H. REDL (Austria): The Austrian delegation takes note with great interest of the document, and in particular of its excellent introduction by. Mr Regnier. Owing to the time available I shall try to be brief and precise. The food situation in Africa has already been commented upon under Item 4.1. Therefore, we observed with interest the work that FAO is doing, which is presently being discussed in New York.
As regards paragraph 45, I would point out that Austria welcomes the activities of the United NationsDisaster Relief Coordinator with reference to the Fourth General Conference of UNIDO, paragraphs 62 onward. It should be stated that Austria is satisfied with the development of the UNIDO activities, and that useful results have been obtained. We would advocate its conversion into a specialized agency of the United Nations.
With reference to paragraph 81, and particularly to paragraph 84, Austria regrets that so far no substantial progress has been made in making a long-term financing system operational.
As far as the peaceful use of outer space is concerned, my country is generally interested in these important activities. We shall be advocating cooperation as explained in paragraph 135.
Turning to IFAD activities, in particular the statements in paragraphs 170 and following, I should here point out that Austria has made great efforts in raising contributions. My delegation expressed the hope that during the deliberations in December of this year, the final problems can be solved.
A.M. QURESHI (Pakistan): We would like to thank Mr Regnier for his clear and comprehensive presentation, and to the Secretariat for the excellent document CL 86/12 bearing on FAO’s intimate involvement in the wide range of subjects in the United Nations system. The vast scale of FAO activities and collaboration with other members of the UN system is indeed impressive. My delegation would like briefly to underline some of the important points.
We are dismayed to observe that the Committee of Universal Membership in carrying out a review and appraisal of the implementation of the international development strategy could not reach agreement, and that its meeting ended without producing any report. It is difficult to go into the reasons for the disagreement without the report before us. We hope that a proper and objective review of the items will be undertaken in the not-too-distant future. My delegation nonetheless appreciates the contributions of FAO to the review and appraisal exercise in this regard.
We appreciate the useful role of FAO as a leading agency for the promotion of ECDC and TCDC in the agricultural sector. We support assistance, consultation, information activities and the formulation of projects promoting ECDC and reorientation of global, regional and social research to lend support to ECDC and TCDC activities.
This august house has listened to some of the touching statements on the critical situation in Africa under Item 4.1. My delegation wishes only to express its hope that the additional funding of two billion dollars will be forthcoming to support all the programmes in the African countries. The situation in Africa is at the top of the global agenda. We appreciate the initiatives of the Director-General of FAO in making Africa the focus of world attention. Once the emergency situation is over, we hope that Africa, in the spirit of the Harare Declaration, will attain the ultimate goal of individual and collective self-reliance.
The problems of adequate food production and distribution are closely linked to that of population. It is encouraging to see that FAO is closely collaborating with UNFPA in highlighting the importance of increasing productivity to reduce the pressure of population and land resources.
The Eighth Council of IFAD, which again was preceded by special consultations, ended without the replenishment of IFAD, a unique organization in the United Nations system which has for its mandate the alleviation of rural poverty, its focus being the small farmer and the landless in the furthest corners of Asia, Latin America and Africa. It is, indeed, a sorry state of affairs. My delegation calls upon the countries involved in the negotiations for an early replenishment of IFAD so that it is salvaged from the throes of the most unparalleled crisis in its existence. It is also disconcerting to note that the resources committed to the UNDP have virtually reached a point of stagnation.
Again, this is an intolerable situation which needs to be solved so that the flow of resources to developing countries in their developmental activities can be augmented.
M. GIFFORD (Canada): First of all, let me say how much we appreciate the fact that the distinguished Ambassador of Colombia has drawn to the attention of the Council the IFAD meeting which took place only a few weeks ago. Of course, this is entirely appropriate since the documents before us were sent to the printing presses before certain meetings took place.
With respect to IFAD, may I emphasize that we share the concern over the inability to date to find a formula for the replenishment of IFAD. The distinguished Ambassador of Colombia is right when he says that we all want it to survive. In spite of the current difficulties we believe it will survive, and it will do so with the efforts and goodwill of all categories, including the continuing efforts of the Chairman of the Governing Council.
Thus, we do not believe that the responsibility for the present difficulties lies only with Category I - it lies with all of us. To repeat, we firmly believe that IFAD in fact will survive.
My second comment deals with the World Commission on Environment and Development. Canada fully supports the work of the Commission and we would encourage FAO to cooperate wherever possible. In this respect, we are pleased to note that the FAO Secretariat has already been in contact with the Commission.
My third comment deals with a very recent development in the UN system. As noted by the Director-General in his opening remarks at the beginning of the Council session, the United Nations Secretary-General and the FAO Director-General have taken the initiative of establishing a Joint Task Force to examine problems between WFP and FAO. As the Director-General is aware, we welcome this initiative. We have made our views known in detail on the content, structure and terms of reference of the Task Force during the recent session of the CFA. Since the Agenda item before us is essentially an information item, I will not go into the substance of the circumstances surrounding the Task Force. Instead, I simply encourage the Council to take full note of the complete discussion and unanimously agreed on Report of the Eighteenth Session of CFA, particularly as it applies to the Task Force.
In closing, I draw attention to the following points. The CFA agreed that there was no question of WFP becoming a separate agency, and that the basic relationship with the United Nations and FAO should be preserved and improved.
The CFA welcomed assurances by representatives of the Secretary-General and the Director-General that it was the intention to involve the Executive Director of the WFP at every stage of the work of the Task Force.
Finally, the CFA noted the Director-General’s assurance that the work of the Task Force should proceed with all due dispatch and emphasizes the need for the Task Force report to be submitted to the 19th Session of the CFA for its consideration and appropriate action.
Sra. E. HERAZO de VITI (Panama): Luego de haber examinado el documento CL 86/12 sobre los acontecimientos ocurridos en el sistema de Naciones Unidas, despues del último período de la Conferencia, pasamos a hacer los siguientes comentarios. Dentro del contexto de las varias Conferencias mundiales celebradas este año, observamos que en la Segunda Conferencia Internacional sobre Asistencia a los Refugiados en Africa, la mayoría de los Gobiernos donantes reiteraron sus contribuclones financieras, y además prometieron ayuda a travës de conductos bilaterales para cubrir la asistencia adicional a los refugiados y repatriados en Africa.
Asimismo, la Conferencia Internacional de Población celebrada en Mexico el pasado agosto, de la cual emanó la Declaración de la Ciudad de Mexico sobre Población y Desarrollo, estudió la relación entre la población y el desarrollo rural, recalcando los problemas de las zonas rurales, en las cuales se había originado la erosión de los suelos y el agotamiento de las tierras de labranza; recomendo la aplicación del Plan Revisado de Acción Mundial sobre Población.
Mucho apreciamos en el ámbito de las conferencias, que en la Conferencia Mundial para el Examen y la Evaluación de los Logros del Decenio de las Naciones Unidas para la Mujer: Igualdad, Desarrollo y Paz, que se celebrará en Nairobi en 1985, se propondrán medidas para asegurar el progreso de la mujer hasta el año 2000.
Apoyamos la iniciativa de declarar 1986 Año Internacional de la Paz y consideramos muy atinada la contribución de la FAO a ese respecto en el sentido de vincular los objetivos del Año de la Paz como el Día Mundial de la Alimentación 1986, en el marco del tema Alimentos y Desarrollo para la Paz.
La delegación de Panama cree oportuno señalar la oportunidad de lo que sobre este particular declara el Presidente del 38° período de sesiones de la Asamblea General de las Naciones Unidas al expresidente panameño Jorge Illueca, cuando al referirse sobre este particular expresó, “que no existen
pruebas de que problemas apremiantes como el desarme, el hambre y el desarrollo económico se puedan resolver de modo eficaz mediante esfuerzos meramente bilaterales o unilaterales”. Agregando, además, “que la causa de la paz nos impone primordial responsabilidad hacia cada uno de nuestros propios pueblos y para todos los que habitan el mundo.”
Particular interés nos ha suscitado para el año 1985, el Año Intemacional de la Juventud. Participación, desarrollo, paz, porque en la juventud tenemos basadas todas nuestras esperanzas, porque representan a los ciudadanos del mañana y en consecuencia juegan un papel importante en el futuro del mundo.
Apreciamos las actividades de la FAO encaminadas a ofrecer a la juventud rural la oportunidad de participar activamente en el desarrollo agrícola y rural mediante la capacitación en agricultura, economía doméstica, organización y dirección a través de una serie de actividades a este propósito.
Por último, con referencia a las relaciones con las instituciones internacionales de financiación, deseamos hacer especial mención del Fondo Intemacional de Desarrollo Agrícola y destacar el problema por el cual atraviesa el FIDA que es, básicamente: demora en la reposición de recursos y disminución de los presupuestos de préstamos; distribución de la carga para la reposición de recursos. Notamos con pesar, los resultados negativos de la segunda reposición cuando en el último Consejo de Gobernadores, en París, no se llegó a un acuerdo sobre el reparto de cargas entre la categoría I y la categoría II, influenciando esto la meta límite propuesta de 800 millones, ya que sólo se llegaría a un total de 760 millones, así distribuidos: 415 millones para los países de la OCDE; 295 para los donantes OPEP y 50 millones adicionales por parte de varios países de la OPEP.
Señalamos también la idea de algunos donantes de convertir al FIDA en una banca comercial mas y que para lograrlo pretenden modificar las condiciones en que se dan actualmente los préstamos.
Es por esto que nosotros recordamos aquí la reciente Declaración del Presidente del Panamá, Nicolás Ardito Barletta, al 22° período de sesiones de la Junta Ejecutiva, en el sentido de que el FIDA “había llenado un vacío en el ambiente intemacional financiero”. Y sobre los plazos agregó que: “en el mundo actual, el plazo de vencimiento de los préstamos es un elemento de extrema importancia para todos los países, no sólo para los muy pobres sino para los de ingresos medios también”. Citamos estos conceptos, por la validez que tiene la observación que hace un estadista latinoamericano con larga experiencia en instituciones financieras internacionales. Nuestra delegación se augura sinceramente que se encontrará una solución concreta con miras a resolver la grave crisis que aqueja hoy al FIDA.
K. SHIOZAWA (Japan): We would like to express our thanks to the Secretariat for having presented to us the informative document on the Agenda. We also appreciate Mr Regnier’s excellent introduction. We welcome the fact that FAO is carefully following and paying due attention to the inter-agency affairs that are particularly relevant to the work of FAO. We fully support the role of FAO in trying to achieve increased food and agricultural development by effective utilization of its expertise primarily in the developing countries.
Concerning the activities referred to in the document, my delegation particularly appreciates FAO’s initiative in calling for international assistance to the food crisis in African countries and the activities created by the FAO/WFP Task Force established by the Director-General in alleviating the food situation and estimating the external assistance requirement for drought-affected countries. My delegation hopes that FAO will continue to play a central role in coping with the food-and agricultural problems of the developing countries, in particular African countries now facing serious and difficult situations in close cooperation and coordination with other organizations in the UN system toward alleviating hunger and malnutrition, improving the economic situation and attaining the well being of developing countries.
With regard to the recent decision taken by the Secretary-General of the United Nations and the Director-General of FAO on the creation of a Joint Task Force, my delegation would like to express our appreciation for the timely decision and our expectation that the Joint Task Force will make a thorough review of the problems which have arisen since the inception of the World Food Programme.
My delegation also hopes that the possible solution of their problems and the recommendations of the Joint Task Force will be put forward to the Nineteenth Session of CFA which will be held next spring. We believe that it is also very important that the Executive Director of WFP’ be fully involved in the work of the Joint Task Force.
J. TCHICAYA (Congo): Je pensais, pour ma part, je ne sais plus exactement quel jour, la semaiñe dernière dans tous les cas, que nous avions discuté du problème de savoir s’il fallait que nous parlions des rapports entre la FAO et le PAM. Je crois, si ma mémoire ne me trahit pas, que nous
étions arrivés à un accord pour que nous ne puissions pas aborder cette question au cours de cette session. Il se trouve qu’un certain nombre de délégués - je veux parler du Canada, du Japon, de la République féderale d’Allemagne - ont abordé ces questions. Je voudrais, pour ma part, savoir ce que vous ferez de ces informations concernant les rapports entre la FAO et le PAM, notamment l’équipe spéciale. Je voudrais être rassuré par vous-même, Monsieur le President, et savoir si malgré ces declarations notre rapport n’en fera pas du tout mention.
H. CARANDANG (Chairman of the Group of 77): I would just like to state that the Group of 77 is not prepared to open a debate on the CFA Report, which is not on the Agenda of this Council. My own delegation is not prepared to make any comments on the CFA report, as we have no instruction in this regard. I would like to fully support the views expressed by Congo, and we hope that no further reference to the CFA will form part of the report of the Council.
M. GIFFORD (Canada): I certainly do not want to make your life more difficult, Mr Chairman. I certainly do not want to reopen the detailed discussion that took place in this city three or four weeks ago, simply to make the point that we think it was entirely appropriate that the Director-General in his opening remarks made reference to the recent meeting of the CFA, and in fact the reference to his agreement with the UN Secretary-General to initiate a Task Force. A few delegations thought it might be desirable for information purposes that some documentation be circulated for the information of delegates. That was the issue, as you recall, that was pushed to a vote last week. However, I think that the comments you have received to date, particularly this afternoon and this morning, have been extremely moderate in tone, and I think constructive in content, and there is no doubt whatsoever, none of us wish to reopen the substance of this issue.
CHAIRMAN: We have just heard interventions by Congo, Philippines and Canada on the subject as to whether reference should be made to the CFA Report, the Council having taken a decision earlier this week that no reference be made to that Report.
M. GIFFORD (Canada): With all due respect, perhaps my memory is faulty, but I thought the decision that the Council - and I accept that, it was a decision of the majority of the Council - was with respect to my inquiry as to whether certain documents would be circulated. The decision, as I recall it, was that circulation of new documents would somehow constitute a new agenda item and therefore this would be inappropriate, but that is all my recollection of the meeting was of last week.
J. TCHICAYA (Congo): Il ne semble pas que ma délégation ait saisi de la même manière ce que nous avions décidé la semaine dernière. Je veux dire que nous sommes en contradiction flagrante avec la délégation du Canada. Nous pensons pour notre part que le document concernant le CPA n’ayant pas été distribué à tous les membres de ce Conseil pour être discuté, nous n’avons pas à nous pencher sur cette question et nous avions demandé que la discussion sur ce ranport FAO/PAM, notamment sur l’Equipe spéciale, ne soit pas introduit dans nos discussions actuelles. Je crois que c’était clair et, de toute façon, ma délégation s’opposera à ce que mention soit faite dans le rapport sur cette question.
A.Y. BUKHARI (Saudi Arabia, Kingdom of) (original language Arabic): In fact, the Canadian request to include certain documents in the agenda came a bit late, I would think. It did not come in at the right time, because we had already adopted our agenda and had started our discussion of the agenda as adopted, so, I would fully support the view put forward by.Congo and also by the Chairman of the Group of 77 to the effect that it is not customary to enter the views of certain delegations into the report of the Council. The report of the Council should contain the essence of the points that have been discussed as on the agenda, because otherwise, any delegation could bring up anything and expect to have it included in the report. But if this were the case, we would have to ask the Italian Government to liberate hundreds of thousands of tons of paper to be able to produce the report of this Council, so I would again stress that we should not include in our report any items except those that have been agreed upon when adopting the agenda.
P.S. McLEAN (United Kingdom): I do not want to add to your difficulties as Chairman of this Session but I do think I need clarification of what is going on in this Council at this time. And I do so as if I were raising a point of order, and in accordance with Rule XII, paragraph 20. I will not discuss the substance but merely the procedural side.
My understanding is that on Friday afternoon a representative in this Council made a request. This was debated; some supported it and some opposed it. After the Legal Counsel had drawn attention to Rule XII.24, the Council agreed to a representative’s proposal that the debate should be closed. At the same time the Legal Counsel did draw our attention to Rule XII paragraph 25, which provides that when a proposal has been adopted or rejected it will not be reconsidered, but, in my view what the Council did was to decide to suspend the debate. It reached no decision that I am aware of with regard to the adoption or rejection of the request that had been made by a particular representative.
Equally it seems to me that there has been ample reference during the whole course of our debate to the issue of the Task Force, a matter which surely the Council will agree is of direct and extreme importance to the Food and Agriculture Organization as well as to very difficult at times to sit here when I hear members say they will not, as independent sovereign states or representatives of them, be intimidated by any single member. I cannot accept that there is any question about the references having been made in this Council, and therefore that there should be some reference made to that in the Council report.
Now, if my interpretation of what I have said about the procedure is wrong, perhaps the Legal Counsel can be asked to put me right.
A. ABDEL-MALEK (Liban) (langue originale arabe): Je crois que la question a été discutée longuement la semaine dernière et qu’aucun élément nouveau n’est intervenu pour que nous en discutions de nouveau. Par conséquent, j’appuie la proposition faite par M. l’Ambassadeur du Congo et par le Chef du Groupe des 77 ainsi que par l’Ambassadeur de l’Arabie Saoudite car il n’est pas coutume d’insérer dans le rapport du Conseil quelque chose qui n’a pas été inscrit à l’ordre du jour de ce même Conseil.
B.H. DJIBRIL (Benin): Je ne voudrais pas être plus long. Je, voudrais simplement dire que le débat a déjà eu lieu à ce sujet la semaine dernière, et que le Conseil avait arrêté une position bien claire. Je ne comprends pas pourquoi cette même question revient sous une forme plus insidieuse. Ma délégation voudrait simplement s’associer à ce qui a été dit par le Chef du Groupe des 77, et de certaines délégations, à savoir la délégation du Congo. Done en conclusion, ma delegation souhaiterait que le débat s’arrête à ce niveau pour que l’on puisse avancer dans nos travaux.
H. CARANDANG (Philippines): I just wanted a clarification, because apparently it is now being claimed that there was no decision with regard to the substance of the matter, whether or not the document should be circulated, and that the point of order or the motion was just to stop the discussion on the matter. I would like to state that the way I saw it, the majority was clearly against the circulation of such documents and therefore the inclusion of the matter in the agenda. If there was any doubt on that, I suppose you could call for a raising of hands as to whether indeed there was or there was not a decision of the majority against the circulation of the documents to the Council at that time.
M. ABDELHADI (Tunisie): Je pense pour ma part que le débat sur cette question a été clos. Nous sommes en train de perdre du temps: un temps précieux. J’appuie par consequent ce que vient de dire le délégué des Philippines en ce sens que le rapport de notre reunion doit contenir le fond des points discutés par le Conseil et qui ont été prévus par l’ordre du jour lequel a été adopté par le Conseil dès le premier jour.
H. HØSTMARK (Norway): I must say, that like the representative of the United Kingdom I too have a certain feeling of what was actually debated and what was the decision of the Council. I shall not prolong this but I would just like to support the request by the United Kingdom for a clarification of this point by the Legal Counsel.
CHAIRMAN: It seems to me that before we call on other speakers we should hear the views of the Legal Counsel.
LEGAL COUNSEL: When, in the course of a debate, one of the delegates moves the closure of the debate on whatever matter is under discussion at the time, and the motion is carried and the debate closed, this leaves the matter exactly where it was before the motion. It may be, as seems to be the case, that no decision was formally taken on the question under discussion. The end result would be that certain delegates spoke in favour and certain other delegates perhaps spoke against a particular course of action, but no decision was taken and the debate ends as from the adoption of the motion, to close the debate.
If there is no decision one way or the other, delegations can draw their own conclusions from the discussion that took place as to whether there were more or fewer who wanted a particular course of action to be taken. It it a well-known procedural move when delegations do not wish to pursue a matter, to propose the closure of the debate. Those delegations who wish to pursue the matter further until a decision is actually formally taken, will then vote against the motion to close the debate. But once the closure of the debate has taken place, that is where the matter rests.
M. GIFFORD (Canada): Let me first of all say that I agree entirely with the representative of Tunisia that we should not prolong this debate, and I assure you that this will be the last time I speak on the subject. All I can repeat, is that my understanding of what I said last Friday was a suggestion that certain documents be circulated. I was asking the Chair for clarification as to whether it was appropriate for those documents to be circulated. We then had a rather heated debate that ended in a vote, but that was the intent, as I understood it in my own mind, as to what I was asking.
Turning away from that issue on the question as to what is sensible in an international meeting, it seems to me that a number of us during the course of this Council meeting have made reference to activities in other fora, for example, the question of IFAD was discussed at length and in depth this morning. This was a particular reference to a meeting that occurred only three or four weeks ago. This, as I said, is entirely appropriate when we are discussing an item on development in the UN system, so I fail to see why the references that some people have made to the formation of the Task Force by the UN Secretary-General and the Director-General of FAO should generate this kind of debate. I am quite frankly at a loss.
DEPUTY DIRECTOR-GENERAL: I should like to clarify a couple of points concerning the Director-General and this item. Firstly, reference was made to the fact that in his opening Statement to the Council, the Director-General referred to the appointment of this Task Force. Well, this was a matter for information in his opening speeches to the Council or Conference. He refers to many subjects but this does not mean that they are on the agenda or he wishes them to be on the agenda or expects the Council or Conference to discuss them, or for that matter and even more important, to appear as matters which have been discussed in the report of the meeting. Otherwise you will limit him simply to discussing those items on the approved agenda and for which documentation had already been issued. You do not wish to limit him in this way and it has never been the case in FAO, so I think it is really irrelevant to the question of the agenda whether he mentioned it or not in his opening Statement.
Secondly, I think that in my 21 years experience of FAO, this is the first time that the subject of the WFP’s activities or its relations with FAO has been raised under this particular item. The WFP has always been treated as part of the UN and FAO and as meriting a discussion on the basis of circulated documentation as a separate item on the agenda. It has not been the case that the report of recent CFAs have been discussed under this item of the agenda. Of course it might be a good precedent to subject the CFA and its report to the general supervision of the Council in this way, but if so it should be a conscious decision and not one incidental to this particular situation in which we find ourselves.
Thirdly, the Legal Counsel was very careful to answer the question which was put to him in a very precise way. It was a precise question and he answered it precisely, but I recall that during that
discussion there were very explicit statements to the fact that the question of the Task Force should not figure on the agenda of this Council, and that whatever anybody wished to say about it, references to the Task Force should not appear in the report. Normally, when a subject is left hanging in the air like that, one would proceed to a second vote on the substance. In this case the vote was on the closure. The next vote should have been on the substance. Did the Council want this matter to be referred to in its report or not? The Council in its wisdom decided not to go to those lengths of voting. It is open to it to do so today, but I would suggest that given the spirit of all the interventions - I say of all the interventions - this would be unfortunate and in any case unnecessary, because what is the situation? People are simply repeating their agreement of what the Director-General said as an obiter dictum, so to speak, in his opening Statement. This reminds me of an actual incident when I was a child and I was taken to the circus. There was an act involving several people, one of whom.was trying to sing a song. He was interrupted by his companions who said “Stop”, and he stopped. And they said “Go on singing: we wanted to tell you to go on singing”. So he went on singing, but they resorted to further methods. First one hit him on the head with a very large hammer. It was of course only a cardboard hammer but it looked terrible and made a terrible noise as it touched his head. And then they said “Go on singing”. Then one came with an axe which buried itself in his head. It was a false head but the axe was left sticking there, and they said “Go on singing”, and then someone came with a knife and stuck it in his back. Of course he had a pad there so it did not do him any harm but you could see this great knife sticking out of his back, but they said “Go on singing”. You are saying to me “Go on singing”, but it is not really necessary. I have not even started singing yet, but I will sing because the Director-General has said I should. So I do not think it would honestly serve any purpose to have a vote on this issue, But if that is what the Council wants to decide the substance, then of course it is open to you and the Council to decide to do this.
J. BELGRAVE (New Zealand): I asked for the floor earlier to make a substantial intervention which, with your permission, I will do later on. I just wanted to make one or two brief observations on the procedural point in front of us now. It seems to me, and I was not here on Friday morning, but the verbatim record, as the Deputy Director-General has just said I think confirmed by the Legal Counsel or vice versa, “stop at that point”, and certainly as I read it - and I think that is just what has been said again - there was not a decision taken on the second point, whether discussion or reference or whatever, to the issue should itself be ceased.
Secondly, in that context it would seem to my delegation that if speakers do want to refer to the reference by the Director-General in his opening statement, which I have read from the text, it would be in order in that context, but I would suggest that you may wish to rule so that speakers who want to address the item substantively kn’ow where they stand.
SUHARYO HUSEN (Indonesia): Since Indonesia is not a member of CFA my delegation has no instruction on the last CFA session and my Government needs time to study the report before discussing it. Finally, my delegation supports fully the decision made by the Chairman of the Group of 77 and others not to include the report into the present Council meeting since it is not in the agenda.
Y. A. HAMDI (Egypt) (original language Arabic): According to the clarification given by the Legal Counsel and by Mr West the DDG, the Egyptian delegation feels that we should not re-open the debate on this subject, either with regard to the distribution of documents or with regard to the inclusion of the debate on this subject in the report of this session of the Council.
Sra. M. RUIZ ZAPATA (México): Nosotros pensamos también que la interpretación del Sr. West y la anterior dada por los representantes del Congo, de Arabia Saudita y de Filipinas es adecuada.
No rechazamos solamente que se circularan los documentos sino que la mayoría se opuso a que se tratara el tema referente al informe del CPA, como ya dimos nuestra opinion la semana pasada. Nosotros nos oponemos igualmente a que se refleje cualquier comentario sobre el informe o sobre el Grupo de Acción en el informe.
A. ABDEL-MALEK (Liban): La délégation libanaise voudrait remercier le Conseiller juridique pour les opinions qu’il a exprimées. Toutefois, ces opinions n’ont pas contribué à éclaircir la situation; de même Vopinion de M. West n’a pas non plus éclairci la situation. Ce problème a été discuté quant au fond, et íe débat a été clos. Par consequent, si le Conseil estime que le débat n’est pas clos, nous proposons de soumettre cette question aux voix pour en finir et passer a une autre question.
A. M. QURESHI (Pakistan): We have listened to the discussion which has been going on here; we have listened to the Deputy Director-General; we have listened to the Legal Counsel; we have listened to the various distinguished delegates. What are we doing, what is the purpose for which we are gathered here today? We have 49 Members of the Governing Council of FAO here to solve the problems of the world on malnutrition, on hunger, on poverty, on people going away without food, children crying for food. What are we doing here; what is this kind of debate? It will lead us nowhere. Each one of us has the mandate to strengthen FAO, the World Food Programme, to make them more effective, to render services to the hungry who are dying. We have several problems; we have a voluminous agenda before us; we have so much to do. I only propose that in the spirit of international cooperation we close this debate and proceed on the item which is under discussion.
Mrs M. FENWICK (United States of America): I would like to second the motion of the delegate of Pakistan. I agree with him. We are fiddling here while Africa burns.
CHAIRMAN: We have a motion tabled by Pakistan and seconded by the United States that the debate be closed. Are there any delegates who wish to speak against the closure?
J. TCHICAYA (Congo): Bien entendu le Congo ne s’oppose pas à ce que l’on mette fin à ce débat, tout au contraire. C’était notre objectif depuis le debut. Nous pensions pour notre part ...
CHAIRMAN: I am sorry, but there is a motion tabled for closure of the debate. If you are going to speak against closure you will be allowed to speak. If you are not going to speak against closure we cannot entertain your intervention. Are there any delegates who wish to speak against? There is a motion, which has been seconded, for closure. The chair is entertaining at this moment interventions against that motion. Are there any such interventions?
H. HØSTMARK (Norway): Can I ask a question for clarification? Is that possible? I do not know if I am in order or not.
CHAIRMAN: The Ambassador for Lebanon asked for clarification. I told him No. So I have to tell you No. Let us move on with the question of the vote for closure. We have a motion before us for closure. The chair can entertain two speakers against the motion and then we take a vote on it. I will read the relevant regulation: “A delegate or representative may at any time move the closure of the debate on the item under discussion whether or not any other delegate or representative has signified his wish to speak. Permission to speak on the closure of the debate shall be accorded to only two speakers opposing the closure, after which the motion shall be immediately put to the vote. If the Conference or the Council is in favour of the closure the Chairman shall declare the closure of the debate.” Perhaps we should hear the Legal Counsel as to whether a point of order can be raised.
LEGAL COUNSEL: If you look at paragraph 24 of Rule XII, which gives the order of precedence of motions, you will see that “The following motions have precedence in the following order over all other proposals or motions before the meeting, except a point of order”. Therefore I consider that it would be perfectly correct for a delegate who is not clear on what the motion is about, or wishes to have an explanation, to raise a point of order. Then immediately after that point of order has been answered, there still may be only two speakers who may oppose the motion and, immediately thereafter, the motion must be put to a vote.
CHAIRMAN: I thank the Legal Counsel for his guidance. We are hastening slowly.
J. TCHICAYA (Congo): C’est exactement ce que je voulais faire. Je voulais effectivement présenter un point d’ordre. Pour ma part, je n’ai pas bien compris la motion ni surtout ce que cela recouvre; en effet, il me semble que l’on avait déjà vote sur une motion et sur ce débat; et cela n’a pas empêché que le débat s’ouvre à nouveau.
Est-ce que cela signifie que nous remettons ce débat à plus tard? Ou est-ce que nous décidons maintenant que l’on ne doit plus parler de cette affaire ?
DEPUTY DIRECTOR-GENERAL: As I indicated before, on this point of order a closure of a debate is a closure of debate. As stated by the Legal Counsel earlier, it does not answer the substantive question. Therefore if you want an answer to the substantive question, should this matter be referred to in the Report, rather than have closure of the debate you should have a vote on whether this matter should be referred to in the Report or not.
CHAIRMAN: I thank the Deputy Director-General. As I see it, we are still at the point where we have a motion for closure moved and seconded. There have not been two speakers against that vote for closure. There has been adequate time.for any such speakers. There have been no such speakers. The Chairman rules that the motion for closure which has been tabled and seconded has been accepted and passed.
H. HØSTMARK (Norway): My reason for having to speak against the closure of the debate is very simple since I could not have the clarification. I do not really know what is entailed in this motion, how far it goes, what implications it has not only for this issue but for other issues in this and in future Councils. I consider these questions serious and I would like to have them answered before I can take a point on this motion. Since I do not have the information I would have to go against the closure.
CHAIRMAN: One country has now spoken against closure. Is there another country prepared to speak against closure of the debate? We need two countries.
Y.A. HAMDI (Egypt): Can I have a point of clarification or not? Let me put my question. Is it possible to modify the motion?
CHAIRMAN: I do not think so. So we are at the point at which we have only one speaker against closure of the debate. The regulation requires two speakers. Therefore the vote for closure of the debate, tabled and seconded, is passed, it is accepted by the Council. That means the debate is closed.
The question still is, however, whether in making their statements delegates will be able to refer to the CFA Report or to matters arising directly therefrom. Prior to the taking of the vote for closure there were two clearly defined views on the subject. One school of thought felt that it was decided earlier that the CFA Report should not be discussed since it was not an agenda item. This school of thought today expressed the view in so many words that an attempt was being made surreptitiously to discuss the CFA Report. They therefore took objection to these attempts to discuss the CFA Report under this Item. As a result the Ambassador of Congo raised what was virtually a point of order. Another school of thought argued that no such decision was taken earlier in the week, that in point of fact their request was made, discussions were held, but before a decision was taken a vote of closure was tabled and accepted. Legal Counsel, together with the Deputy Director-General, supported this view. They said that the vote of closure having been taken no decision was in fact reached. So the question was at that point of time whether in view of the fact that no decision was actually taken on this subject delegates should be able to make reference to this subject in their speeches and their interventions. This is where we were when the vote of closure was taken and this is where we are now.
The Deputy Director-General made it quite clear that there is a way to go if delegates are insistent that no reference should be made to this Report, and that is that a motion should be tabled to that effect stating specifically that no reference must be made to the CFA Report directly or otherwise. That is the way you can go. If you do not go that way, then I do not think the chair can prevent any delegate from making reference to whatever subjects they wish.
J. TCHICAYA (Congo): Après le point que vous venez de faire sur la situation, pour notre part celle-ci nous semble désormais claire. Nous voudrions poursuivre dans le sens que nous avons évoqué dès le debut; nous voudrions, pour notre part, demander à ce que nous puissions nous prononcer sur la question de savoir si l’on doit, ou si l’on ne doit pas mettre ces allusions dans le rapport.
Comme nous l’avons déjà dit, nous pensons que le CPA vient de tenir sa reunion, et que le rapport est à peine prêt. Il n’a pas été distribué; en tout état de cause, il sera soumis à notre Conseil à une session ultérieure. Pour cette raison, nous pensons que pour ce qui concerne cette session il ne doit en aucune façon être fait mention dans notre rapport de la situation ou plutôt des rapports existant entre le PAM et la FAO; et notamment aucune allusion ne doit être faite à l’équipe spéciale d’action.
A.Y. BUKHARI (Saudi Arabia, Kingdom of) (Original language Arabic): We already said that nobody has the right to reopen the debate on this subject. We did not simply want to close the debate on the subject: we said that we did not have the right to discuss this question for a number of reasons. First, this is the CFA Report, it is not a Report of the Council. Secondly, this item was not included on the Agenda of the present session of the Council. Thirdly,the request of the delegate of Canada was not presented at the right moment, it was presented after adoption of the Agenda and even after the discussion of a large number of items on this Agenda. Fourthly, within this same Council representatives of sovereign countries are represented who are not members of CFA, How can
they discuss this Report? Finally, if the objective is simply to take note of the contents of the Report without discussing it then I am quite sure that any delegation can get the Report from the Secretariat if all they want is to have the Report available to read it. The Secretariat can hand out this Report outside the room. This is why I have asked for the floor, in order to reaffirm that nobody has the right to reopen the debate on this subject and that therefore this question, or any opinion on this matter, should not appear in the Report of the Council.
H. CARANDANG (Philippines): There appears to be a lot of confusion in the discussion we are having this afternoon. First, with regard to the closure of the CFA on the Agenda, there is no question of that. It is clear that if anybody wants it put on the Agenda 60 days’s notice is needed. Once the Council has started nobody can put anything in any more unless there is a two-thirds vote of the Council to add to the Agenda. But even that has gone because the Agenda was adopted on the very first day of the session. So there is no question of the CFA Report being included in the Agenda. That is absolutely out of the question.
The second question, whether the request to circulate the documents of the CFA was decided upon or not, as you have indicated apparently you have made a ruling that before it was decided the discussion was closed. But I indicated earlier that it was very clear that the majority was against the circulation of these documents because it had not only the effect of giving information but it also had the effect of giving a legal status to a document which has not been studied by our governments, not sent to our governments, therefore we could not have had any instructions with regard to these documents as a matter of discussion for our Council.
So if you have any doubts with regard to this, that that request was really rejected by this Council, please clarify this before we proceed further because you will know very clearly that at the time although there was a closure of the debate the consensus of the meeting was very clear that the majority was opposed to the circulation of this document because also of the implications that it would have.
There is the other question of making reference to that Report, which was not on the Agenda, for which no documents have been circulated.
These are three different questions. Before we close the debate, let us clarify our minds in this regard. If anyone has doubts as to how the Council feels, there was a meeting of the Group of 77 this morning, and I have to tell you that the Group of 77 is not prepared to discuss the CFA Report because of the reasons I have already indicated - it is not on the Agenda, we have no documents, we have not had time to study it, some delegations cannot give their opinion on this matter and therefore, we are not ready to discuss this item. We hope also that references to this will not be made in the report for reasons I have stated already.
CHAIRMAN: I thank the distinguished delegate of the Philippines. We have just taken a vote of closure and we are speaking on the subject again. We must cry “halt’’ somewhere, or we will just go on and on. It seems to the Chair that the majority of delegates favour a position whereby no reference is made to the CFA Report either directly or indirectly, and I think we should so proceed. If members who have formerly taken a different position on this matter feel otherwise, we can put the matter to the vote, I am inclined to rule that in view of the fact that it is clear that a majority of delegates would rather not see any inclusion of the CFA Report in speeches directly or indirectly, then we shall so proceed and I so rule.
M. GIFFORD (Canada): I was quite content to be quiet after my last intervention, as I indicated, because I agreed with the statement made by the distinguished delegates of Pakistan and the United States of America that we have spent far too much time in arguing about this issue. But now, as I interpret your ruling, you are suggesting that if no one objects, your interpretation then would be that there will be no reference to the CFA Report in the report of this Council meeting. Am I correct? If that is the case, I would like to make a statement opposing that interpretation if I may, and if you would bear with me, I think the point I am trying to make here is that the issue before us goes far beyond the simple question of a reference to CFA.
This appears necessary to the extent that in the few visits I have made to Rome I have been struck by the tendency to invoke the gladiatorial imagery of Rome’s past to characterize the present day intentions of delegations. In our view, this is unfortunate and counter-productive. However, I do realize that as in any other multilateral meeting, there is a tendency for all of us to relieve the monotony of set-piece speeches by engaging in verbal jousting. No one takes it personally, and we all engage in it from time to time. However, there are limits. As the adrenalin surges, we should try and remember that points of order, requests for votes and other parliamentary techniques are not really substitutes for debate and dialogue.
Each delegation in this Council, whether from a developed or developing country has a basic and inalienable right to express its view on matters before the Council. No delegation can impose its view on another, but if any of the others are effectively prevented from expressing their views, we are not members of a multilateral agency of the 20th century, we risk instead becoming members of a star chamber of the Middle Ages,
Most of us have been extremely moderate, and I, for one, wish to maintain the tone of moderation expressed by many in this room. Therefore, I honestly believe it will be counter-productive for future meetings of this Council if the question of the reference to the CFA in the report is put to a vote. I think the motion put forward earlier by the distinguished delegates of Pakistan and the United States is entirely appropriate. We have spent far too much time in arguing an essentially procedural issue, but when you put forward the ruling that there should be no reference to it in the report, you are raising a fundamental point that goes beyond the procedural issue, or so it seems to me.
DIRECTOR-GENERAL: I hesitated to say anything, but I think the decision is made by the majority, and the views of the minority are always accepted and listened to. But the minority should not be tyrannical and arguing will not benefit anyone. I still fail to understand the insistence of some to make mention in the report of what has happened in another meeting when the subject is not on the agenda. Mr Chairman, I know.you have closed the debate on this subject, but I feel personally concerned because I have had discussions with Canada on this subject, and I still do not understand. The matter will be discussed here next year in the CFA and I hope there will be no more arguing.
A. ABDEL-MALEK (Liban)(langue originale arabe): Je regrette que mon collègue et ami du Canada ait traité notre Conseil d’un “Conseil de gladiateurs”.
Je considère que ce que nous entreprenons au sein de ce Conseil est tout à fait conforme aux regies de la démocratie. Le Canada lui-même est un berceau de la démocratie. Je fais partie de ce Conseil depuis 1960 en tant que représentant du Liban et j’ai connu 7 presidents de conseil et aucun conseil n’a été qualifié de “Gladiateurs”.
Du point de vue juridique la chose est très claire: il y a un ordre du jour mais ce point n’y figure pas. Done il n’est pas utile d’inclure dans le rapport un point qui ne figure pas à l’ordre du jour. Aussi je propose que le débat sur cette question soit clos et que l’on passe au vote si besoin est.
CHAIRMAN: I think we, should move on. This matter has been aired at great length. There have been several speakers on the subject even after a vote of closure was passed, so I do not think that anyone can truthfully say they were not given a fair chance to speak, or were not allowed to speak.
S. ZAHARIEV (Bulgaria): I do not want to continue the discussion but, would you please take into account that some members of the Council are not members of the CFA and cannot spend so much time on things which are entirely matters for the CFA and the World Food Programme. Let us carry on with our agenda.
CHAIRMAN: We will continue with the statements on the substance.
L. ARIZA HIDALGO (Cuba): Había perdido el hilo de la discusión, no sabía qué estábamos discutiendo, puesto que cuando nos salimos de lo que está programado corremos el riesgo de que pase esto.
Primeramente quisiera saludar la exposicion y presentacion que nos hizo el Sr. Regnier. Creemos que con su acostumbrada claridad nos ha expuesto un documento muy amplio. En el contexto del programa de nuestro Consejo, la FAO es hoy un organismo de participacion plena en todo el sistema de Naciones Unidas, logrando la integracion de alimentacion y la agricultura en toda la economía mundial.
Este documento analizado con detenimiento, realmente nos pone de manifiesto toda la gama de actividades que el Sistema de Naciones Unidas desarrolla, tratando fundamentalmente de examinar, evaluar y aplicar programas y reforzando asistencias para aliviar los incumplimientos de la estrategia internacional. Así en este análisis conjunto del documento, creemos que debemos insistir en la necesidad de que se exprese la necesidad, valga la redundancia, de la implementacion del Nuevo Orden Economico y Social. Pensamos que todo lo que expresa este documento, es todo un pálpito de búsqueda de nuevos
caminos, de búsqueda de caminos que realmente refuercen. En una ojeada rápida por algunos aspectos de este gran documento, cuando hablamos del examen y evaluación de las estrategias, deploramos que no se reconozca que para la estrategia internacional del desarrollo debe de aparecer el establecimiento del nuevo orden economico y las negociaciones globales, específicamente éstas; porque son ellas esencialmente las que nos van a dar un poco de sentido. No hemos podido llegar realmente a una estrategia internacional del desarrollo referente a la cooperación economica y técnica entre países en desarrollo.
Sencillamente queremos saludar a la FAO por su participación; saludar también al Director General por el empeño que ha tornado en que la cooperación entre países en desarrollo se haga realidad.
El párrafo 14 nos parece muy importante en toda su implementación, considerando los problemas internos que tiene esta cooperación entre los países. El documento tiene expuesto toda una serie de consideraciones quehizoel Sr. Regnier y toda una serie de reuniones muy bien relacionadas, pero nosotros queremos hablar sobre dos o tres, aunque no vamos a tomar mucho tiempo. Tenemos una preocupación con el parrafo 44, que viene de la Décima Reunion Ministerial del Consejo Mundial de la Alimentación. En ese parrafo se dice: el Consejo Mundial subrayo que el verdadero problema de la coordinación no residía únicamente en estos propios organismos, sino también en los diferentes objetivos y las distintas orientaciones políticas de los organismos ajenos al sector alimentario, especialmente las instituciones financieras. Quiere esto decir que el Consejo Mundial de la Alimentación ha llegado ya a la conclusion de que la coordinación se hace imposible con las orientaciones políticas de los Organismos Financieros ajenos al problema alimentario. Nos hubiera gustado que este exposición se hubiese plasmado en el documento final. En este documento, se nos expone con toda amplitud los resultados de esta Décima Reunion Ministerial; pero, cuál es la función del CMA? iqué haría para poder cumplir su función de coordinación? Esta es una pregunta que hasta ahora no le vemos respuesta.
Quiero pasar ahora a los Aspectos Interorganizacionales del Desarrollo Rural en el que se habla del Informe sobre Reforma Agraria y Desarrollo Rural para el Consejo Economico y Social, cuyo documento nos parece que es una pálida vision de la realidad del análisis y seguimiento que se presento en la Conferencia. No dejamos de reconocer que el parrafo 113 analiza la situación real por que atraviesa el desarrollo rural en el mundo, aunque con algunas palabras un poco tupidas, ya que en el segundo parrafo se nos dice: que esto parecía indicar que había otros factores - especialmente limitaciones de la estructura agraria • Creo que se han hecho muchos informes sobre esta materia, bastantes razonamientos para decir “parecía”. Creo que cuando tenemos cifras podemos decir: “es”.
A pesar de los esfuerzos que le reconocemos y que saludamos en la FAO por el seguimiento de esta Conferencia Mundial de Reforma Agraria y Desarrollo Rural, la 22 Conferencia llego a la conclusión de que los adelantos no habían sido muchos y que todavía manteníamos en algunos importantes casos, como el acceso a la tenencia, la misma situación de concentración de la tierra de muchos años antes y en la participación popular y en la creciente concentración de la modernización de la agricultura.
También se puso de manifiesto que se había creado ya una gran diferencia entre las posibilidades de participación de las masas marginadas, de las masas pobres, de las masas de pequeños agricultores y las grandes, diríamos en otros momentos haciendas lafitundiarias, hoy grandes haciendas de las transnacionales agroexportadoras. Creo que esto fue también discutido con bastante profundidad durante la Conferencia de la FAO.
En este punto queremos expresar nuestro criterio sobre una situación que tiene mucha relación con el desarrollo del trabajo de la FAO. Esta situación la presento el distinguido colega Bula Hoyos que hizo algunas preguntas y que yo quiero responder a alguna de ellas.
Creo que todos somos conscientes de que el FIDA surge como un organismo sui géneris para ayudar a los pequeños agricultores y cooperativistas en su esfuerzo para poder participar con alguna posibilidad frente a los grandes productores y trasnacionales agroalimentarios para no seguir siendo marginados y arruinados gradualmente como lo son.
El Consejo de Gobernadores de Paris, deparo otro fracaso; fracaso que han llamado muchos, eso: fracaso. Yo quisiera llamarle otro escalon en la estrategia contra las organizaciones multilaterales. La FAO sostiene la bandera del desarrollo rural y la reforma agraria a través de la participación popular y ésta no es otra, la participación popular, no es otra que el pequeño agricultor, los marginados, los pequeños productores del campo.
En este sentido nosotros creemos que es necesario buscar la causa del escalon o de la respuesta que el colega Bula Hoyos pide; todo efecto tiene una causa, y nos gusta bastante analizar un poco de donde va a correr. Se debe çomprender que el FIDA no es un organismo que posibilite el engandrecimiento de los monopolios y las trasnacionales alimentarias; si esto es así, vemos una razon por la cual no hay una adhesion a tener posibilidad de ayudar a un organismo como éste. Nosotros diríamos que si el FIDA se hunde no es solo la muerte de otra institución de las Naciones Unidas; significaría la pérdida de las esperanzas para los pequeños agricultores y los trabajadores agrícolas que trabajan fuera del dominio de las transnacionales y agroexportadoras en los países subdesarrollados.
Nosotros vemos aquí la razon de porqué hay países que, repito, lo expresé cuando se cito el análisis de la situación de la alimentación, se pueden dar el lujo de expresar en Paris que sus legisladores no pueden aprobar una participación en el FIDA, que es un organismo de nueva creación sui géneris,
distinto, es que están tratando de convertirlo en otra agencia bancaria para, en el mecanismo de su cadena de distribución interna, poder seguir creciendo ellos.
Eso es un punto que yo considero muy importante entre las novedades del sistema en estos momentos.
Queremos terminar repitiendo nuestra felicitación al Sr. Regnier y a la FAO por este documento tan completo que realmente nos permite hacer un análisis general del sistema en toda su fortaleza y su interrelación, y además apoyamos, como colofon para demostrar que la FAO es en estos momentos un organismo de total integración dentro del Sistema. Los párrafos 153 y 156, donde la FAO debe también vigilar y preparar los análisis sobre el desarme y la indicación expresa de que está dispuesta a participar en 1985 en los Seminarios Regionales organizados por las Naciones Unidas para preparar el Año Internacional de la Paz. Por qué?. Porque la FAO está consciente que la alimentación y la agricultura hay que desarrollarlas sin armas y en paz.
CHAIRMAN: I would just like to indicate at this stage that we have lost a lot of time on this item, and as a result we may have to extend this Session until 8 or 8:30 p.m.
A. RODRIGUES PIRES (Cap-Vert): Tout d’abord, nous remercións M. Régnier pour la présentation remarquable du document CL 86/12. Nous notons avec beaucoup d’intérêt le rôle de la FAO dans la coopération et la collaboration avec les autres institutions des Nations-Unies.
Permettez-moi de souligner certains points de ce document, points qui nous paraissent d’extreme importance.
Nous prenons bonne note que la question du développement soit comprise dans sa globalité et l’intégration de l’agriculture aux autres secteurs; là aussi la FAO en étroite collaboration avec les autres institutions a un role important à jouer.
Au paragraphe 14 nous nous associons pleinement à la declaration de l’Ambassadeur de la Colombie car nous sommes certains que la cooperation économique et technique entre les pays en voie de développement est fondamentale. La FAO comme l’a très bien affirmé le Directeur general se doit de soutenir les pays dans leurs efforts pour développer la cooperation technique et économique et souscrire pleinement aux activités de CEPD/CTPD dont l’Organisation a explicitement fait l’une des principales priorités de son programme de travail et budget pour 1984-85.
Nous soutenons le contenu du paragraphe 36 concernant la creation de systèmes nationaux de prevision des récoltes et d’alerte rapide, et l’elaboration de plans rationnels de sécurité alimentaire.
Nous donnons beaucoup d’importance aux questions qui ont trait à la participation des femmes, et nous avons pris bonne note du role de la FAO dans la preparation du principal document de la Conference sur les femmes prévue en 1985 à Nairobi. Nous appuyons le paragraphe 92 à ce sujet.
En ce qui concerne la resolution 8/71 de la Conférence de. la FAO, l’Organisation continue d’appliquer les dispositions de la declaration sur l’octroi de l’independance aux pays et peuples colonises. Nous félicitons la FAO d’avoir été la premiere organisation spécialisée à admettre la Namibie en qualité de membre à part entière de l’Organisation et de lui avoir fourni une aide alimentaire d’urgence et une assistance technique notamment en formation et soutien à la production vivrière. Nous donnons notre plein appui au paragraphe 159.
Pour terminer, nous saisissons cette opportunité pour appuyer le paragraphe 176 concernant les activités du Centre d’investissement de la FAO, et surtout les aides et assistance en faveur des pays en développement pour l’identification et la preparation des projets d’investissement.
J. TCHICAYA (Congo): Ma délégation remercie M. Regnier pour son brillant expose introductif de ce matin. Nous encourageons la FAO à continuer sa coopération étroite avec d’autres institutions des Nations Unies.
A l’instar d’autres délégations, nous souhaitons féliciter la FAO pour ce rapport qui est riche en informations et qui présente avec objectivité la situation qui prévaut dans le système des Nations Unies et qui touche ces activités. La delegation de mon pays tient à exprimer sa deception pour le manque de résultats probants du Comité charge d’examiner, d’évaluer la mise en oeuvre de strategies de développement pour la troisième décennie des Nations Unies pour le développement. Pour notre part, cela nous surprend lorsque l’on sait que les objectifs de la stratégie n’ont guère été respectes par ceux-là même qui ont la plus grande responsabilite en raison de leur puissante economie. Nous espérons néanmoins que le Comité arrivera à produire un rapport qui nous permettra d’aller de l’avant. Nous sommes reconnaissants de la contribution de la FAO aux travaux de ce Comité. Pour ce
qui concerne la cooperation économique et technique dans les pays en développement, nous souhaitons réitérer notre appui aux efforts faits par la FAO pour soutenir cette cooperation dans le domaine de l’agriculture et de l’alimentation. Nous souscrivons à l’analyse du Directeur general qui figure au paragraphe 14, relative aux problèmes que rencontrent les pays en développement pour promouvoir entre eux une cooperation économique et technique viable.
En effet, cette analyse rejoint celle que le Groupe des 77 a faite du 26 au 30 mars dernier à Bucarest et nous sommes confiants que la FAO, comme l’a dit ce matin le représentant de l’Argentine, coopérera avec le Comité des 16 du Groupe des 77 pour rassembler toutes les informations utiles à un développement harmonieux de cette operation. La participation de la FAO à Bucarest et à Cartagène en Colombie, montre l’intérêt que notre Organisation porte aux relations Sud/Sud. Nous espérons qu’elle continuera à oeuvrer dans ce sens. En outre, ma delegation note avec satisfaction que la FAO fournit des propositions concretes de projets agricoles aux differentes tables rondes qui ont eu lieu ici et là, dans les pays les moins avancés et qui visent à mobiliser une aide extérieure accrue. Nous nous felicitons des instructions que le Directeur general a donné à ses représentants dans les pays en développement pour suivre ces questions et de sa disponibilité à contribuer à l’organisation des missions d’identification et formulation de projets.
La situation en Afrique a largement été débattue mais nous voudrions réitérer notre appel aux donateurs pour qu’ils fassent preuve de plus de réalisme et appuient davantage les programmes nationaux et collectifs d’autosuffisance alimentaire. Nous exhortons le Directeur general à continuer à diffuser des rapports détaillés sur cette situation afin de tenir la communauté internationale informée de l’evolution de la situation.
Nous nous felicitons des excellents resumes des travaux du dixième anniversaire du Conseil mondial de l’alimentation qui ont mis en evidence les principales conditions à remplir pour atteindre les object ifs de la Conference mondiale de l’alimentation dont l’échec est principalement du au manque de volonté politique veritable des pays développés.
En vérité, le Conseil à travers les strategies nationales s’efforce d’établir un lien entre la production et le besoin de consommation et chacun sait que les efforts soutenus de la part des pays en développement pour accroître la production alimentaire et améliorer l’accès aux approvisionnements se heurtent à un fléchissement des efforts de la communauté internationale sur le plan de l’aide publique au développement. Autant dire que 1985 est un nouveau rendez-vous manque: celui de l’eradication de la faim dans le monde, car les engagements pris en 1974 n’ont pas été tenus par ceux-là même qui bloquent l’ouverture des négociations internationales qui ouvriraient la voie à l’avènement d’un nouvel ordre économique international plus juste et plus humain et qui consacreraient ainsi de nouveaux rapports entre le Nord et le Sud.
J’en viens aux relations avec les institutions financières internationales pour dire combien ma délégation se réjouit du soutien constantde la FAO à l’investissement dansles pays en développement, et ses rapports avec la Banque mondiale et son guichet special avec l’AID, avec le FIDA et les Banques et Fonds régionaux de développement, devraient être renforcés. Cependant, comment ne pas déplorer la faiblesse des ressources de ces institutions au regard des problèmes à résoudre, auxquels certains pays ne souhaitent plus voir jouer le role qui leur revient.
L’exemple du FIDA, comme mon collègue et ami de gauche, l’Ambassadeur Bula Hoyos de Colombie, President du Conseil des gouverneurs du FIDA, a présenté avec son eloquence particulière ce matin, nous semble suffisamment édifiant. En effet, non’contents d’avoir fixe l’objectif de la seconde reconstitution des ressources à un niveau ridiculement bas, sans rapport aucun avec la situation qui prévaut dans le monde en développement, tous ces prétextes sont irréalistes et scandaleux.
Je n’entrerai pas dans le detail de questions sur lesquelles l’Ambassadeur Bula Hoyos s’est étendu ce matin et dont j’approuve l’analyse et les conclusions en tant que membre de la Consultation de la seconde reconstitution. Nous espérons sincèrement que le bon sens l’emportera, afin que le FIDA, dont les activités en direction des plus pauvres des pauvres ruraux sont appréciées de tous, (de tous les pays membres), continuera à assumer sa noble mission. Nous sommes favorables à ce que le Conseil en fasse état dans son rapport et nous exprimons nos vives preoccupations, tout en réitérant notre appui au FIDA. De cette manière, nous invitons les pays membres de la catégorie I à faire preuve de plus de souplesse dans leur position, eu égard à la conjuncture économique et financière que traversent les pays de la catégorie II afin de garantir le succès de ces négociations dont il apparaît clairement que l’échec aurait des consequences désastreuses dont ils porteraient l’entière responsabilité. La FAO devra poursuivre sa collaboration avec le FIDA par l’intermédiaire de son centre d’investissement, dont les activités sont préeieuses aux institutions financières et aux pays en développement.
Sra. M. RUIZ ZAPATA (México): Mi delegación considera que la inclusión del tema que nos ocupa en la Agenda del Consejo es muy util porque permite a los míembros estar enterados de los acontecimientos recientes en el Sistema de las Naciones Unidas, pero sobre todo porque hace hincapié en la importancía de la cooperación interagencial para que todos los componentes del Sistema trabajen en base a alineamientos generales que permitan que las estrategias comunes puedan ser puestas en práctica de manera efectiva.
En primer lugar es muy importante señalar la participación de la FAO en la estrategia internacional para el desarrollo.. Apoyamos energicamente que todas las actividades de la Organización formen parte de esta estrategia. Igualmente nos parece acertado el enfoque del párrafo 9 que señala que la CEPD no es un sector independiente del Programa, sino que debe aplicarse a toda la faceta de los trabajos del sistema. Apreciamos la opinion del Director General expresada en el párrafo 14. Hemos apoyado ya, y lo reiteramos, la actividad de la Organización en favor de Africa y de los países menos adelantados.
Instamos a la FAO a que participe con la ONUDI en el terreno de las agroindustrias; tal vez alguno de nuestros Comités podría abocarse al estudio de este tema que ha demostrado su relevancia en los sectores rurales de nuestros países. Apoyamos también la declaración de la Ciudad de Mexico sobre población y desarrollo.
Revestirá especial importancia la Conferencia Mundial para el examen y valoración de los logros del Decenio de la Naciones Unidas para la Mujer. Nos complace que la FAO esté atendiendo el problema de la participación de la mujer en el desarrollo agrícola y es obvio que cuenta con el apoyo de los Estados Miembros para seguir trabajando en este sentido. Esperamos, por tanto, que con motivo de la Conferencia intensifique sus actividades para garantizar todos los derechos de la mujer campesina y participen activamente en la misma.
En ninguna Organización del sistema de las Naciones Unidas son tan evidentes como en la FAO las absurdas consecuencias de la carrera armamentista. Reiteramos en este foro la invariable posicion de Mexico en favor de un desarme general y completo.
Sabemos que si solo algunos de los inmensos recursos que se dedican al armamentismo fueran orientados a solucionar el problema del hambre en el mundo, este objetivo primordial y prioritario podría lograrse. Instamos, una vez mas, a que se produzca la voluntad política que permita la utilizacion racional y humanitaria de los recursos.
En este sentido, apoyamos también los objetivos de la cooperación internacional para la utilización pacífica del espacio ultraterrestre. No podemos terminar, sin manifestar nuestra grave preocupación por la constante tendencia descendente de la disposición de capital para el desarrollo, como lo señala el párrafo 174. El ejemplo del FIDA, ya expuesto por la delegación de Colombia, a la que apoyamos en su planteamiento, está presente. Lo está también el del PNUD al que se refería el Sr. Regnier. Este Consejo debe manifestar claramente su profunda preocupación por este hecho, expresion clara de las mismas actitudes que inciden las negociaciónes globales y el establecimiento del Nuevo Orden Económico Internacional.
La delegación de México reafirma su apoyo respecto a las Organizaciones internacionales y su fe en el multilateralismo ya que es el sistema más perfeccionado al que hemos llegado, porque está basado en la igualdad jurídica y soberana de los Estados. Expresamos nuestro desencanto por algunas actitudes de bloqueo sistemático al multilateralismo. Apoyamos, por tanto, y suscribimos las declaraciones de Colombia, Argentina, Ecuador, Panamá, Cuba y Congo.
P. S. McLEAN (United Kingdom): In view of our earlier debate I have been at some pains to ensure that if I address myself to one particular item under this agenda item I should not be found out of order. In fact, I do find that in paragraph 175 there is a reference to IFAD and it is that subject that I want to address very briefly. All members of that institution were greatly disappointed at the failure of the consultations which had been going on for over a year to reach agreement on a second replenishment of the IFAD resources during the Governing Council in Paris last month. This was not through want of trying, as the distinguished Ambassador for Colombia is well aware since he, of course, is the Chairman of our Governing Council.
This is not the occasion to rehearse all the problems that beset the second Replenishment but I think it is important that the Council should appreciate the nature of the outstanding issues. The partnership arrangement between members of OECD and members of OPEC was a fundamental consideration in the creation of IFAD, and that partnership has been confirmed by both categories at successive annual meetings and during the consultations on the Second Replenishment.
The issue of burden-sharing which we have heard a lot of, that is how that partnership is effected, is of basic importance to the members of category one, and it would, I suggest, be unfair to assert that OECD countries in these negotiations have had no regard for the problems of the oil-
producing countries. They have recognized that the replenishment will have to be at a level below that which would be desirable in relation to the needs of the poorest countries which IFAD serves, because it would be unreasonable and unrealistic to expect many OPEC countries to contribute at the same level of resources as they did to the initial capital and to its first replenishment.
Thus the postponement of the next round of talks is, I believe, to enable the new President of the Fund to carry out his own consultations before the contributing members are called together again. I am confident there will be a solution and that the valuable work of IFAD will not be disrupted.
In this connection, I think I should mention to the Council that the largest contributor in category one has already indicated a figure at which it would be prepared to contribute to the Second Replenishment under certain conditions. Therefore while not in any way dissenting from an appeal by this Council, my delegation hopes it will be addressed to achieve a positive response from all members of the Fund, whatever the grouping to which they belong in the Institution.
J. BELGRAVE (New Zealand): Could I just seek your indulgence to enquire if I do refer to the Task Force that the Director-General referred to in his opening statement, will you rule me out of order, because if you will then I will not refer to it, and if you will not I will refer to it, but to avoid a procedural debate I seek your ruling, Sir..
CHAIRMAN: Go ahead.
J. BELGRAVE (New Zealand): New Zealand finds that the resume of developments in the UN system which are of interest and indeed concern to FAO, set out in document 86/12, provides indeed a very comprehensive analysis of the wide range of view in aid and development-related activities which are central to food aid and of course to agricultural development. We feel that FAO’s involvement in agricultural development is evidenced by the wide range of contributions to the many agencies which are delineated in the paper. It is of course also to be commended. Sir, many other delegations have drawn attention to much of the work of extreme substance in the document, and New Zealand would like to mention just one or two points. First, we would place particular attention on the work of the World Commission on the Environment and Development, primarily because of the emphasis being placed on the effect of development, particularly agricultural development, on the environment by the newly-elected Government of New Zealand. We will of course await the Commission’s report with interest and note FAO’s expertise on environmental matters which, because of the Organization’s very nature, as related to agriculture and rural development, is being made available to the Commission.
Similary, we would like to refer to the reference in the document to the preparations for the World Conference to Review and Appraise the UN Decade for Women. This again strikes a very responsive chord with my delegation since one of the first actions of our new Government was to establish in New Zealand a Ministry of Women’s Affairs, and this has already set itself the task of addressing in fundamental terms the state of women in New Zealand society.
The document gives a very good impression of a willingness, indeed of a necessity for the agencies in the UN system to coordinate their efforts in the light of their common objective, In this context New Zealand feels that the Task Force discussed by the Director-General in his opening address to examine the FAO/WFP relationship in the context of the existing worthwhile interface between the two bodies deserves full support.
S. M.MATIUR RAHMAN: (Bangladesh): My delegation would just like to thank the FAO Secretariat for the comprehensive report, and Mr. Regnier for his lucid presentation of the subject. The document is very informative and as such, should continue into the future.
However we would like to make a few observations on a few points. The document gives a clear picture of what is happening to food and agriculture in all other agencies of the United Nations system. It also describes FAO’s involvement and valuable contribution in all these areas. We are pleased with FAO’s increasing contribution in all these matters which are of great interest to all our developing countries. We encourage FAO to continue its due and increasing role in all areas having a bearing on food and agriculture.
We have noted with great interest the valuable support FAO is rendering to ECDC and TCDC. We commend FAO and the Director-General for their valuable support to the efforts of developing countries, for the promotion of ECDC and TCDC amongst them, and we request that these be further stepped up.
Regarding the implementation of the substantial New Programme of Action for the 1980s for the Least-Developed Countries, my delegation invites attention to the fact that the UN General Assembly at its session on 20 December 1983 called upon the international community to provide support measures for the effects of the LDCs in the priority sector, particularly in food and agriculture. The UN General Assembly also invited all organs and organizations of the system to take necessary measures for effective implementation of the SNPA within their respective spheres of competence. In this connection the active part and valuable contribution of the FAO in the implementation of the SNPA for the least developed countries in the food and agriculture sector is noted with appreciation. We would invite all other organizations to step up their activities for implementing the recommendations of the SNPA in their own areas of competence.
We commend FAO’s continuous and relentless effort to help the African countries to overcome their present critical situation..
FAO’s contribution to the follow-up of the WCARRD programme of action in monitoring the progress of its implementaiton is impressive and commendable. This work should continue in the future.
FAO’s relation with international financial institutions. We note with sincere appreciation FAO’s programme of cooperation with the major multilateral and other financing institutions lending for agriculture and rural development mentioned in paragraph 170 of the document. We believe that FAO’s valuable cooperation with these institutions has facilitated these financial institutions in making increased investment for food and agricultural development in the developing countries. We would therefore recommend the FAO’s continued close cooperation programme with these financial institutions in the future also.
FAO’s Investment Centre is playing a major role in promoting investment in the agricultural sector of the developing countries. However, Mr. Chairman, in this connection my delegation shares the serious concern expressed by all developing countries because of the continuing declining trend in the availability of urgently needed capital assistance on concessional terms for the development of the developing countries. The low level of the last replenishment of IDA, a small increase in the resources of the Asian Development Bank and the serious uncertainty about the level and timeliness of the replenishment of IFAD are of great concern to our delegation. We would urge upon all members concerned to finalize the negotiation on the Second Replenishment at an adequate level without any further delay. IFAD is for helping the small farmers in the poorer countries and it deserves the support of all those who want to improve the lot of the rural poor in the developing countries.
Mrs M. FENWICK (United States of America): I would like to speak, not in the spirit of debate or annoyance but only because I do think that one cannot let allegations pass unanswered when everybody knows what is being referred to, as though those allegations might be true If this happens often enough it becomes accepted as true. Why do we not answer? In that spirit, not in anger, or because I want to debate, I would like to put a few matters on the record.
In the first place, mention has been made very generously concerning U.S. actions by our distinguished delegate from the United Kingdom, and it is true that the United States is very much in favour of IFAD and is prepared - I do not know if it is public knowledge - under the conditions that existed and under which the Congress first agreed to IFAD, to put up to 150 million dollars into IFAD replenishment. That is not perhaps generally known, but that is the truth.
Further, mention has been made of the decrease in the aid that has been given internationally to agriculture in the less developed countries. I would like to point out that, far from that, it has gone up. It has gone up, and this is according to paragraphs 171 and 172, from 4.8 to 7.1 thousand million dollars. That is not a diminishment, that is an increase, and I am happy to say that I think all our countries have a share. But also I would like to say it is not enough to say we support IFAD or we support help for others. Some effort, some evidence has to be there. All the countries of the world should support help for those who suffer - east and west, east as well as west. All countries should respond when people suffer, north and south, each country according to its ability to provide help. It is not enough to say we are all for it and then do nothing. I was very moved, as I think all uf us were the other day, when Congo announced its contribution, and I thought that was a very important and a very significant step - two million dollars, a lot of money, and something that we ought to respect and admire which I hope will be an example to others.
1 would like also to speak about the question of arms in section 153. It is indeed a terrible burden on the world, but leaving aside the two great armed associations - NATO and the Warsaw Pact - I wonder if all my colleagues know what is being spent in the world outside those two. Three hundred million dollars a day, three hundred million dollars a day for military armaments and military affairs by countries which are in terrible problems. Three hundred million a day. Billions and billions a year and this is not something.
Now we speak also of the economic difficulties, and God knows that is something we all ought to be prepared to do something about. We have in the United States instituted a Generalized System of Preferences for tariffs, now extended this year for another eight and a half years covering 140 countries, covering 2 800 different items which come in duty-free or in some cases very much diminished duty from the developing countries. Why? On purpose to allow for freer trade; to lift restrictions on entry into our big market. We are not unaware, we are not unfeeling, we are not unconcerned, and our actions tell that, not just our words. You have all heard me here in the Council, you have heard me, you know how I feel in my heart, but this is what our country is doing and this is what our people are supporting. As long as they know that this aid is going where it is intended to go, that it goes into the mouths of the poor, that it goes to help the developing countries, as long as it is fairly spent I am convinced that you will continue to get that kind of support.
I hope I have not taken too long but I think there are some of these things that never get said. I hear these inferences, I know what they mean, and I just want to lay this before my colleagues and thank you, Mr Chairman, for the kindness that allows me to do so.
CHAIRMAN: That concludes the list of speakers under this item.
A. REGNIER (Directeur, Bureau des affaires interinstitutions): A la fin de ce débat, je voudrais avant tout remercier les nombreuses delegations qui ont pris la parole sur ce point de l’ordre du jour. Leurs commentaires et leurs remarques ont été dûment notées avec attention, et le Secrétariat tiendra compte de leurs questions dans la preparation de futurs rapports de ce genre. Je voudrais surtout remercier les nombreuses délégations pour les commentaires favorables qu’elles ont bien voulu émettre au sujet de ce rapport.
Je ne voudrais pas anticiper sur votre resume mais permettez-moi de faire quelques remarques: Tout d’abord, pour noter avec plaisir l’intérêt manifesté par de nombreuses delegations aux questions interagences et l’appreciation portée par elles quant aux efforts entrepris par la- FAO pour consulter et coordonner ses activités avec les autres organisations du système des Nations Unies.
Nous avons pris note de l’appui donné par de nombreuses delegations aux activités de la FAO ayant ainsi des applications au niveau du système, soit que la FAO y joue un role pilote comme par exemple dans le cas du développement rural et des activités de l’Equipe spéciale sur le développement rural, soit que la FAO collabore avec de nombreuses organisations du système dans des secteurs comme par exemple - et je cite seulement un certain nombre de cas qui ont été particulièrement mentionés ce matin et cette après-midi - les problèmes de l’enyironnement, le role des femmes dans l’agriculture, les transferts de technologie, la cooperation économique et technique entre pays en voie de développement.
Nous avons également note avec satisfaction l’appui qui a été donné aux activités du Centre d’investissement et de manière plus générale, l’importance attachée aux actions de la FAO pour promouvoir l’investissement dans le secteur agricole. Ceci d’ailleurs fait comprendre l’intérêt que nous portons aux relations avec les institutions financières internationales et, du même coup, l’importance que nous attachons au devenir du FIDA, sujet qui a été largement mentionné aujourd’hui, matin et après-midi. Je voudrais seulement rappeler que les projets élabores par le Centre d’investissement de la FAO représentent quelque 66 pour cent des montants totaux engages en faveur de l’agriculture par le FIDA, c’est dire l’importance que nous attachons à un FIDA sain et en pleine expansion.
Ceci étant dit je me permettrai seulement quelques petites remarques sur des points plus spécifiques. Je ne crois pas qu’il y ait eu des questions precises qui aient été posées mais je souhaiterais, malgré tout, apporter quelques éléments d’information additionnels sur quelques points.
Tout d’abord le représentant de la Colombie a demandé où on en était concernant les négociations globales. Malheureusement je crains n’avoir pas grand chose à vous dire à ce sujet. Tout ce qu’on sait c’est que ce point est à l’ordre du jour de la présente session de l’Assemblée générale. Le Président de l’Assemblée générale a tenu un certain nombre de consultations informelles jusqu’à ce jour mais, apparemment, la situation ne s’est pas débloquée et je ne peux pas vous en dire davantage.
De nombreux délégués se sont êgalement référés aux problèmes de la cooperation économique et technique entre pays en voie de développement et ont appuyé l’action de la FAO à ce sujet, ainsi que les preoccupations et les actions du Directeur general dans ce domaine.
Je voudrais seulement dire ceci au représentant de l’Argentine qui s’est référé à ce sujet en demandant que le CAC, le Comitë Administratif de Coordination, consulte le Groupe des 77 de manière à s’assurer de l’appui des organisations du système à ce sujet. Je voudrais l’assurer que ceci se fait déjà puisque, pour ne prendre qu’un exemple, lors de la reunion conjointe du CAC et du CPC le Comité du Programme et de la Coordination des Nations Unies, qui tient une fois par an des reunions conjointes, lors de ces reunions, en juillet dernier a mis ce sujet à l’ordre du jour et le President du Groupe des 77, l’Ambassadeur MUÑOZ LEDO du Mexique, a été invite à participer à ces délibérations.
De même, j’ajouterai que le Secrétariat FAO est informellement en contact, selon que de besoin, avec le Groupe des 16 auquel il s’est référé également ce matin.
De manière plus générale d’ailleurs, je dirais, rappelant une information qui se trouve déjà dans le document CL 86/5, qu’une analyse des programmes á l’échelle du système - ce qu’on appelle en anglais COPA - doit avoir lieu et la FAO est étroitement associée à sa préparation. C’est ce qui permettra de donner une idée plus précise des ressources qui sont dirigées par le système vers ce vaste secteur.
Nous avons également noté avec intérêt l’appel du représentant de l’Egypte pour que dans ce secteur des ressources additionnelles soient mises à la disposition du système parce que, comme indiqué dans le rapport, le niveau actuel d’activités peut être soutenu avec le niveau des ressources mais tout accroissement de l’intervention du système nécessiterait certainement des ressources additionnelles.
Enfin un dernier élément d’information: on a demandé, et c’est le représentant de l’Inde, où en était la mise en place du Fonds commun des produits de base. Je voudrais signaler à cet égard les chiffres suivants: 110 pays ont signê l’Accord portant établissement du Fonds commun, 81 l’ont ratifié représentant 47 pour cent du capital souscrit. Cependant pour que ce Fonds commun entre en vigueur il y a deux conditions à remplir simultanément. La première c’est que ce Fonds soit ratifié par 90 pays, il l’a été par 88 seulement et, d’autre part, que ces 88 pays représentent les deux tiers, 66 pour cent, du capital souscrit. Jusqu’à présent on a rassemblé 47 pour cent. Done ces conditions ne sont malheureusement pas remplies pour la mise en oeuvre du Fonds commun dans l’immédiat.
Je pense qu’avec ces quelques remarques j’ai couvert les principales questions et remarques et je remercie une fois encore les delegations qui ont bien voulu s’exprimer et marquer une appréciation de la FAO dans ce vaste secteur des relations interagences.
CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much, Mr Regnier. This brings us to the end of the discussion on Item 9. It is very difficult, if not impossible, to give an in-depth summation of an item of this type. I will therefore not attempt to do so. I do not think it is desirable. Suffice it to say that I consider the discussion very useful and that due note will be taken of all-your valuable contributions by the Secretariat.
It is my pleasant duty now to pass the chair over to Mr Mclean of the United Kingdom, but before doing so let me say thank you for your support and your collaboration during my stint today. You will have me again some other time in the week and I look forward to being here.
P.S. McLean, Vice-chairman of the Council, took the chair
P.S. McLean, Vice-Président du Conseil, assume la présidence
Ocupa la presidencia P.S. McLean, Vicepresidente del Consejo
CHAIRMAN: Ladies and gentlemen, can I first on a personal note say that it is with some surprise that I find myself sitting here, remembering that three weeks ago I was sitting in an equivalent position in a room not so far away. At least here I should be able to see vou all when you ask for the floor, unlike on one or two occasions in that other room.
I. ALVARENGA (Presidente, Comité de Asuntos Constitucionales, y Jurídicos): Efectivamente, como está señalado en el Orden del Día el Documento que hace referencia al tema que nos ocupa, es el CL 86/5 a) y como se recuerda en este Documento, la Conferencia en su 22° período de sesiones solicitó que se examinaran las normas que regulan los procedimientos de votación del Consejo y de la Conferencia. El Consejo a su vez en su 85° período de sesiones, solicitó que emitiera su opinión el Comité de Asuntos Constitucionales y Jurídicos, el Comité analizó el tema en la forma que le fue sometido durante su 45° período de sesiones celebrado del 8 al 10 de octubre del corriente año. El tema propuesto se refiere al voto secreto que, según el Reglamento de la Organización, es obligatorio para elegir al Presidente Independiente del Consejo, al Director General, a nuevos miernbros y miembros asociados de la Organización, así como a los miernbros del Consejo mismo.
En el Documento preparado por la Secretaria se ha senalado que, aun cuando es dificil hacer un cálculo exacto del tiempo consumido en esas votaciones, la del Presidente Independiente del Consejo realmente alarga la reunión, o mejor dicho consume un tiempo de la reunión de veinte minutos, porque como observarán ustedes, en el párrafo 7 se habla de que la elección, toma veinte minutos para la votación, más 20 para el recuento. En cuanto a la elección de los miembros del Consejo, requieren dos horas; o sea 120 minutos para la votación, lo cual dará un total de 140 minutos. Es obvio que se considera este tiempo frente a la duración toda de la Conferencia; no es que signifique una gran proporción del mismo, sobre todo si se tiene en cuenta que son dos ejercicios: la elección del Presidente Independiente y del Consejo y de los miembros mismos del Consejo. Es una de las funciones más importantes a las cuales debe abocarse la Conferencia.
El Comité tomó nota además de que esta es una cuestión que ha sido ya debatida en otras oportunidades por los Organismos de Gobierno de la Organización y que frente al interés de ahorrar tiempo existe la opinión manifestada en diversas oportunidades por las respectivas delegaciones, de que suprimir el secreto del voto, o suprimir el voto por así decirlo, crearía algunos inconvenientes en cuanto a la política exterior que en determinado momento pueda sustentar un determinado Gobierno. En otras palabras, se daría el caso, que es el más frecuentemente citado, aunque otros ejemplos podrían existir, de que un Gobierno aparezca votando en favor de otro por el cual en ese momento no tiene las mejores relaciones a nivel internacional. Por ese motivo cada vez que se ha propuesto la supresión del voto secreto en esos casos se ha llegado a la conclusión de que la Norma debería dejarse como estaba. En esta oportunidad el Comité también llegó a la conclusion de que no conviene modificar el Reglamento, tal como ahora se encuentra. Sin embargo advirtió que habiendo sido la Conferencia la que solicitó que se analizase el tema, era ésta misma la que teniendo en cuenta las adecuadas consideraciones políticas que fuesen necesarias tomar en consideratión, llegase a una conclusión definitiva. En caso de que la Conferencia estimase oportuno reformar las Normas del caso, el Comité ha propuesto en el párrafo 10 del Documento una posible redacción.
Incidentalmente el Comité tomó nota de que hay unas discrepancias, como lo señala nuestro Documento, entre los textos, españoles por una parte y francés e inglés por otra. En efecto, en el texto español se habla de realizar las elecciones cuando haya tantos candidatos como puestos vacantes por aclamación. En cambio, en los otros textos se habla de una expresión que significaría consenso general; dado que la palabra “aclamación”, según una breve indagación de tipo semántico, en esa oportunidad indica una entusiasta aprobación en la elección, esa palabra se presta justamente al inconveniente político señalado; o sea, los países aparecían eligiendo con entusiasmo a otros con los cuales no tienen en ese momento la mejor relación. De ahí que el Comité ha sugerido proponer concretamente al Consejo que a su vez apoye la uniformización, perdonen por la palabra, de los tres textos a fin de que quede en la misma forma y con el mismo significado. Este es en general el tema que hay que discutir en este momento.
CHAIRMAN: In inviting Members of the Council to address this item I suggest that they might indicate whether they are in general agreement with the CCLM’s recommendation that the present provisions Seem adequate or whether they feel that-they would wish to put as a Council the matter to Conference with a contrary view.
I suggest that perhaps the item which our colleague has just referred to concerning the Spanish text is, I hope, non-controversial, and even looking at my Spanish-speaking friends I hope we will not find any disagreement with the recommendation there.
G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): De la sala verde a la sala roja cambio de color pero es el mismo Presidente, nuestro colega y amigo el Sr. Peter Mc Lean, del Reino Unido, bajo cuya direccion nos complace intervenir ahora.
Señor Presidente, cada ocasión que este Consejo discute cuestiones relacionadas con el CACJ es grato a la delegación de Colombia reconocer la competencia y el profundo contenido jurídico con que nuestro colega el embajador Alvarenga, de El Salvador, ejerce sus altas funciones de Presidente del CACJ, asesorado muy válidamente por nuestro Consejero legal el Sr. Roche.
Creemos que el CACJ cumplió en forma adecuada la solicitud que le hizo el Consejo al atender la solicitud de la Conferencia anterior del año 1983 sobre esta cuestión.
Conviene notar también, como lo ha dicho el Presidente Alvarenga y como consta en el párrafo 8 del documento, que este mismo punto fue ya planteado en ocasiones anteriores, particularmente en los años 1959, 1965,y 1967 y en todas esas ocasiones se ha llegado a la conclusion de que se trata de una materia de definición política. Sin embargo, queremos reiterar nuestra gratitud al CACJ porque en el párrafo 10 nos ofrece un menú variado, dos alternativas a la luz de las cuales podría pronunciarse este Consejo para hacer una recomendación a la próxima Conferencia.
Sin embargo, no obstante, en ese buen trabajo del CACJ la delegación de Colombia piensa que subsisten, que siguen muy válidos los motivos por los cuales en ocasipn anterior se ha decidido mantener el statu quo en este asunto. De allí que nosotros expresemos nuestra opinión en favor de que el artículo XII apartado a) se mantenga en su forma actual, o sea, que no recomendemos a la Conferencia la supresion de los dos miembros de frases que aparecen entre corchetes en el apartado a) del actual párrafo 10. Por el contrario, queremos apoyar la propuesta del CACJ que aparece en el párrafo 11 en el sentido de que se ajusten los artículos del Reglamento General de la Organización de manera que los textos en español correspondan al significado actual de los textos en inglés y francés.
A.M. QURESHI (Pakistan): I want only a point of clarification at this stage. Paragraph 8 mentions that the CCLM noted that previously (1959, 1965 and 1967), the Governing Bodies of the Organization had examined the matter and thought it preferable to maintain a secret ballot. I would like to know whether the matter was referred to the Council or to the Conference, and at what stage the Governing Bodies, both the Council and the Conference, took that decision. I would like to know what happened.
Mrs M. FENWICK (United States of America): My delegation wishes to support the recommendation of the CCLM.
W.A.F. GRABISCH (Germany), Federal Republic of): My delegation would like to thank the CCLM and í welcomes the presentation of the documents befores us.
As regards the question of voting procedures in both Council and Conference, when there is the same number of candidates as places to be filled, we share the votum of the CCLM as reflected in paragraph 9 of its Report. We believe, too, that the interests of member States are best safeguarded by the proven procedure practiced for so long under Rule XII.9 (a). Former investigations came to the same result. Therefore, we cannot concur with the eventual modification of the existing provisions which call for secret ballots.
M. ABDELHADI (Tunisie): Je voudrais tout d’abord remercier vivement le Président du Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques pour l’exposé très clair introduisant la question qui est soumise à notre examen. Le rapport de la 85ème session du CQCJ ayant enregistré ces références dans le document CL 86/5, a traité dans sa seconde partie de questions soulevées lors de la dernière Conférence générale. Ma délégation estime que le Comité s’est acquitté convenablement de son mandat à lui confié par la Conférence. Puisque la question des règles régissant les procedures de vote du Conseil et de la Conférence a été traitée sous tous ses aspects et les conclusions du Comité sont bien argumentées en matière de procédure de vote régissant la désignation des Membres du Conseil, l’admission de nouveaux Etats Membres, la nomination du Directeur général, les textes de l’Organisation sont clairs, puisqu’en principe le vote de scrutin secret est le vote obligatoire prévu par ces textes; le secret de vote étant destiné à garantir aux Etats Membres la possibilité d’exprimer leur choix sans contrainte ni géne. Toutefois, pour Selection du Conseil, il n’y a pas de possibilité de secret ciui soit suspendu, certainement pour des raisons de commodité et d’économie de temps et conformément au Règlement général de l’organisation. Ma délégation estime que cette disposition, en vertu de l’article régissant cette question au sein du Règlement général, article qui prévoit la possibilité de suspension du vote au scrutin secret du Conseil, est suffisamment souple pour ne pas envisager quelque modification que ce soit. Ma délégation appuie en consequence les conclusions du rapport du Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques.
J. TCHICAYA (Congo): Je voudrais dire toute ma satisfaction de vous voir présider cette séance. Nous pensons également qu’il convient de remercier le Président du CQCJ pour le travail qu’il accomplit, avec tous les autres membres du Comité. Nous estimons qu’ils se sont acquittés convenablement de leur tâche et qu’il convient de les en féliciter. Néanmoins, nous pensons aussi qu’il n’est pas opportun que nous puissions procéder à des modifications des textes qui existent. C’est pour cette raison, pour être bref, que nous pensons pour notre part que le statu quo devrait demeurer pour ce qui concerne l’article XII-9a.
K. SHIOZAWA (Japan): First of all, my delegation would like to thank Mr Alvarenga for the excellent presentation of this item. We thank the members of the CCLM for the considerable amount of work done on the various important subjects. Concerning the issue of rules governing the voting procedures of the Council and Conference, we share the same view as the CCLM. In addition, we are of the opinion that the General Rules of the Organization should not be amended unless there is an absolute need to do so.
Paragraph 9 of CL 86/5 (a) mentions that “Rule XII.9(a) could be suspended in accordance with Rule XLII.l....”. We would be able to refer to this Article if there is a serious shortage of time, so therefore, we do not see any absolute necessity for the amendment of the Rule XII.9(a).
Sra. E. HERAZO de VITI (Panamá): Sobre este tema la delegación de Panamá apoya la conclusión a la cual llegó el Comité de Asuntos Constitucionales y Jurídicos expuesta en el párrafo 10 del documento CL 86/5(a), en el sentido de no considerar necesaria ninguna enmienda al artículo XII a). Por las implicaciones políticas que las elecciones secretas conllevan,esta delegación propugna que las mismas se mantengan y que en todo caso exista la salida expuesta al final del párrafo 9 del documento sobre la posibilidad de suspender el artículo XII a) como solución apropiada si en circunstancias excepcionales hubiera una grave escasez de tiempo.
Por otra parte, conforme a lo expresado en el párrafo 11 nos pronunciamos de acuerdo con la recomendación del CACJ en el sentido de proponer a la Conferencia modificar la version española del Reglamento General de la Organización (RGO) suprimiendo las palabras “por aclamación” que figuran en el párrafo 9 a) del artículo XII y sustituirlas por las palabras “evidente consenso général”, así como introducir notas análogas en el párrafo 17 del artículo XII tal como se señala en las tres últimas líneas del párrafo indicado del documento en mención.
A. M. QURESHI (Pakistan): I did not get an answer to my earlier request for clarification, but anyway, I must congratulate you, Mr Chairman - it is nice to see you presiding over this session this afternoon. We would like to thank the distinguished Ambassador of El Salvador, Mr Alvarenga, for his clear presentation of document CL 86/5(a).
Listening to the distinguished delegates of the United States, Mexico, Tunisia, Panama and others, my delegation also feels that the present provision is adequate to protect the interests of member Nations. Therefore, we feel that any amendment to Rule XII.9(a) is not necessary.
CHAIRMAN: I can assure the distinguished delegate of Pakistan that I am about to call upon the Chairman of the CCLM to reply to his earlier point, and I have much pleasure in so doing.
I. ALVARENGA (Presidente, Comité de Asuntos Constitucionales y Jurídicos): Creo que, en efecto, la única cuestión pendiente es la planteada por el distinguido representante de Pakistán.
Yo preferiría que fuese el señor Asesor Legal quien diese las explicaciones del caso y ya aprovecharía yo para plantearle otra cuestión.
Ha habido varias referencias a la posibilidad de suspender el Reglamento. Esa posibilidad tal como está expuesta en el documento recibio una consideración mas amplia oralmente en el curso de los debates del Comité; se llego, y ahí quisiera que el señor Asesor Legal nos aclarara, a la conclusion de que realmente es un remedio casi tan difícil como la:enfermedad, porque para suspender el Reglamento se necesita un procedimiento largo y se perdería mas tiempo que el que se consume en la votación misma. Temo que sea un remedio heroico que se tiene que recurrir solo en casos extremos. Prefiero, entonces, ceder la palabra al señor Asesor Legal.
Para no volver a interrumpir, agradezco muchísimo las observaciónes que se han hecho sobre la labor del Comité, en especial las que se han referido a mi persona, y entre ellas escojo la de mi queridísimo amigo Gonzalo Bula Hoyos que en base a su amistad ha tenido palabras muy amables.
LEGAL COUNSEL: To reply to the question raised by the distinguished delegate of Pakistan, for the record I should mention that in 1959 both the Conference and the Council examined Rule XII, of the General Rules of the Organization. The Council suggested to the Conference that it might wish to amend the Rules in order to obviate the need for secret ballots, but at its Tenth Session in 1959, the Conference preferred to retain the requirement.
The problem arose again at the Thirteenth Session of the Conference in 1965, when the Conference suspended Rule XII and asked the Council and the CCLM to look into the matter again. On this occasion, the CCLM and the Council submitted their recommendations to the Conference which decided, once more, that on balance it was preferable to maintain the secret ballot. The Chairman of the CCLM mentioned the fact that suspending the General Rules might not always be easy, but the need for suspension would normally arise only when the Conference realizes that it is very far behind in its work and wishes to obviate the need for night sessions, and so on. Therefore, this crisis situation could be foreseen fairly well.
The Rule on suspension requires a two-thirds majority of the votes cast and there must be 24 hours notice. Therefore, suspension of the General Rules of the Organization is not all that easy, but it is not an insurmountable problem and the Conference has already shown on once occasion, when presumably the need became very urgent, that this procedure can be resorted to and can solve any serious problem.
Therefore, as the Rules stand at present, I think the Conference has all the safeguards it needs in the event that it runs very seriously behind in its timetable.
CHAIRMAN: I thank the Legal Counsel. I take it there are no further comments. I think I can sum up by saying it is clear that the Council supports the recommendation of the CCLM that the present provision in terms of voting procedures is adequate and that no amendment of Rule XII.9(a) should be necessary or desirable. I think the Council has noted that suspension of the rules can be considered by the Conference in appropriate circumstances, perhaps for the election of the Chairman of Council or for the election of Council members, but that the general feeling is that, this should be resorted to perhaps rarely and only, as the Legal Counsel has suggested, in circumstances where otherwise the item cannot be dealt with.
Finally, I think it is clear that there is support for the amendment of the text in Spanish in the two places indicated, as proposed in paragraph 11. That completes our short discussion on this item. It remains for me to thank the Chairman of CCLM, the distinguished Ambassador of El Salvador, Mr. Alvarenga, for all the work of the Committee.
including:
notamment:
en particular:
CHAIRMAN: I remind the delegates that we have also within this item a specific sub-Item concerning the AGRIS Data Base Utilization Policy.
M. TRKULJA (Chairman, Programme Committee): It is not just a courtesy if I say that I am very glad to see you presiding over this particular item on our agenda. I am very grateful to you for giving me the privilege to address the Council on behalf of my colleagues on the Committee.
As is broadly known, the main task of the Programme Committee in a non-Conference year is to systematically review FAO activities on the basis of already existing documentation; that means the Programme of Work and Budget, the Review of Regular programme, and the review of field programmes, previous findings of the Council and the Committee itself and of course, through a traditional dialogue, intensive dialogue with the Secretariat. The Committee has studied the remaining part of the programme and thus completed the four-year cycle reviewing exercise at its last two sessions, in May and in September-October.
In accordance with the sequence decided by the Council in 1980, the Committee studied in considerable depth the following programmes: in May, Nutrition, Food and Agricultural Information and Analysis, Food and Agricultural Policy, Fisheries, Forestry; in September-October the Committee considered Field Programme Planning and Liaison, Investment, Two Special Programmes, Freedom From Hunger Campaign and Andre Mayer Fellowships, FAO representatives and Technical Cooperation Programmes.
Obviously, Mr Chairman, I would take too much of your precious time if I were to refer to details on such an appreciable number of programmes and sub-programmes. Therefore, I feel honestly obliged to confine my introductory remarks to some general points and to only a few specific issues which I feel merit fully your attention.
On Nutrition, the Committee supported the gradual shift in emphasis with the primary objective to incorporating the nutrition component in most FAO field.activities wherever suitable through practically oriented and locally suited approaches. It welcomed the continuing close cooperation of FAO with the rest of the UN system, directly or through the ACC Committee on Nutrition. In the same context, the Committee noted with satisfaction the agreement reached in the sub-Committee to undertake an in-depth assessment of the nutritional situation in some countries, especially in Africa, and Mr Regnier on the previous item has already informed you that Kenya was selected for that purpose. The Committee continued to support the joint FAO/WHO work on Food Quality and Standards.
Before I continue, I want to stress one point of principle, that is that the Programme Committee only very exceptionally and with considerable reluctance addresses itself to the Regular Programme Resources in programme reviewing. I think it is for obvious reasons and I will not dwell on it too much. As I said, basically it is a matter of principle and I think it is well recognized by the Council. Thus, whenever you see references to the resources, it means that the whole Committee without any hesitation thought that it was really necessary to bring the resource issue to your attention.
The Committee made such an exception in the case of Food and Agricultural Information and Analysis regarding the need for a gradual increase in Regular Programme resources, primarily to assist governments to improve their own statistical systems. We thought it was essential and also we noted that extrabudgetary resources for that purpose were very limited.
May I only add that the Committee on the whole was very pleased with the ongoing activities in this field that we always considered as very vital and one of the mandatory activities of the Organizations.
On Food and Agriculture policy, a very closely inter-related programme to the one that I have just made very brief reference to, the Committee expressed general satisfaction with the ongoing work and was mostly concentrated on the main, new undertaking, that is agricultural price and incentive policies studies. Our views on this important initiative or programme or project are contained in paragraph 38 of our report. I am referring to document CL 86/3.
On Fisheries, I have very little to report. I would like just to reiterate that the Committee continued to highly appreciate the fisheries programmes, its decentralized approach, its close cooperation with national institutions, the TCDC and ECDC components in most of its activities, its remarkable flexibility and its abilities to adjust to speedy changing realities in the global fisheries. I do not need to go any further because the Committee was also largely concentrated on the preparations for the World Fisheries Conference. The Council has already discussed the outcome of the Conference as well as the initial follow-up activities by FAO.
On Forestry, I will limit myself to expressing the view of all my colleagues on the importance and in many respects unique role of FAO in this field. The Committee was generally satisfied with the progress already achieved within the reoriented activities approved by the Council and the Conference. It placed particular emphasis on rural energy and in that on fuelwood, with clear recognition of the need for FAO to be increasingly involved in assisting countries to alleviate the grave energy r problems in rural areas.
On the additional work on forestry, the Committee shares the hope expressed by the last Conference that increased resources should be available for forestry in coming biennia.
Field Programme Planning and Liaison provides a logical frame for considering FAO extrabudgetary resources. I will not go into the resource problem. Also, Mr Regnier made a reference in the document prepared for the previous agenda item. The Council was fully updated on the situation with regard to the UNDP and other extrabudgetary resources. The part of our own report which referred to the resource is still fully valid, since nothing has happened in slightly more than a month since we met. In the programme itself, the Committee highly appreciates the fact that it was able to bear an increasing workload with more or less the constant resources.
The Investment Centre has been traditionally appreciated by the Programme Committee. With regard to the FAO/World Bank Cooperative Programme, it is enough to draw your attention to the results of the recent evaluation study by the World Bank. The World Bank team concluded that the quality of FAO’s work was comparable with other sources, including the World Bank itself. Given the fact that the Cooperative Programme is mainly involved in the so-called “First Generation” projects and taking into account many other factors, certain small realities which are so human and exist usually to a certain degree within the system, the Committee felt that the conclusion gave well-deserved tribute to FAO achievements jointly with the World Bank.
On the Investment Support Programme, while fully supporting the current activities, the Committee suggested in paragraph 1.26 of the report modification in budgetary procedures. The Committee was assured that the Director-General had already taken steps to give effect to this suggestion.
Given the time restraints, I obviously cannot make specific reference to two special programmes. It is enough to say that on the whole, the Committee fully supported the activities of both the Freedom-From-Hunger Campaign/AD, and Andre Mayer Fellowships. May I only draw your attention to the updated information on all relevant aspects of the Programme in paragraph 1.42 to 1.47 of the report.
Finally, on TCP, let me first underline that the. Committee was provided with detailed figures, a small part of which is incorporated in the report. The Committee thoroughly examined all aspects of TCP. It particularly focussed on the essential issue of TCP, that is its original concept. After a profound debate, the Committee was glad to conclude that while every effort had been taken to incorporate new and changing ideas and approaches, the essentials of the original concept had been fully maintained. I am obliged to bring to your attention paragraph 1.55, as it contains the views of the committee with regard to the potential resource base of TCP in the next bennium. May I conclude my presentation of the programme reviewing with the suggested sequence for the next cycle of programme reviewing, which is contained in paragraph 1.56, which is in fact the same as the one we have just completed and through its report to the Council is advised by the Committee to take note and give its consent to reviewing the sequence. Now let me deal briefly with the Use of Consultants in 1983/84. This is the second report. A summary of the document, because the document was prepared for both committees, is provided in Annex A to the report. TheCommittee noted the considerable
progress achieved in implementing the recommendations the Committee had made at its Forty-third Session. Further, the Committee urged the Director-General to persist in his efforts to reduce expertise from a few countries.
May I be allowed to make a very brief reference to the AGRIS Data Base Utilization Policy. This is a matter of formal decision by the Council. The Committee recommended that the Council give its support to the text contained in Annex A of document CL 86/3. In the same context, the Committee welcomed the progress achieved within the AGRIS network now with more than 130 countries, national centres participating and the amount of reference has already reached more than one million. We suggested in our report a small change and in fact in Annex 3 has been modified by the Committee. In our best judgment, the modification was suggested to reflect better the partnership concept in the whole network.
Finally, with reference to the Joint Inspection Unit Reports, the Committee studied in depth seven JIU reports. Most of the reports are as usual voluminous and deal obviously with very complex matters. Given this and the new procedures decided by the Council a year ago, I do not think I need to introduce specifically JIU documents. On the whole, this set of JIU documents bears yet another evidence of the very favourable position of FAO within the UN family. I may only recommend to your attention the JIU report on the OPE, that is the Office for Project Execution of the UNDP as it has obviously great significance not necessarily only for FAO but the whole UN system.
The Committee had no difficulty in reaching full agreement with the Inspectors on both their diagnosis and or analysis and remedial actions that they recommended.
Of course, I stand ready to answer or clarify any point that the members of the Council may wish me to do.
CHAIRMAN: I am sure the Council will wish me to express appreciation to Mr Trkulja for that very succinct introduction which he has given to the two Programme Committee reports and I would now invite the Chairman of the Finance Committee Mr Abeyagoonasekera to introduce the two reports of the Finance Committee.
D.H.J. ABEYAGOONASEKERA (Chairman, Finance Committee): Let me first say how pleased I am to see you chairing this part of this Session, not only as a senior member of FAO but as a member of the Commonwealth.
Under this item I shall be covering only those aspects of the two reports which are not covered by items listed on the Agenda for tomorrow and Wednesday, mainly Contribution matters and financial matters and budgetary matters. The audited accounts of the UNÜP, the Regular Programme and WFP, I will not be touching on them. They will be taken up, I presume tomorrow and the day after.
On Budgetary Performance discussed under Budgetary Matters in the Fifty-third Session, the Council’s attention is drawn to certain comments the Committee has made, although not matters requiring a decision and/or discussion by the Council. Your attention is drawn to paragraph 4 to 12 in the Fifty-third Report.
With regard to the transfers made which have been referred to in paragraph 6, the Committee noted that these had in no way had a negative effect on the implementation of the approved Programme of Work and Budget for 1982-83; rather they had facilitated the execution of additional activities within the level of resources approved for the total programmes.
Secondly, the programme savings had been deliberately made in some areas, for example, posts proposed for abolition in the 1984-85 biennium had been frozen as soon as they became vacant in the 1982-83 biennium; economies were also made in the cost of documentation, interpretation, and in the cost of the FAO Country Offices.
The Committee noted these measures, and appreciated the constant attention that had been given to enhance economy and efficiency of the Organization.
In the Report of the Fifty-fourth Session, there are two items under Budgetary Matters for the information of the Council, namely, the Report on Duty Travel in 1982/83 which are referred to in paragraphs 2.4 to 2.7, and the Report on the Use of Consultants in 1982/83, referred to in paragraphs 2.8 to 2.12.
The Chairman of the Programme Committee has already referred to the report on the Use of Consultants, and I shall not be going into detail of our discussion.
The Report on Duty Travel is the fourth report of its kind to the Finance Committee. The Report on the Use of Consultants is the second report of its kind to the Finance Committee. The Committee spent quite some time on discussing these reports. It was the Committee’s view that both reports contained very useful information and that they should continue to be presented to the Committee in the future, since both areas covered by the reports dealt with key areas of expenditure of the Organization.
JIU Reports: The Council may wish to note that with regard to the JIU report on United Nations System Cooperation in the Developing Evaluation by Governments, the Committee agreed with their conclusions and recommendations. In a previous report the JIU had complimented the FAO on its evaluation measures and procedures and the Committee continued to encourage the Organization to involve itself in building national capabilities in monitoring and evaluation further.
On the JIU in the UN per se, the Committee raised a number of questions (paras. 81-83 in our 53rd Report) in relation to its structure, organization, how subject matter for subjects are selected, the level of the budget ($4.4 million), FAO’s contribution to it ($560 000) based on cost-sharing formula of the CCAQ, and the extent to which the reports were of benefit to FAO. The Committee was informed of the background and history of the JIU, the provisions of its statute, procedure for appointment of Inspectors, process followed in producing reports and the present procedures in reporting to Council as adopted by the FAO Council at its Eighty-third Session.
I wish to draw particular attention to one of the JIU Reports which was discussed at our Fall Session, the report on the Office of Projects Execution of UNDP. This is an important study as it draws our attention to friction that arose between UNDP and the iSpecialized Agencies, where with the expansion of OPE activities,since Its establishment in 1973 there was considerable overlapping of activities, particularly in areas where existing agencies had the competence and capacities, although it was a requirement that UNDP should consult other agencies on each project to be executed by OPE. Please see para. 2.91 for the Committee’s views of this.
I come next to Personnel matters. The Council’s attention is drawn to the International Civil Service Commission Survey of General Service Salaries in Rome. Attention is drawn to paragraphs 2.50 to 2.58 in the Fifty-fourth report. Under Article 12, paragraph I of the ICSC statute, ICSC is empowered to conduct surveys and make recommendations to the Executive Heads of UN Organizations. It is also the practice for representatives of those organizations to place their views before the Commission and the recommendations which are finally submitted are generally implemented.
We were informed by the secretariat that the ICSC Report stated that there were problems with the data for some of the jobs selected for the survey, and as a consequence some difficulties were experienced in the drawing up of grade-to-grade relativities.
The Committee therefore sought and obtained clarification from the Secretariat on a number of general as well as technical points relating to the survey. The Committee felt certain aspects of the ICSC survey methodology, particularly, the criteria for the selection of employers, could have been the reason why the recommended salary increase was so high. The Committee also felt that a more representative cross-section of employers in the Rome labour market ought to have been selected; and recommended that in future there ought to be a better balance since the present survey included more employers from the credit and financial sectors and fewer employers from other sectors such as the Italian Civil Service, the Ministries, the other Embassies in Rome apart from the one selected for the survey
Based on the ICSC Recommendations, the Director-General recommended to the Committee five measures for implementation. These are referred to in paragraphs (i) - (v) in paragraph 2.53 of the Fifty-fourth report. To mention them briefly, the first recommendation is for a 9.1 percent increase throughout the grades and steps - please see Appendix C for more particulars. These recommendations are to be implemented from 1 March 1984. Secondly, addition of a new biennial step for all grades to be implemented from 1 January 1985. Thirdly, to endorse the ICSC recommendation on the interim adjustment procedure and the Separation Payments Scheme. Fourthly, level of Dependency Allowances recommended to be endorsed subject to one proviso that the allowance for a dependent child should be raised only to Lire 846 000 per annum and not 859 000 as recommended by the ICSC. Fifthly, joint studies between ICSC and FAO for a possible salary scale based on biennial steps.
These proposals are submitted to the Council with the Committee’s approval for their implementation.
The consequences of these recommendations or their implementation to the Organization would be: Firstly, they would bring the General Service salaries in Rome to a level higher than that reached in the last between-survey adjustment to the old salary scale which became due in June 1984. Secondly, in the current biennium, it would lead to additional costs to the Regular Programme of $4.2 million and US $2,1 million under support costs.
The Committee was also informed that it would be possible to cover these costs from within current budgetary allocations without affecting the programme level if there are no serious adverse currency or inflationary trends during 1985. Thirdly, the implementation of the new scales of salaries for staff in the General Service category would also cause some overlapping with salaries of some professional grades, particularly at the P-2 level. Some concern was expressed regarding this.
The Committee also wishes to impress upon the Members of the Council that these recommendations were discussed in detail and questions were asked by all members; and that we did not merely put a rubber stamp on the recommendations of ICSC,
CHAIRMAN: Again the Council will, I am sure, be very grateful to the Chairman of the Finance Committee for those introductory remarks.
Before I open the debate perhaps I ought to clarify one issue concerning Agenda Item 11.1 on AGRIS Data Base Utilization Policy. I did mention this in my own introductory remarks as indeed has the Chairman of the Programme Committee, and although it is actually shown as a separate item I would like to suggest to the Council that the Members could perhaps cover this in their interventions on the reports in general in order to save time, and if this is agreeable I would ask Mr Savary, the Secretary-General, to say some additional words about the AGRIS item before we proceed with our general debate.
Le SECRETAIRE GENERAL: Je vais prendre la parole maintenant en tant que responsable du Département des affaires générales de l’information car c’est en cette qualité que je voudrais dire quelques mots sur la politique d’utilisation de la base de donnees AGRIS. AGRIS, le système international d’information pour les sciences et la technologie agricoles,a été créé et il estcoordonné par la FAO, mais c’est essentiellement un système coopératif. En dix ans d’activité, il a connu une expansion remarquable. 11 y a aujourd’hui 131 centres qui fournissent des references relatives à plus de 10 000 nouvelles publications agricoles chaque mois. La base de donnees AGRIS compte maintenant 1 100 000 references concernant tous les domaines de competence de la FAO et constitue un capital intellectuel important et aussi un atout économique précieux d’où l’on peut tirer des services et des produits d’information extrêmement divers. Certains de ces services et produits peuvent être fournis par la FAO tandis que les centres participants en préparent d’autres pour leur propre usage ou pour distribution à partir des donnees mises à leur disposition par la FAO, soit sous forme de bandes magnétiques, soit sous la forme imprimée de notre bibliographie AGRINDEX. Cette croissance remarquable d’AGRIS a fait apparaître la nécessité de définir une politique qui precise les modalites de cooperation dans le système et qui definisse leurs droits et obligations ainsi que ceux de la FAO, tout en conservant la souplesse quia toujours été une caratéristique de cette coopération.
La politique qui est maintenant soumise à l’approbation du Conseil est basée sur le consensus qui s’est dégagé de la troisième consultation technique des centres AGRIS. Après examen du projet par le Comité du programme, le texte qui est soumis à l’approbation du Conseil est celui qui figure à l’annexe A du document CL 86/3. Les caractéristiques principales de la politique proposée sont les suivantes: Premièrement, les entrées dans la base de donnees AGRIS consistent en informations bibliographiques se rapportant à des publications non confidentielles et dont la distribution n’est pas limitée. Chaque participant partage avec la FAO les droits d’auteur et d’exclusivité sur les données qu’il fournit mais c’est la FAO qui exercera ces droits en ce qui concerne l’ensemble de la base de données.
Je voudrais souligner d’ailleurs que les droits en question ne concernent pas les données individuelles mais bien l’ensemble des entrees d’un pays ou la totalité des donnees bibliographiques traitées par la FAO.
Deuxièmement, en vue d’encourager la circulation de l’information tout en renforçant les systèmes nationaux d’information agricole, tous les participants peuvent utiliser les données pour préparer des produits et fournir des services destines à l’usage interne, mais ceux qui désirent fournir des services dans d’autres pays peuvent le faire seulement si le centre national intéressé n’y fait pas d’objection. De toute façon aucun participant ne peut réclamer de redevances ni imposer un droit quelconque sur le contenu intellectuel des donnees, évidemment un paiement peut être demandé pour récupérer le coût materiel des services fournis.
Troisièmement, enfin,les participants présenteront chaque année un rapport sur l’utilisation qu’ils auront faite de la base de donnees, et c’est sur ces rapports que sera fondé le développement futur du système.
Au cas où les membres du.Conseil auraient des questions à poser.au sujet de ce texte, mes collègues de la Division de la bibliothèque et des systèmes documentaires seront à leur disposition pour répondre aux questions qui seront posées.
CHAIRMAN: I thank Mr Savary very much in his capacity as Assistant Director-General for General Affairs for that very useful description of the AGRIS which I am sure will be helpful to the Council in your deliberations of this item.
L. ARIZA HIDALGO (Cuba): La delegación de Cuba desea saludar a usted, en esta primera oportunidad en que nos está presidiendo. Sé que es usted una persona dinámica y nos va a ayudar a salir antes de las siete y media. Nosotros trataremos también de ayudar a usted.
Nuestra Delegación ha estudiado con interés el Informe sobre el 46° período de sesiones del Comité del Programa y queremos agradecer al Sr. Trkulja por la magnífica presentacién del mismo. Creo que se ha hecho un gran esfuerzo de concision.
Queremos presentar algunos aspectos. Referente al sentido de la nutrición, al sector de la nutrición, quisiera insistir en la necesidad de que la FAO continue sus actividades en dicho sector, considerando que tiene un alcance universal ya que se ocupa de los problemas tanto de la población urbana, como de la población rural y, particularmente, de los grupos más desfavorecidos.
Consideramos igualmente necesario reiterar la necesidad de que se elaboren acciones de carácter practico adaptadas a las necesidades locales vinculando los programas de nutrición con otros programas de desarrollo agrícola y rural que se cumplimenten en los países, tratando de aprovechar al máximo los servicios de la FAO y de todo el Sistema de Naciones Unidas. Quisiera resaltar la importancia del planteamiento recogido en el párrafo 13 del Documento 86/3, referente a la función de la mujer en el campo, la nutrición y la necesidad de mayor cooperación entre la FAO, y la OMS y la UNICEF con vistas a elaborar programas de nutrición eficaces y a poner remedio a la deficiencia de determinados nutrientes.
Consideramos también de gran importancia que se continue dando prioridad al fortalecimiento de la infraestructura para la inspección de la calidad de los alimentos y las actividades de vigilancia y control de la contaminación de los alimentos en los países. En tal sentido quisiéramos mencionar la labor de coordinación que está desarrollando en nuestra region el Comité Regional de Codex Alimentarius, para América Latina y el Caribe, el cual cel’ebrará en abril próximo su tercera reunión en La Habana, con la participación activa de todos los países miembros de la Región.
Apoyamos las labores que se han programado y se están realizando de acuerdo con el Programa complementario de la Conferencia Regional de Reforma Agraria y Desarrollo Rural, en especial en el sector de seguridad alimentaria, y la función de la mu’jer en el desarrollo, tal como se plantea en el Informe.
También mi delegación quisiera destacar la importancia de que se mantenga el sistema analítico elaborado para el éstudio Àgricultura: Horizonte 2000, mediante revisiones y actualizaciones periódicas de sus elementos, así como la utilización de sus datos y metodología en el examen a mediano plazo de la estrategia internacional para el desarrollo.
Quisiéramos también exhortar a que se continue el trabajo de análisis de los precios agrícolas para que sea revisado en el Comité de Àgricultura proximo.
En nuestra Conferencia Regional para America Latina y el Caribe celebrada en Buenos Aires, nuestras delegaciónes se refirieron ampliamente a este aspecto.
Instamos, igualmente, a que se ponga en práctica el programa de seguimiento de la Conferencia Mundial de Desarrollo Pesquero celebrada en junio pasado, especialmente lo expresado en el párrafo 71.
Apoyamos los planteamientos del párrafo 79 referente al incremento de los recursos asignados para montes en los Programas de Labores y Presupuesto para futuros bienios.
Nuestro país, Señor Presidente, reconoce los importantes servicios prestados por AGRIS, y que puede prestar en adelante, sobre todo en la distribución e información entre países desarrollados y subdesarrollados, que es muy importante para los subdesarrollados.
Nuestro país apoya el Apéndice A sobre políticas de utilización de la base de datos AGRIS en todas sus partes.
Esto es con respecto a la información del Comité del Programa.
Sobre la información que nos ha dado el Sr. Abeyagoonasekera, de Sri Lanka, Presidente del Comité de Finanzas, queremos expresar que muchas de sus partes han sido ya discutidas en nuestras sesiones anteriores. Queremos solamente apoyar en todas sus partes los asuntos presupuestarios y financieros que se nos han presentado. Creemos que la información del Presidente del Comité de Finanzas es una información muy amplia, muy detallada y muy esclarecedora.
W.A.F.GRABISCH (Germany, Federal Republic of): My delegation would like to thank the Programme Committee for its work and analysis as presented in the documents before us, CL 86/3 as well as CL 86/6. We share the basic statements in document CL 86/3 on the Programme Review. This applies to programmes relating to nutrition, food and agricultural information and analysis, food and agriculture policies, fisheries and forestry.
To further agricultural production in many developing countries, particularly through agricultural price policy incentives to farmers in developing countries to produce more, is in line with the view expressed by us at several former FAO sessions. On the other hand, we support the opinion reflected in paragraph 8 of document CL 86/3 that within the framework of a comprehensive agricultural and food policy steps have also to be taken to give access to food to all people, particularly to low-income groups.
The request for linking nutrition programmes to other development programmes, as pointed out in paragraph 9 of the document, continues to be necessary to an increased extent. We welcome the measures already initiated and implemented.
We also attach great importance to the improvement of nutrition education of the rural and urban population. The main target groups must be women and school children, but men should also be included as far as possible.
We welcome the establishment of the global information system for the trade in fishery products. In view of the great share of cost of energy in fishery we also attach great importance to saving energy in fishery. Good results were achieved in that sector by the Federal Research Centre of Fisheries in Hamburg, which tests on so-called stationary fishing with regard to the quality of catches with the same yield or slightly increased yields.
My delegation welcomes the fact that more than 60 percent of FAO’s field projects directly serve the increase of agricultural production aimed at small farmers and fishermen, as pointed out in paragraph 1.15 of document CL 86/6.
We share the assessment of the work of the United Nations Joint Inspection Unit as reflected in documents CL 86/3, CL 86/4 and CL 86/6 as well as the Programme of Work for the Joint Inspection Unit.
We feel that the system of AGRIS data bases is a very valuable contribution of FAO to the world-wide scientific work in the field of nutrition and agriculture as well as related subject matter fields. The clarification of rights and obligations brought about by the new utilization policy for the use of the AGRIS system is also useful in our opinion.
With regard to the utilization policy under paragraph 5(c) of Appendix A of document CL 86/3, we have however a little problem. Our reading of this draft provision is that before giving an answer to an information request from a user of another country we would have to notify the National Participation Centre in that country and see whether the Centre has any objection. We consider this a provision which would hamper the flow of information. According to the legal practice in the Federal Republic of Germany we give and will have to give all users free access to the data base of the AGRIS system. A prior notification of use to the respective national data centre is therefore not practicable for us. In the opinion of my delegation the principle of equal treatment must be maintained for all users. My delegation therefore suggests as change the deletion of this provision in paragraph 5(c) of the new utilization policy.
My delegation further holds the view that it would be useful on a long-term basis if the existing three agriculture data bases were comprised to one single world-wide system. The practice used so far makes it necessary to draw on all three systems for bibliographic references. This renders scientific work somewhat difficult. In the case of one single system such a difficulty would not exist.
Before taking up one point on the report of the Finance Committee documents, I would like to thank that Committee. The one point I would like to take up concerns personnel questions. In this regard we support the Finance Committee’s request that the planned fully computerized personnel data system should take up operation as soon as possible. We would also like to see in the future documentation on personnel the established posts at FAO country representations broken down according to grades. The other matter on financial issues we will take up at a later stage.
ZHOU WEI (China) (original language Chinese): We have read with great care the Report of the Forty-sixth Session of the Programme Committee. They have carried out their regular studies of the FAO activities. The comments of the Committee and the examination of the various programmes are reflected in the Report. This is particularly useful for the Members of the Council to be informed of the activities of the Organization. We would like to thank the Programme Committee for the excellent work they have carried out.
Paragraphs 36 to 39 go into the question of.the agricultural commodity prices. This is one of the subjects which is often discussed at international meetings. We certainly welcome the efforts made by FAO in this regard. In November of last year an expert was sent to take part in a colloquium on this question and discussion of the price policies for agricultural commodities and our information was communicated at that time. As you know, a reform of the economic structures is at present taking place in China and the primary activities are taking place within the cities. The price policies are therefore a very important element in such changes and in regard to agricultural commodity prices there are still some problems which need to be resolved. For example, there are too small differences between the different qualities of prices and in some cases the difference between given product prices is too great. So measures have to be taken to change these matters, but progressively.
The Chinese delegation agrees with the suggestions made by the Programme Committee in regard to the great diversities among countries, particularly concerning the economic, political and social differences as well as the financial resources available. In regard to appropriate price policies, we realize that these policies can have a repercussion, for example on income distribution and investment policies, and we must therefore realize that this is a very complex problem which we are dealing with and to simplify the solution would make it very difficult to apply policies to various countries or groups of countries because of the complexity of the issue.
We hope that FAO will continue to study this question in depth and that this can be discussed at the Twenty-third Session of the Conference of FAO. We hope that useful conclusions can be reached for all developing countries.
A. EL SARKI (Egypt) (original language Arabic): In the name of Allah the Merciful, the Compassionate, my country’s delegation wishes to thank the Chairmen of the Programme and Finance Committees for their excellent presentation of this Report. I shall take up two main items in my statement, namely the AGRIS system and FAO’s programmes.
As far as the AGRIS system is concerned my country fully appreciates the vital role undertaken by this programme in the field of research documentation and information exchange. This enables us to achieve food security and provide services to researchers. As a result of our faith in the targets of this programme we, in Egypt, thanks to the help of FAO, have set up a centre for agricultural documentation. With the training provided by FAO for the staff of this centre we were able to provide documentation for a number of research projects that have helped scientific research in my country. We also took part in a technical consultation on the AGRIS system and welcomed the results of these consultations.
After examining paragraphs 95 and 96 we welcome the special draft resolution on the principles of AGRIS data base utilization policies.
After examining paragraphs 8 to 11 on nutrition, Programme 2.1.6, we wish to welcome the design of these programmes.and more specifically those dealing with the role of women in nutrition.
Sub-programme 2.1.6.3 dealing with nutrition criteria and quality control as well as its targets on this subject have come in accordance with the legislation recently issued in my country dealing with the control of food quality and safety. We have set up a Higher Council in my country to draw up policies in this field and it is staffed by high officials. This council is responsible for the supervision of importation, exportation and distribution of food commodities as well as quality and safety controls. We also provide incentives to workers in this field.
We also wish to stress the importance of Programme 2.1.7 dealing with food and agricultural information and analysis. We also support the sub-programmes, especially 2.1.7.3. This programme deals with the food information and early warning system. It is a system that has proved its vital importance in predicting food crises and shortages. Egypt has sought to expend training programmes in the field of analysis and designing of projects. This is in accordance with the targets of programme 2.1.8.5. We would welcome more cooperation with FAO in this field.
My country is currently according great importance to the fisheries sector. We are seeking to achieve the maximum benefits from fisheries and to develop them. We are also attempting to develop and to improve the social conditions of fishermen. We have prepared comprehensive programmes for this purpose.
After having reviewed programmes 51 and 71 on major Programme 2.2 dealing with fisheries, my country wishes to express its full satisfaction with this programme. We wish to stress the need to take into account the priorities referred to in paragraph 71 of this document, especially when a special programme dealing with the development of fisheries is drafted.
F.G. POULIDES (Cyprus): First I wish to congratulate you, Mr Chairman, and say that I am indeed glad to see you chairing this meeting. On behalf of my delegation I wish also to thank very warmly Mr. Trkulja and Mr. Abeyagoonasekera for their excellent work and the clear introduction of the documents of the Programme and the Finance Committees.
The delegation of Cyprus has carefully studied document CL 86/3, the Report of the Forty-sixth Session of the Programme Committee, which we fully endorse. We note the Committee’s comments in reviewing several programmes of FAO’s activities. We generally agree with the comments.
We have only one observation, which refers to sub-programmes 2.1.7.1 and 2.1.7.4, statistical processing and analysis, and statistical development. We are in agreement with the planned publication of long term historical data service on area yield and production. We are sure that such a study would be very useful and that valuable conclusions could be drawn from such a data service. We also agree that data on vegetables and fruits needs more attention. However, it is our belief that a more comprehensive picture will emerge if, in addition to area yields and production, also consumption is added. We wish to know whether the possibility of including quantities consumed has been studied and if not what are the reasons for not doing so. We are sure that with the proper analysis of such data, including the incorporation of conception, future projections would be possible, of course a very useful factor for the planners.
From the other parts of the Report we emphasize the need for monitoring and evaluation and we note with satisfaction the comments of the Committee in paragraphs 80 to 83. We find also the AGRIS data base utilization policy to be well balanced and especially for the future operation of the data base, and we are pleased to endorse it. The access to information by those interested and the right of all participants to the network are well safeguarded.
Turning to document CL 86/6, I would like to express my delegation’s agreement with the comments of the Programme Committee, which we fully endorse. I would also like to stress the value of the role of TCP in the development process of developing countries. On this point I wish particularly to stress paragraph 1.55, where it is mentioned that the Director-General would take into account the very positive assessment of the programme in formulating his proposals for the next Programme of Work and Budget.
J.P. NEME (France): La délégation française a étudié avec intérêt les rapports du Comité du Programme et du Comité financier, notamment en ce qui concerne les rapports du corps commun d’inspection sur le bureau dexecution des projets du PNUD. A cet égard la délégation française declare que le principe directeur, mis au point conjointement par le PNUD et les organisations spécialisées qui prescrivent des consultations préalables au sujet des projets executes par le bureau de I execution des projets du PNUD dans les domaines relevant de la competence des organisations spécialisées, n’a toujours pas été appliqué.
Elle regrette tout particulièrement que l’OAA n’ait bien souvent été informée qu’après la decision de confier au bureau d’exécution des projets du PNUD l’exécution directe de certains projets concernant le secteur alimentaire et agricole. Elle considère que la première recommandation des inspecteurs est très importante et mérite une attention approfondie du Conseil.
La délégation française recommande done que les procedures de consultation entre le PNUD et les institutions spécialisées telles que l’OAA, soient systématiquement respectées à l’avenir.
Par ailleurs, en ce qui concerne les rapports du corps commun d’inspection sur les politiques et pratiques suivies en matière de publication des organisations du système des Nations Unies, ma délégation appuie la suggestion figurant au paragraphe 170 du rapport de la 47ème session du Comité du Programme concernant la signature par leurs auteurs des ouvrages publiés afin de mieux motiver les rédacteurs.
Enfin, ma délégation se félicite des résultats remarquables obtenus par le système international d’information pour les sciences et la technologie agricoles qui a permis de mettre en commun les informations dont disposent les pays développés et les pays en développement dans ce domaine. Elle appuie en particulier la politique proposée d’utilisation de la base de données AGRIS avec la modification recommandée par le Comité du Programme.
J. BELGRAVE (New Zealand): Can I first thank the Chairmen of both the Programme and Finance Committees for their comprehensive introduction which reduces the need for all that much comment. I have just one or two observations on behalf of my delegation, first in relation to document CL 86/3, which is the Report of the Forty - sixth Session of the Programme Committee held in May. There are two particular points in the agricultural area, to which I would like to refer, first under the heading “2.1.8 Food and Agricultural Policy”. In paragraph 38 in particular, reference is made to the study which I think has been underway for quite some time, looking at factors to be taken into account in the formulation and implementation of national price and incentive policies. The point is made by the Committee that in their view, it certainly is as my delegation understands it, notwithstanding that price policies are one of the guidelines for production, that other elements need to be taken into account. Well, my delegation would not agree with this in principle, but I leave the thought with you that remunerative prices for producers in the long run, certainly in our experience, should not be underemphasized. Unless the producer can see a return for his investment, no matter how small, in the long run production development is inhibited.
Turning to page 6, paragraph 41, Commodity Policy and Trade, and sub-Programme 2.1.8.3 refers, we would support “...the pivotal importance of trade issues for food and agricultural development, particularly for countries which were heavily dependent on exports of a few primary commodities as the main source of their foreign exchange earnings.”
In paragraph 42, reference is made to the work of the various FAO intergovernmental commodity groups. Mention is made there of the sub-group of the banana exporters and other groups of meat, oilseeds, fats and so on. We endorse the thought behind paragraph 41. We also recommend the efficacy of the various intergovernmental groups which from time to time look at trade problems in the particular areas.
On fisheries, the Report is very much to the point, I think. In paragraph 64 on page 8 of document CL 86/3, it brings up again the question of barriers to trade in fish and certainly we would endorse the studies being made by the Organization in relation to a register of import regulations affecting fishery products, which I gather is updated from time to time. Unless people developing inshore fisheries can get to these products, the development of prices is stultified, to say the least.
Paragraph 71 of the Report was mentioned by the distinguished delegate from Egypt. Various subjects for further priority attention in relation to future Programmes of Work relating to fisheries are mentioned, and we endorse them as they emphasize the two elements of conservation and management; (vi) of paragraph 72 is mentioned the overall question of marketing and trade of fish and fishery products
Turning to the Fifty - fourth Session of the Finance Committee, I wish to touch on one observation made by theChairman in introducing the item at paragraph 2.56 on page 25 - the question of relativity and Chairman in introducing the item at paragraph 2.56 on page 25 - the question of relativity and methodology used in compiling ICSC data for recommendations. We would endorse the points made in paragraph 2.56, and from what is said in paragraph 2.58, I guess that the Director-General has taken on board the Committee’s concern in bringing those items to the notice of the Director-General. One final point I have overlooked - the AGRIS policy in Appendix A under the Programme Committee’s Report. We endorse the concept generally taking into account the point made, I think by the distinguished delegate from the Federal Republic of Germany, that one or two elements of free availability may cause some problems because of legal requirements of individual countries. I would think application of a general policy like this could be modified to enable particular countries in individual situations to be taken care of.
N.C. SERSALE DI CERISANO (Argentina): En primer lugar, nos referimos al documento CL 86/3. Queremos acá referimos al párrafo 40. Para nosotros el apoyo de la FAO a la cooperación economica entre países en desarrollo, cooperación técnica, debe ser apoyado, y al mismo tiempo, solicitamos se intensifique. En el caso del Seminario propuesto, como en el Grupo de los 16, al que ya nos hemos referido esta mañana, estamos teniendo actividades que podrían complementarse con las del Seminario propuesto, lo que pedimos, en nombre del Grupo de los 16, es que se coordinen las acciones preparativas de este Seminario con las que realiza el Grupo en materia de identificación de proyectos, en materia de CEPD y CTPD.
Permítame pasar ahora a AGRIS. Para nosotros este sistema es muy importante. Asimismo, queremos agradecer especialmente el apoyo dado por el Centro Coordinador del AGRIS en’ FAO, como la base de datos de AGRIS de Viena, que nos han prestado un gran apoyo, e inclusive lo han hecho durante la ultima Conferencia Regional para America Latina y el Caribe que tuvo lugar en Buenos Aires.
Además, tengo acá la solicitud, que para nuestro país sería muy útil, de aumentar el número de ejemplares de AGRINDEX que se recibe por país.
Permítame ahora pasar al documento CL 86/6, sobre el 47° período de sesiones del Comité del Programa; respecto al párrafo 1.14 en donde se prevé el análisis de los diversos aspectos de la CTPD y de la CEPD, en el campo de actividades de la FAO que es cuando se analiza el Examen del Programa Ordina-rio 1984-85.
Acá se dice que la FAO presentaria al ECOSOC un análisis interinstitucional de los programas en este campo. Eso por una parte. Por otra parte, en el próximo Comité del Programa se haría un análisis profundo de- las actividades de la FAO al respecto.
Lo que a nosotros se nos ocurre, debido a que la FAO ya tiene previsto hacer estos dos trabajos, es por que ello no podría ser presentado al proximo período de sesiones de este Consejo como tema de la Agenda; o sea que se incluya el tema de cooperación economica entre países en desarrollo dentro del marco FAO, como tema de Agenda del Consejo, y también el tema de análisis interinstitucional también como tema del Consejo.
Nosotros pensamos que ésta ha sido una buena oportunidad para presentarlo. La FAO tiene una serie de mandatos y actividades específicas que surgen de la Conferencia de 1979, los párrafos 365 a 371, en el Programa de Arusha, en la Quinta Reunion Ministerial del Grupo de los 77, en la Reunion del CEPD sobre Agricultura y Alimentación que tuvo lugar en Bucarest; y hay innumerables resoluciones de Con-ferencias internacionales que le dan mandato a la FAO para trabajar en este sentido, y lo hace muy bien.
No obstante, nunca o por lo menos desde 1979 a esta parte, hemos hecho un balance sobre las actividades a nivel de Consejo. Es por eso que nos interesaría quede incluida en la proxima reunion. Ello nos va a permitir a nosotros, los del Grupo de los 77, tener una mejor evaluación de estas actividades. Y al mismo tiempo, nos permitiría identificar acciones de CEPD de acuerdo a nuestras necesidades.
En cuanto a los párrafos 1.48 a 1.55 que se refieren a actividades del PCT, queremos apoyar especialmente las que se refieren al párrafo 1.50.
En cuanto al empleo de consultores a que se refieren los párrafos 1.57 a 1.62, apoyamos con entusiasmo la recomendación del párrafo 1.60 sobre la contratación de consultores del mundo en desarrollo. No obstante, debemos decir que en el caso de America Latina, la situación no es tan satisfactoria como la que se dice en el párrafo 1.58.
Mrs. M. RAVN (Norway): First of all, I would like to thank the Chairmen of both the Finance and Programme Committees for their comprehensive introduction to this item. I have just a few comments on the AGRIS Data Base Utilization Policy. As you all know, one essential precondition for developmental society is the ability to utilize information and knowledge which had been acquired in different spaces over time. The value of this information depends on whether it can be adapted to the particular circumstances or not. There are a lot of problems in the path of transferring the knowledge from one country to another, but there is no doubt that a precondition for the transfer is a proper way to procure, treat and store information and data. In our opinion, AGRIS is one example of this kind of system of link in a chain of transfer, which we consider to be very important.
A question arises with regard to the capability of using this system of data collection, and as we all know, this is a real problem in many countries. But we think the problems can be overcome by training users and by developing the system further to serve this very essential and important purpose. As such, we can go along with the recommendations in the Report before us.
Sra. M. LIZARRAGA SAUCEDO (México) La delegación mexicana desea felicitar a los distinguidos Presidentes de los Comités del Programa y de Finanzas por la excelente presentación que hicieron de los respectivos temas. Asimismo expresa su apoyo para que el Conseio apruebe el documento CL 86/3 en su coníunto; y en particular, manifiesta su acuerdo con lo planteado en el párrafo 95 relativo a la política de utilización de la base de datos AGRIS, en donde el Comité propuso meiorar el texto del artículo 3, a fin de refleiar el reparto de derechos nacibnales con la FAO respecto de los datos enviados al sistema, los cuales serían ejercidos por la FAO, en nombre de todos los participantes.
En función de ello, apoya que el Consejo ratifique esa modificación expresada en el Apéndice A del documento.
En relación con el documento CL 86/4, particularmente con el Informe de la Dependencia Común de Inspección de las Nación es Unidas, relativo a la Oficina de Eiecución de Proyectos del PNUD, la delegación mexicana se hace eco de la preocupación del Comité en el sentido de que las operación es de la OEP se llevan a cabo, principalmente mediante la adiudicación de subcontratos a compañías de consultoría, y normalmente incluían pocas actividades de capacitación , inclumpliendo en cierta forma las directrices del PNUD y los organismos que preveían la realizacíon de consultas previas respecto de los proyectos que la OEP ejecutara en las esferas de competencia de los organos especializados, y que la FAO era informada después de la decision de recurrir a la OEP para ejecutar un proyecto. Referente a la alimentación y a la agricultura, el Comité encargo a este Conseio las recomendación es del informe y exhortó a que se observaran estrictamente los procedimientos.
Nuestra delegación comparte plenamente que el obietivo primordial de la cooperación técnica debe ser la autosufíciencia, por lo cual apoya la recomendación contenida en el párrafo 1.67 del documento. La delegación mexicana, asimismo, pide sea incluido en el informe del bienio 1984-85 información relativa al uso de consultores.
Queremos apoyar a la distinguida delegación de Argentina en lo relativo al apoyo de las actividades del CEPD, y asimismo el Programa de Cooperación Técnica.
En lo relativo con el documento CL 86/4, habida cuenta de la información contenida en los párrafos 5 a 12 del informe, la delegación respalda la aprobación de los asuntos presupuestarios.
SUHARYO HUSEN (Indonesia): First of all, my delegation thanks the members of the Programme Committee for all their efforts in coming to this Report contained in document CL 86/3. My delegation also congratulates the Chairman of that Committee for his excellent presentation of the Report.
My delegation is in full agreement with the view expressed by the Programme Committee in recognizing the important service provided by AGRIS, as stated in paragraph 92. With the assistance of FAO my Government hopes to set up a centre for AGRIS, and we thank FAO for its continuing assistance to the Government of Indonesia.
Regarding the proposed AGRIS Data Base Utilization Policy referred to in document CL 86/3, my delegation has no difficulty in supporting it.
Referring to document CL 86/4, the Report of the Fifty-third Session of the Finance Committee, my delegation much appreciates the work done by the Finance Committee in producing that Report, and congratulates the Committee Chairman for his presentation. The Indonesian delegation endorses the Report contained in document CL 86/4.
J D. AITKEN (United Kingdom): In this intervention I will speak only about Appendix A of document CL 86/3 concerning the AGRIS Data Base Utilization Policy. I wish to state that the United Kingdom delegation in general finds the text of Appendix A acceptable and timely, but like the distinguished delegate of the Federal Republic of Germany, we question the need for sub-paragraph 5(a), since we think operationally this provision on occasion could act against the rapid utilization of information held by AGRIS. To some extent, this defeats one of the objects of on-line computerization. Therefore, we suggest this paragraph could be deleted or modified as suggested by the distinguished delegate of New Zealand without loss to the purpose or effectiveness of the text.
CHAIRMAN: I am looking at the clock, and remembering there are members of Council who feel it would be in our interest to adjourn at 7 o’clock. But I have been made aware also that there are some members of Council who would prefer to make a statement under this general item tomorrow, so I think that indicates there is no chance of concluding tonight. There are a number of issues still on which we have to reach a decision. I would like to suggest to the Council that it might be useful at this stage to pick up the particular point made about AGRIS - i.e. Appendix A of document CL 86/3. I refer to the proposal made initially by the distinguished delegate of the Federal Republic of Germany, which has also been commented on by the distinguished delegates of New Zealand and the United Kingdom. If the Council agrees, it would be helüful to our further deliberations if I were to invite some comment from the appropriate member of the Secretariat. If that is agreeable, I would like to ask the Chief of the Documentation Systems Branch, Mr Samaha, if he would come to the dais and speak on that particular point.
H.J.H. TALEYARKHAN (India): This will not necessarily mean that the Director will not reply to other points raised about the AGRIS later when some of us intervene.
E.K. SAMAHA (FAO Staff): I will confine my comments on this particular issue as you suggested. Paragraph 5(c) was also discussed at length by all the AGRIS participating centres, particularly this issue of access to the AGRIS Data Bases and to services to other countries. We appreciate very much the concern of some countries which are providing world-wide services through their host computers and we are grateful for the support of the Federal Republic of Germany for having put AGRIS on line within Europe. And in fact most of the European countries, particularly members of the EECnow have access in AGRIS also through the German host. Therefore there is no difficulty in this particular situation to apply this policy because the member countries of the community have accepted to be served by the German host. But you also appreciate the concern of other countries. As you know, the purpose of our activity assistance is to help strengthen international capabilities. Several countries have also undertaken to develop their capabilities to provide services to use the AGRIS Data Base to provide service to their users and from this point of view they also have a certain right to safeguard their own right to serve the users and they said during the discussions in case a country would like to provide such on-line services outside its frontiers, it is normal that the country itself, the recipient country, would agree to do so. It is not at the individual user’s, it is a matter which is commonly used by hosts when they have hundreds sometimes of data bases that some of these data bases have some restrictions to some countries. They get the agreement in principle from the country and then the access to the data base comes free. In that case, in our situation here, the reason for this is that if in a country X, they have the AGRIS Data Base, the whole data base mounted in a computer and they offer on-line services, a user with a terminal can have access to that data base. The principles said that if this country would like to offer this service outside for another country, it is necessary to have the agreement in principle of the country, and once the agreement is given, there is no restriction at all on any user to get access to it. This will happen normally when the country itself is providing services. Therefore, there is no hindrance at all, and there is no restriction at all of the distribution of information to the users.
This matter has been reached through a consensus of about 130 participating centres, the Data Utilization Policy was circulated to them, that was modified on various occasions to meet the requirements. They came here to discuss it at length and they agreed on this proposal, so what we have submitted to you is really the consensus reached by all the participating centres. Some of them have already raised this issue of access and this objection to 5(c).
CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much indeed, Mr Samaha. As I say, perhaps those who have raised this issue and are concerned about it might perhaps reflect on this response, so that tomorrow when we have to reach a conclusion, I hope we can do so amicably, and I want to emphasize this in no way prevents obviously other speakers on this item taking the floor.
The meeting rose at 19.00.
La séance est levée a 19 heures.
Se levanta la sesión a las 19 horas.
