Sra. Mercedes FERMIN GOMEZ (Venezuela): Debemos comenzar por expresar nuestra satisfacción por la excelente preparación y por la presentación que de ella hizo el señor Director General Adjunto ante esta Asamblea de los documentos CL 90/19 y CL 90/21.
Expresamos nuestro apoyo al Programa de Acción de las Naciones Unidas en cuanto al objetivo de alcanzar un desarrollo más dinámico y la importancia que asigna a la función de la mujer.
No queremos desaprovechar la oportunidad que esta referencia nos brinda para recordar a este Consejo la vigencia que a este respecto tiene la Resolución adoptada unánimemente por nuestra Conferencia General de 1985 sobre la mujer en el medio rural, la cual solicita prestar atención a la mujer campesina de los países subdesarrollados en vías de desarrollo en todos los programas do la FAO, y en este caso concretamente le corresponde a la mujer africana que debe merecer preferente atención en el estudio a considerar para Africa, que apenas ha recorrido la primera etapa en el camino de su verdadera liberación del colonialismo. Para que sea una emancipación completa, para que la soberanía de las naciones africanas sea a plenitud es necesario que se haga efectiva su emancipación económica; es en el plano económico en el cual puede valorarse la verdadera independencia de los pueblos y es hacia este fin al cual consideramos nostros que se dirige el Programa de Acción de las Naciones Unidas y más especialmente el estudio que sobre Africa propone la FAO referente a la producción de alimentos básicos y en el campo de la agricultura, y cuando decimos agricultura estamos también incluyendo la pesca y la ganadería.
Pero, aún más, como bien lo plantea el señor Director General en este documento CL 90/21, dicho Programa sería mayormente efectivo puesto que ya se ha demostrado que no basta la ayuda alimentaria per se, sino que es indispensable ayudar a los países a incrementar y desarrollar su propia producción de alimentos y por ello es indispensable la ayuda en especie.
Como lo expone el documento en sus párrafos 15 y 16 deberíamos hacer efectiva la estrategia de cuatro puntos denominada las cuatro "íes" propuesta por nuestro Director General.
Para cumplir con la solicitud de la Conferencia Regional Africana que pide a este Consejo un mandato para realizar el estudio de factibilidad propuesto por el Director General queremos expresar nuestro pleno apoyo a tal solicitud, manifestando al mismo tiempo nuestro respaldo a la sugerencia de que tal estudio se extienda a otros continentes los cuales arrastran una vida de pobreza crítica degrandes masas humanas que necesitan ayuda. A estos países en vías de desarrollo el Programa de Ayuda en Especie en forma de insumos agrícolas les sería completamente necesario.
Debemos también respaldar la propuesta del Director General contenida en el párrafo 20 del documento CL 90/21 en cuanto a reformas institucionales referidas a la reforma agraria y a los servicios de capacitación, investigación y extensión, centradas principalmente en las necesidades del pequeño agricultor.
Debemos recordar aquí que en la Conferencia Regional de Barbados, la cual tuvo lugar en agosto de este año, el punto central fue la solicitud hecha al Director General de la FAO de un estudio de las condiciones económicas de América Latina y el Caribe, lo cual fue aprobado por unanimidad. Lo que deseamos expresar aquí es que veríamos con agrado que al realizar el estudio de viabilidad para Africa se tome en cuenta este hecho para incorporar, cuando se trate de extenderlo a otros continentes, el estudio de referencia, sobre todo con aquellos países que enfrentan problemas de abastecimiento.
Resumiendo, queremos finalizar nuestra intervención ratificando nuestro apoyo al documento, en el contenido del párrafo 46 y en consideración al párrafo 48, con ayuda en especie; esperamos que así como este estudio debe abarcar a todos los países, debe ser también considerado para lograr un consenso pleno.
Y para terminar, nos pronunciamos por que este estudio se emprenda de inmediato a fin de que pueda ser presentado para su consideración y aprobación a la Conferencia de 1987.
Tawfik A. H. AL MESH-MEDANI (Iraq) (Original language Arabic): I should like to express my delegation's satisfaction at the introduction of the documents under discussion. The two documents under discussion are, indeed, worthy of our appreciation, and I find document CL 90/21 on the in-depth study in Africa an appropriate one. It contains a clear outline and description of the situation.
I should like to refer more specifically to the contents of paragraph 29 of the document and the reasons for increasing aid-in-kind. The analysis in this paragraph of the reasons for increasing this aid are valid ones. As to the means of undertaking the study, described in paragraphs 46 to 49, these are also valid. As concerns the question whether we should undertake the study or not, we agree to undertaking the feasibility study provided that it takes into account more specifically the needs of Africa and a number of other developing countries which are also encountering problems in obtaining their production inputs.
In adopting such a policy, nevertheless we should like to point out that we would not accept any form of aid which would be conditional or tied aid.
Hidayat GANDA ATMADJA (Indonesia): Allow me to share our comments in reviewing the documents under discussion, that is documents CL 90/19 and CL 90/21, regarding African food and agriculture.
Let me first of all congratulate Mr Walton on his excellent presentation. My delegation has studied the papers carefully and we find them quite comprehensive. For a long time we have been monitoring the active leading role of FAO in solving the agricultural problems in Africa. We have also witnessed the. Director-General's full attention on this matter. We arc of the view therefore, that FAO's contribution to African agriculture is not only significant but really commendable.
The report on the In-depth Study of Agricultural and Food Problems in Africa is quite satisfying as far as my delegation is concerned. The Programme of Action for African agriculture, namely the four "i's" strategy, that is incentives, inputs, institutions and infrastructure, and expansion of aid-in-kind, should be regarded as wise approaches. With regard to the four points of strategy, my delegation is of the opinion that these are the right methods to foster food production. Similar strategies have been the key elements in the success of Indonesian food production programmes which achieved self-sufficiency two years ago. The Government of Indonesia would welcome sharing its experience with other developing countries, especially in Africa.
Taking into account its successful achievement in rice self-sufficency, a token contribution equal to about 100 000 tonnes of paddy rice was donated by the Indonesian farmers for the people who badly needed it in other countries, particularly Africa.
My delegation would like to emphasise that a political decision by the concerned Government to place the agriculture and food production programme as the main priority of its national development, followed by an appropriate pricing policy, would provide greater incentive to farmers to produce marketable surpluses. Provision of inputs such as seeds, fertilizers, pesticides, credits etc., in the most appropriate way would be prerequisites for the successful achievement of the programme. This would include the right provision of inputs in terms of appropriate time for the appropriate place, appropriate quality as well as quantity, and appropriate price related to farmers' purchasing capabilities. The institutional setup and infrastructural developments to support food production development programmes would be of fundamental importance.
With regard to the proposal for stepping up aid-in-kind, my delegation fully supports the Director-General's proposal for a further detailed study of the proposal, not only for the African region but also for other developing countries. My delegation would like to stress that aid-in-kind should be developed in such a way not only in the framework of North/South cooperation but also in the scheme of South/South cooperation. Considering that the implementation of aid-in-kind should take into account the effectiveness of the assistance, it is my delegation's view that participation in the study of the concerned Government with the country under study is of great importance.
Rainer PRESTIEN (Germany, Federal Republic of): As previous speakers have done, 1 should also like to associate myself with the statements in document CL 90/19. We welcome the presentation of FAO's follow-up of the UN General Assembly Special Session on the critical economic situation in Africa. Let me mention that the Federal Republic of Germany took an active part in the deliberations of this important session.
We support the UN Programme of Action for African Economic Recovery and Development 1986-1990, to which paragraphs 9 and 10 of the document refer. Africa has always been and continues to be one of the most important focal points in the Federal Republic of Germany's overall economic cooperation. The volume of our technical and financial cooperation with Africa from 1950 to 1985 amounted to DM 32.2 billion, approximately $16 billion according to the present exchange rate. During this period of time we increased the share of agriculture and rural development to more than 30 percent. This demonstrates the high importance we attach to this sector. My country has always recognized the moral duty to help mankind in need.
With regard to the feasibility study proposed in the document, I refer to the statements which the distinguished representative of Belgium made in view of this item on behalf of the Commission of the European Communities. The Federal Republic of Germany will continue its fruitful development cooperation with Africa. In so doing we will attach special importance to rural development as we have done since the inception of our cooperation efforts thirty-six years ago.
Adel Helmy EL SARKI (Egypt) (original language Arabic): Allow me, at the beginning of my statement, to express my deep thanks to Dr Walton for his clear introduction of documents CL 90/13 and CL 90/ 21, currently being examined by the Council. During the 13th Regional Conference for Africa we welcomed the proposal to undertake a study of agriculture and food problems in Africa. During the 14th Session of the Regional Conference the completed study was examined and Egypt expressed its full satisfaction with it. We welcomed more specially those items related to the development of human resources and the harnessing of the necessary financial resources for increased production. The Egyptian delegation wished to express its full support fox the Director-General's programme aimed at increasing aid-in-kind provided in the form of production inputs. This form of aid plays a vital role in increasing agricultural production. We, therefore, join other delegations in endorsing the proposal to request the Director-General to undertake a feasibility study on the possible volume of inputs.
We would also like to seize this opportunity to stress the importance of the special programme for Africa currently being implemented by IFAD and which Egypt fully supports. This programme indicates the importance attached by the international community and donor countries to helping those nations still suffering from the effects of drought and famine. Egypt attended the United Nations special session on revitallizing the African economy. There we expressed our full satis-
faction with the decisions and measures resulting from that meeting. I would like to express my special support for what his Excellency the Minister of Agriculture of Tanzania stated at this morning's meeting, namely that the development of agriculture in Africa is first and foremost the duty of the sons of Africa and none other.
Igor KIPMAN (Brazil): In connection with this subject I would like to say that the interests of my country in the overall development of the African nations and the ties which unite our peoples are well known and I need not elaborate at length about them. I will only mention that within the constraints imposed by financial difficulties some cooperation programmes are under way involving Brazil and African countries.
Regarding the feasibility study demanded by the African Regional Conference, my delegation feels that all efforts should be undertaken by FAO to have it completed as that study will certainly be an important tool for the continent's integrated development. I, therefore, extend the support of my delegation to this project.
I would like to recall that the 19th FAO Regional Conference for Latin America in the Caribbean, held last August in Barbados, also requested that a specific study be done to analyse the present crisis of Latin America and Caribbean agricultural economic situation as well as its implications on the long-term development of the region, in what pertains to food and agriculture. That request is stated in paragraph 20 of the report of that meeting. In this connection we would appreciate it if the Secretariat would take into consideration in that study the new concept of aid-in-kind as it comes to be dealt with in the feasibility study for Africa. I am, therefore, pleased to notice that some common aspects arise and the methodology employed, as well as results achieved, might be complementary to each other. For brevity's sake, I want to conclude by expressing the support of my delegation for the points raised by the distinguished delegate of Mexico.
Thomas YANGA (Cameroun): Je voudrais tout d'abord vous exprimer la satisfaction de ma délégation de vous voir présider nos travaux à un moment important non seulement pour notre ordre du jour mais également pour le continent africain. Permettez-moi de remercier M. Walton pour son excellente présentation du sujet dont nous débattons.
Du 29 mai au 1er juin 1986, l'Assemblée générale des Nations Unies a consacré sa 13ème session extraordinaire à l'examen de la situation économique critique de l'Afrique; et par sa Résolution S/13/2 l'Assemblée générale a adopté à cette occasion le programme d'action des Nations Unies pour le redressement économique et le développement de l'Afrique 1986-1990. Ce plan d'action a repris le plan d'action prioritaire d'action économique de l'Afrique 1986-1990, présenté par l'OUA et qui constitue un pacte de solidarité entre l'Afrique et la communauté internationale pour sortir celle-ci de la situation économique critique où elle se débat désespérément.
A l'intérieur de ce pacte, l'Afrique, tout en reconnaissant sa responsabilité première dans la situation critique où elle se retrouve, s'est engagée à mettre en oeuvre les politiques et les programmes exigés par cette crise profonde (et ce, même si ce programme est draconien et fort douloureux); la communauté internationale par ailleurs s'est engagée à fournir un effort supplémentaire pour répondre à l'appel lancé par l'Afrique.
Du fait d'un heureux concours de circonstances, bien avant cette session spéciale de l'Assemblée générale des Nations Unies, l'Afrique avait demandé à la FAO, lors de sa Conférence régionale à Harare en 1984 une étude approfondie sur la situation agricole et alimentaire de l'Afrique. Cette étude a contribué de façon positive à la formulation du plan d'action économique prioritaire pour l'Afrique préparée par l'OUA. Les conclusions de l'étude présentée à la 14ème Conférence régionale de la FAO pour l'Afrique, à Yamoussoukro en septembre 1986, ont été appuyées par cette conférénce, compte tenu de la convergence qu'il y avait entre elle et les conclusions du plan d'action prioritaire présenté par l'OUA. Il ressort de cette étude que l'accroissement de la production agricole est largement inférieur à celui de la population; et de ce fait, l'Afrique connaîtra dans un avenir proche une situation alimentaire de plus en plus catastrophique si la tendance actuelle est maintenue.
Pour y remédier, le Directeur général de la FAO a proposé un plan d'action dont les composantes visent à l'amélioration des quatre "i", incitations, intrants, institutions et infrastructures. S'agis-sant des engagements pris par l'Afrique, concernant le programme d'action des Nations Unies, il est fait état de ce que les gouvernements africains étaient en train de prendre des mesures importantes de réorientation des politiques et de réformes indispensables pour la reprise et le développement de leurs économies.
S'agissant des engagements de la communauté internationale, mis à part quelques gestes isolés fort appréciés par les Africains, nous nous trouvons encore dans des situations d'attente, et dans le cadre de la réalisation de ce point, nous croyons que l'aide en nature peut jouer un rôle important, notamment dans le développement du secteur rural.
Nous notons dans le paragraphe 42 du document CL 90/21 que le Directeur Général de la FAO, suite aux souhaits de la Conférence régionale pour l'Afrique, souhaite que le Conseil lui donne mandat d'effectuer une étude de faisabilité sur l'aide en nature. Permettez-moi de féliciter très chaleureusement le Directeur général pour avoir eu cette courageuse idée sur l'aide en nature sous forme d'intrants qui, face à la situation de crise économique et financière internationale généralisée, est la seule solution envisageable.
S'agissant de ce mandat, la résolution adoptée par la session spéciale des Nations Unies fait appel à toutes les institutions spécialisées des Nations Unies pour appuyer pleinement cette action. Cela revient à dire que la FAO a déjà un mandat, peut-être non explicite mais en vérité un mandat de l'Assemblée générale des Nations Unies, et tous les pays membres du Conseil ne peuvent que suivre cette recommandation des Nations Unies.
D'autre part, on nous parle d'une étude de faisabilité; ce terme de "faisabilité" fait penser à une situation d'incertitude quant au résultat final; et tout à l'heure, la déclaration de l'honorable délégué de la Belgique, au nom des pays membres de la CEE a soulevé une certaine inquiétude de notre part. Or, si l'on regarde le tableau 5/96 sur l'étude de l'agriculture africaine dans les 25 prochaines années, que pouvons-nous constater sur les statistiques préparées par la FAO ? Il ressort par exemple, en ce qui concerne l'utilisation des engrais en Afrique soudano-sahélienne que l'on utilise environ 2 kg d'intrants/ha sur les cultures vivrières; en Afrique occidentale humide et subhumide 5 kg/ha; en Afrique centrale, 1 kg/ha; en moyenne en Afrique occidentale subhumide et montagneuse, 4 kg/ha; en Afrique australe subhumide, 14 kg/ha, ce qui donne en gros une moyenne d'environ 5 kg/ha pour l'Afrique subsahélienne. (Un hectare fait environ 10 000m2. ) Si l'on ramène ce chiffre à la densité d'une culture comme le mais, qui en monoculture a une densité d'environ 50 000 pieds, on voit que la quantité d'engrais utilisée par pied tend vers zéro. Je peux vous fournir un autre chiffre aussi alarmant concernant l'utilisation des tracteurs, moissonneuses et batteuses.
Bref, ces chiffres montrent à l'évidence que l'Afrique a cruellement besoin d'accroître les quantités d'intrants agricoles qu'elle utilise; mais ces chiffres appellent non plus une étude de faisabilité, mais plutôt un plan d'aide en nature, en vue de l'accroissement de l'utilisation des intrants agricoles pour l'Afrique.
En ce qui concerne cette aide en nature, nous souhaitons que la notion d'aide en nature et même la notion d'intrants agricoles puissent être utilisées dans le sens le plus large possible afin de répondre aux conditions spécifiques des différentes régions de l'Afrique. Par exemple, que représenteraient pour un pays du Sahel des millions de tonnes d'engrais mis à sa disposition s'il n'avait pas d'eau, qu'elle vienne du ciel ou des systèmes d'irrigation ? Et je me remémore la déclaration que nous a faite, à Genève, à la quatorzième conférence pour l'Afrique, M. Félix Houphouet Boigny: "Donnez de l'eau à nos frères du Sahel, ils vous en seront plus reconnaissants, ils cultiveront leur sol, cette eau leur permettra de pratiquer l'agriculture et procurera le fourrage de leurs animaux".
De même, comme l'a signalé M. Walton, l'efficacité d'une aide supplémentaire en intrants est étroitement liée au développement d'autres secteurs. Je voudrais mentionner ici les mesures d'accompagnement qui devraient être envisagées tant en aval qu'en amont avec la mise en oeuvre d'un tel plan, car il y a beaucoup de choses à prendre en considération avant le lancement d'une telle opération. C'est aussi l'occasion de lancer un appel à tous les pays et organismes fournisseurs d'aide en insistant sur la nécessité de réaliser dans son intégrité le Programme d'action des Nations Unies pour le redressement économique et le développement de l'Afrique.
En conclusion, notre délégation donne son plein appui à la mise en oeuvre du Programme d'action des Nations Unies pour le redressement économique et le développement de l'Afrique, et plus particulièrement à une étude sur l'aide en nature car celle-ci cadre parfaitement avec la notion de modernisation de l'agriculture à laquelle s'est engagé mon Gouvernement pour les cinq prochaines années par son sixième Plan quinquennal de développement économique et social.
Dans un premier temps, la réalisation d'une telle étude devrait concerner l'Afrique. Plus tard, elle pourrait s'étendre à d'autres régions en développement tel qu'envisagé dans le cas de l'étude approfondie de l'agriculture africaine. Et surtout, comme le propose le Directeur Général dans le document CL 90/21, elle devrait assurer pleinement que le pays bénéficiaire coopère et participe entièrement à toutes les phases de sa réalisation.
James D. AITKEN (United Kingdom): I would like to begin by welcoming you to leading our Council for the first time this Session. 1 think from your intervention this morning we all know you will be able to bring certainly the wisdom of Solomon to any judgements.
We would like to thank the Deputy Director-General for his excellent introduction to this item. In common with a number of other countries we welcome the successful conclusion of the United Nations Special Session on Africa and the guidance given in the Plan of Action. There is now an impressive sense of purpose to develop solutions to African problems. This was a process started with the Lagos Plan of Action and continued with the Harare Declaration.
The United Kingdom was privileged to attend the African Regional Conference as an observer. We were impressed by the determination and the commitment of African Ministers of Agriculture to take the difficult decisions necessary to increase agricultural production on the continent. It is good to hear today from the interventions of our African colleagues that this determination remains and has been reinforced.
At the Africa Regional Conference the United Kingdom observer made it clear that we consider that the FAO study "African Agriculture: the next 25 years" to be an excellent document. It is a comprehensive work and in our view one of the most successful and significant studies produced by FAO in recent years. The identification of the four "i's", incentives, input, institutions and infrastructure, is an excellent encapsulation of ideas. The emphasis on a conservation-based development strategy and the recognition of the importance of population policies is in our view totally sound. However, it is the recognition of the need for appropriate policies which favour agriculture which gives this study its central strength and authority. We were thus pleased to see the Programme of Action proposed by the Director-General endorsed at the African Regional Conference.
Turning now to the question of aid-in-kind, we welcome the recognition given to the role which can be played by what we call programme aid in. improving agricultural production. Our aid programme has included programme aid for some time now and indeed in recent years we have switched aid from project to programme aid, particularly in response to the problems in Africa. Where economic circumstances suggest it is an appropriate response we are always prepared to consider switching the forms of our aid to maximize its effectiveness. Our experience is that programme aid must be handled sensitively and flexibly if it is to succeed. Programme aid for agriculture cannot be considered in isolation from activity in other economic sectors and national development plans.
Turning now to the question of the feasibility study on the basis of the terms of reference given in CL 90/21, we have some reservations on the terms of reference but I am happy to say that in his comprehensive and detailed opening statement the Director-General has answered many of our questions and reassured us. We see this as a timely exercise to develop more effective forms and delivery systems for existing aid flows.
In the light of Mr Walton's opening remarks, we now feel reassured that central to this study will be the recognition that the other three "i's" identified in the Africa study, infrastructure, incentives and institutions, have to be developed in parallel to enable countries to benefit from inputs. Here 1 would very much like to refer to and support the remarks made by the delegate of France in this aspect. We consider that the study should concentrate on the positive aspects of aid-in-kind identifying techniques and programmes. In our view the country studies are essential if the overall study is to be a practical document pointing the way to help the farmer in the field. In the final analysis, programme aid is given on a country basis and it is tailored to the individual needs. We must hope that financial pressures will not lead to the dropping of these particular country studies and, in fact. we consider them to be very central. We hope the study will enable FAO to develop its capacity to advise countries on how to formulate requests for programme aid and also help countries with problems of switching between different forms of aid with the readjustment of priorities this may require.
We believe that Africa's problems are urgent and we consider, in common with a number of other delegations, that initially the study should be limited to Africa. Any proposal for expansion should be phased so that they can learn from experience in Africa. At the Regional Conference at Yamoussoukro, the United Kingdom indicated it would be pleased to share its experience with FAO and participate in-any study. I can confirm this and confirm that we endorse the proposals for the feasibility study as described by Mr. Walton and outlined in CL 90/21. Like many other delegates we would also like to stress that we hope that while concentrating on inputs, FAO will not lose sight of the need to provide assistance especially to African countries to enable them to develop the other three "i's". It remains the view of my Government that Africa should continue to be given priority in FAO's programmes.
In conclusion I would like to state that my Government attaches considerable importance to effective coordination of the effort to help Africa. We hope that FAO will continue its efforts to coordinate its activities with other UN and multilateral agencies using and respecting their established mechanisms and procedures.
R. MacINTOSH (Canada): The Canadian delegation was also to some degree satisfied indeed with the reasonable and pertinent assurances provided by the Deputy Director-General this morning. However, we continue to have some reservations over the proposal to undertake a study of aid-in-kind. We are a little concerned that rather than dealing with the substantive merit of aid-in-kind the proposed terms of reference of these studies seem confined to the measurement of the input-gap and the examination of the administrative modalities for putting the scheme into operation.
FAO has performed an invaluable service through its production of a comprehensive study on "African Agriculture: the next 25 years". Apart from the very thorough research that has clearly gone into this document one of its most welcome features was the attempt, a good one we think, to articulate the basis of a policy strategy, that is priority to agriculture, the so-called for "i's", the importance of conservation and changes in the external economic environment. The strength of the African study lays in its analysis of the African situation and the challenges faced by African countries when dealing with it. These challenges are first and foremost challenges of policy and challenges of strategy. Throughout the study attention was properly devoted to the complexity of the issues and to the need for appropriate balance in the actions taken to address those issues. Obviously nobody can argue against the need for more readily available modern inputs in support of African Smallholders. The point is against what strategy would such shipments take place. As the delegate of the United States, as well as other delegates from the United Kingdom, France and Mexico, how can we be sure that balance will be preserved among the various priorities and programmes that may be selected. Are inputs indeed a central catalyst, as they tend to be portrayed in the documents? Is there really a firm relationship between certain rates of growth in agricultural output and certain levels of aid-in-kind? The briefly cited example of India in the 1960s, that is in document CL 90/21, is an interesting one, though we believe that many observers of the Indian experience agree that their success was primarily as a result of the determination and vigour of its policymakers as well as once again the application of an all-fronts approach. The recent successes in China have not been noted in document CL 90/21 and while obviously there are significant differences in the situation we are not aware that the availability of aid-in-kind has been a major factor.
It was my privilege to have attended as an observer the Regional Conference at Yamoussoukro. At the Conference I recall a wide variety of opinions on the usefulness of this initiative-that is, relative to other priorities in the region, such as research, water conservation and technology transfer.
Canada is only one donor in Africa. We are at once proud of our record yet fully aware that more must be done. In our fiscal year 1986/87 Canada anticipated that $900 million will be spent in the African region. The assistance is being allocated in various types and through a variety of channels. The configuration is a combination of what Canada is in a position to provide, what our African partners ask us to do, and what we both agree will have the highest impact for the resources available.
We do detect an increased interest in programme aid and we have responded where this is mutally assessed to be feasible and cost effective.
If Africa should approach us for programme aid in the form of agricultural inputs we would of course consider it. The important point to observe is that even in a context of generally increasing aid levels, as is the case in Canada, the choice of aid-in-kind would be most unlikely to involve additionality. It is a question of one type of aid over another type. Moreover, and contrary to the suggestion on page 7 of the English version of the Programme of Action, whether or not aid is provided in kind or not, it still must be financed from a limited official development asssitance budget.
Finally, we would ask two questions: first, is this really the time to be speaking of more tied aid, of moving back the cycle of dependency one notch from food aid to that of agricultural inputs; and secondly, in this particular time in the current international trade system, do we really want to open new opportunities for increases in subsidized commodity exports?
We urge for the terms of reference for any study, if it is approved by this Council, to include an examination of national food and agricultural strategies as an initial step, followed by a consideration or appraisal of the role of programme aid in achieving the objectives of those strategies. We feel that this is a more logical and realistic approach than to initiate an aid-in-kind scheme and figure out a strategy later to accommodate it.
M. Afzal QADIR (Pakistan): I will start by apologizing that 1 feel handicapped in my understanding of the subject matter under discussion by reason of the fact that I was late in arriving at this Council this morning when a statement, widely acclaimed and enthusiastically received, was made by the Deputy Director-General in launching the document and in kicking off the debate thereon.
Judging by the number of delegations participating in the debate, the item has rightly attracted the serious attention it deserves. I would like to take this opportunity to reiterate on behalf of my government that the suffering and the plight of the people of Africa is one that has struck the deepest chords of sympathy in the hearts of the people of Pakistan. We would wish, and it would be our sincere hope, that the African problem would be a short-lived one, so that the valiant people of Africa would be able to resume their endeavors towards enriching the civilization of this world untrammelled by fears of hunger, malnutrition and shortages.
As far as the document is concerned, I find it interesting for the substantive matter that it embodies and more for the reflection of the serious desire on the part of FAO to play a central role in the alleviation of the African problem.
There is much to commend in this document and less to criticize. However, I find the title of the document, namely Follow-up on the General Assembly Session, is a misnomer because two-thirds of the document is devoted to FAO's technical contribution prior to the General Assembly Session rather than as a follow-up to it. The essential questions bearing upon the follow-up are, what has been achieved by way of resource mobilization for the African programme, and. secondly the steps taken towards actual implementation.
The document is silent on these matters, leading us to conclude that progress has been slow in these respects.
The first question relates to firm financial commitment, whether multilateral or bilateral, for the $45 billion foreign exchange component of the African programme over 1986 to 1990. Undoubtedly this is a considerable amount and it would be our expectation that the donor countries would contribute generously in reaching the target, matching the genuine concern that they have expressed over the African situation.
The second question relates to the preparation of plans, programmes and projects by the African countries themselves with technical assistance from FAO and other institutions. The Programme has been well underway for a year now and it still is not clear where we stand in these two respects.
I would like to point out in this connection that IFAD's African programme has already been under implementation. It became effective only in May of this year.
As regards the modalities of implementation, which have been described in paragraph 27 of the document, we find the first sentence of the paragraph seemingly misleading. The Steering Committee's note mentioned in the paragraph is presumably "on" implementation and not "for" implementation, as the document says. The real implementation will be done by the governments themselves. The Steering Committee's task will hopefully be to mobilize international support in various forms, including the strengthening of UNDP Round Tables and the World Bank Consultative Group. The Steering Committee's views at paragraph 29. 3 (e) seem to allude to a "policy dialogue" between the donor and the recipients. In this respect we would like to say that while the donors' participation in a policy dialogue with the recipient countries is a reasonable donor expectation, the sovereignty and sensitivities of the recipient countries should be respected. What I am trying to say is that the term "policy dialogue" should not be used as a cover for acquiring "policy leverage" on the recipient countries.
As regards the UN Africa Programme and the African situation in general, our comments are that while the UN Programme recognizes agriculture as the main engine for economic development, the fact is that the programme as it stood in May 1986 when it was adopted devoted only 45 percent of the total programme investment to agriculture, the rest going to industry, transportation and communication, trade and finance. I would assume that these areas would be supportive of the agricultural sector. Then again, the deep-rooted, as well as the multi-faceted, nature of the crisis that we have in Africa points to the need to identify key issues. What is included in the programme seems more of a shopping list for housewives going on an errand in the morning.
We are heartened to note that the African governments have declared their resolve, as in the Lagos Plan and OAU etc. , to devote at least 20 to 25 percent of their total national investment to agriculture. With this I would conclude my observations on document CL 90/19.
Now I come to document CL 90/21. The relationship between FAO's programme and the UN programme has not been made clear in this document. The timeframe of the United Nations programme is four years, 1986 to 1990. The perspective of FAO's study on which the Programme of Action is based is 25 years. FAO's programme nevertheless is commendable, comprehensive and based on an indepth analysis. It presents its conclusions in stark terms. It paints a frightening Malthusian picture in which unless something is done fast some African countries could find themselves relentlessly engaged in a struggle for survival with famines like the one of 1983/84 occurring even in times of normal rainfall.
We have noted with satisfaction that the potential for agricultural development does exist through the four i's-inputs, infrastructure, institutions and incentives-as well as a conservation-based approach. A large number of important factors are covered under these rubrics. The international framework of aid, trade, protectionism, etc is alluded to as an important factor which in the case of export orientated countries may be a key factor.
As regards paragraph 4 of the document, it talks of FAO programmes' complementarity with the UN programme. Similar complementarity of the IFAD programme for Africa is not mentioned.
The four-point strategy prepared by FAO is commendable, but irrigation seems to have been underemphasized. Paragraph 6 of the document bears this out. We would like to have an elucidation as to why this important element in the overall strategy has been relegated.
Regarding paragraph 12, we are fully supportive of the need to evolve close linkage between Agricultural research, extension and education.
As regards the main proposal for a feasibility study on aid-in-kind we feel as many delegates before me have felt that it can serve a very useful purpose, considering that aid-in-kind has potential benefits for both donor and recipient countries. We therefore support the proposed feasibility study.
In conclusion, I should like to say that given the dynamism with which the Director-General has been addressing the problems of Africa, it will not be beyond the ability of FAO to implement the Programme of Action that he has formulated. We would request him to see that not much time is lost in putting this Programme of Action into place, so that these programmes become self-executing ones at the earliest opportunity.
Ms Anne-Lise PETERSEN (Denmark): We have studied with interest the documentation in front of us and we have listened carefully to the introduction of this important matter. We have also received the executive brief of the in-depth study of the Food and Agricultural problems in Africa, document CL 90/21, however brief, contains the findings of the FAO African study together with a summary of the Programme of Action for African Agriculture. Although we have not received the full study we find that the brief is a well-structured description of all development issues which are well known to the donor countries. We accept that the starting point for making comments on this Agenda item is that the Fourteenth Regional Conference for Africa (as indicated in its Report) has endorsed the main findings and recommendations and, furthermore, thoroughly endorsed the Director-General's four-point strategy of agricultural development. It is in this light that we are making some suggestions and comments.
During the last two years we have participated in a number of donor meetings arranged to mobilize aid for the rehabilitation) of Africa's agriculture. During that discussion of the Rehabilitation Programme we all stressed the importance of having the long-term development in focus. Now that we are considering the long-term agricultural development of that continent, on this occasion we would have liked to have been confronted with an account of the results of the Rehabilitation Programme and how this is now placed in the long-term plans. Furthermore, it would have been of help to us had we been given the detailed study.
One further point which we should like to comment upon is the idea of FAO being given a mandate to carry out a feasibility study of the possibility of stepping up a id-in-kind in the form of agricultural inputs. In this connection, I feel it necessary to make some general comments.
Each year Denmark has pledged a steady increase in the financial volume of their development assistance. We have also, as accepted policy, been giving high priority to the development of agricultural production and stabilization of food supplies in the developing countries. Therefore, the total framework is set and every new programme can only be implemented at the cost of other activities being given a lower priority. In other words, no principle of additionality can be applied just because a new programme is adopted. This certainly applies to the proposal for an aid-in-kind programme.
It is stated that the proposal for stepping up aid-in-kind is a means of balancing aid to produce food in comparison to the increasing food aid. Whilst we acknowledge that a proper equilibrium between different kinds of assistance should be subject to permanent monitoring, we do not agree that at present an in-balance exists between aid to produce food and food aid. I feel it important to emphasize that aid-in-kind is being utilized in a big way to generate bilateral aid from donor countries to recipient countries. In fact, some countries call this kind of assistance "tied aid". A multilateral organization such as FAO should, in our opinion, consider very carefully whether or not it would be advisable to embark on an activity which is predominantly being handled bilaterally.
From the document in front of us, we note that the Director-General is now suggesting that the feasibility study should be a global study. In this connection we should have to express a serious word of warning. In this context we would also warn FAO against any re-establishment of a link between so-called surplus capacity of industries in the developed countries and nid for development. Eventually that could turn history back to the situation we had some twenty years ago. In food aid, for instance, we have almost succeeded in cutting such links. In our view the international development assistance and specifically agencies such as FAO should not change the balance too much from software to hardware.
Concerning the proposed feasibility study, we are now faced with having to make a decision in the Council. However, we find it might be premature to start such a global feasibility study at this stage. However, a preliminary step could be made to review how agricultural inputs are channelled and used to date by bilateral agencies and international financial institutions in Africa only. Such a review could be made at a much lower cost than that estimated for a full feasibility study. It would give a preliminary indication on the possible need for changing the balance and composition of the different kinds of development assistance to the food and agricultural sector. Only with this information available will we be in a position to decide whether a final feasibility study would be worthwhile. In this connection, perhaps we could ask whether any other international organization has made an account to see whether or not a breakdown focusing on the agricultural, forestry and fisheries sectors, could not be made in a fairly simple way.
In confirming Denmark's unconditional support to assist the countries of Africa in their agricultural development, in making this statement we wish to issue a warning that the FAO, as primus inter pares of the United Nations family in the agricultural sector, should not be diverting from the course laid down in numerous donor meetings and in the special UN sessions on the particular development problems in Africa.
In conclusion, I should like to say that in the present critical situation, the whole UN system should try to derive any benefit possible from maximum cooperation and coordination.
Humberto CARRION M. (Nicaragua): Nuestra delegación ha tomado debida nota del contenido del documento CL 90/19. Creemos que estuvo plenamente justificada la convocación del 13 periodo de sesiones de la Asamblea General de carácter extraordinario que examinó la crítica situación económica en Africa. Todos conocemos los antecedentes económicos y climatológicos que llevaron a esa convocación y en este sentido reconocemos la plena colaboración que prestó la FAO al octavo preparativo de la Asamblea extraordinaria soble el arroz así como también reconocemos el compromiso político adoptado por la OUA en julio de 1985, que constituye, sin lugar a dudas, la voluntad de los dirigentes africanos de ejecutar el Programa de Acción de las Naciones Unidas que hace además hincapié en el sector de la alimentación y la agricultura.
Nuestra delegación está convencida de que toda actión para el desarrollo debe partir de las voluntades políticas nacionales y que la cooperación de la comunidad internacional es necesaria para que esa acción para el desarrollo pueda materializarse.
La situación económica de crisis por la que atraviesa el Africa no es cualitativamente distinta de aquella que atraviesan las otras regiones en desarrollo. Las causas son las mismas y las principales causas tienen origen externo, pero es en Africa donde la crisis económica es más acuciante y, por lo tanto, esa región amerita une atención y asistencia prioritaria de los países industrializados y de aquellos países en vías de desarrollo, incluyendo países africanos mismos, que estén en condiciones de prestar asistencia dentro del marco de la cooperación Sur-Sur.
Otra condición para el desarrollo, para la producción agrícola y alimentaria es la paz. Condenamos entonces enérgicamente toda actividad, militar o no, que realiza el régimen oprobioso de Sudáfrica para desestabilizar a los países vecinos.
Por otro lado, agradecemos al Sr. Walton su presentación del documento CL 90/21. Este documento contiene información útil sobre el estudio a fondo de los problemas agrícolas y alimentarios en Africa así como las soluciones solicitadas a la FAO por los propios países africanos para que se presentaran en la 14 Conferencia Regional de la FAO para Africa en septiembre pasado. Nadie es mejor que los propios gobiernos africanos para definir y ejecutar su propia estrategia para salir del estancamiento y del decrecimiento actual de la producción de alimentos. Entendemos que esta estrategia incluye un programa de acción para la agricultura africana que es plenamente compatible, es más, complementaria del Programa de Acción de la Asamblea General de las Naciones Unidas ya que formula sugerencias concretas en cuanto a la forma de poner en práctica algunos componentes del programa de acción de la Asamblea General.
Aquí cabe felicitar al Director General de la FAO, Sr. Edouard Saouma, y reconocemos su dinamismo y su dedicación para tratar de resolver el flagelo del hambre en el mundo y en el Africa particularmente por haber elaborado el programa de acción para la agricultura africana que se compone de dos partes: una estrategia de cuatro puntos para aumentar la producción alimentaria y una iniciativa concreta para incrementar la ayuda en especies como elemento catalítico para aumentar la producción, según se desprende de los párrafos 15 al 35 del documento CL 90/21, entendiendo que en las propuestas del Director General se subraya que sin la asistencia externa, Africa no puede lograr resultados satisfactorios y que para que Africa obtenga por sus propios medios recursos para su desarrollo es indispensable una transformación estructural en las relaciones internacionales de intercambio. Esto es extendible a todo el mundo en desarrollo.
En base a los párrafos 29 al 31 del documento CL 90/21 sobre el aumento de la ayuda en especies, particularmente basados en los párrafos 35 y 41, apoyamos las conclusiones a que llegó la 14° Conferencia Regional de la FAO para el Africa y apoyamos la propuesta de que la FAO realice un estudio de viabilidad sobre las necesidades de ayuda en especies al Africa, según el enfoque establecido en los párrafos 42 al 47 del documento en cuestión y según el enfoque complementario hecho por la delegación de México.
Temel ISKIT (Turkey): Allow us first to say how pleased we are to see you in the chair when we are discussing this particular item of our agenda. Let me also express our congratulations to the Deputy Director-General for his very clear and to-the-point introduction to this item.
The United Nations Special Session on Africa was a success. First of all, it constituted a good example of international solidarity at a time when the spirit of multilateralism needs strengthening, and the Programme of Action unanimously adopted in New York is, without doubt, one of the most comprehensive and action-oriented documents ever produced so far by the United Nations on any subject.
The first part of the document, that is the Africa Priority Programme for Economic Recovery 1986-1990, adopted by the African Heads of State and Government in July 1985, represents the unprecedented resolve of a whole continent to overcome its huge problems of underdevelopment and poverty. This comprehensive commitment to self-help deserves the highest praise and admiration. The African countries themselves decided on what to do, and the priorities they set up as well as the action upon which they are embarking are clearly the wisest and soundest ones. However, it is also obvious that the success of African efforts depends on the full support or commitment of the international community.
That brings us to the essential second part of the UN Programme of Action requiring intensified cooperation and substantially increased support at bilateral, regional and global level. Increased net flows of financial assistance, especially in the field of agriculture-which has the priority of priorities, as Mr Walton put it, in the Plan of Action-and the alleviation of Africa's debt problems are certainly central to this support. Here we can only review the appeal to especially bigger donors to increase their financial assistance, to improve the quality of their aid, and take measures to cope with Africa's indebtedness. However, aid not being a panacea for development, improvements in the external environment conducive to the expansion of trade opportunities for Africa appear to be a must. Above all, this requires the elimination of protectionist policies and practices impeding especially African countries' exports and thereby hindering their structural adjustment efforts.
It is obvious that with the adoption of the historic UN Programme of Action for Africa a new phase has begun in redressing the critical economic situation of this continent and paving the way to its sustained development. It is now no longer necessary to waste previous time in setting forth the objectives. It is necessary to act to implement the Programme. A speedy follow-up is the only thing which counts now.
As concerns the follow-up at the international level, we believe that the close cooperation and coordination of all related institutions of the United Nations is essential. That is why we welcome the appointment by the Secretary-General of the United Nations of a steering committee for the implementation of the Programme of Action. We are certain that FAO should and will play the most prominent role in this committee.
All United Nations institutions should harmonise their actions already initiated or to be initiated towards helping Africa along the guidelines set forth in the UN Programme of Action. We think that this harmonization would also encourage the donors to increase their assistance to Africa through multilateral channels. Among such multilateral actions already initiated, we should particularly mention the IFAD Special Programme for Sahel Countries. This programme, which is in line with the UN Programme of Action, deserves to be funded completely to permit its full implementation.
Since the UN Programme of Action recognises agricultural development as the main engine for recovery and long-term development in Africa, it is only natural that FAO should play the role of vanguard in its follow-up at the global level. This prominent role is not only justified by the mandate of FAO but it is also deserved by the long-standing record of actions already launched and effectively pursued by this Organization towards the rehabilitation of agriculture in Africa. All the same, the promptness with which our Organization responded to the "Call of duty" deserves the warmest of tributes. No doubt, FAO's active contribution for the preparations for the UN Special Session has been vital to its success. Without such a contribution most certainly the New York paper and the African paper would not have been elaborated or at least would not have achieved the maturity they reflected.
As for the follow-up, we note with satisfaction that the FAO Programme of Action based on the findings of its remarkable study "African Agriculture; The Next 25 Years" is in full conformity with the UN Programme of Action. In fact, since it contains specific suggestions as to the implementation of certain elements of the UN Programme, it complements this Programme by translating this strategy into tactics. We believe that the soundness and timeliness of the FAO Programme of Action is already confirmed by its principal addressees, namely all African States, by its adoption at the Fourteenth FAO Regional Conference for Africa held last September. The reconfirmation by OAU of approval given by the Regional Conference consolidates, certainly, the validity of the Programme.
After such a strong condoning of the Programme by the African countries themselves, it would have been almost redundant for my delegation to comment on its first part relating to the four point strategy to raise food production. We can only hail the soundness of the first three points. As to the fourth point concerning the improvement of the international economic environment, we have already expressed at the beginning of our intervention the importance we attach to increased trade opportunities and to expanded financial and technical assistance for African countries, as well as to the alleviation of the burden of debt of the continent.
Now 1 come to the second part of the Director-General's programme, namely stopping up aid-in-kind, which addresses an important aspect of financial assistance to Africa and to developing countries in general. We have studied carefully the proposal put forward in document CL 90/21. Since the Council is called upon to take a decision or give a reaction concerning the feasibility study which forms the first step of this proposal, we thought we also on our part should express our views on the subject.
First of all, we entirely agree with the Director-General that the consensus among the recipient, as well as the donor, countries is essential for initiating such a study, and we hope that as clear a consensus as possible will emerge from our meeting. In this present case-and it is a rare occasion for my delegation-we are speaking from the position of a donor. Although Turkey's experience as a donor country is quite recent and her programme of aid is relatively modest, still
the disbursement of our assistance of $10 million to Sahel countries is well under way and, more importantly, the emphasis of this aid is shifted towards technical assistance rather than food aid. It also includes, incidentally, a component of aid-in-kind involving the supply of agricultural inputs.
Not only for this reason but also because we believe in its usefulness we find that the Director-General's proposal is fully acceptable to us. We think that this is a path well worth being explored. Also, given the complexity of the subject, we think that a feasibility study is required to determine the additional possibilities existing in this field, that is in addition to the actual aid-in-kind practices. We think that such a study may even give an impetus to the already on-going aid-in-kind actions by focusing the attention to this kind of assistance of the decision makers and administrators of donor, as well as recipient countries, even if it does not lead to more detailed action programmes.
We also believe, for reasons of emphasis as well as of economy, that this study, while covering the surplus capacity of all developed donor countries, may at the initial stage be confined to African recipients only. Its extent can be enlarged to cover all developing countries if and as appropriate at a later stage.
A. K. M. Kamaluddin CHOUDHURY (Bangladesh): It was our special privilege to participate in and contribute to the UN Special Session on Africa in May 1986 in New York. We express our appreciation to the Director-General of FAO and the Secretariat for the constructive efforts they have made towards the success of the Special Session in New York.
The Fourteenth Meeting of the Regional Conference of FAO in Africa held in September 1986 made a significant contribution to implementing the first phase of the recommendations of the Special Session.
As regards document CL 90/21, my delegation has always been appreciative of studies of this nature which help to crystallize problems and help us focus attention on issues of such critical nature as that of African agriculture.
In the light of the very clear introduction of the Deputy Director-General, my delegation has no doubt about the feasibility study of this kind to find out the practicability of aid in kind directed towards enhancing the agricultural production as a sound proposition. My delegation would extend its support to this undertaking.
In this connection my delegation attaches particular importance to the proposal of the Director-General which he has subsumed under the four "Is". We are particularly happy to note that the FAO would coordinate its efforts with the UNDP Round Table for the preparation of the feasibility study.
Danilo VUJICIC (Yugoslavia): I would like to commend the Secretariat of FAO, and particularly the Deputy Director-General, Mr. Walton, for his introduction to the subject and for presenting a very useful analysed report on all African food crises, and the national and international action to overcome the acute food crisis and for laying the foundation for a long-term solution. 1 would like to underline and praise the initiatives and the role and contribution of FAO in fighting the acute crisis and in the preparation of the UN special session which approved the global UN programme of action for economic recovery and development of Africa by 1990, in which food agriculture has a central role to play. For this reason it is logical to expect that the international organizations in the field of food and agriculture, particularly FAO, have to play a central role in the follow-up activities as well.
The UN Programme of Action, and the conclusions and recommendations of the African Regional Conference held in Yamoussoukro should represent the backbone of the future follow-up action by the national governments of Africa and international community including the governments of donor countries and international organizations. I would like to stress here the necessity of a
coherent and coordinated action by the FAO and other inter-national organizations in this field. Here I also have in mind IFAD which has launched and approved, by the governing council, a new additional financial facility of 300 million dollars for Sub-Sahelian African countries affected by drought. In the implementation of this decision of IFAD we would welcome continuation and strengthening of the cooperation between IFAD and the FAO, giving always priority to the needs and the requirements of the developing countries concerned.
In general context of the implementation of the programmes approved by the UN General Assembly, as well as African Regional Conference, my delegation appreciates and supports the proposal contained in document CL 90/21 including the action orientated towards development of food and agriculture in Africa through the increased assistance-in-kind. This approach has proved its effectiveness in recent history, particularly having in mind the positive results of the so-called green revolution in Asia, as well as experiences of many other developing countries.
In the framework of the approach and implementation of the programmes approved, we also support the African countries' request to the Director-General of FAO and the proposal of the Director-General, to work out a feasibility study on stepping up aid-in-kind in the agricultural development of Africa. In executing this task the Director-General should have the full support and assistance of all countries, in the preparation of the study and later in the implementation of the programme to follow. Here, I would like to stress, that my delegation does not go along with, and could not understand those delegates, who have been expressing themselves against the idea of the necessity for additional resources for these purposes, for the development of agriculture in Africa, in this manner.
As a number of other delegates before me, I would like to stress that the study should focus at this stage on Africa. However it may, as appropriate, take into account the situation, needs and facilities of developing countries from other regions and recommend elements for a more global action in this respect in future. The study should be prepared in time for the next FAO Conference to enable it to consider it properly, make suggestions and take decisions on further action. The study should take into account the suggestions made during this session by all delegates, but particularly those from Africa who have dealt very comprehensively with this. Particularly, I have in mind the very contentful statement of His Excellency, the Minister for Agriculture of Tanzania. As the representative of Indonesia and some others this afternoon, I would like to stress the need, and to request the Director-General to take into account in the study, the possible role of economic cooperation amongst developing countries on the effects of the increased aid-in-kind in the agricultural development of Africa.
The experiences and capacities of inputs, production and supply by developing countries, both in Africa and in other regions, should be integrated into a cooperative action by all countries, African, other developing and developed countries, as well as by the international organizations concerned, particularly FAO.
Antonio Albertino AFONSO DIAS (Sao Tomé-et-Principe): Monsieur le Président, je suis très heureux de vous voir à la Présidence.
En ce qui concerne les documents CL 90/19 et CL/90/21 relatifs à la situation économique en Afrique, qu'il nous soit permis de remercier le Directeur Général pour avoir déjà mis à exécution l'une des recommandations de la Conférence générale de la FAO pour l'Afrique de Yamoussoukro, en Côte d'Ivoire, et de remercier également M. Walton pour son excellente présentation des documents. Cela dit, nous nous déclarons en faveur de la réalisation du programme d'action et, pour ne pas répéter ce qui a déjà été dit, la délégation Sao-tomienne fait sienne la déclaration si pertinente de la délégation congolaise.
Chavaly SRINIVASA SASTRY (India): I would submit that the proposal for taking up a feasibility study, as contained in the document CL 90/21, deserves to be supported by this Council. The critical economic situation of Africa was considered by the UN General Assembly in May and June last. The problems of Africa, in the field of food and agriculture, were gone into twice in the last two regional conferences for Africa of the FAO. On the basis of the request made in the 13th FAO Regional Conference for Africa in July 1984, the Director-General has got a study carried out of the agricultural and food problems in Africa. What does this study, based on country level and sub-regional analysis reveal? It shows that the present food supply position, not as liquid as it is in some instances, is unsustainable. It also shows that if no concerted action is taken, Africa's food situation will deteriorate further during the next 25 years. Famines of the magnitude experienced during the 1983/84 drought could become a regular feature, even periods of more normal rainfall. Highlighting the drain on the foreign exchange of these countries, if they were to meet the shortfalls through imports, the report indicates the scenario which would show that the result would be chronic famine. Some countries would hover on the brink of survival with incalculable consequences not only for Africa, but for the world at large.
These portents have serious implications and significance for the world as a whole and have a special relevance for the FAO in view of its charter and objectives. In this context the Director-General has proposed a programme of action in two parts. They underline the fact that Africa cannot succeed without help from outside. Another significant point, emphasized by the Director-General, was that there is need for a balance between food aid and aid to produce food. In this context the role of aid-in-kind, which is not really new as a concept, and which we know had played a significant role in the launching of the Asia's green revolution, has been highlighted in the Director-General's report.
Whilst I would thank the delegate from Canada for the references he has made to the achievements in the field of agriculture in India, I would, with due respect, submit that the situation in India today, and in many of the Asian countries, is radically different from the problems that are facing the countries of Africa in 1986/87. Possibly, the situation now in Africa is comparable to the situation existing in the early sixties in India when there were looming shortages in food production.
The Canadian delegate has also referred to the concept that for achieving self-sufficiency it is the national will that counts and not so much the aid from abroad. Whilst I would submit that nothing on earth can substitute for the will of the nation to pull itself up by the boot strings, the aid from abroad, in terms of commodities, also could be of considerable significance, provided it is matched with the requirements of the country and the efforts made by that country to improve its own agriculture, as the Indian experience has amply shown.
This report of the Director-General containing his recommendations was accepted by the Fourteenth FAO Regional Conference on Africa in September 1986. The Conference has accepted the three-point programme of the Director-General covering expansions of aid-in-kind, enhancement of local production of inputs and promotion of inter-regional trade in inputs. The Conference accepted the view that a feasibility study was required to explore the practicability of aid-in-kind and that is the background for the proposal we are now considering today. In relation to this proposal, as we see it, the questions we have to answer are four. Firstly, should there be such a feasibility study at all? I would submit that against the background of what has been mentioned and considering that the financial profit involved would not be very high we would strongly support the proposal that the feasibility study be undertaken.
The second question that arises is what should be the time frame for the study and when should the report become available? Considering the problems that the African countries have been facing and recognizing that time is of the essence in the operation, we would suggest that the study be carried out as early as possible so that the report becomes available to the Council in 1987 and thereafter to the 1987 Conference. By the time the Conference meets, the report would have been analysed and would possibly have resulted in a specific plan and a programme of action which could be carefully studied by the Conference, resulting in concrete further action.
Thirdly, what should be the terms of reference? The delegate from Canada has suggested a widening of the terms of reference of the document suggested in paragraph 46 of the document and has suggested that the national strategies for obtaining agricultural development should be analysed and they should be studied in the context of efforts being made by the member countries as to whether those strategies can be achieved. We would submit that these wide-ranging terms of reference would not only be expensive in terms of money, but also in terms of time. We would also therefore support the proposal that the terms of reference, as envisaged in paragraph 46 of the document, be agreed to without any further broadening.
The last question which we have to face is whether this feasibility study should cover only Africa or should it cover other developing countries all over the world? Considering that the proposal emanated from the background of two Regional FAO Conferences on Africa, it would be appropriate that Africa remains as the main focus for this proposed feasibility study. However, without any severe stretching of the timeframe envisaged, if it becomes feasible to cover, say, a few developing countries outside Africa, possibly they could be considered, subject to the conditions that no further time would be needed for this feasibility study.
Subject to these observations, we would submit that the proposal for the feasibility study be endorsed by the Council.
Amadou Moustapha KAMARA (Senegal): Ma delegation vous adresse ses félicitations et se réjouit de ce que vous présidiez cette séance consacrée aux problèmes de l'Afrique. Je voudrais, au nom de la délégation sénégalaise, féliciter M. Walton pour la présentation claire et concise qu'il nous a faite des documents CL 90/19 et CL 90/21, qui portent respectivement sur l'action de la FAO consécutive à la session extraordinaire de l'Assemblée générale des Nations Unies sur la situation économique critique en Afrique et sur le rapport sur l'étude approfondie des problèmes agricoles et alimentaires de l'Afrique.
Ma délégation, tout d'abord, félicite le Directeur général de la FAO et ses collaborateurs pour la contribution décisive de notre Organisation à la préparation et aux premières actions de la mise en oeuvre du programme d'action des Nations Unies pour l'Afrique. Deuxièmement, pour demander au Conseil de donner un mandat impératif au Directeur général de la FAO pour entreprendre l'étude de faisabilité pour un accroissement de l'aide en nature et en intrants à l'Afrique. Troisièmement, pour établir que, si les objectifs de l'étude esquissés à la page 11 du document CL 90/21 constituent l'élément essentiel des termes de référence de l'étude envisagée, ils constituent pour le Sénégal une base solide et acceptable, puisqu'ils prennent en considération les exigences de développement de la production locale d'intrants et de promotion des échanges interrégionaux d'intrants.
Ma délégation estime que ces propositions pour l'accroissement de l'aide en nature en intrants résultent des conclusions de l'étude approfondie de l'Afrique, ou de l'agriculture africaine, les 25 prochaines années, et concernent ainsi le continent africain. Son contexte devrait, en unpremier temps, se limiter à l'Afrique, en attendant que les études en cours sur les autres sous-régions ou régions soient achevées afin qu'on puisse établir pour ces régions, des priorités qui ne seront pas nécessairement, j'en augure, axées sur les intrants. En tout état do cause la rigueur et la logique militeraient en faveur d'une telle démarche et d'une telle approche.
Avec l'appui de la FAO, notre Organisation, et de son Directeur général, M. Edouard Saouma, un grain a été semé à Addis-Abeba en juillet 1985. Il a commencé à germer à New York, en mai et juin 1986, il a entamé à Yamoussoukro en septembre dernier sa phase d'étalage. Pour qu'il puisse aborder sa forme de montaison à Rome, il est nécessaire que notre Conseil lui en donne la possibilité. Ma délégation souhaite que vous la lui donniez afin que dans les toutes premières années nous puissions nous atteler à sa moisson.
Robbie Matongo MUPAWOSE (Zimbabwe): The Deputy Director-General must be thanked for a clear and concise presentation of a programme on possible aid-in-kind. FAO met its obligation to the call made in the Harare Declaration and now has developed a proposal that aims to come up with practical proposals. We hope that the study shall have a practical approach. We believe that many people are now aware of the food plight of most developing countries. It is the practical use of available knowledge and resources to remedy the situation that needs to be focused on. There is need to examine also and come up with measures to protect the environment. Land protection, nutrition and measures to avoid degradation should be emphasized. Deforestation with its resultant evils, lack of pasture and livestock management and also water resource conservation are all facets that should be discussed when attempting to improve agriculture.
The Deputy Director-General made mention of the estimated costs of the order of about 400, 000 dollars which could be reduced to about 200, 000 dollars by inclusion or exclusion of case studies. We strongly believe that on a subject as important as this, penny-pinching will not be a wise move. We are conscious of the financial problems the Organization faces, but this type of study can only have its true worth and value when clearly substantiated with practical case studies.
The roles and complementary activities of regional institutional organizations, such as SADCC in the Southern African region, should be included in such case studies. So much is happening in developing countries which have a general shortage of training manpower. Attempts should be made to avoid any duplication of activities because the man or woman-hours are becoming very stretched.
We fully agree and thank you for the eloquent comments which you made, Mr Chairman, when you were talking on behalf of your country and we believe those comments also represented those of the SADCC countries and those OAU members, of which you are a valuable member yourself.
We can assure FAO of all necessary support needed from our region in carrying out this study. We give this assurance in our capacity as the coordinator of food security and agriculture in the SADCC countries.
Joseph TCHICAYA (Congo) Je voudrais, avant tout, dire toute la satisfaction que j'éprouve à vous voir présider ce débat si important pour l'Afrique. Je voudrais aussi m'excuser de prendre le parole à cette heure tardive, mais étant donné les responsabilités qui sont celles de la République populaire du Congo dans le suivi du Programme d'action des Nations Unies, vous permettrez qu'au terme de ce débat nous puissions nous exprimer au nom du Président en exercice de l'OUA. En effet, nous avons reçu mandat du Président en exercice de l'Organisation de l'unité africaine de suivre de près les débats sur cette question au cours de ce Conseil. Ceci montre tout l'intérêt qu'il attache à la réalisation de cette étude, susceptible d'engendrer un mécanisme d'aide additionnelle
permettant à l'Afrique d'accomplir la mission qu'elle s'est fixée avec l'appui de la communauté internationale. Nous sommes sensibles à l'accueil globalement favorable qu'a reçu cette proposition. Nous tenons à transmettre les sentiments de gratitude du Président en exercice de l'OUA et de toute l'Afrique aux éminents membres de notre Conseil et aux gouvernements qu'il représente. Certes, nous étions convaincus que la communauté internationale, qui a apporté unanimement son appui à l'Afrique à la session extraordinaire de l'Assemblée générale des Nations Unies, ne pouvait pas se déjuger cinq mois plus tard. En effet, il s'agit ici de chercher et de trouver les moyens et les voies d'accroître les ressources pour appuyer les efforts annoncés et entrepris par les pays africains eux-mêmes: efforts visant la réalisation du Programme prioritaire 1986-90. Nous nous réjouissons qu'il se soit dégagé ici un consensus ausi large.
Il nous revient donc de nous féliciter des résultats de nos débats qui montrent une fois de plus combien la situation critique de l'Afrique est partagée par la communauté internationale, sans exclure qui que ce soit dans ce dialogue. Nous voudrions lancer un appel aux pays encore hésitants, que nous savons être amis de l'Afrique, pour qu'ils se joignent au consensus général qui s'est dégagé dans cette salle, afin qu'ils participent pleinement au processus de réalisation de l'étude en mettant à la disposition du Secrétariat les données statistiques nécessaires à la réalisation d'une étude de faisabilité viable.
Le fait que l'étude ne concernera que l'Afrique, dans un premier temps, ne doit pas frustrer nos amis et frères du Groupe des 77. Nous voudrions les remercier pour leur sens de la mesure et le caractère altruiste de leurs interventions. Une fois de plus, la solidarité du tiers monde a joué positivement. Soyez assurés que l'Afrique n'oubliera pas le témoignage de générosité dont vous avez fait montre à notre égard. Nous émettons le voeu que cette étude s'effectue dans une perspective qui accroisse véritablement l'aide à l'Afrique, car il ne faudra pas perdre de vue que l'Afrique a besoin, annuellement, de 9 milliards de dollars supplémentaires pour exécuter entièrement son programme prioritaire. A cet égard, aucune confusion n'est possible. L'aide en nature, dont il est question ici, est une aide additionnelle que les pays développés ont promis de fournir, éventuellement, pour appuyer les efforts des pays africains eux-mêmes aux Nations Unies, et apporter ainsi tout l'éclairage voulu aux déclarations faites par nos amis du Canada et du Danemark tendant à s'interroger sur ce sujet.
Mrs Millicent M. FENWICK (United States of America): The United States has already spoken but I cannot resist saying something that 1 am so longing to say to you and to my fellow colleagues. I do not represent any tremendous organization like the OAU whose representative has just spoken; so I just have to ask your indulgence more personally.
I was struck by what the delegate from Zimbabwe had to say. I was there and 1 saw the master farmer scheme. More than 50 percent of the people enrolled in the particular village 1 visited were women. This is a nation-wide system and we have a wonderful training and visiting system in India which has been used in 40 countries as developed in India, the training and visiting system. So when the delegate of Zimbabwe said “let us not have duplication", I was struck, remembering that visit to Zimbabwe and what we have heard about the training and visiting. But I would like to say something to the Secretariat and to any experts in this scheme for the feasibility study. 1 would urge that one goes down into the village and listen. Maybe there is a group of farmers who have formed an independent cooperative, their farms are near together, and maybe they could well use a tractor because they would have the dues from their cooperative to pay for the fuel and the spare parts. But not every farmer will want a tractor. Some will want a donkey or a pair of oxen or a horse or something to pull the plough, to take the cart so that they can get their produce to town. So sit down and listen and see what is wanted. It is not enough to say it will vary country by country. I have been in so many African countries and one area varies from another. You cannot say this will be all right in Tanzania. Look at the Chaga district which the delegate has spoken about. So sit down and listen. That to me is where the beginning of all the improvement is going to take place. If it does not start there, none of it will be any good. Big ideas in air-cooled offices will not do it.
CHAIRMAN: I thank the representative of the United States for her timely warning and for her experience in the field. I think we all share the feeling that the grassroots participation approach is the best.
Mrs. Millicent M. FENWICK (United States of America): Mr Chairman, the oxen would give input, fertilizer-I forgot to say that.
Horacio CARANDANG (Philippines): At this stage of the debate I can afford to be very brief, just to say that the Philippines believe that the feasibility study on aid-in-kind for Africa deserves to be supported. We hope there can be a consensus on the desirability of undertaking the feasibility study so that there can be justification to allocate the necessary resources for this purpose. We believe that this study should initially be limited to Africa, and if resources and time allow, it could be extended to the other regions. The reasons for this are spelled out very clearly in document CL 90/21.
First we say that food production can be increased by greater inputs. The amount of output can only depend on the amount of input. Land gives out according to the measure we put in. The green revolution in Asia has been possible only when rice and wheat grains have been invented that were responsive to fertilizer and when fertilizer was available, together with the appropriate technology. Second, because of the high debt problem of Africa, you need to make this available. The aid-in-kind would probably be a way of circumventing the problem of shortage of resources in inputs, this aid-in-kind of fertilizer and other needed inputs.
Finally, the other four l's are required, but without the required inputs this would not produce the necessary effects. These are reasons which have been given over and over again. I just want to say that we agree with this kind of reasoning and we believe and hope that there will be consensus in this hall so that this study can be launched.
Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Sr. Presidente, Sr. Ministrole Tanzania, a los representantes de Colombia nos complace intervenir esta tarde bajo su presidencia después de haber oído esta mañana el llamado elocuente y sentido que Ud. hizo en favor del Africa.
Teníamos unas notas, pensábamos intervenir, pero, despúes de la declaración alegre y optimista de nuestra querida amiga Millicent Fenwick, Embajadora de los Estados Unidos, preferimos reducir nuestra intervención para facilitar el curso de nuestros trabajos a apoyar el llamado que ha hecho nuestro vecino de la derecha, el Embajador Tchicaya del Congo.
Sólo queremos expresar nuestra opinión en relación con el alcance de este Estudio. Representamos a Colombia, país de una región como América Latina y el Caribe, cuyas condiciones económicas y sociales se vienen deteriorando progresivamente. En su declaración inaugural el Director General dijo que sería posible extender ese Estudio a los otros países en desarrollo. El Embajador Tchicaya del Congo y otros colegas africanos se refirieron en términos amplios y generosos a cualquier posibilidad, pero fueron realistas como los demás miembros del Consejo. Por eso, la delegación do Colombia se suma a lo que han dicho México, Venezuela y Brasil, particularmente, en el sentido de que el Director General podría considerar la posibilidad de que en el Estudio a largo plazo sobre la situación agrícola y alimentaria de América Latina, si fuere oportuno y conveniente, se incluya un capítulo relacionado con esta ayuda en especies, que tamblén necesitan algunos países de nuestra región. Ese Estudio para América Latina y el Caribe fue solicitado por la Conferencia Regional de Barbados, agosto de 1986, y sólo será sometido a la próxima Conferencia Regional, segundo semestre de 1988, de manera que el Director General dispondrá de un amplio marco de tiempo dentro del cual podrá tomar la decisión más conveniente.
S. Gblorzuo TOWEH (Liberia): Mr Chairman, it is a pleasure for me to see you chair this 90th Session of our Council, especially at this moment when we again began our other round of discussion on agricultural and food problems in Africa. My delegation therefore warmly commends you on your preferment to lead our deliberations. My delegation also compliments Mr Walton, Deputy Director-General, for the lucid and comprehensive introduction to documents CL 90/21 and CL 90/19.
Again we are assembled here to re-examine the findings of the FAO Africa study, as we did a few weeks ago in the city of Yamoussoukro. My delegation will not prolong the debate on this issue but rather re-echo our support for the FAO feasibility study on aid in Africa and our hope that this study in the future be concluded for other developing regions.
My delegation still believes that the four i's-incentives, inputs, institutions and infrastructure-are basic to agricultural development. Attainment of food self-sufficiency in line with the four i's, as proposed in the feasibility study on aid-in-kind, will undoubtedly serve as a catalyst for increased food production in Africa.
We believe aid-in-kind will provide us with an opportunity to use production inputs and in the future, to reduce our debt burden by increasing our foreign exchange earnings.
Evlogui BONEV (United Nations Development Programme): I am very pleased to have been given the opportunity to comment briefly on behalf of my Organization on this very important issue-the follow-up on the UN General Assembly Special Session on the Critical Situation in Africa. I read with interest the documents presented and listened with attention to the excellent introduction by the Deputy Director-General, Mr Walton.
The enriching intervention by the distinguished members of the Council, as well as the inspiring message of the President of the Republic of Senegal, and the Chairman of CILSS delivered by the coordinating minister of the latter last Friday, represent another contribution to the deliberation of this important Agenda item.
The preoccupation and the importance UNDP and its Governing Council attach to the destiny of this continent most in need is clearly demonstrated by the allocation of over 40 percent of the total UNDP resources for the next cycle 1986/1991 to this continent.
Participants in this forum are well aware that the Governing Council of UNDP at its last June Session discussed very intensively and extensively the UN Programme for African Economic Recovery and Development adopted by the Special Session of the UN General Assembly earlier this year, as the latter assigned major follow-up responsibilities to UNDP and the World Bank in the round table and consultative group meetings for monitoring the implementation of the United Nations Programme of Action.
As reflected in document CL 90/19, UNDP is a member of the Steering Committee for the implementation of the Programme of Action. The Administrator is determined to play his full part in this regard. UNDP will play an important monitoring role at the national level in the follow-up to the new action programme. One of our first tasks will be to ensure that IPF programmes reflect the latest priorities adopted by governments in the new action programme.
Several initiatives in this line have already been taken. Immediately after the Governing Council the Administrator visited some of the African countries and consulted with their governments. He met with Resident Representatives from the region where he visited projects on the ground, and gave specific instructions for the preparation of the Country Programmes in the African Continent. He pointed out that a coherent and concerted action was required from all partners-UN Organizations, the donor community and the recipient governments, if we were to fulfill the expectations of the international community.
Senior representatives from Agencies, including FAO, also participated in this important meeting, which was attended by the Director-General for Development and International Economic Cooperation, the Executive Secretary of OAU, the Executive Secretary of ECA, the Associated Administrator of UNDP and other senior officials. This meeting provided an excellent opportunity for better coordinated and coherent action at this important stage in initiating the new action programme.
One of our key preoccupations in the upcoming Cycle is how best we can support governments in implementing the new Programme of Action for Africa. Through the close and continued dialogue we conduct with them, we are working to ensure that UNDP's assistance will go primarily to agriculture, human resources and institution-building. Through our associated funds, we are focussing on its other major priorities: drought and desertification; small and medium-scale capital assistance; women's integration in development; science and technology; and programmes of volunteer assistance.
For your information, the Regional Bureau for Africa of UNDP has recently completed the review of the FAO proposals for inclusion in the Fourth Cycle Regional Programme for Africa 1987-1991. Taking into consideration, however, some important relevant events which took place late in this year and their outcome such as: the issues related to agricultural development oulined in the UN Programme of Action for 1986-1990, the Second Extraordinary Session of Ministers held in Addis Ababa, 13-16 October 1986, and its recommendations, the Programme of Action endorsed at the Fourteenth FAO Regional Ministerial Conference held in Yamoussoukro, 2-12 September 1986, UNDP decided to carry out an entire examination of its regional approach to agriculture in Africa in order to ensure that the Fourth Regional Programme for Africa be more in tune with the priorities defined by the above mentioned important bodies.
To this end UNDP proposed a Joint UNDP/FAO Panel of Consultants to identify projects which clearly put in action those recommendations and priorities. This proposal has recently been communicated to FAO and we hope that FAO will agree with this very constructive and action-oriented approach.
However, while helping Africa work out long-term solutions, we must remain alert to the region's immediate trials, inlcuding the latest cruel paradox of nature, the return of hoards of locusts, which the Director-General of FAO, Dr Saouma, stressed in his excellent introductory statement on the first day. We have recently channelled over 1. 6 million dollars from out "Trust Fund to Combat Famine and Malnutrition in Developing Countries" into new locust control and aerial spray operations in the six most affected countries, in addition to the programmed support for crop protection in several other countries. Further projects are being prepared for UNDP funding by national authorities working closely with FAO and UNDP offices in the field.
In conclusion, I should like to reiterate that UNDP looks forward to cooperating closely with FAO and other Specialized Agencies and organizations, each within its competence, as well as with donors in assisting the African countries in the implementation of their Programme of Action.
Raphael RABE (Observateur de Madagascar): La delegation malgache est très heureuse et très fière de vous voir présider nos travaux. Elle vous remercie de lui donner la possibilité de s'exprimer sur ce point important de l'ordre du jour. Elle voudrait féliciter M. Walton pour sa présentation très claire du sujet.
Notre intervention sera assez brève pour éviter de répéter ce qui a déjà été dit tant sur la grande valeur de l'éiude our l'agriculture africaine pendant les vingt-cinq prochaines années-étude d'ailleurs qualifiée de lucide, exhaustive et pondérée par la Conférence régionale-que sur la participation active et intensive de la FAO a sa mise en oeuvre.
Nous voudrions tout simplement associer notre voix à celles des délégations qui se sont prononcées en faveur de la réalisation de l'étude de faisabilité visant à déteimincr la possibilité d'accroître l'aide en nature sous forme d'intrants agricoles. Il se confirme qu'une telle étude est vraiment indispensable, ne serait-ce que pour apporter des réponses précises à toutes les questions qui ont été posées par certaines délégations sur l'opportunité d'intensifier l'aide en intrants.
Il est peut-être d'ores et déjà utile de rappeler que, de tout temps, les interventions de la FAO ont toujours été faites dans le cadre de paquets technologiques appropriés et en harmonie avec toutes les autres actions.
L'étude envisagée sur les intrants n'échappera pas, bien entendu, à cette règle-nous en sommes convaincu. Au même titre que la délégation du Congo qui a parlé au nom du Président de l'Organisation de l'unité africaine, nous nous félicitons du consensus général qui s'est dégagé au sein du Conseil pour donner mandat au Directeur général d'entreprendre ladite étude. Le coût approximatif de l'étude, son contenu et sa durée sont déjà connus. Nous pensons que cela est très important en cette période où les priorités dans les programmes et les projets sont plus que jamais examinées avec le plus grand soin par le Secrétariat.
La contribution effective de tous les protagonistes, donateurs et bénéficiaires à la réalisation de l'étude est le garant de son succès. La déclaration de la délégation de la Belgique, au nom des pays de la CEE, et celles de nombreux autres pays sont, à ce titre, très appréciées par notre délégation.
Pour sa part, le Gouvernement malgache voudrait en tout cas assurer le Secrétariat de son soutien total dans cette noble tâche.
Assefa YILALA (Observer for Ethiopia): Like all those who have spoken before us we should also like to indicate our pleasure at seeing you in the chair during the deliberation on this important Agenda item.
The contribution of food accessibility by all to the well-being of mankind has been dealt with adequately and therefore our delegation sees no need to repeat it here, except to mention that the African situation is no exception in this regard, as has been expressed by all those who intervened on this item.
The concerted effort and the pace with which long-term solutions are sought to the economic crisis facing Africa today, which is appropriately referred to, is a concern of mankind as a whole rather than an exclusive African problem which will very much determine the future accessibility to food because the economic crisis has a high and direct bearing on food production capabilities.
In the framework of the prevailing economic crisis and the present trend of global economic development, securing food from the international trade is a very remote probability, and therefore the likelihood of improving access to food through this alternative is also unlikely within the foreseeable future.
A greater understanding of the magnitude and the critical nature of the economic situation in Africa is to be realized in the response of the international community in terms of both the short-term emergency operations and Africa's priority programme for economic recovery. The 13th Special Session of the UN General Assembly which was preceded by the 1984 Session of ECOSOC, the Addis Ababa OAU Summit Meeting of 1985, the preparatory Committee of the Whole and FAO's unreserved involvement in the study, are all manifestations of the attention that needs to be considered as a background of the problem being faced.
The fact that global distribution of food production is being reported as favourable, even though the forecast for cereal production is slightly below that of the previous year tends to shadow the critical economic situation in Africa. Even though food production patterns have been different from previous years, the fact that, this is a short-term outlook due to the season's favourable rainfall situation does not guarantee sustained food production availability for the future. Over and above the cumulative effect of the historic drought in over 20 African countries, food production has been faced with further calamities of drought in seven African countries. Here, 1 should like to mention the Ethiopian food shortage situation as one example, not as an isolated case.
In Ethiopia, where the historic continental drought had its maximum strength, the rainfall in 1986 was favourable in most parts of the country with the exception of the south-east, south-west and the northern parts of the country, either because of late or erratic rainfall in the middle of the growing season. The persistency of the repeated drought has become a cause for shortage of food again in those affected areas. Because of the cumulative effect of the drought in the past and the present drought in some parts of the country, the food shortage situation will continue to prevail even though the magnitude of the shortfall is below that of the previous years. Further to the drought, in some parts of the country crop losses due to locusts and grasshoppers in the north-western part of the country have become an additional cause of shortfalls.
Although the rainfall situation in the growing season of 1986 was favourable and created a better growing environment for production the situation was not fully utilized because most of the available resources were diverted towards facing the emergency and therefore creating even further shortage of inputs. Hence, the food shortage situation will still require emergency and relief attention in those parts which are affected and continuous effort in maintaining a satisfactory level of food production.
This is one example where the food shortage situation is still prevailing and yet it is being overshadowed by the overall favourability of the rain in 1986. I am sure that the same holds true in most of the drought-affected African countries. The present food situation in Africa is just of a temporary nature when one looks at it from a generalized point of view. Even worse is the fact that this generalized view tends to shadow the existence of shortage of food and millions becoming victims in the situation.
The critical economic situation in Africa will require longer and closer attention for it to recover. The area of food production to which the agenda item under discussion is related will also require as much attention.
In the study of African agriculture during the next 25 years it is indicated that Africa can feed itself provided that the potential is properly mobilized and safeguarded. It is also clearly pointed out that Africa has potential for sustained food production and yet in limited by capital and other investment resources to exploit it so as to mobilise the resource available. The flow of capital from developed to African countries over and above the commitments of African countries to devote more resources to agriculture comes into the scene as an important factor to be considered.
Aid-in-kind as one way for flow of capital was supported by the African Ministers of Agriculture during the Fourteenth Session of the African Regional Conference as it was presented in the document. The aid-in-kind which is presented for consideration is therefore accepted as a major means of enhancing food production and agricultural development. Hence, the present request is to allow FAO to do the detailed study in this regard. My delegation would like to indicate its support for the proposed detailed study.
As it stands now, the critical economic situation of Africa has become a focal area of attention for the international community, and therefore tackling the economic problem of the African continent as a priority area for consideration will face relatively less difficulty, and the need for further clarification might not be necessary, in addition to its contribution of demonstrating the value of such a scheme.
It is therefore the view of the Ethiopian delegation that priority should be given to Africa, with due and primary attention to the least developed countries as a strategy in the initiation of such studies. In stating this, my delegation fully realises that all developing countries of the globe are faced with input supply problems, and that the need to look at it as a global perspective is equally important. However, as further groundwork will have to be done in order to launch a study at the international level, any delay in launching will only lead to a worsening economic situation in Africa. Therefore, we would like to indicate that the study should go ahead as far as the African continent is concerned, and meanwhile preparatory work on covering other areas or developing countries should be simultaneously completed so as to cover all developing countries ultimately in the final analysis.
In listening to the interventions made on this agenda item, the phrase "stepped up" which supposedly should precede "aid-in-kind" seems to have been left out in most of the discussions. Therefore, we would like to make the small reminder that reference be made to "stepped up aid-in-kind".
Finally, my delegation would like to thank the Director-General for the follow-up action taken after the African Regional Conference, for bringing this important item of discussion to the attention of the Council, and we thank the Deputy Director-General for summarizing the agenda item very clearly and precisely.
Antonío RODRIGUES PIRES (Observateur du Cap-Vert): Monsieur le Président, à l'instar des délégués qui m'ont précédé, je dois vous dire que c'est un grand honneur pour moi de voir présider le Ministre de l'agriculture d'un pays africain alors que nous examinons un point de l'ordre du jour crucial pour notre continent.
Tenant compte des orateurs qui l'ont précédée, notamment les délégués du Congo, de Madagascar, de l'Inde, du Sénégal, pour ne pas citer les autres, ma délégation sera extrêmement brève-tenant compte aussi des autres observateurs qui voudraient bien prendre la parole.
Sans nul doute, les propositions formulées par le Directeur général de la FAO revêtent une grande importance. C'est pourquoi notre délégation appuie la proposition qui figure au paragraphe 29 du document CL 90/21 concernant l'aide en nature. Il s'agit là, comme vous pouvez le comprendre, d'une action à court terme primordiale-je dis bien primordiale-pour des raisons très clairement exposées audit paragraphe de ce document.
Les intrants constituent, certes, la pierre angulaire indispensable pour l'augmentation de la production vivrière et alimentaire, surtout dans les pays africains où la situation économique actuelle est critique. Les pays africains, compte tenu également de leur dette, ont d'énormes difficultés à importer les intrants nécessaires, tels que les engrais, les pesticides, les instruments perfectionnés, les outils agricoles, dont ils ont besoin pour leur production vivrière. C'est pour cela que mon gouvernement demande nu Conseil de donner mandnt nu Directeur général de la FAO et d'accéder à la requête qui lui a été faite par la Conférence régionale pour l'Afrique, à savoir d'effectuer une étude de faisabilité afin d'examiner la possibilité d'accroître l'aide en nature sous forme d ' intrants agricoles.
Avant de terminer, j'aimerais dire deux mots au sujet du document CL 90/19. Il ne fait nui doute qu'à Yamoussoukro, les ministres africains ont clairement exprimé leur position au sujet du rôle clé de l'Organisation dans le suivi du Programme d'action des Nations Unies, compte tenu de la spécificité et de l'expérience de notre Organisation.
Par ailleurs, je tiens à remercier le Directeur Général et son équipe pour la collaboration fructueuse et étroite qu'ils ont toujours eue avec l'OUA et la Commission économique pour l'Afrique. La FAO a toujours répondu favorablement aux requêtes de notre organisation panafricaine. Je ne doute pas qu'à l'avenir, elle continuera à travailler avec les Etats, car ce sont les Etats qui sont les chefs de file, pour coordonner les aides de toute nature, soit bilatérale, soit multilatérale.
Stanley Mukindia GUANTAI (Observer for Kenya): First of all, let me say how happy we are to see you on the Chair, especially representing our side of the region, East Africa. My delegation would like to thank the Deputy Director-General, Mr Walton, for the introduction of the very clear Secretariat documents CL 90/19 and CL 90/21. My delegation welcomes the report on the United Nations Plan of Action for Africa and the proposals of the Director-General for the follow-up.
The FAO has continued to show great concern for the problems of Africa and was closely involved in the preparation of the African document and the proposals to the special session of the General Assembly.
The study "African agriculture: the next 25 years" is a valuable document which will remain a major reference in agricultural strategic developments in Africa, thanks to the FAO.
During the 14th FAO Regional Conference in Yamoussoukro, my country participated fully and made our views and support quite clear. We believe, and in this view support the delegate and Minister for Agriculture from Tanzania, yourself, Mr Chairman, that the African leaders have put their views and strategies together, and what they require most is cooperation and support from the international community.
In the same vein, we believe that regional cooperation will play a crucial role in the development efforts in Africa. In this regard we endorse the statement by the delegate of Uganda on Inter-Governmental Authority on Drought and Desertification (IGADD), and 1 agree with the delegates who have spoken on the role and need for coordination with other UN organizations for maintaining FAO in the forefront.
The Special Programme for sub-Saharan Africa under IFAD is a step towards translating and supplementing the UN Action Plan for Africa. My country is amongst the initial 20 proposed beneficiaries. My delegation takes this opportunity to convey our gratitude.
Coming back to the proposals of the Director-General on aid-in-kind, we would like to add that it will have a major role to play in the African agriculture if directed to increasing the productive elements on a per-unit basis. We feel this initiative by FAO for a study merits our support and hope that such an initiative will continue to be manifested by Africans themselves and the international community to accelerate economic recovery in Africa.
Sra. Yolanda GAGO DE SINIGAGLIA (Observador de la Costa Rica): La delegación de Costa Rica interviene brevemente para referirse a las declaractiones de Venezuela y Colombia sobre el estudio para América Latina, en el cual el Gobierno de Costa Rica desea que se prosigan los estudios sobre el tabaco iniciados en 1982/83 abarcando cifras de empleo y rentas fiscales generadas por los sectored y la importancia de ese producto en la economía de los poíses subdcsarrollados, incluyendo además el tema del tabaco dentro de la actualización periódica del cuadro, estudio global y proyecciones de insumo.
Carlos DINATOR (Observador de Chile): Nos complacen los avances de Africa y desde luego el estudio que ha suscitado la interrogante sobre la posibilidad de una ayuda adicional en especie. Por cierto, una coordinada ayuda en especie debería ser alentada y nos sumamos a las delegaciones que han apoyado tal idea puesto que permite conocer con certeza los beneficios efectivos.
Nos atrevemos a insinuar que se estudie la posibilidad de introducir algún componente de monetización por cuanto las donaciones puras y simples tienen conotaciones paternalistas que pudieran hacer más mal que el bien que procuran remediar.
Han llamado la atención de mi delegación, sin embargo, las reticencias que algunos han manifestado respecto del segundo aspecto consultado por la Secretaría; esto es, respecto de la conveniencia de limitar o no la acción a los países africanos, párrafo 48 del documento CL 90/21.
Al respecto, mi delegación debe recordar que ya el señor Director General expresó en la sesión inaugural de este Consejo su esperanza en una respuesta favorable a la petición que sobre la materia análoga efectuó la Conferencia Regional de la FAO para América Latina y el Caribe recientemente celebrada en Barbados.
Mi delegación insta a todas sus similares a considerar de la mayor importancia la suficiente universalidad en la acción de la FAO. Asimismo, estimamos que el problema básico no es el de restringir los planos de acción de la FAO en favor de determinados sectores, sino en proseguir una labor mancomunada para que los esfuerzos y recursos lleguen simultáneamente a todos quienes lo necesitan, de acuerdo con una debida consideración a todas las áreas que requieren esta ayuda. Si América Latina tiene un mayor grado de desarrollo relativo, su situación no puede ser penalizada recibiendo menos atención que otras zonas. La credibilidad de las organizaciones de vocación universal está vinculada a prácticas que guardan relación con su propia naturaleza y, por lo tanto, con una asignación amplia de los esfuerzos.
Mi país ha manifestado en la reciente Conferencia Regional de la FAO para América Latina y el Caribe que el estudio sobre la situación actual y perspectivas del sector alimentario y agrícola en la región es necesario para lograr un crecimiento acelerado y un mayor bienestar de la población. En esa oportunidad Chile hizo presente los requerimientos en los campos de investigación agrícola, transferencia de tecnología, sanidad agropecuaria y protección de los recursos naturales, sin descuidar en el desarrollo agrícola el gasto social en el sector, incluyendo la educación, salud, política administrativa y sus relaciones con la infraestructura y servicios básicos del citado sector agropecuario.
Mi delegación debe concordar en que este aspecto tiene vinculaciones con los aspectos financieros y por ello cree del caso señalar que la cuestión de la asignación de recursos implícita en estas cuestiones no consiste, ni podría consistir, en entregar un pastel a uno mientras los demás ven comer. El caso consistiría más bien en tratar de obtener más pasteles para que todos coman. La asignación de recursos en forma restringida podría estar conduciendo a las fracasadas prácticas de nivelar hacia abajo en vez de buscar que todos crezcan participando de un pastel mayor.
Propicia mi delegación la opción amplia y universal para la alternativa del párrafo 48 del documento CL 90/21. En la misma forma en que mi delegación puso de relieve la indiscutible ilegalidad del no pago oportuno de la contribución, igualmente debe señalar que consideramos fuera del espíritu de nuestra normativa constitucional la tendencia de propiciar exclusivimos en las corrientes de cooperación multilateral, añadiendo que ambos fenómenos pudieran generar iguales consecuencias desestabilizadoras, comprobadas en otros foros.
Permítame señalar que la posición de Chile, por lo demás compartida con muchos países de América Latina, no puede considerarse un amago para los intereses de los países hermanos de Africa; no puede mi delegación creer que los intereses de una región en desarrollo pasen por el camino de la posposición y del olvido de otra, por que la altura de miras y nuestra fe en esa región hermana de Africa nos impiden creer que esa clase de pensamiento prevalece entre los países aquí representados.
Más que nunca mi delegación piensa que en todos los países en desarrollo existe la tarca de mancomunar voluntades y estrechar filas para que nadie se sienta al margen o sobrepasado; en conjunto podemos aspirar a lo mejor, separados seremos lo que otros quieran que seamos.
A determinados países desarrollados que se han pronunciado sobre aspectos de principio y han apoyado unas sólidas tendencias restrictivas, no podemos menos que expresar nuestro asombro.
La lectura y aplicación del preámbulo de la Constitución de la FAO debería guiar los pasos de este Consejo si realmente creemos en esta Organización, en su gran futuro y en el marco general de normas que regulan la acción de la Organización.
Permítame finalizar expresando admiración por la tesonera labor de Africa que está dando significativa y cabal prioridad al sector silviagropecuario, asignando un papel trascendente a la autoayuda en su reciente Conferencia Regional en Costa de Marfil.
Célestin KAREKEZI (Observateur du Rwanda): Depuis un certain nombre d'années, notre Conseil s'inquiète régulièrement, des crises alimentaires de l'Afrique, crises que les pays essaient heureusement de soulager par la fourniture d'une aide alimentaire. Or, comme nous le savons tous, l'aide alimentaire est une solution provisoire associée aux moyens de production qui sont notamment les intrants, repris dans le document CL 90/21 de la FAO. Cela pourrait permettre au continent africain d'accroître sa production et d'atteindre l'autosuffisance alimentaire dans un délai raisonnable. Ma délégation appuie sans réserve la proposition du Directeur général de la FAO à propos de l'étude sur la faisabilité d'une aide en nature sous forme d'intrants.
Ousman N. R. OTHMAN (Gambia): At the end of a very long debate I would like, very briefly, to say how very pleased the Gambian delegation is to see you chair the discussion on an item on Africa. I also wish to thank the Director-General for his efforts to promote agricultural development in Africa and Mr Walton for his excellent presentation of the working document under discussion. As for the proposals contained in documents CL 90/19 and CL 90/21, the Gambian delegation would wish to indicate its total support for the mandate to be given for the feasibility study on aid-in-kind in Africa.
Giuseppe VASTA (Observateur de l'OCDE): Je vous remercie de m'avoir donné la parole et je vous prie de m'excuser pour l'heure tardive. Je désire féliciter M. Walton pour son excellente introduction et les services compétents pour les documents intéressants que nous sommes en train d'examiner. Qui a visité l'Afrique et revient dans son pays d'origine souffre souvent d'une nostalgie profonde que
l'on appelle le mal d'Afrique. C'est à propos de ce mai d'Afrique que je remonte dans le temps en pensant à ce que les pays de l'OCDE ont commencé à faire au sein d'un groupe nommé "Les amis du Sahel". Pour ce qui est du point à l'ordre du jour, je désire déclarer que toute étude réalisée pour l'amélioration de la situation des pays en développement et, dans ce cas spécifique, des pays de l'Afrique, ne peut que recevoir un encouragement soit de la part du DAC, soit de la part de la direction de l'agriculture de l'OCDE, et cela en harmonie avec l'intérêt et les préoccupations que manifestent, entre autre, les Ministres de l'agriculture des pays de l'OCDE à l'égard do l'avenir des pays en développement, chaque fois qu'ils se réunissent à Paris au Siège de l'Organisation. Dans cet esprit, je souhaite bon travail aux services intéressés, avec l'espoir que cette étude puisse apporter une aide toujours plus généreuse et efficace en faveur du continent si cher à notre coeur, et avec la certitude que l'aide du bon Dieu ne pourra pas nous manquer quand nous agissons en faveur de nos frères, qui nécessitent de notre aide et de notre compréhension.
CHAIRMAN: I thank the representative of OECD for his words of encouragement.
LE DIRECTEUR GENERAL: Ce 24 novembre sera marqué un jour, je l'espère, d'une belle flamme car toute la journée nous avons débattu d'un sujet vital pour le devenir de plus de 500 millions d'Africains. La qualité et le sérieux des interventions, et la sérénité qui a prévalu tout au long de cette journée m'ont fort impressionné. A vrai dire, j'ai beaucoup apprécié l'accueil chaleureux réservé à l'étude "L'Agriculture africaine: les 25 prochaines années". Tous les délégués sans exception nous ont félicité ou se sont déclarés satisfaits de la qualité de l'étude.
Tout aussi chaleureux fut l'accueil réservé par la plupart des membres du Conseil et par la totalité des observateurs, à la demande formulée par les Ministres de l'agriculture de l'Afrique au Conseil, en vue d'autoriser le Directeur général à procéder à une étude de faisabilité sur le programme d'aide en nature à l'Afrique, programme que j'ai eu l'honneur de proposer à la Conférence des Ministres de l'agriculture à Yamoussoukro. Ce programme devrait permettre à l'agriculture vivrière-celle qui concerne les petits paysans-de faire un bond en avant, après une stagnation de plusieurs années. L'agriculture vivrière nous donne à tous des sujets d'inquiétude.
On a parlé de coordination; soyez rassurés; nous sommes aussi soucieux que vous de la coordination parce que ce programme de réhabilitation de l'économie africaine, tel que proposé par l'OUA et accepté par l'Assemblée générale, demande un effort de tous. Je vais la semaine prochaine à Brazzaville, honoré d'une invitation du Président en exercice de l'OUA, faire rapport devant le Comité directeur de l'OUA qui assure le suivi de la session spéciale des Nations Unies; je ferai également rapport des discussions au Conseil.
De plus, le Secrétaire général des Nations Unies m'a fait l'honneur de m'inviter à New York les 8 et 9 février pour faire rapport aux pays donateurs, qu'il a lui-même convoqués, avec le Président en exercice de l'OUA.
Je ferai donc et à Brazzaville et à New York rapport sur les décisions prises aujourd'hui.
Et maintenant, M. le Président, je vous prie de bien vouloir autoriser mon collègue le Directeur général adjoint de répondre aux questions et d'apporter des éclaircissements sur certains points soulevés par las délégués au cours de cotte journée. Merci M. le Président.
DEPUTY DIRECTOR-GENERAL: In my introduction this morning 1 said that the basic question before the Council is whether there is sufficient support among the donor community to justify our launching the feasibility study. The response from the Council has clearly been "yes". However, there is one item on which a certain ambiguity still remains, and that is the question of whether the study should be limited to Africa or extended globally, and if so at what stage. I think probably the majority of speakers suggested that it focus initially on Africa and be extended later to other regions.
One specific suggestion has come from the floor, that Latin America be covered separately in the study requested by the last Regional Conference for Latin America and which is destined for the next Regional Conference in Latin America in 1988. That certainly, so far as the Secretariat is concerned, appears a very sensible suggestion.
However, there is still some ambiguity regarding coverage of the other regions. There are two possibilities. One is that the non-African regions could be dealt with towards the end of our work on the study for the FAO Conference in 1987 or alternatively that other regions could be covered in the work coming after the FAO Conference. I think it is desirable to have a ruling from the Council on this matter to avoid any ambiguity at a later stage and I commend this for your attention.
In supporting the idea of the feasibility Study a number of donor representatives especially expressed a word of caution. These are very much in line with the cautious approach which I adopted in introducing the subject this morning. However, there were two cases in which caution slipped, I think, over the frontier into an area which I will call scepticism.
Some specific questions were put to the Secretariat by the two delegates concerned and I would like to comment first on some questions raised by the delegate of Canada. His main question appeared to imply that stepped up aid-in-kind, input aid-in-kind is likely to be a bad thing, at least in terms of development theory. I would like to say that in the view of the Secretariat, stepped up aid-in-kind is neither inherently a good thing nor necessarily a bad thing. The questions at issue relate not to goodness or badness in theory but to effectiveness, effectiveness in impact and effectiveness in the use of aid resources which we all recognize as being extremely limited.
The Representative of Canada said that his aid programme would respond positively to specific requests for input aid put forward by African countries. I would personally hope that the outcome of the feasibility study will provide concepts, approaches, ways of thinking, ways of analysing that will enable Canada and other donors to take a more comprehensive and perhaps more sophisticated approach when examining requests for aid-in-kind in the future.
The outcome of the feasibility study in other words and not the Secretariat should provide some of the answers to his questions at this stage. I very much hope that Canada will participate in the work on the study both by providing data and by discussing ideas. Indeed, a healthy dose of scepticism accompanied by a willingness to look objectively at the facts, will, I am sure be useful and stimulating for the preparation of the study.
The Representative of Denmark questioned the possibility of using data from other organizations in order to avoid the expense of going to the full feasibility study which we have proposed. There is some fragmentary data available. FAO itself monitors the flow of fertilizer aid. We have also informally made soundings with the World Bank which is ready to provide us with the data in its possession on the flow of input in aid-in-kind. However, that is not really the point. The point is I think, as has been stressed by a number of representatives in the debate, that we are looking not merely at a quantitative analysis but also at a qualitative analysis.
The problems are whether aid-in-kind has run into serious problems in the past, what can be its potential for use in the future, and answers to this type of question cannot be derived from a simple analysis of quantitative data.
There have been some general questions on coordination. The Director-General has given two examples of how he at his level coordinates the approaches of FAO at the highest level with the United Nations, OAU and other organizations. FAO continues to participate in the work of the United Nations Steering Committee which 1 mentioned this morning and indeed, there will be a meeting of the Steering Committee in New York tomorrow.
At national level the Consultative Groups and Round Tables are essentially dealing with macro-economic issues, and I can only confirm that FAO is ready to make its sectoral input insofar as it may be requested and useful within this broader context.
So far as coordination with UNDP is concerned, I would like to refer to the statement made in the debate by the representative of UNDP and to thank him for his very positive intervention.
Finally, I would like to comment on just one technical issue which emerged in the course of the discussion. That is the question from the delegate of Pakistan-in effect, why is irrigation not a fifth 'i'? Conceptually water is of course an input. So in a sense water is covered by the four i's. However, the problems and potential associated with irrigation schemes in Africa have been analyzed in the study "African Agriculture: the Next Twenty-Five Years". 1 shall not recapitulate them now but I would point out that there are serious problems connected with the high cost of irrigation schemes in Africa and there are also problems with the support systems required for the development and operation of such schemes. In part for these reasons the study anticipates that rainfed agriculture will continue to account for about 90 percent of food production in Africa.
I think I do not need to comment on any other of the questions raised in the course of what has been an extremely substantial and substantive debate.
CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much, Mr Walton. I think this brings us to a point that we need to examine what we need to decide and conclude our deliberations upon. The point that has been raised with regard to the studies embracing more than one region is one that the Deputy Director-General feels is left open-ended. In my view, listening to different speakers this morning and this afternoon, I thought the consensus was that this kind of study is good for Africa and is good for other regions; therefore since it is going to be done in Africa why should it not be extended to other regions. This is a legitimate desire for other regions to benefit from studies such as the one that we have been discussing. But certainly this does not warrant that additional funds should now be provided so that we have more than $400 000 that have been mentioned throughout. What I thought was that the general understanding of the mood and interventions from Member Countries here is that, let us proceed with the study on Africa and when that is done, then we will look to other regions, and the region that has a request now is Latin America, arising from the regional meeting in Barbados. So in my judgement we should stick to what has been the recommendation by the Director-General and that is, give him the mandate to do the feasibility study as mentioned in the document and then look at the possibility of extending such studies to other regions. I think this would be a fair way of treating this issue, rather than opening up another debate on whether we should now deal with Latin America at this last hour. This is my understanding. Unless there is a conflicting view or different understanding, I would judge the issue accordingly.
Are there any views contrary to my understanding? There seems to be no contra view. Therefore, Mr Deputy Director-General, the consensus of this session is that we will give the mandate to the Secretariat and the Director-General to carry out a feasibility study In accordance with the recommendations brought to the Council and that having done that, we will then examine ways and means of extending these studies to other regions when and if it is desires.
I would like also to comment on the views that we have received, and I must confess that this is my first time and I am acting as a rookie in the game as it were, but my judgement on the discussions here is based on the fact that this is a democratic institute, and as such we are bound to receive a divergence of views and we cannot expect views to be uniform. Therefore, when we receive slightly different observations from what we expect to be the correct version we should not feel that this is outside the scope of our discussions. Therefore, we always welcome a different point of view and then work on the democratic judgement of the consensus of the majority view.
In this case I am alluding to the fact that there were some observations made by Denmark and Canada. In my view I consider those views seeking further clarification and refinement of the kind of work that we want to do. I did not get the impression that there was total opposition to the programme that will help Africa feed herself.
In that case I would suggest that the Secretariat take into account some of the observations, because they could be of great help in our work, but bearing in mind that the majority view of this Council endorses the study that has been recommended by the Secretariat, by the Director-General, and the recommendations of the Special General Assembly of the United Nations, as well as the Regional Conference of the African States which met in Yamoussoukro. I think, ladies and gentlemen, we have treated this subject properly, as it deserved to be treated. We had altogether 52 speeches, 43 from members of Council and 9 from observers, and the consensus of this august assembly is that we should give full support and mandate to the Secretariat and to the Director-General to carry out the feasibility study in accordance with the terms of reference that appear in paragraph 45 of the paper that we have been discussing.
Ladies and gentlemen, 1 am satisfied that we have dealt with all the matters brought to us for our judgement and I am pleased to say that we have reached a conclusion which will give us a push which will answer some of the serious problems that have been posed, but there can never be finality in these matters. We are dealing with one aspect. After the study we will discover that we need to do a little more perhaps. There may be some other issues that will be revealed by the feasibility study and at that time we will have an opportunity to deal with those issues. For the time being, I believe that we now have the support of the Council, and the Director-General can proceed with the feasibility study.
I thank you very much. I thank you ail for your very kind support for the Chair throughout our discussion.
The meeting rose at 18. 15 hours
La séance est levée à 18 h 15
Se levanta la sesión a las 18. 15 horas
