanding of the technical part of the organization.
The Finance Committee does not perform comparable reviews of those chapters of the Programme of Work and Budget which fall under the Finance Committee, although in the nature of things personnel and financial matters are constantly before them and come up as separate matters for decision as at these sessions.
The reviews were basically for the education of the Programme Committee, and subsidiarily of the Council. However, about eight or ten years ago the Council decided it was spending too much time in rather pointless discussion of what the Programme Committee had already discussed and that in future it would in fact note the views of the Programme Committee on the programmes, and for several years now the Council has not asked for or wanted to discuss those sections of the Programme Committee Report which have contained their comments following their reviews of the particular programme at that Session. On the contrary, the Council decided that, time being short, it could not spend adequate time on the discussion of programmes at length, but should concentrate only on those matters which required decision. As the delegate of Brazil noted, there was nothing from the first Session which required decision, and those matters from the second Session of the Programme Committee which did require decision "are in fact before you as separate items. You may remember I explained this on the first day when discussing the agenda, that the Council had decided some time ago it only wanted on the agenda those items which were for decision.
There were one or two other procedural points which came up in the intervention we have heard and one or two of them I must say surprised me. It was suggested, for example, that it was a duty of the Council to keep under review the implementation of the. current programme. If you examine the Basic Texts I do not think you will find this. The Basic Texts talked at length about the functions of the Council and there is a whole page on the Council's duties in relation to the world food and agricultural situation and related matters, which would of course cover world food security and such matters as the establishment of a Food Security Commission.
In section 2 there is another page, only half of which deals with current and prospective activities of the Organization, but that half page is very specific. It refers to the summary and draft Programme of Work and Budget as submitted by the Director-General for the following financial period, not the current one, but the future one in the form submitted by the Director-General. It also refers to the activities of the Organization in relation to the UNDP, and then it refers to taking any necessary action with respect to the technical activities of the Organization.
May I observe en passant with regard to the technical activities that in one of the interesting commentaries we have just heard there was a reference to the TCP as if it was something separate from agriculture.
As I have observed in the past, what is the TCP unless it is agriculture, forestry and fisheries? It is not something separate. It is classified for budgetary purposes as being separate, but its whole substantive content is direct action in the field of agriculture, forestry, fisheries, or rural development or nutrition. It is directly in response to member governments' own priorities. The demand is made by the government itself in accordance with its perceptions of its immediate requirement. There is no clearer expression of the government's priorities other than the TCP project' It is agriculture in the broad sense.
As I said, there is nothing in the Councils functions under the Constitution which requires it to consider the question of programmes, their implementation in the present biennium, or indeed their shape in the next biennium. The Council is pledged to consider the proposals put to it by the Director-General under his exclusive responsibility for proposing a Programme of Work and Budget, and it should be remembered that he proposes the Programme of Work and not just a budget. Here of course one can sympathise with the distinguished delegate of Brazil - that it is the programmes and not just the budget level which should require attention.
Unfortunately, in the past there has been a great deal of attention on the level as such rather than on the programmes, but this is not an indication that there has been a controversy over programmes and priorities which would have occasioned concern by the Council, so that it would have to contemplate changing the Constitution, or changing its previous decision on procedure.
I could quote to you from various decisions taken by the Council and its subsidiary bodies with regard to the current Programme of Work and Budget. There is no suggestion in them that there is something wrong with them requiring constant attention and review. Of course, nothing is perfect and things can be changed and circumstances change them, and when this happens the Director-General comes to you with proposals for programmes for budgetary transfers which appear in the report, but for example the Joint Programme and Finance Committee Session said about the present budget that they fully supported the present strategy and budget proposed and considered they were consistent with the present situation and in accordance with previous policy guidance by the Council and Conference, so the Programme Committee itseli was saying "We have had guidance from the Council and Conference and the priorities are in accordance with that."
It was said also that it was generally felt that the organization deserved commendation for its priority programmes, the quality of the service provided to the governments and the economy and efficiency which it had shown in the implementation of activities.
So there is no crisis situation here, or visible situation which would seem to call for a change in the Constitution or adopted procedures. I could go on with quotations from the Council and Conference, but I think I have made my point from the records of the Programme and Finance Committee itself.
Finally, because I would not like to detain you too long, I would point out that the Programme of Work and Budget in its summary form is due to come before you next June, which is the crucial session of the Council. But before then priorities will have been considered by the major Council committees qualified not merely to judge on technical aspects but also on policy aspects. As I think you will find from their terms of reference, they are concerned with policy and not just the technical concept - I am referring to COAG, COFO and COFI.
In addition you will have the report of the Programme Committee itself. At this Session already you have the recommendations of the regional conferences, and there are many statutory bodies which are also reporting, and of course there are many individual views expressed directly to the Director-General in meetings with him. So I do not think it can be suggested there is a lack of guidance to the Director-General in the preparatory and pre-formulation stages of the Programme of Work and Budget.
This is all I should say at this point, although if some other points should arise, I hope you will again give me the occasion to speak.
DIRECTOR-GENERAL: My attention has been attracted by one sentence, that the Council should check the approved Programme of Work to see whether there was deviation in the allocations. If the Council wants to perform such a duty, as the distinguished delegate of Brazil suggested, it must do so during this Session.
This means that the Director-General must provide the Council with a report - another document -on implementation of the Programme of Work and Budget during 1982.
The Conference has reserved this right for itself. It has requested me to prepare a document on the implementation of the Programme of Work and Budget for 1982-83 as well as on the implementation of the field programme both of which will be considered by the Conference.
So as the Deputy Director-General has said, there is nothing in the Basic Texts which asks the Council to check whether there is a deviation in the allocations made in the Programme of Work and Budget.
My understanding, subject to correction, is that once the Conference has approved the Programme of Work and Budget then it is up to the Director-General and his staff to implement it and take the responsibility. We can provide information at any time on progress.
I wish also to make another remark about the agenda. The agenda for this Council is extremely important. We have constitutional and legal matters which relate to the future of this Organization. We have also the recommendations of the regional conferences, which have an impact on the details of agricultural programmes all together. We have also the creation of the Regional Commission for Food Security in the Far East which starts its work next year, and we need the Council's approval.
We have also to keep under review the world food situation which to my understanding is one of the major responsibilities of this Body.
CHAIRMAN: I thank both the Director-General and the Deputy Director-General for their additional clarifications and information.
S.S.BALANZINO (Italy): At this stage I have a point of clarification. There are some items which are referred to in the Finance Committee report which bring my government to the forefront. What I would like to know is whether the Chairman of the Finance Committee will touch upon the items in detail later on, or whether his intervention at the beginning has been exhaustive.
CHAIRMAN: We will come to this specific issue later. We are now on item 15, and you are thinking of items 13 and 14, on which there will be some introduction later.
N. KISHORE (India): About personnel matters, my delegation has noted that the United Nations General Assembly has yet to approve the recommendations of the ICSC. By the end of this Council Session the approval of the General Assembly may not be available. As the changes are proposed to be made from 1 January 1983, and as the next Session of the Council will be held in the middle of 1983, my delegation feels that it would be appropriate to authorize the Director-General of FAO to amend the staff regulations, to give effect to the changes in salaries and allowances as approved for the United Nations by the General Assembly.
It would also be in the fitness of things to authorize the Director-General to use his discretion in the applications of the changes in salaries and allowances approved by the United Nations General Assembly. The Director-General may, however, report the reasons for not implementing certain recommendations to the next sessions of the Finance Committee and the Council.
My delegation supports the proposal that the Director-General be authorized to amend staff regulations to give effect to the changes in the salaries and allowances approved for the United Nations by the General Assembly.
As regards the World Conference on Fishery Management and Development, my delegation fully supports the organization of the Conference. My delegation feels it would be in the fitness of things if the technical phase of the World Conference on Fisheries Management and Development takes place in May 1983, and the session of the Committee on Fisheries takes place in October of 1983. This will give 4 to 5 months to FAO to prepare the report and circulate it to members of Governments who would be able to have adequate time for making further suggestions for the consideration of the Committee on Fisheries.
My delegation also supports the proposal that the World Conference on Fisheries Management and Development should be open to all the members of the FAO or of the United Nations or its specialized agencies or of the International Atomic Energy Agency.
As regards the use of consultants, my delegation shares the concern of the Programme and Finance Committees over the excessive concentration of recruitment of consultants from a limited number of countries. My delegation supports the suggestion of the Programme Committee to have a policy of positive discrimination in favour of equally qualified applicants from developing countries and the use of more local consultants in order to reach a more balanced distribution, We also support the suggestion that FAO country representatives, regional offices and permanent representatives of governments to FAO should be instrumental in putting forward more names of suitable consultants and institutions for inclusion in the FAO roster,
A.H.EL SARKI (Egypt) (Original language Arabic): My delegation has taken the floor this morning in connexion with document CL 82/4. We shall now confine ourselves to document CL 82/3 and we wish to congratulate the Secretariat for its excellent preparation and presentation of this document. We welcome FAO activities aiming at preparing an integrated system of food crops and encouraging the use of organic fertilizers. We have benefitted from the Organization's experience in the employment of energy and also from the experience of two friendly countries, India and China, as well as technical assistance in the use of the remote sensing system for land census and classification. We attach great importance to FAO's Programme on crops and other sub-programmes, particularly that on selected seeds.
We also wish the implementation of the proposed regional project for improvement of food crops productivity which is at the basis for achieving food security. I also wish to pay tribute to the economic and social effects of the regional olive production project and its effect on the population in certain hit areas.
We also welcome the Organization's efforts for improving the situation of the rural population through income increase and employment by encouraging them to raise the silkworm. We also support all the campaigns for desert locust control which have their effects on all countries which could have been victims of infestations.
We also welcome the priority given to emergency programmes for controlling animal disease and the intensification of efforts for regional cooperation in the area of animal health and thus limiting the spreading of animal diseases. My country wishes to thank the Organization for its immediate response when we were threatened with rinderpest disease in some parts of the country. We also wish to express our satisfaction in connexion with research programmes in developing countries and providing training to the citizens of those countries in the area of implementation of research and management of research.
We also welcome any system of coordination between research institutions, be it regional or sub-regional. I wish to point out the importance of both AGRIS and CARIS, considering that my country is among those who benefit most from these two programmes. We also wish to inform the Council that, convinced of people's participation in rural development, we have set up a special ministry that concentrates on this effort and we are mobilizing all national efforts for agricultural development; and we have set up banks that will be financing national projects in this area. Also, there must be credit available in order to satisfy the requirements of rural development.
My delegation wishes to express its interest in rural development and particularly within the area of follow-up of WCARRD, particularly in the area of education and training, for their effective results on rural development. Moreover, there must be a broad public information system for the rural area. We wish to pay tribute to the Organizations Technical Cooperation Programme for it can always solve immediate problems in the area of food and agriculture. We wish to congratulate the Director-General for his continued efforts in supporting this Programme.
W.A.F. GRABISCH (Germany, Fed. Rep. of): At this juncture of our debate we wish to refer to only two points. First, personnel matters. With regard to the issue relating to personnel matters and the staff regulations, we agree with the position adopted by the Finance Committee. In particular, my delegation has no objections to the new financial regulation for the Separation Payments Scheme Fund as recommended on the basis of an actuarial review. Under this scheme established on 1 January 1975 separation payments are granted to the General Service staff leaving the Organization.
Paragraph 35 and following of the report of the 49th Session of the Finance Committee outline this issue. My Government assumes that separation payments equivalent to one month's salary for each year of completed service are also granted by private enterprises in Rome paying the best salaries, as the principle,that the basis of salary of the General Service is the locally best possible employment conditions-, must also apply to the separation regulations.
The suggested criteria for the adjustment of the dependency allowances for the General Service between salary surveys as mentioned in paragraphs 45 and 46 of the Finance Committee's report before us, can be supported by my delegation. The same applies to the new rates suggested as from 1 January 1982 for the dependency allowances spelled out in paragraph 47.
My delegation wishes to reiterate in this connexion the position that the regular submission of updated and complete information on the staff situation, in particular on the established and/or the actual filled posts, is to the interest of all member states of the Organization.
My second point concerns the reviews of programmes carried out by the Programme Committee and set out in document CL 82/3 and CL 82/11. We wish to thank the members of the Committee for its thorough review. We will take their findings into consideration when we study the next Programme of Work and Budget and when we review the current Programme of Work and Budget at the 22nd Conference.
As regards the reviewing of the current Programme of Work and Budget, we wish to voice again that we would consider it convenient if this were done previously to the discussion of the forthcoming Programme of Work and Budget; that is to say, we would prefer at the Conference that, first, the current Programme of Work and Budget be reviewed before we discuss the forthcoming one.
A. PINOARGOTE (Ecuador): La delegación del Ecuador cree que la exposición del Brasil debe ser debidamente aquilatada en su aspecto constructivo. Mucho me temo que por una reacción instintiva de los mecanismos de defensa propia equivocadamente, aunque de buena fé, se conduzcan las cosas hacia un derrotero inapropiado; si se valora en términos constructivos la intervención del delegado brasileño no tiene porqué tomarse su postura como una crítica contra nadie en particular; en especial deseo referirme a los funcionarios de la Organización, pues parece que así lo han tomado y creo que esto es erróneo, más bien debe entenderse esta exposición como una crítica constructiva al propio Consejo antes que a los funcionarios, pues en casi todas las organizaciones públicas y privadas actuales en el mundo los Consejos o directorios se limitan simplemente a aprobar lo elaborado por los ejecutivos y los técnicos de la organización respectiva, de tal forma que esta labor directora termina limitándose a degustar lo que está preparado; en la práctica incluso puede ocurrir que mejor sea así antes que los directorios pretendan sumergirse en un mar para el que no tienen los pulmones necesarios; pero ningún extremo es bueno, de modo que pueda devenir algo nocivo dejar casi todo librado al buen criterio de los técnicos y ejecutivos por muy capaces y brillantes que sean.
En tal virtud, la delegación del Ecuador apoya la propuesta concreta del delegado del Brasil en el sentido de que el Consejo trate preferentemente en su agenda en la reunión previa a la Conferencia los asuntos relacionados con los Comités del Programa y de Finanzas, los cuales evidentemente son los medulares de la Organización.
La delegación del Ecuador está firmemente convencida de que con una resolución de este tipo haremos un gran bien a la FAO, a la Conferencia, al Consejo, a sus técnicos y funcionarios; creemos que esta es una oportunidad que no se debe dejar pasar.
A.R. TANGO, Jr. (Philippines) : Allow me first to state that I will be neither long nor controversial for a change! Since I missed congratulating you, Mr. Chairman, on your election last November, allow me to compliment you on your adroit handling of the Chair, as usual, and to congratulate both the Chairman of the Finance Committee, Mr. Abeyagoonasekera, and my old friend, and sometimes adversary, Mr. Trkuija, for his very able handling of the Programme Committee. It seems he will die in that post, the length of time he has been occupying it! Of course, we do not wish you to die, Mr. Trkuija!
Allow me also to compliment the Director-General, Mr. Saouma, for his very excellent statement, which I have been reviewing with particular interest to the outlining of the very critical situation of the Third World in terms of overall economics. I believe with him that there is a need for a global food programme. I believe with him that it is time, in fact, with the Delegate of Brazil, that the Programme Committee does concentrate on some of the suggestions that have been made and on the guidelines set by the Director-General at the beginning of the Conference. It is important to discuss details but I think it is also important to state general directions and guidelines and for the Programme Committee to have, as part of this review, an overall overview of the situation.
My delegation, of course, welcomes also the statement of the Director-General on World Food Security and on the successes of the regional conferences; his meetings with 70 ministers of agriculture cannot be but useful to this body and to the cause of eliminating hunger in the world.
In this age of tight finances we welcome his statement that - well, his desire to collect, and I believe that many of the countries are beginning to pay up - his statement that we will cut expenditures to the extent possible, his desire to sharpen the expenditures and to aim it at the high priority activities which, of course, gives the Council the additional problem of being much more perceptive and much more rigid in terms of keeping this Organization adhering to the priorities established.
In view of the fact my Chairman is also my colleague in IRRI, allow me to take this opportunity, with your permission, to mention that we celebrated World Food. Day by celebrating the fusion between science and political will. In the Philippines we celebrated October 16th by having my president,
President Ferdinand Marcos, come to the International Rice Research Institute, both to inform as well as to be briefed on the latest developments in the field of rice technology and science. It is after all symbolic that his visit combined with the scientific accomplishments of this very dedicated band of thirty or forty scientists that had led to Philippine rice production succeeding to the point where, when we used to import 600 000 metric tons, this year we are exporting 300 000 metrictons of rice.
Perhaps a .few of you know that our very Chairman present here today is the new Director-General of the International Rice Research Institute and we consider ourselves blessed and fortunate that he accepted this post, the first Asian to head an international agricultural research institute. We are very proud of him, and we really only consider him to be on loan to the FAO.
But research, that remains in laboratories, such as the very competent laboratories of IRRI, is useless unless it is fused with political will, and it is my hope, among others, that the FAO can in fact link up more with the thirty international research institutes supported by the CGIAR and serve as the conduit to bring the technology, the new scientific discoveries, the pest resistant strains, to the research and extension services of the developing countries. It would seem to me that greater emphasis in this direction, which I note in our agenda, is also being taken up by the Council, might be of great interest and certainly would be of great profit to the developing countries. I believe on a world-wide scale that this is one of the most urgent tasks of the FAO, to take this technology, developed at a cost running today at $130 million, $150 million a year, to bring to the least developed countries, for them in turn, hopefully, to bring to their own farmers, and other growers and centres of production in their own countries.
A word before I end on the proposed establishment of a Regional Commission for Food Security for Asia and the Pacific. If I am not mistaken, this is the first of its kind, at least as far as food security is concerned and we, Ministers of Agriculture, meeting in Indonesia last May, agreed that this was indeed a vital priority in the establishment of some modicum of security for the hungy people in Asia.
Since I am leaving tomorrow, 1 thought, with your permission, that we would voice not only our support but our urgent request that this be approved by the Council and forthwith, as has been outlined here, implemented by the Director-General. We, of course, note a subject that was of some controversy, the welcome by the ESCAP of the creation of such a commission and we note also in the resolution the stated desire of FAO through this commission to establish linkages with ESCAP, We hope that this will lead, not to any further duplication of activities, but to one network that will protect the hungry people in Asia and the Pacific.
It only remains to thank you and the rest of the Council Members. We are coming back into the Council this year, this is our re-maiden speech, and so we thought that we could make a few comments of this nature. We hope to be able to participate even more actively in the activities of this Council and of the Conference.
P.M. AMUKOA (Kenya) : My delegation generally endorses the views of the Programme Committee and the Finance Committee as expressed in these documents. In particular we would like to emphasize the need for a balanced distribution of consultancies between groups of countries and underline the importance of using competent local consultants in those countries where these are available. In this regard I support the use of FAO regional offices and member country permanent representatives based here in Rome in identifying suitable candidates and institutions in specific areas of consultancies. This is important.
Regarding the World Conference on Fisheries Management, I support the views that are expressed in the document but I do not know if I may just go into a little bit of the subject matter, with
your permission. I wish to propose that inland fishery development be given attention. We believe that Africa has a great potential in inland fishery development and discussions on the subject will be very useful to FAO, which is already involved in this work, and to us governments. In addition, I would like to see the subject of fish handling by small fishermen discussed. My delegation believes many activities in these two areas are people's activities and fall within WCARRD's Programme of Action in People's Participation in Development. I have gone into this because paragraph 1.98 shows consultations are going on what will be discussed and I think this is a forum which could also be used for these kinds of consultations and that is why in this spirit I have made these remarks.
T. SATONE (Japan) : Firstly, my delegation would like to state our position on personnel matters. We feel that concerning the situation of altering or increasing staff salaries within the UN system, including FAO, the ICSC should finalize and be consistent to its own policies. This is because of the fact that the ICSC has a specific type of authority, it is delegated to investigate and study personnel matters as a whole within the UN system from a neutral position. Therefore, it is much to our dismay that the ICSC did not adhere this autumn to its original policies and left this matter to be decided by the UN General Assembly. In regard to this matter of increasing the staff salaries within the UN system, we feel that it is not a matter to be decided by the majority at the UN General Assembly and FAO meetings without proper criteria and reliable data. If this matter is decided upon in such a way, then it means deviating from the present established system in which this matter was decided upou by comparison of salaries of Government officials in some countries. The result of this situation will create many problems for the future.
Consequently, we would like to urge the ICSC to reconsider this matter once again and after awaiting the final conclusion of ICSC, we could resume discussion on this matter at such meeting as the FAO Conference. Maintaining this viewpoint, we think that it is inappropriate to discuss staff salary increases at this FAO Council.
In regard to the proposal which was made by the Finance Committee document CL 82/11, to authorize the Director-General in his discretion to immediately apply to the FAO staff any future recommendations of the ICSC approved by the UN General Assembly; we respect the recommendations of the ICSC, however, in view of the fact that the cost of staff salaries shares the main part of the Regular Budget, and alterations in staff salaries is an important matter to be discussed at the Council or FAO Conference. Therefore, we have some difficulty in accepting this proposal that the Council authorize the Director-General in his discretion to apply immediately to the FAO staff any future recommendations of the ICSC approved by the UN General Assembly.
Secondly, I would like to comment on the World Conference on Fisheries Management and Development.
First of all I would like to congratulate Mr. Carroz on his appointment as Secretary-General of the FAO World Conference on Fisheries Management and Development.
My delegation greatly appreciates the supreme effort made by the FAO staff in preparation for the Conference as well as other various important meetings.
I would like to stress the point that the utilization of the marine resources is essential to the improvement of nutrition through increased supply of protein consumption.
My delegation is appreciative of the effort that FAO is making in strengthening its role to lead and guide the coastal countries, especially the developing countries, in their further development of fisheries resources.
Furthermore, my delegation is pleased, but also hopes that FAO will take a vital role in promoting at least a reasonable utilization of the fisheries resources in the EEZ through the cooperation of the coastal nations and the fishing nations, on the basis of the principle of rational utilization of fisheries resources which was agreed upon in the Law of the Sea Convention this past April.
Taking into consideration the whole situation, my delegation feels that the taking place of the World Conference at this point in time is rather significant and very important; and we believe that it will give us a very good opportunity to discuss the future development of fisheries as well as the ways and means for a reasonable management of the fisheries resources based on the results of the Law of the Sea Convention.
Finally, my delegation would like to comment briefly on the report of the 42nd Session of the Programme Committee concerning the evaluations and suggestions of FAO's activities in the current biennium.
The report reviews FAO's activities pertaining to the preservation of natural resources, the Biological Nitrogen Fixation, genetic resources conservation, utilization of root crops and vegetables, development of feed resources, research support and rural development.
My delegation would like to appreciate these various fields of activities.
By the way, we are hoping that FAO will look after the harmonious works pertaining to the gathering of information, investigation, research, discussion and recommendation of international measures and other areas concerning food and agriculture as a UN specialized agency qualified to treat such matters.
Recently the Organization is strengthening its tendency towards action-orientation. However, the information on the field activities, funded by the extra-budget, is circulated rather infrequently; except for the material on "The Review of Field Programmes" which is rather brief and not very concrete.
So my delegation is hoping that the Secretariat will consider providing some concrete information more periodically, by which members will be able to understand and easily review the current situation of FAO's field activities within the realm of budgetary allocations given for the distribution of information.
M. I. MAHDI (Kingdom of Saudi Arabia) (original language Arabic): The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia supports what was said by the Director-General and the Deputy Director-General. We also support the procedure presently followed by the Council and my delegation objects to any change in the procedure as regards the Council's approach to the priorities and objectives. The Programme Committee has made no recommendation to suggest an amendment in the present situation. The delegation of Saudi Arabia wishes to repeat its expression of trust in the Director-General of FAO. He has spared no effort to ensure that the activities of FAO reflect the aims and the needs of our Organization and the Member Nations.
A.K. KUOL (Sudan): My delegation has closely and keenly followed the statement made by the delegate of Brazil and his remarks on the Organization's programme. My delegation has also followed with interest the self-explanatory statement made by the Deputy Director-General and the precise additional statement by the Director-General himself.
In the light of the above-mentioned, my delegation approves and strongly supports the statements of both the Director-General and the Deputy Director-General on the issue.
My delegation notes that at present there is no necessity that calls for a change in the Programme of the Organization. Therefore my delegation fully endorses the Programme as stated by the Programme Committee.
Finally my delegation would like to renew and reiterate its support and appreciation to the Director-General and the Secretariat of the Organization for the tolerance and prudence with which they are carrying out their respective tasks, which in the opinion of my delegation is being done in accordance with the Rules and Procedures of the Organization.
T. AHMAD (Pakistan): First as a member of the Programme Committee may I with your permission, Mr. Chairman, convey our appreciation to the Chairman of the Programme Committee who in a very articulate manner introduced the subject and conveyed the deliberations of the Programme Committee before the Council. We wish him long life and we assure him that other things beings equal we are willing to suffer him for another three or four decades.
We are today looking at two reports of the Programme Committee and a report of the Finance Committee under this item. In the 42nd Session of the Programme Committee this four-year cycle of the Programme review was initiated and it was done under Rule XXVI of the Basic Texts. At that time also there was some discussion regarding the exact contents of the discussion. After some deliberations the Programme Committee decided that what it was conducting was a review of the Programme and that the Programme Committee at that stage was not competent to change any allocations and priorities which had been laid down by the Conference itself. Therefore I now wonder a little why this recognized principle of procedure has been questioned. I will take you to the Basic Texts again, to paragraph 7 (a) (ii) of Rule XXVI, which is very explicit, and with your permission I would quote from that Rule. The Rule requires the Programme Committee as such to do certain things, and 7 (a) (ii) requires that the summary and draft Programme of Work and Budget of the Organization for the ensuing biennium, particularly with respect to - and this is worth noting - content and balance of the Programme, having regard to the extent to which it is proposed that existing activities be expanded, reduced in scope or discontinued. It goes on "the extent of coordination work between the different technical divisions of the Organization and between the Organization and other international organizations", which means that during the 40th and 41st Sessions of the Programme Committee while debating the draft Programme of Work and Budget we were supposed to look at the content, priorities and allocation of the Programme. We were not only supposed to do that. I presume that in our limited ability we managed to do that, and we put in a report to the Council which the Council duly approved and all the members of the Council had the requisite time and ability to look at these different priorities and allocations. From there it went to the Conference and again all the members had the desire, the ability and the time, particularly when some of the delegations to the Conference are multi-member delegations, then at the request of the Programme and Finance Committee before them. So as far as I can see, as far as the procedures are concerned, which are laid down now, there is ample opportunity for all Member Nations to look at the priorities, the contents and the allocation of the programmes and it is approved at the level of the Conference with the approval of all Member Nations. I personally would feel terribly embarrased if after having attended the Conference and approved the Programme of Work and Budget I had to come back and say, "No, I do not know where the contents are, I do not know where the priorities are". The flaw would lie with my delegation and not with the procedures. I feel that we have been going through it all along. Therefore perhaps to answer my Government before they fire me I have to tell them that I have looked at all the Programme of Work and Budget and the priorities, allocations, etc. in the reports of the Programme which came from the Programme Committee to the Council and the Conference. So I feel that all Member Nations, all delegations, have the opportunity, not at one stage but at three stages, to do this. So there is no flaw in the procedure. So we can go along with that.
After I have made these general remarks I want to make only one reference to the issues that we have been discussing under item 15, and this at the cost of repeating myself, because I have brought up the same issue during the Programme Committee, and that is regarding the use of consultants.
We appreciate the efforts being made by the Director-General and FAO in the direction of getting more consultants from developing countries but feel that much more has to be done yet. The consultants from the developing countries are far too limited in number. I was looking in the morning at some of the tables, and just for your curiosity, Mr. Chairman, I saw that there are three countries from which we have 467 consultants, and from the Asian, Near East and African regions - not countries, regions - we have only 331 consultants. This imbalance has to be removed as soon as possible, so we would again urge the Director-General and FAO to use positive discrimination as far as possible but without, of course, losing the efficiency required in going in this direction.
S.M. MATIUR RAHMAN (Bangladesh): The Bangladesh delegation has carefully studied the reports of the Forty-second and Forty-third Sessions of the Programme Committee and the report of the Forty-ninth and Fiftieth Sessions of the Finance Committee and the recommendations made therein. At the outset, I must congratulate the Chairmen and Members of these two Committees for their very hard work and the valuable recommendations made by them.
Regarding personnel matters, my delegation fully agrees with the Finance Committee that the Council authorizes the Director-General to amend the staff regulations to give effect to the changes in the salaries and allowances approved for the United Nations system by the General Assembly.
Regarding the World Conference on Fisheries Management and Development, my delegation agrees with the recommendation of the Programme Committee that the Fiftieth Session of the COFI be re-scheduled from May to October, 1983 and the final policy phase of the World Conference on Fisheries Management and Development be held in May 1984 and that it should be open to all member states of FAO and of the United Nations.
My delegation also shares the views and endorses the recommendations of the Programme Committee on other subjects and specifically ón Public Information, including the new Annual World Food Report, the Information Programme for World Food Day, Documentation and Publication Programme, the Office of Inter-Agency Affairs. My delegation shares the views of the Committee at the excessive concentration of the appointment of consultants from only a few countries, and with the position that there should be a better distribution of appointment of consultants between the groups without, of course, reducing the quality of the consultants1 categories.
In this connexion, I must mention that after going through the reports of the Programme Committee and Finance Committee, my delegation is convinced and satisfied that the Director-General is not only trying to implement the recommendations of the Programme and Finance Committees, but is also making untiring efforts and personal initiatives to economize on the costs, improving the means and effectiveness of the Organization and its programmes for the service of the poor of the world by projecting the problems of the world food and agriculture as well as the role of FAO both in the developed and the developing countries. These reports are commendable and should not only be continued but further extended, keeping in view the theme that food comes first.
J. TCHICAYA (Congo): Ma delegation voudrait associer sa voix à celle des délégués qui l'ont précédée pour féliciter les deux comités ainsi que leur président qui ne se sont pas départis de leur réputation pour nous présenter des analyses complètes, précises et concises contenues dans les documents soumis à notre examen. Nous voudrions exprimer notre appui aux résultats des travaux des deux comités qui sont présentés dans ces documents.
Ma délégation voudrait vous rappeler que nous sommes partisans de toutes les procédures qui feraient économiser du temps et de l'argent à notre Organisation. Ma délégation est d'avis que le Conseil doit jouer son rôle conformément aux textes fondamentaux et nous sommes heureux que les priorités dégagées dans le Programme de travail de la FAO soient correctement exécutées et nous en sommes gré au Directeur général de notre Organisation. A ce sujet, nous sommes satisfaits du travail qu'effectuent les comités mis en place par le Conseil. Bref notre délégation apprécie la manière dont le Directeur général traduit nos préoccupations et met en oeuvre les priorités dégagées par les instances appropriées de notre Organisation. Nous voudrions profiter de l!examen de ce point de notre ordre du jour pour rappeler que la Conférence régionale de la FAO pour l'Afrique, tenue à Alger en septembre-octobre derniers, a approuvé la manière dont la FAO met en oeuvre les priorités telles qu'elles se dégagent du document soumis à notre examen. A cet égard, nous réitérons les préoccupations de cette conférence qui appuie sans réserve le programme de coopération technique et nous demandons que, conformément à la résolution adoptée à Alger, les ressources affectées à ce programme soient accrues lors du prochain biennium, en raison de la facilité de la mise en oeuvre de ce programme ainsi que les services précieux qu'il rend dans tous les domaines couverts par les activités de la FAO, à savoir l'agriculture, les forêts et les pêches. Ma délégation approuve la tenue de la conférence mondiale sur l'amenagement et la mise en valeur des pêches en deux phases et je réitère le souci de mon pays de voir débattre, au cours de cette réunion, les problèmes qui concernent la pêche continentale. Pour ce qui concerne l'emploi des consultants nous appuyons sans réserve les recommandations des comités.
A. RODRIGUES PIRES (Cap-Vert): Après les interventions des délégués qui m'ont précédé, il ne me reste qu'à développer quelques points. Nous avons écouté attentivement ce qui a été dit et nous voulons appuyer ici entièrement la déclaration du Directeur général adjoint, M. West. En effet, en ce qui concerne la procédure nous partageons le principe et la position prise par certains délégués africains ainsi que par le Pakistan. Avant de terminer je voudrais attirer votre attention sur le fait très important que pour nous le PCT est un programme vital, agricole qui appuie surtout les projets de terrain et les petits agriculteurs, tout au moins dans mon pays. Ce n'est pas un luxe. Nous voulons être clairs sur ce point et désirons souligner ainsi que l'a déclaré l'honorable délégué du Congo que la résolution qui a été adoptée à Alger l'a été par les ministres des pays africains pour ce qui concerne le PCT. Voilà les quelques observations que je voulais faire.
P. ELMANOWSKY (France): Toujours l'inattendu arrive, a dit un de nos écrivains... et en effet, la délégation française s'était fait inscrire pour parler des pêches et c'est ce qu'elle fera, mais elle avait considéré en même temps qu'il y avait d'autres points à l'intérieur du point 15 sur lesquels elle désirait intervenir. Plutôt que de faire deux interventions on me demande maintenant d'amalgamer ce que je devais dire dans l'une et ce que mes collègues devaient dire dans l'autre. Je suis donc un peu pris au dépourvu et vous savez comment sont les mauvais élèves qui vont devant un professeur, quant on les interroge: ils commencent par ce qu'ils savent le mieux. Vous permettrez donc que je commence par les pêches. Non pas pour pêcher, mais parce que je connais mieux le sujet.
Prenant la parole sur la préparation de cette conférence mondiale sur les pêches, je tiens tout d'abord à remercier vivement le Directeur général ainsi que M. Carroz, et tout le Secrétariat pour nous avoir présenté un nouveau document, le document CL 82/LIM/3 et a répondu à notre demande en nous présentant une synthèse remarquable des vues exprimées au cours des différentes conférences régionales tenues cette année. Ce document nous précise d'abord très clairement les objectifs de la future conference dans le cadre de la formulation de stratégies et de programmes permettant une utilisation aussi complète et efficace que possible des ressources de la pêche, à partir de là, notre objectif c'est la contribution apportée par ces produits à l'alimentation et, par suite, à la sécurité alimentaire. Ensuite nous trouvons un objectif indispensable: "Assistance aux pays en développement quant à l'aménagement et à la mise en valeur des pèches elles-mêmes", et, enfin, suite de l'assistance, c'est "Encouragement à la coopération internationale entre pays développés et pays en développement dans ce domaine". Le document qui nous est soumis regroupe ce que j'avais souhaité: six rubriques, six têtes de chapitre, si on préfère, dans lesquels on trouvera les différents sujets qui pourraient être envisagés pour en discuter et tâcher de leur trouver des solutions, sous réserve, bien évidemment, d'une étude plus approfondie. Ces rubriques paraissent correspondre aux objectifs définis et ma délégation espère que la future conférence sera en mesure d'y apporter les réponses adéquates. En tous cas, dès à présent, je puis dire que ce document nous sera fort utile et qu'il constituera une base solide de réflexion et de commentaire pour les entretiens que, du moins nous le souhaitons, et nous lfespérons, le Secrétariat et le Secrétaire général de la conférence en particulier pourra avoir avec notre administration, comme avec toutes celles qu'il estimera devoir rencontrer. Me souvenant de ce qu'on avait fait lors de la conférence sur la réforme agraire, j'ajoute qu'il serait également profitable que les pays qui le désireraient ou avec qui le Secrétaire général de la Conférence ne pourrait s'entretenir puissent adresser à l'OAA dans les prochains mois des commentaires écrits sur les thèmes envisagés de manière qu'au mois de juin prochain lorsque notre Conseil se réunira à nouveau, il puisse être saisi d'un véritable projet de l'ordre du jour. Cependant, malgré tout le bien que nous pensons de ce document nous avons encore quelques observations et quelques questions d'ordre pratique à adresser au Secrétariat. Peut-être et même certainement ne pourra-t-il y répondre en totalité. Mais en tous cas, il pourra nous donner son opinion, nous faire part de ses intentions, de ses idées, au stade actuel, nous fournir une première estimation ou une évaluation, forcément encore générale, des dépenses, La première observation est un conseil de prudence. Il faut éviter, il convient d'éviter, toute interférence avec la Conférence des Nations Unies sur le droit de la mer en ne tentant ni de légiférer, ce qui ne serait pas de notre compétence, ni même d'essayer de définir des sortes de règlements cadres destinés à assurer le controle et la surveillance des pêches ou de tenter la mise au point d'un accord à conclure entre un pays ou un autre en vue de l'exploitation des droits de pêche dans les zones économiques exclusives.
Il s'agit là d'un domaine qui relève de la compétence des Etats, un domaine où l'on rencontre des situations très diverses et qu'il serait vain de vouloir traiter de manière uniforme. Mais bien évidemment une telle observation ne signifie pas que la pratique de la pêche doive évoquer l'image d'une jungle où les plus forts écraseraient les plus faibles. Nous savons fort bien que parmi les accords de pêche en vigueur certains, hélas, peuvent être assimilés à ce qu'on a pu appeler des traités inégaux. Au contraire, nous considérons que, dans de telles négociations de même que dans l'exploitation des sotcks partagés, il conviendra par exemple d'avoir présent à l'esprit un souci de collaboration et le cas échéant d'assistance aux pays en développement pour qu'ils soient de plus en plus à même de développer leurs ressources.
Ma deuxième remarque concerne l'organisation pratique de la Conférence. Deux phases sont prévues : technique, réunion du Comité des pêches à l'automne 1983; politique, réunion à un niveau élevé (et c'est celle-là que j'appelle, pour simplifier, la Conférence) au printemps et probablement à la fin du printemps 1984, je suppose, mais peut-être le Secrétariat pense-t-il que la première phase, tout en étudiant les différents sujets inscrits à son ordre du jour, est destinée à remplacer ce que nous avons eu pour la Réforme agraire, c'est-à-dire la réunion préparatoire. Quant à la seconde, à caractère politique, elle va travailler à partir des documents qui auront été élaborés dans le premier stade lors du Comité des pêches et sera sans doute amenée pour couronner ses travaux à adopter une déclaration ou un ensemble de principes - peu importe les mots d'ailleurs - qui devront être mis en oeuvre par les Etats dans le domaine des pêches; mais la tâche qui va consister à discuter utilement de tous les sujets sera très vaste et j'aimerais demander si l'on envisage de répartir, lors de la Conférence proprement dite, les sujets entre plusieurs commissions comme on l'a fait lors de la Réforme agraire.
Il y en avait eu alors deux, l'une concernant les problèmes nationaux et l'autre concernant plus spécialement le domaine international et, question annexe, comment et par qui seront examinées les questions relevant des pêches continentales et de l'aquaculture. En effet, les spécialistes de la pêche en mer ne sont pas les spécialistes des pêches continentales.
Durée de la deuxième phase de la Conférence : si j'ai bien trouvé dans un document, le CL 82/21 que le Comité des pêches, première phase, est prévu pour durer 10 jours, en réalité cela ne donnera que huit jours de travail pratique car c'est à cheval sur deux semaines. Nous ignorons tout de ce que peut être la durée de la conférence politique. Enfin, dernière question - et ce n'est pas la moins délicate - à combien faut-il évaluer le coût de la Conférence dans son ensemble ? Je suppose que les dépenses correspondant à la première phase, préparation des documents, déplacements, réunion du Comité des pêches lui-même sont déjà prévues dans le budget en cours qui relève du biennium 82/83 et, pour la Conférence du printemps 1984, disons juin 84 peut-être, il me semble que ce sera le budget du prochain biennium, celui qui sera fixé par notre Conférence en novembre 1983. A-t-on déjà une idée de ce que cela représentera dans le budget ? Est-ce que cela n'entraînera pas une majoration sensible du budget 84/85 du moins au titre du chapitre qui est consacré à l'organisation des réunions, ce que j'appellerai l'intendance de la FAO pour les réunions internationales ? Avant de conclure sur cette première partie, je souhaiterais rappeler une fois de plus que ma délégation désire que la Communauté économique européenne puisse participer pleinement aux deux phases de la Conférence. Certes, et à moins de modifier les textes fondamentaux de l'Organisation, la Communauté n'est pas membre de celle-ci en tant que telle. Cependant, nous pensons qu'il doit être possible de trouver de manière pragmatique des formules qui lui permettront - comme d'ailleurs nous avons eu le plaisir de le constater au cours de la présente session du Conseil - d'intervenir dans les débats en même temps que les Etats et non pas seulement après que toutes les délégations soient intervenues. Vous savez en effet qu'en matière de pêche il existe chez nous une politique commune définie par le Conseil des ministres de la Communauté qui est ensuite suivie, contrôlée et éventuellement expliquée ou défendue par la Commission.
Cela étant dit, je suis obligé de changer de casquette et de passer au deuxième thème de l'intervention, c'est-à-dire aux remarques sur les rapports des 42ème et 43ème sessions du Comité du Programme. Tout d'abord, il faut que je félicite les deux présidents de ces comités qui ont été élu ou réélu tout récemment. En outre, la délégation française se félicite qu'à la demande de la délégation brésilienne l'examen des programmes soit inscrit à l'ordre du jour de la présente session du Conseil en raison même de l'intérêt des observations et des suggestions figurant dans les deux derniers rapports du Comité du Programme. A ce titre, nous nous permettons d'attirer l'attention du Conseil sur certaines suggestions du Comité du Programme qui concernent un certain nombre de points.
Tout d'abord les Bureaux régionaux : nous souhaitons, comme d'ailleurs l'a fait le Comité du Programme, que. le prochain "Examen du Programme Ordinaire" donne des informations plus précises sur les activités des bureaux régionaux et en particulier sur la manière dont les crédits alloués à ces différents bureaux régionaux se rattachent aux sous-programmes techniques. En effet, nous avons pu constater que les crédits alloués aux bureaux ne sont pas ventilés entre les sous1" programmes dans l'annexe 1 du Programme de travail et budget, mais que cette ventilation est faite seulement par programmes techniques. Evidemment, il serait souhaitable de nous fournir à l'avenir cette ventilation par sous-programme pour chaque bureau régional. Quant au soutien du Programme de terrain, je note que le Comité a été informé que, contrairement à ce qui se produit pour les bureaux régionaux, il est impossible de ventiler avec tant soit peu de précision les crédits totaux entre les sous-programmes techniques parce que les ressources extrabudgétaires allouées aux divers sous-programmes sont difficiles à prévoir (c'est une citation tirée du Rapport du Comité). Ce n'est qu'après, par le biais de "l'Examen des Programmes de Terrain", qu'on peut vraiment savoir comment les ressources consacrées au soutien des programmes de terrain se rattachent aux différents sous-programmes. Nous souhaiterions une fois de plus voir figurer dans le prochain "Examen des Programmes de Terrain" la ventilation par sous-programme technique des ressources consacrées au soutien des programmes.
J'espère que ce que nous demandons ne sera pas trop difficile, trop compliqué et n'alourdira pas une fois de plus la tâche du Secrétariat. Je crois qu'il doit être possible d'arriver à quelque chose de concret. Enfin, nous verrons... En ce qui concerne le soutien de la recherche, la délégation française appuie la suggestion du Comité du Programme (paragraphe 77 du CL 82/3) qui estime souhaitable de reconsidérer la présentation de ce programme dans le Programme de travail et budget afin de faciliter les futures délibérations et de donner une image plus complète de l'ensemble des activités exécutées par l'Organisation en matière de la recherche. Quant au choix des thèmes évalués en profondeur dans "l'Examen du Programme Ordinaire", nous avons noté que,durant les futurs cycles d'examen des programmes, le Comité ferait certaines suggestions sur les thèmes à traiter dans "l'Examen du Programme Ordinaire". Nous souscrivons pleinement à cette initiative et tout particulièrement quant au choix des sous-programmes et éléments de programmes qui seront évalués en profondeur lors de "l'Examen du Programme Ordinaire".
Quant aux bureaux de liaison, encore une observation que je suis amené á faire : nous appuyons la suggestion du Comité du Programme selon laquelle on doit envisager à l'avenir de regrouper quelques-uns des services assurés par ces bureaux auprès des différentes institutions des Nations Unies à New York, Genève et Washington, afin cíe réduire les coûts.
Sur le Service des conférences, la délégation française appuie la proposition du Comité du Programme (paragraphe 15 du document CL 82/11) pour réduire encore le nombre des lettres-circulaires et dire que. l'on devrait coordonner les réunions des différentes institutions, notamment celles installées à Rome.
Je voudrais faire encore quelques observations sur des questions que je qualifierais de documentation en général. Pour la Bibliothèque, ma délégation a été étonnée - c'est effectivement curieux et c'est une lacune sans doute regrettable - que la Bibliothèque de la FAO n'ait pas une collection complète des documents sur les activités de terrain de l'Organisation. Elle appuie donc vivement la recommandation du Comité du Programme pour que les unités techniques et opérationnelles de l'Organisation coopèrent activement pour faire parvenir cette documentation à la Bibliothèque.
Enfin, en ce qui concerne la Division des Publications, nous appuyons également les recommandations du Comité en vue d'éliminer les disparités encore existantes pour l'échelonnement de la traduction et la distribution des documents dans les différentes langues de travail. C'est une chose que tous les délégués réclament d'année en année. Il y a quelques améliorations, mais cela n'a jamais été parfait. Il faudrait peut-être aussi une souplesse accrue dans les méthodes de distribution pour que les gouvernements ne reçoivent que les documents dont ils ont effectivement besoin, compte tenu des sujets traités dans les réunions auxquelles ils sont invités. Ceci ne veut pas dire qu'ilsne doivent pas avoir une documentation complète de toutes les activités de la FAO mais par exemple il me semble injustifié qu'ils reçoivent - et en disant cela, je me rends compte des difficultés que le Secrétariat aura à donner suite à cette remarque - le même nombre d'exemplaires des documents préparatoires pour les sessions de la Conférence ou du Conseil et pour un certain groupe intergouvernemental quelconque. Je prends l'exemple du Groupe intergouvernemental sur les fibres dures. Les fibres dures c'est très intéressant. Il faut que les membres participant à ce Groupe reçoivent les documents. Mais il n'est peut-être pas nécessaire qu'on en reçoive autant d'exemplaires que ceux destinés à préparer la Conférence. Ce serait une économie importante. Je crois qu'un contact délégation par délégation pourrait régler le problème. Le Secrétariat, en liaison avec les délégations, pourrait réviser la liste de distribution des documents en fonction des sujets traités.
En conclusion, la délégation française souhaite que le Conseil accorde une place plus importante dans ses travaux à l'avenir à l'examen des programmes et aux suggestions correspondantes du Comité du Programme. Les recommandations du Conseil pourraient ainsi être prises en compte pour la préparation du prochain programme de travail et de budget de l'Organisation.
A.F. BOTHNER (Norway) : Like the preceding speaker I should like to comment briefly on the proposed World Conference on Fisheries Management and Development. The Norwegian authorities take, considerable interest in this Conference which, if well planned and executed, could mean an important step forward in this vital area. My delegation and my Nordic colleagues as well, agree that the meeting of the FAO Committee on Fisheries could be postponed until October 1983 in order to give it better time for the necessary preparations. We also agree that the Conference itself should be held in May 1984.
The Governments of Finland, Sweden and Norway also agree to the participation by all countries with interests and concern in fisheries, in the World Conference on Fisheries, as proposed in the report of the Programme Committee. My delegation and those of the other Nordic countries on the whole find that the synthesis in document CL 82/LIM/3 could serve as a good basis for further work on the preparation of the draft agenda for the Conference. The objectives and the key issues are presented in a clear and precise manner. We do, however, feel that there is one basic aspect that could be given special attention during the preparatory work and the Conference itself : that is the relationship between fish and nutrition. By that we mean not nutrition in a narrow, technical sense but in a broad policy context; and that is on the role of fish as food.
The Council yesterday at great length discussed WCARRD. In the view of the Nordic countries, these very principles should also be applied with regard to fisheries development, that is, people's participation, the role of women, etc. In short, fish should not only be considered as a commodity for sale and exports but as a food for people for domestic consumption.
The Norwegian authorities, do, as I say, take a great interest in this aspect and would be prepared to organize in Norway an international expert seminar with limited participation on this issue. Through the organization of such a seminar the groundwork could be prepared for including language to the above-mentioned effect in the draft agenda.
R.A. SORENSON (United States of America) : My delegation has listened to the comments that have been made regarding the need for this governing body to have a point in the agenda at which serious attention can focus on the report of the Programme and Finance Committees with great interest. This is a serious topic and one that we believe merits discussion and decision. When we pause to consider the overall budget making cycle of FAO, when we pause to consider this cycle we must realize that following the meetings of the various technical committees and bodies that form the programmatic input of our agenda as well as meetings of the Programme and Finance Committees, there is not a single opportunity for Member Governments to discuss Programme ideas cast against their resource implications. The Director-General is under a constitutional duty to present the provisional Programme of Work and Budget at the next Council Session, and once we have ended our discussions in this Session of the Council, the content and shape of the Programme of Work and Budget for the coming biennium will in effect be cast. This is our final chance to offer our advice and recommendations to FAO's Programme managers.
My delegation therefore joins with those who support changes in the agenda of the Programme and Finance Committees and of the Council's consideration of the reports of these Committees. We believe that this Council requires a process that more adequately allows us to offer our thoughts on this process based upon an integrated examination of the Programme together with its budgetary
implications. In our view this Council should urge the Programme and Finance Committees to sweep clean those parts of their agenda that inhibit their performing this important function. We support the proposals of the French delegation with respect to the need to have more information on the regional offices.
Another important step that should be taken is for the Secretariat to provide the Programme and Finance Committees with information at the Programme element level. In the FAO we are faced with a situation in which Member Governments are called upon to approve a Programme of Work and Budget framed at the sub-programme level. This is like having to decide whether or not to buy a diamond necklace that you have never seen and that lies sealed in a paper bag and you cannot see it and thus you have no idea of its value, its merits and shortcomings. The major governing bodies of this Organization have two more opportunities to examine activities in such detail, and we believe they should have the informed advice of the intergovernmental committees in their expert capacities, such as the Programme and Finance Committees on the fine tuning needs of this Organization's Programme of Work and Budget.
In this respect my delegation strongly supports the Programme Committee's report in paragraph 1.7 of document CL 82/11 where the call was made for more detailed information on certain budget items. Without such information my delegation believes Member Governments cannot effectively carry out their responsibilities to supervise FAO's management and make informed decisions on Programme directions.
Let me now turn to the question of fisheries. We would like to commend the Secretariat, and especially the Department of Fisheries, for the work done in preparation for the World Fisheries Conference. Since it was proposed in 1979, the Fisheries Conference seems to have taken on somewhat of a life of its own. Originally it was conceived as an expanded version of COFI to be held in 1982. It has since been felt that there was a need to turn it into a two-level conference, one phase of a technical nature in 1983 and a policy phase a year later. As we the participating States prepare ourselves for this Conference, we are concerned that planning be coherent, that the agenda be clearly and carefully delimited and that everything be done in close consultation with participating States. These principles have already been clearly enunciated in the Council and Conference Sessions in 1981 and we believe should be reaffirmed by this Session of the Council,
As part, of its mandate for consultation FAO solicited the views of Member States in the round of regional conferences held this year. The synthesis of views expressed on preparation for the World Fisheries Conference in document CL 82/LIM/3 is thus a useful first step in arriving at an agenda
and we appreciate the work of the Secretariat in moving us this far forward. In order to further advance the work of the Fisheries Conference, we recommend that this Session of the Council go another step and request the Secretariat to present a detailed agenda for the World Conference, to the June 1983 meeting of the Council for its discussion and approval.
Turning to the financial cost of this meeting, the budget for the current biennium contained a sizable amount to provide for holding the World Fisheries Conference. Since this has now been divided into a two-phase conference, with the policy phase to be held in the next budgetary period, we assume there are consequent savings for the current biennium. We would like to have as soon as possible an estimate from the Secretariat of the amount that will be spent during the current biennium for the technical conference and during the upcoming biennium for the policy phase of the Conference. We view this Conference as an important and timely meeting and we will extend full cooperation towards making it as full as possible to optimize the value of the Conference. We cannot overemphasize the need for careful preparation and intensive consultation with the interested Member Governments including adherence to a timetable that will permit the next meeting of the Council to express itself with respect to a preliminary and tentative agenda.
M. ZJALIC (Yugoslavia): My delegation generally agrees with the major findings, conclusions and proposals contained in the report of the Programme and Finance Committees. We would like to make a few short comments on some issues contained in the reports and also on some proposals and the ideas submitted or mentioned by previous speakers.
First, concerning the reports, we would like to say that my delegation considers the review of the Programme a very useful exercise offering a lot of indispensable information which can serve as elements for our Member Governments - at least for my own - involving their position concerning the next Programme of Work and Budget.
We also wish to endorse the proposal for adjustment of pension allowances. As for ideas and proposals mentioned in previous discussions, we wish briefly to share the view of the Delegate of India concerning the proposal that the Director-General be authorized to implement recommendations of the United Nations General Assembly. As for the Brazilian proposal, in our view it amounts to an initiative to change the FAO constituían; and I fully endorse the statement of the Delegate of Pakistan.
As for the opportunity or possibility for governments to influence FAO's Programme, I think that the existing practice is efficient and sufficient. In particular I wish to stress the importance of review or two-phase activities of regional conferences. This is a very important instrument in reviewing the current Programme of Work and Budget and evolving proposals and ideas for the next biennium. My delegation does not see any reason for changing this existing practice.
R. de MEIRA FERREIRA (Portugal): Firstly, my delegation wishes to congratulate the Chairmen of the Programme and Finance Committees for the excellent report they presented to us.
Secondly, my delegation would like to join the delegate of Brazil in the pertinent suggestions made regarding the programme of organization, and we are happy to see the prominence now given in our order of the day to the report of the Programme and Finance Committees.
My delegation would also like to make a few comments regarding the next World Conference on Fisheries Management and Development. Portugal considers this Conference of the utmost importance, not only because each individual country can benefit largely from the exchange of experience it will provide, but because it will help initiate a new order of world understanding, namely in the fields of fishery management and development, which are the main proposals of the Conference.
In Portugal, although the fishing sector did not present a great relevance to the GNP compared with the other sectors, it has considerable importance at the regional level due to the populations that are greatly dependent on the sea for their living. On the other side, if the crisis of the fishing sector is world-wide, affecting countries mainly with less resources in its EEZ, my country on the contrary has a very extensive EEZ, with a great volume of resources - but these resources are not yet duly assessed and, in general terms, our fishing fleet is insufficient and technically inadequate. We are also convinced that in a certain way we can take from the sea the food which is not easy to find in the agricultural field due to the characteristics of our land and climate, not totally favourable for most of the basic cultures, namely cereals. In order to cope with these deficiencies, the Minister of Agriculture, Trade and Fisheries has been preparing a five-year plan on fisheries which, if it is finished in time, will be included in the budget for 1983. This plan is also very important if you consider that Portugal is in the process of negotiations to join the European Community, and we must adopt our legislation to that of the Common Market where we have to safeguard our position and avoid being overpowered by those countries technically more developed.
Everything which is said confirms the interest my delegation attributes to this Conference; and in general terms, as we have already said on previous occasions and at the last Regional Conference for Europe held in Sofia, we are willing to give our support to the initiative given by FAO. In this sense at the Sofia meeting we suggested that some subjects be included in the agenda of the Conference which we think are of common interest and must deserve general consideration. Also in Sofia, there were a number of points emphasized by a number of delegations, some of which in our view must be stressed, (I am sorry if I am going to repeat some of the points just raised by the delegates of France and the United States) : the conference must be carefully prepared in collaboration with the member countries. The Conference, after having in mind the fundamental change which occurred in the regime of the oceans by the Conference of the Law of the Sea should avoid discussing subjects already dealt with by this Conference of the Law of the Sea.
Another point of concern to several delegations and one my delegation shares regards the financial implications of the Conference; we know that this is a topic supposed to belong to the technical and organizational part which must be discussed by the Committee on Fisheries at its next session, but we also believe its importance deserves a special reference and if possible a first exchange of views or information in this forum.
Finally we should like to refer to the timing of the two-phased programme for the Conference. In order to be realistic and taking into account what happened with the preparatory phase of the Conference of the Law of the Sea, in spite of its much larger scope, we are of the opinion that this type of conference needs such a careful preparation that sometimes all eventual attempts to place it in a very rigid or precise timetable can only damage its objectives and compromise its results. It is better to walk slowly but well.
G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Al intervenir en este debate a estas alturas, tenemos la impresión de que la conclusion fundamental a que se podría llegar es la de que las intervenciones del distinguido colega de Brasil y de otros representantes han contribuido a destacar, una vez más, la importancia de los Comités de Programa y de Finanzas. A través de los cambios que se han introducido en la composición de esos Comités, sigue vigente su condición de ser los dos órganos asesores más importantes del Consejo. Nosotros creemos que esos dos Comités, particularmente el Comité del Programa, deben seguir cumpliendo la revisión de los distintos aspectos del Programa que lleva a cabo, de acuerdo con los ciclos establecidos, y que la mejor utilización de ese ejercicio que hace, particularmente el Comité del Programa, por parte del Consejo dependerá de la forma más o menos intensa y cuidadosa como los Miembros del Consejo nos ocupemos de las recomendaciones que nos haga el Comité del Programa.
Después de estas consideraciones de orden general, vamos a limitar nuestra intervención al solo punto específico de la Conferencia sobre Ordenación y Desarrollo Pesqueros. Es muy poco lo que tenemos que decir a este respecto, puesto que estamos muy de acuerdo, en líneas generales, con lo que han dicho los colegas de Noruega en nombre de los países nórdicos, y Estados Unidos y Portugal, particularmente.
Creo que ahora, en este momento, no es conveniente adelantarnos un poco a los acontecimientos, como tal vez ha pretendido hacerlo el distinguido colega Elmanowsky de Francia, un poco entusiasmado por el interés que le despierta esta Conferencia. Creo que, por el momento, el Consejo debería limitarse a apoyar las recomendaciones concretas del Comité del Programa, que son las mismas que las del Comité de Finanzas, sobre el aplazamiento de mayo a octubre de 1983 de la reunión del COFI, que servirá de reunión preparatoria de la Conferencia, y luego, será necesario un intervalo de seis o siete meses entre la Preparatoria y la Política, para que haya tiempo de distribuir los documentos y que los Gobiernos los estudien. De tal manera, que la Política debería celebrarse en mayo de 1984. Todo esto debe adelantarse cuidadosamente, en estrecho contacto con los Gobiernos.
Creemos que, como ya se ha dicho, el documento CL 82/LIM/3, que ha sido distribuido, es de gran utilidad, contiene una síntesis de los objetivos que fueron definidos en las Conferencias Regionales para esa Conferencia Mundial. Yo creo que en este documento y en los comentarios que han hecho los Miembros del Consejo, la Secretaría tiene ya bases esenciales para prepararnos un proyecto de Programa, un proyecto de Agenda que consideremos en nuestra reunión del verano próximo.
Sobre los Gastos, creo que esto no debe preocuparnos; lo esencial es que haya un adecuado saldo entre la relación costo/beneficio. Estamos seguros que el Director General, como en anteriores ocasiones, procederá con cautela y con austeridad, y en el proyecto de Programa de Labores y Presupuesto del bienio entrante nos presentará sus propuestas sobre asignaciones presupuestarias. Podríamos también acaso pensar en la posibilidad de que se arbitren fondos extrapresupuestarios en forma tal que no se grave tan acentuadamente el Programa Ordinario de la Organización, el nivel del presupuesto que • corresponde al Programa Ordinario de la Organización.
Naturalmente, todo esto lo decimos de una manera muy flexible, y repetimos, tenemos confianza en la acción eficaz que al respecto cumplirá el Director General. Creemos que el colega de Francia se refería a coincidencias de fechas, a declaración de conjuntos de principios, a selección de temas.
Todo esto es prematuro empezar a discutirlo desde ahora. Estoy seguro de que el Director General de la FAO seguirá todo esto con atención, y en el momento oportuno nos presentará las propuestas pertinentes.
Sobre la asistencia a esa Conferencia, estamos de acuerdo en que sean los Miembros de la FAO, también los de Naciones Unidas, los del Organismo Internacional de Energía Atómica, y hemos tomado nota del interés que ha anticipado el colega de Francia, sobre la participación pragmática -parece que dijo pragmática- de la Comunidad Económica Europea. Nosotros no dudamos de que esa participación se va a cumplir; cito el ejemplo de este Consejo, y a través de nuestras deliberaciones aquí y de nuestra participación en el Grupo de Contacto, hemos podido constatar que esa participación de la CEE no sólo es pragmática sino políglota, multifacética y afortunadamente constructiva.
M. NAANANI (Maroc): Je voudrais, au nom de ma délégation, féliciter le président du Comité du programme et du Comité financier pour la bonne présentation des documents que nous analysons.
Je crois qu'il serait irrationnel de notre part, après tout ce que nous avons dit auparavant et tout ce qui a été dit par d'autres délégations et dans d'autres réunions, de déclarer aujourd'hui que le programme de la FAO n'est pas efficace ou qu'il présente telle ou telle anomalie. Ma délégation considère que le processus d'analyse du programme de travail et budget, est, jusqu'à preuve du contraire, le meilleur. Ce n'est peut-être pas parfait, mais c'est en tout cas le meilleur auquel nous sommes arrivés après une longue période riche en expériences.
Ma délégation se félicite de la conception des programmes et de la manière hautement efficace avec laquelle ces programmes sont exécutés sous les directives et la bienveillance du Directeur général de la FAO. M. Edouard Saouma ne nous a habitués jusqu'à présent qu'au sérieux et au courage avec lesquels il veille à l'élaboration et à l'exécution du programme. C'est pour cela que nous lui devons, et à juste titre, toute notre confiance. Ma délégation tient à appuyer les recommandations des Comités financier et du programme et particulièrement celles relatives à la répartition géographique et à l'utilisation des consultants. Nous appuyons également et fortement la tenue de la Conférence mondiale sur l’aménagement et la mice en valeur des terres.
L. ARIZA HIDALGO (Cuba): Nuestra delegación quiere expresar su apoyo a los informes de los Comités del Programa y de Finanzas en todas sus partes. Nuestro país ha seguido una línea de apoyo en toda su amplia gestión para el desarrollo de la agricultura en los países necesitados.
A estas alturas creemos que la FAO ha cumplido, por lo que nos parece que todo lo que pueda propender a incluir cuestiones que institucionalmente no estén reguladas reglamentaria o estatutariamente son, a nuestro juicio, necesario examinar con sumo cuidado. La FAO tiene un Comité de Programa y un Comité de Finanzas que, como expreso la representación de Colombia, se pueden considerar los dos más importantes y a nosotros, a los países, nos incumbe hacer a estos dos Comités más eficientes y analíticos. Si además tenemos un Consejo con la amplitud y el tiempo que tenemos para discutir, creemos que éstos son los instrumentos encargados de vigilar y establecer los controles sobre el ejercicio de la FAO. Vamos a utilizarlos.
Creemos firmemente que el Programa de Presupuestos y la FAO pueden tener un análisis profundo si se quiere, pero dentro de los niveles institucionales creados. No entendemos los cambios procesales como nuevas instancias hoy, cuando estamos planteando con fuerza reducir reuniones, conferencias, direcciones y personal. Pensamos que hay que hacer más eficiente la instancia establecida y no pedir otra especial que pueda cargar el presupuesto; en fin, sobre este punto estamos en contra de toda modificación.
Específicamente nos interesa la Conferencia Mundial de Pesca y recordamos la Conferencia de Reforma Agraria y Desarrollo Rural como un evento que a nuestro juicio salvó una etapa histórica en el desarrollo rural en nuestro universo, y decimos que salvó una etapa histórica porque este evento se efectuó como segunda etapa de una anterior conferencia mundial, pero que lamentablemente no perduró. No tuvo, diríamos el suficiente poder como para que sus acuerdos pudiésemos haberles chequeado. Nos presentamos a la segunda Conferencia de Reforma Agraria con unos antecedentes muy leves de la primera.
La reacción de la II Conferencia a nuestro juicio más importante, fue llevar a cabo una preparación metódica y profunda con un Comité de Expertos y con un Comité Preparatorio, que se nos presenta ahora, y que sería el primer Comité Técnico.
Estamos totalmente de acuerdo con esta estructura y queremos proponer que dentro del mecanismo de presentación de trabajo de este Comité previo se vaya pensando en elaborar un plan de acción como en la Conferencia Mundial de Reforma Agraria, que fue un plan de acción, creemos, que como mecanismo simple y conocido de soluciones prácticas, es el más objetivo que tenemos en estos momentos. Nos preocupan las conferencias si no se lleva a cabo una metódica y rigurosa evaluación y de un plan de acción que nos pueda marcar el paso futuro.
Finalmente, y no queremos adelantarnos, sobre las materias a discutir, la situación a enfocar, la Conferencia pensamos que debe de aportar todo lo discutido y no resuelto, ya que no tiene objetivo una conferencia si las situaciones no están resueltas.
A.G. NGONGI NAMANGA (Cameroon) : First let me say that at the start of this afternoon's debate I was looking for a seat between the United Kingdom and the United States of America so that I could use my country's full name, the United Republic of Cameroon, and escape from this seat here. I knew there would be a lot of comments coming from my neighbour, so since I could not escape from that seat I am sitting next to him.
I wish first to congratulate the Chairman of the Programme Committee on the excellent presentation of his report and the Chairman of the Finance Committee. I can only assure you that as a member of the Programme Committee I would like to see our distinguished Chairman occupying that chair for many more years, because of the experience he has gained over the years which is very useful in tempering some of us who come with a lot of impatient questions. I think his macho attitude on the Committee is very welcome.
As I have not had the opportunity to welcome my distinguished friend and colleague and former Chairman of the Finance Committee, Mr. Bel Hadj Amor, I would like to express my delegation's appreciation to see him sitting there as Director of Personnel. I am sure he is taking good interest in looking after our Organization. Having occupied the job of Chairman of the Finance Committee he must be very cost-conscious of this hungry Organization.
First, in discussing the documents before us let me express my support for the position which was taken by the delegate of Pakistan on the discussions carried out in the Programme Committee relating to consultants. We can only add our voice to his, that the Director-General should spare no efforts in seeking and recruiting consultants from developing countries using all channels of communication available to him. If the problems are problems involving developing countries, if you have people from developing countries they will be much better placed in trying to advance solutions to these problems.
On the matter of personnel my delegation supports the position taken by the Finance Committee.I think they have looked at it thoroughly and the recommendations should be endorsed by this Council.
On the World Fisheries Conference my delegation supports it. I think it will make some meaningful contribution to the fisheries policies of a lot of countries and especially in this new area of the EEZ. As was well discussed in the Regional Conference for Africa, the World Fisheries Conference should at least have a major emphasis on inland fisheries, because this area is of particular concern to Africa. As we know, virtually all fisheries collected from inland waters are consumed by human beings, whereas a good proportion of fish captured in the ocean goes to other purposes. So on that score the African delegations would like to see a major emphasis on inland fisheries in this World Conference on Fisheries.
Generally on the Programme report, being also a member of this Committee, I think I am little Uased when I say that my delegation endorses the recommendations of the Programme Committee, so I will not go into a lot of detail. I can only say that a lot of lively debate took place in this Committee, both in the 42nd and 43rd Sessions, and I do not think that the liveliness of the debate will decrease as the years go by. I think it will continue and I hope that this Council will continue to give guidance to the Programme Committee.
Let me address myself for a moment to the question raised by the delegate of Brazil. Without going into a lot of detail, I think you can say that through his efforts we now at least have an item on the agenda. Some delegations say that he has brought out that the Programme Committee and Finance Committee should be given the same amount of seriousness as other committees.
On the procedures, the opportunity of discussing the whole aspect of the next Programme of Work and Budget, in the opinion of my delegation in this matter rules will not help us very much. Sometimes rules tend to confuse, depending on what section of the basic rules you look at.
Let us look at the whole procedure which goes into forming the Programme of Work and Budget. We have COAG, which is a technical committee which discusses technical sections of agriculture. We have COFO, which is a technical committee which discusses forestry and makes recommendations. We have COFI, which discusses fisheries and makes technical recommendations. We have the Committee on World Food Security, which also makes recommendations and gives guidance to the Council and to the Conference. We have grains. We have jute. Indeed we have the regional conferences, and I had the privilege of participating in the last Regional Conference for Africa, in which many issues of vital importance to Africa were discussed. We have brought up issues here in this Council session. A lot of delegates highlighted the matters which were discussed at the Regional Conference for Africa - TCP, training and more technical cooperation among developing countries, regional programmes, all these were brought out.
Finally, we have this Council itself which of course places a very major role in shaping the policies of this Organization. Then we have the Conference, which has the final say. It is a matter of judgement of saying when debate should be in this Council. But I think we have an agenda item which is discussed at some length in the Council which is called the State of Food and Agriculture. Any delegation coming here one year after the execution of the new Programme of Work and Budget would have had time to put its ideas together. The delegate of Brazil took a lot of time to make a consistent argument, but I would say he could have an opportunity, or any delegate could, to include his views in the existing State of Food and Agriculture, because in the final analysis this Council can say if you wish to put more emphasis on research it was brought out by many delegates, if you wish to put more emphasis on training it was brought out by many delegates,if you wish to put more emphasis on soil conservation it was brought out by many delegates, if you wish to put more emphasis on food security that was brought out by many delegates. If that is not a direction to the next Programme of Work and Budget, what is it? I think this Council can play that role and play it effectively. I think the Council has played it effectively and will continue to do so.
I am not saying that my colleague from Brazil is right or wrong, I am saying if we succeed in putting this item in a permanent place on our agenda. I think that the Council in exercising its normal traditional role and the Programme Committee carrying out seriously the work which is assigned to it can fulfil this mandate and guide the Director-General in the implementation or preparation of the next draft Programme of Work and Budget. It may not sound a satisfactory solution, but I think I have found ample opportunity in this Council session to voice my country's views, and in the Programme Committee I have spared no opportunity to present my country's views. I think the delegate of Brazil, being Vice-Chairman of that Committee and taking an active part in that Committee, would agree with me that if we put more emphasis on that Committee we can submit a report to that Committee and this Council and have these decisions taken seriously.
M. TATIETA (Haute-Volta): La delegation de la Haute-Volta approuve et appuie le travail fait par les comités des programmes et des finances. Elle soutient toutes les opérations entreprises dans les domaines de l’élevage, de la pêche, des productions végétales et du développement. Nous marquons notre accord à la déclaration faite par le Directeur général et le Directeur général adjoint de la
FAO. La délégation de la Haute-Volta est convaincue que le Conseil doit se limiter à ses prérogatives et faire confiance aux hautes instances en ce qui concerne les autres aspects du problème. La délégation de la Haute-Volta partage par ailleurs les autres points de vue évoqués de façon convaincante par les délégués du Congo, du Cap-Vert et du Pakistan.
Sra. M. IVANKOVICH DE AROSEMENA (Panamá): No tenía intención de participar en este tema pero la discusión que ha suscitado me hace manifestar en esta oportunidad al Consejo que como miembro del Comité de Finanzas participé en su discusión y apoyé las conclusiones a las cuales llego el Comité; es por este motivo que no intervenimos para referirnos a cada uno de los temas que vamos a considerar durante este debate. Deseo, sí, manifestar que mi delegación no tiene ningún inconveniente en aprobar los informes de ambos Comités.
Ahora deseo referirme a los consultores. Consideramos que se debe hacer un mayor esfuerzo para que se contraten cada vez más consultores de países en desarrollo. Mi delegación desea destacar al Consejo lo aprobado por la Conferencia Regional de FAO para América Latina sobre su apoyo al Programa de Cooperación Técnica.
Apoyamos también la celebración de la Conferencia Mundial sobre Ordenación y Desarrollo Pesquero, y realmente esperamos y confiamos que alcance los mismos éxitos que logró la Conferencia Mundial sobre Reforma Agraria y Desarrollo Rural.
Por último, consideramos después de haber escuchado la declaración del delegado del Brasil y la intervención del doctor West que se trata de una cuestión que debe estudiarse cuidadosamente y que este Consejo debe decidir sobre la misma tomando en consideración el beneficio que para la Organización tiene que el Consejo estudie más a profundidad temas que estudian los Comités del Programa y de Finanzas y que después informan al mismo.
S.S. BALANZINO (Italy): Since time is running abort, and the discussion on item 15 seems to be almost reaching its end, I wanted to touch upon a sub-item that is included under item 15, and I refer to import licenses for equipment for official use. I am pleased to re-affirm that the Italian government has never ceased to honour the obligations arising from the Headquarters agreement. However, in recent times the following problem has confronted the Italian Customs and Excise Administration.: FAO has repeatedly submitted requests for clearance on sizeable quantities of various items indicated only under a general labelling. In view of the amount of material or equipment involved, the said Italian Administration has asked for a more detailed and clear breakdown of those requests. In some cases these procedures have taken some time, and consequently the pertinent licenses have been issued with delay.
We wish to assure FAO's Secretariat that this matter is being given most careful and proper attention by the Italian authorities which have already suggested to the Secretariat that representatives of the Italian competent administration be invited to pay a visit to FAO Headquarters and to receive an exhaustive briefing on the multiple and increasing needs of the Organization.
A. DOUEDARI (Syria) (Original language Arabic): I would like to add to what I had previously said two very succinct comments. First, my delegation supports fully the contents of the two reports of the Programme and Finance Committees and particularly in regard to the questions on personnel matters and those on consultants.
Secondly, I would have liked to discuss the proposal" which has been made by Brazil and supported by other delegations, though I realize that with the time limitations and the bored air showing on many faces, we will not be able to discuss this at length. The comments made by Mr. West as well as the Director-General and the statements made by Pakistan and other delegations make it possible for me to avoid having to repeat what has already been said.
I simply want to state here that my delegation fully supports what was said by Mr. West as well as the Director-General and Pakistan as well as other delegations and we do not feel that it is necessary to airanend the procedures of the Council. My delegation is convinced that the present procedure followed by the Council is effective. We would also like to renew our confidence in the policies the FAO has been implementing under the leadership of the Director-General, and we are very pleased with the very effective solutions which the Director-General has found for the benefit of all developing countries without exception.
T. TCHICAYA (Congo): Je me permets de reprendre la parole poarce que les déclarations que j'ai entendues sur la prochaine Conférence mondiale sur l'aménagement et la mise en valeur des pêches ne pouvaient pas ne pas m'amener à reprendre la parole pour dire que, de l'avis de ma délégation, il convient de laisser les mains libres au Secrétariat pour concevoir et nous soumettre un projet d'ordre du jour qui tienne compte des intérêts des pays maritimes pauvres. En effet, je pense qu'il serait dangereux d'enfermer le Secrétariat dans certaines suggestions visant à faire perpétuer la situation actuelle. L'espoir que notre pays place en cette conférence est grand car nous pensons qu'elle devra aider les pays en développement qui en sont membres à profiter largement des ressources immenses qui résultent de l'explotation de leurs zones économiques exclusives et elle devra les aider à mettre fin aux accords déséquilibrés qui sont signés entre les pays maritimes en développement et les pays disposant de la technologie avancée et des investissements appropriés.
H. CARANDANG (Philippines): A proposal has been made that the Council during the non-Conference year devote more of its time to debate of the programme of FAO. I believe that the most important work that a governing body of FAO could do is to discuss that matter which FAO is all about, that is, what FAO does, what it intends to do for its Member countries, particularly the developing countries, and that is indicated in the Programme of Work and Budget. I believe that more discussion on what FAO is all about cannot but redound to the benefit of this Organization. The more delegates are able to express their views on what FAO should do and what are there needs I think cannot but redound to the benefit of this Organization.
Cameroon has indicated that delegates have an opportunity to do this on the present set-up. They can do so in the examination of the reports of committes of the Council, like the COAG, the COFI, the World Food Security Committee, and also in the discussion of the situation of food and agriculture. This is true.
However, if delegates feel that the situation can be improved, I do not think we should refuse to study the means that I have indicated, by which the delegations are able to participate in a fuller way to the discussion of the Programme of Work and Budget.
Like Panama, I would therefore suggest that the matter be studied carefully and that we should come to a decision on this at a later stage.
H,H. CARABAÑ0 (Venezuela): Mi delegación pensaba solo intervenir para decir que nos encontramos entre aquellos que se suman al informe valioso de estos dos Comités y, por supuesto, que respaldamos en líneas generales sus recomendaciones. Sin embargo, también quisiéramos hacer alguna consideración de carácter principista.
Nos da un poco la sensación de que por la misma ligereza del debate muchas veces los miembros de este cuerpo al exponer sus puntos de vista no siempre logran la precision del planteamiento que quieren y da lugar a interpretaciones que ciertamente pensamos nosotros no se corresponden a la realidad. Nos referimos a ello porque la intervención de la delegación del Brasil pareciera que ha originado unas reacciones que no se comparecen con la intención que esa proposición fue hecha, por lo menos en los términos en que mi delegación la ha interpretado. Creemos que Brasil en modo alguno ha planteado que aquí se esté violando el texto constitucional; todos sabemos lo celoso que es el Director General en cuanto a defender ese texto; no ignoramos que lo que estamos haciendo ha sido dispuesto por el propio Consejo. De lo que se trata, entiende mi delegación, es de saber si ante las actuales circunstancias, de las que todos estamos informados, ayudaría o no a la FAO una revisión de esos procedimientos. En el camino de la perfección no hay límites, así lo ha reconocido el señor West, y nada indica que si esa revisión se hiciera sería necesariamente para modificar lo que se está haciendo; podría ser perfectamente ratificado, pero aun así saldría fortalecida la posición del actual equipo directivo de la FAO.
De eso se trata y, por cierto, que no podría hacerse una revisión en una Plenaria como ésta, porque en una Plenaria como ésta evidentemente nadie tendría el tiempo suficiente para discutir una cuestión tan delicada; en todo caso en una reunión como ésta podría, si acaso, decirse que se consideran o no dadas, las circunstancias para que esa revisión se hiciera y en ese caso eso tendría que hacerse sobre un documento preparado por el propio Director General o a nivel de los Comités.
Es por eso, señor Presidente, que nosotros entendemos que lo dicho por el Brasil no ha sido captado en toda su dimensión y también por ello es por lo que nos acogemos a la intención de las palabras del señor delegado del Ecuador.
Estamos conscientes que está dentro del ánimo de la gestión que inspira al Director General hacer causa común con todos los representantes de los distintos países de todas las regiones para que la FAO pueda superar con fortaleza este período de crisis que estamos viviendo la humanidad.
B.E. PHIRI (Zambia): My delegation would like to state at the outset that we welcome the views expressed in the documents we are considering now by the Programme and Finance Committees.
We run the risk of being de-railed from the business of discussion put before us when we bring in almost too many things that have not been on the agenda, but looking at the document we cannot quarrel with what the committees have done or have put before us. If we think that something more or something else should have been done by them or should have been prepared by them, then possibly we should have got down to the roots of the matter at the appropriate time.
Talking about personnel matters, we would like to state as we did before that there are very few African faces in United Nations organizations, including ours here. We urge the Director-General to continue the search for suitable personnel from developing countries, particularly Africa.
On the question that was mentioned, of funds and TCP, my delegation feels that adequate funds have not been allocated to this item. We would favour the increased support of the TCP so that more meaningful assistance could be given to recipient countries. On the question of changes in the salary scales, we will merely ask a question here because we note in the document that the General Assembly has already accepted the proposal of the International Civil Service Commission, so we ask - is there any possibility that a Council like this would reject what has already been agreed in the General Assembly, or is this matter in fact just placed before us for information?
As far as consultants are concerned, we think more use of local personnel should be made, for reasons that you all know. We understand this situation better than people who might come and look at the issues for only a few weeks.
As to what should be discussed in this Council, we agree with what has been said by the Director-General and the Deputy Director-General. The Secretariat has prepared the items for discussion in accordance with the procedures which we ourselves established, and until those procedures are changed we expect the Director-General to continue preparing the Programme of work for this Council as he has done in the past.
The FAO is not a static organization. A lot has changed in the past few years, and I am sure a lot will change in the future, but timing is important. Change should not be made for the sake of change, but rather to improve the situation.
An example of a sort of change we welcome is the allocation of resources in the regular programme to personnel. At one time this was as high as 75%; it has been reduced over the past few years to something like 60% or so, and in fact this percentage could be reduced even further if we increased the resources of TCP, since it is from that chapter that tangible assistance could be given to recipient countries.
So while not disputing the intentions of the delegate of Brazil, we think that we should not just rush into change for the sake of changing things, and a thorough examination of this, possibly not by this Council but by a working party, may be considered as possibly the best way to approach the situation.
F. BREWSTER (Barbados): I will be very brief. My delegation wishes to express its support for the reports of the Programme and Finance Committees. My delegation considers that the work as currently organized allows adequate opportunities for analysis and appreciation of the work of the Organization. In this regard we fully endorse the remarks of the delegate of Cameroon.
As regards the Fisheries Conference, my delegation supports the proposal for the holding of the world conference in two stages. The Conference would be of greater importance in making a contribution to the re-ordering of the management of world fisheries.
We also support the proposal in respect of the use of consultants, and would wish to reaffirm the usefulness and strengh of the TCP programmes for developing countries. We therefore give the Director-General support in these areas of operations.
B.N. SEQUEIRA (Angola): At this late stage, my delegation does not wish to deeply analyse the questions under examination, and therefore we are only going to make a minor point. The delegation of Angola wishes to add its support to what the delegate of Cameroon said in relation to some of the proposals which have been advanced by the delegate of Brazil. However, we disagree with the delegate of Brazil on the question of the TCP, and on this matter we welcome the manner in which the Director-General has been dealing with this programme, and welcome the increase of the amount of money which has been allocated to the TCP.
Coming to the question of the World Conference on Fisheries Management, as you know, the waters of Angola are rich in these and other resources, and therefore everyone wants to fish in the waters of Angola. My delegation therefore looks forward to participating in this Conference as soon as possible, and fully supports the Secretariat on this matter.
Finally, on the question of import licences for equipment for official use of FAO we welcome the statement which has been made by the delegate of Italy, and we think that this question could be dealt with in a more expeditious way so that the goods which FAO needs for its efficient operations are not unduly delayed at the ports of entry into Italy.
G.J. BOXALL (New Zealand): On your advice, I shall be very brief and only address myself to the sub-item of the World Conference on Fisheries Management and Development. The range of topics which might be considered for the Fisheries Conference are listed in document CL 82/INF/3. These are very wide. We would be glad for the Secretariat to explain what they have in mind. In particular we see significant advances in the interchange of views and experiences as proposed by the World Fisheries Conference.
As the arrangements proceed there is a need for a clear definition of topics. For example, the possibility could include (a) management development of in-shore fisheries or (b) management development of deep water fisheries including migratory species. Both of the above relate to the objectives of fisheries in the coastal states, but we would note that the second topic which entails large capital expenditure does not necessarily follow from the first.
Another possible topic ould be along the lines of management of the EEZ and joint approaches by foreign nations by countries with contiguous EEZs. The Secretariat will recall that we made similar general comments on the needs for clear delineation of the topics at the Asian and Pacific Regional Conference in Jakarta in June.
Finally, we note also that FAO intends to have an expert consultation in March 1983. Some further clarification of the experts' views on what the Conference should do would be valuable.
MS. V.E. BETTON (Observer for Jamaica): The Observer Delegation of Jamaica would like to make a few remarks about the FAO World Conference on Fisheries Management and Development. We attach considerable importance to the holding of this Conference and we appreciate the efforts made by FAO in preparing document CL 82/LIM/3, the synthesis of views on this subject expressed at the regional conferences earlier this year.
As a small island developing country we hope that in this Conference an opportunity will be provided to identify the special needs and problems of such countries and for seeking mutual solutions to these problems.
Secondly, we also wish to use this opportunity to highlight the importance for developing countries such as mine of gaining the necessary information to enable us to make the best use of extended national jurisdiction over marine fisheries.
We also support the other issues listed in this document for possible discussion at this Conference. Jamaica is willing to work actively towards the success of the Conference and we thank the Secretariat for the work done in the field so far for preparations.
G. DESESQUELLES (Observateur pour la Communauté économique européenne) : Je ne sais pas si c'est un privilège d'être le dernier orateur, mais croyez bien que je n'en profiterai pas pour faire un discours sans fin, surtout à cette heure tardive.
Au contraire, la Communauté économique européenne souhaite tout simplement attirer 1 attention du Conseil sur son intention de participer pleinement à la Conférence mondiale de la FAO sur la gestion et le développement des pêches. En effet, la Communauté, au nom de ses Etats membres, exerce une compétence particulière en matière de gestion des ressources de pêche. Dans ces conditions, la Communauté et ses Etats Membres suivent avec intérêt la préparation de la Conférence mondiale de la FAO sur la gestion et le développement des pêches, et participeront donc activement aux travaux de la Conférence.
La Communauté et ses Etats Membres considèrent qu'il est indispensable, pour assurer la mise en oeuvre de la Conférence, de définir avec précision les termes de l'ordre du jour. Dans ce contexte, nous avons pris note de diverses recommandations faites par la conférence régionale de la FAO.
Nous remercions le Secrétariat qui a regroupé certaines de ses conclusions dans le document CL 82/LIM/3, questions qui devraient être plus particulièrement étudiées avant la fixation de l'ordre du jour^ A cet égard, la Communauté et ses Etats membres considèrent comme fondamental d'éviter une répétition des sujets déjà discutés lors de la Conférence sur le droit de la mer.
Par ailleurs, la Communauté et ses Etats Membres considèrent que la Conférence devrait se concentrer sur un échange des expériences concernant les aspects techniques de la gestion des pêcheries et la collaboration entre pays développés et pays en voie de développement.
En outre, c'est avec plaisir que la Communauté et ses Etats Membres prennent note que ce sera la prochaine session du Conseil en juin 1983 qui discutera de l'ordre du jour.
CHAIRMAN: You may recall when the Chairman of the Finance Committee introduced item 15 he mentioned that with reference to sub-item 4, import licenses for equipment, the Secretariat may offer some explanation. The Ambassador of Italy has already made some comments; I now give the floor to Mr. Georgiadis who might explain the position with reference to this item.
A.G. GEORGIADIS (Director, Administrative Services Division): We welcome the remarks of the Delegate of Italy regarding the latest development on the outstanding import license applications. However, I am sorry to say that there has been an unduly negative attitude on the part of one or
two customs officials because even after we provided the information requested, the breakdown requested, the customs authorities continued to refuse the issue of these licenses which were clearly for official material needed for the Organization's daily work. To give only one or two examples, there is photocopy paper lying in customs since last June; it covers one year's consumption, is imported from Sweden. All we had to prove is that the sizeable quantity which the customs authorities queried is for our consumption of one year; we shall not import any more until next year. Presumably this is still found to be too much and the paper is not released, so we are compelled to buy on the local market at a price over 30 percent more than the Swedish price.
There has been printing paper for our publications, cardboard - two years' supply this time - it is the paper we use for our publications, the cardboard for the covers, including that for the Programme of Work and Budget. And there are some other things like stationary, pencils; but also some small computer parts desperately needed for the maintenance of our computers in the World Food Programme, the DDC for the information system and which has to be imported because they have to be from the same manufacturer in Norway.
Examples of additional costs incurred for this which we think should be brought to the attention of the Council: so far we paid customs duties and demurrage charges totalling $39 000. If and when we clear the goods that are still lying in customs, additional duties and demurrage charges would cost us another $58 000. Some of the outstanding applications date back to 15 January, and despite the information provided they have still not been granted. However, there has been just one ray of hope recently when Ambassador Borin, whom we all know and who represented Italy at this Organization for many years, acting on behalf of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, managed to have discussions with the Customs Officials concerned, and it seems that they have requested some additional information which we are glad to provide, of course. Perhaps there will be a breakthrough, but at this stage we cannot foresee when this will happen.
We particularly welcomed the help given by the Italian Diplomatic Mission and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs itself because it is obvious that the customs department has been embarrassing the Ministry with its attitude. But of course, we feel it is our duty to bring all these things to the attention of the Council not only for the principle of one clear provision in the Headquarters Agreement not being observed, but also for the expense involved which will run into hundreds of thousands of dollars if it continues, and which will of course subtract these sums from the technical programmes.
Therefore, if the Council would share the Director-General's concern in this matter, it could perhaps be reflected in the report and be brought to the attention of the Conference; unless - as we hope - the situation is unblocked long before then. So, to repeat, we would welcome the visit of the customs officials and would be glad to show them around and explain to them the size of these buildings, the consumption of many materials we import, so that they can be convinced that everything that is imported is used for official purposes.
S. S. BALANZINO (Italy): I can only repeat that customs officials or rather representatives from the Ministry of Finance, have already expressed their readiness to enter in contact with the competent services of FAO and examine and discuss these points in depth. I shall refer to the people in the Ministry of Finance what has just been said and I can assure the Organization and the Council that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is doing its utmost to iron out these problems.
CHAIRMAN: I think Council members will agree: we shall record suitably our concern in this matter and also note with reassurance what the Delegate of Italy has stated; and we hope this matter can be resolved soon to the satisfaction of both the Government of Italy and our Organization.
J. CARROZ (Secrétaire general, Conférence mondiale de la FAO sur l'aménagement et la mise en valeur des pêches) : Si vous permettez, j'aimerais répondre brièvement à certaines questions qui ont été posées à propos de la Conférence mondiale sur l'aménagement et la mise en valeur des pêches. Tout d'abord j'aimerais me référer à la préoccupation exprimée par plusieurs délégations, (en particulier les délégations du Kenya, du Congo et du Cameroun), en ce qui concerne la portée de la Conférence. Ces délégations souhaitent que la Conférence ne soit pas limitée à la mise en oeuvre du nouveau régime de la mer dans le secteur des pêches mais couvre également les eaux intérieures et l' aquaculture. Je tiens à les rassurer. Les conférences régionales ont en effet exprimé les mêmes préoccupations et la place qui leur est due sera reconnue aux eaux intérieures et à l'aquaculture. J'aimerais également assurer la délégation du Japon que les suggestions très utiles qu'elle a faites sur les objectifs et les sujets prioritaires ont été la plupart, sinon toutes, évoquées par les conférences régionales. Elles seront donc prises en considération.
J'aimerais maintenant répondre aux diverses questions posées par la délégation de la France et tout d'abord aux conseils de prudence qu'elle nous a donnés de ne pas rouvrir les discussions et les débats de la Conférence des Nations Unies sur le droit de la mer. Je voudrais l'assurer que ce n'est pas notre intention. Nous l'avons répété à toutes les conférences régionales. Au contraire, je pourrais dire que le Secrétariat de la Conférence des Nations Unies sur le droit de la mer a salué l'initiative de la FAO comme le premier effort au plan international pour examiner la mise en oeuvre du nouveau régime de la mer. Le délégué de la France a également appelé notre attention sur la diversité des conditions dans le monde en ce qui concerne la négociation d'accords bilatéraux en matière de pêche et je peux l'assurer qu'il n'est pas du tout notre intention de préparer des accords modèles. Le délégué de la France a posé des questions sur la structure de la Conférence elle-même. Je puis dire qu'à ce stade nous envisageons une Conférence qui tiendrait des réunions plénières pendant huit jours et comprendrait deux commissions qui se réuniraient quatre jours chacune et probablement simultanément. Il a également posé des questions sur la durée de la phase politique, mais je viens de lui répondre indirectement. Finalement, il a posé des questions sur les incidences financières du renvoi de la phase politique de la Conférence en 1984 et cette même question a été posée par d'autres délégations. Tout d'abord, en ce qui concerne le problème des économies possibles qui pourraient être effectuées dans ce présent biennium du fait du renvoi de la phase politique en 1984, il nous est difficile de faire des pronostics précis du moment que nous venons de commencer les travaux préparatoires et que nous organisons toute une série de réunions spécialisées qui se tiendront entre janvier et mai de l'année prochaine. En fait, je n'excluerai pas la possibilité de faire des économies. Toutefois je n'aimerais pas susciter des espoirs exagérés car, au moment où le budget de la Conférence a été préparé il y a un peu plus de deux ans, on envisageait une réunion de 10 jours sans intervalle, en fait une réunion technique de sept jours suivie par trois jours de réunions au niveau politique. C'est à la suite d'une suggestion de la délégation des Etats-Unis que l'idée s'est imposée qu'il faudrait avoir un intervalle de plusieurs mois entre les deux phases de la Conférence. En ce qui concerne les coûts de la réunion de 1984, on les estime de manière provisoire à environ 600 000 dollars. Je dirais que la plus grande partie de ce montant servira à couvrir le salaire des interprètes et la traduction de plusieurs documents. Le délégué de la Nouvelle-Zélande a posé des questions sur la réunion préparatoire qui se tiendra en mars-avril de 1 année prochaine. Il y en aurait en fait cinq à cette époque. Je lui ferai parvenir le prospectus de ces diverses réunions.
Enfin, et je suis sur que j'exprime l'opinion du Directeur général, j'aimerais exprimer notre gratitude a la délégation de la Norvège qui a proposé d'organiser dans son pays un symposium international sur un des sujets qui se rattachent directement à l'un des quatre objectifs majeurs de la Conférence mondiale sur la pêche. Je suis sûr que le Directeur général l’étudiera avec grand intérêt.
M. TRKULJA (Chairman, Programme Committee) : I was very much tempted to use rather decorative words to express our thanks for the address to the Committees and the Chairmen, but I will refrain from that. I would only pledge my dedication and my colleagues' delegation that we continue our task with renewed energy and renewed determination, especially as we are now facing the most delicate part of our mandate, the Summary Programme of Work and Budget. Well, I could not help but say two or three words about what Mr. Tanco has said. He has given me a great honour by recognizing me as his old friend, if not an even greater honour by his indicating me, as he said, as his intellectual adversary at times . He did not add that we always agreed fully on principles and objectives but we differed obviously sometimes on methods.
With regard to one issue, of course, it is not my task to offer any comment on the position of governments in the Council. I trust that the basic objectives of the comments offered by Brazil, as addressed to the Council and not to the Committee, but there is one aspect at least I feel has very direct bearing on our work. This aspect might seem at first sight technical but it is very conceptual and it deals with the very core of our mandate in programme reviewing. It raised the problem of how to understand, how to interpret our mandate. Of course, the mandate given by Council was very general and we spent, as I indicated in my introduction, a considerable time trying to shape our own understanding of the mandate and we agreed fully that the first primary concern and the first primary task of the Committee should be to study details, activities and methods and approaches of FAO and to try to relate activities and methods and approaches to the priorities and objectives established by the Conference. I still strongly believe that it is the core of our task. Of course, the problem of our vocation is not to be singled out and I already indicated that we considered and all agreed that it should be a secondary task of the Committee in our programme reviewing. Of course, my friend Mr. Machado de Freitas kept insisting on the allocation issue, as he himself explained, on the instructions of his government, and he was obviously following the instructions of his committee as well. But as I indicated, my personal strong feeling was as I explained and I believe that most of the members fully agreed with my interpretation of our mandate. We have heard it would be premature to go into allocations just a couple of months after the Conference. The Conference had full opportunity and full access to all views and after all, Conference decided, not necessarily only the overall budget and the overall programme but all allocations by programme, and major programmes, programmes and sub-programmes. I trust that the Council will agree with the understanding of my own understanding and the understanding of the majority of the Committee. So if it is so, then we will continue along the same lines. Of course, whenever we agree that a certain supplement in relevant terms, should be given a certain weight we carry on accordingly. Whenever a single member felt strongly that allocations given to a certain programme or sub-programme were not adequate, of course the view was expressed. We use a language which is I think obvious to all Council members.
Finally, I have to clarify two or three issues. First of all, I have already indicated the delicacy and the complexity of the issue of programme elements, the insertion of programme elements into the Programme of Work and Budget document, but since one member at least spoke in favour, emphatically in favour, of incorporating programme elements into the Programme of Work and Budget, I am bound to say a couple of words more. As I indicated already, I asked the Secretariat and I made my own choice about five sub-programmes which in my view very well represented a cross section of FAO1s technical programmes, just to illustrate what it actually implied. These five programmes are just to give you an idea, farm management and production economics, agricultural engineering and international food losses, food agricultural industries, marketing products. Five sub-programmes occupied in the present Programme of Work and Budget exactly 56 lines, that means slightly more than one page. If you are to incorporate programme elements in this case it amounts to thirteen more pages to make the programme elements meaningful, to make it possible for the Members of the Committee, let alone the Council and the Conference, to understand the meaning of the basic substance. I think it will be inevitable to extend substantially, and I want to underline substantially, extend the narratives about five to six times at least to show how the programme elements are grouped in the clusters, how these clusters are derogated to the priorities and objectives at the same level, at the sub-programme element level. Well, just to give you a very rough idea, my calculations show that if we were to do that the main object of the Programme of Work and Budget, that means the part which does not incorporate the introductory policies and annexes, should be extended to about at least 2 000 pages. I wanted just to illustrate the delicacy and complexity of the issue. The Programme Committee decided, as I stated, to consider carefully the whole matter and then when we reach a certain full understanding of the issue we will report back to you.
Then two small things, reference was made on paragraph 1.7 of our report. It is really my duty to explain that paragraph 1.7 was only related to programme 1.2, Policy Direction Planning, and it was not the position of the Committee but was the position of two members. It seems necessary to introduce a sort of glossary of Programme Committee terms to make sure that our message gets across quite clearly,but whenever we use language that "the views were expressed by" obviously means that the majority views were expressed to that regard. The same relates to the reference made to paragraph 1.26 which was obviously the view of one member and certainly not the view of the Committee.
D.H.J. ABEYAGOONASEKERA (Chairman, Finance Committee): I must say that I was very gratified to note that almost all members agreed with the views, comments and recommendations made by the Committee. It is gratifying to note that we are on the same wavelength. This gives us a lot of encouragement to proceed with our work in the future with great earnestness and care. There is one point that I think I should touch on, the matter raised by the delegates of Japan and Zambia in regard to personnel matters. I should mention at this stage that on issues affecting the common systems, such as the level of professional salaries, it is for the FAO and other agencies of the United Nations to follow decisions taken in this regard by the United Nations Fifth Committee on the recommendations made by the International Civil Service Commission. It is more or less mandatory thereafter that agencies follow the recommendations made by the United Nations General Assembly. The recommendation that we have made in relation to personnel matters in our 50th Report was made at that stage because the Council meets in November and the next Council meeting is next year in June. So perhaps the implementation of recommendations will take more than six months if we do not bring this matter to the notice of this Council meeting. That is the purpose of bringing those items your attention to endorsement.
DIRECTOR-GENERAL ; I am conscious that it is late, but I think I should clarify the matter for the distinguished delegates of Venezuela, of Ecuador, of Brazil and for all of you.
The Programme of Work and Budget for 1982/83 is approved by the Conference with budgetary allocations for various activities. Neither the Programme Committee nor the Council can change the allocations.
Only the Conference which approves this document can amend it. This is the constitutional aspect. Some members indicated however, that unless thay examine and revise the allocations, the exercise of reviewing the Programme is useless and that they should have authority to advise the Council on changing the budgetary allocations. Only the Conference can change it. The Secretariat is responsible for the implementation of the Programme of Work and Budget. The Programme Committee has no authority over the Director-General. According to the present rules and the Basic Texts, it can only advise him and the Council.
As far as priorities are concerned, I want to say to the delegate of the United States that as the Director-General, I am preparing now the Programme of Work and Budget for 1984/85. How do I prepare it ? First, on the basis of the report of the last Conference which includes many priorities, many orientations for the next Programme of Work and Budget. This is one thing. Then, on the basis of the medium-term objectives approved by the Conference, which also indicate what the objectives should be for the next five or seven years. Then, the Committee on Agriculture, which is made up of all Member States, gives priorities. It is technical but it also gives policy orientation. It indicates for example that more importance must be given say to plant protection, to animal diseases, to other programmes. Then, the Committee on Fisheries, on which all Member Nations are represented, also says which sector of fisheries is important, and indicates what is to be done in the next Programme of Work and Budget. Then, there are the CCP, the Committee on Food Security, the CFA, the Committee on Forestry. There is also the United Nations Conference on Outer Space asking FAO to participate in a programme of action; the United Nations Conference on Energy held in Nairobi; the General Assembly, and ECOSOC, as well as the five Regional Conferences, where your Ministers of Agriculture discuss as a permanent agenda item the priorities of the regions for the next biennium.
These Regional Conferences give me the most important orientation for the next Programme of Work and Budget, because they pass resolutions dealing with the priorities of the Region. In addition, I have 150 meetings in FAO during the biennium dealing with subjects such as Codex Alimentarius and many different other subjects. All of them indicate priorities for the next Programme of Work and Budget.
The Constitution has thus given the Director-General flexibility so as to study, with his staff, the ways to harmonize all those priorities. As the delegate of Cameroon said, we have heard many priorities being spelt out during this Council during the discussion of important documents such as the SOFA and the report on food security. I have noted many of these proposals.
There is, in fact, no single subject which does not receive high priority or some priority somewhere. Recently, I had a meeting lasting two hours with a very important group of Member Nations in FAO. I spoke to them about my views on the next Programme of Work and Budget. Not one of them was able to tell me that he had in mind some additional priorities. I am ready to receive delegates in my office to tell me that their governments have instructed them to give priority to this subject or that subject. I have the most difficult task later on to try to marry those priorities, and so far have succeeded 100 percent. There was always unanimity in the Council and in the Conference during my term about strategies and priorities. I can circulate to the Members of the Council the relevant extract of the final report of the Programme Committee to the Conference.
The only pomme de discorde has always been the level of the budget. On this, five countries have voted against the budget in November 1981, seven or eight abstained - much, much less than other organizations of the United Nations. I hope very much that for the next Programme of Work and Budget even fewer countries will vote against the budget. We will come to you with a Programme of Work and Budget based on all the priorities of all those hundreds of meetings.
A.F.M. DE FREITAS (Brazil): Perhaps, I was not clear enough. I did not say that I was trying to propose a revision of the budget. In fact I was very clear in my statement that there was no question of revising the budget. That is my first point. The second point is, I do not criticize the different allocations that have been approved by the countries. We are not criticizing the Director-General. This was not our aim. We are trying to improve the working and the functioning of the Organization. My third point is that I agree that the Constitution will not change this document C 81/3, but before we come to that stage. That is why I am proposing that the Council should have ample time to discuss and to make proposals and to review, based on the review of the past Programme of Work and Budget. I am not proposing to change that document. I am proposing that we should influence much more before this document comes to its final shape.
H.H. CARABAÑ0 (Venezuela): Ante todo quiero hacer una declaración de fe: Como católico la única autoridad que no discuto es la del Papa cuando habla ex cátedra. Quiero decir que el Director General sabe que yo lo he aplaudido siempre cuando ha dicho que está dispuesto a no dejarse arrebatar ni a renunciar sus facultades constitucionales; pero creo que también hay un derecho que no se puede negar a ninguno de los miembros de este Consejo, porque este Consejo dejaría de existir el día en que sus miembros no puedan expresar libremente sus opiniones.
Yo quiero decir lo siguiente: que a mí me hubiera gustado mucho más que después del debate hubieran tomado la palabra el Director General y el Subdirector y no inmediatamente después que presento su punto de vista el señor Embajador de Brasil, a menos que la intervención del Director General hubiera sido exactamente como lo ha hecho ahora al final.
Yo creo que este Consejo, como todos los cuerpos deliberantes, sabe que siempre es mucho más fácil manejar una institución centralizada que no un debate en colegios, por eso si el delegado de Brasil hubiera propuesto que aquí entráramos a proponer las modificaciones que nuestro apreciable Director General entiende que fueron las que se formularon yo no habría estado de acuerdo. Sencillamente el delegado de Brasil ha planteado una preocupación deseoso, como el que más, de perfeccionar las acciones de la FAO por cuanto todos sabemos que los países aportantes hacen planteamientos que quieren precisamente tener la convicción de que los programas de FAO responden a las necesidades que el mundo tiene. Nosotros sabemos que todo se está haciendo constitucionalmente, que la Conferencia decide después que el Consejo ha dado su punto de vista, pero nadie nos dice que no pudiera haber un procedimiento más perfecto. De manera que todo lo que se ha hablado es sugerir, por lo menos así lo entendió mi delegación, que pudiera pensarse en un perfeccionamiento constitucional del problema, es decir, dentro de lo que la Constitución establece.
Yo quiero aclararle al Director General que en ningún momento mi delegación ha apoyado algo que pretenda sacar las líneas de acción de la norma constitucional; somos respetuosos de esa norma jurídica y como le he dicho tantas veces al Director General hemos aplaudido en él la firme decisión con que siempre ha dicho que no está dispuesto a renunciar a sus prerrogativas constitucionales.
CHAIRMAN: I would like to now make my comments in two parts in summing up. The first is in relation to item 15 on the agenda. We have had a good discussion, and there were four specific issues which have been posed for the Council's decision: personnel matters, the World Conference on Fisheries Management and Development, Use of Consultants, Import Licenses for Equipment for Official Use.
I think it may be fair to say that having heard all the distinguished participants with reference to the first three items, we endorse the recommendations of the Programme and Finance Committees, subject of course to some of the comments which have been made, additional suggestions which have been made about fisheries and some points in relation to personnel matters. But we endorse the recommendations of the Finance Committee.
With reference to import licenses for equipment for official use, we are concerned about this matter but we are greatly encouraged with the steps being taken by the Italian Government, particularly the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and we do hope before the end of the year this matter can be amicably solved and all misunderstanding cleared, because it is obvious that it is the interpretation of certain rules that has caused some misunderstanding; it is not a question of the whole Italian Governments tremendous support to this Organization over the years.
Now let me come to the issue which has been discussed, first placed by Brazil, about the manner of examining the Programme of Work and Budget. The Director-General has clearly explained how the process is done which also has been explained by several other delegates, the very large number of inputs, and here I am not talking only as the Independent Chairman of the Council; I also served as Chairman of Commission II in the- General Conference, which examined the Programme of Work and Budget. I think it will not be fair to say that the Council Members and those who attend the Conference on behalf of governments do not go into the matters in detail. They do their very best. In fact, I have sat hours and hours when the Programme of Work and Budget has been discussed, but what I think is important arises from what Brazil has said. It is a reminder to the Members of the Council that next year when the document comes from the Director-General's office to us, to the Programme and Finance Committees, at the June meeting of the Council, we should take adequate trouble to study it carefully and present our views so that at the General Conference there could be a general acceptance of both the Programme and the Budget. I think this is importante I agree with the Director-Genéralo It is my fervent hope that next year' s General Conference will see that even with reference to budget, there will be no disagreement, because we should have examined the proposals carefully so that ultimately there is no difference of opinion at all. But it is my firm conviction that the Director-General, after all, enjoys our confidence, he has been selected by the governments concerned; he and his officers should have full freedom, because I think we should resist the temptation of causing paralysis by analysis, because I have seen this happen frequently. You can analyse a problem so much that it can paralyse an organization. I think that is not what we want. We want a dynamic and active organization, and it is here that we are should help.
However, I generally appreciate the comments that have been offered, the comments which have been initiated by Brazil, which show a concern that the Council should put its adequate input into a careful examination of the Programme of Work and Budget, and the occasion for this will come next year at the June meeting, and I think even now we should take note of this. It is a grave responsibility.
But meanwhile I think we should wish the Director-General and his staff all the best to implement the one which was approved at the last Conference so that they are able to give an excellent implementation report next time.
Items 13 and 14 will be postponed until tomorrow. I want to thank you all for the very interesting discussion this afternoon. The meeting is closed.
The meeting rose at 18.45 hours
La seance est levée à 18 h 45
Se levanta la sesión a las 18.45 horas