(b) Alternative Approaches to Dealing with Budgetary and Financial Uncertainties (continued)
(b) Les incertitudes budgétaires et financières: approches possibles (suite)
(b) Alternativas para afrontar las incertidumbres presupuestarias y financieras (continuacion)
Almir F. de Sa BARBUDA (Brazil): I am sorry that I was not able to be here this morning when you gave the floor to my delegation.
First let me congratulate Dr Shah for the very useful and constructive introduction of this item of the agenda.
My delegation also fully shares the Director-General's concern mentioned at paragraph 1 of document CL 90/24 about the budgetary and financial uncertainties at present being faced by FAO. All efforts should be made at this point to help him implement the main programmes of the Organization and as well to demonstrate that the spirit of real multilateralism is still alive.
With few exceptions we have, however, listened to disturbing interventions of some of the larger contributors to the FAO budget. While recognizing that the main problem today is the shortfall of payment by the larger contributors, some of these Members have attempted to disguise the situation, requesting measures that will result in punishment to developing countries in arrears, not showing much disposition to face the difficulties and support the measures proposed by the Secretariat, and as well attempting to blame FAO's management for the present problems, with which we do not agree.
It Is regrettable as well that the Organization and all member countries, including the least developed ones, be penalized for a unilateral decision to withhold legal payments of the contribution by the leading world economy.
We have been discussing for two days the financial crisis but we do not have precise elements to evaluate its impact and exact extension in the future stability of the Organization.
This morning it was confirmed that the amounts to be paid are the same, or almost the same, as foreseen by the Secretariat. We have now learned that up to next year the largest contributor will pay less than half of its legal contribution. The united States' intervention was not therefore too helpful. We still do not know what is going to be paid in relation to the 1987 contribution, nor what will be done with regard to arrears in the future.
Taking into account the seriousness of this crisis, a crisis provoked by this most important shortfall, my delegation cannot see the relevance for the Finance Committee to keep up discussions of alternatives as presented in paragraph 31 of document CL 90/17 and its Appendix C, alternatives that do not contemplate the main problem now faced and that will further penalise the developing countries most affected by an unfavourable international environment. Our opposition is greater in relation to the Canadian proposal which would actually aggravate the situation without inducing the major contributor to honour its obligation. We recognize however that it is always easier to disguise the real problem by overreacting to secondary difficulties.
Developing countries such as Brazil have already paid disproportionate contributions in relation to their capacity to pay and to the share of certain industrialized Members of this Organization. We have traditionally maintained this position when discussing scales of contributions and budgets in UN aid agencies. The huge amount of resources annually drained to service our external debt and the protectionist measures that prevent the free flow of our products into developed markets render it difficult sometimes for us to pay in time our very high contributions to international organizations. It can be no surprise to us that among the ten largest debtors to FAO, in US dollars, not percentages, there are some developing countries, actually the main exporters of capital to the industrialized world today. What really surprises us is that today there are developed countries among these ten debtors and that the main debtor is the wealthiest nation in the world.
The Secretariat knows that my government has never challenged our legal obligations, and has tried to do its best to reduce our arrears. I assure you further efforts will be made in this regard.
Most of the alternative approaches presented by the document CL 90/24 have implications on the rate and amount of actual resources to be disbursed by member countries. In this respect my delegation believes that the Secretariat could have provided us with more precise information on their direct impact in terms of US dollars on our contributions. However, we are assured that these additional elements will be presented later for deeper discussion. On this point my delegation wishes to state, in a very preliminary way, that we look forward to additional and in-depth studies and discussions on each proposal presented.
If it is possible to reach a consensus in this Council we would be prepared to support the non-distribution of the cash surplus and the non-deduction of forecast miscellaneous income to the contributors. Unfortunately, wealthier member states, with few exceptions, are not ready to give a good example of their commitment to multilateral organizations. We would be prepared by consensus to support the amendments proposed to the financial regulations which would leave no room for doubts about the transitory nature of the measures which would be revoked when FAO's financial situation improved. We are still prepared to support the increase in the level of the Working Capital Fund, which has already proved to be insufficient to support the general fund and should be increased to the level of other agencies. However, we have doubts as to whether the increase in costs and administration work would justify budgets in US dollars and Italian lira, or a currency based on a basket of currencies. We are not prepared at this moment to support budgets not restricted to emergency expenditure.
Antonio Albertino AFONSO DIAS. (Sao Tomé-et-Principe): Le document CL 90/24 montre combien la situation, déjà difficile, risque de devenir plus grave si un geste positif, vis-à-vis de l'Organisation, n'est pas fait de la part des contributeurs. En fait, la plupart des pays qui n'ont pas pu acquitter leurs devoirs sont les pays les moins avancés et les pays en développement. Ce sont les pays, dont le mien, qui à plusieurs reprises ont demandé l'assistance de la FAO.
Compte tenu de cette situation et nonobstant les difficultés dont nous sommes tous victimes, je demande, si le Conseil est d'accord, qu'une fois de plus le Directeur général fasse un appel pressant, par les canaux appropriés afin que les riches et les pauvres effectuent leurs paiements dans un délai à convenir.
Abdel Azim EL-GAZZAR (Egypt) (original language Arabic): I asked for the floor only to inform the Council that I have received today a letter saying that Egypt has transferred its annual contribution to the budget of the Organization.
José Ramón LOPEZ-PORTILLO ROMANO (México): Deseo agradecer a nombre de México al Doctor Shah por la presentación de este tema. La delegación de México agradece al Director General la forma cautelosa y eficiente como administra los recursos de esta Organización. Ello ha evitado que las perspectivas que hoy enfrentamos sean más negativas. La FAO hubiera podido hacer frente a todos los inconvenientes financieros menos, como se ha hecho ver, a la decisión unilateral del principal contribuyente. Por eso queremos que quede constancia en las actas y en nuestro informe de la responsabilidad directa de ese país, del principal contribuyente, en el sensible debilitamiento de la FAO y su transcendental función en beneficio de la humanidad. Repetimos, esta decisión de no pagar la totalidad de la contribución la consideramos un error histórico que todos los pueblos del mundo sabemos sancionarán.
La situación futura es ambigua e incierta, como quedó claro hoy en la mañana, en vista de que no podemos saber cuánto y cuándo pagará aquel país de lo que resta de su contribución bianual. Frente a esa situación nos pronunciamos en contra de que se imponga un castigo más severo a la ejecución del Programa de Labores y Presupuesto aprobado para este bienio. Esto no implica, señor Presidente, que estemos de acuerdo en conducir a la FAO a una situación financiera inmanejable. Por el contrario, nos obliga a hacer un ejercicio serio, maduro y, sobre todo, oportuno, en el que respetemos prioridades; pero como ya varios delegados lo han cuestionado ¿quiénes y cómo se interpretan esas prioridades?
Esta es una Organización orientada a la asistencia y apoyo al desarrollo agrícola y alimentario y al logro de la seguridad alimentaria mundial. Esas son las prioridades que por lo menos la gran mayoría de los Estados Miembros reconocemos. Y esas prioridades, como lo ha escuchado usted, señor Presidente, por parte de la mayoría de los países aquí representados, se plasman fundamentalmente en el PCT y en otros programas ligados a la seguridad alimentaria.
Debemos, por supuesto, propugnar por mayor eficiencia, pero no al extremo de que ésta afecte la eficacia, es decir la capacidad de cumplimiento de metas en FAO.
Deseo aclarar también que no podemos aceptar que para resolver los problemas financieros de FAO y de las Naciones Unidas en general debamos aceptar los objetivos de cambio estructural que busca imponer el principal contribuyente y otros países. Ello sería tanto como reconocer que ése y otros países tienen prevalencia sobre los intereses de la mayoría de los Estados Miembros que estamos representados en condiciones de igualdad.
México reafirma los principios de objetivos de nuestra Organización y defiende su Constitución; es mas, mantendremos vivos y vigentes esos principios y objetivos antes de ceder a cualquier tipo de condicionamiento.
En la escala de cuotas que se aplica a los miembros de FAO resulta que hay un contribuyente mayor, pero también que hay países en desarrollo ahora con grave crisis financiera, como nos lo han recor
dado varios delegados, que pagan más que varios países industrializados. Esta Organización, por tanto, no es de quien paga, y menos de quien paga más; la humanidad no pertenece a los poderosos, sino los poderosos a la humanidad.
En este contexto, y ante la incertidumbre de largo plazo, me remito al párrafo 28 del documento CL 90/24 donde se indica claramente que el ejercicio que ahora hacemos y en relación a las siete propuestas es preliminar y deberá profundizarse concienzudamente en el Comité de Finanzas.
Agradezco, por tanto, al Director General de que actúe con prudencia y que no nos haya presentado un paquete de pánico y de desmoralización, sino una estrategia flexible que irá adecuando a la certidumbre financiera que se conozca en el futuro.
Por eso quiero concluir observando que las siete propuestas nos resultan interesantes y dignas de que el Comité de Finanzas las estudie a fondo; por. lo pronto, no queremos emitir nuestra opinión detallada respecto de cada una de ellas.
Asimismo queremos expresar que reconocemos que el Director General tiene facultad para contratar empréstitos de corto plazo aunque subrayamos nuestra opinión de que esa debe ser una opción de última instancia.
El Comité de Finanzas se reunirá dos veces por lo menos hasta que este Consejo vuelva a encontrarse. Estoy seguro que ahí se tratarán con responsabilidad y profundidad las propuestas hechas aquí y otras que respondan a las exigencias.
Pedimos al Director General que nos mantenga informados de toda novedad y que podamos conocer con toda antelación la confirmación o proposición de nuevas decisiones para emitir nuestro juicio razonado con toda calma.
Terminamos haciendo un llamado a todos los países a que cubran sus pagos lo más pronto posible y a todos los miembros de esta Organización a que fortalezcan con altruismo el espíritu y los cauces del multilatéralismo.
LE PRESIDENT: Nous arrivons a la fin ces interventions et je voudr?is donner la parole au Directeur général adjoint pour qu'il contribue à ce débat.
DEPUTY DIRECTOR-GENERAL: The Council has given preliminary, but very thorough, consideration to the various proposals put forward in the document that we have just been discussing. Many comments have been made on each of the various options. There has been a wide range of opinion, some for, some against. As might have been expected, reactions have been extremely mixed.
I would suggest that it is not necessary for the Council to strive to reach any consensus at this stage on which of these various options should be pursued. I would suggest that when the Finance Committee meets, in just over three weeks time, we should look with the Finance Committee at the verbatim records of this discussion and take into account the many points of view that have been expressed when we take a decision as to whether any, or all, of these options should be studied in depth. That would be only a procedural discussion at the Finance Committee in mid-December. A substantive examination of the various options which it is felt desirable to pursue would then go to the Finance Committee when it meets again in May.
In case any doubts remain, I should like to emphasize that these options are long-term measures to tackle long-term problems. There is no thought in our minds, and I hope not in the minds of any
delegations, that these various options are going to solve the critical situation which we face in the rest of this biennium, and certainly at the beginning of the next biennium. What we are looking at are the possible ways to minimize or avoid a recurrence of such problems and on such a magnitude on future occasions.
As for the short-term critical situation both in this biennium and more particularly at the start of the next biennium, there have been a number of comments made, in the debate, by delegations commenting upon the options in this document. These comments too will be useful when the Finance Committee meets. The perceptions of the financial short and medium-term crisis are still evolving. As the Council is well aware, we only had the final offical figures from our largest contributor this morning. When the Finance Committee meets in mid-December perhaps some aspects will be a little clearer. I should like to emphasize that these are not problems that are special to FAO. They are affecting virtually all organizations in the UN system. Of course, we shall be working extremely closely with other participants, other members, other organizations in the UN system as we attempt to tackle the crisis that confronts us.
I have nothing further to add on the options for long term solutions, but there was one specific question put to the Secretariat by the Representative of Canada. It related to the measures put forward by the Finance Committee in paragraphs 22 to 31 of its Second Report, document CL 90/17, where a series of alternatives are suggested for the handling of the cash surplus at the end of a biennium essentially with a view to rewarding the virtuous and not the virtuous and the sinners equally.
The Canadian suggestion was that the Finance Committee's conclusions on these matters be referred to the CCLM for the drafting of an appropriate modification in the Financial Regulation concerned and that from there the matter go to the Council and the Conference. He requested the comments of the Secretariat, and I can only say that in logic and procedure-wise this certainly is correct; this would be the way to handle the matter. However, the question of substance reverts to the Finance Committee and it will be for the Finance Committee to decide whether the guidance given to it by the Council is sufficient to narrow down the alternatives which have been put forward in its report and to come up with a narrower range in the form of perhaps a specific decision to be taken by the higher organs of FAO.
LE PRESIDENT: Je remercie le Directeur général adjoint de ses éclaircissements.
Ce qui compte pour nous, à ce stade de la discussion, comme l'ont dit de nombreux délégués, c'est de parvenir à préserver l'avenir et la pérennité de l'Organisation. 11 faut trouver des solutions stables qui permettent de prévoir tous les cas. C'est la raison pour laquelle la proposition de faire analyser le dossier de façon approfondie par le Comité financier est tout à fait opportune, d'autant plus que de nombreux Etats Membres n'ont pas eu matériellement la possibilité de faire examiner par leurs services compétents les propositions avancées et qu'ils ont dû se limiter à une réaction préliminaire. Je crois donc que le travail qui attend le Comité financier sur ce point précis, le 16 décembre, est important. Je pense qu'il aura la possibilité d'approfondir la question et d'éclairer par la suite le Conseil sur les incidences de ces mesures - et surtout sur les tenants, les aboutissants et les applications de ces mesures - de manière à permettre aux Etats Membres de prendre une position circonstanciée an toute connaissance de cause.
De nombreux pays ont suggéré que l'on analyse ce qu'ont "fait, dans des circonstances analogues, d'autres organisations. Je crois que c'est là une suggestion intéressante qui permettrait de mieux étudier la question. Je n'en dirai pas plus à ce stade et nous pourrions peut-être passer au point suivant de l'ordre du jour.
George Henry MUSGROVE (Canada): Mr Chairman, I did just want to thank the Deputy Director-General for his response to our question. I quite agree with what he has said, but there is one slight qualification. I had asked that the Finance Committee be charged with selecting a single proposal from amongst the three preferred alternatives they have suggested and in the light of the action taken by the International Civil Aviation Organization, so in a sense there are four options that I have suggested might be usefully considered by the Finance Committee, and insofar as the Finance Committee is the best qualified, most expert, and would have the ability to make that choice, they could choose one of those and then follow on with the CCLM and the presentation to Council. I would hesitate to leave the point on the grounds that there may not be sufficient guidance and therefore the Finance Committee is unable to take such action, so I wonder if that could be included in the summing up.
Secondly, the Deputy Director-General's suggestions are very wise indeed about the seven proposals that have been put forward by the Director-General in the sense that the Finance Committee might usefully take a look at those to decide which, if any, would merit further study at subsequent meetings. I wonder if I could also ask that the additional two proposals which we have put forward in this regard might be taken into consideration by the Committee so that there were not just seven put forward by the Secretariat but at least others derived from the discussion. I think particularly we have drawn attention to the prospect of reviewing the problem of cross-subsidization between the Regular. Programme and the Field Programme; secondly, the prospect that there could be a priority or core budgeting involved as a longer term measure to address financial stringency.
Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Yo reitero mi impresión sincera expresada ya en varias oportunidades en el sentido de que considero que todas las delegaciones que se están preocupando por proponer soluciones concretas están inspiradas en el mejor de los deseos. Sin embargo, nos preocupa que a este tema se le pretenda dar una situación particular algo excepcional. Yo creo que la consideración de este tema debe ser como la de todos los demás: reflejar en el informe el sentido de las discusiones y, naturalmente, el informe del Consejo contendrá aquellas orientaciones para su organismo asesor que es el Comité de Finanzas. No quisiera que en el informe del Consejo tratáramos de encerrar en una camisa de fuerza ciertas propuestas o ciertas actividades.
En dos ocasiones hoy mi distinguido colega y amigo Musgrove de Canadá ha hablado de algo que ha pasado en la Organización de la Aviación Civil. No tengo idea de qué se trata; mi vecino de la derecha tampoco lo sabe y por eso estamos preocupados, estamos aquí en tierra y no sabemos lo que esta pasando en esa organización, si él nos ilustra un poco, o a través de sus declaraciones transmita a la Secretaría esa información fuera del curso normal de cada tema.
George Henry MUSGROVE (Canada): My good friend the Colombian Representative is seldom caught not having read his documents, but there is a report of the Finance Committee, document CL 90/17, and in Annex B to that report there is a description of the process that has been adopted by the International Civil Aviation Organization. It is a matter that has been reviewed by the Finance Committee to some extent, but only in a very cursory sense, but now that the matter has been adopted by ICAO it is an example of what has happened in the UN international system. We are not necessarily an advocate of it; we are only suggesting that they have taken a look at it in a cursory sense; it is described in a cursory form in the document before us, and perhaps it is worth a second look.
Chavaly SRINIVASA SASTRY (India): I am speaking with specific reference to the point made by the delegate of Canada. He has suggested that in the summing up of the discussion it should specifically be mentioned that the two suggestions that they made, in addition to the seven contained in the documentation to this Council meeting, and also something else that occurred in another UN-associated body, should be considered by the Finance Committee.
If 1 heard the Deputy Director-General correctly, when he was summing up he did say that the verbatim reports of the discussions in the Council along with the documentation would be placed before the Finance Committee. Therefore, all these suggestions would specifically be before the Finance Committee.
Secondly, we are dealing with a situation which is changing very rapidly and which is dynamic. It is therefore conceivable that between now and the next meeting of the Finance Committee, some other steps might have been thought about and implemented in several other UN organizations and bodies. Surely all this relevant information will be placed before the Finance Committee by the FAO Head-quarters Secretariat.
Therefore, with due respect I would submit that it would neither be appropriate nor advisable in the summing up specifically to name any suggestions made by any delegation during the course of the discussion.
LE PRESIDENT: Y a-t-il d'autres délégués qui veuillent prendre la parole? Je pense, qu'au benefice de ces remarques, nous pouvons passer à la suite de notre ordre du jour, si vous en convenez.
A. REGNIER (Director, Office for Inter-Agency Affairs): It gives me great pleasure to introduce before this Council the agenda item entitled "Recent Developments in the UN System of Interest to FAOM. The document before you is CL 90/12 which attempts to review the most recent developments. Of course, the document does not cover those items which are considered elsewhere in the agenda of the Council, for example agenda item 8.2 concerning Africa and its related documents which will be introduced later on.
Throughout 1986 FAO has continued to cooperate fully with the other organizations of the United Nations system in the inter-secretariat machinery established under the aegis of the Administrative Committee on Coordination. For example, at the October session of ACC the executive heads had a full exchange of views on the social and human impact of structural adjustment policies and on a proposal by the Director-General it was decided that the matter should be pursued and discussed further by the ACC Task Force on Longer-Term Development.
FAO has continued to provide leadership for the United Nations system in its chairmanship of the Task Force on Rural Development, as well as its significant role in the ACC Sub-Committee on Nutrition. This type of activity ensures a close cooperation of effort among the organizations of the system, particularly at a time when member governments are devoting more attention to the efficiency of the system and the optimum use of its resources.
In view of the fact that the document before you is rather exhaustive and was prepared recently, and includes matters up to September of this year, there are only a few further developments on which I would like to report at this time. These include developments in the General Assembly of the United Nations, the Annual Meeting of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, the launching of the Uruguay round of the GATT and the preparations for UNCTAD VII.
Among the many issues before the General Assembly at this session, I should like to draw to the attention of this Council two Resolutions which have been approved by the Assembly on the recommendation of the Second Committee.
The first resolution deals with the fight against the locust and grasshopper infestation in Africa. Recognizing the important work achieved by the Global Information and Early Warning System of FAO, it urges this Organization to strengthen its coordinating mechanisms and its technical and field
operational support for locust and grasshopper control. It requests the Secretary-General, in close consultation with the Director-General of FAO, to take catalytic action in raising the consciousness of the world community regarding this potentially disasterous situation and invites the Director-General of FAO to report on the locust and grasshopper infestation to the Economic and Social Council at its summer session of 1987.
The second resolution concerns the emergency situation in Africa and deals with the follow-up to the work of the Office for Emergency Operations. I should like to bring to your attention that hereto the role of FAO with regard to the early warning systems is fully recognized in the resolution. As you may know the Secretary-General has announced separately new arrangements for the follow-up to the Office for Emergency Operations which closed at the end of October. These new arrangements are defined to ensure that the experience gained in responding to the recent drought-related emergency in Africa is preserved, and to enhance the capacity of the United Nations to respond to future emergencies in a timely, effective and coordinated manner. The Secretary-General has designated a Director for Emergencies in Africa, who will also serve, at the same time, as Director of the office of UNDRO in New York. FAO will continue to cooperate closely with this mechanism and to respond quickly and effectively in the areas of its mandate and competence.
I should also like to mention the 1986 United Nations Pledging Conference for Development Activitíes, which took place in New York on 13 and 14 November. For UNDP, 90 countries pledged a total of almost $600 million, with estimates for additional pledges of $208 million. Total UNDP general resources for 1987 would thus exceed $800 million, the highest level in UNDP's history, and 4 percent higher than the actual 1986 funding level. For UNICEF, 79 governments pledged $170 million, and for UNFPA, 77 governments pledged $100 million.
The annual meeting of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund stressed the need for coordination of international economic policies. Cooperation and co-responsibility were seen as essential to stimulating non-inflationary growth, in order to make progress on the debt problem and in order to improve the functioning of the international monetary system. Structural adjustment policies were felt to be untenable in the absence of steady growth.
Slow growth was being recorded in the industrial countries, the annual meeting noted, and balance-of-payments problems remained in several industrial countries. Developing countries faced a marked deterioration in terms of trade and a deceleration of rates of growth. A deterioration was continuing both in the external environment and as a result of the drop in oil prices. Haw material producers continued to see an erosion in their terms of trade and consequently rising debt, as well as a reduction of net capital inflows. There has been no decision to undertake a new allocation of special drawing rights, despite the fact that conditions under the Statute had been met •
The meeting of GATT at Punta del Este, which launched the round, was quite successful. Regarding the structure of the round, a decision was reached by ministers, not by the contracting parties, in a declaration on trade in goods and trade in services. Trade in goods fails under the existing framework of GATT, but services remain as you know outside it.
Concerning trade in services, two approaches are envisaged. First to create a possible moderating instrument governing trade in services and second, to develop other instruments. In this regard, two new areas for discussion are trade-related investment and counterfeit and intellectual property. Looking at the more general context of the round, the declaration adopted at Punta del Este notes the importance of an improved trade environment to help the debt situation of many countries, as well as of the monitoring of the flow of resources to developing countries.
As far as follow-up to Punta del Este is concerned, the declaratio`n included a calendar. On 27 October, three negotiating committees began their work: the trade negotiations gruop, the negotiating group on goods, and the negotiating group on services. FAO has requested Observer Status in the GATT negotiations, in view of the issues under discussion which arc central to its mandate and areas of competence.
A few words on UNCTAD VII. UNCTAD VII will take place in Geneva in July 1987. It will have a single agenda item focused on the revitalization of growth and international trade. The role of the private sector will be taken into account in assessing trends. The competence of other
institutions, especially financial, will be respected, and the centrally-planned economies will be included in the review. At this time, two basic documents are envisaged: one being an analytic report on the issues, the other a series of policy proposals by the Director-General of UNCTAD. FAO will continue to follow these developments closely.
Before closing let me also briefly mention two other matters.
Firstly, the United Nations Conference on the Law of Treaties between States and International Organizations, or between International Organizations, took place in Vienna in March this year. The Conference adopted a convention. Signature of the convention should take place before the end of June 1987, prior to the disposition of instruments of formal confirmation, I am informed that, in those cases where a governing body of an organization of the United Nations system will not meet before that date, arrangements are in process for signature of the convention ad referendum and subject to a decision of the competent organs.
Second and last point, let me bring to your attention the two conventions which were adopted by the General Conference of IAEA at its first special session in September 1986. These conventions concern early notification of nuclear accident and assistance in the case of nuclear accident or radiological emergencies. The convention on early notificiation entered into force on 27 October, having received the required number of signatures of states. Several other states are applying the conventions provisionally, pending their entry into force.
At this point, I should like to bring my brief presentation to an end. I shall of course be happy to provide any information or clarification which members of the Council may wish to have.
Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Sr. Presidente, la delegación de Colombia admira sinceramente el hecho de que nuestro colega y amigo Andrés Régnier-no obstante, está dedicado ahora a tiempo pleno a otras actividades-haya elaborado adecuadamente este documento del cual ha hecho una excelente presentacion.
Parece que el nuevo administrador del PNUD empezó bien. El párrafo 5, aunque un poco ambiguo o reflejo de espejismo, habla de que el aumento de las promesas para 1986 "superará los 745 millones de dólares, más del 10 por ciento, superior al 8 por ciento convenido para incremento de las contribuciones voluntarias". Como dijo el Sr. Régnier en el párrafo 5 se afirma que esa es la cantidad mayor jamás prometida en la historia del PNUD.
Sin embargo, la ducha de agua fría viene al final de ese mismo párrafo, que dice: "Por lo que respecta a los recursos del PNUD en 1987 y los años futuros, la situación se presenta un poco sombría"-sombría, éste es un término que se está poniendo de moda ahora-"debido a las contribuciones del mayor donante"; así dice este párrafo.
Este documento que tiene fecha de septiembre, o sea, hace ya casi dos meses, pensábamos que sería actualizado por la presentación del Sr. Régnier, pero tenemos la impresión de que no, que tal vez no tuvo tiempo de actualizar esas cifras porque nos ha hablado de 800 millones de dólares y la traducción nos llegó correctamente.
Quisiéramos saber si ahora, cuando ya se conocen dos leyes del importante país mayor donante, aera posible preguntarnos sí la expresión SOMBRÍA de ese párrafo corresponde a la realidad y a cuánto ascenderán realmente los recursos del PNUD en 1987 y cuales son las perspectivas para los anos siguientes. ¿Se puede ya saber cómo ha influido o cómo van a influir las decisiones del mayor donante de los recursos del PNUD?
La delegación de Colombia senala como hecho positivo la frase final del párrafo 8, según la cual "varios países tanto desarrollados como en desarrollo, destacaron la necesidad de quo el PNUD aumente sus adquisiciones de insumos, como equipos, en países en desarrollo".
Esperamos que esa recomendación sea refrendada plenamente por este Consejo y que se incluya en el informe.
El párrafo 10 indica además que el PNUD parece que va a aproximarse de nuevo en la distribución de sus recursos en favor del sector agropecuario a los niveles anteriores, después de que éstos habían bajado considerablemente. Creemos que entre el 20 y el 30 por ciento de esos recursos, en la mayoría de los países, para el sector agrícola, es un buen índice que en nuestro informe debemos estimular con la esperanza de que aumente aún más en la medida en que así lo soliciten los países beneficiarios de acuerdo con las prioridades que establezcan sus gobiernos.
La delegación de Colombia está segura de que en la FAO se pondrá en práctica la recomendación contenida en el informe del Director General de las Nacioas Unidas de Desarrollo y Cooperación Económica Internacional, según la cual, párrafo 24, se insta a las Organizaciones del Sistema a que recurran en mayor medida a las capacidades de los países en desarrollo para la ejecución de los programas y proyectos y fomenten la cooperación sur-sur a través de la CTPD y mecanismos afines. Ojalá que esto conste en nuestro informe.
La Duodécima reunión ministerial del Consejo Mundial de la Alimentación, celebrada excepcionalmente en Roma, en junio pasado, fue poco movida. El informe está pleno de reservas.
El nuevo Director Ejecutivo del CMA, Sr. Trant, ha llegado muy silencioso. Afortunadamente ya ha comenzado a moverse un poco y tiene el propósito de entrevistarse con los representantes de los gobiernos, lo cual es muy positivo. El gobierno de Colombia está ansioso y complacido de encontrar al Sr. Trant para reiterarle nuestro apoyo a las labores del CMA. Sin embargo, todavía tenemos dudas sobre si en realidad el CMA ha encontrado un rumbo cierto y positivo. Puede ser que a lo mejor ahora, a la luz del párrafo 55 se podrá lograr el fortalecimiento de la función del CMA la luz de las recomendaciones hechas por el grupo Asesor que se ocupó de ese Consejo.
Del mecanismo de coordinación, como se definió en la Resolución de la Conferencia Mundial de la Alimentación, al CMA; ahora ese Consejo podría pasar a ser, pero ojalá de verdad y muy en serio, un catalizador político, un foro para el examen de ideas, y propuestas normativas, mediante su trabajo de seguimiento de los problemas alimentarios en el mundo. Pensamos que ya también la Resolución de la Conferencia Mundial habló de que el CMA debería funcionar dentro del marco de la FAO, situación ambigua que nunca hemos podido definir exactamente; de todos modos convendrá que el CMA colabore con la FAO expresamente sin duplicar actividades.
El apéndice A contiene las conclusiones y recomendaciones de la Duodécima reunión ministerial del CMA, de las cuales convendrá destacar el párrafo 2 porque coincide con los resultados de la discusión de nuestro tema 4 sobre la situación de la alimentación y la agricultura en el mundo.
La delegación de Colombia apoya la frase final del párrafo 2 del citado anexo A, sobre el hecho de que "la eliminación del hambre y la malnutrición se podrá lograr mediante un proceso mundial de reestructuración de las relaciones entre gobiernos, sobre una base justa, equitativa y democrática y con el establecimiento de un nuevo orden económico internacional".
Finalmente, señor Presidente, el párrafo 133 del documento 12, indica que en 1985 el total de los préstamos multilaterales en el sector de la agricultura aumentó algo en relación con 1984, pero se quedó aún por debajo de las cifras que ya se habían logrado en 1983.
En la sección de las Relaciones con las Instituciones Internacionales de Financiación, se hace referencia al Banco Mundial, a los Bancos Asiático y Africano de Desarrollo y, sólo muy de paso, se habla del Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo, BID, en el párrafo 133 para señalar una disminución en los créditos agrícolas concedidos por el BID. Convendrá que la Secretaría actualice esa información, pues tenemos noticias según las cuales el Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo está aumentando sus créditos al sector agropecuario.
Al final del párrafo 140 aparece un cuadro que contiene los principales organismos de créditos que cooperan con la FAO y con los cuales el Centro de Inversiones ha ayudado a formular numerosos proyectos en el sector agrícola. En ese cuadro aparecen el Banco Mundial, el FIDA y los Bancos Asiático y Africano de Desarrollo. ¿y el BID?. ¿El BID no aparece en ese cuadro? ¿Acaso no ha asistido el Centro de Inversiones de la FAO al BID en la preparación de proyectos agrícolas?.
Hacemos esta pregunta porque luego, después del párrafo 142, aparecen las regiones beneficiadas con los proyectos apoyados por el Centro de Inversiones, y como podrá verse en ese párrafo 142, América Latina y el Caribe ocupan el último lugar entre las regiones en desarrollo.
Creemos que la FAO debe estrechar cada vez más sus relaciones con nuestro Banco Regional y no olvidarlo completamente.
Vaclav DOBES (Czechoslovakia): I would like to congratulate Mr Régnier on his introduction. We consider the presented document CL 90/12 very lucid and important for the Council's work. We have studied it carefully because in a number of United Nations General Assembly bodies and at the Sessions of General Conference of Agencies we often happen to hear questions concerning the coordination, inter-relation and cooperation within the whole system of the United Nations. Allow me to raise a few very brief questions, answers to which are of interest to us.
First of all we think that the Thirty-Third Session of the UNDP Governing Council preparing the UNDP fourth programme cycle for the years 1987/91 was of fundamental importance to the FAO field programme. I would like to ask the Secretariat what share the FAO is expected to take in the developing projects of the next cycle. Of course, the following estimation could serve for orientation only if already forty-four of the projects the value of which amount to more than one billion dollars have already been approved and the share of agriculture will be 22 percent to 30 percent. Then it may be of interest to the Council to know whether the projects are supposed to be realized by FAO or whether there are some other ideas too.
With respect to the forty-four country programmes, the review of FAO's participation should be known relatively exactly.
As to the part of the Report concerning recent developments in UNIDO, we believe that the issue of the UNDP Technological Centre should be of extraordinary interest to FAO. Could the Council be informed of the FAO intentions concerning the problem of cooperation with UNIDO in the field of agriculture and food technologies ?
As to the part concerning the achievements of the United Nations Decade for Women, I would like to say that we appreciate that FAO does not consider the programme of the advancement of women finished by the United Nations Decade. I am convinced that the Council will further support the FAO efforts in this field.
The Development of New and Renewable Sources of Energy mentioned on page 15 of the document is long term and at the same time the practical problem, the general importance to agriculture of which is hardly underestimated by anybody.
We appreciate that in the European region the cooperation network of European institutes and the UNDP regional project yield very helpful result). I would like to ask therefore whether the pro-Jects are related to the follow-up activities on the implementation of the Nairobi Programme of Action of the Development of New and Renewable Sources of Energy.
The document contains only a few short paragraphs concerning the International Year of Peace and the problem of decolonization. However, on this occasion I would also like to emphasize that the issue of peace and disarmament and that of the development and struggle against poverty and the need for the elimination of hunger from our planet are communicating vessels. It is in the interest of our Organization to contribute within its possibilities to the relaxation of international tension and support all the United Nations efforts aimed at the strengthening of peace directed against further armaments in earth and in outer space as well.
Marc-André FREDETTE (Canada): Let me first note with satisfaction that CL 90/12 includes a new section on decisions of the UNDP Governing Council as requested at the last Conference, as well as expanded coverage of relevant activities of ECOSOC and the United Nations General Assembly. Better reporting and acknowledgement is a logical first step for the improved follow-up to the decisions and requests of the United Nations central organs.
In the interest of brevity I will not reiterate in detail Canada's well known views on the need for improved coordination. It is indeed a statement in itself to be able to refer to ten years of frustrating appeals in this regard. Suffice it tò report that firstly this is an objective Canada has persistently pursued, not only in FAO but throughout the United Nations system. I might point out also that it is not Canada's desire but the desire of ECOSOC and the United Nations General Assembly to improve coordination to which I will now refer. I wish to point this out because it is not a point we would like later to be recorded as a Canadian concern but clearly as a concern that has been recognised and decided upon by several organs of the United Nations, that is the United Nations General Assembly and ECOSOC, to which all members of this Council here belong, and decisions to which they have all participated.
Secondly, I wish to recall that the benefits of improved coordination would go primarily to the recipient countries in the form of increased programme impact for a given cost. This is specially crucial in these days of budgetary restraint and more than ever relevant to FAO now in the light of its financial crisis. Indeed, Canada has become so disillusioned in this regard that we probably would not have raised this matter if it were not for the critical financial situation of our Organization. Even in this carefully drafted document by the Secretariat no coordination emerges as a major and recurrent theme. The UNDP Governing Council made decisions on the new round table mechanisms, for LDCs. For instance the role of resident coordinators in the field was underlined at the last ECOSOC. United Nations General Assembly Resolution 14/177 stressed the need for effective and improved coordination in the UN system. Ideally these things would go without saying. However, they must be said.
In my statement I will refer to and quote from documents already approved by central United Nations organs, which incidentally are available in all official United Nations languages and I hope this will prevent any points of order or other obstacles from preventing the expression of their use.
ECOSOC Resolution 1986/74 underlines clearly the importance of UNDP country programmes as the central framework for promoting more coherent and coordinated approaches to all the UN systems technical cooperation activities, therefore including those of FAO. Indeed that Resolution invites governing bodies, including this Council, to reaffirm their full support for improved coherence of action by the UN system at the country level and for the role of resident coordinators in accordance with UN General Assembly Resolution 32/197. If 1 may digress briefly, 1 would submit that there is very little indeed unfortunately that this whole Council could probably agree to, but perhaps one of them might be the primacy of food and agriculture, and I hope another is the need for improved coordination.
That Resolution 1986/74 further invites governing bodies, like this one, to provide views and comments on the implementation of the present Resolution, in particular, and I quote, "On the role of resident coordinators, the use of UNDP country programming process as the framework for operational activities, the co-location of field offices and further harmonization of operational procedures. "
May T point out as well, given the debate here in the past two days, that the same Resolution, once again adopted by all of us, gave a mandate to the UN Secretariat, "To conduct further comparative analyses of the relationship between programme delivery oh the one hand and administrative and support "costs on the other hand. " Despite the obvious ambivalence of this body to pursue the matter, there is clearly a signal from the central UN organs to which we all agreed that this matter does deserve our attention, once again, particularly in these days of financial constraints.
Finally, we must bring the Council's attention to an oversight in the coverage of the document under this agenda item. I refer to the report of the JIU on Structure and Coordination of Field Representatives at UN Agencies in document A/41/A24. This interesting document states inter alia, and I quote “that there is an excess of field establishments, that it is sometimes doubtful whether all Country Representatives are fully occupied in the field, and that the overall pattern of representation does not make complete sense. " Such bluntness is rare in UN language. It therefore strikes us that this issue is serious enough to warrant an independent review, perhaps conducted by the JIU, particularly in light of the FAO current financial crisis. Indeed we should heed the recommendation of the JIU in that report, and I quote, "The governing body of each organization should (a) put a stay on new arrangements for the establishment of field representation, (b) test the cost effectiveness and efficiency of its field representation by reviewing the following…"-I will not read to you all the criteria but I will highlight a few. One is whether the cost of field representation in all individual cases is justified by the quantum of services delivered, whether representatives have the required authority to take necessary decisions in the field, whether all representatives have the professional and managerial talents necessary for the conduct of their responsibilities, the extent to which UNDP services are used in the field. I will save you the boredom of the other criteria, but certainly there is a proposal there that deserves serious consideration.
As an example of the relevance of such a review to the current financial situation here in FAO, may I quote one last time from that report. Paragraph 41 of the JIU report "FAO began setting country offices in 1977. There are now some 70 of them. At the end of 1983…"-which is when the report stops-"county offices had a total staff…"-and I presume it has increased since 1983-"…of 117 international professionals and 543 General Service staff, " During the corresponding period the number of FAO experts, the heart of this Organization, declined from 1964 to 1719. I therefore submit that there is here an issue of priorities and that there is at least sufficient material to warrant a review from the point of view of considering economies in this Organization by looking at this JIU report and its impact in FAO.
In conclusion, I believe we simply cannot afford not to look seriously and objectively at these issues, particularly in the light of possible economies at a time when FAO resources are most stressed.
Igor KIPMAN (Brazil): Document CL 90/12 enabled us to have a comprehensive and in-depth review of the relevant recent developments in the United Nations system of interest to FAO and once again reflected procedures and careful work of the Secretariat.
Among all the information therein included, there are some aspects of the Twelfth Ministerial Session of the World Food Council which I would like to comment upon for their relevance and importance, and here I will be perfectly in line with the observation made by his Excellency Bula Hoyos regarding this subject.
Among the many important conclusions and recommendations produced by the Council, special remark is to be attributed to its paragraph 12, which underlines the conclusions reached at the Buenos Aires consultation held last April when Latin American Caribbean Ministers explored practical ways of encouraging regional cooperation in food trade and food security, especially the initiative of the Presidents of Agentina and Uruguay for a regional treaty for assistance in emergency food situations.
Furthermore, I want to recall the request made to the Council to bring the critical problems that affect the agricultural economy of the countries o. f the region to the attention of the industrialized countries and international financial and credit organization and also the request to point out with the-greatest possible emphasis the destructive effects of the unfair and strongly protectionist trade practices employed by the developed countries on the production systems of the developing countries and the need for the former to introduce drastic adjustments in their agricultural policies.
To conclude, a special reference should be made to the fact that the question regarding the future of the Organization has remained unresolved since the Working Group report on the strengthening of the role of the World Food Council was not examined with the attention and care that its important findings and suggestions deserved.
A last remark that I cannot refrain from uttering relates to the extensive number of delegations involving some very important paragraphs of the document, paragraph 18 for example. The unusual issuance of so many reservations should lead us all to careful meditation and consideration of the present and future role of the Organization.
Rainer PRESTIEN (Germany, Federal Republic of): My delegation would like to thank the Secretariat for the comprehensive compilation of recent developments in the United Nations system of interest to FAO in document CL 90/12. We have gathered from the document that FAO participates in a wide range of activities within the United Nations system and makes in all cases a qualified contribution from its field of work. We particularly welcome the noticeable efforts towards increased coordination in the United Nations system, as mentioned in particular in paras. 72 and 73, but also in many other paragraphs of the document. An intensive cooperation between the individual organizations in the UN system is also in our opinion of special importance. We, therefore, particularly welcome the close cooperation of FAO with WHO, as stated in paras. 26 to 31. We feel that FAO can make a valuable contribution under the aspect of nutrition to the world health strategy of WHO. In the chapter on the ACC Task Force on Rural Development we particularly welcome the publication, as mentioned in para. 45, "Guiding principles for the design and use of monitoring and evaluation in rural development projects and programmes". The increased attention given by the Task Force to the role of women is also in our opinion of importance. In the chapter on UNDP we particularly welcome the increase in UNDP resources to the highest level so far (para. 5). In this respect, we likewise welcome the high share of 20 to 30 percent of UNDP funds to be earmarked for the agricultural sector. In our national bilaterial development cooperation the share for agriculture and rural development is even slightly over 30 percent.
We welcome ECOSOC Resolution 1986/74 as it appears as Appendix. B to the document before us. We consider para. 19 of this Resolution of particular importance.
Tomofumi KUME (Japan): We appreciate very much document CL 90/12 prepared by the Secretariat. That document provides us with a very brief review of the recent activities of the UN system of particular interest to FAO. We feel that such a review is very useful for the FAO in order to manage the Organization's activity effectively and to establish FAO's closer cooperation with the other Agencies so as to avoid possible duplication in its activities. In particular we recall the Twelfth Ministerial Session of the World Food Council in Rome which made useful suggestions with regard to the food centre development in Africa. It is desirable that FAO should take into account these suggestions in implementing its activities.
Waliur RAHMAN (Bangladesh): My delegation would first of all like to express its sincere appreciation to the Secretariat and Mr Renier in particular for his presentation of document CL 90/12. It is a comprehensive paper which incorporates references to efforts in various UN fora directed towards assisting the developing countries in improving the quality of life of their people. Pioneering work of the multilateral agencies including FAO in fighting the scourge of hunger and malnutrition was almost foreshadowed by that great humanist and noble laureate, Ralph Bunche when he said "Peace must be translated into bread and rice, shelter, health and education as well as freedom and human dignity". The efforts of the international community to ensure better coordination amongst the UN agencies has been on the agenda as long as the UN system itself. In this connection the document CL 90/12 presented by the Secretariat, which is under discussion, assumes a special significance under this effort.
My delegation has noted with satisfaction the level of cooperation that FAO maintains with other organizations of the UN system. In particular we noted with satisfaction the leading role that the FAO is giving the ACC Sub-Committee on Nutrition. I should also like to mention the work done by the ACC task force on Rural Development which is headed by FAO.
The conclusions and the recommendations of the 12th Ministerial Session of the World Food Council held in Rome in June 1986 have inter alia rightly stated that in respect of the world food situation there were reasons for both satisfaction and concern. There are nations that have food surpluses but a number of developing countries have experienced a deterioration in their food situation. To add to their miseries these countries suffer adversely in respect of trade in food and agricultural commodities.
We agree with the World Food Council that national food objectives cannot be achieved without the support of increased international solidarity and cooperation. We note that the present food and agricultural situation is not in the interests of either developed or developing countries.
I should now like to refer to the 33rd Session of the Governing Council of UNDP. It is heartening to note that the Governing Council approved 44 country programmes over the next five years at a total allocation of about $1 billion of which about 20-30 percent are in the agricultural sector.
We are also pleased to note that UNDP continues to lend its active support to the technical assistance activities. We welcome the stress given on the need for UNDP. to make increasing use of inputs, including equipment, from developing country sources. We are confident that FAO derived better benefit from the UNDP fund and cater for the needs of developing countries. In my country we particularly appreciate the decision of the UNDP and the emphasis given on the utilization of local expertise in implementing the programmes undertaken.
In the context of urgent need of cooperation between various international organizations, we welcome the discussion on "the Role of Inter-Sectoral Cooperation in National Strategies for health for all" held during the 39th World Health Assembly at Geneva in May 1986. The formation of the Working Group of WHO on Agriculture, Food and Nutrition stressed the need for integrated policy and planning in respect of agricultural and development policies. The working group recommended that governments should formulate comprehensive agriculture and health policies keeping in mind issues of equity and the special needs of identified target groups.
It is really heartening to note that FAO and WHO have agreed to have consultations to discuss the practical application of the recommendations and to draft a plan for joint action. It is known to all that the General Assembly at its 40th Session stressed the need for effective and improved coordination in the United Nations system. It gives us pleasure to know that FAO has been maintaining a close working relationship with the relevant UN agencies such as UNDP, UNIDO, WHO. Apart from those, the investment centre of FAO has established a close relationship with almost all the multilateral financing institutions for giving investment support to the developing countries. My country is a beneficiary of that. In this connection the sharp decrease in the second replenishment of IFAD gives us cause for concern. My delegation has noted with satisfaction that the FAO maintains close cooperative relations with UNDP and UNDRO with special reference to economic and disaster relief assistance. It continues to assist the affected countries and regions as part of its normal field activities and also as part of its emergency operations.
A number of countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America, including my own, are prone to be periodically affected by natural disasters. In a rare demonstration of solidarity the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution in its 40th Session pledging support for long-term solutions to the economic problems that my country faces as a result of natural disasters.
The observance of an International year of peace gives us satisfaction. In my own country in pursuance of the General Assembly resolution we have formed a national committee to observe this year in a befitting manner and we have given all cooperation to UN to make this year a success.
Before 1 conclude I should like to compliment Mr Regnier again for his reference co some important meetings which are not included in this report such as the meeting ac Punta del Este, UNCTAD VII, and the pledging conference in New York with particular reference to the Punta del Este meeting. It has been our opinion that developing countries, and of course the least developed among them, should be given special dispensation in any future decisions or resolutions which are going to take place as a follow-up to the Punta del Este meeting.
My last, but not the least, point is a query to the Secretariat. Very recently, as a result of the big debate of the 2nd Committee in New York, (I believe it is still going on but 1 do not know) according to the report of the Committee of eighteen wise men certain far reaching decisions are likely to be taken. Is there any relevance in the recommendations of the 18 wise men which could have been reflected in this report, but were not?
Robbie Matongo MUPÁWOSE (Zimbabwe): Our delegation agrees with the comments which the previous speaker from Bangladesh has made and we agree with some of the comments made by speakers as to the relationship between FAO and other sister organizations. However, if you will bear with me, there is an item which I feel needs some comment from us.
In the document which we examined, CL 90/12, there are sections of it which so far other members have either ignored or are happy to delete. I am talking specifically about sections 126 to 131. which apply to areas of decolonization and related matters. Lest it is cried foul that one is talking politics in a food production arena, let me dispel those sentiments because I am treating this issue on the basis of food production. You will be aware recently at the UN and the Non-Aligned Countries Conference, and also the Commonwealth Conference issues of apartheid in South Africa and the issue of the independence of Namibia and the destabilization of the southern African region have been discussed. I think it will be very unfortunate if members of this Council do not take note of the fact that in these regions there are people, small farmers, who are being deprived of an opportunity to carry out their daily activities. It was very interesting yesterday to listen to the representative of the United States expressing her sentiments and pleading for small farmers, and we very much agree with those sentiments.
One wonders whether some of these sentiments are also in sympathy with some of the activities of some of our larger contributors. I am not talking here specifically of one contributor but of the first, second and following^ who themselves have a role to play in the response of the United Nations and some of these organizations as far as responsibility towards the plight of citizens of member countries is concerned. We know that people are suffering daily because organizations are being supported and maintained and sustained financially, materially and morally by large organizations in large countries, as a result of situations depriving small farmers from going about their daily work.
Over the last few days we have been preoccupied here in discussing the issue of finances to FAO and how this will assist farmers. Yet there are people in the countries who themselves do not even have the opportunity of using these resources from FAO because they are deprived as a result of destabilization within their country. We think it is important that those members of this Organization should take cognizance of this. The issue of giving food assistance, whether through WFP or whatever organization, of assisting some of the hungry people in these areas, is not necessarily enough. I think people should go beyond that, by examining their consciences and ensuring that they are assisting the legitimate desires and wishes of members in those countries.
I also want to note the fact that in these areas one finds people who have become refugees from their countries. As a result, they have had to be assisted by neighbouring countries. We would appeal to organizations like FAO to assist some of these people in the refugee camps by developing and assisting programmes which will help them not to become merely helpless refugees, but active individuals who will participate in those resources so that they can prepare themselves for when they eventually go back to their countries.
There is the question of sanctions which I have made mention of. This question has been raised in different fora. Yet we are aware of the many sanctimonious pleas by many large countries on the ineffectiveness of sanctions. Who are we to question the effectiveness when the very citizens of South Africa and these countries have decided what they want and they are prepared to die for their country. It is said that a pittance of sanctions will not be effective. Of course, sanctions were never intended to solve the plight of people in South Africa, but anything that can be done to dissociate and isolate that obnoxious system of apartheid in Africa will be very much welcomed.
So I would like it recorded and noted that whilst we are talking of food and food assistance and development programmes there are some who are being deprived not because they do not want to work, not because they are lazy, but because the activities of some of our member countries are assisting in making life very difficult for them.
Adel Helmy EL SARKI (Egypt) (original language Arabic): We are pleased to see that the cooperation between FAO and the various UN agencies is increasing, especially in the area of supplementing, strengthening and coordinating the developmental activities, as shown in this document. For example, the document refers to the cooperation with UNIDO in the field of analysing the social and economic researches and policies, the follow-up and evaluation of the achievements of the UN Decade for Women, and the UN Conference on Science and Technology for Development. My delegation would like to commend the close cooperation that exists between FAO and the multilateral financial institutions for the benefits which the member countries can reap from this kind of cooperation. We fully appreciate the role played by the investment centre in helping countries prepare investment projects.
We would like to reiterate our support for the important role FAO is playing in Africa. We appreciate its contribution to the economic recovery of Africa through global agricultural development. Finally, we should like to thank Mr Régnier who presented this document.
R. G. PETTITT (United Kingdom): I too should like to thank Mr Régnier for document CL 90/12 and his presentation, as well as the additional news he gave us. These accounts of the activities of sister organizations and cooperating groups are well written, interesting and, as far as I am able to see from my knowledge of the few of the meetings covered, accurate and objectvive. Like the delegate of Canada, I was pleased to note that the coverage now included meetings of the UN Development Programme Governing Council.
I start, however, with a question which I hope will not be regarded as a rude one. Are all these interesting reports necessary for the Board or for us as the Board members? 1 have in mind that governments should be aware of the developments in most of these bodies since governments nowadays are normally either members or observers. For some institutions or groupings reported on, such as the ACC Task Force, I can see that information is less readily available and here the document is providing a service. But how are the rest selected for presentation to us? Obviously, they are ones that happened recently since the last report and, I was told, are about things not on the agenda elsewhere. Perhaps the reports have other uses, to inform staff or the public, and the work in preparing them for us is marginal. If so, my point falls away, but having cast doubts on the need for some of these reports, perhaps I should say what I see as the real reporting requirement.
This is a report on those meetings and decisions taken within the UN system which have significant implications for FAO or, in the case of decisions, are addressed directly or indirectly to FAO, together with what response is to be made and the action required of the Director-General or the governing bodies. This second is not only desirable for reasons of courtesy and efficiency; it is also needed to meet one of the key points in that important resolution of ECOSOC referred to by our colleagues from Canada at Annex B of CL 90/12. I have particularly in mind paragraph 14 which reads:
"Decides… and, in this context, stresses that efforts. should be undertaken to strengthen the necessary dialogue and inter-action between the governing bodies of the United Nations system concerned with operational activities for development so as to ensure consistency between decisions taken by policy-making bodies. "
In commending reports under this item on what response is recommended or planned to developments in other organizations, I am not suggesting that FAO organs should always accept and implement decisions emerging elsewhere in the system. Indeed, for some purposes we expect a spirited defence of our sectoral interests, but if the Secretariat believes that the suggestions are misconceived they should say so and the delegations will seek to attain consistent policies in the different parts of their own governments.
An example of what I have in mind of the way that a report should be written is CL 90/19, which we are going to discuss under the next item on the follow-up to the UN Special Session on the critical economic situation in Africa, where the report to Council outlines for discussion or decision future action by the FAO. There are other examples I could quote, such as the verbal reports just given on locusts and on the future replacement of the IAEA, where we were told of the implications for FAO and what we had to do. An example of the weakness I am drawing attention to is in the report of the UNDP Governing Council which, though a good report of the meeting, does not pick up the several points for decision which are directed to the agencies covering such matters as the inclusion of information on agency projects in the UNDP country policy papers and on procurement as mentioned by my colleague from Bangladesh.
I could make the same point and go on grumbling about the report of the policy review by ECOSOC of operational activities for development, but I will not do so because CL 90/12 does quote the very important resolution fully and I would prefer now to comment definitively on this. I am saved extensively from doing this by the remarks of my colleague from Canada, and 1 can shorten my remarks because I agree so fundamentally with what he said.
Perhaps 1 could say that for years we have admired the intellectual effort which has been put in by Canada to the subject of coordination and the skill and sensitivity with which the Canadian delegation, and other delegations here too modest to come forward 1 think, has steered it through the UNDP Governing Council, and these ideas form the basis of the ECOSOC resolution. The ECOSOC resolution calls for very specific action by the specialized agencies or organizations in the UN system. I will not list them but just refer in passing to the operative paragraphs.
Paragraph 8 is about procurement; paragraph 12 about assisting governments to strengthen their capacity for coordination at the overall and sectoral level, which concerns us all; paragraph 14 I have already mentioned; paragraph 16 is about providing resident coordinators with authority to carry-out their role; paragraph 17 is about field administration and collocation of field offices. In this regard I would support the proposal of the delegate of Canada for an independent consideration of this issue. Paragraph 23 is about harmonization of operational procedures in such areas as project presentation, monitoring, evaluation and procurement. Those are particularly clear signals sent out about support for the UN resident coordinator, support for him from governments and agencies alike. Like the delegate of Canada, I particularly draw attention to paragraph 15 which is directed at bodies such as ourselves, which invites the governing bodies of the organization of the United Nations system to reaffirm their full support for improved coherence of action by the system at the country level and for the role of the resident coordinator in accordance with General Assembly resolution 32/197…" I would suggest that this Council reaffirm this at this Session.
Finally, as the delegate of Canada mentioned, the governing bodies are invited to provide ECOSOC at its second regular session next year with views and comments on the implementation of the resolution, in particular on the role of the resident coordinators, the use of the United Nations Development Programme country programming process as a framework for operational activities, the collocation of field offices and the further harmonization of operational procedures. "
I should like to ask for information from the Director-General as to what the current plans are for responding to this request, and at what stage it is proposed that the membership would be involved in this, since the invitation is addressed to the governing bodies.
As I seem to recall the Director-General's submission last year was based on views expressed by the Programme Committee. Without wishing to criticise this Committee, I observe that the response seen from the perspective of Geneva, didn't seem to be particularly helpful on this. I had hoped that both "content of the handling could be different on this occasion and that our response will be positively framed. My own suggestion is that the response for ECOSOC should be considered at our meeting next spring, if this fits the relevant timetable.
Finally, my other comments are on paragraphs 26 to 31 and 32 to 40 of the report. My colleagues, in the part of our ministry concerned with health matters, have specifically requested me to welcome the efforts seen in the collaboration between the FAO and WHO to encourage comprehensive agriculture and health policies involving a coordinated approach by the UN agencies and to welcome the plans to improve exchange of experience and provide appropriate training.
As to the work of the ACC Subcommittee on Nutrition, I am not sure if this is the place to say this but I am not sure where one does give comments on an ACC Subcommittee, to whose budgets the specialized agency contributes. However, I am encouraged by the news that FAO has a leadership role here. I just have to say that the UK will continue to make the point made as an observer at the last meeting in Tokyo, that if the SCN hopes to obtain additional funding it should bring donors properly into consultation by admitting them to regular participation in meetings and reveal to them the budget of the Subcommittee.
M. Afzal QADIR (Pakistan): We admire the document, but even more so, the author who prepared it. I know Dr Regnier. I worked with him and I am fully aware of the motivation and dedication with which he conducts his responsibilities. Having said this, I would like to raise one or two very minor issues. My first observation relates to paragraph 138 of the document relating to IFAD-International Fund for Agriculture and Development. I think the paragraph stops short of saying that the contributions have so far been placed for about 200 million. I think it should have been expanded to reflect the situation that now apparently obtains. We are all aware of the fact that a special programme for Africa has already become effective and that five projects involving a total outlay of 110 million dollars have been approved and these projects are going to benefit over 15 countries. I do not know why this information was withheld. I am absolutely sure that it is not wilful, because we are all aware that FAO and IFAD are close partners for progress. They are close partners in a great human endeavour in Africa. I think, therefore, that this FAO document should have reflected the good work that IFAD is doing. This is my first observation.
The second observation that I am going to make, I might even suggest, is that the scope of the document could be broadened a little more in order to reflect FAO's consultation with some inter-governmental bodies. My reason for saying so is that earlier this year three of us, the distinguished Ambassador of Turkey, the distinguished Ambassador of Iran and I had gone to see Dr Saouma saying that a new economic cooperation organization has been established between the three countries. Between these three countries agriculture plays a dominant role, or an important role in their economies for which the FAO should be willing to provide such assistance, as the organization might require, in advancing the agricultural activities and prospects of these countries. Dr Saouma was kind enough to assure that he will extend his fullest cooperation.
This is a nascent organization-this ECO-Economic Cooperation Organization between Turkey, Pakistan and Iran. It is a new organization therefore 1 would like to see in future reports what the FAO is doing to assist this organization in its endeavours to advance the agricultural sector in the three countries in a regional context. Beyond this I do not think I would like to add anything further, 1 would like to thank Dr Régnier once again for the very excellent document he has produced and the way in which he has introduced it to us.
James E. ROSS (United States of America): My comments pertain to paragraphs 50-56 of document CL 90/12. The US delegation would like to note the appointment of a new Executive Director for the World Food Council. We want to express our confidence that he will be able to guide the Council in a manner which will make it a highly effective organization, capable of making a very significant contribution to international agricultural development. The US delegation believes FAO and WFC should closely coordinate their efforts in order to make the most use of the limited resources available to the two organizations.
Joseph TCHICAYA (Congo): Je souhaite féliciter M. Régnier pour l'excellent rapport qu'il a soumis à notre Conseil. Nous sommes reconnaissants à la FAO d'avoir fait dans ce document le recensement des activités menées par les autres organisations et qui ont un rapport avec elle.
Je voudrais tout d'abord intervenir sur le paragraphe 138 pour relever qu'il est dommage que la seconde reconstitution des ressources du FIDA ait été retenue à ce niveau justement au moment où de multiples problèmes se posent dans les zones rurales les plus pauvres de notre planète.
Je voudrais d'autre part me féliciter du fait qu'au niveau du FIDA on ait pu retenir un programme spécial pour l'Afrique subsaharienne dont les pays ont été victimes de la sécheresse et de la désertification. Nous nous réjouissons qu'à ce stade on ait pu enregistrer 200 millions de dollars sur les 300, et nous espérons que les 100 millions de dollars restants viendront compléter ce que nous avons déjà.
Je voudrais également intervenir sur le point important évoqué par notre ami du Zimbabwe. Il me semble primordial que la FAO puisse aider les peuples victimes de l'agression de l'Afrique du Sud; nous l'avons déjà dit; j'appuie entièrement toute la déclaration faite à ce sujet.
Leopoldo ARIZA HIDALGO (Cuba): Yo voy a ser más breve, señor Presidente, que nuestro cologa del Congo.
Queremos también felicitar al señor Régnier por la presentación del tema y a la Secretaría de la FAO una vez más por darnos la posibilidad de conocer todas las incidencias del mundo de Naciones Unidas en relación con las actividades de esta Organización. Sobre el tema han hablado con bastante autoridad y conocimiento del desarrollo de todo lo que se informa los colegas de Checoslovaquia y Colombia; pero nosotros queremos en esta intervención apoyar en todas sus partes la intervención de la representación de Zimbabwe y específicamente, lo que acaba de expresar nuestro colega del Congo.
Akbar Mirza KHALEELI (India): I would like to place on record the full support of India to the points raised by my distinguished colleague from Zimbabwe. The Non-Aligned Summit in Harare mandated eight foreign ministers to visit a number of developed countries, including Italy. A delegation which included our External Affairs Minister, the Foreign Minister of Zimbabwe and a number of other distinguished foreign ministers, started a tour of a number of developed countries, industrialized countries, with a visit to Rome. Naturally, at this meeting there was a great sense of cooperation and mutual understanding. It is not our intention to politicize the matter which is already highly politicized, but we should bear in mind that the type of problems that arc created, and likely to be created around South Africa are going to place an additional burden on the FAO and the WFP at a time when their resources are already stretched.
The distinguished representative of Zimbabwe mentioned the problems of small farmers. We also know that Zimbabwe has had a flourishing agriculture. It has surpluses in maize. It is a front line state, just like a number of other front line states. The UN has expressed its opinion and its decisions a number of times regarding South Africa. I think we should take note of the fact that if refugees are created by South Africa's actions with nobody to help and small farmers who are productive are to be thrown out of their land, they become a liability. They become a liability not because they wish to be a liability, but because they have no choice. Perhaps one should start thinking of steps to assist them.
A point raised by my distinguished colleague from Pakistan is important. There should be some reference to the committed projects. Here also, it is a matter of concern that the funds available for IFAD have fallen. Here is an organization which is really helpful to developing countries.
Developing countries do not like to be on the dole. They like to develop. Political and military pressures which are being exercised in Southern Africa and the neighbouring states (should not become factors or reasons for the trend towards development of agriculture in the developing world to be impeded. Otherwise, the pressures on WFP for emergency assistance become greater rather than allowing the real world food programme for development to develop. This is a point which we have to bear in mind and whilst we. would not like to politicize, we cannot keep everything in watertight compartments.
Paul A. BOMANI (Tanzania): I had indicated my desire to take an option on speaking later and I feel that we have exhausted the discussion on this very important subject. I only wish to endorse. very strongly the remarks made by my colleagues with regard to problems of déstabilisation in Southern Africa caused by and perpetrated by the apartheid regime of Pretoria. Coming from front line states, as we are, we have first-hand experience ¿n the problems that engage and affect the people of that area. As my colleague from Zimbabwe stated, that despite the fact that Zimbabwe
has been fortunate in having a good record crop this year, the neighbouring country, Mozambique, is facing a serious problem of starvation; nearly one and a half million people are facing serious problems of starvation because they were not able to cultivate and produce food for themselves. It is in this regard that I would add my voice to the points that have been expressed effectively by my colleagues.
Now, the question of destabilisation of independent countries in southern Africa must not be neglected and we do have responsibility in making sure that those people enjoy freedom, enjoy opportunity to produce and feed themselves.
Evlogui BONEV (UNDP): Thank you for giving me the opportunity to address the Ninetieth Session of the Council of FAO on behalf of the Administrator of UNDP, Mr Draper III, who wishes you every success in your important work.
FAO is the largest executing agency for UNDP-financed projects and we therefore attach a great importance to our cooperation with this agency. The document prepared by the FAO Secretariat on the various issues of cooperation and collaboration activities of this Organization with other organizations within the United Nations system during the period under review can serve as a good basis for the deliberations of the Council.
We arc very pleased to see the document CL 90/12 information on proceedings on important decisions of the last session of the Governing Council of the UNDP which we interpret as a testimony of the importance the FAO attaches to its cooperation with UNDP. We welcome this initiative of FAO as we consider it a very important element for strengthening the cooperation between the two organizations and for ensuring better consistency by their governing bodies in dealing with common issues.
Allow me to give you some fresh figures on the delivery by FAO of technical assistance financed by the UNDP. It is worth noting the total expenditure on the UNDP-financed FAO projects in 1985 amounted to US$ 122. 3 million, or one million more than in 1984. Logically, a substantial share, over 40 percent of these resources, went to the African region where most of the needs are. We expect a substantial increase in the delivery of technical assistance in the current year for which the total approved budget for the UNDP finance and FAO executed project has already reached US$ 191 million. Again the share of the African'region of the total approved budgets maintains its level of over 40 percent, as a computer printout just before my arrival here showed. This trend may continue during the next programming cycle of 1987/1991 as well if recipient governments maintain the priority they give to the technical cooperation activities in the field of competence of FAO. You may recall that for that cycle, the share of the African region in the central resources of UNDP rises to over 40 percent of the total in comparison to below 37 percent in the present cycle. The share of the LDCs; alone goes up 41. 4 percent in comparison to the 37 percent in the current cycle and a major number of the LDCs, as we well know, are in this region.
Allow me to give you some more details on the outcome of the last June session of the Governing Council of the UNDP. This Session was considered of special significance as it was a session during which the first package of country programmes for the fourth cycle 1987/1991 was approved. The Council approved forty-four country programmes for which the total resources programme amounted to US$ 3 023 million. Agriculture represented 25 percent of the overall expenditure for these programmes.
It is important to note also that in 1987 the Governing. Council of the UNDP will approve over 80 more country programmes in the various regions of the globe. The share of FAO in the implementation of the programmes will depend on the rate of priority the recipient governments themselves give to the sectors coming within the competence of this Organization.
Another important event during this Session was the deliberations during the high level segment of the Session, the theme of which was the role of UNDP in human resources development and development cooperation in the 1980s. I refer to this issue in view of the particular interest of the FAO in it and its role as specialised agency in assisting developing countries in building up their human resources in the fields of agriculture, forestry, fisheries, etc. We are pleased to note how this matter is highlighted in the FAO document CL 90/12. A challenge as multi-
dimensional as this calls for closer cooperation across the board. Human developments strategies involve multiple partners in many different sectors. We could not agree more that this is an area in which FAO has been actively engaged for many years and we will look forward to enhancing our cooperation.
With regard to the role foreseen for the UNDP I would like to draw your attention to the decision 86/14 adopted by the Governing Council after the high level deliberations.
Another issue of considerable importance and relevance to FAO dealt with by the Governing Council of the UNDP at its last Session is the issue of coordination, which is referred to in paragraph 8 of the document CL 90/12. This issue was mentioned by several delegations at this meeting as well. The UNDP Governing Council addressed this important issue taking fully into account the triennial report of the Director-General for International Economic Cooperation and Development and the recommendations contained therein. In decision 86/17, the Governing Council emphasises the need to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of operational activities for development of the United Nations systems; expresses its concern at the decline in the share of UNDP in total technical cooperation expenditures of the United Nations system engaged in operational activities for development: reaffirms the central role of the United Nations Development Programme in funding technical cooperation activities for development within the United Nations system; and emphasises the need to provide the Programme with increased and adequate resources to fulfill its role.
Some of the specific points raised in the UNDP Governing Council decision 86/17 on issues of importance in the context of the triennial review of operational activities for development referred inter alia to the following: developing a coherent strategy for long-term action; strengthening of the role of the Resident Coordinator (UN General Assembly Resolution 32/197) and responding constructively to host country requests to play a broader coordinating role; promoting collaboration between UNDP and the specialised agencies to improve project implementation; developing comprehensive surveys of technical cooperation needs within the framework of the countries' objectives; encouraging the use of the country programme by governments and specialised agencies for promoting a more coherent approach to technical cooperation activities; streamlining of procedures; encouraging better utilisation of resources of technical assistance supplies from developing countries and under-utilised donor countries; promoting harmonisation of project presentation, monitoring activities, evaluation and procurement among others, of UNDP and the agencies; encouraging the use of national and regional input and expertise in the implementation of projects whenever possible; facilitating the transfer of skills promoting the strengthening of dialogue between governing bodies so as to achieve consistency between decisions taken by central and sectoral policy bodies; and encouraging, promoting and supporting TCDC in compliance, in particular, with the Buenos Aires Plan of Action and other relevant decisions. Lastly, it was stated that the Secretary-General should consider further measures to promote coherence of action and to mobilise increasing resources for UN operational activities.
I would not go into further details of other decisions adopted by the Governing Council. 1 should, however, mention decision 86/25 which strongly supports procurement from developing countries and under-utilised donor countries. Very importantly, concern for the more effective integration of women in development was the focus of several statements. The Council adopted two important decisions, 1986/19 and 86/20, on this subject. Other decisions of relevance in FAO are those on: technical cooperation among developing countries; evaluation; assistance to the National Liberation Movements; the IPF of Namibia, the Special Needs of the Island Developing Countries, and the substantial New Programme of Action for the Least Developed Countries. All of them can be found in the report of the Governing Council to ECOSOC, document Ε/1986/29 which is also a document placed before the current session of the General Assembly for its consideration.
I was very pleased to hear the updated information by Mr Regnier, to whom I am very grateful, updating the last events related to the pledging conference for UNDP at the present General Assembly session. I do not want to repeat the figures which he correctly mentioned. I would like, however, to say that if achieved, this total amount of US$ 800 million, which partly is pledged and partly will come as it was indicated by governments which were not in a position to pledge now due to their internal legislation.
I would like to refer here to the statement of the Ambassador of Colombia who asked specifically whether the major donor contribution of UNDP is also included. 1 would like to inform him that in the best estimates, which are in the figure of US$ "800 million, according to the information
I have received from UNDP, the donation, the contribution, of the major donor is also included, as it was informally unofficially indicated to the Administrator and which of course is subject to confirmation later οn.
I should not miss this opportunity to express the profound thanks of the Administrator of UNDP, Mr Draper III, to all those countries, developed and developing alike, which have contributed Lo this outstanding result, to Finland first for a breathtaking 48 percent increase, and that is after last year's splendid 46 percent like, to Denmark and Italy out in front with 19 percent increase, to Spain and France with 18 percent and 16 percent increase, respectively, to the Federal Republic of Germany and the Netherlands with 13 percent and 10 percent increase, respectively, to Sweden with 11. 6 percent increase, to Switzerland and Austria with 9 percent and 8 percent increase respectively, and Norway and Canada with 7 percent and 6 percent, just to name a few of them.
We cannot help mentioning that when it comes to UNDP, recipients are donors as well. Among many remarkable performances, let me single out the thirteen recipients whose contributions increase, meet or surpass the Governing Council 8 percent target. They are Barbados, Bhutan, Bolivia, China, Cook Islands, Cuba, Guatemala, Maldives, Paraguay, Poland, Republic of Korea, Somalia and Yugoslavia. The Administrator's profound thanks and special gratitude goes to them as well.
Closing my statement, Mr Chairman, I would like first to tell you that 1 have taken very careful note of all comments here by the Council and these comments will be duly transmitted to the Administrator of UNDP, and I was gratified to hear those comments.
I would like finally to reiterate the readiness of UNDP to further strengthen its cooperation with the executing agencies and particularly with FAO in the common task of assisting the efforts of the developing countries towards their better future.
DEPUTY DIRECTOR-GENERAL: I would like if 1 may to comment on just two points before handing over the microphone to my colleague, Mr Regnier, to reply to a number of other issues that came up during the course of the debate.
My first point relates to the queries that were raised about how FAO will respond to operative paragraph 35 of the ECOSOC Resolution on Operational Activities for Development. This appears as Appendix Β in the document which the Council is now discussing. Paragraph 35 invites the governing bodies of the organizations of the UN System to provide ECOSOC with-and then follows a list of points on which information is requested. A somewhat similar request was made by the Economic and Social Council a year ago, and FAO was one of the few agencies that made a specific response through the Programme Committee. The response came only from the Programme Committee because there was no meeting of the Council this year in mid-year. This will not be the same position in 1987 and consequently the orderly procedure will be for this matter to go first to the Programme Committee in the Spring and then to the Council at its session in the Summer. The Council report can then be forwarded to ECOSOC.
The second point I want to comment on relates to a proposal that there be an independent evaluation of the FAO country offices. The Director-General has been rather forthcoming in responding to requests for external evaluations. He took the initiative following a number of requests from individual governments to organize an evaluation of the Technical Cooperation Programme and he is currently organizing an evaluation by an external panel of three of the FAO Action Programmes. These external evaluations do cost quite a lot of money. The Council has before it as Appendix A to one of the reports of the Finance Committee, the Annual Report of Budgetary Performance to Member Nations, in which a notation is made that $700 000 was transferred to cover the evaluation of the TCP and of the Agricultural Rehabilitation Programme for Africa. About half of that covered the cost of evaluating the TCP. The current evaluation exercises now in progress will also involve a substantial amount of expenditure. In the present financial situation, the Director-General is unlikely to be forthcoming in taking the initiative and going ahead with an evaluation of the country offices in response to individual requests, precisely because of the financial situation. However, if such an evaluation is decided by the governing bodies of the Organization, it will of course be carried out. I will now give the floor to Mr Regnier.
A. REGNIER (Directeur, Bureau des affaires interinstitutions): Je voudrais tout d'abord remercier les délégués pour leur participation à ce débat. Nous avons noté avec grand soin tous les commentaires et toutes les suggestions qui ont été faites. Ils nous serviront très certainement dans nos contacts et discussions avec les autres organisations de la famille des Nations Unies visant à renforcer la cohérence du système. Vos commentaires et suggestions nous aideront également à préparer à l'avenir les rapports que nous présenterons sur ce même sujet.
Je voudrais peut-être dire quelques mots concernant la portée du document, puisque la question a été posée de son utilité et de son objectif. Il appartient cependant au Conseil de définir si ce genre d'information est intéressante, c'est bien vrai que pour la plupart, je suis persuadé, d'entre vous avez, par vos positions dans vos propres pays, les informations concernant le système des Nations Unies et ses développements. Toutefois, par tradition, ce document a été préparé avec un double objectif. D'une part, d'informer les Etats Membres présents au Conseil de certains développements, pour le cas où ils n'auraient pas été informés, et parfois ce sont des développements très intéressants. Je me suis permis tout à l'heure d'annoncer en quelques mots les annonces de contributions qui ont été faites il y a deux ou trois semaines à New York. C'est relativement récent. Le second objectif de ce document est aussi de décrire les relations de travail et de coopération que la FAO entretient avec les autres membres du système des Nations Unies. Nous pensons que ce document peut avoir un intérêt; il nous permet de faire rapport sur les travaux de l'ECOSOC J'ai constaté qu'un certain nombre de délégations ont noté avec intérêt, et même commenté, la résolution de l'ECOSOC sur les questions opérationnelles (c'était au mois de juillet) et il est sans doute intéressant que vous ayez ce texte devant vous aujourd'hui.
Mais il est bien évident que ce document doit rester sélectif. Vous savez mieux que quiconque la portée, je di rai s presque universelle, des travaux des Nations Unies. Nous avons un document qui doit être synthétique et nous ne pouvons pas tout aborder. Nous nous efforçons d'attirer l'attention sur les points qui ont une relation directe avec la FAO, ses travaux et ses programmes. A cet égard, je voudrais également ajouter que la chose n'est pas toujours facile: par exemple, le distingué représentant du Bangladesh a demandé si les travaux du Groupe des 18 auraient pu ou dû être traités dans ce document. Au moment où nous avons rédigé ce papier (à la fin du mois de septembre), le document n'était pas encore comme dans toute sa portée réelle. Maintenant, nous ne pouvons pas faire rapport en détail non plus sur les résultats des travaux du Groupe des 18. Je suis persuadé que vous êtes au courant; ce groupe a fait l'objet d'un premier débat à la séance plénière de l'Assemblée générale; il a ensuite été référé à la Commission V de l'Assemblée. Il fait maintenant l'objet de discussions informelles. A ce stade, nous savons que si conclusions il doit y avoir, elles peuvent avoir une incidence pour le système des Nations Unies dans son ensemble. Nous ne sommes pas en mesure de vous donner les détails précis. Par conséquent, c'est la raison pour laquelle non seulement dans le texte écrit il n'y a pas de détails, mais, en même temps, dans mon introduction, je n'ai pas pensé qu'il était possible d'aller dans le détail.
En réalité, ce document doit être lu, non pas isolément mais comme une série continue. A chaque session, vous avez un document et au bout d'un certain nombre de sessions ceci doit vous donner une certaine idée de l'ensemble des activités des Nations Unies, qui ont un intérêt pour la FAO, de manière à vous permettre de réagir. Bien entendu, c'est au Conseil de nous dire si ce type de document présente un intérêt et une portée suffisants pour être placé à l'ordre du jour de notre Conseil. Un certain nombre de délégations dans le passé ont insisté pour que le document soit fourni régulièrement, et ont même demandé des informations additionnelles. On a demandé récemment que les délibérations du PNUD soient incluses et on avait demandé précédemment de faire le point des relations avec les organisations financières et internationales. Nous nous efforçons de le faire dans les limites d'un document lisible pour notre Conseil.
Je voudrais en venir peut-être à certaines questions plus précises qui ont été posées. Je voulais répondre à une question du représentant de la Colombie concernant le PNUD, mais mon collègue du PNUD lui-même a déjà répondu. Je ne vais pas m'y attarder. En ce qui concerne la Banque interaméricaine de développement, effectivement les chiffres n'apparaissent pas. Nous souhaitons en ce qui nous concerne accroître au maximum la collaboration avec la Banque interaméricaine, qui peut-être n'est pas jusqu'à présent d'un import extrêmement élevé et n'a pas fait l'objet de chiffres. Nous nous efforcerons de communiquer les informations lors de la prochaine session.
Le distingué représentant de la Tchécoslovaquie a posé certaines questions de portée générale et une ou deux questions spécifiques. La question de portée générale à laquelle je réponds concerne la part de la FAO dans le programme du PNUD. La part de la FAO dans les fonds centraux du PNUD présentement est de l'ordre de 21 pour cent. Elle était, je dois dire, de 25 pour cent en 1980 et de 30 pour cent en 1975. Il y a là un certain effritement. Mais, pour le quatrième cycle, il est évidemment trop tôt pour se prononcer.
Comme vous le savez, seulement une quarantaine de programmes indicatifs ont été arrêtés. A peu près 80 devront l'être en 1987. Il semble qu'il y ait un certain redressement, peut-être du fait de l'importance particulière, attachée à l'agriculture, en particulier en Afrique et d'ans les pays les moins avancés. Dans l'ensemble des programmes, actuellement approuvés par pays, on peut dire que la part serait de l'ordre de 23 pour cent. Comme je le disais, il y a un léger redressement.
Pour ce qui est du Centre de l'ONUDI sur les biotechnologies à établir à Trieste et à New Delhi, la FAO a offert sa pleine collaboration dès que ce centre sera fonctionnel. Nous sommes tout disposés à collaborer au maximum avec lui. D'ailleurs, déjà, la Division conjointe FAO/AIEA a proposé au moins deux projets de portée pratique pour considération dès que le Centre deviendra opérationnel. En ce qui concerne le projet sur l'énergie en Europe, je pense qu'il doit s'agir d'un projet des Nations Unies pour l'environnement. Il n'est donc pas directement lié au suivi de la Conférence de Nairobi sur les sources d'énergie nouvelles et renouvelables.
Le représentant du Canada a indiqué qu'il manquait dans ce document une référence au rapport du Corps commun d'inspection sur la représentation dans les pays. A cet égard, je voudrais dire que le système des Nations Unies n'a pas encore arrêté ses commentaires sur ce rapport. Le Comité administratif de coordination s'est abstenu, à sa session d'octobre, d'arrêter ses commentaires dans la mesure où le Groupe des 18 touche également cet esprit. Mais il faudra d'abord que la session de l'Assemblée générale soit terminée. Il reviendra sur ce point à la session de printemps 87. Bien entendu, à ce moment-là, le rapport en question sera présenté au Comité du Programme et au Comité financier avec, d'ailleurs, les commentaires du Directeur général, commentaires qui, individuellement, ont déjà été communiqués aux inspecteurs; à la session de mai donc de ces deux comités. Le Conseil recevra bien entendu les rapports du Comité du Programme et du Comité financier, comme il se doit, en juin 1987. Par conséquent, il n'est pas opportun, ni réellement possible, de traiter de ce point dans ce document à cette session-ci du Conseil et je suis persuadé que l'honorable délégué du Canada apprécie des circonstances. Le représentant du Canada a également fait de nombreuses remarques concernant la résolution de l'ECOSOC sur la coordination. Je voudrais lui dire que la FAO attache une extrême importance à la coordination en matière opérationnelle. D'ailleurs, le rapport triannuel présenté à l'ECOSOC en juillet dernier par M. Ripert, Directeur général à la coopération internationale et au développement a fait l'objet de consultations, non pas sur le texte final mais dans ses grandes orientations, avec les organes du système des Nations Unies et la FAO avait eu l'occasion de s'exprimer sur ce texte. Nous pensons cependant qu'il existe, au sein du système des Nations Unies un mécanisme assez complexe de coordination à la tête duquel se trouvent le Secrétaire général, le Président du Comité administratif de coordination, et ceci permet en quelque sorte de traiter de tous les problèmes de coordination, lorsqu'ils apparaissent. Au niveau de la coordination des pays, la FAO a également participé avec les représentants résidents à tous efforts de consultation. Nous sommes, par exemple, en contact avec les représentants résidents dans les pays pour la préparation du quatrième cycle du PNUD. Je ne veux pas entrer dans les détails, car ma réponse doit rester courte et nous pourrions donner des exemples, mais ceci a permis d'aider les pays à présenter le Programme indicatif de leur pays au PNUD en mettant un accent particulier sur le secteur agricole.
Nous pensons notamment que la FAO, avec une cinquantaine. de projets de planification, aide les pays à définir leurs priorités sectorielles, et, dans cette mesure, cette coordination au niveau sectoriel est un élément de préoccupation continue de la FAO.
Avant de quitter cette résolution de I'ECOSOC, une question particulière a été posée concernant les équipements, l'achat des équipements, dans les pays en développement. Je voudrais signaler que la proportion des équipements achetés par la FAO dans le cadre des projets mis en oeuvre en provenance des pays en développement, est de l'ordre de 25 pour cent et a tendance à augmenter.
En réalité, nous en sommes presque à pratiquer une espèce de discrimination positive lorsque cela est possible et, bien entendu, en tenant compte des types de spécifications et des coûts des équipements en question. D'ailleurs, nous utilisons notre réseau de représentants dans les pays, mais également des informations pour obtenir d'autres sources pour obtenir des informations concernant les fournisseurs éventuelles dans les pays en développement.
Un dernier point sur la coordination. Le représentant du Canada a parlé des tables rondes et des groupes consultatifs. Ce n'est un secret pour personne et, le Directeur général l'a dit à plusieurs reprises, combien, dans cet effort de participation à la définition et à l'aide des pays, et à la définition des secteurs, nous attachons de l'importance à la participation de la FAO dans ces tables rondes et dans ces groupes consultatifs et nous sommes en train d'explorer avec le PNUD les voies et les moyens permettant d'optimiser l'apport possible de la FAO dans leur préparation.
Une question également a été posée par le délégué de le Zimbabwe et appuyée par plusieurs collègues concernant l'action de la FAO dans la lutte contre l'apartheid. Je voudrais dire que le système des Nations Unies est parfaitement conscient de ce problème et le comité administratif de coordination s'y est référé à plusieurs reprises. Je voudrais dire que la FAO assiste les réfugiés sur le plan des techniques agricoles, et notamment pour l'amélioration du niveau nutritionnel-surtout les femmes - dans le cadre de l'économie domestique et de la formation des cadres. C'est donc une activité dont l'importance humanitaire ne nous a pas échappée. Je voudrais aussi remercier le représentant du Pakistan pour les mots aimables qu'il a prononcés à mon égard et. lui répondre sur les deux points qu'il a soulevés.
Effectivement, en ce qui concerne le FIDA, les chiffres cités sont arrêtés à la fin du mois de septembre. Il faut tenir compte des développements. Des engagements ont été pris depuis lors et cela aurait du être mentionné dans mon introduction, j'ai essayé d'être bref et je ne l'ai pas fait. D'autre part, il a demandé que le document à l'avenir soit élargi pour tenir compte et faire rapport sur les consultations entre la FAO et les organismes intergouvernementaux. En ce qui concerne l'ΙΕO, il s'agit d'une nouvelle organisation, il l'a dit lui-même; des consultations ont été commencées avec la FAO et, bien entendu, nous espérons qu'une collaboration pourra intervenir. Sur le plan du rapport, les relations entre les organisations intergouvernementales et la FAO font l'objet à chaque conférence biannuelle. d'un point spécifique de l'ordre du jour. Nous soumettons à ce moment-là un document qui fait le point des collaborations nouvelles depuis la précédente édition du document (lors de la Conférence précédente), et il serait probablemente trop long dans le document que nous soumettons à chaque session du Conseil de faire de même. Nous pensons qu'une revue biannuelle de ces collaborations devrait pouvoir suffire, sauf exceptions, pour lesquelles nous sommes disposés à donner les informations additionnelles, soit par écrit, soit oralement, si c'est souhaité par quelques membres du Conseil.
Je crois avoir été plus que long. J'espère avoir répondu à l'essentiel des questions.
LE PRESIDENT: Je remercie M. Régnier et M. Walton pour les éclaircissements et les informations données au Conseil à la suite des interventions des orateurs. Je dois dire que nous avons maintenant une vue panoramique des activités de la famille des Nations Unies, notamment, du Programme des Nations Unies pour le développement.
L'intérêt et la nécessité d'une coordination des activités des diverses agences des Nations Unies n'échappent à personne et tout effort dans cette direction doit être encouragé. Nous avons pris note de la réponse de M. Walton au sujet de l'application des résolus tons de 1 'ECOSOC et je pense que le Comité du programme et le Conseil suivront cette réponse et cet effort de près.
Nous avons également pris note des efforts faits par la FAO dans le groupe consultatif ou à la table ronde pour essayer d'améliorerun peu les procédures et d'harmoniser les efforts. Cependant il faudrait quand même souligner que contrairement à ce qui est dit dans le rapport, bien que la programmation des aides ou des programmes de développement puisse être effectuée en coopération ou par l'assistance technique d'une organisation quelconque des Nations Unies, celle-ci doit rester du ressort exclusif des Etats Membres. Il serait également malsain (et c'est mon opinion) qu'on vende des projets et que l'on se substitue aux Etats Membres pour définir des programmes de développement dans n'importe quel secteur, même agricole; il faut laisser aux Etats Membres le soin, dans le cadre de la politique sectorielle, de retenir leurs priorités et de définir leurs choix. C'est un point important qui mérite d'être souligné.
Le rapport a fait état de l'amélioration de liquidité et du montant global des crédits réservés à l'agriculture. Par rapport à l'année dernière, il y a eu 6 800 000 000 de dollars contre 6 milliards 100. Ce montant important est inférieur à celui de 1983 et au moment où le monde est sensibilisé sur l'agriculture et son développement, il serait éminemment souhaitable que la dotation globale ou l'effort global réservé à ce secteur soit le plus important possible.
Les remarques faites par un grand nombre de délégués au sujet de telle ou telle région méritent d’être prises en considération et tout effort - qu'il vienne des Nations Unies ou d'organisations financières internationales - devrait être recherché.
Pour en revenir à la part des projets agricoles dans les efforts du Programme des Nations Unies pour le développement, M. Régnier a souligné qu'après une chute assez importante, une petite reprise s'amorce. Nous devons appeler de tous nos voeux un renforcement de ce pourcentage qui est actuellement de l'ordre de 23 pour cent; il est bon qu'il soit aussi élevé que possible, et arrive au maximum de la frange des 20 à 30 pour cent définis dans le programme du PNUD.
Nous devrions - et c'est très important - continuer à rechercher l'intégration des ressources humaines et matérielles des pays en développement, dans ces projets, d'abord en essayant de faire appel au plus grand nombre possible d'experts de ces pays dans le cadre de la ligne tracée pour la coopération technique entre pays en développement; d'autre part, il faudrait limiter le role des experts des pays développés à celui de consultant à temps partiel, ceci afin de faire le maximum de projets avec le minimum de dépenses. Enfin, il faudrait utiliser au mieux les équipements des pays bénéficiaires.
Enfin je pense que notre Conseil devrait faire droit à la demande manifestée par plusieurs délégués pour que nous puissions inscrire dans notre rapport l'importance primordiale attachée à ce que l'on contrecarre tous les effets négatifs sur le développement agricole des pays de première ligne, de la politique d'apartheid de l'Afrique du Sud; c'est un point important qui devrait prendre sa place dans notre rapport.
Je laisse au rapporteur le soin d'avancer autre chose.
R. PETTITT (United Kindgom): I should like to thank Mr Regnier and Mr Walton for their replies, which satisfy me; they are very full. However, I should like to pick up one point made by Mr Regnier. When he used the expression in relation to procurement "positive discrimination" I hope that was his shorthand for the conventional wording of this which is in paragraph 8, which is "widen the geographical distribution of [developing countries'] sources of procurement consistent with the principle of competitive international bidding through, inter-alia …”. Is that right?
A. REGNIER (Director, Office of Inter-Agency Affairs): Yes.
The meeting nose at 17. 30 hours.
La source ent levée 17 h 30.
Se levanta la sesión a las 17. 30 horas.
