G.J. BOXALL (Chairman, Drafting Committee): Only a few brief comments to say that the Drafting Committee had two sessions last night and this morning incorporating eight hours work in total. The cooperation of members at all times was very welcome and I thank them for that and the valuable Secretariat assistance. We considered all the material before us contained in REP/1, REP/2 and REP/3 and REP/4 (Sections 1 and 2). Discussion was at all times, I might say, harmonious. There were obviously, as can be expected, different points of view expressed in different ways but these points of view I feel were accommodated in a general spirit of compromise and always a desire to move things forward. I trust that the Council has few problems and I am happy to clarify where I can any particular points that come up as we go through the Report. I understand there are a few small changes to the Reps before us and with your permission maybe the Secretariat could read these out to the Council.
Ms. K. KILLINGSWORTH (Secretary, Drafting Committee): The changes are in the French and Spanish versions of REP/1. They are small errors which have crept in and which we would like to announce in advance to bring the three texts in line with each other.
In regard to the French in Rep.l, in paragraph 5 on page 3 in the fourth sentence it begins "Il s'est également déclaré préoccupe par la nouvelle" the sentence should read "Le Conseil …". This brings it in line with the English and Spanish versions.
Again in the French text on page 4, paragraph 13 we have three small changes. The first sentence should read "Le Conseil a pris note avec intérêt d'une proposition adressée au CP tendant à ce que" instead of "à l'effet".
In the second sentence the penultimate line at the bottom of the paragraph the verb "serve" should be "suive" and in the last line the phrase "au besoin" should be changed to "si nécessaire".
Finally in paragraph 27 on page 8 in the third line there is a typing error "le concept élargit" the word "élargit" should not have a 't' at the end of it.
The Spanish version there is one change which was not made unfortunately on page 6, paragraph 22 of the Spanish version. The Spanish phrase for hard fibres was not accurately translated, it should read I believe "fibras duras" and not "fibras afines".
CHAIRMAN: I hope that these changes in the French and Spanish texts are clear.
Paragraph 2 approved
Le paragraphe 2 est approuvé
El párrafo 2 es aprobado
Paragraphs 3 and 4 approved
Les paragraphes 3 et 4 sont approuvés
Los párrafos 3 y 4 son aprobados
PARAGRAPHS 5 to 26
PARAGRAPHES 5 à 26
PARRAFOS 5 a 26
G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): En el párrafo 6 encontramos dos veces la palabra "observo", tanto en la primera frase del párrafo 6 como en la segunda. Quisiéramos hacer una modesta contribución al re-forzamiento de ese párrafo que en esas condiciones es muy débil, y si bien podríamos dejar el "observo" de la primera frase, quisiéramos en la segunda frase del párrafo 6 proponer la siguiente modificación, decir: "El Consejo lamentó que, a pesar de la reactivación, etc.". Se trataría de reemplazar las palabras "El Consejo también observo" por "El Consejo lamento".
Espero que esto no ofrezca dificultades.
A. PINOARGOTE CEVALLOS (Ecuador): Para apoyar la propuesta de Colombia, nada más.
CHAIRMAN: The proposal by Colombia you have heard, which is in paragraph 6, second sentence "The Council regretted that despite the upturn in economic activity" etc. instead of "noted".
A. FEQUANT (France): Nos interprètes disent tantôt "déploré" tantôt "regretté". J'avoue qu'en français j'aime mieux le terme "regretté" d'une part plutôt que "déploré", et, d'autre part, cela a quand même une conséquence sur la fin de la phrase en français "il a regretté que la situation économique de nombreux pays en développement reste grave et qu'elle soit assombrie par la détérioration". En français il faut dire cela: "et qu'elle soit assombrie".
CHAIRMAN: If there are no more comments, I take it that the paragraph is amended according to the Colombian proposal Paragraph 7: any comments?
T. AHMAD (Pakistan): I thought it would be useful to elaborate this "broader concept of world food security". If I could take you back to the words of the CCP, could we use the words of the CCP "the broader concepts of world food security as drawn up by the Committee of World Food Security and endorsed by the Council". These are the precise words in the CCP Report.
CHAIRMAN: The Pakistan delegate has proposed that in paragraph 7 the last line should read "taking into account the broader concept of world food security as drawn up by the Committee on World Food Security and endorsed by the Council", Is this acceptable? Approved Paragraph 8.
M. HAMDOON (Iraq) (Original language Arabic): In the end of paragraph 8 there is a reference in the beginning of the second sentence to the fact that "several members requested the FAO Secretariat to analyse the impact of the activities of transnational corporations in international trade in food and agriculture commodities". I wonder if we could add to the end of the sentence the fact that the information should not only be that available to the United Nations system but also, other information available, that is to say that information available outside the UN system and this should be equally resorted to.
CHAIRMAN: The delegate of Iraq has proposed that in paragraph 8 at the end it should read "using the information available in the UN system and from other sources" instead of "in the UN system". The suggestion is that there is data elsewhere that could also be used. We agreed to add "in the UN system and from other sources". Paragraph 9?
C. VIDALI CARBAJAL (México): Solamente es un problema de estilo que posiblemente afecte al español. Poner con mayúsculas las primeras letras de "nuevo orden económico internacional".
CHAIRMAN: I think that is agreeable. Paragraph 10?
G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): La distinguida secretaria del Comité de Redacción, la Sra. K. Killingsworth conoce muy bien el castellano e hizo una revisión de este texto, pero sin duda por la presión del tiempo con que se trabaja, parece que en la segunda frase del párrafo 10 hay un error que debe corregirse en castellano. Se dice al final de la segunda frase del párrafo 10 "otras ayudas a la explotación". Se dice en español "explotación". Cuando leímos esto, nos causó impresión ese término que podría tener referencia en relación a la situación de los países en desarrollo en materia de comercio internacional, pero creemos que, en vez de "explotación" debe ser "exportación" que figura en el texto inglés.
M. HAMDOON (Iraq) (Original language Arabic): In the end of the last sentence I do not know if my amendment applies to the English text but in Arabic it refers to the increased interdependence or the growing interdependence. We believe that this interdependence does not exist yet so we should refer here to the need to increase interdependence rather than growing interdependence. In Arabic one understands by the present wording that this interdependence already exists and we are calling for more and for a wider degree of interdependence. What we are trying to say actually is that this increase in interdependence is a vital necessity, I do not know if this applies to the English text.
CHAIRMAN: Well, the English text stresses what you said. "It stressed the growing interdependence between developed and developing countries". The delegate of Iraq's suggestion is that "it stressed the need for interdependence between developed and developing countries".
Mrs. M. FENWICK (United States of America): I am asking for the indulgence of the Chairman and my colleagues to return briefly to paragraph 9. I see no reason for the capitalization of "new international economic order". I do not see why the lower case letters cannot continue to be used.
In regard to paragraph 10 I think "it stressed the need for increased interdependence" is an excellent suggestion and I hope very much that that will be adopted.
I wish we could return in paragraph 9 to the new international economic order as reported and not with the change.
CHAIRMAN: The new international economic order is used widely in the United Nations system. I do not know what is the normal convention. I do not know whether Mr. West can explain how the United Nations refers to it, capital letters or small letters.
DEPUTY DIRECTOR-GENERAL: I cannot speak for the United Nations but we have had many discussions in FAO about it and I do not want to purport to be taking sides. But the compromise reached on previous occasions has been without capitals.
CHAIRMAN: That is satisfactory to you, delegate of Mexico, since it is being used in that way?
Then we move on to paragraph 10, Iraq has proposed and the United States Ambassador has supported that the last but one sentence in paragraph 10 will be reworded as follows "it stressed the need for increased interdependence between developed and developing countries". Is this acceptable to you?
DEPUTY DIRECTOR-GENERAL: I think this is a language problem because I think that in the English at any rate, and in the French, and I think the Spanish too, the wording is in conformity with the views of the Council and Conference. I would suggest that if it is a problem with the Arabic text it should be made to conform with the other versions.
M. HAMDOON (Iraq) (Original language Arabic): The Arabic text refers to the fact or seeks to imply that the Council endorses or is in admiration for this increased interdependence but what the Council is calling for is an increased or a growing interdependence. We are seeking here in the Arabic text in fact to stress the need for an increased interdependence, we are not satisfied with the present situation; we want to improve on the present situation. We would like to draw the attention of the international community to the need to increase this interdependence, and solidarity between developed and developing countries. Now if this idea is covered in the English and the French texts then we have no objection to its staying that way but the Arabic text needs to be amended.
S.A.E. SULIMAN (Observer for Arab Organization for Agricultural Development) (Original language Arabic): Paragraph 10 of the Arabic text in the same sentence referred to by the delegate of Iraq, the wrong word here I believe is the reference to interdependence and in order for this text to be in accordance with the English text the appropriate term for interdependence should have been used. Therefore it is a question of the word used in the translation for interdependence.
A. PINOARGOTE CEVALLOS (Ecuador): Yo pienso que lo que se ha querido decir es que se subraya un hecho existente; eso significa, cuando se subraya, la interdependencia creciente entre países desarrollados y paises en desarrollo. Es decir, no es que se está recomendando que haya más interdependencia. En ese sentido, lo que habría que corregir es que todo está en el tiempo pretérito porque se dice "subrayó la interdependencia creciente que existíal'. Entonces, ahí sí hay una contradicción porque quiere decirse que hubo interdependencia y ya no hay. Tal vez, el Comité de Redacción nos pudiera ilustrar mejor acerca de qué es lo que se ha querido decir; si solamente es un hecho que existe o se ha querido recomendar que ese hecho existente se refuerce. En todo caso, según mi punto de vista, debería quedar el párrafo, la oración, en el sentido de que "también subrayó la interdependencia creciente que existe entre países desarrollados y países en desarrollo".
DEPUTY DIRECTOR-GENERAL: Perhaps I was too quick before, because there is apparently a problem with this sentence, but in my humble view the problem is with the word 'growing', not with the word 'interdependence', because the thought being expressed here is that there is an interdependence between developed and developing countries and because of this certain things need to be done in the field of north-south dialogue, etc., because of this interdependence. I think it is the word 'growing' which throws one off the scent.
W.A.F. GRABISCH (Germany, Federal Republic of): I hesitate to intervene, but first I must say that the delegate of Ecuador is quite right. In the Spanish text it says 'que existía'. This is not correct. It should read 'que existe'. What does this sentence mean - that we are living together in one world, that we are increasingly living together depending on each other, and I think this is quite good, it means that we are becoming a closer family. Perhaps the Arabic translation is not correct and should be brought in line with the English text, the Spanish text should be brought in line with the English text, and I hope the French text is correct, and then we have no problem at all so that the text could be adopted as it stands.
CHAIRMAN: Shall we leave the English text as it is and make suitable changes in the Arabic text? So we will leave it as it is. Any comments on paragraphs 11 and 12? None? Then we move on to paragraph 13.
G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Sobre el párrafo 13, se refiere a una propuesta que fue apoyada por nuestra delegación y por numerosísimas otras delegaciones en el CPPB. No fuimos miembros del Comité de Redacción pero suponemos que este párrafo se ha redactado con base en un pretendido equilibrio entre las tendencias que se presentaron al respecto; pero aun así nos parece que ese equilibrio perseguido desfavorece el apoyo que recibió esa propuesta tanto en él Comité como en el Consejo, y quisiéramos ensayar unas ligeras modificaciones para tratar de lograr el equilibrio que, a nuestro juicio, sería más adecuado.
Al principio del párrafo 13, en vez de decir "el Consejo tomó nota con interés", podríamos decir "el Consejo apoyó en general". Luego, se nota que en la segunda frase del mismo párrafo 13, viene ya la posición de aquellos miembros que expresaron el hecho de que se estaba haciendo algo de esto en otro organismo, y entonces podríamos decir "varios miembros se refirieron a la labor que estaba desarrollando en este campo el Comité del GATT del Comercio, en el Sector de la Agricultura"; todo igual, y luego decir "y se acordó por lo tanto". Creemos que esta forma neutra corresponde mejor a lo de "varios miembros" y no al Consejo en general. Esperamos que esto no ofrezca dificultades.
H. CARANDANG (Philippines): I would have no difficulties with the proposal of the Ambassador of Colombia with regard to the first sentence. The Philippines delegation would be happy if that were possible
For the second part I have some suggestions. My suggestion is to cut this last sentence into three parts, because the way it reads gives some implied approval of this Council of the work that is being done in another forum, which probably we are not competent to do. So I would say "Several members referred to the ongoing work in this field in the GATT Committee on Trade in Agriculture. The Council …" - take away the word 'therefore' - "… agreed that the CCP should keep progress in GATT under review on a regular basis. If necessary, the Council would consider the above-mentioned proposal at a future session." This is a more neutral expression of what went on in the Committee without making any judgement about what is going on in another forum, and at the same time it keeps the flavour of what was agreed in the Committee. I think this is a fairer rendition of what happened during the discussion of this item and I hope it will not cause any difficulty to anybody.
CHAIRMAN: Let me repeat what I understand to be the combined suggestions of the delegate of Colombia and the delegate of the Philippines. Will you kindly listen to see whether I have interpreted the suggestions correctly. I will read paragraph 13 with the amendments suggested: "The Council generally supported a proposal made to the CCP that FAO should convene a group of experts to develop guidelines on national agricultural support measures, tariff and non-tariff barriers and export subsidies. Several members referred to the ongoing work in this field in the GATT Committee on Trade in Agriculture. The Council agreed that CCP should keep progress in GATT under review on a regular basis. If necessary, the Council agreed to consider this proposal at a future session." Is what I have said correct? The Philippines delegate agrees that I have interpreted his break-up correctly. Is this acceptable to you?
A. FEQUANT (France): Le premier amendement proposé par M. Bula Hoyos me semble un peu en contradiction avec la fin du paragraphe. En réalité que s'est-il passé? Un certain nombre de membres du Conseil se sont exprimés dans un sens, d'autres membres se sont exprimés dans un autre sens et la conclusion est celle qui apparaît à la fin du paragraphe, une conclusion très sage. "il vaudrait mieux que le Comité des produits suive les travaux du GATT" et brusquement mettre en début de paragraphe qu'il y a un accord de façon générale, il semble que cela détruise tout l'équilibre du paragraphe.
H. CARANDANG (Philippines): If we look at it with some calm what it really means is that right now the Committee should not take any action but in the future it could. This is what I thought the decision was. In other words, right now let us see, let us wait, let us look what they are doing, but the door is not closed to the convention of this Committee. In other words, you leave all doors open. But right now there is no decision to convene it. This is my impression of what the paragraph is all about. I do not know whether others look at it in a different way.
W.A.F. GRABISCH (Germany, Fed, Rep. of): I hesitate again to intervene, but I would like to say that my delegation would give preference to the text as it stands. Our understanding is that the Drafting Committee discussed the issue and came to some sort of compromise proposal which is before us and which as it stands now would not prevent the CCP taking up the issue where CCP feels things are not going in the right direction. So it does not prohibit action of the Committee on Commodity Problems. So do we really need to take a decision on an eventual case which may happen in the future? I am just asking.
P.S. McLEAN (United Kingdom): I would like to support the views just expressed by my French and German colleagues. I am perfectly content with the latter part of the proposals made by the delegate of the Philippines which I agree make it much clearer than the text before us. But, as our German colleague has just said, I believe that it would be better to retain the text as it stands in the first sentence of the paragraph before us as drafted.
G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Lo que preocupa esencialmente a la delegación de Colombia es la expresión "tomó nota", aunque aquí se agregue con interés, porque en realidad eso no se dijo en el Consejo. Nosotros apoyamos esa propuesta, reiteramos ese apoyo que ya habíamos hecho en el Comité; pero en el entendido de que era un apoyo en general, lo cual era muy amplio. Creo que mis colegas podrían aceptar la siguiente modificación que podría ser transaccional: "el Consejo destacó con interés la propuesta hecha al CPPB". Destacó con interés, ya que tomar nota es muy pasivo y eso no es lo que se dijo. La propuesta de Filipinas en relación con el texto español no cambia nada la sustancia, pero con ánimo transaccional podríamos aceptar la segunda parte de Filipinas. Podríamos así aceptar este párrafo.
T. AHMAD (Pakistan): There is perhaps very little to say after the distinguished Ambassador of Colombia. I also tend to agree with the Ambassador of Colombia that perhaps saying that "noted with interest" is neither factual nor appropriate because CCP is a Committee of the Council and it was the CCP's Report to the Council which we were examining, and just to say "noted with interest" would really defeat the very purpose for which it first came to the Council, so we should express -I personally agree with the Ambassador of Colombia that we can now strengthen the sentence by saying "the Council highlighted with interest". That is a more positive way of looking at the Report.
A. FEQUANT (France): J'avoue qu'il est très difficile en français de dire "a souligné avec intérêt", on peut dire "a pris connaissance avec intérêt", cela c'est tout à fait correct.
V. ISARANKURA (Thailand): I have nothing to amend this, just to support the idea made by the Philippines. I would like to stress that if the CCP is going to do something about what we proposed, we do not need to propose this, our proposal to the CCP, so I would like to repeat this. If something happened in the CCP along the lines that we want, I do not need to propose our proposal.
CHAIRMAN: Now there is this problem. The first sentence, "The Council noted with interest" is what Colombia and Pakistan said, but there is a problem with the French translation of this "highlighted with interest". I think if we generally agree on the tenor of this "highlighted with interest", then a suitable French translation could be arrived at.
Would you kindly suggest a French formulation.
A. FEQUANT (France): Cela depend beaucoup du texte anglais que je ne connais pas, je ne sais pas comment vous écrivez cela en anglais, je tâcherai de me tenir le plus près possible du texte anglais.
CHAIRMAN: As I said, the suggestion is in English. This will be as follows: "The Council noted with interest a proposal made to the CCP that FAO should convene a group of experts" etc., instead of "noted with interest".
A. FEQUANT (France): Je crois qu'il y a deux possibilités en français, c'est, ou de dire: "Le Conseil a fait connaître son intérêt pour …", ou "a manifesté son intérêt pour"; ou bien "il a généralement attiré l'attention sur …". Mais j'aimerais mieux la première formule qui est plus claire: "Le Conseil a manifesté son intérêt pour …".
CHAIRMAN: Is this satisfactory for those who know French? Is the United Kingdom satisfied with this formulation? Is Colombia?
G.BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Yo no conozco muy bien el francés, pero me preocupa que se trate de conocer simplemente. Acaso podríamos decir le Conseil "a souligné".
A. FEQUANT (France): Je n'ai rien contre le terme "a souligné", mais il faut voir ce qui vient ensuite: "il a souligné l'intérêt?" C'est vraiment le maximum qu'on puisse imaginer en français.
M. HAMDOON (Iraq) (original language Arabic): I do not know whether I can help, but instead of saying "The Council noted", we can say "The Council discussed with interest".
ZHONG SHUKONG (China): I think here nothing substantive is involved. More problems seem to crop up with the translation, so I would suggest we accept Colombia's version, "The Council generally supported", which would permit translation into other languages, and as to the second part, I can go along with the proposal made by the Philippines that was very clear and concise.
G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Yo creo que el colega de Francia puede aceptar simplemente: "a souligné avec intérêt".
A. FEQUANT (France): Je serais ravi de pouvoir faire ce plaisir à M. Bula Hoyos mais il y a des difficultés qui subsistent. Je crois que si l'on disait "Le Conseil a pris connaissance avec intérêt" ou "a manifesté de l'intérêt pour", ce serait assez clair et je crois que cela correspond à la réalité; mais on ne peut pas dire qu'il y ait eu déjà une sorte de répartition des voix entre les différentes tendances. C'est pour cela qu'on est obligé, quand on parle du Conseil, d'agir avec une grande précaution puisque, dans ce Conseil, il y avait plusieurs opinions divergentes. Je ne représente pas tout le Conseil, M. Bula Hoyos non plus, mais je crois que nous pourrions nous mettre d'accord sur une formule assez neutre qui serait ou bien "Le Conseil a pris connaissance avec intérêt", ou bien "a consacré un grand intérêt à la discussion d'une proposition", ou bien "a discuté avec un grand intérêt une proposition".
Voilà ce que je propose, il y a plusieurs formules qui sont offertes au choix de mes collègues.
CHAIRMAN: I think arising from France's remark, one formulation suggested is "The Council expressed considerable interest in a proposal made to the CCP", instead of saying "highlighted". So subsequent speakers can make a comment whether it is satisfactory, "The Council expressed considerable interest in a proposal made to the CCP".
G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Yo preferiría que se aceptara la primera propuesta nuestra que fue generalmente bien recibida en el inglés y en el español y entre la escogencia que nos sometió el colega de Francia tal vez "consagrar" podría ser la más aproximada. En inglés y en español se "destaco con interés". En francés "consacré", quizá sea lo mejor.
F. BREWSTER (Barbados): I think "supported with great: interest" or even "manifested great interest in" would be the appropriate rendition for the English to meet the French translation.
T. AHMAD (Pakistan): To be honest, I have lost track of where we are now.
A.A. MALEK (Liban) (langue originale arabe): Nous ne sommes pas en train de réviser un texte de poésie mais en train de discuter de l'adoption d'un rapport. Je préfère qu'on se consacre beaucoup plus au fond qu'à la forme, ceci pour éviter de nous retrouver encore ici à minuit traitant de l'adoption du rapport.
A. FEQUANT (France): je suis prêt à me rallier à la dernière formule proposée, c'est-à-dire "Le Conseil a examiné avec intérêt une proposition…".
CHAIRMAN: Is this acceptable? Does it satisfy Colombia? Yes; thank you very much. The rest of the formulation as suggested by the Philippines has been accepted, so we go on to paragraph 14.
T. AHMAD (Pakistan): On paragraph 14, basically I have a question for the Chairman of the Drafting Committee on the structure of the paragraph, which is actually only one sentence. The way the paragraph reads now is: "The Council, with the exception of the EEC member countries noted". I was just wondering whether "with the exception of the EEC member countries" refers to the CCP or refers to the Council, because the way it reads it seems as if the EEC members of the Council did not note what happened in the CCP. What perhaps you want to say is that the Council noted the widespread and deep concerns which had been expressed at the CCP by member countries except the EEC members regarding the recent proposal, etc., because EEC members' exception to what was happening in the Council is contained in paragraph 17, which goes on to discuss this, so maybe you need to restructure the sentence.
G.J. BOXALL (Chairman, Drafting Committee): I cannot, of course, and I would not want to speak on behalf of the EEC member countries. The point made by Pakistan, though, is well-taken. This particular phrase was an addition which we talked about in the Drafting Committee, and if I am right, the EEC wished to insert that their exception to this thought was as Council members, the members of the Community within the Council.
CHAIRMAN: The Chairman of the Drafting Committee has explained that here, the Council with the exception of the EEC member countries, that is, who are members of the Council "noted the widespread and deep concerns".
T. AHMAD (Pakistan): I do not wish either to be a spokesman for the EEC countries, or speak on their behalf, but I was wondering if the EEC members in the Council were not noting that what was happening in the CCP, because it was the CCP Report that we were discussing, and perhaps what we wanted to say was that in the CCP, the member countries expressed concern except the EEC member countries in the CCP, and that exception is in paragraph 17, when it says "The Council, with the exception of the EEC member countries, appealed to the EEC", etc. so if that is factual and correct, then you have to restructure that exception in paragraph 14 and bring it after the words "expressed at the CCP".
CHAIRMAN: I hope what Pakistan is suggesting is clear: "The Council noted the widespread and deep concerns which had been expressed at the CCP, with the exception of the EEC member countries, regarding the recent proposal of the EEC Commission to the EEC (European Economic Community) Council for the imposition of a tax on domestic and imported fats and oils", etc. It is a clearer formulation. I agree that as formulated, one has to split the sentence, as the Philippines suggested earlier. Maybe we could try to put it in two sentences.
P.S. McLEAN (United Kingdom): I believe that it would be quite readable and logical if in fact the expression after the word "CCP" was, not, as you suggest, "with the exception of" but simply "by the EEC member countries". In other words it would read " the concerns which had been expresed at the CCP except by EEC member countries", and then it would go on, I think, quite sensibly. I am afraid that that is all I can suggest.
H. CARANDANG (Philippines): I think I would like to support the proposal of the delegate of Pakistan because the verb is "noted". I mean, they did not approve, they did not endorse, just noted, and the word "noted" is neutral. I do not know if the EEC member countries did not note this proposal during the Council; they must have heard it. They must have read it and that is noting, exactly what the word "notes" means, and if they saw it they read it and that is all we are saying. I do not see why you have put that during the Council meeting they closed their ears, they refused to read anything like this, which is an absurdity, so I think it is just logical that we omit those words there.
J. TCHICAYA (Congo): Je partage le point de vue que viennent d'exprimer les délégués des Philippines et du Pakistan, mais je voudrais également dire que si l'on accepte cette proposition le mot "généralement" n'a plus, à mon avis, tellement de raison d'être ici. Ne pourrait-on pas le supprimer?
CHAIRMAN: As now formulated by Pakistan, the United Kingdom, Philippines and the Congo, the paragraph will read as follows: "The Council noted the widespread and deep concerns which had been expressed at the CCP except by EEC member countries regarding the recent proposal etc." which will remain the same.
I find the French and the German delegations are approving, so thank you very much. Shall we now go on to paragraph 15?
C. VIDALI CARBAJAL (México): Es un problema de la version en español. La ultima oración que aparece en la version en español no aparece en la versión en inglés, y la version en inglés es la correcta, la que aprobamos en el Comité de Redacción.
Ms. K. KILLINGSWORTH (Secretary, Drafting Committee): I am afraid it is an error in the Spanish version. The Drafting Committee took the sentence out and it is out in the other three versions.
M. HAMDOON (Iraq) (original language Arabic): About the middle of the paragraph it says, "the EEC should find a solution domestically rather than by shifting the burden to another sector and to third countries." What do we mean by third countries? Do we mean developing countries or do we mean developed countries, socialist countries and Third World countries, because it says that it was still morally incorrect to transfer the burden to third countries. If we have third countries here, who are the first and second countries? Surely we mean developing countries?
G. J. BOXALL (Chairman, Drafting Committee): This particular point in fact was not discussed by the Drafting Committee at all. Third countries to my mind would mean any country outside of the European community.
H. CARANDANG (Philippines): I just wanted to add another sentence before the last sentence. It would indicate one of the reasons that have been raised against this tax, and that the so-called non-discriminatory consumption tax which, according to the proposal, would be levelled at the point of entry would, according to normal practices, not be really added to the consumption price but discounted to the exporters. I would like to add this sentence in here if there is no objection because this is really the paragraph wherein you indicate the reasons that have been brought against this tax, and if there is no objection to this I would suggest that it should be included although the thought is already included in the other sentence in a sort of term but it is made more explicit by this sentence.
CHAIRMAN: Have you a precise formulation; exactly how you would like it to be worded?
H. CARANDANG (Philippines): "The so-called non-discriminatory tax which, according to the proposal would be levelled at the point of entry would, under normal trading practices, not be added to the consumer prices but discounted to the exporters."
A.FEQUANT (France): Je crois que cette proposition a été présentée au Comité des produits par la délégation des Philippines, mais, d'après ce que l'on m'a dit, il n'y a pas eu de discussion détaillée au Comité des produits sur ce point. Alors, moi, je ne verrais aucune objection à ce qu'on dise qu'une délégation a proposé que …
H. CARANDANG (Philippines): If you look at CL 84/PV/1, page 14, you will see exactly these words indicated, and I thought that we were just summarizing the arguments that were given in the CCP and I thought that these views were supported by those who opposed the tax.
A. FEQUANT (France): Je n'ai aucune objection à condition qu'elle n'engage que les Philippines.
H. CARANDANG (Philippines): If you look at the structure of the way this thing is drafted you will see that the paragraph 14 indicates the agreement of the Council. Paragraph 15 indicates the views of those who oppose the tax and paragraph 16 indicates the view of the EEC members. Now if the contention of the EEC members is that only the Philippines was of this view, I can guarantee to the distinguished delegate of France that it is not just the view of the Philippines because it has been supported by other delegations. I therefore believe that if they have anything that they have to say against that they should indicate it in paragraph 16 and not in paragraph 15.
CHAIRMAN: Paragraph 16 of course starts by saying, "The observer of the EEC stressed that at this stage the tax was only a proposal of the Commission to the Council of Ministers which had not as yet taken a decision". What the Chairman of CCP is suggesting is that since the earlier paragraph 15 relates to the views of many members expressed at a meeting, it follows in chronological order. This is one view, and the EEC's view is reflected in paragraph 16, and if it has to be strengthened it can be done. This is what the Philippine delegation, who is also the Chairman of CCP, is suggesting.
P. ELMANOWSKY (France): Le paragraphe 15 mentionne les arguments qui ont été invoqués par les adversaires de la taxe, et en principe il doit mentionner les arguments qui ont été soulevés au Conseil. Ce que vient de nous suggérer le représentant des Philippines a été dit en particulier au Comité des produits, et je crois que ceci est reflété dans le rapport du Comité des produits. Je n'ai pas souvenir - mais là je peux me tromper - que cet argument ait été repris au Conseil, et, de toute façon le paragraphe 15 reprend essentiellement - je dis bien: essentiellement - les arguments énoncés au Conseil. Je crois que ceci nous donne satisfaction et devrait donner également satisfaction à ceux qui sont contre la taxe. Alors, si l'on me montre que l'argument récent invoqué par les Philippines a bien été repris dans son intervention au moment du Conseil, on peut le reprendre; sinon je ne vois pas sa place à cet endroit.
H. CARANDANG (Philippines): I thought I had already indicated that on page 14 of document CL 84/PV/1 at the bottom of the last paragraph, the tenth to the last line, you have these words there. Now if that is the difficulty of the delegate of France then we have no problem at all.
P. ELMANOWSKY (France): Effectivement, Monsieur le Président, le représentant des Philippines l'a prononcée au Conseil et dans ces conditions, cette phrase, s'il veut nous la relire en la condensant peut-être un petit peu plus, nous pourrions l'insérer dans le paragraphe 15, car ce serait l'expression d'une des voix qui s'est manifestée contre la taxe, alors là je n'aurais pas d'objection.
CHAIRMAN: Could the delegate of the Philippines kindly read it again slowly, please? It was also suggested that you make it shorter if possible; so, slow and short please.
H. CARANDANG (Philippines): Our shortened formulation of the sentence proposed as an amendment, as requested by the French delegate, is as follows: "The so-called 'non-discriminatory consumption tax', which according to the proposed rules would be levied at the point of entry, would not be added to consumer prices but under general market conditions would be discounted by traders from the CIF prices." That is the insert just before the final sentence of paragraph 15.
P. ELMANOWSKY (France): Je dirais qu'il est relativement clair que c'est la déclaration d'un ou de plusieurs membres adversaires de cette taxe. La rédaction est donc de leur pure responsabilité. Nous ne pouvons pas nous opposer à ce qu'ils disent, nous en prenons note.
CHAIRMAN: We now move on to paragraph 16. Any comments?
P.S. McLEAN (United Kingdom): I am sorry to be holding up the Council again on this issue of oils and fats. This paragraph rightly represents the observations made by the representative of the EEC Commission in answer to the concerns which were expressed and as now recorded in paragraphs 14 and 15. The first sentence correctly states that this tax is as yet only a proposal of the Commission to the Council of Ministers, and I suggest that it would follow that, and be clearer, if the second sentence started as follows: "He stated that in the view of the Commission this tax was necessary" etc. I think this is a factually correct statement.
As a matter of English tidying up, it might then be appropriate to change the words "in view" which follow the word "necessary" by the word "because". I hope this would cause no problem to my colleagues or the Council, and the proposal would be that the second sentence should read: "He stated that in the view of the Commission this tax was necessary because of the fact" etc.
CHAIRMAN: I think this puts it more factually, it is more in conformity with the first sentence. Shall we then accept the United Kingdom delegation's proposal and proceed to paragraph 17? Agreed. I see no comments on paragraphs 17-20? They are approved. Paragraph 21?
M. FAIZUR RAZZAR (Bangladesh): The emphasis on research on jute as contained in the CCP document also, is on the improvement of productivity. And keeping that in mind, may I suggest a formulation by adding four words as follows: after the third comma in paragraph 22, the sentence reads "and stressed the urgent need for research to find new end uses for these commodities." I am proposing that we add, after the word "research", the words "to improve the productivity and to find new end uses for these commodities."
CHAIRMAN: I hope this is acceptable because it is an important point: need for research to improve the productivity and find new uses for these commodities.
C. VIDALI CARBAJAL (México): Nada más recordar que esto lo discutimos en el grupo de redacción y sugerimos que además de que se mencionen fibras duras como ya lo aclaro la Secretaría, se pusiera "henequén o sisal" adicionalmente a yute, kenaf. Se dijera "yute, kenaf, henequén/sisal y otras fibras duras".
Y otro asunto de orden es que creo que el párrafo 24 podría ir a continuación del párafo 22; es decir, hacer un cambio de párrafos, ya que creo que van muy ligados, y el párrafo 23 está un poco en medio de dos ideas que se expresan en el párrafo 22 y 24, que deberían de ir una detrás de la otra. Proponemos concretamente reordenar esos párafos.
G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): El párrafo 22 empieza por las palabras "Muchos miembros", y dice "hicieron referencia"; creemos que esta manifestación es un poco débil e ingenua; acaso se nos podría permitir encabezar ese párrafo 22 por "El Consejo hizo referencia", y naturalmente, más adelante habría que cambiar "y subrayó la necesidad".
CHAIRMAN: Instead of "Many members" the Colombian delegation has said: "The Council referred to the sharp decline in the price of jute … sisal and other hard fibres, on account of competition from synthetic substitutes … need for research to improve productivity and find new end uses for these commodities."
I hope this combined formulation of the suggestions of Colombia, Mexico and Bangladesh is acceptable.
Then the next suggestion of Mexico is that since paragraph 24 also refers to research, the present paragraph 24 should become 23 and the present 23 might then become 24, so that it reads more logically. That is, paragraph 24 would be: "Several members stressed the need to establish a mechanism for cooperation among developed and developing countries to stimulate research and development of new technologies which would permit diversifying the use made of basic commodities." This will become paragraph 23.
G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Para complementar el reforzamiento de las ideas de estos pŕrafos, acaso también al principio del párrafo 24, podríamos decir "Se insistió en la necesidad". Tratamos simplemente de suplir donde sea posible "varios miembros" o "algunos miembros" porque esto debilita la posición del Consejo; si esto no es conflictivo.
CHAIRMAN: The new paragraph 23 as suggested by the Colombian delegation will now read: "Several members emphasized the need to establish a mechanism" etc.
Then we go on to the present paragraph 24.
G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): La traducción que me llego al castellano, me excuso Sr. Presidente, fue la misma del texto actual. Yo he propuesto que en vez de "varios miembros" se diga "se insistió"; forma neutra de "se insistió".
CHAIRMAN: In that case I think the formulation will have to be: "The need to establish a mechanism" and "was stressed" will come at the end. "The need to establish a mechanism for cooperation" etc. "was emphasized." So shall we change it in this way?
P. ELMANOWSKY (France): Je m'interroge sur le remplacement de "plusieurs" par "on" qui a une connotation beaucoup plus générale. Effectivement, il y a quelques membres qui ont fait cette remarque, mais ce que je voudrais surtout bien comprendre, c'est ce que veut dire: "créer un mécanisme de coopération entre pays développés et pays en développement pour stimuler la recherche et la mise au point de nouvelles techniques qui permettraient de diversifier les utilisations des produits de base". Est-ce qu'on fait allusion à ce qui a déjà été fait à la Conférence sur les transferts de technologies? Je crois qu'il existe déjà un certain nombre de mécanismes; je ne suis pas un spécialiste de ces questions, mais cela existe. Est-ce qu'il est question de créer un mécanisme tout à fait nouveau, et quel mécanisme, comment, etc. ?
Il est bien difficile, si l'on n'a pas de précisions sur une idée de ce genre, de dire que le Conseil ou "on", c'est-à-dire beaucoup de membres du Conseil, sont d'accord pour la création d'un tel mécanisme, alors qu'on ne sait pas très bien de quoi il s'occuperait, comment il fonctionnerait, et sur quoi porteraient ses travaux. C'est pourquoi je me pose des questions.
G.J. BOXALL (Chairman, Drafting Committee): This was a new paragraph, in fact, which we considered without too much discussion. Perhaps the proposer of this particular paragraph could throw some light to the French delegation on their proposal?
CHAIRMAN: The French delegate has asked a question: "The need to establish a mechanism for cooperation among developed and developing countries to stimulate research and development". He says there is no mechanism at the moment; do you want to start a new mechanism and if so, what kind of mechanism? Otherwise, he feels it is very weak.
I see the Ambassador of Peru asking for the floor. The report of the Council normally is discussed only by Council members but if Peru has some useful suggestions which can help us, I shall give the floor to you, Ambassador of Peru.
J. GAZZO F.D. (Observador del Perú): Le agradezco por la deferencia. Yo creo que el espíritu del páraffo 24 se refiere a que este mecanismo de colaboración no es para investigar sobre la producción de los productos básicos, donde ya existe un mecanismo, sino para estudiar los posibles usos y acá dice "que permitan diversificar la utilización de los productos básicos". 0 sea, no es para investigar esos productos; para eso, ya existe un mecanismo. Lo que queremos es que haya una organización, un mecanismo de colaboración para que se nos enseñe a usar algunos productos básicos en otras actividades, en otras funciones porque la función principal que tenían, está siendo sustituida por productos sustitutorios opor productos sintéticos. De manera que es un mecanismo adicional que no interfiere con el otro, sino que lo refuerza.
G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Yo comparto, en cierta medida, la inquietud del colega Elmanowsky de Francia sobre el contenido de este párrafo. Podríamos acaso ponernos de acuerdo sobre una redacción transaccional que podría decir "Se insistió en la necesidad de mejorar los mecanismos de colaboración …".
C. VIDALI CARBAJAL (México): Realmente, no entendemos la duda del distinguido delegado de Francia que participó con nosotros en el Comité de Redacción y que no planteó esta duda que está planteando ahora en este seno. Entonces, no entendemos si lo que está objetando es que se ponga "se insistió" o qué es lo que está objetando, o si ya realmente se dio cuenta de que la idea es una idea que no está clara, y esto no se pudo ver ayer porque, posiblemente, estábamos un poco cansados. En fin, no entiendo la duda del distinguido delegado de Francia.
A.M. QURESHI (Pakistan): I would only like to suggest that in the place of the words "several members" we could substitute the words "the Council": "The Council emphasized the need to establish" because that would, I think, be more appropriate.
P. ELMANOWSKY (France): La dernière suggestion proposant de mettre "le Conseil" ne ferait qu'aggraver mes doutes.
En français, on dit qu'on n'a pas l'habitude d'acheter chat en poche. Si on met "le Conseil", ou si l'on met "on", c'est-à-dire dans le fond beaucoup de monde, cela veut dire que nous reconnaissons la nécessité de créer un mécanisme de coopération pour stimuler la recherche et la mise au point de nouvelles techniques permettant de diversifier les utilisations des produits de base. Ma première réaction est de dire: est-ce qu'il n'existe pas déjà quelque chose, par exemple dans le transfert de technologies? Est-ce qu'il n'y a pas aussi quelque chose dans le travail qui est fait à la FAO en liaison avec la CNUCED, par exemple dans deux cas précis s'insérant dans le cadre du programme intégré et du Groupe sur les oléagineux et matières grasses de la CNUCED, ainsi que sur le groupe viande de la CNUCED, où la FAO a examiné des projets de recherche et de développement applicables à ces produits pouvant permettre, par l'intermédiaire de la CNUCED, le financement. Si c'est cela que l'on pense, il ne s'agit pas d'une création, mais d'une amélioration. Si, au contraire, c'est quelque chose d'entièrement nouveau, si l'on pense de créer un organe quelconque dans une autre enceinte indéterminée, avant de se rallier à une telle idée, il faut avoir beaucoup plus d'explications.
C'est parce que je n'ai pas de réponses précises à ces questions que j'ai des doutes pour dire: "on" a souligné …
CHAIRMAN: I will give the floor to Germany, if you could specifically comment on the suggestion of Colombia. Let me just read out what he said. "Stress was laid on the need to strengthen or improve mechanisms for cooperation among developed and developing countries". That is what he has proposed and from the intervention of the delegate of France I take it you have no objection to that formulation. I would like to get it clear.
W.A.F. GRABISCH (Germany, Fed. Rep. of): I think the suggestion put forward by Colombia is a very useful one, with one exception, he is still using the word "mechanism". If he would just say "stress was laid on the need to improve cooperation among developed and developing countries" and so on, I think this could perhaps meet the views of all. the nations around the table.
CHAIRMAN: The Colombian delegate agrees.
Paragraphs 5 to 26, as amended, approved
Les paragraphes 5 à 26, ainsi amendés, sont approuvés
Los párrafos 5 a 26, asi enmendados, son aprobados.
A. PINOARGOTE CEVALLOS (Ecuador): Quiero hacer una observación de carácter general, gramatical. No sé cómo estará en los otros idiomas, pero en castellano o en español se repite este error con frecuencia. Cuando se habla de lo que hace el Consejo, se habla en pasado, como es correcto. Pero cuando se refiere a circunstancias o a hechos que no son del Consejo sino de otras personas o instituciones, se utiliza también el pasado. Y esto puede generar equivocaciones o errores o contradicciones que yo no creo que son propias de un documento de un organismo como éste.
Por ejemplo, en el párrafo 26, cuando se refiere al reconocimiento que se hizo al Sr. Leeks, cuando se dice "El Consejo hizo constar …, el cual se "iba" a retirar" refiriéndose al Sr. Leeks, entonces parece que se iba a retirar, pero no se retira. Cuando el señor se va a retirar y por eso es que el Consejo le hace un reconocimiento.
Igualmente en el punto 13 se hace lo mismo. Se habla de un asunto que había sido de interés del Consejo, pero como se "está" desarrollando una labor por el GATT esto se estudiará después. Sin embar-go, está en el sentido de que se "estaba" desarrollando. Es contradictorio, no porque se "estaba" desarrollando, sino porque se "está" desarrollando, el Consejo no resuelve ahora nada en concreto, sino que ofrece estudiarlo en el futuro.
O sea, que sugiero esta observación de índole general para que no haya contradicción en cuanto a lo que hizo el Consejo, y a lo que está haciendo, o van a hacer, ciertas personas u organismos.
CHAIRMAN: We now move on to the next item. Item 6.
PARAGRAPHS 27 to 32
PARAGRAPHES 27 à 32
PARRAFOS 27 a 32
CHAIRMAN: Any comments on paragraph 27?
G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Seguramente usted, Sr. Presidente, y nuestros colegas recordarán que sobre este tema la delegación de Colombia hizo una intervención bastante fundada a través de la cual expresó serias preocupaciones, que fueron apoyadas por otros colegas sobre el descenso de la asistencia multilateral. Somos conscientes de que a estas alturas de nuestros trabajos no conviene demorar más la aprobación de este Informe; por lo tanto vamos a limitar solamente nuestra intervención a agregar algo al final del párrafo que espero refleje, aunque sea tímidamente, esa preocupación y esperando que no ofrezca dificultades.
Al final del párrafo después de "canales multilaterales", pondría una coma y diríamos: "cuyo descenso preocupa al Consejo". Creemos que es lo mínimo que se puede expresar a este respecto.
CHAIRMAN: The suggestion of Colombia to add at the end of this "especially through multilateral channels to this sector whose decline is a cause of concern" or something of that kind. I hope there is no objection to adding to this.
W.A.F.GRABISCH(Germany, Federal Republic of): Just one question, the delegate of Colombia spoke on this point and he expressed his concern. I am just wondering whether this would refer to all multilateral finances or whether it is just meant to be UNDP. Perhaps the Secretariat would be helpful in this as to whether we could say that or not UNDP. I would agree we have this in the documentation as well but in regard to the World Bank and other institutions I am just asking the question.
G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Yo creo que el colega de la República Federal de Alemania está muy acertado en solicitar la opinión de la Secretaría.
Nosotros situamos nuestra intervención en el contexto general, de la asistencia multilateral, y dije que es una demostración de descenso. Vamos a escuchar a la Secretaría y creo que no habrá dificultad entre el colega Grabisch y yo para ponernos de acuerdo.
A. REGNIER (Directeur, Bureau des affaires interinstitutions): Je crois, selon les dernières informations que nous avons recueillies, qu'en 1982 l'assistance multilatérale totale au secteur agricole a baissé en termes réels de l'ordre de 4 pour cent, toutes sources confondues bien entendu. Le déclin du PNUD a une influence considérable dans ce chiffre mais ce n'est pas la seule source du déclin. Je crois que ce que le représentant de la Colombie a dit est en fait correct.
CHAIRMAN: This is a cause of concern to the Council. With these remarks, we adopt paragraph 27, as amended. Any comments on paragraph 28?
C. VIDALI CARBAJAL (México): Nosotros estamos con la impresión de que el texto que se aprobó en el Comité de Redacción decía lo siguiente: "El Consejo señaló con preocupación los progresos poco satisfactorios", en vez de la redacción que tenemos a la vista.
CHAIRMAN: "The Council expressed concern at the unsatisfactory progress …" This is what we want to convey. I do not know whether the Spanish formulation requires improvement.
G.BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Queremos referirnos al párrafo 28, aunque lamentamos mucho retrasar sus trabajos Sr. Presidente, y creo que somos sinceros a este respecto; pero corresponde a posiciones muy definidas del Gobierno de Colombia. Por lo tanto proponemos que el párrafo 28 se divida en dos frases. Recordarán ustedes que cuando yo intervine señalé la necesidad de que el Consejo hiciera un llamado acerca de la difícil situación de los recursos del FIDA, y está ese llamado en el Informe del Consejo Mundial de la Alimentación que hizo parte del documento sobre el cual discutimos este tema.
Podríamos decir en la primera frase después de "Fondo Internacional de Desarrollo Agrícola, ": "e hizo un llamado para que se cumplan los compromisos de la primera reposición y se adelante la segunda reposición con positiva voluntad política."
Naturalmente la segunda frase del párrafo 28 deberá decir: "El Consejo expresó preocupación también por la demora"•
Repetimos.que este llamado fue aceptado unánimemente por el Consejo Mundial de la Alimentación, de forma no controvertida y tuvo el apoyo del Consejo ya que ninguno se opuso cuando hicimos esta propuesta formal.
CHAIRMAN: You have heard the Colombian proposal about splitting paragraph 28 into two sentences. The first will read: "The Council expressed concern at the unsatisfactory progress in the replenishment of IFAD (International Fund for Agricultural Development) and appealed for the commitments under the first replenishment to be complied with and for progress to be made on the second replenishment with positive political will. The delay in the entry into force of the Common Fund, and the lack of progress in the initiation of global negotiations were also noted with concern." Are there any objections to this? It makes it much more positive. Paragraph 20, as amended, has been approved. Any comments on paragraph 29? None. Then we move on to paragraph 30.
P.S. McLEAN (United Kingdom): With apologies, I am slightly puzzled by the inclusion of paragraph 30. It purports to attribute to the Council in the first phrase a view which seems to be not wholly in accord with views that members have expressed in other bodies of FAO on this issue. Of course this does not mean of itself that the Council cannot reach its own conclusion. But I do not recall the issue even being aired in the current Council. Could I ask the Chairman of the Drafting Committee if he could enlighten me as to the origin?
G.J. BOXALL (Chairman, Drafting Committee): I can enlighten Mr. McLean only by saying that this paragraph was in the original draft which the Drafting Committee looked at and it was not discussed.
CHAIRMAN: The Chairman of the Drafting Committee has stated that it was in the draft given to them.
P.S. McLEAN (United Kingdom): I do not want to make an issue of it, although one could say, as we have in the past, that it is questionable whether things should be included in a report which were not actually raised on the floor. In another place not so long ago the Chairman suggested that when we read a report in the future we should have an understanding of what it means. In this case I may have an understanding which does not necessarily accord with that of other members of the Council, but I will let it pass.
G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): No hubiera querido intervenir otra vez pero me siento culpable, honestamente culpable. Fue la delegación nuestra la que se refirió a este asunto y por eso está este párrafo en el Informe. Nosotros destacamos esa referencia a la manera como se atiende la situación de emergencia y destacamos esa situación satisfactoria y la de limitación de responsabilidades entre los organismos.
Tal vez se podría completar esta idea si el colega McLean estuviera de acuerdo con lo que también dijimos nosotros, que si fuera necesario mejorar esa participación de los organismos debería también considerarse esa posibilidad; pero en fin esto no corresponde sino a lo que yo dije sobre esta situación.
V. BLANCO (México): Unicamente para apoyar al distinguido representante de Colombia, ya que de acuerdo con mis notas, en este tema él se refirió a esta situación.
DEPUTY DIRECTOR-GENERAL: The United Kingdom delegate was right in suggesting that what is said here is somewhat different from what has been said in the past. The position is, as explained by Mr. Regnier in his introductory remarks, that there has been a further stage of discussion in ECOSOC which has improved matters. However, in line with what was just said I suggest we could reconcile the viewpoint of both by saying at the end of the sentence that the role of the participating agencies and organizations was now better defined.
CHAIRMAN: I think you have got the point, that the last sentence, according to Mr. West, can read: "The role of the participating agencies and organizations is now better defined".
F. BREWSTER (Barbados): What I want to suggest is that for the sake of consistency in style perhaps we could begin the paragraph "The Council again" instead of "As far as the strengthening of the capacity…"
CHAIRMAN: Thank you. So shall we retain this in a modified form?
Paragraphs 27 to 32, as amended, approved
Les paragraphes 27 à 32. ainsi amendés, sont approuvés
Los párrafos 27 a 32, asi enmendados, son aprobados
Paragraph 33 approved
Le paragraphe 33 est approuvé
El párrafo 33 es aprobado
Paragraph 34 approved
Le paragraphe 34 est approuvé
El párrafo 34 es aprobado
Draft Report of Plenary, Part 1, as amended, was adopted
Le projet de rapport de la plénière, première partie, ainsi amendé, est adopté
El proyecto de informe de la Plenaria, Parte 1, asi enmendado, es aprobado
DRAFT REPORT - PART II
PROJET DE RAPPORT - PARTIE II
PROYECTO DE INFORME - PARTIE II
Paragraphs 1 to 6 approved
Les paragraphes 1 à 6 sont approuvés
Los párrafos 1 a 6 son aprobados
Paragraph 7 approved
Le paragraphe 7 est approuvé
El párrafo 7 es aprobado
PARAGRAPHS 8 to 15
PARAGRAPHES 8 à 15
PARRAFOS 8 a 15
T. AHMAD (Pakistan): On paragraph 11 only a question again for the Chairman of the Drafting Committee. I was wondering whether we really need this last sentence in this paragraph which says: "A number of members indicated their intention…" I believe that all members of the Council will be wanting to do so. Why restrict it to "a number of members"? My suggestion is to delete the last sentence of paragraph 11.
CHAIRMAN: The Pakistan delegate has proposed that we delete the sentence: "A number of members indicated their intention of offering comments in more depth during the forthcoming session of the Conference". This item will come before Commission II.
W.A.F. GRABISCH (Germany, Federal Republic of): This delegation was amongst those who indicated that they would give further comments on the proposal for the Programme of Work and Budget 1984-85 at a later stage, and we said that at the forthcoming Twenty-second Conference we would then voice our final position. Of course nobody is deprived of speaking on the subject at the forthcoming Conference, but this was mentioned by several delegates. If our report is to reflect what took place I think we would rather leave it in.
CHAIRMAN: I think Pakistan has no objection. It is a factual account of what happened.
T. AHMAD (Pakistan): I would not want to perhaps enter into a lengthy debate on the subject; but my query was that this sentence is at the end of paragraph 11, and if you want this sort of idea generally, then perhaps you will have to fit it elsewhere. In paragraph 11 we said, "The Council agreed therefore that the balance of programmes, " etc., reflected the needs of developing countries, and then when you have a sentence at the end of this, perhaps what we are suggesting is that some Members who want to speak specifically on this issue and have reservations on this. What I want to say is that no Member is debarred or even discouraged from expressing its views in this Conference, and perhaps in that sense it is a redundancy, and may I remind you, Mr Chairman, that I was one of those Members who said that we examine everything in depth where it is required to be examined, which is Commission II, and the Council was not really examining the whole thing in depth, so by saying here that they would do so later on in depth is as if we were not really doing our work here. The work here has to do with the Programme of Work and Budget and not go into detail.
CHAIRMAN: I think Pakistan has a point. If Members agree, what I would like to suggest in the last but one sentence is, "Views and perceptions on the relevance of many FAO programmes were expressed in this connexion and would be elaborated further in the forthcoming Session of the Conference", because some expressed very briefly their views, so this might take care of that.
Federal Republic of Germany and Pakistan, the suggestion is to delete the last sentence. If you still feel there should be something said about the views of Members offering comments, I suggest that we just put a small addition to the previous sentence: "Views and perceptions on the relevance of many FAO programmes were expressed in this connexion and would be elaborated further in the forthcoming Session of the Conference". I think that will be a factual statement. Germany agrees?
W.A.F. GRABISCH (Germany, Federai; Republic of): It would not be good English, perhaps, but couldn't we just add "which was expressed explicitly by several delegations", to what we have said, and then I think it would be better.
CHAIRMAN: Well, I suppose all the delegates may like to say something, as Pakistan says. I would suggest we leave it as it is; it does not matter. That is what we say, "Views and perceptions on the relevance of many FAO programmes were expressed in this connexion and would be elaborated further during the forthcoming Session of the Conference".
C. VIDALI CARBAJAL (México): No sé si ya llegaron a un acuerdo, pero realmente, si recordamos, ya se llegó a una solución porque ésta es una frase que realmente pensamos que sobra por el hecho de que cualquier Delegado puede expresar sus opinones en la próxima Conferencia cuando se plantee este tema. Por eso habíamos quitado, inclusive en el Comité de Redacción, otra que sugerimos al principio de nuestra discusión que estaba en al versión española y se había eliminado de las demás, es un poco el mismo caso. Realmente esa es una observación que sobra.
CHAIRMAN: Thank you, but anyway, it is a factual account, and this is a short Council. People will not have time to deal with it in detail. I see no harm in saying that different perceptions will be elaborated further.
Paragraph 11, as amended, is approved. Paragraph 12. That is an important paragraph because it brings out the redeployment of resources within the Organization. Paragraph 12 approved. Paragraph 13?
M. FAIZUR RAZZAK (Bangladesh): Following on this page which begins with "The Council" and also following the pattern of the Council that "zero growth" is opposed by the Council itself, may I propose that we take out the words "Many members" and say "the Council emphasized that although it fully supported the proposals", and we go on that way.
P.S. McLEAN (United Kingdom): I understood initially that Bangladesh was making the point that the paragraph as it starts would in my view be factually correct if it used the words "The Council emphasized that they supported the proposals" but I think he would then wish us to go on to include "as an expression by the Council", the latter part of the sentence, and of course, for reasons which I am sure many members of the Council I trust will understand, this I think would not reflect the view of the Council as a whole. I think therefore that the draft as it comes before us is the proper reflection of the position as it affects the members of the Council collectively.
CHAIRMAN: We will split it in two sentences, because the United Kingdom has said the last part of it is not shared by all Members, so either we have to say "the Council emphasized" or leave it as it is.
T. AHMAD (Pakistan): I do not want to enter into this discussion about whether you should have "the Council" or "Many Members". I would of course be happy if the Bangladesh proposal could be accepted and we can have this as the views of the Council. However, since some delegates are opposed to it, I was only wondering whether this paragraph does reflect the opinion of many Members, but these were the many Members, including my country, who also expressed the view that there was lack of additionalty in this particular budget, and the concept of zero growth was tackled in paragraph 13, but that idea had not been brought in. I am not going to suggest any specific language, I can leave that to the Chairman of the Drafting Committee, but I would suggest that particular idea be incorporated in this particular paragraph 13, which is the while supporting "The proposals, which they considered a further reflection of the realism emonstrated by the Director-General, many members also expressed concern at the fact that theic was very modest additionality of resources in the budget".
Mrs.M. FENWICK (United States of America): A very brief suggestion: that 13 might read: "The Council emphasized that they fully supported the proposals, which they considered a further reflection of the realism demonstrated by the Director-General in reconciling conflicting demands. Many members, however, were concerned lest this might be interpreted as a commitment in the future to the concept of zero growth, which they had consistently opposed".
M.FAIZUR RAZZAK (Bangladesh): We agree with the suggestion given by the United States.
CHAIRMAN: I think there is support for the statement by the United States. Will the Ambassador read out the second part of it so we can see the formulation?
Mrs.M. FENWICK (United States of America): "Many members, however, were Concerned lest this might be interpreted as a commitment in the future to the concept of zero growth, which they had consistently opposed".
T. AHMAD (Pakistan): We personnaly think it is an excellent formulation and we agree. However, we are still concerned about the idea we wanted to be incorporated, and with this excellent formulation, if we could go on, my suggestion is to sav "and expressed concern at the modest additionality of resources proposed for the biennium".
CHAIRMAN: Is this additional sentence "and expressed concern at the modest additionality of resources proposed for the biennium, " acceptable, because it still only follows "many members".
ZHONG SHUKONG (China): We can go along with the amendment with one modification at the end, that is after "zero growth" we read "to which they had been consistently opposed". In this way the attitude is clear rather than actions being expressed.
CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much; "to which they had been consistently opposed". Paragraph 13, as amended, is approved. Paragraph 14?
Mrs.M. FENWICK (United States of America): I know that this is of interest and that two Members of the Committee the other day did express concern. I wondered whether rather than have it the whole Council, we should let paragraph 14 read, "Some members expressed concern about the possible reduction in future years of financial contributions from one Member Nation. The Council greatly appreciated the steps the Government of this Member Nation was currently taking in order to avoid such an occurrence". It is not a big change.
G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Creemos que, salvo que diga lo contrario el Presidente del Comité de Redacción, este texto del párrafo 14 fue acordado ya por unanimidad entre los miembros de ese Comité, y la lista de los componentes del Comité de Redacción aparece en el REP.l.
Nosotros creemos que este es un asunto de demasiada importancia y que nadie se opuso a lo que expreso en este sentido nuestro distinguido colega el Embajador del Ecuador; y algo más, tuvimos la impresión de que la propia y muy distinguida Embajadorade los Estados Unidos de América compartió esa preocupación, cuando, con gran elocuencia, expresó la preocupación de su Gobierno y la posición con-traria de su Administración a esa propuesta.
Si esto es así, tal vez convendría dejar el párrafo en su forma actual.
CHAIRMAN: The matter was first requested by the Chairman of the Finance Committee since the Finance Committee had gone into this.
Mrs. M. FENWICK (United States of America): I do indeed share the concern expressed by our government and by this body but I was trying to reflect more accurately the fact that at the meeting Ecuador and another country - there were two that mentioned the danger of this amendment in our congress, and I heartily endorse the view that there were only two members that expressed this opinion, and I thought that "some members" reflected it better rather than suggesting some unanimous position.
H. CARANDANG (Philippines): I do not think we should belabour this point because after all I think the matter has been resolved if the news that I hear is correct. In fact although my delegation was concerned, there was indeed a very distinct possibility that the matter could be solved without having recourse to any other thing than the will of the government itself concerned. I was just wondering, if as a matter of compromise we could just say that "deep concern was expressed over the possible reduction in future years" and then that could avoid all the possible connotations. This is why I said it was a neutral proposal although we know that it is indeed a very real concern.
CHAIRMAN: The Ambassador to the united States agrees to this proposal of the Philippines delegate, "deep concern was expressed over the possible reduction in future years" etc.
T. AHMAD (Pakistan): It is perhaps a useful suggestion but when you formulate it in such a neutral way you are deleting the Council's concern in the issue. I do agree with the distinguished Ambassador of the United States, that perhaps it was few members who expressed it, but the Council noted it with concern so I would suggest, that if it meets with the satisfaction of the Ambassador of the United States could we instead say, "The Council noted with concern the possible reduction" because I thought the Ambassador of the United States was basically concerned about the fact that there were views expressed by only two members, but the whole thing was noted by the Council. So if we could say, "The Council noted with concern the possible reduction in future years" etc., that would leave at least the Council in the paragraph.
G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Por principio, somos contrarios a tomar notas. Creemos que con ánimo transaccional, podríamos aceptar la propuesta de Filipinas.
A. PINOARGOTE CEVALLOS (Ecuador): Estoy de acuerdo con lo que acaba de decir el Embajador de Colombia respecto al ánimo transaccional, aunque realmente, como dijo la distinguida Embajadora de los Estados Unidos, solo intervenimos dos personas sobre este tema expresando preocupación. Tengo entendido yo que esto le preocupa profundamente al Consejo, porque es un asunto de vida o muerte para esta institución una situación de este tipo. Pero con el ánimo de que quede de esa forma y de procurar armonía, yo creo que podría decirse que "se expresó profunda preocupación"; porque es importante que se haya expresado esa preocupación, así como es importante que conste el hecho de que el gobierno de ese Estado Miembro está tomando las medidas para evitar que esto ocurra. Yo pienso que así se refleja la realidad.
CHAIRMAN: So shall we leave it as "The deep concern was expressed" which is acceptable to most delegations? Thank you very much. Paragraph 15? Any comments? In this paragraph "In conclusion, the Council expressed its full support of the Director-General's proposal and agreed to remit the Programme of Work and Budget for 1984-85 to the Twenty-second Session of the Conference with the recommendation that it be unanimously endorsed".
W.A.F. GRABISCH (Germany, Federal Republic of): I wonder whether it would not be wise and appropriate to recall here a remark made by the Director-General when we came to an end of the discussion on this agenda item. I should like to suggest therefore to insert just three words after the word "Council" in the first line, and the words are: "except two members".
S. GOTO (Japan): My delegation would like to support the proposal made by the distinguished delegate for the Federal Republic of Germany. My delegation thinks that the report should reflect the pro-ceedings which actually took place at the meeting.
CHAIRMAN: The delegates of Germany and Japan have suggested that paragraph 15 should read as follows: "In conclusion, the Council, with the exception of two members, expressed its full support of the Director-General's proposals and agreed to remit the Programme of Work and Budget, etc."
C. VIDALI CARBAJAL (México): Quisiéramos recordar que existen en el Consejo los "verbatim reporters" que reflejan claramente la expresión de las delegaciones sobre los particulares que se manejan en nuestros debates. La solución que le propondríamos a las distinguidas delegaciones de Alemania y del Japón sería que formularan su reserva al pie de la página, como ya parece que otra delegación lo hizo en otro tema, más que quitar esta consideración que hizo el Consejo por, prácticamente, abrumadora mayoría.
A. PINOARGOTE CEVALLOS (Ecuador): Yo me iba a referir a ese punto. Pienso que la aportación que voy a hacer tenía o va a tener algo que ver con lo que se ha planteado previamente, pero a mí lo que me llamaba la atención era que al final se haga una recomendación para que fuera refrendado por unanimidad. Yo tengo la impresión de que el Consejo no puede hacer insinuaciones o sugerencias coercitivas, pero sí se puede recomendar que fuera refrendado totalmente, que en definitiva, eso es el sentir y el criterio de la gran mayoría de este Consejo. Entonces, yo pienso que esto de recomendar unanimidad no es procedente; tal vez, que se refrende totalmente es más apropiado.
K.C.S. ACHARYA (India): I think it would be quite embarrassing to single out two countries to be shown in this report as if they have not given support to the Programme of Work and Budget. If I understand it right, the UN system works through consensus and when there was such an overwhelming support to the Programme of Work and Budget and only two members expressed certain views - and I am certain they do not oppose the Programme of Work and Budget but they only expressed their reservations on some of the points - it would be somewhat odious to highlight that point in such a prominent way in this report, because once it goes then everybody starts asking who are those two, and that kind of thing, and I am sure the members present in this Council, it is not their intention to single out those two members in this manner.
I suggest, Mr. Chairman, through you for the consideration of this august body, that a simple statement should go that the Council approved this Budget and it recommends for the Conference's approval. I think the reference to those two countries should be deleted.
TESSEMA NEGASH (Ethiopia): Actually as a member of the Drafting Committee I refrained from talking. This point was raised during the Drafting Committee's session and to our recollection no opposition was actually raised. Reservation or lack of commitment, yes, but no opposition to my recollection.
Secondly, as the representative of India put it, it is really embarrassing to single out two members of the Council whom I really do not know myself, and I would personally prefer to leave the text as it is rather than putting the exception.
W.A.F. GRABISCH (Germany, Federal Republic of): I appreciate very much the remarks made by several speakers which I consider very helpful, and I can see in those remarks a lot of sympathy. On the other hand I must say that this delegation was at this stage of the discussion of the Programme of Work and Budget not in a position to accept the proposed level of budget and the proposed Programme. Now this must have been the feeling of the Director-General also, otherwise he would not have said, and I quote from PV/3 of our Council Session, "with the exception of two only". Now of course it is not very nice if such a singling out takes place but: these are the facts; we have to face them and this has to be reflected in the report. On the other hand, I must say I do not like very much the suggestion that we should appear in a footnote.
P.S. McLEAN (United Kingdom): I should like to try to be helpful to you, Mr. Chairman, and to the Council. I very much sympathize with the views that have been expressed by the delegates of the Federal Republic of Germany and Japan. I recall that the United Kingdom found itself in a very similar position at the June Council in a section of that Report where a view was being attributed to the Council with which we found it very difficult to go along. I recall at that stage the Director-General saying that expressions in a report attributing a view to the Council would not always be regarded as meaning that there was wholly unanimous support for that view. By the same token I recall that the way we ultimately resolved that issue and made it even a little looser was to put in the word 'generally'. I do not know whether the delegates of the Federal Republic of Germany and Japan would be prepared to accept the use of the word 'Council' with, perhaps, the addition of the word 'generally' together with what I believe to be a very valid suggestion made by previous speakers about what follows.
I believe that it would be far better for this paragraph to keep a little more closely to the wording that was used in the Report of the Joint Session of the Programme Committee, something such as 'approved' or 'endorsed' the Director-General's proposals; and, as I think our Indian colleague suggested, agreed to remit the Programme of Work and Budget to the Twenty-second Session of the Conference with its full support. So I do not know whether such changes in the paragraph, together with the suggestion about its introductory phrase, would help our colleagues from the Federal Republic of Germany and Japan.
W.A.F. GRABISCH (Germany, Federal Republic of): Yes, this sounds to be a very helpful suggestion; could the delegate of the United Kingdom be so kind as to read it at dictation speed later on. Perhaps it is acceptable to everybody and we all, could agree as a fair solution.
P.S. McLEAN (United Kingdom): I think it might read as follows: "In conclusion, the Council generally endorsed" or "approved" - I do not mind - "endorsed the Director-General's proposal and agreed to remit the Programme of Work and Budget for 1984-85 to the Twenty-second Session of the conference with its full support." I hope our English speakers will confirm that the word 'it' there refers to the Council.
S. GOTO (Japan): My delegation is glad to accept the proposal made by the United Kingdom.
CHAIRMAN: Are there any other comments? You have heard the suggestion of the United Kingdom delegate: "In conclusion, the Council generally expressed" - you suggested "endorsed " or "supported" -"generally endorsed the Director-General's proposals and agreed to remit the Programme of Work and Budget for 1984-85 to the Twenty-second Session of the Conference with its full support."
K.C.S. ACHARYA (India): I do not wish to delay the proceedings but the term "generally endorsed" is a very weak term; it can raise a meaning as though it received only very marginal support and that there were wide-ranging differences, and that the agreement was only very, very restricted; whereas the fact of the matter is that it received overwhelming support. This "generally endorsed" totally depresses and totally conceals that overwhelming support which the budget received.
I therefore feel I would have some difficulty in reconciling myself to the use of this expression which does not do justice to the proceedings that took place here in this House.
CHAIRMAN: I think there is much strength in what the delegate of India has stated. My own understanding is that whenever we use "the Council", as was explained, unless we say "unanimously supported", this means the Council's general view. If there are the specific words "unanimously supported" then it commits every member. The way the Drafting Committee cautiously put it - since there were two exceptions - at the moment it reads: "The Council expressed full support" etc. It does not say that the Council unanimously expressed full support, in which case it would commit the Federal Republic of Germany and Japan. So I do not know if there is a need for "generally" because in almost all cases there may be one or two exceptions.
W.A.F. GRABISCH (Germany, Federal Republic of): I am sorry to delay the proceedings but I am thankful for the suggestion made by my neighbour to the right who has given me much technical assistance already during this Council Session. Why not say instead of "generally", "overwhelmingly"? It may not sound very good in this respect but I think it would be all right.
H. CARANDAKG (Philippines): The concern expressed at the end of paragraph 11 already expressed in an indirect way the concern of these two countries and I was wondering whether they could live with this kind of expression of their fuller expression regarding the Programme of Work and Budget. Because during the debate there was really no categorical opposition to the budget but there was this hint of a probable further indepth expression of their views at a later stage, and that was indeed very well captured in the last sentence of paragraph 11. I was merely wondering whether this could indeed be indicated to hint at a possible divergence which might be later expressed, because I am not aware of any categorical expression of opposition to this Budget during this debate.
DEPUTY DIRECTOR-GENERAL: The comments of the two delegations and of the Director-General are a matter of record. However, that does not affect the style in which the Council chooses to report its conclusions. As already pointed out, the Council adopts many paragraphs saying "The Council felt", "The Council said", "The Council decided", in certain circumstances in which governments have expressed different views. Now in this case, if the two delegations said: we are opposed to this budget and are going to vote against it or abstain, the correct course, according to past precedents would be for them to insert a footnote in which they would name themselves as having expressed a reservation. This has been done in the past. However, they did not say that, and while - again on the basis of past precedents - one can feel a certain pessimism, especially in regard to those Member Nations, on the other hand we can still live in the hope that during the Conference they may choose to join the other Member Nations.
Therefore, I would suggest that the paragraph might begin by saying: "The Council as a whole expressed its full support". "As a whole" means that perhaps there were other views during the meeting; it is virtually the same as "generally" but it is less suggestive of broad differences of views.
If that is not acceptable to the two delegations, then I believe it would be right for them to name themselves in a footnote.
TESSEMA NEGASH (Ethiopia): I am contrary to the idea that Mr West proposed, the idea of naming, since they are not very strongly opposed to the idea of the Programme of Work and Budget of the Director-General. I can see the concern of the Federal Republic of Germany taken care of in paragraph 11 which says that further elaboration will be made during the Conference in Commission II.
The concern of Japan, as I see from the verbatim record, is over the use of TCP which actually they seem to appreciate very much. I see these people are with us and I think they will fully join us.
W.A.F. GRABISCH (Germany, Federal Republic of): I would hope this could be my last intervention on paragraph 15 of REP/2 which is before us. To me it would seem to be a contradiction if we said at the beginning that "The Council as a whole expressed" and then at the end of that sentence, "that it be unanimously endorsed". But if others have no problem with that, I will not oppose it. So, I could accept "In conclusion the Council as a whole" and so on. What I could not accept was the conclusion drawn by the Deputy Director-General - or the possible conclusion - about the statement made by two delegations, I did not hear us or the other delegation speak against or in favour of the budget. We merely said that we would voice at a later stage - meaning at the Conference -the final position of our Government.
Therefore at the present stage we unfortunately had to reserve our position but, as I said at the beginning, I can go along with that suggestion.
CHAIRMAN: Germany endorses the suggestion of Mr. West that the paragraph read as it is, except: "In conclusion the Council as a whole expressed its full support", etc. I hope the Japanese delegation also agrees to this formulation of Mr. West, and the Mexican delegation also agrees. So that if it has your support we shall accept Mr. West's formulation. Paragraph 15, as amended, is approved.
Paragraph 8 to 15. as amended, approved
Les paragraphes 8 a 15, ainsi amendes, sont approuves
Los párrafos 8 a 15, así enmendados, son aprobados
Paragraphs 16 to 18, approved
Les paragraphes 16 à 18 sont approuvés
Los párrafos 16 a 18 son aprobados
PARAGRAPHS 19 to 35
PARAGRAPHES 19 à 35
PARRAFOS 19 a 35
B.N. SEQUEIRA (Angola): On paragraph 22, I hope the members of the Council will be kind enough to bear with my ignorance but it would appear to me that paragraph 22 is not very clear, therefore we are not very happy with it and our unhappiness may stem from the fact that we are not conversant with Article 300 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea which is mentioned here. What is actually before us, if I may put it like that, is the linkage between that Article and the exercise and then on the fourth line of paragraph 22, after the words "Convention", "and should
exercise the rights, jurisdiction and freedoms recognized in the Convention in a manner which would not constitute an abuse of rights." Now, usually when two parties in a contract do not agree there would be a referee or they would come to an understanding about their point of convention. However my doubt is that I do not know who would be the referee, who would say that that exercise of the rights would constitute an abuse. Therefore at this stage I wonder whether I could have the legal opinion explained to me about the whole of this paragraph.
D. MENASVETA (Secretary, Committee on Fisheries): I am very sorry but Mr. Carroz is not here and, he is by profession the international lawyer. I am a fisheries biologist but anyway this is the language we use in Fisheries and at the Fifteenth Session of the Committee on Fisheries, many delegations stressed that this language has to be used in the text of the Fifteenth Session and we put this in the Draft Council Report, it comes from paragraph 68 of the Committee on Fisheries Report which stated that "some delegations believed that it was important to stress the spirit of Article 300 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which refers to the good faith in which the state parties should fulfil obligations assumed under the Convention and should exercise the rights, jurisdiction and freedoms recognized in the Convention in a manner which would not constitute an abuse of rights." So this again is repeated in the Draft Council Report.
B.N. SEQUEIRA (Angola): That was quite helpful. However, in order to clarify some of our doubts, I wonder whether this paragraph would stop at the word 'Convention', "assume under the Convention" and then delete the rest up to the words which say "constitute an abuse of rights".
CHAIRMAN: The proposal of the Angolan delegation is that we stop with the word 'Convention', "jurisdiction and freedoms recognized in the Convention" "in a manner which would not constitute an abuse of rights" to be deleted. This is the proposal.
B.N. SEQUEIRA (Angola): The paragraph would stay as it is, if I can read it and then I stop third line, "Convention of the Law of the Sea, which refers to the good faith in which the State parties should fulfil obligations assumed under the Convention." And then we delete "and should exercise the rights, jurisdiction and freedoms recognized in the Convention in a manner which would not constitute an abuse of rights".
G.J. BOXALL (Chairman, Drafting Committee): I just wanted to make the point, in relation to the proposal from the Angolan delegate to stop the sentence after "abuse of rights", this next sentence following that was an additional sentence brought in at the Drafting Committee at the specific desire of the Indian delegation. The Drafting Committee considered this matter part of this paragraph and approved it. That is why it is there and that is why the paragraph is seemingly so long.
R.C. SERSALE DI CERISANO (Argentina): La Delegación Argentina participo en el Comité de Redacción del Comité de Pesca y recordó que esta primera frase del párrafo 22 fue propuesta por las Delegaciones Latinoamericanas que estaban en ese Comité de Redacción y que previamente lo habían hecho en la sesión plenaria del Comité de Pesca.
El sentido de esta declaración no era más que recordar el Artículo 300 de la Convención de las Naciones Unidas sobre el Derecho del Mar, porque en él se hace hincapié a la buena fe en que deben actuar las partes, y eso es lo que lleva de por sí todas las razones que hagan que después los derechos de jurisdicción y libertad reconocidos en esa Convención no constituyan un abuso de derecho; de ahí que se hable justamente de derecho de jurisdicción y libertades y no se hable de obligaciones que sería lo que cambiaría el sentido de la frase.
Tenemos entendido que esa discusión fue muy profunda y muy larga en la misma Convención cuando se discutía en Nueva York la Convención de Naciones Unidas sobre el Derecho del Mar, y el artículo 300 fue considerado un artículo que favorecía los intereses de los países en desarrollo con litoral marítimo. Por eso es por lo que nosotros preferiríamos que se conserve el párrafo tal cual está, ya que expresa no solamente lo que se ha reflejado en la Convención de 1982, sino lo que se ha discutido en el Comité de Pesca.
C. VIDALI CARBAJAL (México): Totalmente de acuerdo con lo planteado por el distinguido delegado de Argentina.
Nuestra Delegación hizo esta declaración a nombre del Grupo Latinoamericano y del Caribe en el seno de los trabajos de este Consejo y, por tanto, además de que se está recogiendo el espíritu de lo que se trató en el Comité de Pesca se está planteando también lo que sucedió en el seno del Consejo.
A nosotros también, por las razones expresadas por Argentina, nos gustaría que permaneciera la redacción tal cual está y fue acordada por el Comité de Redacción.
B.N. SEQUEIRA (Angola): I think the explanation supplied by my neighbour on my right was qvite a useful one and I wonder whether we could have some minutes to exchange some views and we could come to an agreement.
CHAIRMAN: If Angola and Argentina would like to have some discussion - has any other delegation any view on this paragraph other than the points raised by Angola? Then we shall proceed, in the meantime. I see no comments in the paragraphs 23 to 26. So we pass on to paragraph 27.
A. BOTHNER (Norway): I have just a small point to make, and if there are objections I will not pursue it. I would be happier with the words 'development of fisheries' rather than 'fishery products'.
CHAIRMAN: The delegate of Norway has suggested on paragraph 27: "The- Council underlined the vital role fisheries could play in alleviating undernutrition". Personally I think it is a good proposal because it is a whole area of income and so on. Mr. West suggests "the vital role fisheries development could play in alleviating undernutrition".
A. BOTHNER (Norway): I agree with that.
CHAIRMAN: So we say: "The Council underlined the vital role fisheries development could play in alleviating undernutrition. It stressed that the reduction of post-harvest losses should receive particular attention to improve food fish supplies". Is there any other suggestion on paragraph 27. Paragraph 27 is approved, as amended. I see no comments on paragraphs 28 to 32. We pass on to paragraph 33.
H. CARANDANG (Philippines): I would humbly submit the addition of another word in the second line after the word 'fisheries', that it should read in this way after the colon: 'fisheries planning, management and development'. This matter has been brought up during the discussion of the Committee. I think it is logical that before you can manage and develop you have to plan. I think also it is understood in the context of the previous paragraphs of the document that has been indicated here and this matter has been brought up by the Philippines. I wondered whether it would cause any problem to anyone. So I would indicate the addition of the 'planning' before 'management and development'.
CHAIRMAN: The Philippine proposal is that paragraph 33 should read as follows: "The Council agreed that the following five Action Programmes should be submitted to the policy phase of the World Fisheries Conference: fisheries planning, management and development (covering both marine and inland fisheries)…" The word 'planning' is added.
A. FEQUANT (France): D'après ce que me dit l'expert de la délégation française, ce programme d'action a été approuvé par le Comité des pêches agissant en tant qu'organe technique de la Conférence. On peut se demander dans quelle mesure le Conseil peut modifier le programme qui a déjà été établi.
CHAIRMAN: No, I think we can. The report comes to the Council.
H. CARANDANG (Philippines): If the Council cannot make any changes in the recommendations of the Fisheries Committee then why are we looking at it? I think we have the right to make our comments on changes in the recommendations.
CHAIRMAN: I have already explained the position. We can make changes.
R.C. SERSALE DI CERISANO (Argentina): Lamento volver a intervenir otra vez en el tema de pesca, pero es para apoyar lo que dijo la Delegación de Filipinas y queremos recordar que cuando se aprobó el informe final del Comité de Pesca la Delegación de Filipinas hizo esta recomendación de incluir junto al concepto de "ordenación" la "planificación", y fue aceptado por el Comité. Además quiero también recordar que el incluir la idea de planificación en relación a la ordenación fue una propuesta argentina que fue aprobada por el Comité, en fin, por una cuestión de consideraciones que no es necesario repetir aquí, pero estos temas fueron considerados en el Comité de Pesca, fueron aprobados por el Comité de Pesca y se decidió que "planificación" fuera junto con "ordenación" por una cuestión conceptual.
TESSEMA NEGASH (Ethiopia): I think we can leave the door open for approval and we can delete the Committee's report, as you put it rightly, Mr. Chairman. I do agree with fisheries planning, management and development' and I fully endorse the position of the Philippines and Argentina.
A. FEQUANT (France): Si cette proposition a été examinée, et même, si je comprends bien, approuvée au Comité des pêches, les remarques de la délégation française tombent d'elles-mêmes. Ce dont on peut s'étonner, c'est que nous n'en ayons pas la trace dans le document qui nous est soumis.
CHAIRMAN: So we add "Fisheries planning, management and development".
Any other comment on this paragraph 33? The paragraph is approved as amended. No comments on paragraphs 34 and 35? They are approved.
Are Angola and Argentina ready with the revised formulation for paragraph 22?
N. SEQUEIRA (Angola): At this stage and in order to expedite our work, I wonder whether you would be kind enough to insert a footnote expressing the reservations of the People's Republic of Angola on paragraph 22. Thank you, Sir.
CHAIRMAN: What exactly should the wording of the footnote be?
B.N. SEQUEIRA (Angola): The wording of the footnote would be like we saw for example in paragraph 11, that a different perception and view may be taken by this particular delegation.
I wonder whether the Secretariat could help me with the drafting of our reservation. That is that we just have a different perception and understanding on this particular issue, and moreover, you will agree with me, Mr Chairman - and I do not want to bring this matter into the FAO - that the Convention on the Law of the Sea is not recognized by all countries. However, most of those countries who do not recognize this do fish and quite a lot, but I wish to stop here because I do not want to bring this matter up here.
CHAIRMAN: In any case, I was about to suggest that we have now got REP 3 and it will take some time for REP 4. We could have a 15-minute break so that we can look over REP 3 which has just been distributed. Meanwhile, if Angola will sit with the Secretary and the Secretary of the Drafting Committee and find some manner of giving expression to his views, so we will just adjourn.
The meeting was suspended from 18.15 to 18.45
La seance est suspendue de 18 h 15 à 18 h 45
Se suspende la sesión de las 18.15 horas a las 18.45 horas
CHAIRMAN: May we hear from the delegate of Angola as to whether he has found a satisfactory formulation?
B.N. SEQUEIRA (Angola): I have exchanged some views with my neighbour and I also talked to the Legal Counsel. My doubt is a valid one; it is deep seated. However, it cannot be solved here at FAO. Therefore I have no doubts about this and no reservations; it shall go in.
CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much for your most helpful statement and attitude. We shall therefore take paragraph 22 under item 5 in CL 84/REP/2 as adopted as it is.
Paragraphs 19 to 35, as amended, approved
Les paragraphes 19 à 35, ainsi amendés, sont approuvés
Los párrafos 19 a 35, así enmendados, son aprobados
Draft Report of Plenary, Part 2, as amended, was adopted
Le projet de rapport de la plénière; deuxième partie ainsi amendé, est adopté
EÍ proyecto de informe de la Plenaria, Parte 2, asi enmendado, es aprobado
DRAFT REPORT - PART, III
PROJET DE RAPPORT - PARTIE III
PROYECTO DE INFORME - PARTE III
Paragraphs 1 and 2 approved
Les paragraphes 1 et 2 sont approuvés
Los párrafos 1 y 2 son aprobados
Paragraphs 3 and 4 approved
Les paragraphes 3 et 4 sont approuvés
Los párrafos 3 y 4 son aprobados
Paragraphs 5 to 14 approved
Les paragraphes 5 à 14 sont approuvés
Los párrafos 5 a 14 son aprobados
PARAGRAPHS 15 to 18
PARAGRAPHES 15 à 18
PARRAFOS 15 a 18
Mme A. DELLA CROCE DI DOJOLA (Italie): Je dois dire que notre délégation n'est pas d'accord sur une partie du paragraphe vers la fin, la phrase qui commence avec "en ce qui concerne la proposition de construire une nouvelle aile adjacente aux bâtiments principaux, les fouilles archéologiques se sont poursuivies jusqu'à la fin d'octobre 1983, mais elles ont été temporairement interrompues". Je propose de supprimer la fin de cette phrase. En effet, ici on dit que les travaux ont été terminés à la fin octobre, c'est-à-dire la semaine passée. Or, tout le monde sait qu'en Italie la première semaine du mois de novembre est pratiquement une semaine de congé pour beaucoup de monde, y compris les écoles. Il est donc difficile de considérer cette interruption temporaire de ces quelques jours comme une interruption d'une plus longue durée.
Je vous demande donc, si possible, de supprimer cette partie de la phrase et également le commencement de la phrase suivante: "On ne sait pas si la Direction de l'archéologie sera en mesure …" et l'on pourrait dire: "On espère que la Direction de l'archéologie …".
CHAIRMAN: I will repeat the recommendation of Italy: "On the question of the proposal to construct a new wing adjacent to the main buildings, archaeological excavations had continued until the end of October 1983". And delete the rest of it. Then: "It was hoped that the Superintendency of Archaeology would be able to complete the work and issue its report by the end of December 1983 as originally announced." "The Council hopes", this is the suggestion of Italy.
G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): En primer lugar sobre la propuesta de Italia consideramos que esta segunda parte del párrafo 15 pertenece a la opinión del Gobierno de Italia, y entonces quisiera compartir el optimismo de nuestra distinguida colega italiana, y no tendríamos ninguna dificultad en aceptar su propuesta; pero habíamos pedido la palabra para complementar ese espíritu de optimismo de nuestra colega y fortalecer el sentido positivo de la actuación del Gobierno italiano.
Querríamos proponer en la segunda frase del párrafo 15 que se suprimieran las palabras, que tradi-cionalmente no nos gustan, "tomó nota" y dijera, en la segunda frase y en lo que respecta a la construcción de 70 despachos en el octavo piso del edificio D: "El Consejo acogió con beneplácito las medidas positivas", ya que a todos nos causa placer que por lo menos en un campo el Gobierno italiano adopte medidas positivas.
Con este mismo espíritu de acentuar el sentido positivo de esta consideración, volveremos a intervenir, si usted nos lo permite Sr. Presidente en el párrafo 17.
DEPUTY DIRECTOR-GENERAL: It is for the Council to decide on its report and I shall not make any comment as regards the suggestion of the delegate of Italy, except to say that we have been informed directly by the Superintendency of Archaeology that the excavations are temporarily suspended and that they are doubtful whether they will be able to complete the work and issue their report. Having said that, it is on record and we will come back to it if necessary during the Conference or during any subsequent meeting of governments; but I want to put on record that that is what we have been told directly less than 48 hours ago by the Superintendency of Archaeology.
Mme A. DELLA CROCE DI DOJOLA (Italie): Pourrais-je savoir si la communication de la superintendance est une communication écrite? Dans ce cas, la délégation aurait reçu la même communication, or nous ne l'avons pas reçue, mais nous avons eu de nombreuses conversations téléphoniques avec ce service et cette communication est tout à fait nouvelle pour nous.
CHAIRMAN: I would suggest you accept the proposal of Colombia and amend the second sentence as regards the construction of 70 rooms on the 8th floor of Building D. The Council welcomed the positive action taken by the Host Government in approving the construction project and towards the latter part we accept the proposal of the distinguished delegate of Italy "had continued until the end of October 1983".
G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): La Delegación de Colombia sigue siendo enemiga de la expresión "tomo nota", sobre todo en este caso del párrafo 17.
Con el mismo buen espíritu con que produjimos la modificación del párrafo 15 queremos proponer que el párrafo 17 empiece por las palabras "El Consejo expreso su grave preocupación"; creo que éste es un hecho, Señor Presidente.
CHAIRMAN: I think this paragraph as amended by Colombia is a statement of fact, and I see that the Italian delegate has graciously agreed.
W.J. MAJOR (Canada): Concerning paragraph 18, the record as we have it may have omitted one item which may affect the total amount of office space available in the FAO. This item has not figured in the documentation but was the subject of a question and a reply by the Secretariat. Could we therefore propose the following addition, "the Secretariat informed the Council of its request to the World Food Council to vacate the offices occupied in Building A".
DEPUTY DIRECTOR-GENERAL: Well, it is for the Council to decide whether it wants to put that, that particular point, but if it does I think you should also establish in the answer that was given to the question. It was to the effect that this would not have an adverse effect on the relationships between FAO and the World Food Council, bearing in mind that several important units of FAO and the World Food Programme are situated in a building some kilometers from headquarters.
CHAIRMAN: So now the Canadian proposal is to say that "The Council is informed by the Secretariat of its request to the World Food Council to vacate the office space occupied in Building A". Mr. West suggests that if you want to insert this, he has characteristically stated, you must add that "the Council was further informed that this would not in any way affect the collaborative work" or whatever it is. Something that has to be formulated to that effect.
G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Nosotros entendemos muy bien la posición de la distinguida Delegación de Canada y consideramos que ellos están en su pleno derecho de haber hecho la propuesta que ahora está ante el Consejo, pero tal vez quisiéramos pedir al colega del Canadá que nos permitiera que no se incluyera en el texto esta referencia, porque creemos que no tendría sana indicación, no contribuiría mucho, sino más bien tendría efectos negativos en cuanto al objeto de esta señalación, y más bien la Delegación de Colombia piensa que es deber de todos los miembros del Consejo y de todos los representantes de Gobiernos evitar esta referencia a organismos que trabajan en común en favor de la solución de los problemas de la agricultura y la alimentación. Tal vez no podría ayudarnos mucho y podría, en cambio, representar algunas dificultades que ya se han hecho patentes a raíz de la respuesta del Sr. West.
Le pediría respetuosa y cordialmente al colega y cuasi vecino del Canadá que no insistiera a este respecto.
Sra. M.E. BONDANZA DE FILIPPO (Argentina): Sí, la Delegación de mi país quiere simplemente apoyar lo manifestado por el Sr. Delegado de Colombia. Entendemos, en efecto, que esa explicación que se dio sobre el Consejo Mundial de la Alimentación no ayuda, realmente, para resolver este tema y creemos que por lo tanto es más adecuado no incluirlo en este párrafo.
W.J.MAJOR (Canada): I think nonetheless it does reflect the discussion that took place. It is simply stated as a matter of fact and I think we have no objection in principle with the Secretariat continuing the sentence to provide the explanation that it provided but it does affect, as I initially said, the amount of office space that may be available to the Secretariat and I would also point out that it would affect the amount of office space available to the Secretariat in the very near future, much earlier than some of the other things which are being discussed.
DEPUTY DIRECTOR-GENERAL: There was a question and an answer. If on that basis you want to put it in, no problem that I can see provided you have the explanation but just a point of clarification, we do not have any extra office space and the situation described here is not improved. What are the reasons we are doing this thing? Because the CFA has just approved 80 new posts for the World Food Programme and we are hoping that the Conference will approve the proposals in the Programme of Work and Budget for a new division for research. We will still have an acute space problem so let there be no mistake about that. It has got nothing to do with making free space. It is because of the force of circumstances we have had to do this. We do not want to do it, we have had to do it because of decision of government already taken or we hope about to be taken.
CHAIRMAN: We will find in the Verbatim Reports this question and answer. Would you like it to be included in the Report?
W.A.F, GRABISCH (Germany, Federal Republic of): It was this delegation which put forward the question and we did it in a constructive spirit and we do still feel it would be some sort of underlining of the urgency that the whole question of Headquarters Accommodation has to be solved. So it has a connexion with the subject which is before us and I just recall that resolution by which the World Food Council was set up and I think it states explicitly that the World Food Council should act or work within the framework of FAO. Now, of course, we were assured that the cooperation would not be affected, all right we are quite happy about that, but actually we had sympathy with the proposal of Canada that it should be put in but we have no strong feelings about it.
Ms. A. DELLA CROCE DI DOJOLA (Italy): I had decided not to say any thing about this item but I would only like to support the idea put out by Mr. West that the subject should be included with the answer to the question. I would accept it as it is because I think you may understand that this problem is likely to cause us problems as well.
G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Voy a acogerme a dos aspectos de la declaración que hizo mi distinguido amigo Grabisch, de la República Federal de Alemania. Quiero compartir con él el espíritu constructivo que le animo esta mañana cuando él planteo esta cuestión, y también compartir con él la segunda parte de su declaración cuando dijo que no tenía ideas muy fijas ni sostenidas a este respecto.
De manera que con ese espíritu de cooperación yo insistiría, señor Presidente, en que no se incluya aquí ni la pregunta que se hizo, ni la información que dio la Secretaría, ni la respuesta a que se ha hecho referencia por parte del Sr. West.
Seguimos pensando que todo ello no contribuiría a nada, no tendría ningún significado positivo. Usted ha dicho, adecuadamente, que esas declaraciones y las que estamos haciendo ahora figuran en las actas, de manera que lo demás sería dar la apariencia de que estamos planteando un problema de diferencia entre dos organismos que todos nosotros estamos interesados en que trabajen de común acuerdo.
Ahora, yo creo que también hay un hecho. No pienso que se le pueda atribuir mayor incidencia a una separación física. Una separación física no quiere decir que se va a suspender la colaboración entre dos organismos, ni mucho menos, sobre todo una separación física que va a tener un radio de acción muy limitado porque ese organismo va a seguir en Roma y va a seguir trabajando en cooperación con la FAO. Cualquier referencia a este asunto puede causar problemas y no representa ningún aspecto positivo; por eso insisto en que ojalá nuestros colegas de Canadá y de la República Federal de Alemania no insistan en incluir esta cuestión.
W.A.F. GRABISCH (Germany, Federal Republic of): May I ask, through you Mr Chairman, my good friend Mr. Bula Hoyos, whether he still opina de la misma manera y si él piensa que esto podría ayudar a nuestra distinguida Delegación de Italia.
G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Una de nuestras intervenciones anteriores confirmó el ánimo positivo con que yo recibo siempre toda actitud constructiva de Italia; con ese mismo espíritu estoy seguro que a la distinguida colega de Italia le será suficiente ya el debate que se ha celebrado en la constancia que están en las actas como material útil para intervenir ante su Gobierno y así habremos prestado el servicio a la Delegación de Italia y evitaremos que en un informe del Consejo aparezca esta referencia que puede ser más dañina que beneficiosa.
El colega Grabisch habla muy bien el castellano y me está haciendo señas de que asiente a mi propuesta y se lo agradezco de antemano, al igual que al colega y amigo del Canadá.
P.S. McLEAN (United Kingdom): It seems that one of the problems about whether or not to include it is that if we include it it will become two very long sentences, first the one that Canada has proposed and then a piece that the Deputy Director-General has suggested. I wonder, since the point has come clearly across to me in the course of this discussion whether it could be put in something like this way: "It was noted that pressure on accommodation was such that the World Food Council would have to leave its accommodation in building A shortly". I offer this as a possible way out of the dilemma because that seems to be the issue presented certainly by the Deputy Director-General, unless I grossly misunderstood him.
DEPUTY DIRECTOR-GENERAL: I do not want to get between the beautiful friendships of Colombia, Germany and Italy. But at the risk of seeming to take it lightly I would say that physical contact is not absolutely necessary these days, there is such a thing as artificial insemination - I am talking about ideas of course. As a matter of fact I had the most cordial and profitable discussion with the Executive Secretary of the World Food Council today in FAO, and we hope to have the same tomorrow with the President of the World Food Council. So I myself would honestly and frankly say to you that I do not think it adds or detracts anything to put a reference in here. I am afraid the Government of Italy is going to have the problem whether the sentence appears in here or not. But I do want to stress that if a record appears it can certainly appear in the terms that the delegate of the UK said, that it was pressure on accommodation, but I would still like to put in that at least in the view of FAO it should not affect the cooperation between the two organizations. Otherwise why make reference to it?
W.J. MAJOR (Canada): I think we were motivated by the following considerations: should the record be complete; has the Council indeed been informed of this request; and should the discussion, or the record of the discussion, indeed indicate the amount of space that is likely to be available to the FAO. The agreement which established the World Food Council states that it is to be serviced within the framework of the FAO. That may or may not mean that it has to be accommodated in the FAO. The suggested statement which we made made no reference to the state of cooperation between the two organizations or to the legal obligations of one to provide accommodation to the other and there were certainly no suggestions that the space thus liberated could not be productively used by FAO, certainly not. The statement only urged that the Secretariat inform the Council of its request. I am satisfied to leave it at that. I think the formulation of the United Kingdom is certainly acceptable to us or in the manner that has been proposed by Dr. West.
CHAIRMAN: I think the United Kingdom formulation, if you want to add it must come as a separate paragraph because it does not fit in anywhere. It would have to come between paragraphs 16 and 17: "It was noted that pressure on accommodation is such that the World Food Council has to be requested to vacate its office in Building A" and so on. I think the United Kingdom delegate could further revise it.
G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Yo creo que en este Consejo toman asiento algunos de los que participamos en 1974 en la Conferencia Mundial de la Alimentación, en cuya Resolución 22 se adoptaron las palabras a las que hizo referencia el colega del Canadá, dentro del marco de la FAO. Fueron unas palabras muy ambiguas que nadie ha sabido interpretar después, no obstante que la propia Asamblea General de Naciones Unidas apoyo esa Resolución de la Conferencia Mundial de la Alimentación. De manera que en ese campo quiero dar absoluta razón a los distinguidos colegas de Canadá y de la República Federal de Alemania, pero el colega de Canadá hizo una afirmación que yo creo que está en favor de nuestra posición de que no se incluya nada.
El dijo, y creo que él es muy justo y adecuado en su interpretación, que cuando él hizo esta propuesta no estaba haciendo referencia a las relaciones entre la FAO y el Consejo Mundial, sino a la reducción del espacio en la Organización. Yo creo que esto es evidente, pero si se incluye algo en el informe, daríamos la opinión contraria de que estamos haciendo referencia entre uno y otro organismo. Espero que éste sea un argumento convincente para insistir, nuevamente, de manera cordial y respetuosa, en que evitemos esta referencia que, repetimos, puede causar daños y no traer ningún beneficio.
Sra. A. CAVERO (España): Solamente para apoyar la propuesta del delegado de Colombia en el sentido de evitar generar nuevos focos de desagrado, en algún aspecto, en cuanto se está tratando de salvar por todos los medios, esas incompatibilidades o aparentes incompatibilidades entre órganos que a todos nos interesa que se coordinen mejor.
W.J.MAJOR (Canada): I am satisfied that we have had a full discussion on this question and I will not insist on the addition.
Ms. M. FENWICK (United States of America): I have a proposal in the form of a new paragraph 19 to follow immediately after paragraph 18. I will read it because I think it is neater in that way:
"The Council agreed that with respect to matters regarding relations between FAO and the host country government the issues relating to negotiations with the host country government, as well as legal questions, should be referred to the Committee on Constitutional and Legal Matters, while specific administrative and financial questions were properly the concern of the Finance Committee."
It seems to me that this states very clearly the responsibilities of the different committees of this body. The responsibilities of the administrative and financial questions are properly the concern of the Finance Committee, whereas relations between FAO and more legal matters should be referred to the Committee on Constitutional and Legal Matters for action. I think it is simple and sensible. I hope it will be adopted.
I should have said I meant to add that this was discussed in the Committee and agreed by the delegate of Colombia. It was discussed, it was raised, it was agreed, there was no objection, and under those conditions, as the Ambassador has said, that consensus can be taken as agreement because there was no objection.
G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Por la ultima referencia de la gentil y distinguida Embajadora de los Estados Unidos, no sé si dio la impresión de que esto había sido discutido en el Comité de Redacción; si fue así, entonces no sé por qué no aparece en el texto del informe. No sé si entendí correctamente, pero a mí me asalta una preocupación. Es el hecho de que tanto el Comité de Finanzas como el Comité de Asuntos Constitucionales y Jurídicos son dos órganos asesores del Consejo, y ambos órganos, a la luz de los Textos Fundamentales, se ocupan de aquellos asuntos que les remite el Consejo, que el Consejo les pide que se ocupen en tal materia respectiva a cada Comité. De manera que esto sería redundante; estaríamos, en un informe del Consejo, repitiendo lo que dicen los textos básicos.
Ms. A. DELLA CROCE DI DOJOLA (Italy): I would like to support the proposal made by the delegate of the United States. As a matter of fact, just to make this a little clearer I wanted to tell you of our experience. While looking for a candidate for the Finance Committee one is actually looking for an expert in budget matters, whereas while looking for a member in the Committee on Constitutional and Legal Matters one is looking for a lawyer. So in my opinion the problems we are dealing with - headquarters, special immunity problems, and so on - are more likely to be dealt with by the Committee on Constitutional and Legal Matters.
B.N. SEQUEIRA (Angola): I am just seeking clarification. Does this mean that if the proposal advanced by the delegate of the United States is accepted that here the Council will not discuss these matters any further because then the matter will be left to the experts, if I did not misunderstand the delegate of Italy. If that is the view I do not think we could accept that. The legal matters between FAO and the host country should be fully discussed by the Council. Then if we have some doubts we should seek the advice of the CCLM.
DEPUTY DIRECTOR-GENERAL: First I would observe that in this report which we are discussing at the moment we are talking about headquarters accommodation, not any legal aspect but about the number of rooms, excavations on archaeological sites, removal of organizations to other parts of Rome, and so forth. There is not one single legal issue there and it is not a question of reaching agreements. The action to be taken is to be taken by the Italian Government within its own jurisdiction. So if you want to take up this question I am surprised that you want to take it up here because accommodation has been dealt with since the foundation of FAO by the Finance Committee and not by the Committee on Constitutional and Legal Matters and I do not see any legal issue here to be dealt with. There is a reference later on under the item dealing with immunity to refer, as appropriate, to the Finance Committee and the Committee on Constitutional and Legal Matters. Immunity is a legal question. The point that was raised was we attempted to cover it there. The report is coming direct to you, so you have not had a chance to consider that so far. I think it is not before you yet.
As to the point raised by Angola, the Council cannot decide this because the functions of the Committee on Constitutional and Legal Matters are referred to in Article 3 of Rule XXXIV of the GRO. Therefore if you want to change the functions of the Committee on Constitutional and Legal Matters an amendment has to be introduced in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution for introducing amendments and it has to be voted by the Conference. I am afraid it is too late to do that, even if you should wish to do it. But I repeat what I said earlier, that matters such as building, excavations, driving licences, number plates of cars, and so forth, are not legal issues: they are administrative and financial issues.
If you turn to the rules defining the functions of the Finance Committee, you will find that it refers specifically to administrative as well as financial and personnel questions. There is no reference in the rules of the CCLM to administrative or personnel questions, so you have a double problem on your hands if you want to change the situation. You would have to amend the provisions relating also to the Finance Committee and not merely to the CCLM, and what is all this about? I really do not understand this sudden desire to discuss archaeological exacavations in the CCLM. It is quite inappropriate. We will refer legal issues to the CCLM as and when appropriate.
The last point I want to make on this is that unfortunately, Italy raised the question of qualifications of membership of the CCLM. Now, that is another constitutional issue and perhaps should be in the CCLM. Are there members of the CCLM present who are lawyers? One says yes. Another maintains discreet silence. Are there members of the Finance Committee who are financial or personnel experts? The question should be answered. The Conference in its wisdom has decided how the members of these Committees should be chosen. There is no provision that they should have degrees or professional qualifications in the fields mentioned, so I think from the point of view of the discussion of the Committee it is, if I may call it so, a red herring.
Ms M. FENWICK (United States of America): I want to speak to the remarks of Angola. It is precisely in an effort to have these things come to the Council through their committees that this proposal was made. Administrative and personnel matters would come through the Finance Committee, as the Deputy Director-General has told us by charter they should, but what I am anxious to do is have them come to those committees, because I think it is very important that we follow not just in the big issues such as immunity, that you know which is just a great big legal issue, but other
legal matters should go to that CCLM, and then the administrative and financial matters, as the Deputy Director-General has outlined, should go to that Finance Committee according to the charter and those two Committees are the arms of the Council. In other words, it is an effort to increase, the information and ability of the Council to act when this proposal is made.
G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Deseamos solamente hacer tres precisiones. Primero, entendemos muy justificadamente las referencias de nuestra distinguidísima colega de Italia a las condiciones que requieren los miembros del Comité de Finanzas y del CACJ; y decimos que entendemos justificadamente esa referencia porque, sin duda, ella muy humanamente, como podemos hacerlo otros, aprovecha esta ocasión para hacer campaña a su aspiración para ser miembro del Comité de Finanzas. Esto nos parece muy adecuado y muy correcto.
En segundo lugar, creemos estar de acuerdo con el Sr. West en el sentido de que esto no correspondería a esta parte de nuestro informe, los locales de la Sede. Esta es una cosa material muy lejos de todo concepto jurídico; de manera que en caso tal podríamos incluirlo en el tema 15, y quisiera muy cordialmente pedir a la delegación de Estados Unidos que leyera el párrafo 16 del REP 4 -Sección 1. Allí, en ese párrafo 16, que consideraremos más adelante, está ya la referencia a lo que ha planteado los Estados Unidos. De manera que les pediríamos, muy cordialmente, a los colegas de Estados Unidos que por ahora prescindieran de insistir en su propuesta hasta cuando llegáramos al párrafo 16 del REP 4 - Sección 1.
Ms A. DELLA CROCE DI DOJOLA (Italy): I just would like to reply to what Mr West has just said about the qualifications required for the Members of the Committee. It says in Rule XXVII, paragraph 1 concerning the Finance Committee, under other things, that this person has to have shown a continued interest in the objectives and activities of the Organization … and have special competence and experience in administrative and financial matters."
Ms M. FENWICK (United States of America): As usual, our distinguished delegate and friend from Colombia has made a statesmanlike approach, and I would like to withdraw because in part 2, paragraph 16 does indeed cover precisely what we were planning here, so it is more appropriate there, I am happy to yield to Colombia.
Paragraphs 15 to 18, as amended, approved
Les paragraphes 15 à 18, ainsi amendés, sont approuvés
Los párrafos 15 a 18, así enmendados, son aprobados
Paragraph 19 approved
Le paragraphe 19 est approuvé
El párrafo 19 es aprobado
Paragraph 20 approved
Le paragraphe 20 est approuvé
El párrafo 20 es aprobado
Paragraph 21 approved
Le paragraphe 21 est approuvé
El párrafo 21 es aprobado
PARAGRAPHS 22 and 23
PARAGRAPHES 22 et 23
PARRAFOS 22 y 23
G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Me excuso ante el distinguido Presidente del Comité de Redacción por seguir en contra de la expresión "tomó nota". Yo sé que éste es un recurso al que se recurre en esos Comités cuando hay discusión de asuntos difíciles; pero creo que cuando discutimos el examen de los Programas de Campo, varias delegaciones coincidimos en que era preocupante el impacto negativo que el déficit de recursos del PNUD y la disminución del aporte de la FAO nos causaba preocupación a todos. Indudablemente, queremos proponer en la segunda frase del párrafo 22, que se diga "expresó su preocupación en particular por el grave impacto … etc.". Espero que esto no sea controvertido. Creo que todos estamos preocupados por esa situación.
CHAIRMAN: Colombia has suggested the second sentence in paragraph 22 should be reworded. Instead of "it noted", "It expressed serious concern in particular".
I think "serious" is coming twice here. "It expressed its serious concern on the serious negative impact on Field Programmes resulting". The suggestion is "It expressed its grave concern in particular to the negative", to avoid the word "serious" coming twice.
Colombia, have you got the formili ation?
G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Tal ves es un error de interpretación, según me anota el intérprete. Yo me había limitado a decir: "expreso su preocupación". El término grave solamente aparecía una vez más.
CHAIRMAN: So "It expressed its concern in particular at the serious negative impact on the Field Programmes resulting from current UNDP resource shortfall and from FAO's declining share of UNDP project execution".
G.J. BOXALL (Chairman, Drafting Committee): I would like to say that that has been noted.
CHAIRMAN: Thank you.
Paragraphs 22 and 23, as amended, approved
Les paragraphes 22 et 23, ainsi amendés, sont approuves
Los párrafos 22 y 23, así enmendados, son aprobados
PARAGRAPHS 24 to 28
PARAGRAPHES 24 à 28
PARRAFOS 24 a 28
Sra. Doña A. CAVERO (España): Una corrección en la primera oración del párrafo 24. Querría decir el Consejo felicitó al Director General por el Informe presentado, tomó nota. Lo de tomó nota yo no lo cambio, no sé si el delegado de Colombia querría cambiarlo, pero mi delegación lo deja.
CHAIRMAN: You have heard the amendment of Spain to the first sentence: "The Council congratulated the Director-General on his report and noted that it incorporated the advice and many of the suggestions" etc.
I take it that is acceptable.
R. GUADARRAMA SISTOS (México): Como miembro del Comité de Redacción, simplemente para hacer un señar lamiento de idioma. En el español convinimos utilizar la palabra "convenio", en lugar de acuerdo, Esto está en el renglón cuarto del párrafo 25. Quedaría incluido un convenio o un compromiso internacional.
Es un problema meramente de traducción.
G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Hay otro "tomó nota" en la segunda frase del párrafo 25, Creo que si lo suprimimos no cambia el sentido de la frase; espero por lo menos que ésta sea mi intención. Podríamos decir: "consideró que este documento ofrecía un análisis global de los problemas relacionados con los recursos fitogenéticos y proponía una serie de medidas destinadas". Se suprimiría la palabra "tomó nota".
Reitero mis excusas.
CHAIRMAN: I think we do not even need it. If you want to redraft it, we can omit "it proposed"; "that it considered a series of measures aimed at establishing a global system."
A. FEQUANT (France): Peut-être que cela ne soulève aucun problème pour la langue espagnole, mais cela soulève pour la langue française parce que quand on dit "il a estimé", c'est un jugement de valeur. Quand on dit "il a noté", c'est un fait. Mais on ne peut pas dire qu'il a estimé un fait. Voilà la difficulté pour la langue française. On peut penser que l'on rencontre souvent le terme "noté" dans ce rapport, c'est exact. Il me semble cependant que les langues française et espagnole, et certai-nement anglaise et arabe, sont assez riches pour employer un autre terme que "noté". "Par exemple, "il a constaté".
G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Cualquier expresión que satisfaga al Embajador de Francia es aceptable para nosotros.
CHAIRMAN: I wish the congratulations would grow. Paragraph 25, as amended, is approved. Shall we now go on to paragraph 26?
Ms. M. FENWICK (United States of America): I am referring to line 2 of paragraph 26 and the words "free availability". In the French text I believe it reads "disponibilité libre". It does not read "disponibilité gratuite", and I think that "ready availability" would be a clearer and a more accurate description, so "free exchange" - "ready availability" or "free exchange", whichever the experts here gathered consider to be more accurate.
CHAIRMAN: "Free exchange" in my view would be better. The two things are different. "Exchange" means "we exchange". The other is to make it available without restriction. What is indicated here is a sort of unrestricted availability.
Ms. M. FENWICK (United States of America): I did not like to take the time of the Committee to go into the reasons for this, but we are in many countries restricted by patent laws, and there are some nations that have for one reason or another legal restrictions concerning the export of seed crops, and not genetic mass but perfected commercial seeds, and there are many countries in the world that have such laws. We have more restrictions from patent laws but if "ready availability" would be considered to be more accurate then I would like to propose "ready availability".
CHAIRMAN: The distinguished Ambassador has suggested "with regard to the importance and ready availability of plant genetic resources for scientific and development purposes as a heritage of mankind."
R. GUADARRAMA SISTOS (México): Efectivamente, no es un problema meramente de traducción. En español definitivamente no tendría un sentido claro y de lo que estamos hablando precisamente es de una disponibilidad que implica o no se reduce a un "exchange".
CHAIRMAN: What the "availability" really means is that it should be freely available; it is not exchange. "Ready availability" can raise the view that we have expressed.
R. GUADARRAMA SISTOS (México): Quisiera una traducción del español de la expresión.
CHAIRMAN: The interpreter, must be interpreting "ready availability" in Spanish satisfactorily.
R. GUADARRAMA SISTOS (México): Definitivamente estamos calificando la disponibilidad. Para evitar una discusión en el tema preferiría que quedáramos como de hecho convinimos en el Comité de Redacción, en donde los Estados Unidos participaron activamente, y le pediría a la distinguida Embajadora de Estados Unidos que tuviera en consideración, por favor, el hecho de su participación en el Comité de Redacción.
CHAIRMAN: Apparently there is no change in the Spanish text. The suggestion is that the Spanish text stays as it is. Is that satisfactory?
R. GUADARRAMA SISTOS (México): Lo que yo quiero es que se corresponda con el inglés. Se dice "libre disponibilidad", no hay limitación a esa disponibilidad. No la estamos calificando. Tendríamos que hacer la correspondiente modificación en el español.
CHAIRMAN: The point is important. Will the delegate of the United States comment?
Ms. M. FENWICK (United States of America): I think that some languages have more words of one kind or another but it seems to me that the French and English here are very clear. The French language says "disponibilité libre" and does not say "disponibilité gratuite". Now the English text suggests "gratuite" rather than "libre", and it is in that effort to make it fall together. In my country, and I am sure perhaps also in Mexico, there are patent laws that make it practically impossible to order the absolute delivery of complete genetic commercial material. Now that does not refer to the kind of basic genetic plasma, you might say a mass, that is available and freely exchanged, and readily available and freely exchanged, but what we are anxious to dp is to make something that we can live up to within the restrictions of our patent laws, and as I said, I could name a couple of countries but there is no point in that. I think the countries here know which ones have restrictions for export which would also interfere with them, so this is something which would be useful not just because we have patent laws but because other countries have export laws of their own.
G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Reconocemos el análisis constructivo y positivo de la distinguida Embajadora de los Estados Unidos; pero después de las explicaciones que se han dado entre la propia representante de Estados Unidos consideramos que los textos de este párrafo deben quedar tal como están en su respectivo idioma, ya que en cambio no sería compatible con el sentido correcto de este párrafo en el texto de otro idioma.
P.S. McLEAN (United Kingdom): I do not wish to enter into arguments about semantics and so on but I think the explanation that has been given by my distinguished neighbour, the Ambassador for the United States, we could include if she agreed the words "free availability" in the English text. As we have said on other occasions, with the understanding that certainly the English readers will put their own interpretation on it as meaning ready availability, and should we ever need to refer back frankly to this paragraph, that is what we would say is the interpretation we would put on it. I wonder if in those circumstances my distinguished colleague and neighbour would be agreeable to keep the words "free availability" in the English text.
K.C.S. ACHARYA (India): Mr Chairman, I think this word "free" would create some difficulties and the interpretation or the suggestions made by the distinguished delegate of the United States, Ambassador Fenwick, I support them entirely because most of the countries do have these laws which regulate the importation or export of the plant material, the genetic material, and there is very strict control exercised on them. Therefore in actual fact this increased "free availability" means nothing because these regulations have to be observed and clearances have to be obtained from a number of sources, and it is only then that this material can be exchanged. I therefore suggest that this word "ready" would be a better substitute here and the text would be clearer.
T. AHMAD (Pakistan): I do not want to add to your problems at this late hour but I personally am in entire agreement with the distinguished delegate from the United Kingdom that we leave the text as it is because the word "free" in the English language has both connotations, the connotation of accessibility plus also the connotation of finances involved in it, and in the English language it can be interpreted both ways, so we should have no difficulty at all. I would suggest we can leave the text as it is in the English language and then go on.
CHAIRMAN: The second sentence here says, "A number of members indicated that certain articles in the draft Undertaking caused difficulties". It would certainly refer to the patent laws, the import convention and so on, so it is recognized here that there are some problems with countries that have got restrictions. So shall we leave it as it is ?
Ms. M. FENWICK (United States of America): Under those conditions, I will let it stand, and with the remarks that have been made by the distinguished delegate of Pakistan.
Paragraphs 24 to 28: as amended, approved
Les paragraphes 24 à 28: ainsi amendés, sont approuves
Los párrafos 24 a 28: así enmendados, son aprobados
W.A.F. GRABISCH (Germany, Federal Republic of): Mr Chairman, you have already decided upon paragraph 26, so we will leave our comments until when this issue is going to come up at the forthcoming Conference.
Draft Report of Plenary, Part III, as amended, was adopted
Le projet de rapport de la pléniëre, partie III, ainsi amendé, est adopté
El proyecto de informe de la Plenaria, Parte III, así enmendado, es aprobado
CHAIRMAN: We have now two more documents which I think the Drafting Committee have not seen yet. These two documents, CL 84/REP/4 - Section 1 and Section 2, have not been examined by the Drafting Committee since there was no time.
I must also bring to your attention that we have interpretation available only until 9 p.m. today, so if you want to have a quick ten minutes break so that people can read it and mark only those points where they want to intervene, or make any minor editorial changes, if it is possible and helpful. We continue ? Good.
DRAFT REPORT - PART IV SECTION I
PROJET DE RAPPORT - PARTIE IV SECTION I
PROYECTO DE INFORME - PARTE IV SECCION I
Paragraph 1 approved
Le paragraphe 1 est approuvé
El párrafo 1 es aprobado
Paragraph 2 approved
Le paragraphe 2 est approuvé
El párrafo 2 es aprobado
Paragraphs 1 and 2 approved
Les paragraphes 1 et 2 sont approuvés
Los párrafos 1 y 2 son aprobados
PARAGRAPHS l to 6
PARAGRAPHES 1 à 6
PARRAFOS 1 a 6
W.A.F. GRABISCH (Germany, Federal Republic of): Just one point, I think several African delegations mentioned the fruitful cooperation and support offered by EEC. Now I wonder whether here in this paragraph 1 this could not be spelled out explicitly, as it would in this case I think not be covered by other agencies. So perhaps just to put this it would cause no problem to anyone else,
TESSEMA NEGASH (Ethiopia): I fully endorse the view of the distinguished delegate of the Federal Republic of Germany. I wish to see the contribution of the EEC recorded in this Session. With this I proceed with paragraph I. I want to add a few words here and there. "The Council expresses its concern" and then follows "that rinderpest continued to be a serious problem".
Then, the last sentence in the same paragraph: "It commended FAO for the assistance provided through TCP projects amounting to more than US $ four million since 1982."
I think this concern, especially the first one I stated, was fully shared by the Council and I expect no objection.
CHAIRMAN: I would like to read the proposal, partly by the Federal Republic of Germany and partly by Ethiopia. The two amendments will make the paragraph read as follows:
"The Council expressed its concern that rinderpest continued to be a serious problem threatening livestock production throughout sub-Saharan Africa. It expressed satisfaction that prompt emergency measures to limit the disease had been taken by governments with the support of FAO, the EEC and other agencies. It commended FAO for the emergency assistance provided through TCP projects amounting to more than US$ four million since 1982."
G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): El distinguido colega y amigo de Etiopía se me ha adelantado a suprimir el "tomo nota" que aparece al principio de párrafo.
Creo que las propuestas de Etiopía todas son muy merecedoras de nuestro pleno apoyo.
Igualmente compartimos la conveniencia de que se incluya la cooperación de la CEE, que es un importante organismo que puede asistir muy válidamente a los países africanos.
A. PINOARGOTE CEVALLOS (Ecuador): Solo para observar que mi querido amigo Bula Hoyos ha sustituido el "tomó nota" por "se expreso" la preocupación"; queremos enriquecer un poco el lenguaje del informe ya que esto sería repetitivo y tal vez habría que recomendar al Comité de Redacción que no emplee tanto el que "expreso su preocupación" ya que hay muchas formas de expresar la preocupación. Solo era esa sugerencia porque sino sustituimos una frase cliché por otra.
CHAIRMAN: Paragraph 1, as amended, is approved. On paragraph 2?
TESSEMA NEGASH (Ethiopia): I have to repeat "expressed" as I do not have any other word for the moment. I want to say "fully appreciated that the emergency was not yet over" but I hate to appreciate emergencies! We would replace that with: "also expressed its regret that the emergency was not yet over and the success achieved was only partial."
A. FEQUANT (France): Je crois qu'il faudrait mettre "a constaté avec regret".
CHAIRMAN: With these amendments, paragraph 2 is approved. Let's move on now to paragraph 3.
P.M. AMUKOA (Kenya): I should like to add a sentence at the end of this paragraph as follows: "It was therefore recommended that FAO continue to provide emergency assistance through TCP and that other donors consider taking similar action."
CHAIRMAN: Is the suggestion of Ethiopia acceptable? I think the Ambassador of the united States put it beautifully this morning about giving a helping hand. Perhaps "and appeal to other donors to take similar action" would be better? So we recommend that FAO continue its emergency assistance through the TCP and recommend to other donors to take similar action.
M.D. METELITS (United States of America): There is, I believe, a grammatical error in line 2 after the reference to vaccine production centres, which is plural, the verb "was" is singular.
CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much, that is right; it should be "were seriously deficient" but I hope that when the manuscript is cleaned up and the final draft comes out, such mistakes will have been eliminated.
TESSEMA NEGASH (Ethiopia): I am going to propose here a very long amendment. The first sentence of paragraph 6 will remain as it is. I have a substitute for the second and the last sentence. My proposal is as follows: "In this connection the Council requested FAO to, (1) prepare a programme of action along with the OAU, IBAR, OIE and the EEC; (2) convene intergovernmental consultation to discuss the programme; (3) present the result of the consultation, together with a programme of action, to a donors' meeting; and (4) report results of both the intergovernmental consultation and the donors' meeting to the next FAO Regional Conference for Africa."
G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Teníamos la intención de haber propuesto algunas mejoras al párrafo 6, pero desde luego la propuesta de Etiopía es mucho más amplia, más completa y más positiva, y apoyamos plenamente las adiciones que ha propuesto.
K.C.S. ACHARYA (India): The modifications suggested by the Ethiopian delegate are excellent. The whole thing becomes very compact and purposeful, and we support it.
ZHONG SHUKONG (China): We also go along with the amendments and as to the last original sentence which reads "FAO's role should also be at the meeting." We cannot agree "a role", there is a preposition missing here.
CHAIRMAN: But now the new Ethiopian proposal replaces that. So we accept the Ethiopian proposal, that is the subsequent, the first sentence, the rest of it will you also kindly give it in writing to the Secretariat.
If members of the Council agree we will add one more point here, a tribute to Dr. Griffiths who is retiring at the end of 22 years of distinguished service in this field. So if you agree we will just put in one appropriate sentence expressing the Council's appreciation of the dedicated service of Dr. Griffiths.
Paragraphs 1 to 6, as amended, approved
Les paragraphes l à 6, ainsi amendés, sont approuvés
Los párrafos 1 a 6, así enmendados, son aprobados
PARAGRAPHS 1 to 11
PARAGRAPHES 1 à 11
PARRAFOS 1 a 11
Ms. K. KILLINGWORTH (Secretary, Drafting Comittee): In the French version of Rep. 4 under item 14, paragraph 3 in the second line you will find the word "Règlement géneral" which should be "Statut du personnel" to correspond with the English staff regulations.
There are a few minor changes. In paragraph 5 "le" instead of "la" in the second line, a few typo-graphical errors which we will cirrect of if course eraphical errors which we will correct of course. In paragraph 10 on page 7 of the French version we should in the first line make "de la" instead of "du"; again we have a problem of gender.
On the 8th line of paragraph 10 we have the words "son adoption pour". This should read "son acceptation par".
In the Spanish version there is a small change on page 8, paragraph 9. There the penultimate line the term "foundary" should read "boundary"
Paragraphs 1 to 4 approved
Les paragraphes l à 4 sont approuvés
Log párrafos 1 a 4 son aprobados
Paragraph 5, including draft resolution, approved
Le paragraphe 5, y compris le projet de résolution, est approuvé
El párrafo 5, incluido el proyecto de resolución, es aprobado
Paragraphs 6 to 8 approved
Les paragraphes 6 à 8 sont approuvés
Los párrafos 6 a 8 son aprobados
PARAGRAPH 9
PARAGRAPHE 9
PARRAFO 9
R. GUADARRAMA SISTOS (México): Solamente como pregunta. Hecha la corrección de las palabras en inglés que tienen en nuestro párrafo 9, quisiera una traducción literal del término "boundary" y "border" e insistir, reconociendo la decision que ya ha tomado el Consejo en esta materia, como información solamente, que en el caso del español no son sinónimos. Me gustaría escuchar una trague-ción literal en español de estos dos términos.
LEGAL COUNSEL: I merely wanted to point out to the delegate of Mexico that the amendment which was accepted this morning in English affects the English text, the text in Spanish and also in French is the same one. It is a "frontera" in Spanish and "frontière" in French, but I do not think the change from border to boundary would necessarily require any amendment to the existing French and Spanish phrases which are in the agreement at the moment.
R. GUADARRAMA SISTOS (México): No teníamos la intención, por supuesto a estas alturas, de presentar ningún tipo de discusión. Simplemente, a manera de pregunta, hicimos la intervención y comprendemos que en español deberemos utilizar la palabra frontera; el límite es una acepción diferente.
Paragraph 9, as amended, approved
Le paragraphe 9, ainsi amendé, est approuvé
El párrafo 9, así enmendado, es aprobado
Paragraph 10 approved
Le paragraphe 10 est approuvé
El párrafo 10 es aprobado
Paragraph 11 including Resolution adopted
Le paragraphe 11 y compris la résolution est adopté
El párrafo 11 incluida la Resolución aprobado
PARAGRAPHS 12 to 16
PARAGRAPHES 12 à 16
PARRAFOS 12 a 16
Mme A. DELLA CROCE DI DOJOLA (Italie): D'après ce que l'on m'a dit, je crois que ce matin, il s'est agi d'un exposé fait par le secrétariat auquel notre représentant a répondu dans son inter vention. Mais il paraît qu'il n'y a pas eu d'autres interventions à ce sujet. C'est la raison pour laquelle je demanderai que l'on veuille bien mettre à la place de: "le Conseil a rappelé" une autre expression comme: "le Conseil a noté", ou "le Conseil a pris note" parce qu'il n'y a eu qu'un exposé de la part du secrétariat.
G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Quisiera ayudar a la distinguida colega de Italia, pero no puedo aceptar la expresión "tomó nota". Tal vez, pudiéramos decir "el Consejo había debatido la cuestión de la inmunidad de procedimiento", porque esto fue un hecho. Lo habíamos debatido; el Consejo había debatido. Espero que esto pueda satisfacer a la distinguida colega de Italia.
Mme A. DELLA CROCE DI DOJOLA (Italie): Je suis désolée, mais l'intervention de M. Bula Hoyos ne m'a pas beaucoup aidée parce qu'il n'y a pas eu de discussion. Il y a eu simplement l'exposé de la part du secrétariat et la réponse de la part de notre représentant.
G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Yo le rogaría, muy cordialmente, a la distinguida delegada de Italia que lea toda la primera frase del párrafo 12. Según mi propuesta diría así: "El Consejo había debatido la cuestión de la inmunidad de procedimiento judicial de la FAO en Italia en su 82° período de sesiones". 0 sea, en el pasado. Yo creo que esto está claro; lo debatimos en el pasado y al suprimir el término "recordó" le estamos dando razón a la delegada de Italia de que nadie insistió aquí en esto esta mañana. Yo creo que nuestra propuesta es correcta puesto que es decir que lo debatimos en el período pasado.
Mme A. DELLA CROCE DI DOJOLA (Italie): Je suis d'accord, on l'a discuté dans le passé, mais pas ce matin.
CHAIRMAN: Shall we just say "The Council had discussed the question of FAO's immunity from legal process in Italy at the 82nd Session and its 83rd Session" just to omit "recalled", "The Council had discussed". Is it acceptable to you?
Ms. A. DELLA CROCE DI DOJOLA (Italy): Yes.
CHAIRMAN: Paragraph 12, as amended, is approved. Any comments on paragraph 13?
Ms. A. DELLA CROCE DI DOJOLA (Italy): It is the same.
"Le Conseil a également rappelé …"
I think it changes a little bit the structure of the paragraph if you only say "has discussed in
the past".CHAIRMAN: So we can again continue with the same formula "The Council had expressed at its 83rd Session great concern at a deteriorating situation", then it continues as it is. This approves paragraph 13. Any comments on paragraph 14?
Mme A. DELLA CROCE DI DOJOLA (Italie): Au milieu du paragraphe, il est dit que "le Gouvernement étudiait actuellement la possibilité d'amender la législation italienne en ce qui concerne l'immunité des Etats et des organisations internationales…". Ce n'est pas correct. Notre représentant n'a pas mentionné l'immunité des Etats. Il a mentionné l'immunité des propriétés des Etats et des organisations internationales. C'est sur ce point que doit porter la loi que l'on a l'intention de faire, l'immunité des actes d'exécution sur les propriétés des Etats et des organisations internationales.
Il y a une autre question. Je vous demanderai si possible de ne pas mentionner le mot "verbales" parce que les assurances données devant le Conseil ne peuvent être que verbales. Mais mettre le mot "verbales", cela donne un ton un peu trop grave.
G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Queremos apoyar las dos propuestas que ha hecho la distinguida delegada de Italia. Creo que ella está en su legítimo derecho de garantizar exactamente las manifestaciones que ha hecho aquí el representante de su país. Pero hemos pedido la palabra porque vamos un poco más allá, siempre con el ánimo de contribuir a que esta situación se solucione satisfactoriamente para todos. Ya el Presidente del Comité de Redacción, sin duda habrá notado, que hay "tomó nota" al principio del párrafo 14. Podríamos acaso decir "El Consejo acogió con satisfacción la declaración efectuada por el representante del Gobierno de Italia". Porque no lo dijimos; lo habíamos pensado decir, pero el momento era muy sometido a la presión del tiempo. Creo que a todos nos causa placer haber oído al Sr. Francisci que el Sr. Saouma se había encontrado con el Sr. Andreotti. 0 sea que "El Consejo acogió con satisfacción".
DEPUTY DIRECTOR-GENERAL: On behalf of the Director-General I must say that I am concerned about the proposed deletion of the word 'oral' . This is the problem. If we were to receive written assurances we would not be discussing the item at all today possibly, but we have only received oral assurances. It is not the case that it is only possible to make oral statements to the Council. It is open to any member state to circulate a document, to send a letter to the Director-General, which can be reproduced as a document. So I think 'oral' has a very specific and important meaning.
Mme A. DELLA CROCE DI DOJOLA (Italie): Au sujet du mot "verbales", je pense qu'il est exagéré de le mentionner. Ce sont des assurances données par le représentant du Gouvernement italien, et les assurances données pendant les réunions du Conseil sont des engagements. En tout cas, il s'agit de déclarations officielles et je pense qu'il faut y croire.
G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Quisiera conceder la razón a la distinguida colega de Italia, aunque comprendo las dificultades del Sr. West. Podríamos acaso decidirnos por esta redacción. Podríamos decir: "En su declaración, el representante de Italia renovó asimismo las garantías", y suprimimos "orales".
CHAIRMAN: Then we make these two amendments to this paragraph, "amending Italian legislation regarding the immunity from measures of execution of State property and the property of inter-governmental organizations" and "In his statement the representative of Italy also renewed the assurances that had been given".
ZHONG SHUKONG (China): I hope, Mr. Chairman, that you can reconsider the term 'state properties', it should be 'state property'. Properties go along with theatrical companies, whereas property in the singular would mean what one owns. Could I seek clarification from our United Kingdom friends? Property and properties are two different things.
CHAIRMAN: Right - 'property of states'.
M.D. METELITS (United States of America): As the Council will recall, my delegation in the able manner of my Ambassador had proposed a paragraph to be added to our record. As a member of the Committee on Constitutional and Legal Matters I might add a few points of information as to why this proposed paragraph might be germane. I can give an example of a concern. This Council a year ago adopted a resolution requesting the Director-General to keep the CCLM and the Finance Committee informed on certain developments. There has been in the interim a decision by the highest court in Italy on those issues. To date the outcome of that case has not been officially reported to the CCLM, while on the other hand it has been reported officially to the Finance Committee. One can agree certainly that there might be administrative and financial repercussions on a decision by a court. But one must also understand that usually there are legal implications on a court decision, and it is to be hoped that this would be a matter that would be considered relevant and germane for the CCLM. Indeed in reading the general text we see in Rule XXXVI, paragraph 3, that the CCLM is supposed to consider specific items referred by the Council or the Director-General which may arise out of, among other things, matters relating to membership in the organization and its relations with nations. Certainly this is germane. It is for the purpose of assisting this organization in areas in which a body that already exists has competence that my delegation had proposed a paragraph to be added. The paragraph reflects the statements that were made in this room by Member Nations-, statements which were not contradicted from the floor, although certainly the Secretariat had expressed other views. It has been the practice in this session that when a number of delegations express an opinion and no delegation rises to contradict Or dispute that opinion this is in fact what the Council agrees. It is therefore my delegation's pleasure to offer for the wise consideration of our colleagues here the following paragraph, which I shall read if I may. This would be a new paragraph 17 to follow the current paragraph 16 on page 9 of REP/4 Section 1. The text would be as follows:
"The Council agreed that with respect to matters regarding relations between FAO and the host country government, issues relating to negotiations with the host country government as well as legal questions should be referred to the CCLM, while specific administrative and financial questions were properly the concern of the Finance Committee."
G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Naturalmente no hemos tenido ocasión de tomar todavía en su forma completa la larga extensión del nuevo párrafo 17 que se propone. Queremos, como reacción preliminar, agradecer la comprensión y la tolerancia con que la distinguida Embajadora de los Estados Unidos acepto nuestra propuesta de aplazar esta iniciativa hasta llegar ahora aquí donde nos encontramos, al párrafo 16 del REP 4.
En segundo lugar, nosotros oímos con inmenso placer la elocuentísima y sabia declaración de una joven mentalidad de abogado que, naturalmente, contrasta con lo que dijo la delegación de Colombia cuando se planteo este asunto, luego empiezo por sentar el hecho de que, por lo menos, nuestra delegación no estuvo de acuerdo con la interpretación que se dio a este punto.
Nos preocupa, en tercer lugar, y lo decimos con mucha sinceridad, la referencia un poco desobligante al Director General, en el sentido de que él haya menospreciado, que no haya tenido en debida consideración al importante organismo, el CACJ, y haya preferido enviar una cuestión jurídica al Comité de Finanzas. Creemos que esto es inaceptable, que nuestro Director General merece el más pleno respeto y la confianza de todos los representantes y de los Estados Miembros de nuestra Organización, y creemos que fue lamentable haber hecho esa referencia que no debería repetirse para argumentar en favor de la aceptación de esta propuesta.
Insistimos una vez más, el Consejero jurídico está aquí presente y sabe que el CACJ no puede ocuparse del fondo de ninguna propuesta, sino de la forma de aquellas propuestas que le sean remitidas por el Consejo.
No creemos deba aceptarse este nuevo párrafo 17 que en esencia repite lo que ya dice el 16, que ya ha sido acordado y que termina con la expresión "según fuera apropiado".
En tres palabras se recoge toda la elocuencia del colega de los Estados Unidos.
Creemos además que tampoco convendría que en un informe del Consejo vayamos a tratar de modificar el artículo 5 de la Constitución que habla del CACJ y tampoco de los artículos que hablan de las funciones del CACJ y repetir aquí lo que todos sabemos a través de 38 años de existencia de FAO, de que cada Comité se ocupa del asunto que le corresponde.
Nos parece, Sr. Presidente, inaceptable esta propuesta.
Ms. A. DELLA CROCE DI DOJOLA (Italy): I just wanted to support the proposal made by the delegate of the United States.
K.C.S. ACHARYA (India): We are not against the proposal made by the United States delegate when he says that a new paragraph 17, as he slowly dictated, should be inserted here. We are not against the spirit of it. But in our view it is a question of how it should be provided and where because it related to the working of a committee, it relates to its charter which already exists. Therefore, I think this matter should be examined by the Secretariat to see, if in the existing charter there is some ambiguity in the points in the new paragraph 17, how they can be amended or rectified so that they become self contained and they answer the type of problems raised in this paragraph. I think it is a matter of where to fit it. I feel that unless that examination has been done and its rightful place determined and the manner of its doing it would not be proper to incorporate it in the proceedings of this Council in this manner because it has these constitutional and other legal implications.
L. ARIZA HIDALGO (Cuba): Nosotros queremos expresar que nos parece un poco intempestivo a estas horas, este gran párrafo que se pretende incluir en un tema que se ha debatido bastante en esta Sala. Fundamentalmente queremos expresar que independientemente de lo que está dentro del párrafo, poco varía; creemos que es improcedente por la razón institucional que ha aducido la representación de Colombia de que el CACJ no debe conocer de estos asuntos hasta no ser tratados por un comité de la Organización.
P.S. McLEAN (United Kingdom): My intention is to be very brief and I simply raised my flag to offer the support of the UK both as a Member of this Council and as a Member of the CCLM to the proposal made by the United States for the reasons that he very lucidly set out. However, I am very sorry that I have to expand a little in my intervention, because I am quite sure that Mr. West is probably going to repeat what he said at the early juncture or something along those lines. Of course, he is entitled to give us his views and his guidance on this matter, but I do suggest and I would say this with great respect also to my Colombian colleague: that the point made by the US is simply one of the Council putting an interpretation on the terms of reference, and I call them that for ease of understanding to what is set out in the Basic Texts.
I was sorry that Mr. West suggested at an earlier stage that the proposal was an attempt to try to go round the back door to change those terms of reference. That is not what I had in mind. It is simply hoping that the Council, which I believe is the competent body, go as it were by taking an interpretation give some guidance to the Secretariat on the role that the CCLM should play. I simply repeat that paragraph 3 of the rule in question provides that "the CCLM shall consider items referred to it by the Council or the Director-General which may arise out of" and then it lists a number of things, and again, as the US said, if matters concerning the host country could not be included in the text of paragraph f, which reads"matters relating to membership in the Organization and its relations with nations", then there is obviously a gap somewhere in these terms of reference.
I will not go on, but I feel there is a misunderstanding about the purpose to the proposal that has been made by the US. It was certainly raised and supported during the debate, and I find it difficult to understand why colleagues should find it objectionable or even suggest that it should have to be referred back for consideration by the Secretariat.
This body surely, Sir, as the Council is entitled to put if it wishes an interpretation and so record it in its Report.
K.C.S. ACHARYA (India): I only wish to say this, when I suggested that it should be examined in the Secretariat that this Council should have an authority to request an opinion from the Secretariat whether the charter of the Committee is to be amended or it can be provided here in the minutes. We do not have that advice as yet before us, and therefore the Council cannot express a final view that it should be inserted here in this fashion.
DEPUTY DIRECTOR-GENERAL: I will not repeat all I said before, although I do want to stress that I adhere to what I said before. I would just ask you at this moment to look at the wording of this text and to tell you that were you to adopt it, I would advise the Director-General - and of course I do not know whether he would accept my advice - but I would advise the Director-General to take it to the Conference and to request that the matter be taken up in a proper way in consonance with the Constitution so that we get a clear decision at the highest level. The Constitution cannot be changed by interpretations of the Council.
Now, why am I saying this? When I look at this text I see that there are the words."as well as legal questions", so it is not only legal questions that this text addresses itself to. It says "as well as legal questions issues relating to negotiations with the host country government". In other words, any issue that might relate to any negotiation with the host country government and that again we come back to archeology and building accommodation and the Commissary quotas and Trust Fund Agreements, of which we now have many with the Italian Government. The CCLM wishes to involve itself in discussion of how many million dollars should go to an African country for its development. This is what the words could cover, and who knows what the ambitions of future members of the CCLM might be? These words are completely, I would say, unacceptable as an interpretation which bears any validity whatsoever to the existing approved text of the CCLM, and I consider also that this is a gross inflation of a minor incident in which the CCLM or some member of it seems to be discontented with the fact that at a certain stage, the question of the judgment of the Corte di Cassazione was not referred to them, it was referred to the Council. The question of time and circumstance should not be inflated in our view into a major constitutional problem in which Member States are going to have a lot of difficulties for a long time.
W.A.F. GRABISCH (Germany, Federal Republic of): I was going to support that proposal after I listened very carefully to the explanation given by the United Kingdom. Now having heard what was said by Mr, West, actually, I do not see a necessity yet that the Conference is going to be involved. If we would stick to what the United Kingdom has said, that there was a gap and that the Council should give some direction to the CCLM to be more involved in matters of the Organization, then I would agree that this should be done.
CHAIRMAN: I think paragraph 16 now says: "The Council requested the Director-General to report developments to its Eighty-sixth Session through the Finance Committee and CCLM, as appropriate". If I may humbly suggest, this states to the Director-General that issues which should go to the CCLM should go to him through the Finance Committee, and at this late hour, whether you want to have a further debate on this or wait on the action taken on item 16 and consider it in detail at the Eighty-sixth Session, I would like to have your guidance.
M. D. METELITS (United States of America): If I may speak personally for just a moment, I have the greatest respect for Mr.West. I have known him only for a few years, but in those years I have found his opinions to be sound and his advice very generally to be sage. It is in that respect that my delegation has proposed a way in which Member States could assist or further assist the Director-General in what is, as he has already said and Mr, West has said to us, a very, very serious matter, a series of important issues.
Certainly, neither my delegation nor I myself has ambitions to create a super Organization out of the CCLM, and if it would be possible for us to receive an assurance from the Secretariat that in accordance with the provisions of Rule 34.3, sub-paragraph f, that the CCLM will be consulted regarding the relations between the Organization and the host country, because it very clearly says "matters relating to … its relations with nations", and certainly, the host country is a nation, Mr, Chairman - if we could have that assurance, then I would be glad to withdraw my proposal.
G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Lamento que por principio deba reaccionar negativamente ante la ultima declaración del eminente y sabio jurista de los Estados Unidos. Nosotros creemos que es una falta de respeto a la Organización y a la Secretaría exigir aquí la garantía de que se va a cumplir los textos básicos que hemos aprobado todos como la Biblia, como la guía fundamental de nuestras actividades. Yo creo que esto no es procedente y que ningún representante de ningún Estado por importante que sea tiene derecho a dudar de la imparcialidad y de la buena fe de la Administración de nuestra Organización.
Yo le pido cordial y respetuosamente a usted, Sr. Presidente, que le dé de nuevo la palabra al colega de los Estados Unidos, en primer lugar para que retire su propuesta y luego para que presente sus excusas por esta actitud que nosotros consideramos improcedente.
M. KHORAYCH (Liban) (langue originale arabe): Je voudrais dire que mon pays appuie ce qui a été proposé par la Colombie. Nous pensons en effet que le projet de paragraphe proposé par les Etats-Unis ne devrait pas être inséré dans ce rapport car il ne répond à aucun but positif.
R.F. de J. NETO (Angola): J'associe ma voix à celle du délégué de la Colombie et j'appuie également les affirmations du représentant du Liban pour dire que le paragraphe proposé par la délégation américaine ne doit pas être inséré au paragraphe 16. J'approuve également ce qui vient d'être demandé à la délégation américaine, c'est-à-dire qu'elle retire sa proposition en ce qui concerne sa dernière affirmation relative au Conseil.
M.D. METELITS (United States of America): My delegation does not want at this hour to take up any more time of this body with a proposal. We will withdraw the proposal, and I personally would like to speak to Mr West to explain to him our position.
Paragraphs 12 to 16, as amended, approved
Les paragraphes 12 à 16, ainsi amendés, sont approuvés
Los párrafos 12 a 16, así enmendados, son aprobados
Paragraphs 17 to 19 approved
Les paragraphes 17 à 19 sont approuvés
Los párrafos 17 a 19 son aprobados
Draft Report of Plenary, Part IV, section 1, as amended, was adopted
Le projet de rapport de la plénière, partie XV, section 1, ainsi amendé, est adopté
El proyecto de informe de la Plenaria, Parte IV, sección I, así enmendado, es aprobado
DRAFT REPORT - PART IV SECTION 2
PROJET DE RAPPORT - PARTIE IV SECTION 2
PROYECTO DE INFORME - PARTE IV SECCION 2
Paragraphs 1 to 3 approved
Les paragraphes l à 3 sont approuvés
Los párrafos 1 a 3 son aprobados
Paragraph 4 approved
Le paragraphe 4 est approuve
El párrafo 4 es aprobado
Paragraph 5 approved
Le paragraphe 5 est approuvé
El párrafo 5 es aprobado
PARAGRAPHS 6 and 7
PARAGRAPHES 6 et 7
PARRAFOS 6 y 7
G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Señor Presidente, si usted me lo permite voy a hacer dos propuestas con-juntas sobre los párrafos 6 y 7, siempre con todo respeto por el Sr. Boxali, nuestro Presidente del Comité de Redacción. Propongo que tanto en el párrafo 6 como en el 7 en vez de "tomó" nota" se diga "y señaló la competencia y experiencia", en ambos párrafos.
Paragraphs 6 and 7, as amended, approved
Les paragraphes 6 et 7, ainsi amendés, sont approuvés
Los párrafos 6 y 7, asi enmendados, son aprobados
CHAIRMAN: Then the last item, "Date and Place of the Eighty-fifth Session of the Council". From past experience it can be that sometimes the Conference concludes early, it could be the 24th or 25th, so immediately after the conclusion of the Conference. So I would suggest it might probably be on the 25th or it may be the 24th; it depends when the Conference concludes.
Paragraph 8 approved
Le paragraphe 8 est approuvé
El párrafo 8 es aprobado
CHAIRMAN: This brings us to the close of the adoption of the Report. I want to thank most sincerely the Chairmen and members of the Drafting Committee for the outstanding work they have done, and before I bring this meeting to a close, is there any comment by anybody else?
Draft Report of Plenary, Part IV, Section 2, as amended, was adopted
Le projet de rapport de la pléniere, partie IV, Section 2, ainsi amendée, est adoptée
El proyecto de informe de la Plenaria, Parte IV, Sección 2, así enmendado, es aprobado
DEPUTY DIRECTOR-GENERAL: The Director-General asked me to say a few words on his behalf at the end of the Council, simply of course to say how grateful he is to the Council and to yourself, Mr. Chairman, for this very short but very full and fruitful session of the Council, especially as it has shown such an extraordinary degree of consensus and good feeling about many issues. We have had our moments of course, not least this evening, but the Council would be very dull without such occasions, and the Council has concluded its business at least on a note of good fellowship and constructive accomplishment. So on behalf of the Director-General I would like to thank you all and to thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your very patient and courteous but effective conduct of these proceedings.
G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): No podría, a pesar de lo tardío de la hora, limitarme a tomar nota de que todos estamos muy satisfechos con la forma tan acertada y eficaz como usted, señor Presidente, ha dirigido nuestros trabajos.
Queremos, igualmente, expresar nuestro agradecimiento a los distinguidos vicepresidentes, al Sr. Boxali, Presidente del Comité de Redacción, y a los miembros que le acompañaron en su tarea de presentarnos el proyecto de informe.
Igualmente estamos agradecidos a los Presidentes de los Comités del Programa, de Finanzas, del CACJ y todos los demás representantes de organismos que presentaron sus informes a nuestra consideración.
Al Sr. West pedimos transmita al Director General nuestro reconocimiento por el aporte valioso y constructivo que la Organización ofrece a las reuniones del Consejo. Como lo ha dicho el Sr. West, es cierto que hubo algunos debates que parecieron ser acalorados en determinado momento, pero nosotros creemos que eso corresponde al carácter esencial del Consejo, en el seno del cual de la controversia surge siempre la cordura y el entendimiento, espíritus con los cuales vamos a pasar pasado mañana a la próxima Conferencia. Gracias.
CHAIRMAN: I promised our interpreters that they would not be kept beyond 9 p.m. so I will say a few words and close this particular session of the Council, the Eighty-fourth Session. I must at this time thank all the messengers, our interpreters, the people who are doing the verbatim records and all those who are working here for us. I think they are remarkable. Of course it is just a preparation for them, this meeting, because for the whole of this month they are going to be exceedingly busy, but I have always admired their patience, and they are all the time listening but we are at least talking or walking. We are very grateful to them, the interpreters who are helping to overcome language barriers and the people who are taking our records. We will soon adjourn but for them the work will start, getting the verbatim records transcribed and so on. We greatly appreciate this tremendous number of anonymous people who really make for the success of our Organization, and efficiency. I want to express our very sincere gratitude to all of them.
Then of course my gratitude goes to our Secretary-General, Mr. Sylla, and Mr. Henderson and all the group who are directly concerned with the servicing of the Council. They have also been exceedingly patient and exceedingly helpful. I want to thank Mr. Sylla; he is a wonderful person as I think I told you last time in June. He is a remarkable man, a perfect gentleman, a great human being and also a great asset to the work of the Council.
I would like to thank the three Vice-Chairmen. I apolgize to them; I would have liked to see them sitting here in my chair but this meeting was so short that I could not take advantage of their great experience. All three are very distinguished Vice-Chairmen - Mr. Pinoargot of Ecuador, M. Féquant of France and Mr. Qureshi of Pakistan. I want to thank them for lending dignity and their names to this particular meeting.
Already much has been said about the Chairman and members of the Drafting Committee, Mr. Boxali, and the representatives of Congo, Cuba, Egypt, Ethiopia, France, India, Mexico, New Zealand, Iraq, Norway, Thailand and the United States of America. We were complaining about our long hours but they worked about eight hours last night; they went home at about 12.30 am and reconvened at about 8 o'clock in the morning. I want to thank them most sincerely. My sincere thanks go to Ms. Kay Killingsworth and her associates for the help they have given to the Drafting Committee.
If I may suggest to Mr. West and the Organization, I think on such occasions when the drafting committee has to work during late hours in the evening and night, the Organization could spend a little money to give them a working dinner. I asked Mr. Sylla yesterday whether he has made any arrangements but he was kind enough to ring me up to say that coffee was being arranged. It is certainly worthwhile to show consideration for the people who work until midnight. And not only the Members who are going to draft but also the interpreters and other staff who are going to assist them. Although we have serious financial difficulties I would plead for some funds to provide some sandwiches to the members and the Chairman of the Drafting Committee and to the staff helping them. I hope this can be arranged for next time.
We have been helped in our work by all the committees. Mr. Trkulja is not here, the Chairman of the Programme Committee. Rich tributes have been rightly paid to him, as well as to Mr. Abeyagoonasekera, the Finance Commitee Chairman and the Finance Committee members. Our thanks go to Mr. Glaser of CCLM, the work of which has been much under discussion today; Mr. Carandang, who also is not here, of the Committee on commodity problems; Mr. Abdu Rachman of the Committee on Fisheries, who did excellent work, and his members; Mr. Peterson of the Committee on Forestry; Mr. Norman Tape of the Committee on Agriculture and Mr. Muir of the Committee on World Food Security. All these committees' reports come to us in the Council, and I want to thank the Chairmen and the members of these Committees for their outstanding work.
The Director-General and Mr. West and all their senior colleagues have always been most helpful and understanding and have always given whatever information we ask for. As the Canadian delegate said, the documents are transparent, and I have seen when I sat through the Programme and Finance Committees, any information asked for was inmediately forthcoming, and we want to transmit through Mr. West to the Director-General our sincere gratitude for all that he has done to help the Council in its work ant the outstanding work that has been done.
Of course we would like to convey best wishes on behalf of the Council to the Honourable Mr. J.R. Block, the Chairman of the Conference, and H.E. José Ramon López Portillo Romano, who is going to be Chairman of Commission I, H.E. Chaka Ntsane, Chairman of Commission II, and Mr. T. Glaser, Chairman of Commission III, and also to the members of the Nominations Committee of the Conference and to other officers.
Finally to you, Council membets, and the observers, the NGOs and others who make the Council sessions worthwhile, I want to thank you most sincerily. As you know my two-year term is coming to an end with this session and I have greatly benefited and enjoyed working with all of you; it has been a distinct privilege and pleasure. Somebody said occasionally heat is generated in our meeting but I have not seen heat here. If there is heat it leads to light, and that is what is important. We have more heartwarming light. It has been a source of concentrated education to me on this podium, listening to so many distinguished people all committed to the same cause. I do hope that the spirit of cooperation and comradeship will continue and prevail because I for one believe in an old saying for which there are many versions in different languages. It says "I searched for my God; God I could not find. I searched for my soul; soul I could not find. I searched for my friend; I found all the three." Ultimately in life I think it is friendship and comradeship and cooperation which count, and I have enjoyed it in great measure from all of you, for which I am deeply grateful. Thank you all very much.
I see it is ten minutes beyond our promised time. I thank you all and I wish you all a very purposeful time in the Conference. I hope we will have a very successful Conference because each Conference is a renewal of faith in the Organization and that faith is one like the Olympic flame. It is an eternal flame which we should keep alive because after all food is first among the hierarchical needs of man. Thank you once again, I hope you will have a nice dinner and rest. With this, this Session comes to a close.
(Applause)
(Applaudissements)
(Aplausos)
The meeting rose at 21.15 hours
La séance est levée à 21 h 15
Se levanta la sesión a las 21.15 horas
