Previous Page Table of Contents

DRAFT REPORT-PART II (continued)
PROJET DE RAPPORT-PARTIE II (suite)
APROBACION DEL INFORME-PARTE II (continuación)

DRAFT REPORT-PART II (sup. l) (continued)
PROJECT DE RAPPORT-PARTIE II (sup. l) (suite)
APROBACION DEL INFORME-PARTE II (sup. l) (continuación)

PARAGRAPHS 8-36 (continued)
PARAGRAPHES 8-36 (suite)
PARRAFOS 8-36 (continuación)

LE PRESIDENT: Nous reprenons le cours de nos travaux. Nous allons passer au paragraphe 21. Y a-t-il des observations â ce sujet? Il est approuvé. Paragraphe 22?

R. G. PETTITT (United Kingdom): This is for a suggestion for a paragraph following 21 and before 22. I would suggest that one should have a paragraph saying. "Some members drew attention to what they saw as a high level of liquidity in FAO. It was suggested that further savings could be made in programme delivery costs as an initial alternative to cutting substantive programmes";

Mrs Mlllicent M. FENWICK (United States of America): I was not on the the Drafting Committee, but looking at this it struck me what intelligent person could support a sentence which says, "Many of these members said that limitations should not be imposed on the activities and operations of the Organization as a result of financial pressure". Who could support such a sentence? It is the silliest thing that I have heard. What are they going to do, print money? How did that get into the Drafting Committee, for God sake?

José Ramón LOPEZ-PORTILLO ROMANO (Presidente del Comité de Redacción): Lo que yo le puedo decir al respecto "son dos cosas: la primera que este párrafo se revisó a la luz de los otros párrafos y de las modificaciones que hubo respecto de lo que dijeron algunos y lo que dijeron muchos, y, en segundo lugar, que la delegación de Estados Unidos representada en ese Comité estuvo de acuerdo.

Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Sr. Presidente, después de lo que ha dicho el Presidente del Comité de Redacción, yo creo que la distinguida colega Fenwick se equivocó de destinatario de la pregunta. En vez de preguntarle eso al Consejo ha debido preguntárselo a sus compatriotas que participaron en nombre de su pais en el Comité de Redacción y que aceptaron esta frase.

R. G. PETTITT (United Kingdom): This also puzzled me and that is one of the reasons why I suggested the following paragraph as this would actually square the circle. It would be possible not to impose limitations if one did find economies of this sort.

David Lawrence COUTTS (Australia): I have not spoken before in this debate, because I was a member of the Drafting Committee and I endorsed the Drafting Committee Report. I merely observe that paragraph 20 and 21 were the result of a long discussion in the Drafting Committee. They were an attempt to state two points of view. "Some members" in paragraph 20, and we do not say "other members, " but "a lot of members, " said things in paragraph 21. They are an attempt to find a balance. X will not make a personal comment about the last sentence, but a number of members, in the Drafting Committee, made it quite clear that they felt that a great majority of members accepted that point and we were prepared to support it on that basis.

Temel ISKIT (Turkey): We do not have the advantage of being in the Drafting Committee, although we understand the balance which the Drafting Committee wanted to observe. However, I cannot but agree with the distinguished delegate of the United States for reasons of logic and taking positions. We were amongst the countries who regretted that because of one very well known reason, we have to impose limitations on the activities of the Organization, but in its present formulation it is not logical. If we have a shortfall we cannot avoid imposing a limitation on the activities and that is what the Director-General did. He proposed some adjustments or cuts, so we are for the deletion of the last sentence for reasons of logic.


Joseph TCHICAYA (Congo): D'abord, je voudrais dire que la proposition faite d'ajouter encore une phrase ou un paragraphe ne semble pas à mon avis appropriée dans la mesure où cette opinion est déjà exprimée au paragraphe 20 qui reflète l'opinion de quelques membres. Le paragraphe 21 pourrait, à mon avis, être appelé â tenir compte de ce que les uns et les autres ont dit. Je crois que nous avons dit que, malgré ces pressions financières, 11 fallait en sorte que les programmes techniques et économiques puissent être maintenus. C'est surtout cela. Les aspects techniques et économiques. Nous savons qu'il y a d'autres aspects qui devront forcément subir des pressions, mais c'est des programmes techniques et économiques. Je crois que c'est cela qu'il convient d'ajouter pour que tout le monde soit d'accord.

José Ramón LOPEZ-PORTILLO ROMANO (Presidente del Comité de Redacción): Efectivamente, señor Presidente, esta última oración responde a las modificaciones que se hicieron en el párrafo 20 y buscaba indicar que muchos miembros pensaban que no debían imponerse limitaciones. Quizá faltaría la palabra adicional. La idea de los miembros de este Consejo era que esa expresión condicionaba a la Organización, la obligaba a futuras limitaciones en las actividades de los programas. Quisieron expresar que no constituía una amenaza, pero se evitó la palabra.

Eso formó parte de nuestras discusiones y en el proceso del debate dentro del Comité se llegó a esta fórmula de conciliación. Como digo, crea que esto responde a lo que se dice en el párrafo 20.

Temel ISKIT (Turkey): In the light of the explanations given by the Chairman of the Drafting Committee may we make a concrete proposal to find a compromise. We propose to add the word "additional" before the word "limitations" and the word "essential" before "activities and operations".

John GLISTRUP (Denmark): I am getting somewhat confused, because we are talking about many things at this stage. I wanted to come in after the intervention of the delegate of Congo to oppose an additional paragraph which the delegate of the U. K. has proposed. He says that these views were dealt with in paragraph 20, which we agreed to just before lunch. I would remind the delegate of the Congo that there was an additional proposal to paragraph 20 by the delegate of the U. K. which was withdrawn. Therefore, the views have not been reflected totally in paragraph 20. For that reason, and for the purpose of having a report reflecting the debate which we have had in the Council, I would like to give my delegation'a support to the proposal forwarded by the U. K. for an additional paragraph.

Akbar Mirza KHALEELI (India): I think it is the unanimous view of the Council that no one would like the activities and the operations of the Organization to be limited as a result of financial pressure. It is not a question of financial pressure it is a question of a lack of finance. If there is a lack of finance there has to be, in effect, some cutting down of programmes as a result of which the proceeding paragraphs and subsequent paragraphs indicate that owing to certain financial problems there have been steps taken. Of course, we do not like financial pressure to be direct or indirect, because they are commitments of governments. However, I think that on the whole the Council has tried its best not to pass any critical comments regarding procedures and the action of a major country which has been a major donor, in not being able to fulfill certain commitments. There has been a certain amount of give and take about these matters.

In the same spirit we have removed in paragraph 14 two or three sentences that it was "motivated by, domestic concerns to reduce the national" that has all been removed, which means that we are not attributing motives or pressures at all. If that is the case, I think the alternative before the Council would be either to delete the last sentence straight off, because everything is reflected in the paragraph before, as suggested by the distinguished representative of the United States. I think that la consintent with the whole body of both the events and the paragraphe, or keep it as it la, and not to add any words or another paragraph between 20 and 21. This la my suggestion.

LE PRESIDENT: Nous avons trois propositions. L'une consiste á supprimer le dernier paragraphe; l'autre à dire "beaucoup de ces membres ont déclaré que les pressions financières ne devraient pas entraîner de limitations dane les activités et opérations techniques et économiques de l'Organisation". La troisième consiste à ajouter un paragraphe pour les liquidités. Si vous


voulez, pour en finir avec la dernière phrase, on pourrait accepter une rédaction du genre suivant: "beaucoup de ces membres ont déclaré que les pressions financières ne devraient pas entraîner de limitations, etc. " Pas significatives. Peut-être. Nous en finirions avec ce paragraphe et sur la seconde question posée par le Royaume-Uni, j'aimerais avoir l'avis du Conseil.

Le Secrétariat s'est expliqué sur la question de ces liquidités, mais je ne sais pas quelle est la position du Conseil sur ce point précis.

Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Como usted lo dijo muy bien, señor Presidente, la Secretaría explico la situación y muchas de las delegaciones, la mayoría de las que intervinimos en ese debate también manifestamos que esa situación era satisfactoria gracias a la austeridad y a la eficacia con que se maneja la. gestión de la FAO. De manera que si el colega del Reino Unido insiste en su propuesta, yo tengo ya redactada la mía. Después de haber trabajado muchas horas en el Comité de Redacción, pensaba estar aquí a la defensiva pero no tengo otra alternativa que quedarme aquí y continuar escribiendo. Le ruego a usted, señor Presidente, pregunte al colega del Reino Unido que si insiste en su propuesta la lea y luego yo presento la mía.

R. G. PETTITT (United Kingdom): My proposition, while I did place it here because it seemed to be an explanation, or could form an explanation of the last sentence which we have now amended, stands in its own right and indeed, I was going to propose an additional paragraph thereafter reflecting the decision of the meeting and your summary, which said the Council agreed the Finance Committee would consider the question of programme delivery costs at the next regular meeting. I think I understood that this was the decision and the United Kingdom would discuss with the Secretariat our material and would produce a paper which would go to the Finance Committee. So I would like that there as this was a point which was raised by several countries and should therefore be mentioned in the Report.

George Henry MUSGROVE (Canada): We should like to support the British proposal with respect to the addition of the paragraph between paragraphs 20 and 21. We think we are into the old problem here of the expression of minority views and we for the life of us. cannot think what the difficulty is. There have been a number of delegations who drew attention to a number of areas where the savings might be made and I think these were made in a very clear and articulate way throughout the Council and there was a request from those who were not on the Drafting Committee to have those views reflected in the records. Now if delegates feel that in so inserting there heve to be further amendments we don't mind, we have plenty of time, our delegation could stay and go on as long as anyone wants. This is a simple request and we were one of those who expressed those views and we would very much like to support what the United Kingdom has proposed.

Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Nosotros también tenemos buen ánimo de permanecer aquí todo el tiempo que sea necesario, pero consideramos que es imperativo organizar el debate. El colega del Reino Unido ha hecho dos propuestas de contenido distinto. Primero hizo una sobre la liquidez y sin que usted ni el Consejo hayan decidido nada, ha hecho otra ahora a nombre del Consejo, sobre algo que debe hacer el Comité de Finanzas.

Pido al Reino Unido que se decida y que nos indique primero cuál es su propuesta inicial, si la retiró o no, y que nos diga también dónde quiere y dónde se ha de insertar su propuesta.

R. G. PETTITT (United Kindgom): The paragraph I read earlier which, if people would like I would read again, should come after paragraph 21. A new paragraph I think because it represents a slightly different school of thought but it reade "Some members drew attention to whet they saw as a high level of liquidity in FAO. It was suggested that further savings could be made in programme delivery coats as an initial alternative to cutting substantive programmes. " Then if you like I will cover the other paragraph. I have no firm views where it goes historically. It occurred under this Agenda item.

Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Cordial y respetuosamente, yo le pido al colega del Reino Unido que permita al Consejo que, en primer lugar, se pronuncie sobre una propuesta que ha hecho y no nos confunda agregando más textos, que espere a cuál es la opinión del Consejo, y luego veremos la segunda.


LE PRESIDENT: Oui, je m'excuse, si j'ai bien compris la proposition du Royaume-Uni, ce serait la suivante: il souhaite qu'à la suite du paragraphe 21, on ajoute un paragraphe libellé comme suit: "certains membres ont attiré l'attention du Conseil sur ce qu'ils estimaient être un niveau élevé de liquidités de la FAO. " Ce pararaphe est-il adopté? C'est la phrase que vous avait indiquée le délégué de l'Inde.

R. G. PETTITT (United Kingdom): Yes, it is a new paragraph-21 bis I suppose. That is the first sentence. The second sentence of this same paragraph is what I read out. Shall I read it again? The next sentence reads, "It was suggested that further savings could be made in programme delivery costs as an initial alternative to cutting substantive programmes. "

LE PRESIDENT: Je regrette, mais la première proposition était courte. Elle portait sur ce que je viens de dire, certains membres ont attiré l'attention sur ce qu'ils considéraient être un niveau de liquidités élevé et de rechercher des économies sur les liquidités. Si le Royaume-Uni se limite à cette phrase, je crois que cela permettrait d'avancer les débats. On peut considérer que la proposition serait la suivante "certains membres ont attiré l'attention du Conseil sur ce qu'ils estimaient être un niveau élevé de-liquidités de la FAO et sur la recherche d'économies à partir de ces liquidités. "

Philippe PIOTET (France): Nous avons passé de longues heures au Comité de rédaction et j'ai l'impression que nous sommes encore au Comité de rédaction lorsque l'on essaie d'introduire dans le rapport de longues phrases et de longs détails. Je comprends parfaitement, et c'est tout à fait légitime, qu'au niveau où nous en sommes, le Conseil est la dernière instance où on va discuter de ce rapport. Je comprends que des délégués souhaitent apporter des améliorations à un travail qui est forcément imparfait. Mais je m'étonne que quelques délégations proposent encore des compléments importants à un travail qui, je crois, a été mené dans de très bonnes conditions. Donc, ma délégation est toute prête à examiner les motivations au texte pour l'améliorer, bien entendu, car tout est améliorable, mais ne refaisons pas ici le travail du Comité de rédaction. Nous sommes le Conseil de la FAO, la dernière instance à discuter de ce rapport.

Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): El colega de Francia ha expresado una opinión que debe hacer reflexionar a los miembros del Consejo, sobre todo, esto lo digo con respeto pero con firmeza, a aquella delegación que parece haber adquirido el vicio incorregible de pretender en cada sesión del Consejo destruir el trabajo cuidadoso y profundo que realiza el Comité de Redacción.

Señor Presidente, yo tengo ya, le repito, el texto de la opinión de la gran mayoría de las delegaciones; he tratado de ser casi tan extenso como el colega del Reino Unido, casi tan extenso, de manera que si él insiste yo leo mi propuesta y así tendremos un párrafo kilométrico, pero hágase la voluntad de quienes creen que hay miembros privilegiados en el Consejo.

José Ramón LOPEZ-PORTILLO ROMANO (Presidente del Comité de Redacción): Yo quiero suscribir cada una de las palabras que fueron pronunciadas por el delegado de Francia.

Como Presidente del Comité de Redacción yo hago un llamado a este Consejo que no pretenda convertirse en tal Comité. Todas estas cuestiones se trataron en el Comité de Redacción y llegamos a una conclusión. No era debido ni necesario como lo dije al principio de mi intervención al presentar el informe, no era debido ni necesario presentar los detalles de las distintas posiciones porque si no, no terminaríamos nunca; inclusive nos remitimos también a las directrices que usted, señor Presidente, estableció en torno al tratamiento de ciertos temas come este y el Comité de Redacción tomó nota de que en los verbatim se detallaban las posiciones de cada una de las delegaciones y cada una de esas posiciones tiene igual peso, lo subrayo, tiene igual peso se trate de un país como de otro pals y que, por tanto, ese universo, esa constelación se puede rescatar en este informe; pero si la pretensión de este Consejo es convertir el informe en un verbatim, entonces nunca terminaremos.

Yo a través de usted, señor Presidente, hago un llamado a los miembros del Consejo para evitar que esto se convierta en un Comité de Redacción.


LE PRESIDENT: Je remercie le Président du Comité de rédaction et voudrais me joindre â son appel et vous prier de considérer que les procès-verbaux du Conseil existent et il y a le rapport. Je souhaiterais dans toute la mesure possible que l'on essaie de tenir compte de ces éléments; sinon nous allons alourdir exagérément les débats et nous aurons des difficultés pour approuver le rapport dans les délais requis.

Atif Y. BUKHARI (Saudi Arabia, Kingdom of): For God's sake I would like to support the proposal that came from my colleague of France. Let us be on the level about our responsibilities. We are here to be constructive not destructive. We are wasting a whole lot of time over this. Who chose the Drafting Committee? We did choose them. They are from this Council and we have to give them the confidence. We gave them the confidence so I cannot see any reason for any member himself to stress and impose his opinion in different paragraphs. It was not like that. I am not new in dealing with this kind of matter, but I have never seen anything like this in my life. We are responsible people. We did not come here to waste time. I really would like to appeal to my friends, all of you, to take their responsibilities in a sincere way. We have in front of us only three or four hours or five hours. I do not know when we can finish this.

LE PRESIDENT: Il y a effectivement problème: le Comité de rédaction a présenté un rapport qu'il nous faut adopter, je lance un appel â tous les délégués au Conseil pour qu'ils prennent en considération le fait que les travaux du Conseil sont reflétés dans les procès-verbaux, où tout est consigné, et d'autre part dans le rapport du Conseil; et je leur demande afin de ne pas alourdir nos débats qu'ils ne fassent pas d'incidents qui riqueraient de faire quelque chose de trop lourd.

Un problème est posé par le délégué de la France, par le Président du Comité de rédaction, appuyé par l'Arabie Saoudite: j'aimerais recueillir l'avis du Conseil sur ce point.

Mrs Millicent M. FENWICK (United States of America): I have a compromise to propose. I wish I had never brought this up. I lunched by myself and had an opportunity to read it, and I thought it was foolish and I could not believe that we would have to subscribe to it. But I have been in signalled consultation with my friend, the delegate of Colombia, and we would like to support Turkey, because it seems to me that that leaves the intent of that sentence, by adding additional limitations to essential programmes and practices. In other words, it is merely a definition of intent, and the delegate of Colombia and I feel that the Turkish suggestion is excellent and we hope it could be compromise approach by all.

LE PRESIDENT: Est-ce que cette dernière proposition de la Turquie, appuyée par Mme le délégué des Etats-Unis d'Amérique, pourrait recueillir l'accord du Conseil et nous permettre d'avancer.

George Henry MUSGROVE (Canada): Again I see it as the attempt of some to censor the views of others who do not wish them in the document. We for one had expressed our wish to be on the Drafting Committee and we were unable to be there. We were not otherwise represented on the Committee. We have views to express. We feel that they should be expressed here. It is not unusual, Mr Chairman, and I do apologise for your presence here when we get into these drafting exercises. It has been the unfortunate practice all too often in the past that we go into this sort of exercise, and for the very same reasons, the wish of some countries not to allow the views of the minority to be reflected. If this paragraph is to be left as it is we would simply put a reservation with respect to paragraph 20 on behalf of our government indicating that it inadequately expresses our views and indicating the deficiencies, and that could be put at the bottom of the page. If it is the wish of the Council to adopt that process in the interests of saving time, then we would be prepared to do so and will hand in a written reservation with respect to paragraph 20.

R. G. PETTITT (United Kingdom): It does look as though Σ am resisting rather fiercely, but on this point X fear I will not give way. The Drafting Committee has done a splendid job and in the corridor I said this to its Rapporteur and its Chairman. But the Committee would be superhuman if it were able to identify all the points which are of particular significance to a group of countries or a country which is not on the Drafting Committee.


I would go along with the suggestions that one looks both at the report and the summary record for things which one could reasonably expect to look into the summary record for. I did this just before lunch·

This is a point which was of considerable significance to my delegation and to one or two others. I would therefore strongly request and quote page 111 of the Basic Texts to require it to be included as a point of view.

LE PRESIDENT: M. le délégué du Royaume-Uni maintient sa proposition qui consiste â ajouter au paragraphe 21 un autre paragraphe disant: "Certains membres ont attiré l'attention du Conseil sur ce qu'ils estimaient être un niveau de liquidité élevé de l'Organisation, et demandent que l'on étudie la possibilité de rechercher des économies â ce niveau. " Est-ce que cette phrase peut être une base de discussion ou de consensus.

Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Si el colega del Reino Unido insiste nosotros proponemos que en ese mismo párrafo se agregue lo siguiente: "La gran mayoría de las delegaciones opinaron que la situación de liquidez de la Organización era el resultado de la austeridad y eficacia aplicadas en la administración de la FAO y se aceptaron las adecuadas explicaciones de la Secretaría que presentaron muy bien esa situación, a la luz de la cual no era factible ni conveniente aplicar más reducciones en los programas. "

Así quedan balanceadas las dos opiniones, pero, repito, lo hacemos muy en contra de nuestra voluntad porque no es posible que dos delegaciones pretendan siempre que se incluya lo que ellos dicen y nos obliguen a incluir lo que opinamos la gran mayoría.

Ello PASCARELLI (Italy): I had asked for the floor to express my views, very close to the ones expressed by the French delegation and by the Chairman of the Drafting Committee.

Italy as a Member of the Drafting Committee believes that here we should just make small corrections if needed to improve, but not to add or make long statements to what is written already in the Drafting Committee's report. Otherwise we will do the same as we did in the Finance Committee. If we appoint a committee we should have confidence in it, especially if it did a wonderful job.

Sra. Margarita LIZARRAGA (México): Como podrá comprender, señor Presidente, nuestra delegación se había abstenido de participar hasta este momento por razones obvias, sin embargo, nos queremos unir al llamamiento que otros colegas del Comité de Redacción han hecho buscando un llamamiento a las delegaciones para no tratar de introducir el sentimiento de una o dos delegaciones, porque hubo toda una diversidad de temas que más de dos delegaciones presentaron y que no aparecen en este informe porque no se trata de un verbatim, se trata de un informe y debe reconocer los puntos más sobresalientes·

Creo que detrás de las proposiciones que se están haciendo en este momento se reconoce una proposición que llegó a los miembros de este Consejo por canales no regulares, vamos a decir, y que abrió un amplio debate en esta Ρlenaria. Se tomó demasiado tiempo, se reflexionó que esto no estaba dentro de la agenda, se llegó a una conclusión de parte suya y de parte de la Secretaría en que las representaciones involucradas se dirigieran a la Secretarla, llevaran un mayor intercambio de información y posteriormente si esto meritara iría al Comité de Finanzas. Esto fue reglado allí y en los verbatim consta que fue lo que pasó y cuál es el tratamiento que se dio.

Hacemos de nuevo un llamamiento para que no se insista en esta mecánica, con el mayor respeto, porque las 35 horas que nosotros utilizamos no alcanzarían para tratar de volver a utilizar la revisión de este reporter.

Mohammed ABDELHADI (Tunisie): Je voudrais revenir á la proposition de mon collègue de la Turquie. 1e me semble Stre de nature S resoudre le probleme. Ma délégation adhère â cotta proposition qui est d'ailleurs appuyée par plusieurs membres du Conseil.

Je voudrais ajouter que le rythme de nos travaux est lent, n'est pas satisfaisant et ne nous permet pas d'avancer convenablement. A cet égard j'exhorte tous les membres-ou certains membres du Conseil-â ne pas transformer le Conseil en Comité de rédaction. Nous avons confiance dans le Comité de rédaction qui a bien travaillé, et qui a mis 35 heures á faire ce travail pour nous.


Humberto CARRION Μ· (Nicaragua): Sobre el párrafo 21 creo que el delegado de Túnez tiene razón; la propuesta de Turquía ha sido ampliamente aceptada por el Consejo. Creo que usted, señor Presidente, en relación con el párrafo 21, la podría dar por adoptado.

En lo que se refiere a la propuesta del Reino Unido y a la de Colombia en relación a un distinto párrafo, nosotros deseamos unirmos a la ya extensa explicación que dio nuestra colega representante de Mexico que fue muy clara, muy precisa en cuanto a los antecedentes que llevaron a esa discusión sobre el planteamiento que hacen dos delegaciones.

También otros miembros se han referido a que no debemos en este momento convertir el Plenario del Consejo en un Comité de Redacción puesto que ya han realizado su trabajo, en cuyos miembros hemos depositado nuestra confianza. Sin embargo, deseo manifestar que en el caso de que haya insistencia por parte de delegaciones de incluir el nuevo párrafo sobre el costo de las inclusiones del programa, apoyamos la propuesta hecha por Colombia para complementar el párrafo propuesto por el Reino Unido.

DEPUTY DIRECTOR-GENERAL: If perhaps I may be allowed to pontificate for a moment, it is extremely delicate to work out in plenary a phraseology of majority and minority views acceptable to all concerned. The advantage of doing this in a Drafting Committee is of course that it is off the record and you can make compromises, you can reach agreements, and you can come up with a text. It is difficult to do this in a full Council session with a verbatim record where everybody is watching, is extremely careful about what they say, and achieving a new balance is a real problem. I do not on the other hand at all, frankly, appreciate the suggestion that difficulties in this process amount to an attempt to stifle the views of the minority. This seems to me a morally unacceptable viewpoint, if I may say so.

If I may come now to the specific suggestions made by the United Kingdom, they deal in my view with two completely different matters. One is the high level of liquidity, alleged, and the other is the question of programme delivery costs.

Those are not related. Now, the question of the level of liquidity does not need to be in the group of subjects that have a "some members, other members" complexion. If it is to be included I would suggest that there be a paragraph saying something like this: "In answer to questions regarding the apparently high level of liquidity of the Organization at the end of 1985, it was explained by the Secretariat that all these funds were committed for specific purposes. " End of paragraph.

That to my mind is all that needs to be said. The question of programme delivery costs and the reference to the Finance Committee is another matter which has not yet come up. Perhaps that can be dealt with in a separate paragraph. But is not inherently connected to this group of issues which we are now discussing.

R. G. PETTITT (United Kingdom): I have no views on where the suggestions I made are placed. I raised them here because historically they were dealt with under this item. I do agree that the paragraph I suggested could easily be split into two, and indeed Mr Walton's suggestion is an improvement on mine. The only trouble is from my point of view, he would have to say that a delegation queried this and it was agreed that this delegation would have further discussions with the Secretariat. If he were not satisfied the matter would be referred to the Finance Committee, which I think was the gist of our discussion. That paragraph would suit me perfectly well.

David Lawrence COUTTS (Australia): I was not particularly anxious to intervene. I have been very careful to be silent in this debate except for one short intervention. I have just got two things to say. One is that we have discussed last night in the Drafting Committee about the role the Drafting Committee should play in this discussion. I am very disturbed in the light of that discussion to see a number of interventions particularly by one member of that Committee, in this debate. I think the Drafting Committee has had ample chance to have its say. I am supporting the Drafting Committee's report even though there are some areas about which I have misgivings and I had understood that all other members of the Drafting Committee were going to do the same.

Secondly, I think that we should remind ourselves of what we are trying to do here, and if you look at the rules, the Basic Texts of the Organization, rule VI. 2 says "The Director-General shall communicate as soon as possible after the end of each regular session, a report embodying the text of al l resolutions, recommendations, conventions, agreements, supplementary conventions or agreements and of other formal decisions adopted or approved by the Council, including, when requested, a statement of minority views, to all Member Nations", etc.


I am in no way supporting, or discussing, what the United Kingdom has put forward but they, and in other cases, other delegations have requested that minority views be put in this report and I think that is quite in accordance with what is asked. I do not think it is appropriate for members of the Drafting Committee to participate in that discussion.

LE PRESIDENT: Avant d'aller plus loin, je voudrais demander si le libellé proposé par M. Walton concernant les liquidités est accepté. Il s'agit du premier libellé. Sur une demande d'explications à propos du mot "liquidités", le Secrétariat a donné des précisions au sujet de l'utilisation de ces liquidités.

La proposition de M. Walton donne-t-elle satisfaction au délégué du Royaume-Uni?

Il y a ensuite la question du coût ou de la productivité. Pouvons-nous scinder la question en deux et dire: "sur une question posée au sujet du mot "liquidités", le Secrétariat a donné telle ou telle information"?

R. G. PETTITT (United Kingdom): As far as it went, I am totally happy with this and it can go wherever in the report it is considered to be most appropriate.

I simply have to say that after that one has to have a sentence saying that "a member country said it was not convinced with this presentation. It was agreed that that delegation should have further discussions with the Secretariat and that if it were not satisfied the matter would be referred to the Finance Committee. "

Horacio CARANDANG (Philippines): I have been requesting the floor, again to appeal to the members who adhere to the Drafting Committe's draft. Of course, I agree with the right of everybody to put his own view in the drafting group, but there should also be some other considerations. We know that if you put this kind of draft then you have to put the answer to this draft. For example, it was said that you have this liquidity problem, but it was pointed out that in assessing the liquidity, the liabilities owed at the time should be looked at. Furthermore, it was pointed out that even with the programme adjustments there would be a liquidity crisis at the end of the blennium. I thought that this should be put there. If you put another statement there then you have to put the other counter statement. Therefore, in view of all these complications I think that, as the verbatims are also part of our report, can we please consider the draft report and if we could live with it we should be happier.

I should like to remind others that we who stay in Rome have all the time to sit down here, and that tomorrow probably there is going to be a strike. If you wish to continue until tomorrow we will still be here to discuss this draft.

Akbar Mirza KHALEELI (India): I would not like to add to the length of this debate, but I feel compelled to speak because on this very issue, if you see the verbatim reports, I had anticipated this problem. When this note was circulated on the 17th and a certain amount of heat was generated, (and light also) I intervened, I think it was on the 18th. I said that there has been a ruling by the Chair that this matter is not to be raised now, or in the course of the Conference. This was supported by someone else. Therefore I am rather surprised that this matter, on which a ruling was made on the subject of whether the Director-General was running the Organization properly or not-of course it is a sovereign right to raise it-but it was ruled that it was not on the agenda and that this matter would be discussed by the delegation concerned with the Secretariat. They have discussed in a chance meeting some nine or ten months ago and the next thing that the Secretariat heard was this paper on the 17th. After this takes place, it was our understanding that there was a gentleman's agreement and after this Council meets they will, go and discuss with Mr Shah and Mr Crowther and they have stuck by their decision that the overhead costs are rather high. They may be right, or they may be wrong, but the findings that they come to can be submitted to the next Council or to the next Finance Committee. What is over is over. Now here, we find two things, the Deputy Director-General, out of his desire to follow this long discussion, has also proposed a question of liquidity and separated listing. There is no question of needing to introduce this. The fact is that there has been liquidity if not because of the austerity (as called by the distinguished representative of Colombia) at least because the very salutary anticipation of the problems of liquidity shown by the Secretariat and the Director-General. If he had not shown this anticipation you would be high and dry and there would be straight away a question of financial pressure on such an organization. You would be standing there with hat in hand. I think the


proceedings make it quite clear that this is not correct. The fact that paragraph 20 goes so far is also something which is not acceptable to many of us but we are ready to live with paragraph 20 because it does reflect the views of a very important member and the work of the Drafting Committee are amply reflected, the distinguished representative of the Philippines and all of them. A lot of work has gone into it. Let us not chop and change, let it remain as it is, otherwise this will go on indefinitely. You yourself have suggested a small compromise to the last sentence. We might stick to that.

DEPUTY DIRECTOR-GENERAL: This is a question of liquidity, but I think the representative of the United Kingdom is still linking this to the question of programme delivery costs. On that matter, the Director-General said that if the Council wished to refer that matter to the Finance Committee it would be taken up by the Finance Committee. I do not know whether Council does or does not wish to refer it to the Finance Committee, but if it does, it could surely be dealt with in one sentence, one line, which would say something like "The Council referred to the Finance Committee the question of regular programme delivery costs which had been raised by one representative. "

LE PRESIDENT: La proposition du Secrétaire général adjoint peut-elle servir de base à un consensus?

R. G. PETTITT (United Kingdom): On the question of programme delivery costs I agree significantly with Mr Walton. Page 16 of document CL PV/8 does indicate that there was a decision there to refer to the matter to the Finance Committee, and I would be happy to have a simple entry saying that the Council agreed that the question of programme delivery costs would be considered at the next regular meeting of the Finance Committee.

The other issue I think needs to be ventilated in the sense it was raised, and we had these views, the Secretariat said various things and that this matter also would go to the Finance Committee if it were so required, following discussion between the Secretariat and the delegation concerned.

LE PRESIDENT: Voici comment se présente la situation: on peut dire qu'il y a eu un échange de vues et que le Royaume-Uni, s'il n'est pas encore convaincu après avoir eu des contacts avec le Secrétariat, présentera cette question â la réunion ordinaire du Comité financier.

DEPUTY DIRECTOR-GENERAL: The question to be discussed, which it was said would be discussed, between the United Kingdom and the Secretariat related to programme delivery costs. There was never any decision that the question of liquidity as such would be discussed with the Secretariat. I think that has to be handled as another matter. It is part of the Finance Committee's regular functions to look at the liquidity of the Organization, so I do not see that it needs to be referred to the Finance Committee; it is automatically part of its job. The essence of the liquidity issue surely remains. As I said, questions came up in the debate on the level of liquidity and explanations were given by the Secretariat, and that is it. I proposed a very brief text that would cover that point.

POINT OF ORDER
POINT D'ORDRE
PUNTO DE ORDEN

Sra. Dra. Graflia SOTO CARRERO (Cuba): Sr. Presidente, con mucho respeto mi delegación quisiera expresarle que está perpleja por la forma en que se están conduciendo estas discusiones. Tenemos un texto que ha preparado un Comité de Redacción, un texto que, a nuestro entender, mi delegación estaba totalmente de acuerdo con él, Sr. Presidente. Sin embargo, hace tanto tiempo que pedimos la palabra que hubiéramos querido unirnos a lo expresado por la delegación de Francia, por el Presidente del Comité de Redacción y por la delegación de México, declaraciones que, posiblemente, ya nadie recuerde en la sala, porque, le repito, ha pasado mucho tiempo que solicitamos la palabra.

Mi delegación considera, Sr. Presidente, muy valioso el trabajo de este Comité de Redacción que fue elegido justamente por nosotros y cada uno de sus Miembros. En aquel momento, parece que gozaba de toda la confianza del Consejo. En este momento, aún sigue teniendo la confianza de la delegación de Cuba. Sin embargo, Sr. Presidente, nosotros consideramos que si se mantienen estas propuestas, si se trata de llevarnos de un tema a otro, posiblemente con la intención de confundirnos, si se quieren presentar o incluir en el informe aspectos planteados por una, dos, o a lo sumo tres delegaciones, consideramos sumamente justo que se incluya la propuesta hecha por el distinguido Embajador de Colombia y que si expresa las expresiones al respecto hechas por la mayoría de las delegaciones. Yo le pido, Sr. Presidente, en nombre de mi delegación, que haga valer los Artículos del Reglamento de la Organización que a usted lo ampara, y que exhorte a los demás miembros del Consejo a no divagar más alrededor de este asunto, llevándonos de un tema a otro, y que se adopte


definitivamente, o el texto presentado por el Comité de Redacción que, les repito, mi delegación apoya, o añadirle los textos del Reino Unido con el agregado del Embajador de Colombia y que, por favor, terminemos este punto y pasemos al punto siguiente.

LE PRESIDENT: Au sujet des liquidités, il y a un ajout proposé par le délégué du Royaume-Uni et un autre proposé par le délégué de la Colombie. On nous demande de prendre position sur cet ensemble.

Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Definitivamente hoy he llegado a la convicción de que aquellos distinguidos colegas y amigos que viven por allá en las agradables y lejanas antípodas, tienen una mentalidad muy diferente de la mentalidad de quienes vivimos en otras partes del mundo. Digo esto porque se esgrimió un argumento peregrino en una concepción prehistórica de la época de las cavernas, en relación sobre cual debe ser la conducta de los miembros del Comité de Redacción.

En cuanto a la liquidez, creo que todos debemos agradecerle al colega del Reino Unido que haya aceptado la propuesta del señor Walton.

En relación con los costos de los programas, y la función del Comité de Finanzas, el distinguido colega del Reino Unido, que está aquí sentado delante de mí, me agradeció mi intervención en ese debate cuando yo hice una propuesta flexible que voy a tratar de recoger en la siguiente frase:

El Consejo acordó que a la luz del contenido de este informe el Director General tomó las decisiones pertinentes de, particularmente, en relación con los costos de los programas y la función del Comité de Finanzas.

Esto fue, más o menos, lo que yo dije. El Reino Unido me lo agradeció. Espero que será aceptado, naturalmente si el señor Walton está de acuerdo y los demás miembros del Consejo.

LE PRESIDENT: Sans vouloir allonger les débats, je crois que la question du coût d'exécution a fait l'objet d'un consensus établi après discussion et cette question serait réétudiée par le Comité financier. Il reste la question des liquidités. Une question a été posée par quelques délégués. Il y a eu une réponse de M. Crowther au nom de l'Organisation. Il semble que les délégués ne soient pas encore tout à fait convaincus. Nous pouvons alors considérer également que ces délégués pourraient prendre contact avec le Secrétariat pour approfondir cette question et, s'ils ne sont pas convaincus, ils pourraient demander l'inscription de cette question dans une prochaine session ordinaire du Comité financier. Ceci est-il acceptable?

R. G. PETTITT (United Kingdom): That is a correct summary of what we would like. Is it your suggestion that it goes in the report, or is this some part of our deliberations which is recorded in the verbatim?

LE PRESIDENT: Si vous considérez que cette formulation est acceptable, nous suggérons de la mettre dans le procès-verbal de la séance.

DEPUTY DIRECTOR-GENERAL: I do not think there is any misunderstanding on the substance so, rather than getting into an endless drafting exercise, can we not take it as a decision which is simply recorded in the verbatim record of this meeting now?

LE PRESIDENT Ja pansa que maintenant nous sommee d'aaeetd sur la fond. IL y a un engagement de la Direction générale. Je propose au délégué du Royaume-Uni de bien vouloir retenir cette procédure qui donne satisfaction sur le fond sans que noua soyons attachée outre mesure I la forme. Voilà ce que je propose. Quelle eat votre déciaion?

R. G. PETTITT (United Kingdom): I accept the proposal.


POINT OF ORDER
POINT D'ORDRE
PUNTO DE ORDEN

Horacio CARANDANG (Philippines): I wanted to ask whether the Council really agreed to make the decision to study programme delivery costs in the Programme and Finance Committees. I should like a clarification on whether the Council really took this decision, and I would like to ask the Secretary or Mr Shah to tell me whether this decision has been taken.

LE PRESIDENT: Je voudrais dire au délégué des Philippines que nous avons eu l'occasion de discuter de cette question et que nous nous sommes entendus sur le titre du sujet; c'est un document qui a été distribué hors circuit habituel, par un délégué, et nous avons convenu du titre du document qui serait transmis par ce délégué au Secrétariat pour qu'il puisse l'analyser et y ajouter ce qu'il croit utile d'ajouter dans les cinq langues officielles et transmettre le tout à la session de printemps du Comité financier. Il me semble que cela a été admis en présence de l'organisation. M. Shah pourrait peut-être nous éclairer sur ce point.

V. J. SHAH (Director, Office of Programme Budget and Evaluation): May I refer you to the verbatim record PV/8 from page 15 onwards. This refers to the discussion which took place during the afternoon session on 20th November. There is an intervention by. the Director-General which, among other things on this particular subject, recalled: "Je voudrais m'assurer du libellé du sujet. Si le Conseil veut en discuter, quel titre faut-il lui donner? Est-ce que c'est ce document-là que nous devons traduire et présenter au Comité financier avec nos commentaires? Ou le Royaume-Uni souhaite-t-il un nouveau document élaboré à la suite de vos discussions?"

Le Conseil souhaite-t-il un nouveau document élaboré â la suite de vos discussions? Ce sont autant de questions à éclaircir. Je ne pensé pas qu'il soit nécessaire, pour moi, de lire ce procès-verbal qui est â la disposition de tous les membres du Conseil, il me paraît que la question n'a pas été résolue puisque le Directeur général a soulevé la question. Est-ce que c'est le souhait du Conseil? Le Conseil ne s'est pas prononcé.

Le PRESIDENT: Nous posons la question au Conseil. La question est la suivante: Est-ce que la délégation qui a présenté ce document se mettra en rapport avec le secrétariat qui étudiera la question et sera habilité â préparer un document sur le coût de l'exécution? Il sera analysé par le Secrétariat dans les cinq langues, des commentaires seront faits et transmis au Comité financier lors de la session ordinaire. Car le Conseil ne peut pas étudier un document de cette importance technique sans instructions des gouvernements et sans avoir eu l'éclairage préalable du Comité financier. Est-ce que le Conseil est d'accord ou non sur ce point? Le Secrétariat considère qu'elle n'a pas été établie par le Conseil.

Horacio CARANDANG (Philippines): I am a little surprised at the way we are proceeding. I thought we were adopting a report on decisions that had been taken. Since I believe the decision was not taken, then I doubt whether we should take this decision now, but it is up to you, Mr Chairman. I think we should just say that no decision was taken with regard to this question.

Joseph TCHICAYA (Congo): Ce qu'a dit le délégué des Philippines est exactement ce que je voulais dire. Je pense que nous sommes en ce moment en séance d'adoption de notre rapport. Le rapport signifie que c'est l'expression consacrée de nos débats. Alors, je ne pense pas qu'il soit utile maintenant de rouvrir le débat ou de procéder â un vote pour savoir si oui ou non on doit faire l'examen de ce document i notre Comité financier. Je croie qu'il eat important de devoir al noua aviona pria la décision ou non. 81 on l'a prise, je considère que la question doit être remise â plus tard. En tout état de cause, je pense que, personnellement, J'avala été opposé â ce genre de travail, surtout que l'année prochaine le Comité financier aera assez chargé avec le Programme de travail et budget. Je ne pense pas qu'il soit tellement nécessaire de vouloir leur confier ce travail supplémentaire. Je pensaia que c'était clair et bien compris ici et que la majorité, plus ou moins, n'était pas favorable â ce genre d'exercice â soumettre au Comité financier â cette époque où les ressources sont difficiles.


Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Apoyo plenamente lo que han dicho los representantes de Filipinas y Congo. Quiero repetir lo que ya dije en la Plenaria, de que creo que sentarla un precedente grave con consecuencias imprevisibles si cada delegación trajera aquí a la FAO un documento en su propio idioma y la FAO después lo reprodujera. Esto solamente para dar satisfacción a esa sola delegación, por importante que sea y por obstrucionista. que sea su táctica.

Sra. Dra. Grafila SOTO CARRERO (Cuba): En realidad mi delegación se encuentra esta tarde aquí en la sala para adoptar el informe final del 90° período de sesiones del Consejo, sin embargo, nos sentimos totalmente confundidos al encontrar ahora en este debate nuevos textos que nos han presentado. Me parece que sobre la pregunta que usted ha dirigido a los delegados miembros del Consejo, ellos mismos se refirieron a este tema. Creo que es inútil volver a abrir el mismo.

Para ser más breve, señor Presidente, quisiera decirle que la delegación de Cuba se adhiere a las intervenciones hechas por Congo, Filipinas y Colombia.

David Lawrence COUTTS (Australia): I regret to have to intervene again but I just want to make one observation. My recollection is that when we had this debate there was a discussion, a very extensive one, on whether it was appropriate for this matter to go to the Finance Conmmittee and also whether the paper which the delegate for the U. K. puts out should have been circulated in the way it was. I have been trying to find the verbatim report, but I do not have it with me. It was my clear recollection, that in your summing up you said that this matter would be discussed further between the United Kingdom and the Secretariat and that the matter would be considered at a future meeting by the Finance Committee. Why can we not just reflect that and leave it there?

Akbar Mirza KHALEELI (India): I think the proceedings are summarized on page 17 of document CL 90/PV/8. Unfortunately, I do not know many of the languages here including the beautiful language of the distinguished representative of Colombia, who keeps complaining that he does not know English. I would request that somebody should read this out and this will summarize the ruling, because there was a ruling made at that time by you. in consultation with the Council. I think we can start with this page.

V. J. SHAH (Directeur, Bureau du Programme du budget et de l'évaluation): Le Directeur général avait dit et je cite: "Nous sommes â la disposition du Conseil. Si un document doit être distribué â tous les délégués, il faut qu'il soit traduit dans toutes les langues, en français, en anglais, en espagnol, en chinois et en arabe. C'est une question de principe. Il faut du temps. C'est au Conseil de décider".

Akbar Mirza KHALEELI (India): Somebody ought to read the Spanish, Mr Chairman (interruption in Spanish) I cannot read the Spanish of what the representative of Colombia said, but I can read what I said. I said that we are inclined to go along with the recommendations of the representative of Colombia. We are impressed by the determination with which the United Kingdom representative wishes to place on record certain reservations regarding the overheads of FAO. I thought, right at the beginning, that you had taken a decision, Mr Chairman, that it was not to be a Conference document. I feel that rather than this matter being raised again and again under some other issue, or some other heading, it would be better to decide now as to how it should be dealt with.

Secondly, in the Finance Committee, which has distinguished representatives including the representative of Australia, I think that various reservations, or opinions, could have been expressed and can again be expressed. This matter should be decided strictly according to the rules, on the basis of your ruling, rather than continuing a discussion on a matter that has already lasted too long. As the distinguished representative of the United States said, "We are not just inclined to accept the recommendation of Colombia. We say for heaven's sake let's accept it and get on. We should have finished this long ago and we heartily endorse what the delegate said. "

Then the representative of the United Kingdom himself said, "I am not pushing this further. If the interventions we make do not make sense without our paper we apologize". Then you said, "If the United Kingdom agrees with the proposal made by the delegate of Colombia, confirmed and supported by the delegate of the United States, we consider that that procedure has been opted for. Namely, that in its interventions the delegate of the United Kingdom will refer to all parts of the report which concern him. "


Le PRESIDENT: Effectivement, la délégation de Colombie avait fait une proposition pour que ces éléments du rapport soient évoqués au cours du débat. Je crois que le délégué des Etats-Unis avait suggéré qu'on donne suite et cela a été effectivement obtenu comme procédure. Si cela figure dans le procès-verbal, cela résout la question. Cela figure-t-il dans le procès-verbal? Donc, effectivement, on peut considérer qu'il y a eu accord de procédure. Cette procédure proposée par la Colombie a été retenue par le délégué du Royaume-Uni.

R. G. PETTITT (United Kingdom): I am sorry for taking the floor so often. The passage we have just been looking at was on a different subject all together which was whether a paper which we had put round should be issued as a Conference Room paper. In view of the costs and other things and the general unpopularity I gave up this proposal. The proposal which we thought was carried, and is really in page 15 of CL 90/PV/8, was that we asked that the subject be taken up by the Finance Committee. I said that I would produce a paper which would be a different paper, a paper prepared after discussions with the secretariat. The Director-General then asked what it was to be called and your summary was on page 16 which was that "if the Council is in agreement we can carry on now". I understand this to be an agreement that should be taken to the Finance Committee. The subject of liquidity was discussed under item 12 and the relevant documentation is also on page 16, but is on CL 90/PV/16.

DEPUTY DIRECTOR-GENERAL: The question is not really the fate of the paper submitted by the United Kingdom. The question is whether the Finance Committee should consider the subject. The Rules of Procedure of the Finance Committee state that the Director-General, in consultation with the Chairman of the Committee, shall prepare a provisional agenda. Unless the Council wishes it to be done otherwise the Director-General is quite ready to include, in the next regular session of the Finance Committee, an agenda item entitled, "Regular Programme Delivery Costs". In preparation for the Finance Committee's discussion the Director-General will prepare a paper which will take account of the discussions with the United Kingdom, but it is the Director-General's prerogative to submit his own paper to the Finance Committee. He is not by any means obliged to submit the paper of the United Kingdom, therefore, I think that on that understanding we can proceed unless the Council does not wish this to be included in the agenda.

David Lawrence COUTTS (Australia): I have been getting increasingly perplexed by this discussion. I thought we had a clear understanding on this point. I gained this from reading the verbatim and, as the United Kingdom has pointed out, your own summing up, which was not disputed by anybody at the time and is quite clear. You said, "I would like to separate the question into two parts" I am reading this in English and I am very surprised that the Secretariat has not picked this up. "The first question posed by the representative of the United Kingdom for the Council was to know if it is possible for the Council to accept the principle of a study on the programme delivery costs, which will be presented to the Director-General of FAO by the United Kingdom, to form the basis of an analysis by the Finance Committee next spring. I think that is all that needs to be reflected. " Mr President you went on to say, "If the Council is in agreement we can continue. " There remains a second question posed by the United Kingdom which was to do with whether their paper was to be considered appropriate in this context. I really thought that that had been decided by the Council, and I am very puzzled that we are even having this discussion.

Le PRESIDENT. Nous sommes eu présence d'une proposition concrète de M. le Directeur général adjoint, proposition qui pourrait servir de base â un consensus indiquant: "que le Directeur général peut préparer un document sur cette question, la présenterait au prochain comité ordinaire du Comité financier, mais la soumettrait en tant que proposition du Directeur général sur la base de discussions qui auraient lieu. Je pense que cette proposition de M. Walton peut nous permettre d'avancer.

Temel ISKIT (Turquie): Je voulais seulement vous demander si à la dernière phrase du paragraphe 21, on a bien apporté les additions proposées par ma délégation. Parfait. Merci beaucoup.

George Henry MUSGROVE (Canada): Just to clarify could you indicate what we have done. We have left the Draft as it is with the exception of the amendment proposed by the delegate of Turkey? There is no inclusion in this Draft of a reference to delivery costs? Could you clarify please.


Le PRESIDENT: M. le délégué du Royaume-Uni a accepté la procédure suggérée sur deux points.

En ce qui concerne les liquidités, il a été suggéré que le délégué du Royaume-Uni se mette en rapport avec le Secrétariat et qu'il étudie cette question â fond. A l'issue de cette discussion, le délégué du Royaume-Uni appréciera avec l'Organisation s'il y a lieu d'avancer plus loin, et présentera une requête officielle pour demander que cela soit analysé à un prochain comité financier, pour ce qui concerne les coûts d'exécution.

La rédaction reste en l'état sous réserve que dans le procès-verbal d'aujourd'hui nous disions qu'une procédure a été convenue entre le Secrétariat et le délégué du Royaume-Uni; nous pourrions adopter ce processus.

Mme la déléguée du Venezuela a demandé la parole, je la prie de m'excuser.

Sra. Mercedes FERMIN GOMEZ (Venezuela): Ahora retiro la palabra porque yo iba a pedir un punto de orden; llevamos hora y media discutiendo un punto que no está en el Orden del Día ni en la agenda y yo iba a pedir un punto de orden para traer el debate a su puesto, pero no tuvo la gentileza de ver mi pancarta que hace veinte minutos la tengo puesta pidiendo la palabra. Yo le doy las gracias.

Le PRESIDENT: Nous passons au paragraphe 22. Y-a-t-il des observations?

George Henry MUSGROVE (Canada): Yes, I just will make a comment on the paragraphs that we have concluded. Insofar as the matter of procedure seemed to have satisfied the delegate of the United Kingdom I shall not press for the changes but I do not think they adequately reflect the views that our delegation, amongst others, has suggested and I must say that I find it extremely unfortunate that it has taken an hour and a half when a suggestion had been made for a short sentence to be added to this Report. I made my remarks earlier about the desire of some delegates to censor or to exorcise from the Report the things with which they do not agree. I find it a most extraordinary thing and I would like also to refer to the remarks made by Deputy Director-General Walton. I think we have sufficient difficulty with the debate that we hold amongst us without debating with the Secretariat and we do welcome his contributions in matters of facts but I do not appreciate having to discuss or discourse with, or disagree with, the Secretriat or find they disagree with me either.

With regard to the paragraph 22 I should like to propose the deletion of some words in that particular paragraph and in particular the phrase which begins, "all developing member countries and of the great majority of others". If those words could be deleted I think the sentence would be reasonably gratuitous and accurately reflect the sense of this Council.

Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Yo creo que por lo menos es cínico e irrespetuoso que los propios causantes de las demoras en los trabajos del Consejo traten de descargar su responsabilidad sobre los demás.

La delegación de Colombia respalda plenamente las actuaciones del señor Walton; la Secretaría tiene un papel que está cumpliendo adecuadamente.

En relación con el párrafo 22 al que se refirió ya Canadá me permito observar que estos párrafos fueron objeto de larga discusión en el Comité y que a partir del párrafo 23 aparece la opinión de la minoría, de manera que, por favor, una vez más, no desequilibren el contenido del Informe.

Le PRESIDENT: Nous avons une proposition du délégué du Canada tendant à supprimer au paragraphs 22 la fin de la phrase, c'ast-â-dire "de la grande majorité des autres Etats Membres". Personnellement je dois dire que beaucoup de délégués, la grande majorité des délégués, ont appuyé la préservation de ce programme. Je ne sais pas quelle est exactement la modification que vous souhaitez.

George Henry MUSGROVE (Canada): I can explain perhaps the effect of the deletion which I proposed would leave paragraph 22 reading as follows: "The Council recognized that the Technical Cooperation Programme (TCP) enjoyed the support of all member countries". Our country, of course, has had some differences of view with respect to the control of the management of that Programme but has no difficulty at all in supporting its concept.


Le PRESIDENT. Si je vous ai bien compris, votre proposition consiste á dire que "le Conseil á reconnu que le Programme de cooperation technique (PCT) recueille l'appui de tous Etats Membres". C'est bien cela?

Je pense qu'on peut l'accepter. Parfait, je vous remercie.

Joachim WINKEL (Germany, Federal Republic of): I have to object to that. I would like to leave the text of the Drafting Committee as it is.

Le PRESIDENT: Qui peut le plus peut le moins, par consequent nous gardons le texte en l'état; nous considérons le paragraphe 22 comme adopté.

R. G. PETTITT (United Kingdom): I have an uncontroversial insertion into paragraph 23. I think it reflects the views of ourselves and others. Into the middle of that paragraph, a new sentence "They also mentioned the possibility of some parts of the TCP being transferred to voluntary financing".

Le PRESIDENT: Est-ce que ce point a été étudié par le Conseil? Je pose la question au délégué du Royaume-Uni.

R. G. PETTITT (United Kingdom): It was mentioned by my delegation, I cannot remember whether anybody else…?

Horacio CARANDANG (Philippines): It is true that this was mentioned but also there were other delegations like myself that said that these were all objections that had been raised before and that they should not be raised again at this point.

José Ramon LOPEZ-PORTILLO ROMANO (Presidente del Comité de Redacción) Volvemos a lo mismo, es decir si se agrega un punto entonces se tiene que contemplar lo que los otros dijeron. El informe buscó ahorrar a quien lo lea la necesidad de reproducir aquí los verbatim en primer lugar; en segundo, cuando se habla de algunos miembros no necesariamente todos ellos se refirieron a ese punto, de ahí que tampoco sería justo que en este párrafo se hiciera esa imputación a esos "algunos miembros". El informe busca ser sencillo, elegante, preciso y sobre todo evocar el consenso; ese es el propósito de un informe y no reproducir verbatim.

Vuelvo a solicitar a los miembros de este Consejo que entiendan el espíritu de un informe y no lleguen a que en cada párrafo se haga un enunciado y que en el siguiente cuando se habla de otros o de la mayoría se vuelva a hacer el enunciado contrario; vamos a buscar la fórmula elegante y de consenso en este Consejo. Ese fue el espíritu que estuvo en el Comité de Redacción y espero prevalezca también en este Consejo.

Humberto CARRION (Nicaragua). Deseamos apoyar plenamente lo ya expresado por el Presidente del Comité de Redacción.

Deseamos de nuevo reconocer la responsabilidad y la capacidad con la cual 41 dirigió los trabajos da…Comité qua, de nuavo, marace nuestro respeto y creo que as improcedente ademàe que un solo delegado en este Consejo aeti tratando de imponer un punto de vista minoritario en un informe que ya refleja loa puntos de vista de mayorías y minorías.

R. G. PETTITT (United Kingdom): In view of the fact that nobody else seems to have claimed authorship of this, this was intended to be a helpful suggestion and did in fact help another sister organization to overcome similar difficulties. I will rely on reference in the Verbatim and withdraw the reference.


Le PRESIDENT: Je remercie M. le délégué du Royaume-Uni et nous pouvons considérer le paragraphe 23 comme adopté. Paragraphe 24. Y a-t-il des observations? Adopté. Paragraphe 25.

R. G. PETTITT (United Kingdom): Unless I have misunderstood, I think the last sentence should reflect the spirit of the first sentence and paragraph 28 and it would not be "the Director-General would propose", but "the Director-General would propose and carry out the measures that would be required". One would add "or where necessary carry out".

Le PRESIDENT: Nous avons une proposition de M. le délégué du Royaume-Uni, tendant â modifier la dernière phrase du paragraphe 23 de la manière suivante: "proposera, ou le cas échéant, exécutera les mesures qui pourraient se révéler nécessaires dans chacun de ces cas". Cela laisse la latitude au Directeur général de prendre les dispositions qu'il estime utile…en effet on a parlé de flexibilité. Etes-vous d'accord pour accepter cette proposition? Merci.

Paragraphe 26. Avez-vous des observations? Adopté.

Paragraphe 27. Avez-vous des observations?

George Henry MUSGROVE (Canada): Paragraph 27, I should like to propose the deletion of the last two words in that particular paragraph. We do not find resorting to the Working Capital Fund normal under any circumstances, and particularly not in this circumstance.

Le PRESIDENT: En ce qui concerne la proposition de M. le Délégué du Canada consistant â retirer le terme "et normal", est-elle acceptée par le Conseil?

Elio PASCARELLI (Italy): I do not understand. If we cut out this word does it mean that the Director-General has no right to draw nine million dollars if need be from the Working Capital Fund? What is the Working Capital Fund used for?

Akbar Mirza KHALEELI (India): I think one is, purely in terms of the English wording, instead of using the wording "should the contribution shortfall materialise", "should there be a shortfall of contribution" is better. Should there be a shortfall in contributions as predicted, and here I go along with my colleague from Italy, that if you do not consider it necessary or normal, still there should be some reference to the fact that the Director-General has certain rights which cannot be taken away. It might be considered as normal. So it should be in English "Should there be a shortfall in contributions as anticipated, resorting to the Working Capital Fund to the maximum of resources available therein may be considered in terms of the rules. "

R. G. PETTITT (United Kingdom): I think I understand what the delegate of Canada is saying. I did pick up this point myself but I had a different solution to this. My solution was in paragraph 28. But the position is that several countries did make the point that they regarded the use of the Working Capital Fund to meet shortfalls which were not likely to be made up, to be not normal at all. To deal with a delay in payment until October would be a normal use of the Fund. Indeed we were rather fiercer in our comments earlier in the debate before we had heard the definitive news. We were saying that they should not be used for the Working Capital Fund for this purpose. I think most of us now would say that the Working Capital Fund could be used for this purpose now because we know there will be shortfall and a delay. So "normal" could well be left out and there would be no loss to this.

My proposal-may I mention it now because it relates to this though it is paragraph 28?-would be to add "Any recourse to the Working Capital Fund should be made good in Autumn 1987 when the 1986 payment by the United States is now expected".

Le PRESIDENT: Nous sommes saisis d'une proposition qui est la suivante: il s'agit de supprimer les termes "et normal" dans le membre de phrase "il serait nécessaire et normal de recourir au Fonds de roulement jusqu'à concurrence des ressources disponibles".


Je souhaite vivement que l'on apporte le minimum de modifications au texte car, sinon, nous allons ouvrir un débat ne nous permettant pas de respecter nos contraintes de temps, lesquelles nous imposent de serrer le texte de près.

Une proposition concrète est faite par le délégué du Canada, â savoir retirer les mots "et normal". Le Conseil accepte-t-il cette proposition?

Nous considérons que les mots "et normal" sont enlevés. Le paragraphe 27 est adopté. Paragraphe 28. Y a-t-il des observations? Paragraphe 29. Y a-t-il des observations?

R. G. PETTITT (United Kingdom): My proposal still stands, that there should be a sentence at the end which reads: "Any recourse to the Working Capital Fund should be made good in the Autumn of 1987, when the 1986 payment of the United States is now expected. "

DEPUTY DIRECTOR-GENERAL: The conditions governing the reimbursement of monies to the Working Capital Fund are included in the Financial Regulations, which not even the Council has the power to change, only the Conference can change them. The provisions state: "Advances made from the Working Capital Fund to finance budgetary expenditure under Financial Regulation So-and-So shall be reimbursed from the General Fund as soon as feasible but in any case within the next financial period. " That is the rule and that not even the Council, I am afraid, can change.

Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Sr. Presidente, después de la declaración del Sr. Walton, creo, en realidad, Sr. Presidente, que está plenamente demostrada la forma poco seria como está procediendo una delegación. Sinceramente queremos hacer un llamado, Sr. Presidente, para evitar que debamos ir subiendo en nuestras expresiones de condena de este sistema, de que por favor nos dejen trabajar, que no nos molesten, que sean serios, que sean correctos, que respeten al representante del Gobierno soberano, Sr. Presidente.

LE PRESIDENT: Nous avons une information précise de la part de M. Walton au sujet des Textes Fondamentaux, selon laquelle le Conseil n'est pas compétent sur un point précis.

Le délégué du Royaume-Uni est-il satisfait de cette réponse?

R. G. PETTITT (United Kingdom): I am satisfied with the legal interpretation. This, however, is the recording of the views of some Members on policy, and a point of view, which actually I must confess was not expressed at the time because the information which would have allowed us to express it was not available until the end of the meeting. Had we had that information I at least would have said that in my view the Working Capital Fund should only be used for the purposes of dealing with normal delays and the money which will be late from the USA, and the remaining $25 million should be covered by economies or other means, economies primarily.

If it is not wished to include this in the report, and in fairness I did not say this except now, I will rely upon it being on the record and retain the right to bring it forward again in future discussions.

The other point is that the words "to the extent possible" I think are not appropriate, if this is supposed to represent the views of a group of countries. The sentence should read: "It was stressed that any necessary measures should avoid putting additional burdens on…" etc.

Elio PASCARELLI (Italy): I think I need no correction, after what the delegate of the United Kingdom said. Let me get this point clear. I think proposals of the Director-General implying recourse to the Working Capital Fund for $9 million did take into consideration already what we heard from the largest contributor. In other words, the shortfall anticipated for the end of 1987 was to be covered with $16. 5 million adjustment plus $9 million from the Working Capital Fund. So it is impossible in any case in Autumn after the United States has paid its contribution for 1986 to revert to the Working Capital Fund. So it is in the power of the Director-General to reintegrate whatever it takes in the next biennium, not in the current biennium.


Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Sr. Presidente, ya se ha llegado realmente al colmo de la situación cuando esa propia delegación reconoce que plantea una cosa que no dijo en el debate. Pero lo que màs nos preocupa es que nos ha amenazado con que más adelante va a plantear otro asunto. Para evitar esa actitud que se repite en cada una de las reuniones del Consejo, la delegación de Colombia propone formalmente que el 91 período de sesiones del Consejo se celebre en las Islas Malvinas porque así, bajo la soberanía argentina, podremos evitarnos estos problemas.

POINT OF ORDER
POINT D'ORDRE
PUNTO DE ORDEN

John GLISTRUP (Denmark): I call for a point of order. I think our work is progressing very slowly. I would like you, Mr Chairman, to rule in which way we are going to work. Are we planning for a night session? Are we going to progress as we have been doing so far since this morning? In saying so I have just looked back on the reports, and all the discussions which we have had so far have not improved significantly the reports produced for us by the Drafting Committee. In addition I have to observe that most of the Members who have spoken in this Council during this process have been Members of the Drafting Committee. May I in saying so suggest and move a motion that we approve the rest of the report en bloc?

Applause
Applaudissements
Aplausos

LE PRESIDENT: J'ai le sentiment que la proposition du délégué du Danemark a été approuvée par consensus manifeste.

Applause
Applaudissements
Aplausos

Joseph TCHICAYA (Congo): Je ne prends pas la parole pour contrecarrer le consensus auquel nous venons d'aboutir, mais je pense que, malgré tout, le reste de nos travaux doit être conforme à ce que nous avons adopté jusqu'à présent. C'est pourquoi je demande au Secrétariat de revoir le paragraphe 18 du document CL 90/REP/3 afin qu'il soit conforme au paragraphe 21 du document CL 90/REP/1 que nous avons adopté ce matin.

R. G. PETTITT (United Kingdom): This procedure would require my delegation to give qualifications on the question of the adoption of the report. I would also not think it a totally wise procedure, partly because it would devalue the report substantially and secondly because I suspect that the rest of the report is much less controversial than what we have gone through. My recommendation is that we go on as usual.

David Lawrence COUTTS (Australia): I am not sure what the vote of acclamation actually counted for then, but I did assume that it meant that you had ruled that the Council accepted the report en bloc. Is that the situation or not? No? Right, so we are still debating the matter of whether we accept it or not.

Mrs Millicent M. FENWICK (United States of America): I must admit I joined in the clapping, but with one or two minutes reflection I realise that this is more the product of despair than of reason. We are tired and we do not know what we are looking forward to, but I do not think we can treat our important work and dismiss it in this way. So I must oppose it.

Horacio CARANDANG (Philippines): I thought that the delegate of Denmark had been supported by the great majority of the Council who clapped. I was one of those delegates who clapped, and I supported fully his proposal. In fact, Mr Chairman, you will notice that every time I spoke it was to defend the Draft.


Humberto CARRION M. (Nicaragua): Yo fui uno de los que no aplaudió con la propuesta de Dinamarca, pero, después de lo que dijo la Embajadora de los Estados Unidos, yo también reflexioné y ahora sí lo aplaudo, es decir, de que lo aprobemos en bloque. Yo entiendo que hay una propuesta específica con dos países en contrario. Por lo tanto, usted puede someter a votación si aprobamos este informe en bloque o no.

LE PRESIDENT: Nous allons peut-être trouver un compromis. Il y a, d'une part, le sentiment que la suite sera plus agréable que le début. Un délégué nous a dit qu'il éprouverait beaucoup moins de problèmes que jusqu'à présent. Nous avons, d'autre part, le sentiment qu'il faut faire confiance au Comité de rédaction.

Pourrait-on trouver un compromis, c'est-à-dire adopter le rapport par groupes de paragraphes et non pas paragraphe par paragraphe? Nous pourrions l'adopter par sujet, auquel cas nous aurons formellement analysé-et cela figurera au procès-verbal-le rapport. Je crois que ce compromis pourrait être retenu par les délégués, si le délégué du Danemark en convient.

Je propose donc que l'on analyse le rapport sujet par sujet et non plus paragraphe par paragraphe afin de faire avancer nos travaux sans pour autant enfreindre les règles de la déontologie qui veut que le Conseil de la FAO, à ce niveau, ait lu le rapport.

Cela vous convient-il?

Elio PASCARELLI (Italy): I fully agree with your proposal but I would like to give a response to my Danish colleague, and also if I may give some advice to the Chairman, that is that the members of the Drafting Committee may take the floor only to defend the Draft, as it was the case for me and for my colleague from the Philippines and many others. There was criticism from our Danish colleague that I do not accept. My interventions were only defending the draft and were not to change anything. So, members of the Drafting Committee, should not ask for the floor unless they have something to defend, and not to change.

LE PRESIDENT: Compte tenu de ce que nous venons de dire, pouvons-nous adopter les paragraphes 28, 29, 30 et 31 du document CL 90/REP/2 ainsi que le projet du rapport Partie II qui figure dans le document CL 90/REP/2/Sup. 1? Celui-ci est rédigé comme suit: "le Conseil s'est félicité que le Gouvernement du pays hôte ait accepté, ainsi que l'a annoncé le Représentant de ce pays au cours des débats, de renoncer, au moins jusqu'à 1988, au remboursement de sa part de l'excédent de trésorerie qui sera distribué le 1er janvier 1987 et en outre d'accélérer le versement de sa contribution intégrale pour 1987. "

Akbar Mirza KHALEELI (India): We agree to that. However, I think since we are in Rome we should mention the following slight changes in our thanks to the host government. "The Council expressed its deep appreciation" instead of just "appreciation" "for the announcement made during the debate by the representative of the host government that his government had agreed to delay. The rest of the paragraph is all right. I do not want to take up much time. To refer to it as a positive response to the current phase of budgetary constraints through which the Organization is passing, it is just a minor change, I could discuss it with the Chairman of the Drafting Committee rather than put it to the Council. But, thanks to Italy for the positive response, could it be worded slightly differently, if you do not mind.

Rainer PRESTIEN (Germany, Federal Republic of): This is not with regard to the proposal just made by our Indian colleague. We would prefer different wording in the second sentence of paragraph 29. Our proposal would be to replace the words "it recognized" in the first part of this sentence by "it noted". Then in the second part of the sentence after the word "and" insert the wording "the Director-General's view that it might be necessary to resort to short-term borrowing up to a tentative amount of US$30 million" because in our view, if I may draw your attention to the speech that was given by the Director-General, on page 8, he mentioned "any further delays in receipts would leave me with no other alternative than to borrow a sum of around US$30 million to meet cash flow requirements. " In the view of my delegation it was the Director-General who expressed his view and I think we should express that view in the report.


R. G. PETTITT (United Kingdom): Paragraph 29: I suggest the last line, "the Director-General would consult"-and be guided by the Finance Committee-the words "be guided by" should be inserted. An additional sentence "some members took the view that this situation should be anticipated by the necessary economies and noted that the Conference had the responsibility to consider whether powers of borrowing should still persist. "

Paragraph 31: I think it might be more courteous if we simply invited individual member countries to consider surrendering or deferring their share rather than "express the hope that. " At the end of paragraph 33 "It looked forward to receiving the views of the Finance Committee at its next session, together with a report on action taken by the Director-General. " This conforms with our views that the Director-General should have flexibility to take action.

George Henry MUSGROVE (Canada): My delegation wishes to propose the addition of a sentence at the end of paragraph 33. I am not sure if the sentence is still pertinent with the amendments which have been made by the distinguished delegate of the United Kingdom, but we shall see. The sentence I would propose to add is "The Council noted the Director-General's assurance that should the gravity of the present financial situation be confirmed, it was open for the Finance Committee in December, and the Council in June 1987, to propose further programme economies. "

M. Afzal QADIR (Pakistan): Italy has once again taken the lead in demonstrating its commitment to FAO at a time when the Organization finds itself trapped by financial difficulties. Therefore, I would agree with the amendment suggested by the delegate of India that we should add the word "deep" before appreciation.

Having said that, I should like to say that now Italy has set an example for others to follow, whether we could accept other countries in a similar situation expecting cash refunds to make similar gestures.

Danilo VUJICIC (Yugoslavia): After your decision that we will work in a more efficient manner by taking things en bloc, by subjects, it seems to me after two statements and two interventions by two delegations which have so far also made so many suggestions during our discussion that we are practically going back to the same situation that we were in a few moments ago. I have not got fully the texts of the proposed amendments by the distinguished representative of the united Kingdom and Canada but I have got the sense of them, and my delegation would not go along with such proposals. So I would appeal to them to cooperate constructively that we finish our work tonight. If they will not, then we can agree to continue. I have the permission of my government to stay until next Tuesday to finalize this work.

LE PRESIDENT: Si vous permettez, je signalerai qu'il y a des suggestions de deux ordres. La première a été formulée par l'Inde et certains autres délégués. Au paragraphe 29, au lieu de "il a reconnu que, selon les informations actuellement disponibles" on devrait mettre "il a noté". Je crois que cette modification pourrait être acceptée par le Conseil, sauf s'il en décide autrement. Ensuite, dans le paragraphe supplémentaire il est proposé d'ajouter "le Conseil s'est vivement félicité". Je crois que ceci est tout à fait acceptable. Le Royaume-Uni suggère une proposition pour le paragraphe 29. Dans ce paragraphe, on dit que le Directeur général consulterait et se ferait guider par le Comité financier. J'aimerais avoir l'avis du Conseil. Est-ce que cet ajout est accepté?

Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Entre todo lo que usted leyó, señor Presidente, alcancé sólo a captar la propuesta para el párrafo 29 que es inaceptable para la delegación de Colombia.

Philippa PIOTET (France): Je me rifare i la dernière phrase du paragraphe et ft la proposition du Royaume-Uni selon laquelle le Directaur général consulterait et se farait guider par le Comité financier. Je ne me souviens pas si on a parlé de cela, mais je le suppose, car sinon le Royaume-Uni ne l'évoquerait pas. Je me demande quel est le sens de cette formule. II y a des régies concernant les rapports entre le Directeur général et le Comité financier et, selon l'avis formulé par le Comité financier, le Directeur général prendra ses responsabilités dans le cadre des règles qu'il s'est ainsi fixées. Je ne vols par l'intérêt de cette formule.


LE PRESIDENT: Voilà la position de la France. Pouvons-nous maintenir la rédaction du paragraphe 29 en l'état, avec comme seule modification de mettre au lieu de "reconnu", mettre "noté". C'est un détail qui se trouve à la cinquième ligne du paragraphe 29. Maintenant il reste l'action de fond proposée par le Canada. Je propose de bien vouloir la répéter lentement.

George Henry MUSGROVE (Canada): It was the addition of a sentence at the end of paragraph 33 "The Council noted the Director-General's assurance that should the gravity of the present financial situation be confirmed, it was open to the Financial Committee in December and the Council in June 1987 to propose further programme economies. "

Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Desearía que el señor Walton nos confirmara si la propuesta de Canada corresponde en efecto a una declaración del Director General.

Elio PASCARELLI (Italy): I do not think that this addition would help. We have discussed repeatedly in the Finance Committee the powers of the Finance Committee, the Director-General and the Council. We came to the conclusion that none of them has the power to cut the programme, only Conference has that power. I do not think the addition will help us, only help us to waste time.

DEPUTY DIRECTOR-GENERAL: I am afraid I cannot recall any such assurance being specifically given by the Director-General. However, I would refer back to paragraph 25 which has already been adopted by Council, which relates to the possibility of the financial situation deteriorating, or improving. I think that the thought expressed by the representative of Canada is covered already in paragraph 25.

LE PRESIDENT: Sous le bénéfice de ces éléments, pouvons-nous maintenir en état le paragraphe 33? Bien. Si le Conseil en convient, . . .

R. G. PETTITT (United Kingdom): I did make a suggestion for another sentence at the end of paragraph 29, but as this seems to have produced no response I will be content that it is recorded in the verbatim record.

LE PRESIDENT: Si vous voulez reprendre ce paragraphe de manière à ce que ce soit clair. Quelle est votre proposition?

R. G. PETTITT (United Kingdom): I proposed an additional sentence: "Some members took the view that this situation should be anticipated by the necessary economies and noted that the Conference had the responsibility to consider whether powers of borrowing should still persist". If this is not generally subscribed to, I will make it my own observation in the verbatim record.

Horacio CARANDANG (Philippines): I just wanted to say that if the representative agrees that it be left in the verbatim record, so be it.

Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Si el Reino Unido ha dicho que quede en las actas, pues que quede pero que no haga más propuestas.

LE PRESIDENT: C'est bien. Que propose le délégué du Canada?


George Henry MUSGROVE (Canada): The proposal I had made with respect to paragraph 33 has not been accepted by the Council, I take it. It is different from paragraph 25. I believe I recall the Director-General said that the views proposed by the delegate of Canada and others were unduly pessimistic; however, should they be proven correct it was open for the Finance Committee in December and in June to make further proposals for cuts. I took issue with the Director-General to some extent by saying that in June 1987 there would only be six months left in the biennium in which to effect economies, scarcely a length of time in which to show any great effect. As I recall it, that was the course of the discussion and it was what I wanted to reflect in paragraph 33. However, if it is not the wish of Council to include those words, I withdraw.

However, I do have some changes to make with respect to paragraphs 36 and 39, and as we are doing this in sections perhaps I can propose those as well. Paragraph 36: I believe the last two sentences should be deleted. They are non-attributed and I do not think they add anything to the particular reflection of the Council's deliberations. They seem to be assertions and I am not sure if they are a reflection of the discussion or simply assertions.

Danilo VUJICIC (Yugoslavia): As there has been a proposal to take the paragraphs en bloc I will also reply in the same manner. I think that the two sentences towards the end of paragraph 36 have the sense at least of opening up some prospective for the future of the Organization. In this sense they are useful, and that is why I think it was right of the Drafting Committee to insert them because they reflect the spirit, the sense, of our discussion. Therefore I support that text being left in.

Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Por ahora vamos a limitar nuestras observaciones a las propuestas que se han hecho sobre el párrafo 36. De una vez por todas debemos declarar que si intervenimos como miembros del Comité de Redacción, nunca ha sido para introducir elementos nuevos, sino para apoyar los acuerdos tomados en la sala donde trabajamos.

El colega del Canadá puede tener razón en cierto sentido en relación con los términos en que está redactada la penúltima frase del párrafo 36. Pero nosotros estamos de acuerdo con el colega Vujicic de Yugoslavia en el sentido de que es necesario mantener esos conceptos y los proponemos ahora en sentido positivo así:

Las dos últimas frases dirían lo siguiente: "A ese respecto, el Consejo reconoció la eficiencia de la gestion de la FAO y el apoyo de que gozan sus objetivos y señaló que". Luego se agrega la actual última frase del párrafo 36.

Esto lo dijimos en sentido positivo y creo que nadie pueda discutir que esta afirmación corresponde a hechos.

Mohammed ABDELHADI (Tunisie): Nous pensons que si le Comité de rédaction a retenu les deux dernières phrases de ce paragraphe, c'est qu'elles reflétaient le sentiment du Conseil et les débats qui ont eu lieu ces derniers jours. Ma délégation ne voit donc aucun inconvénient à ce que les deux phrases figurent â ce paragraphe 36.

LE PRESIDENT: Est-ce que la suggestion de M. le Directeur général adjoint recueille l'agrément du Conseil?

Concernant le paragraphe 36, beaucoup de délégations ont pris la parole, en considération que ces deux derniers paragraphes devaient rester, mais sous une forme légèrement différente. Une proposition concrète a été faite par M. le délégué de Colombie et qui est la suivante: "A ce sujet, le Conseil a reconnu l'efficacité de la gestion de la FAO et l'appui dont bénéficient ses objectifs". Est-ce que c'est une rédaction dont on pourrait convenir? Si le Conseil admet cette rédaction, on peut la considérer comme approuvée.

George Henry MUSGROVE (Canada): Yes, Mr Chairman.

Paragraphs 8 to 36, as amended, approved
Les paragraphes 8 â 36, ainsi amendés, sont approuvés
Los párrafos 8 a 36, así enmendados, son aprobados


PARAGRAPHS 37 to 40
PARAGRAPHES 37 à 40
PARRAFOS 37 a 40

George Henry MUSGROVE (Canada): In paragraph 39 there is the question of the options that would be considered by the Finance Committee. In this particular case we have recommended very strongly several other options to the Committee for their consideration. At the time of your summing up we attempted to make reference to those particular additional options, and several members objected that they should be included in your summing up but indicated that they would be reflected in the verbatim record and would find reflection in the draft report. I do not find them here.

With that in mind, I would propose adding a sentence three lines down from the top of page 13 of the English text after the word "options". I shall read the sentence which I think should be included at this point: "Some members felt this list of options to address financial uncertainty was incomplete insofar as it did not include standby measures to reduce programme spending when resources available to the Organization were inadequate. "

With the inclusion of that sentence in the paragraph, there would be a consequent change in the penultimate sentence of that paragraph where it says "decide which of the options". We would suggest that that be changed to "select a number of measures to be studied further".

Danilo VUJICIC (Yugoslavia): On paragraph 39, no options are mentioned here. I remember that many delegations supported one or several options and spoke about the shortcomings and the benefits of some of them, but no statement by anybody has been reflected in this report. If we are now going to reflect all the positions taken, I would request that two options that I mentioned specifically be in and the others be forgotten. The fact that some delegations were of the opinion that some other possibilities and options should be considered is in the verbatim record, and when the Finance Committee is considering this matter they will take the verbatim record into account and not the report, because the report only covers the very general procedural manner on how it will be done. Concerning the last proposal of the delegate of Canada, I can share that proposal and would support replacing the words "would decide which of the options" with "selected a number of measures" I think that is a better expression and I support it.

DEPUTY DIRECTOR-GENERAL: In order to avoid a drafting discussion on the points made by Canada and Yugoslavia, I should like to suggest the following drafting changes. Following the sentence "Varying views were expressed on each of the options" add a comma, and add the words "and additional suggestions were put forward". Then in the line further down where it says "the Finance Committee would decide which of the options should be studied further", change that to "would decide which of the suggested measures should be studied further". I think that would meet all the points that were made.

LE PRESIDENT: Pour le paragraphe 39, c'est donc en ordre, et je pense que M. le Président du Comité de rédaction en a pris note.

Nous en avons terminé avec le document CL 90/REP/2 et je remercie le délégué du Danemark grâce â qui nous avons changé le rythme de travail.

Paragraphs 37 to 40, as amended, approved
Les paragraphes 37 à 40, ainsi amendés, sont approuvés
Los párrafos 37 a 40, así enmendados, son aprobados

Draft Report of Plenary-Part II, as amended, was adopted
Projet de rapport de la plénière, Partie II, ainsi amendée, est adoptée
El proyecto de informe de la Plenaria-Parte II, así enmendado, es aprobado

DRAFT REPORT-PART III (CL 90/REP/3)
PROJET de RAPPORT-PARTIE III (CL 90/REP/3)
PROYECTO DE INFORME-PARTE XIX (CL 90/RSP/3)

José Ramón LOPEZ-PORTILLO ROMANO (Presidente del Comité de Redacción): Sólo para una aclaración a las distinguidas delegaciones de habla hispana. Me refiero al párrafo cuatro del REF/3 que en el texto español y repito para que se traduzca así, en el texto español solamente hay un error, es decir la penúltima oración del párrafo 4 está puesta indebidamente en penúltimo lugar; debe aparecer toda ella en último lugar. Debe ser la última oración del párrafo 4.

Espero que dichas delegaciones tomen nota para que se coteje así con lo que está expresado en los otros textos.


Habría una precision respecto de esta última oración, y le pido otra vez disculpas, señor Presidente. La segunda oración a la que me refiero comenzará: "En relación con la 14a Conferencia Regional para Africa, etc. ". Ahí empezaba la tercera o penúltima oración, la parte que pasa al final como última oración es aquella última frase de dicha penúltima oración que comenzaba con "que podía considerarse la primera aplicación concreta de la resolución aprobada en el período extraordinario de sesiones de la Asamblea General de las Naciones Unidas". Para que dicha frase pase al final se encabezaría con "podía considerarse".

Espero que hayan podido tomar nota las delegaciones de habla castellana.

LE PRESIDENT: Je remercie M. le President du Comité de rédaction et passe la parole à MM. les délégués.

Paragraphs 1 to 5 approved
Les paragraphes 1 à 5 sont approuvés
Los párrafos l a 5 son aprobados

Paragraph 6 approved
Le paragraphe 6 est approuvé
El párrafo 6 es aprobado

PARAGRAPHS 7 to 26
PARAGRAPHES 7 à 26
PARRAFOS 7 a 26

Joseph TCHICAYA (Congo): J'avais d'abord quelques amendements à faire aux paragraphes 11 et 18.

Paragraphe 11: Avant la dernière phrase, je souhaiterais que l'on ajoute une phrase. Après les membres de phrase "pour aider les pays d'Afrique subsaharienne â faire face à la crise alimentaire et contribuer de façon soutenue à leur relèvement économique a été soulignée. " Je voudrais que l'on ajoute une autre phrase: "Le Conseil a lancé un appel aux donateurs, et notamment aux pays industrialisés, afin qu'ils aident le FIDA â atteindre l'objectif des 300 millions de dollars". Lereste sans changement.

En ce qui concerne le paragraphe 18, j'espère que cela ne va pas soulever de problème puisque cette question a déjà été réglée. Je voudrais simplement que nous restions en conformité avec le paragraphe 21 du REP/1. On lirait comme suit: "personnes déplacées victimes des agressions et autres actions de déstabilisation perpétrées par le régime de l'Afrique du Sud dans les Etats de la ligne de front". Viendrait ensuite la phrase suivante: "A ce propos le voeu a été exprimé que la FAO fasse tout ce qui est en son pouvoir pour aider â remédier aux effets négatifs de ces actions déstabilisatrices sur l'agriculture et la sécurité alimentaire des pays d'Afrique australe".

M. Afzal QADIR (Pakistan): I would like to endorse the amendments suggested by the distinguished Ambassador of the Congo in paragraph 11. This is in accordance with the statement he made and which I echoed during our intervention. In addition to that I would like to suggest the addition of a few words in the first sentence. "The importance of the IFAD Special Programme, which has become effective from May 1986" and the rest of the sentence remains as it is here.

LE PRESIDENT: Voulez-vous reprendre, quelle est votre proposition, M. le délégué?

M. AFAAL QADIR (Panietan): After she word pragramme I would like se have inserted she words, "which has become effective from May 1966. " I hope this is now clear.

Bernard LEDUN (Franes): Notre delégation ne peut pas souscrire â l'amendement proposé par le distingué représentant du Congo en oe qui concerne la rédaction qu'il propose pour l'article 18. Mon opposition á cette modification est effectuée pour les mêmes raisons et pour les mêmes principes que ceux que j'avais déjà eu l'occasion d'indiquer ce matin au moment de la proposition de modification de l'article 21 du document CL 90/REP/1. Je souhaiterais que cette réserve figure dans le rapport.


Mrs Millicent M. FENWICK (United States of America): I would like to support Pakistan who mentioned a special programme for Africa which became effective in May 1986. I would like to add the words, "and which has already mobilized two-thirds of its target of $300 million in favour of the drought-affected countries in Africa. "

Emmanuel T. CHENGU (Zimbabwe): I would strongly support the amendment made by the distinguished representative of the Congo on item 18. I wish you to take note that Zimbabwe strongly supports that amendment.

Leopoldo ARIZA HIDALGO (Cuba): Nosotros queremos expresar además de nuestro respaldo total a lo que ha expresado la distinguida representación del Congo, apoyado ahora por la distinguida representación de Zimbabwe, que también lo hacemos teniendo en cuenta los mismos principios y las mismas opiniones que expresamos esta mañana para que aparezca claramente qué Estado es el que crea la desestabllización, porque eso lo conocemos todos, no es un problema de un Estado austral porque se ha insertado entre los Estados de la Línea del Frente, eso no nos dice nada. Creemos que con la proposición que ha hecho no nos dice nada. Creemos que con la proposición que ha hecho la representación del Congo se resuelve la situación.

R. G. PETTITT (United Kingdom): If the paragraph is amended in the way suggested I regret to say that the United Kingdom has to disassociate itself from this. I wish to have this recorded in the report. The new language is inappropriate for a technical body.

Malikana Mike LISWANISO (Zambia): My delegation does not feel like reopening a debate on this particular issue. It was exhaustively debated this morning. The main point of a report is to reflect what was discussed and, so far as I am concerned, and I do recall which delegation participated in this particular debate, we did mention by name South Africa. Therefore, my proposal is that if the. NF countries find it difficult, to mention South Africa by name, they can enter these aversions and we can make progress.

Joachim WINKEL (Gemany, Federal Republic of): As regards paragraph 11, I would like to support the proposals of the delegate of Pakistan and completed by the amendments of the United States. As regards paragraph 18 I cannot follow the new text which was proposed by Congo for the same reasons we had uttered in support of the United Kingdom when we were dealing with paragraph 21 of Rep. l.

Guillermo Enrique GONZALEZ (Argentina): Brevemente, seńor Presidente, para dejar constancia en acta del total respaldo de mi delegación a la propuesta de modificacidn que hiciera la distinguida repreeentacidn del Congo al psrrafo 18.

Elio PASCARELLI (Italy): I want to say that I support the proposal made by the delegate of Pakistan and with the addition of the United States delegation concerning IFAD in paragraph 11 and for the same reason that prevented me from approving the change in the paragraph this morning in the similar words, I object to any change in paragraph 18 because of the economic and non-political nature of this Organization.

Hra Millieant M. PENWILIK (United states of America): I only vane to say that I must repeat our government proposition to the naming, to the political element in this Council and this would apply here in 21 and 18 and it is only for that reason, that politics are being inserted here.

Joseph TCHICAYA (Congo): Ea faisant ma proposition, je na m'attendair pas a ce que lee pays qui s ' y sont opposés ce matin changent d'avis. On nous dit qu'ici, on traite d'economie et non de politique. Je ne sais pas ou est la frontiere entre les deux. Quoi qu'il en soit, je note que ce sont les memes pays qui s'opposent aux sanctions economiques contre l'Afrique du Sud aux Nations Unies,


c'est-à-dire dans un forum politique. Il faut que cela soit clair. On nous dit que ce n'est pas ici le lieu approprie mais il s'agit de subterfuges que nous ne pouvons pas accepter. Cela dit, nous prenons acte de l'attitude de ces pays vis-à-vis de l'Afrique du Sud, elle est connue.

Humberto CARRION M. (Nicaragua): No queremos dejar pasar la ocasión sin dejar constancia también en las actas de que nuestra posición es la misma que aquella que asumimos cuando adoptamos el párrafo 21 del REP/1; es decir, para Nicaragua es une cuestión de principio el reconocer en este Consejo que es el régimen de Africa del sur, Suráfrica, el que desestabiliza la producción agrícola y por tanto alimentaria a los países de la Linea del Frente. Por lo tanto, deseamos apoyar firmemente las dos propuestas hechas por el Congo.

Mohammed ABDELHADI (Tunisie): A l'instar de plusieurs délégués qui m'ont précédé, je voudrais faire miennes les propositions d'amendement au paragraphe 11, formulées par les délégués du Congo et du Pakistan.

En ce qui concerne le paragraphe 18, ma délégation appuie les ajouts formulés par le délégué du Congo. Elle considère que cette proposition ne revêt pas d'aspect politique en ce sens qu'elle soulève plutôt des problèmes agricoles et de sécurité alimentaire.

Igor KIPMAN (Brazil): I would hate to prolong the debate but I cannot avoid registering in the Verbatim Records our support for the proposition made by the delegate of Congo regarding paragraph 18.

Danilo VUJICIC (Yugoslavia): I would like first to support the proposals made by the representatives of Pakistan and the United States on paragraph 11, and in paragraph 18 fully to support the proposal made by the representative of Congo and seconded by many countries, but one thing I cannot understand really, that some countries are claiming that this is a political matter and economical and agricultural matters, technical matters should not be mixed with politics. Then I would just like to put the question to those countries why the governments of the same countries apply economic measures to boycott against the racist regime of South Africa if' we have to divide these distinctions. Why governments in these countries take economic measures concerning a political matter. I think it is the right and duty of this Organization to take into account also the decisions of the General Assembly of the United Nations and also the sense of the policies of the same governments which are speaking here about so-called political character of the problem.

Akbar Mirza KHALEELI (India): I think in the interests of quick working, just as important as the substance, this matter of paragraph 18 has already been gone into this morning. We do not want to make any more divisions or to politicise what is taking place. At the very least one has to mention the regime of South Africa. We have not condemned it. We should have condemned it. We should be condemning what they do. It is not a political matter. It is a factual matter that they are doing what no other regime is doing. So I think it would be in the interests of the House if you just put it to the House as in paragraph 21, 90/REP/1, that the proposition put forward by Congo and supported by others that is put to the House.

As for India, we supported it much earlier and we definitely support at the very least the naming of South Africa.

Leopoldo ARIZA HIDALGO (Cuba): Discúlpeme por una segunda intervención en este punto, pero pensábamos, con nuestro apoyo a la distinguida representación del Congo y a otros que hablaron sobre la necesidad de volver a situar aquí el nombre del país que desestablliza, que no iba a entrarae en la diecuaión otra vez. Ahora noeotros sí queremos expresar que, el hay una reserva y si en le reserva se habla de que hemos politizado la discusión, nosotros haremos une reserva rechazando el concepto de politización y queremos decir lo siguiente: Todos sabemos, Sr. Presidente, que las acciones políticas producen efectos económicos; aquí estamos en presencia de una acción política que produce efectos económicos. Ahora, nosotros no estamos aquí discutiendo la acción política, estamos discutiendo los efectos económicos de esa política y, precisamente, por eso queremos que aparezca sencillamente el nombre para poder ir discutiendo los efectos económicos. Entonces, que se desligue bien clarito la situación, para que se nos quiera entonces parecer una reserva por politización, porque entonces tendríamos que hacer una reserva rechazando la politización, y para que conste en acta también.


LE PRESIDENT: Â la fin de ce débat, je pense pouvoir dire qu'il y a deux questions bien distinctes: l'une concerne le FIDA, l'autre l'Afrique du Sud.

A propos du FIDA, la troisième phrase du paragraphe 11 du document CL 90/REP/3 serait rédigée comme suit: "L'importance du programme spécial du FIDA, qui a vu le jour en mai 1986 et qui a mobilisé deux tiers de ses objectifs pour aider les pays d'Afrique subsaharienne frappés par la sécheresse à faire face â la crise alimentaire et contribuer de façon soutenue à leur relèvement économique, a été soulignée. "

On a proposé d'ajouter les mots suivants au libellé actuel: "qui a vu le jour en mai 1986 et qui a mobilisé deux tiers de ses objectifs".

Le délégué du Congo a proposé ensuite d'ajouter â la fin de ce paragraphe: "Le Conseil a lancé un appel aux pays donateurs, et notamment aux pays industrialisés, pour qu'ils aident le FIDA à atteindre l'objectif de 300 millions de dollars. "

Voilà une proposition concrète. Elle a été appuyée par de nombreux délégués. Je crois que nous pourrions retenir cette proposition et inclure cette phrase dans le libellé du paragraphe 11.

La deuxième question a trait au paragraphe 18. La discussion de ce matin du paragraphe 21 du document CL 90/REP/1 a abordé, â propos des effets économiques, le choix politique. Je note que le libellé proposé pour le paragraphe 18 du document CL 90/REP/3 et qui a été retenu pour le paragraphe 21 du document CL 90/REP/1 donne lieu â des réserves dans un certain nombre de pays, et cela figurera dans le document final de ce Conseil.

Pouvons-nous continuer sur cette base? Nous reprenons donc, pour le paragraphe 18 du document CL 90/REP/3, un libellé analogue â celui du paragraphe 21 du document CL 90/REP/1 adopté ce matin, en mentionnant que six membres ont exprimé des réserves à l'égard du langage de ce texte. Les paragraphes 7 â 26 sont donc approuvés.

Paragraphs 7 to 26, as amended, approved
Les paragraphes 7 â 26, ainsi amendés, sont approuvés
Los párrafos 7 a 26, así enmendados, son aprobados

Y a-t-il d'autres remarques au sujet du document CL 90/REP/3?

Il est adopté.

Draft Report of Plenary-Part III, as amended, was adopted
Projet de rapport de la plénière, partie III, ainsi amendée, est adoptée
El proyecto de informe de la Plenaria-Parte III, así enmendado, es aprobado

DRAFT REPORT-PART IV
PROJET DE RAPPORT-PARTIE IV
PROYECTO DE INFORME-PARTE IV

Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Sr. Presidente, usted acaba de citar los dos temas que contiene este REP/4, que no fueron controvertidos, y la delegación de Colombia propone que se adopten en bloque, sin discusión, este REP/4 y que pasemos al REP/5.

LE PRESIDENT: Je crois que cette proposition reçoit l'agrément du Conseil.

Paragraphs 1 to 14 approved
Les paragraphes 1 â 4 sont approuvés
Los párrafos 15 a 22 son aprobados

Paragraphs 15 to 22 approved
Les paragraphes 15 1 22 son approuvés
Los párrafos 15 a 22 son aprobados

Draft Report of Plenary-Part IV, was adopted
Project de rapport de la plénière, partie IV
, est adoptée
El proyecto de informe de la Plenaria-Parte IV, es aprobado

DRAFT REPORT-PART V
PROJET DE RAPPORT-PARTIE V
PROYECTO DE INFORME-PARTE V


PARAGRAPHS 1 to 17
PARAGRAPHES 1 à 17
PÁRRAFOS 1 a 17

John GLISTRUP (Denmark): May I formally propose that we handle this item in the same harmonious way as we have just done with the last draft. I think these are non-controversial. These are now very good indeed.

Mrs Millicent M. FENWICK (United States of America): I wonder if in paragraph 10 we could mention something which was brought up over and over again and that is that we are particularly hopeful to encourage still further security assurance that the cash component will be paid to workers in public projects; the cash component, it is not wholly cash, it is half of the going wage for that kind of work in that country at that time, the other half in food. I think it is important to stress, because it was certainly done over and over, we welcome assurances that this will be continued and increase the cash component in the workers' wages for public roads and construction.

At the end of paragraph 10 the sentence would read "a number of bilateral donors commended the Programme for the excellent services provided to them for their food assistance. The assurance was welcomed that the cash component in the wages of workers on public projects would be maintained and increased. "

LE PRESIDENT: Pouvons-nous considérer que l'ajout proposé par le délégué des Etats-Unis est approuvé?

Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Estamos plenamente de acuerdo con usted en que ha sido ya aprobado el REP/5. Sólo queremos llamar la atención a nuestra distinguida secretarla del Comité de Redacción para que en el párrafo 14, en la parte final, adapte la redacción castellana a la inglesa. En inglés está bien, en castellano no corresponde. Es un asunto de fondo, pero estoy seguro de que esto se hará.

RIGHT OF REPLY
DROIT DE REPONSE
DERECHO DE REPLICA

M. Afzal QADIR (Pakistan): I wanted the floor after amendments had been proposed and we reached the end of discussion on the subject.

My purpose in asking for the floor is not to suggest any amendment in this document but to exercise my right of reply to a statement which was made by the delegate of Afghanistan when the Council was deliberating on item 7 dealing with the Annual Report of the Committee on Food Aid Policies and Programmes of the UN/FAO World Food Programme.

This statement by the Afghan delegate contained in document CL 90/PV/13 was made at a time when I was not here. Had I been here I would have promptly asked for the floor for the exercise of the right of reply.

The statement by the Afghan delegate abounds in savage and grotesque misrepresentation of facts. It is propagandist and devoid of truth. Particularly reprehensible and objectionable in his statement is that he refers to certain territories in Pakistan of Pashtoons, Baluchs, and I would like to register my protest at this reference in the strongest possible terms.

The statement calls into question a great humanitarian effort under way in Pakistan to look after 3 million refugees who have been driven from their hearths and homes by a brutal regime in Afghanistan and for which the Government and the people of Pakistan have received commendation and praise.

The impugned statement by the Afghan delegate-I am not going to quote his words-suggests that in order to get increased and expanded assistance we have been inflating the number of refugees. This assertion is unacceptable, untenable, in the light of the fact well known to every one of us here that there have been special and independent missions from the UN, WFP and UNHCR who have gone into details of the situation periodically and have given their objectives reports on several


occasions. These reports have been placed before the CFA several times before, and, based on their assessments, the whole system of aid to Afghan refugees in Pakistan has evolved over the last 6 or 7 years.

The Afghan delegate goes on to say that in the process of inflating the number of Afghan refugees to reap benefits the Pakistan authorities have enlisted counter-revolutionary bandits, mercenaries, and so on. I do not want to comment on this because I treat this statement with the contempt it deserves.

In order to dramatize the so-called success of the amnesty programme in Afghanistan, the impugned statement says that as a result of this amnesty offer, a large number of Afghans have returned to their homeland, but then a larger number still could have returned if artificial barriers and obstacles were not created by the Pakistani authorities. It is an insult to the intelligence of the Members of the Council for the Afghan delegate to say this and expect that his statement be accepted by this Council.

It goes without saying that the brutal scorched-earth policy, the de-population policies through resort to indiscriminate bombing, has made even those refugees who were settled in Afghanistan flee into Pakistan, and this process is continual.

Last year at the demand of certain donor countries we carried out an enumeration of refugees and this enumeration was conducted with the full knowledge of the donor countries and with the representatives of the UNHCR and the WFP who are stationed in Pakistan. The enumeration showed that there were 2. 8 million refugees and that the trickle of refugees, or the flood of refugees, I would say a trickle now, was continuing.

We do not want to create any impediments to the return of the refugees to their homes. They have every right to go back to their homes, and we would like them to go back to their homes as soon as possible, which means when the conditions that originally caused them to flee their homes have been removed or rectified.

Apart from the human plight of the refugees themselves, they do not live under very attractive conditions in Pakistan. Pakistan cannot afford to give them the best possible treatment because Pakistan is a developing country itself. These refugees impose upon us a tremendous economic, social and ecological burden, a burden which we have been bearing on purely humanitarian grounds with the assistance of organizations such as the World Food Programme and sympathetic donor governments.

Contrary to the completely baseless and gratuitous insinuations and allegations of the Afghan delegate, we would like to see an immediate end to the plight of the refugees, an immediate end to the conditions that made them flee their homeland.

The statement also talks about fraud, embezzlement, and so on. I have just returned from a meeting with Mr Ingram, who returned from Pakistan about a week ago. I had a luncheon meeting with him. He tells me that he was so happy to see that the Pakistan authorities have been continuously improving the management of the refugees as well as the utilization of assistance provided in this connection. Why should he make a statement like this? He could have kept quiet. We did not ask him for his opinion on how we were utilizing this. He made this statement when he was told by his staff officers in the field that Pakistan's record of utilization is as good as it could be, although there could be problems. We are looking after nearly three million refugees. There could be some leakages here and there. But to say embezzlement, fraud, leakages into unauthorized hands, is totally unacceptable to my government.

The last word I would like to say with regard to the inflation of the number is, why should we inflate the number of refugees, because if we do this our share of contribution for the upkeep of the refugees goes up. So we have no reason to artificially inflate the number. What we do is to accurately and objectively assess the number from enumeration, because it does not help us to show that the refugees are 3 million or 4 million and so on.

The statement also says that a great number of refugees returned to their homes and villages. The Afghan authorities aided by another power should have been able to monitor the number of returnees for the Afghan dalagadefee to have seven us a pratice figure or an approximate figure of the number of people who have returned or are in proeaes of returning on a day-to-day basis. Our report la that the refugees are coming in, given this scorehad earth policy to which X have referred being pursued by the Afghan authorities.

Then they said that we have alee enlisted as refugees those seasonal migrant nomads. In peacetime it le usual for the nomads to come to Pakistan and then go back. It defies imagination how in highly disturbed conditions, fighting is going on, how could one expect the seme flow of nomads bringing their cattle to move into Pakistan and go back untrammelled by fears of being attacked or decimated or destroyed? I really do not know. Having said this, I have now completed my right of reply.


I would like to commend the Chairman and the Members of Drafting Committee for not having included the statement of the Afghan delegate in the report, for which I am most grateful.

LE PRESIDENT: Je crois que le Pakistan a exercé son droit de réponse. Faut-il donner une réponse â une réponse et une réponse â une autre réponse? Je ne sais pas. Votre déclaration a été consignée dans le procès-verbal, ce qu'a dit le Pakistan est consigné. Les deux déclarations sont consignées. Nous pouvons donc passer â la suite de nos travaux. Autrement, vous donnerez une réponse, et puis la réponse du Pakistan, et ainsi de suite. Il n'y a pas de raison pour que cela s'arrête.

Mohammad Hasan PAIMAN (Afghanistan): For so long a time, he was asleep, the delegate of Pakistan, and now he has woken up. Secondly, today is the result of the Council, but it is not a time to speak out of the order of the Agenda. Thirdly, I want to define the facts, but I do not want to attack anybody in this way. The distinguished delegate of Pakistan is making the circumstances today. It is trying to change, it has been provoked by somebody or some forces, they are provoking them against Afghanistan. This is the real fact. Now we want to give some facts about Afghanistan.

LE PRESIDENT: Je pense qu'on va arrêter le débat sur ce point. Je vois que le Pakistan soulève sa pancarte mais nous ne pouvons pas continuer. Non, je ne pense pas que l'on puisse continuer.

Mohammad Hasan PAIMAN (Afghanistan): I do not want to take much time. I do not want to express much on politics but I fully agree whatever speech I have made in CL 90/9 on the WFP programme. My delegation has approved and Council has approved and no one has any objection except Pakistan, on this day only. Everything has been made clear. Everything is all right. The situation is all right in Pakistan and in Afghanistan. I do not mention that there are more than 130 military training camps, these are assessments from all the external organizations, they are giving to the Pakistan Government, they are sharing out by bandits and they are training their militaries. . .

POINT OF ORDER
POINT D'ORDRE
PUNTO DE ORDEN

John GLISTRUP (Denmark): We are here to approve reports of the Council. We have had our discussions and we have had our deliberations. May I request you, Mr Chairman, to stop further debates and revert to the matter of clearing our reports.

LE PRESIDENT: Il y a un point d'ordre. Nous revenons â l'examen du rapport et nous considérons que ce point est épuisé.

Paragraphs 1 to 17, as amended, approved
Les paragraphes 1 à 17, ainsi amendés,
sont approuvés
Los párrafos 1 a 17, asi enmendados, son aprobados

Paragraph 10 approved
Le paragraphe 10 est approuvé
El párrafo 10 es aprobado

Draft Report of Plenary-Part V, as amended, was adopted
Projet de rapport de la plàniáre, partie V, ainsi amendéa, ast adoptée
El proyécto de informe de la Plenaria-Parte V, aui enmendado. as aprobado

DRAFT REPORT-PART VI
PROJET DE RAPPORT-PARTIE VI
PROYECTO DE INFORME-PARTE VI

Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Hemos leído con atención el contenido de los REP 6 y 7. Como usted empezó a decirlo muy adecuadamente señor Presidente, el REP 6 contiene asuntos administrativos y el 7 también. Asuntos de rutina que no fueron largamente discutidos.


Hago notar que en relación con el informe del Comité de Asuntos Constitucionales y Jurídicos, la parte controvertida está en el REP 8. Mi delegación propone para avanzar en nuestros trabajos que adoptemos en bloque sin discusión los REP 6 y 7 y pasemos al 8.

LE PRESIDENT: Nous avons une proposition concrète faite par le délégué de la Colombie et qui consiste â approuver simultanément les documents CL 90/REP 6 et CL 90/REP 7. Est-ce que notre Conseil est d'accord sur ces deux documents? Peut-on considérer qu'ils sont approuvés? Nous pouvons considérer que ces deux documents sont approuvés.

Paragraphs 1 to 3 approved
Les paragraphes 1 â 3 sont approuvés
Los párrafos 1 a 3 son aprobados

Paragraphs 4 and 5 approved
Les paragraphes 4 et 5 sont approuvés
Los párrafos 4 y 5 son aprobados

Paragraphs 6 to 8 approved
Les paragraphes 6 à 8 sont approuvés
Los párrafos 6 a 8 son aprobados

Paragraphs 9 to 11 approved
Les paragraphes 9 à 11 sont approuvés
Los párrafos 9 a 11 son aprobados

Paragraph 12 approved
Le paragraphe 12 est approuvé
El párrafo 12 es aprobado

Paragraphs 13 and 14 approved
Les paragraphes 13 et 14 son approuvés
Los párrafos 13 y 14 son aprobados

Paragraph 15 approved
Le paragraphe 15 est approuvé
El párrafo 15 es aprobado

Draft Report of Plenary, Part VI, was adopted
Projet de rapport de la plénière, partie VI, est adoptée
El proyecto de informe de la Plenaria, Parte VI, es aprobado

DRAFT REPORT-PART VII
PROJET DE RAPPORT-PARTIE VII
PROYECTO DE INFORME-PARTE VII

Paragraphs 1 and 2 approved
Les paragraphes 1 et 2 sont approuvés
Los párrafos 1 y 2 son aprobados

Paragraph 3 approved
Le paragraphe 3 est approuvé
El párrafo 3 es aprobado

Paragraph 4, including Resolution, adopted
Le paragraphe 4, y compris la résolution, est adopté
El párrafo 4, incluida la Resolución, es aprobado

Paragraphe 5 to 7 approved
Les paragraphes 5 à 7 sont approuvés
Los párrafos 5 a 7 son aprobados

Paragraphs 8 to 10 approved
Les paragraphes 8 à 10 sont approuvés
Los párrafos 8 a 10 son aprobados

Paragraph 11 approved
Le paragraphe 11 est approuvé
El párrafo 11 es aprobado


Draft Report of Plenary-Part VII, was adopted
Projet de rapport de la pleniere, partie VII, est adoptée
El proyecto de Informe de la Plenaria-Parte VII, es aprobado

DRAFT REPORT-PART VIII
PROJET DE RAPPORT-PARTIE VIII
PROYECTO DE INFORME-PARTE VIII

Paragraphs 1 to 4 approved
Les paragraphes 1 á 4 sont approuvés
Los párrafos 1 a 4 son aprobados

PARAGRAPHS 5 to 11
PARAGRAPHES 5 à 11
11 PARRAFOS 5 a 11

Akbar Mirza KHALEELI (India): I do not wish to delay the discussions, but I notice when reference has been made to the audit accounts of the Regular Programme, UN Development Programme, and World Food Programme, again at paragraph 9, there is a reference to the word processing and data processing equipment of the FAO. These are not the only comments made there. Why has focus come on this particular thing? There have been references also to the other organizations in the External Auditor's accounts. This could be deleted completely-paragraph 9.

LE PRESIDENT: De quel passage s'agit-il? Indiquez ce dont il s'agit.

George Henry MUSGROVE (Canada): We have a number of suggestions to make with regard to document 8· We have an addition we should like to make to paragraph 5, and addition to paragraph 8, and an addition to the standing paragraph 9· I will read those changes. With respect to paragraph 5, we should like to add a sentence at the end of that paragraph, which reads as follows. "The Council also welcomes the useful work done by the External Auditor in his review of sectors of the Regular Programme, notably his observations on budgetary planning and monitoring systems. " That is the sentence to be added at the end of paragraph 5.

With respect to paragraph 8, the last half of the second sentence presently reads "and noted that further improvements in PLANSYS would be introduced as resources permitted"· We should like to suggest a change in that sentence which would read "and urged that further improvements in PLANSYS be introduced as resources permitted in line with the External Auditor's recommendations. "

With respect to paragraph 9, we should like to add one sentence, which reads as follows: "Nevertheless several delegations remained concerned that the tendering process did not involve fully competitive bids on the same basis. "

LE PRESIDENT: Je demande au délégué du Canada de bien vouloir relire lentement les trois ajouts pour les paragraphes 5, 8 et 9 afin que nous puissions les prendre en note.

George Henry MUSGROVE (Canada): The sentence at the end of paragraph 5 reads as follows: "The Council also welcomed the useful work done by the External Auditor in his review of sectors of the Regular Programme, notably his observations on budgetary planning and monitoring systems. "

Paragraph 8, the last half of the last sentence In that paragraph, which presently begins "and noted". We should like to change that to read "and urged that further Improvements in PLANSYS be introduced as resources permitted in line with the External Auditor's recommendations".

Paragraph 9, there is a sentence to be added at the end: "Nevertheless several delegates remain concerned that the tendering process did not involve fully competitive bids on the same basis. "

Mrs Millicent M. FENWICK (United States of America): In paragraph 5, I certainly approve of the amendment proposed by the delegate of Canada, and would like to add: "and noted with satisfaction


that all accounts…that the External Auditor made clear that there was no discrepancy in any of the financial accounts. " In other words, it does not just refer to the Regular Programme, it refers to all the accounts he audited. In both cases he said that they were entirely satisfactory and according to the regulations. I think that we should say that. "…done by the External Auditor in review of sectors in the Regular Programme and in the audited accounts of all programmes, that all moneys were accounted for and reported according to the regulations. "

Akbar Mirza KHALEELI (India): I think the amendments of the delegate of Canada might be taken into account, except that basically the Council was dealing with the Report of the Finance Committee and here we are going directly to the External Auditor and giving the External Auditor a greater importance than the Report of the Finance Committee. In a way, we are introducing in our comments on the External Auditor's report things that we did not express regarding the Finance Committee. Therefore, the point made by the delegate of the United States needs to be accepted, that the External Auditor's report has been made with absolutely no qualifications, and everything has been gone into thoroughly by the Finance Committee which has considered the clarifications given by FAO and, after being satisfied, has recommended the adoption of the accounts to be forwarded to the Council along with the draft resolution. So if we are to admit the Canadian corrections we should have something to say that the External Auditor has made no qualifications whatsoever in his comments; otherwise it appears critical and one-sided.

Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Apoyamos plenamente lo que han dicho los Embajadores de Estados Unidos y de India.

Sobre la segunda parte de la propuesta de Canadá en relación con los sistemas de planificación y seguimiento presupuestarios, de manera muy cordial nos permitimos llamar la atención de nuestro vecino el colega Musgrove en el sentido que aparece en la primera frase del párrafo 8, en la primera frase del párrafo 8. ·

En relación con la adición que se propone al final del párrafo 9, volvemos a la misma situación. Estoy un poco cansado pero todavía mi mano escribe; si se insiste en incluir la expresión de alguna delegación ya yo tengo redactado el texto de la posición de las otras delegaciones, de manera que es mejor evitar esto y adoptar el párrafo 9 tal como está.

James D. AITKEN (United Kingdom): On this point I would say three things. The first is that I understand the arguments put forward by the delegate of India, but originally this was going to be two separate items, the Finance Committee's report and the financial statements. They were run together as one single item to save time. In those circumstances, I think it is quite reasonable to have the comments on the External Auditor's report in the form they are.

Secondly, I should like to say that we support all the amendments proposed by the Canadian delegation. We certainly consider that these reflect our views and they reflect the views of a number of Member Nations that we heard.

Finally, we would also say that we have a particular interest in this because you will be aware from yesterday's discussions, which are clearly recorded in the verbatim PV/16 on page 16, that we have a number of unanswered questions on these issues which, with your agreement, we are pursuing with the Secretariat and, again with your agreement, are sharing with the Finance Committee. So we have an interest in seeing the text as amended by Canada adopted to reflect our views.

Joseph TCHICAYA (Congo): Nous n'aurions pas beaucoup de peine à accepter les propositions faites par le délégué du Canada au paragraphe 5 mais nous nous demandons si, en l'enlevant, on ne donne pas plus d'importance au Commissaire aux comptes qu'au Comité financier. Il me semble qu'il convient de trouver une formula permettane de balancer le tout.

Ma délégation appuie entièrement la proposition faite par l'Ambassadeur des Etats-Unis; elle reflète les débats qui se sont déroulés ici.

Jacques POSIER (France): La délégation française appuie les interventions qui viennent d'être faites par le représentant de l'Inde, l'Ambassadeur des Etats-Unis, l'Ambassadeur de la Colombie, et l'Ambassadeur du Congo. Il serait sage de maintenir le texte en l'état, sans apporter de


modifications sinon cela nous mènera a des débats très difficiles et fort longs. La délégation française est donc d'avis que nous adoptions ce texte en l'état.

Danilo VUJICIC (Yugoslavia): I may be repeating in English what was just said by the delegate of France, but I would like to say that I support the amendment proposed by the United States to paragraph 5. I also share the assessment of the delegate of India on the proposal of paragraph 5 that we give too much attention to the report of the External Auditor. Even such language as proposed by Canada may encourage the External Auditor to involve himself in the policy-making of FAO, not only following the right procedures and so on. I would not go along that line.

In paragraph 8 I could accept only one word proposed by Canada, that is to replace the word "noted" by "urged", but not the addition at the end of the sentence, so that this would read "and urged that further improvements in PLANSYS would be introduced as resources permitted".

Horacio CARANDANG (Philippines): I would appeal to delegations to go back to the original text as proposed by the Drafting Committee. I believe the thoughts that are being expressed here now do not really add very much to the draft that is already before us. When we say that the work of the Auditor is useful work-well, if he was not doing useful work we would not hire him anyway. We have already said that the Council had expressed an unqualified audit opinion on the financial statements and the latest schedules; in other words, there was really no problem; this was in accordance with accepted auditing principles. That is also the same thought that was being expressed by the United States delegate, although her statement really brings out that point.

With regard to the amendment to paragraph 9, I am afraid that if delegations say that they made this comment, then there will be counter-comment, precisely because this comment was not left unanswered. Therefore, I would prefer the original text.

Mrs Millicent M. FENWICK (United States of America): I would like to support Canada's amendment to paragraph 8.

Akbar Mirza KHALEELI (India): I think the Drafting Committee has been very balanced in everything, and if paragraphs 5 to 12 are read together it makes a very cohesive pattern, plus, of course, some amendments which have been suggested by the United States delegate, but in the last sentence of paragraph 11 there \is reference to the External Auditor's comments regarding the development of the WFP Information System and the circumstances leading to the abandonment of the initial contract. It says "the Council also noted the External Auditor's comments". Those comments were adverse comments; they were very serious comments; and the Drafting Committee has, quite rightly in my opinion, passed it over because the Finance Committee had seen it and passed it over. Why are we concentrating so much on a few things of FAO without dealing with this?

Therefore, I would strongly urge that the draft as proposed by our most capable Chairman of the Drafting Committee, with the slight amendment in paragraph 8 "and urged that further improvements in PLANSYS would be introduced as resources permitted", would be in the interests of everyone and would save a lot of time. Any other amendments would lead to tremendous delays in this last and perhaps most important substantive issue.

Mrs Millicent M. FENWICK (United States of America): I think it would be wise to add at the end of paragraph 11 ". ·· also noted the External Auditor's comments and urged that the programme be accelerated according to the External Auditor's recommendations".

Weahim WINNAL. (uarmany, paerpal nupubise of): I should like to suppers she amandment of the delegate of Canada as regards paragraphs, that we say "urged" and "in line wich the External Auditor's recommendations".

LE PRESIDENT: Nous allons analyser ce document paragraphe par paragraphe s'il le faut.


Commencons par le paragraphe 11, avec la dernière suggestion de M. le délégué de l'Inde, enrichie par les observations de Mme le délégué des Etats-Unis. Pouvez-vous nous confirmer la rédaction que vous proposez?

Akbar Mirza KHALEELI (India): My first proposal is that we should retain the entire thing as it is, with the small amendment suggested in paragraph 8·

If that is not acceptable and the delegate of Canada and others insist on their propositions, then I would suggest the following addition to paragraph 11: "In connection with the development of the WFP Information System and the circumstances leading to losses and abandonment of the initial contract the Council urged that corrective action be taken and the programme for the development of the WFP Information System accelerated according to the External Auditor's comments".

Of course my first preference is neither to have this nor that, but a slight change in paragraph 8, as summarized by my distinguished neighbour, the representative of the Federal Republic of Germany.

Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): El curso del debate nos está demostrando que no es sano ni constructivo proceder de esta manera; debemos evitar la proliferación de propuestas en uno y otro sentido.

Apoyamos firmemente, y pedimos al Consejo lo apoye, la propuesta del Embajador de India en el sentido de aceptar una sola modificación en el párrafo 8 en vez de "tomó nota", "insto" y aprobar todo este REP. Por favor, esta es una actitud sensata y equilibrada que todos deben apoyar.

LE PRESIDENT: Il y a une proposition concrète: c'est que l'on maintienne le texte tel quel avec un simple ajout, au paragraphe 8, que le Conseil a appris notamment que de nouvelles améliorations seront apportées.

Nous pouvons demander au Président du Comité de rédaction de donner lecture de ce texte.

Est-ce-que, sur le plan du principe, pour ne pas multiplier les ajouts, le Conseil accepterait cela?

James D. AITKEN (United Kingdom): The second more detailed amendment, proposed by the distinguished delegate of India, seems eminently acceptable to us. We think that that amendment and the amendment in paragraph 9 are quite complimentary, in the sense of their meaning, and add to the quality of the reports. We are very happy to accept this proposal and the Canadian proposal on paragraph 9.

Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Sr. Presidente, solo para ir clarificando el debate. La propuesta de Canadá en el párrafo 9, que se refiere a licitaciones y otras cosas, no tiene nada que ver con la propuesta de India sobre el párrafo 11. Nosotros hemos dicho que, si se acepta la propuesta de Canadá en el párrafo 9, tenemos ya redactado el texto de la gran mayoría de las delegaciones que no podemos aceptar esa referencia al proceso de licitaciones. Por todo ello, Sr. Presidente, una vez más urgimos al Consejo a que acepte esto, a la luz de la propuesta de la India.

James D. AITKEN (United Kingdom): I am not very experienced in these meetings and my memory sometimes fails me. I believe that it was the feeling of the meeting sometime ago that members of the Drafting Committee should only intervene to defend the draft. I believe that the distinguished delegate behind me is a member of the Drafting Committee. I also believe that what he said was not to dotond the draft, but that he was going to add an additional text i would be grateful for a ruling from you, Mr Chairman, of this point. I realise there la a point where an additional text helps to defend the draft, but it seems to me that we could use some guidance on this, otherwise we could get into difficulties

Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Dicen que los pájaros les tiran a las escopetas. Si yo acepté en el comité de Redacción el párrafo 9 tal como está y Canadá lo modifica en un sentido contrario a mi posición, pues es obvio que yo tenga que reaccionar; creo que esto es claro, Sr. Presidente, y eso


es lo que estoy haciendo. Pero, como lo dije antes, mil veces prefiero la propuesta de India, que mantiene el texto tal como está. Yo soy correcto, Sr. Presidente.

José Ramon LOPEZ-PORTILLO ROMANO (Presidente del Comité de Redacción): Yo quiero constatar aquí, Sr. Presidente, que ya, en varias ocasiones, les hemos dado la vuelta a las discusiones y hemos llegado a la misma conclusión, es decir, que los textos del informe reflejan un equilibrio muy delicado. Hemos debatido a veces una hora, una hora y media, y después volvemos a aceptar el texto, y es que el Comité de Redacción-y lo afirmo con toda responsabilidad-hizo un trabajo muy responsable de equilibrio para evitar precisamente que este tipo de discusiones se dieran. Sr. Presidente, usted está viendo que, cuando se rompe este equilibrio, necesariamente todos los delegados que pudieron haber expresado durante los trabajos de este Comité de Redacción sus propias opiniones tienen que volverlas a plantear. Yo recuerdo aquí que se están discutiendo cosas que ya vimos en el Comité de Redacción, inclusive por parte de los miembros que del Comité de Redacción expusieron estas razones, y se concluyó, después de mucho trabajo, que el texto, como les hemos propuesto, era equilibrado.

Otra vez estamos volviendo a discutir lo que ya se ha planteado en el Comité de Redacción. Yo lo recuerdo perfectamente bien, se tuvieron este tipo de discusiones y les pido a los Miembros de este Consejo a través de ustedes, que lean la totalidad de los párrafos, que vean que hay una armonía entre ellos, una relación entre las distintas posiciones y que ciertas cosas de detalle se omitieron por razones obvias, porque no se podían considerar las de unos miembros y las de otros no; es tan sencillo, pero yo sí quiero dar fe y les quiero agradecer a todos los miembros del Comité de Redacción su actitud responsable durante los debates que hemos tenido en el día de hoy. Sé que ellos han defendido con mucha integridad este informe. Yo lo unico que puedo proponer es que se adopte esta parte del como había sido propuesta por el Comité de Redacción, quizás con la mejora que había suscrito la delegación de la India y algunas otras. Esa es la propuesta del Presidente del Comité de Redacción después de que he constatado que se está realizando el mismo tipo de debate que allá, en la sala de Malasia, tuvimos.

LE PRESIDENT: La proposition du Président du Comité de rédaction peut-elle nous amener à un consensus? Je ne crois pas car je vois beaucoup de colloques.

Jacques POSIER (France): Je prends la parole simplement pour exprimer ma solidarité totale avec les propos que vient de tenir le Président du Comité de rédaction. Je pense, comme lui, que c'est la seule solution et que cette proposition est juste, compte tenu du souci constant que nous avons manifesté pour maintenir, tant que faire se peut, un texte équilibré.

Je ne pense pas que la discussion dans laquelle nous nous lançons aboutisse à quoi que ce soit de satisfaisant.

George Henry MUSGROVE (Canada): Balance like beauty is in the eye of the beholder. There was a fairly extensive discussion of the audited accounts in the Council. The balance of views reflected in the Drafting Committee did not reflect those who were active in that particular discussion. We have made three modest amendments here. I might add that invariably whenever we do have an amendment it is always the same three or four speakers who oppose it. I suppose that if I said it was a nice evening the same three would fully oppose that as well.

In paragraph 5 we have attempted to Introduce an element of consistency which is inherent throughout this report, the reports of the Programme Committee, the reports of the Finance Committee and the reports of virtually every other committee. When a document has been presented by the Director-General and the Secretariat, is heartily endorsed, welcomed and adoration is heaped on it from every point of view. We have here the audited accounts 12. 2 in that discussion. The Auditor Cenerai, in addition to his purview of the accounts of the Regular Programme, is undertaking what we feel is an extremely useful and valuable exercise on behalf of the Organization, that is periodic reviews of different sectors of the programme in its operations. I think Mr Crowther had explained to us that that is what is called a "value-for-money-type" exercise.

I take it from the expressions we have heard here that this particular work by the auditor is not appreciated by a number of members. We for one appreciate it and we thought that that appreciation would be shared by the members of the Council. We simply wanted to put something in there welcoming his work in this regard and giving him some encouragement to continue it. That was the basis for the amendment that went into paragraph 5. We expressed it quite clearly and strongly in our intervention


in the Council therefore the welcoming process is something that we have thought would be due there. It is not to be confused with the Council's approval of the unqualified audit opinion which is found in the first sentence, so I do not think any amendment to my amended sentence that I am adding is appropriate from that regard.

With respect to paragraph 8, I wondered if the Council should not also agree that it is of value to the Organization to institute improvements in the PLANSYS system. We have noted, of course, the Secretariat's regard for the costs which might be inherent in such en exercise and other considerations. Nevertheless, it is an urging, by us the managers of the Organization, to implement such changes as may be possible in line with the resources which are available to us. We think it is moderate and I cannot understand people being against that. This is something we expressed invaluably in the Council debate. It did not find reflection in the report. We were not on the Drafting Committee.

Finally, with regard to the third one, in number 9, I think there is still concern felt on the part of a number of the delegations that the tendering process in the procurement of the word processing equipment was not quite in line with that which we experienced in a number of our own countries. Perhaps, as the auditor has pointed out, it might be the subject of some Improvement in the future. I just wanted to speak of those three amendments and commend them to the Council, and to stick with them. I think that the considerable work which our delegation has put into this Council meeting is grossly unrepresented in this report. I have made a number of suggested amendments during the day, most of those have been disregarded. I really would ask for some tolerance from my colleagues to take another look at those and see that they are not aimed at being devious or trying to obtain unfair advantage. I think that they are a reasonable representation of the discussions of the Council. After all, that is what the report is. It is not a question of whether people entirely agree with each other. It is a reflection of what was said in the Council.

Horacio CARANDANG (Philippines): I would like to speak of the amendment of paragraph 9. It is said here that some delegations were concerned that the tendering process was not fully in compliance with the-it seems there is an innuendo here that the rules have been violated because the debates were not made on the same basis. Of course, this was said, but I don't know if we should put something like this in the report. It was also pointed out that the auditor had made it very clear that no violation had been made of any of the rules under the tendering process. If this is so, I was wondering whether we should put it so negatively. If the delegation insisted on this amendment I would suggest that the words that I quoted would be placed immediately after that. In other words, that it was pointed out by the auditor that no violation had been made of any rules under the tendering procedure.

Waliur RAHMAN (Bangladesh): I am looking at the face of our Chairman of the Drafting Committee. I think he has made an impassioned appeal to us not to make any change in substance at this stage of our deliberations. The reason why the members of the Drafting Committee, at least my own delegation, we refrain from taking active part in the debate, except for one or two minor interventions, it is. very simple. It is not because of any ruling or rule in the Regulations, it is just a matter of courtesy, that we want other members to have a look at it and participate, but then, having said this, I would like to draw the attention of members, particularly those members who have insubstantive amendments to say that in the similar vein of the views expressed by our colleague from the Philippines, we have our own preoccupations too. In this morning's deliberation I had a small amendment which I made, having made it I withdrew, for the sake of our solidarity and unanimity. To my government it had a very special meaning. I did not insist on that. I am repeating what the Chairman of the Finance Committee has said in a very clear and a very reasonable manner, that we should get on with our work and adopt this particular Report. Perhaps again, I did say perhaps, that the only mention which has been made, keeping in view all the paragraphs from 5 to 11, that is at paragraph 11, but this I am only saying as a matter of helping you to accelerate the work, if it helps, but that really, to my mind, takes care of some of the preoccupations of our friends but left to me, I think we should get back to the drafts as they are in the Report.

Igor KIPMAN (Brazil): I have two very brief remarks. The first is to say that my delegation strongly supports the proposition put forward by the Chairman of the Drafting Committee, that would be to adopt this part of the Report without any modification.

The second remark is to support the right of any member of the Drafting Committee to propose additions once other additions have been proposed to any paragraph to this Report which modifies the central idea.


James D. AITKEN (United Kingdom): I have a point on three things here. First of all I recall that when the representative for Bangladesh withdrew his remarks, one of the qualifying facts was that he was a member of the Drafting Committee.

Secondly, when you referred my query for advice to the Chairman of the Drafting Committee, I heard him say that we should leave the text as it was because it was a consensus. Fine. Then I heard him say that we should then accept the short amendment proposed by the delegate of India. I find this rather perplexing. One looks for advice and one gets advice which is perhaps internal, in conflict. If gold rusts, what shall iron do? So it is for this reason that I should like to make it clear. I can accept the whole of the amendment proposed by India, also the additions proposed by the United States, and turn now to the comments made by Philippines, supported by Bangladesh. I think if you can turn to the Auditor's Report you will find that the Auditor does not comment on the tendering procedure other than to say that there was effectively a lack of competition. Now the remarks about the proprietory of the tendering procedure came from the Secretariat. Now we would be very happy to accept the amendments of the Philippines if it is quite clear that the text he is suggesting are the comments of the Secretariat, not the Auditor. I see Mr Crowther nodding.

We come back to all these amendments. We are happy with them. We are particularly happy with the amendment proposed by Canada. This has been a very helpful discussion because we feel at the end of the day there is a very much better text than we already had at the end of the Drafting Committee.

Joseph TCHICAYA (Congo): Il se fait tard. Nous avons écouté avec beaucoup d'attention l'appel lancé en notre direction par le Président du Comité de rédaction. Je crois que le fait d'avoir passé 35 heures de rédaction et passé beaucoup de temps ici devrait suffire pour nous permettre d'avancer. C'est pour cette raison que je pense, pour ma part, en dehors des deux propositions qui sont faites par le Canada au paragraphe 8, qu'on devrait pouvoir laisser le texte en l'état pour que nous puissions avancer au lieu d'accepter n'importe quel amendement. Je crois que de cette façon nous pourrons avancer, sinon il y aura des propositions et des contre-propositions, et je ne pense pas que cela soit utile à notre débat. Je pense que tout le monde devrait pouvoir appuyer le Président du Comité de rédaction.

LE PRESIDENT: Est-ce que le fait que le procès-verbal consigne les remarques techniques proposées par les délégués serait de nature a nous permettre de laisser en l'état le texte du rapport? Tout en sachant que les procès-verbaux font état dans le détail des interventions des délégués au sujet du travail des Commissaires aux comptes.

Est-ce que ceci permettrait de couvrir de manière globale et honnête l'ensemble des débats? Les procès-verbaux qui font état dans le détail des appréciations de tous les délégués sur le travail utile des commissaires aux comptes permettraient-ils de faire avancer les travaux? Je pose la question aux délégués du Conseil.

James D. AITKEN (United Kingdom): We would very much like to help you with this because we realise it is getting late, but because this is a financial matter we do not think it would really be appropriate to follow the course that you have recommended, and we think there is a simple and easy way which is enshrined in the Basic Texts. I would refer you to the notes in paragraph 2 of Rule VI, about the statement on minority views. Now, we can accept the views on a number of items were minority views but they were nevertheless expressed, so we are happy to see all the statements remain in the text simply on the basis that they are statements of minority views. I think it solves the problem, if you agree.

Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Quisiera creer en la sinceridad en ta vez de nuestro colega del Reino Unido y le proponemos lo siguiente Que al pie de página de esta parte del informe se haga un llamado diciendo: "La delegación del Reino Unido no compartió este texto y expresó su punto de vista que aparace en las actas correspondientes" y asi puede ayudarnos a que el informe no sea tan extenso. Que por favor acepte este procedimiento.

James D. AITKEN (United Kingdom): I would very much like to help this Council and it is for this reason that I will explain that we wish to retain a statement of minority view because we think in the circumstances, there are circumstances where one uses a technique of a reservation and we do not


think a technique of reservation is appropriate in these circumstances, which would debase both the technique and the reservations and also the status of minority views. So in these circumstances our position remains the same.

Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Si se pone la opinion de la minoría, habrá que poner la opinion de la mayoría. Yo creo que ha llegado el momento de que usted pida al Consejo qué quiere y que la mayoría de los\ miembros expresen bl se inclinan por la propuesta del Reino Unido, o se acepta el Sistema. Yo creo que esto es aceptable y satisfactorio para el Reino Unido. El puede decir algo más todavía: la delegación del Reino Unido expreso reservas técnicas que constan en las Actas y por tanto no comparte el texto de esta parte del informe.

Señor Presidente, esto es amplio, esto es suficiente, por favor que nos evite tener que agregar la opinión de la mayoría, que ya Congo y Colombia las tenemos redactadas y presentadas.

James D. AITKEN (United Kingdom): I am sorry to have to return on this point, and also I would regret having to suggest that my colleague to the rear may be a little off-centre in his comments here. I do not think it is up to Council to decide this because what I am talking about is something which is in the Basic Texts and we are exercising something for which there is no opportunity for this Council to make a decision. We are exercising our right to have a minority view. Furthermore, I would also say that there is no right for this Council to attempt to stop any member having a footnote or a reservation so I am afraid I do not understand the thrust of the intervention by the delegate from Colombia. I would be very grateful if you would clarify the position for me and assure me my reading is correct.

Leopoldo ARIZA HIDALGO (Cuba): Realmente en estos momentos estoy mirando un partido de ping-pong: Colombia-Reino Unido. Ya me duele el cuello. Creo que debe usted señor Presidente tomar la bolita y suspender la bolita, así se acabará el partido, y decidir qué hacemos, porque estos dos colegas, capacitadísimos los dos, nos pueden tener aquí hasta las tres de la mañana con la bolita esa.

LE PRESIDENT: Le délégué de Cuba a parfaitement raison. Le délégué du Royaume-Uni fait état d'un texte fondamental sur le paragraphe 6. 5, aux termes duquel on dit qu'un rapport concernant le texte de toutes les résolutions et recommandations, accords, etc. , approuvés par le Conseil ainsi que l'exposé des opinions de la minorité. On pourrait trouver une forme succincte pour ne pas avoir un texte trop lourd et dans lequel on pourrait dire ceci: "Certains délégués, ou un nombre restreint de délégués, etc. " Le Président du Comité de rédaction accepterait-il cette forme en faisant état de l'opinion de la minorité?

José Ramon LOPEZ-PORTILLO ROMANO (Presidente del Comité de Redacción): Reconozco, y el Comité lo sabia, y reconoció en el texto que ustedes ven, que está plasmada aquí, la opinión de la mayoría cuando el Comité pensó qué. era conveniente expresarlo a fin de no complicar demasiado el texto. Si bien dice este artículo. 6 que se debe expresar la opinión de la minoría, no niega el derecho a la minoría a poner un párrafo en consecuencia. Lo que estoy diciendo es que si la minoría va a pedir tal cosa se va a complicar el texto.

El proyecto de informe era sencillo y buscaba claridad. Solamente llama la atención para que se
tome en cuenta.

James D. AITKEN (United Kingdom) Again I think there Is a way round this draft. I have not spoken to my Canadian colleague about this but might it not be in relation to paragraph 10 "some Members noted"? Would this be acceptable?

LE PRESIDENT: Y a-t-il une observation?

Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): No sé de qué tomaron notas esos miembros, señor Presidente; no sé de qué van a tomar notas, pero lo cierto es que si esos miembros van a incluir en el informe aspectos


específicos, que no aparezcan ahora como opinión de la mayoría. Es nuestro derecho reflejar esa opinion. Yo creo qu Cuba le ha dado a usted, señor Presidente, una pauta de que detenga la bolita y pregunte al Consejo si prefiere una u otra opción. Son muy claras las dos.

LE PRESIDENT: Je crois qu'il n'y a pas d'autre solution si l'on veut être aussi complet que possible. Tant pis pour la longueur du texte. Il faudra faire état de l'opinion de la majorité du Conseil et un paragraphe pour exposer la position d'un certain nombre de délégués qui ont fait part de leurs points de vue. Il faudrait faire mention des deux positions, de cette façon le rapport sera complet. Il n'y a pas d'autre solution. Pouvons-nous accepter cette proposition et je laisse au Comité de rédaction···

Mrs Millicent M. FENWICK (United States of America): I think I understood the delegate of the United Kingdom correctly to say that he would be satisfied with the wording used in paragraph 10, which is simply to say that in all these cases the Council agreed with the External Auditor's suggestions for improvement and noted that the Director-General was implementing these recommendations. Did you say you thought that was fine?

LE PRESIDENT: Est-ce que nous faisons état des deux opinions, celle de la majorité et celle de la minorité pour avoir un rapport complet?

POINT OF ORDER
POINT D'ORDRE
PUNTO DE ORDEN

Sra. Mercedes FERMÍN GOMEZ (Venezuela): Yo he estado escuchando pacientemente en este juego de ping-pong, especie de obra de aficionados en que se ha convertido este Consejo. Me he estado absteniendo, pero aquí no cabe otra cosa que un punto de orden. Voy a poner una moción de orden para que cese este debate y para que el Presidente someta esto a decisión y el Consejo decida. lo que tiene que poner en el informe. Quiénes están de acuerdo con la moción que trae la redacción del Comité y que la mayoría decida.

Me excuso, pero la verdad es que llevamos más de media hora con esto.

Donat CHINKUMO (Cameroun): Nous devrions procéder comme nous l'avons fait au Comité de rédaction. Si le temps nous le permettait, il y aurait lieu d'envoyer en mission un délégué du Royaume-Uni et un délégué de la Colombie. Ils nous apporteraient un texte sur lequel ils seraient tombés d'accord. C'est ainsi que nous avons procédé au Comité de rédaction et nous avons eu un résultat positif.

LE PRESIDENT: IL y a deux hypothèses. Ou bien on émet l'opinion de la majorité et de la minorité, et cela impliquera un travail assez long et compliqué, et je le regretterai pour ma part, ou on demandera au Conseil de s'exprimer par vote, mais ce serait dommage.

Leopoldo ARIZA HIDALGO (Cuba): Con todo respeto quiero recordar, señor Presidente, que hay un punto de orden en la mesa propuesto por la delegación de Venezuela y los reglamentos dicen que usted debe resolver y no entrar a discutir hasta que no se resuelva ese punto de orden.

LE PRESIDENT Il y a une motion, d'ordre présentée par le Veneauela. Cette motion d'ordre suggêre de mettre au vote le Conseil sur ce texte. Le Conseil est-il d'accord pour voter ce texte? Nous passons donc au vote. Mala je crois que ce serait mauvais de passer au vote. Il faut absolument continuer I faire un effort de plus pour ne pas avoir une tradition de vote que je ne voudrais pas voir instaurer au Conseil. J'aimerais vivement qu'on puisse trouver une autre solution. Si le Conseil le veut, 11 peut voter, nous sommes disponibles.


Donat CHINKÜMO (Cameroun): Ce que j'ai proposé, les Textes Fondamentaux l'interdisent. Si c'est possible, pourquoi ne pas ··(continue sans micro).

Joseph TCHICAYA (Congo): Je suis quelque peu préoccupé par tout cela. Je crois que nous devons néanmoins suivre le texte quelles que soient les difficultés que nous avons en ce moment. Nous devons suivre les textes.

Je crois savoir qu'il y a une mention qui a été proposée. · Nous devons nous prononcer avant de poursuivre. On ne peut pas le différer. Les textes le disent aussi.

LE PRESIDENT: Nons passons au vote. Le Règlement dit que c'est une décision prise par le Président et ensuite on passe au vote si la décision du Président est contestée.

Je voudrais que le Secrétaire général lise le paragraphe en question.

LE SECRETAIRE GENERAL: Il s'agit du paragraphe 20 de l'article XII du Règlement général: "Au cours de la discussion d'une question, un délégué ou représentant peut demander la parole pour motion d'ordre, et le Président prend immédiatement une décision sur cette motion. Un délégué ou un représentant peut en appeler de la décision du Président, auquel cas l'appel est immédiatement mis aux voix, et la décision du Président, si elle n'est pas annulée a la majorité des suffrages exprimés, est maintenue. "

Jusqu'à présent, aucun membre n'en a appelé d'une décision que vous auriez prise.

Horacio CARANDANG (Philippines): I want it to be clarified what we are voting about.

LE PRESIDENT: Madame la déléguée du Venezuela demande à passer au vote. Nous passons donc au vote à moins que le Conseil ne s'y oppose.

Horacio CARANDANG (Philippines): Do I understand that the proposal is either to adopt the text as it is now proposed or to adopt the text with the amendments proposed by the United Kingdom, with the other views that would be put after that? I want it to be clarified.

James D. AITKEN (United Kingdom): If I could take up the offer from the delegate of the Philippines and attempt. to clarify, the position, as I understand it, is that we are debating a point of order.

The text before us had amendments proposed by Canada, India, United States, Philippines and Bangladesh. The position that we had reached was we had said that we could accept all the amendments as they were proposed except in the case of the ones for the Philippines and Bangladesh, where we said the comments came from the Secretariat rather than the Auditor.

We would also suggest that the actual wording of the Canadian amendment in paragraph 9 makes it clear that is a minority view. So there is no need for a separate paragraph. It is quite straight-forward. It is clear that it is a minority view, and because of that it should not cause any difficulties.

LE PRESIDENT: Je regrette mais 11 y a une motion d'ordre actuellement.

Sra. Mercedes FERMÍN GOMEZ (Venezuela): Me excuso con todo respeto y debo decir lo siguiente: en primer lugar, que una moción de orden no se debate; en segundo lugar, que lo que vamos a someter a votación tiene que ser primero la proposición con las modificaciones; segundo, el texto. Votarán los que estén por las modificaciones y luego se votará el texto y allí votaremos la mayoría que estemos por el texto sin modificación. Primero las modificaciones y luego el texto come está; ese es el orden parlamentario, señor Presidente, Si lo vamos a seguir.


LE PRESIDENT: Cela concerne le texte initial plus les amendements de l'Inde; et ensuite le texte initial lui-même. J'aimerais bien avoir l'avis du Conseil juridique.

LEGAL COUNSEL: I think the delegate of Venezuela has now made the issue that she wants to put to the vote clearly. She has said that, as is very often done in Parliamentary procedure, there is a text and there are a number of amendments to the text. You start voting on the amendments and they are either accepted or rejected, and you end up with the final text as a result of the voting.

You can handle it in one or two ways. You can either-and I think this is what the delegate of Venezuela suggested-take all the amendments as a package and if those are not accepted, then you are left with the original text; or else you can vote on the various amendments which have been proposed one by one.

If anybody proposes the latter procedure, it is a procedure which could be perfectly feasible. Of course, if the Council takes the amendments one by one, some of them may be interdependent, but that is a matter which the Council will have to judge when voting on them in a series of votes.

LE PRESIDENT: Nous passons au vote sur les amendements proposés dans leur globalité.

Humberto CARRION M. (Nicaragua): Es sobre este punto de orden que nosotros, obviamente, apoyamos; tal vez podemos ayudar a la situación.

El punto de orden presentado por la Embajadora de Venezuela se refiere prácticamente a que si continuamos debatiendo los textos que tenemos o si en realidad vamos a adoptarlo tal como lo presenta el Comité de Redacción. liemos escuchado una serie de intervenciones, incluyendo una del Presidente del Comité de Redacción en donde se explicaba el trabajo de equilibrio y las discusiones largas para presentar el texto equilibrado. Por lo tanto, incluso después de escuchar al Asesor Jurídico me parece a mí, esto lo puede aclarar la Embajadora de Venezuela, según interpreto vamos a votar primero a ver si deseamos que haya modificaciones, y creo yo interpretar que vamos à votar la mayoría que no deseamos modificaciones porque confiamos en el trabajo del Comité de Redacción.

Por lo tanto, digamos, mi interpretación es que vamos a entrar si deseamos que haya modificaciones, y estoy seguro que habrá votos minoritarios o, si queremos el texto tal como ha sido equilibrado.

Motion carried on a show of hands
La proposition est adoptée par un vote á main levee
Se adoptó la propuesta por votación a mano alzada

LE PRESIDENT: Les explications de M. le Conseiller juridique sont très claires; il propose que le Conseil se prononce sur les amendements, soit dans leur globalité, soit séparément. Je propose au Conseil de se prononcer sur les amendements dans leur globalité.

Quels sont les membres du Conseil qui sont pour le vote des amendements, pour l'appréciation des amendements dans leur globalité?

Quels sont les membres de notre Conseil qui votent l'ensemble des amendements proposés, quels sont ceux qui veulent modifier le texte?

Quels sont ceux qui veulent maintenir le texte dans son intégralité initiale?

M. le Secrétaire général, voulez-vous nous donner le résultat de ce vote?

LE SECRETAIRE GENERAL: Les membres du Conseil se sont prononcés ainsi: pour les amendements qu'il était proposé d'apporter au texte: 6 voix; pour le texte tel que préparé par le Comité de rédaction: 30 voix.

Le texte proposé par le Comité de rédaction a donc réuni la majorité et doit être considéré comme adopté.


George Henry MUSGROVE (Canada): As the Council has availed itself of voting to adopt the text of the draft that we have before us, I should like your indulgence to enter a footnote to the section on the audited accounts, which would read as follows: "The delegation of Canada regretted that paragraphs 5 to 9 did not adequately reflect the discussion on the audited accounts and its views in particular·"

Sra. Margarita LIZARRAGA (México): Mi delegación quiere deplorar el que en el voto expresado por el texto sin cambios una delegación que formaba parte del Comité de Redacción y que estuvo de acuerdo con el delicado equilibrio haya votado en contra.

James D. AITKEN (United Kingdom): I would like to associate my delegation with the reservation made by the delegation of Canada and ask that this be recorded in the report.

Victor HJORT (Denmark): The delegation of Denmark would like to add its name to the footnote entered by the delegation of Canada.

LE PRESIDENT: Je crois que c'est l'ensemble du texte que l'on à mis aux voix. Il y avait beaucoup d'amendements. Ceux du 5, du 8, du 9, et du 11. Comme l'a dit M. le Conseiller juridique, nous avons voté sur les amendements dans leur globalité, c'est-à-dire tous les amendements, y compris ceux du 11.

On maintient le texte tel qu'il est rédigé avec les remarques indiquées par M. le délégué du Canada, M. le délégué du Royaume-Uni et M. le délégué du Danemark.

Akbar Mirza KHALEELI (India): We are going back again in a disguised form to the same thing. First we have a decision that we should avoid reference to this matter while giving the sovereign right to each country and each delegation to have its say. Now, after all this one and a half hours of discussion, we have said there is a minority view and there is a view. Even though I was not 100 percent satisfied with the drafting of paragraphs 5-11, however, I said I would go along with it. Now a couple of delegations have exercised no doubt their sovereign right to express their view. This is reopening the whole thing, why 5-9, why not 5-11? They are missing out 11, why did they miss out 11? Why do they concentrate on 5 to 9? I am saying that they should indicate their reservations in the Drafting Committee, you have put it to the vote and they can do it. Why do they have to have their reservation in the main report?

Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Sólo queremos apoyar lo que acaba de decir nuestra colega y amiga de México. Consideramos que no es sensato ni correcto que mientras que distinguidos y competentes colegas trabajan seriamente con nosotros en el Comité de Redacción, luego la distinguida y respetable jefe de esa delegación se divierta irresponsablemente aquí en esta Sala Roja.

Angus MACDONALD (Australia): I wanted to take the floor to clarify the position of my delegation and explain why we have just abstained in the vote that was taken. I wanted to indicate that that in no way suggested a resiling or a detraction from our position as a member of the drafting group, or in support of the draft. It was simply to ensure there was no misunderstanding, that this delegation very strongly holds to the principle and the right of the minority to express their views in this Council and to have those views recorded.

Mrs Millicent M. FENWICK (United States of America): I too should like to say that we did not join with our other colleagues against the acceptance of this report. We did vote because two of those regulations, (although one I suggested was simply ignored), were mine. I did not think it sensible to vote that we should accept the report without the amendments that had been voted. As I wished to support the Drafting Committee, I did not join with other colleagues in the reservations they have taken.


Akbar Mirza KHALEELI (India): It is my understanding that what you put to the vote was whether the majority went along with it with page 3 and page 4 of document CL/9 REP/8 (5 to 12 inclusive). Thirty members voted for, six voted against. What I would like to understand, the reservations made by our distinguished colleagues and representatives of Canada, I think they would like to express their reservations about the fact that paragraphs 5 to 9 do not reflect their views, and that that should be included in this report. I think that is also a point of order, you put that to the vote also, so that it should not be included here.

LEGAL COUNSEL: The reservations which were made by certain delegations related to certain specific paragraphs which they cannot go along with. It has been a practice in certain cases where it has unfortunately not been possible to accommodate all the views of all the delegations to their respective satisfaction, that footnotes are included which disassociate specific delegations from specific paragraphs and I think this is what is intended on this particular occasion.

Humberto CARRION M. (Nicaragua): Una aclaración adicional que quisiera porque entendí que habíamos sometido todo el tema 9 con todos los párrafos incluidos a votación; si adoptábamos los textos presentados, no sometimos el tema párrafo por párrafo; supongo que la reserva será sobre la totalidad del tema. Quisiera que se me aclarara porque creo que es algo novedoso esto.

LE PRESIDENT: Le vote est intervenu sur les amendements proposés aux paragraphes 5, 8, 9 et 11. Tels sont les quatre amendements.

LEGAL COUNSEL: The vote was on the text of paragraphs 5 to 12 in its entirety. The vote was that this text should remain unchanged as drafted by the Drafting Committee. Now, when that text is adopted in that form certain delegations may find that some of the paragraphs are perfectly acceptable to them. They merely wish to indicate those paragraphs on which they have a reservation. Therefore, it is not necessary for the various delegations to make a reservation on the whole section. The reservation is just on those particular paragraphs of the text which was voted on as a block, which certain delegations have some difficulty in accepting. Therefore, I think it is perfectly normal for those delegations to indicate that their difficulties are with paragraphs 5 to 9. On the other hand, I assume, they have no difficulties with paragraphs 10 to 12, and thus the scope of their reservation is at least circumscribed.

LE PRESIDENT:

Paragraphs 5 to 11, as amended, approved
Les paragraphes 5 à 11, ainsi amendés, sont approuvés
Los párrafos 5 a 11, asi enmendados, son aprobados

Paragraph 12, including Draft Resolution, approved
Le paragraphe 12, y compris le projet de résolution, est approuvé
El párrafo 12, incluido el proyecto de resolución, es aprobado

Paragraphs 13 to 18 approved
Les paragraphes 13 à 18 sont approuvés
Los párrafos 13 a 18 son aprobados

Paragraphs 19 and 20 approved
Les paragraphes 19 et 20 sont approuvés
Los párrafos 19 y 20 son aprobados

Paragraph 21, including Resolution, adopted
Le paragraphe 21, y compris la résolution, est adopté
El párrafo 21, incluida la Resolución, es aprobado

Draft Report of Plenary, part VIII, was, as amended, adopted
Projet de rapport de la plénière, partie VIII, ainsi amendée, est adoptée
El proyecto de informe de la Plenaria, Parte VIII, asi enmendado, es aprobado


DRAFT REPORT-PART IX
DE PROJET RAPPORT-PARTIE IX
PROYECTO DE INFORME-IX

PARAGRAPHS 1 to 15
PARAGRAPHES 1 à 15
PARRAFOS 1 a 15

Hermann REDL (Austria): I shall try to be very precise to avoid difficulties. I followed the discussion of item 10 very carefully, and on the basis of my long FAO experience I would like to propose the following change in paragraph 9. The first sentence would remain unchanged. The rest of the paragraph would read as follows: "Medium-term objectives would be specifically considered by COAG and subsequently. by the Programme and Finance Committees, by the Council and ultimately by the Conference. In the course of these discussions, Member Nations would have ample opportunity to advance any suggestions for programme priorities that might be pursued by FAO The Conference would finally be able to take, in a rational and harmonious manner, any decision that it might consider necessary"

Carlos R. SERSALE DI CERISANO (Argentina): Es para apoyar la propuesta de Austria. Nos parece al menos que en español el texto queda mucho más claro.

John GLISTRUP (Denmark): I can go along with the proposal made by Austria, which I think makes the text clearer, with one change in the last but one sentence. Instead of "new directions" he said "programme priorities". I can accept that we say "programme priorities", but I think we should maintain "new directions" because I think that reflects some of the views which my delegation expressed on behalf of the Nordic countries.

Joachim WINKEL (Germany, Federal Republic of): I support the amendment of Austria and the amendment proposed by Denmark, which better reflects the discussion.

James D. AITKEN (United Kingdom): To echo the comments of my German colleague, I would say that we support the amendment proposed by Austria together with the addition proposed by Denmark.

Mrs Millicent M. FENWICK (United States of America): I would be anxious to support the proposal, but I worry about this business of innovative proposals. There is not a UN agency that does not try continually to broaden its mandate. I have struggled against this in the Programme Committee, and I do not think we should keep urging people to go into new pastures. It is one of the temptations of every bureaucracy, and I think the priorities are the important thing. The Committee on Agriculture, I suggest, would have a great deal to say. Therefore, I could support this, apart from urging my colleague from Denmark not to try to widen the bureaucracy that already exists.

George Henry MUSGROVE (Canada): We support the redrafted paragraph 9 put forward by the delegation of Austria, together with the slight amendment made by the delegation of Denmark with respect to the inclusion of reference to new directions.

Humbarra CARRIUN Mi (wisavagu) implement para cpoya? también la prepuesta del texto que propuso Austria y con la eusereneia de edición de Dinamarca. Creemos que los srganos deliberativos, empelando por le Conferencia, cenemos la facultad no sólo de discutir, definir o redéfinir las prioridades a plaso medio, sino también cualquier otra nueva dirección que la Organisación pueda tener dentro de sus Textos Fundamentales en su propia constitución.


John GLISTRUP (Denmark): I should like to assure my colleague from the United States that we certainly do not want to widen bureaucracy. In fact, her own delegation agreed to these words in the original draft, so I do not think it should be too difficult for her to accept this.

Kosei SHIOZAWA (Japan): I should like to associate myself with the previous speakers in supporting the amendment proposed by Austria and the addition proposed by Denmark.

Danilo VUJICIC (Yugoslavia): I have tried to compare the existing text with the new one, and I find that the new one is simpler, direct, and in the right sequence of development. I think it will contribute to avoiding some possible misunderstandings later, so I support the proposal made by Austria as amended by Denmark.

Joseph TCHICAYA (Congo): Ma délégation souhaite également apporter son appui aux deux amendements proposés successivement par l'Autriche et le Danemark. Mais je souhaiterais qu'à la fin, on mette "de nouvelles orientations dans le cadre du mandat actuel de la FAO".

Temel ISKIT (Turkey): I asked for the floor to support the proposal of Austria as amended by Denmark, but after hearing the delegate of Congo and perhaps thinking that his addition will allay some hesitations of our colleague from the United States, we can support the proposal of Congo as well.

Horacio CARANDANG (Philippines): I wanted to know whether this could also include the Regional Conferences, because according to the Basic Texts the Regional Conferences can suggest priorities. I hope that this paragraph does not mean that there is a change in the Basic Texts regarding the role of Regional Conferences in making suggestions on the Programme of Work.

Sra. Margarita LIZARRAGA (México): Nuestra delegación quiere también apoyar la propuesta hecha por Austria con las modificaciones propuestas por Dinamarca y por Congo. Pero también tenemos un poquito la preocupación, como en el caso de Filipinas, de que se habló prácticamente del COAG exclusivamente y creo que el texto original planteaba que de "los órganos técnicos, etc. , etc. , ", es decir, todas las instancias por las que prefiere pasar; no quisiéramos que quedaran limitados el Comité de Pesca o el Comité de Montes.

Sra. Mercedes FERMÍN GOMEZ (Venezuela): Simplemente para expresar nuestro apoyo al párrafo 9, con las modificaciones presentadas por Austria, Dinamarca y Congo.

Hermann REDL (Austria): Just a small point of clarification: behind my intervention is Rule XXXII, paragraph 6(b) I think our Basic Texts gives us a clear indication. In this connection I would also like to draw your attention to the incorporation of the medium-term objectives of the Programme of Work and Budget as approved by the Council in November 1982, and the Conference considered in November 1983 the Programme of Work and Budget for 1984/85 which also contains the medium-term objectives. This was behind my idea.

DEPUTY DIRECTOR-GENERAL: On a point of factual clarification the process set out in this paragraph now in the proposal for an amendment relates to events which will happen in 1987, leading up to the meeting of the Conference. There will be no Regional Conference next year, nor will there be a meeting of the Committees on Fisheries and Forestry and that is why they are not mentioned in this paragraph. There will, on the other hand, be a meeting of the Committee on Agriculture. That is the only reason why those parties are not specifically mentioned. I must correct myself, the Committee on Fisheries does meet in May, but not the Committee on Forestry or the Regional Conferences.


LE PRESIDENT: Par une heureuse circonstance, le Conseil est d'accord sur l'amendement. Nous pouvons donc considérer que la proposition du délégué de l'Autriche, améliorée par celles du délégué du Danemark et du délégué du Congo, est acceptée par le Conseil. Pour éviter toute confusion, je voudrais lire le texte en français: "Les objectifs á moyen terme de l'Organisation seront examinés de manière particulière par le Comité de l'agriculture, puis par le Comité du Programme et le Comité financier, puis par le Conseil, et, enfin, par la Conférence. Au cours de ces débats, les Etats Membres auront de nombreuses occasions de proposer des suggestions quant aux priorités des programmes et des orientations nouvelles de l'Organisation, dans le cadre du mandat actuel de la FAO, que pourrait poursuivre l'Organisation. La Conférence pourra prendre, de façon rationnelle et harmonieuse, toute décision qu'elle estimera nécessaire. "

Je pense que nous avons à peu près traduit l'amendement autrichien, amélioré par ce qu'ont dit les délégués du Danemark et du Congo.

Pouvons-nous considérer que le document CL 90/REP/9 est adopté?

James D. AITKEN (United Kingdom): There is one small factual point on paragraph 12, the final sentence begins, "The Council recognized that the concern expressed by the Programme Committee" etc. etc. , I think from the verbatim it was "the Deputy Director-General who observed" rather than "The Council recognized" If I remember rightly this subject was not raised in individual interventions it was simply raised from the Secretariat table at the end of the debate. I suggest in the interest of accuracy the reference to "The Council" is changed to a reference to "The Deputy Director-General"·

DEPUTY DIRECTOR-GENERAL: It would not be in accordance with the usual practice of Council to make here a specific reference to the Deputy Director-General. If the Council is not willing to endorse this statement perhaps some other turn of phrase would be appropriate such as, "It was recognized" or something like that

José Ramon LOPEZ-PORTILLO ROMANO (Presidente del. Comité de Redacción): Para anunciar, señor Presidente, a todos los miembros del Consejo un cambio que lamentablemente se filtro a todos los textos en todos los idiomas en el párrafo 8. Es una pequeña frase que se habla suprimido en el Comité de Redacción. Me refiero a la tercera oración que empieza: "Por otra parte, si fuera a realizarse tal examen, no debería basarse en una serie de propuestas y opciones disociadas artificialmente del conjunto de directrices, consensos y acuerdos surgidos de las deliberaciones de los órganos rectores de la FAO. "

Por tanto, se suprimiría: y por consiguiente, potencialmente creadores de divisiones por su misma naturaleza.

Esta frase que desgraciadamente se filtró en los textos, desaparece en todos los idiomas. Seguramente los miembros del Comité de Redacción lo habrán notado.

LE PRESIDENT: Nous avons deux modifications concernant la suppression de ce membre de phrase que vient d'évoquer le Comité de rédaction, au point 8 et ensuite au point 12. Il s'agit de la suggestion du Directeur général adjoint de remplacer les termes "le Conseil a reconnu" par "il a été reconnu", moyennant ces deux motivations pouvons-nous considérer que le texte est approuvé?

Paragraphs 1 to 15, as amended, approved
Les paragraphes 1 á 15, ainsi amendés, sont approuvés
Los párrafos 1 a 15, asi enmendados, son aprobados

Draft Report of Plenary-Pert IX. as amended, was adopted
Projet de rapport de la pioniera-partie IX, ainsi amendée, est adoptée
El proyecto de informe de la Plenaria-Parte IX. así enmendado, es aprobado

Je crois que nous arrivons au bout de nos travaux et je voudrais maintenant passer la parole á l'honorable délégué de la Colombie. Je tiens à lui exprimer ma reconnaissance ainsi qu'à tous les délégués et membres du Conseil qui ont bien voulu enrichir notre débat par leur travail très fouillé et leurs interventions très riches. Je crois pouvoir exprimer l'avis de tous en disant que les documents préparés par la FAO ont fait l'objet d'études très approfondies et d'un travail très sérieux de la part de toutes les délégations.


Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Señor Presidente, a nombre de los miembros del Consejo pertenecientes a la región de América Latina y el Caribe, queremos declarar que, a nuestro juicio, el resultado de esta reunión, plenamente satisfactorio para todos, nos compromete una vez más a seguir unidos sin distinciones en el propósito común de que la FAO trabaje cada día mejor y más eficientemente en favor de todos los Estados Miembros, particularmente de aquellos en vías de desarrollo.

Usted, señor Presidente, ha contribuido muchísimo al buen éxito de este período de sesiones Fue una. reunión plena de temas controvertidos, y en cierto momento hubo inquietudes, alcanzaron a agitarse las aguas. Pero usted, señor Presidente, afortunadamente afrontó todas estas situaciones con serenidad, ponderación, mesura, que los Latinoamericanos y del Caribe queremos reconocerle. Usted ha actuado con inteligencia y con imparcialidad y puede estar seguro de que al concluir hoy sus labores está rodeado por todos nosotros, señor Presidente, unánimemente con el tributo de respeto y de la admiración que le profesamos.

En la presidencia tuvo usted tres valiosos colaboradores: loe Vicepresidentes, el doctor Alwi Jantan, de Malasia, el Ministro de Agricultura de Tanzania, señor Bonami, y nuestro colega y amigo señor Iskit, Representante Permanente de Turquía ante la FAO. Gracias a los Vicepresidentes por los eficaces servicios que nos ofrecieron.

Agradecemos también a los colegas y amigos, Embajador Bukhari de Arabia Saudita, señor Mazoyer, de Francia, Guillermo González, de Argentina, e Ivo Alvarenga, de El Salvador, quienes hicieron competentes presentaciones de los informes de los Comités que presiden.

Los Latinoamericanos pensamos que éste ha sido un buen Consejo. El informe es muy aceptable, equilibrado y contiene orientaciones muy positivas para el íuturo de nuestra Organización.

Los miembros del Comité de Redacción actuaron todos con sincero deseo de acertar y de procurar el consenso en todas las oportunidades. Gracias a nuestros compañeros de ese Comité, que estuvo presidido por un colega y amigo que no obstante su juventud ya sobresale por su inteligencia, sus grandes capacidades, su consagración y la firmeza con que suele defender sus convicciones democráticas.

Con su labor como Presidente del Comité de Redacción, José Ramón López-Portillo Romano, digno representante de una gran nación como México, ha honrado a su país, ha prestado un valioso servicio al Consejo y nos ha hecho sentir profundamente orgullosos a sus colegas y amigos, particularmente a nosotros los de su propia región de América Latina y el Caribe.

El Comité de Redacción tuvo una Secretaría femenina atrayente y eficaz.

El Director General, y pedimos al señor Walton que le transmita este sentimiento, debe sentirse plenamente satisfecho. Sabemos que él como Jefe de esta Organización recibe este reconocimiento bien merecido, con serenidad, con ánimo positivo porque en esta Sala Roja está representada toda la comunidad internacional y el Director General nos representa a todos sin distingos de ningún orden. La Secretaría de la FAO debe sentirse complacida porque tiene funcionarios muy capaces y competentes.

Aún con el riesgo de incurrir en exclusiones involuntarias, queremos destacar la participación de los señores Walton, Islam, Crowther, Floree Rodas, Lignon, Shah, Bonte-Friedheim, Roche, Moreno, Régnier y todos los demás, a todos los niveles.

La Secretarla del Consejo sigue servida muy eficientemente por el señor Savary, con la valiosa asistencia del competente señor Tedesco.

Agradecemos al señor Ahmed, Director Ejecutivo Alterno del PMA y a sus colaboradores, la adecuada participación en esta reunión, en la cual el Consejo expresó su satisfacción por la merecida designación del señor Ingram, como Director Ejecutivo del PMA.

Gracias a los intérpretes que han permitido nuestro entendimiento. Nuestro agradecimiento a las jóvenes y simpáticas mensajeras. Nuestro reconocimiento al grupo de damas, a la derecha de la Sala quienes con sus mágicas maquinitas reproducen tan fielmente nuestras declaraciones.

Gracias también a los traductores e impresores, a todos a quienes visible o invisiblemente han colaborado en el buen éxito de nuestros trabajos.

A los colegas que regresan a sus países les deseamos feliz viaje de retorno, con nuestro deseo sincero de que encuentren en salud y alegría a su familia y con progreso y paz a sus estados. Muchos de nosotros seguiremos en Roma. Nos vamos a separar por un periodo, pero pronto continuaremos nuestras reuniones y actividades. Los Latinoamericanos y del Caribe expresamos nuestro agradecimiento a todos los representantes, cuyos países dejaran de ser miembros del Consejo a partir de 1987.


Permítame, señor Presidente, una mención particular a nuestro distinguido colega y amigo Embajador Tchicaya, del Congo. Durante seis años yo le había tenido de vecino de la derecha, y el Embajador Ariza a su izquierda. El Embajador Tchicaya nos hará mucha falta, porque ellos han hecho valiosísimas contribuciones.

Finalmente, soplan vientos de otoño; se aproximan las Navidades y 1986 toca a su final. Con todo respeto por las creencias religiosas de cada uno de los miembros del Consejo, les deseamos unas Navidades felices y serenas y que 1987 traiga para todos nosotros y nuestras familias todo lo mejor: paz, amor, alegría, dicha y prosperidad.

M. Afzal QADIR (Pakistan): Speaking on behalf of the Asian group, I would like to say how beholden we are to you for the excellent manner in which you have conducted the deliberations of this Council leading to fruitful and productive conclusion to this gathering.

As Ambassador Bula Hoyos pointed out there were problems that were handled during the Session but with your wisdom, with your patience, with your charm and with your firmness we have been able to overcome these problems resulting in the happy conclusion we have been able to achieve.

I would not like to go into details over the members of the Secretariat and members of the staff who have ably assisted you in producing the results that the Council was able to achieve. These things which have already been mentioned by Ambassador Bula Hoyos, we would like to endorse the tributes that he has paid to them, and as I say, we wish you success. We look forward to seeing you at the next meeting and it was a great pleasure working with you and we can assure you we will continue to extend wholehearted cooperation in the future.

Having said this, I would like to raise a point which relates to the reply, which Afghanistan wanted to make to my reply which was brought about by a statement I had made. Now, you delayed him, you had disallowed him from taking the floor but before you silenced him he was able to say a few words and I would request you order the expungement of those.

Adel Helmy EL SARKI (Egypt) (Original language Arabic): As we are at the conclusion of our Session, on behalf of the Egyptian delegation we would like to express our appreciation to you for your excellent guidance, your patience and your wisdom in listening to the statements of our colleagues and to ours. I would like to thank all those who have presented the different documents that were discussed. I would like to support all those who saluted the efforts of the Drafting Committee and we would like to reassure you that we will always cooperate with FAO.

Mrs Milllcent M. FENWICK (United States of America): Canada is not here so I dare to speak for North America and I would like to thank you, Mr Chairman, and all of you six veterans up there on the podium, and Mr Roche, I see in the background there. It is endurance, endurance is one of our great virtues, and I would like to say something about my friend, López-PortiIlo. I am not exactly a Latin American, but he is a very near and a very dear neighbour, and so I would like to say how much we have appreciated his work and how many compliments I have to send him, mail letters reporting all the compliments he has been getting as Chairman of the Drafting Committee. All of us here, and my colleagues, and the new members, those who have not been veterans as so many of us have of so many of these meetings, but we are all in it together and we all have purpose and however disparate our ways of reaching that goal may seem the important thing is that we are trying to do something useful in the world, that is the point. If I think, as you know, of nothing but the little man at the end of the line, he is my target; other people have broader, more educated ideas, more expert, I am not denying it, but everybody tries to do it in his own way.

I just would like to thank Miss killlngsworth especially, sitting up there. Everybody has joined in this enterprise in which I think it was from Mali we had a representative; this enterprise in which we are all partners.

Jacques POSIER (France): Je n'ai pas eu le temps de consulter mes collègues du groupe de l'OCDE. Je m'excuse auprès d'eux mais ils ne m'en voudront pas si je vous adresse quelques propos très brefs.

Je voudrais pouvoir prendre à mon compte les propos tenus par la délégation de la Colombie, mais je ne le ferai pas afin de ne pas prolonger cette séance. En effet, 11 a tout dit, mais je tiens à m'associer quand même, expressément, à tous les remerciements adressés à ceux qui ont contribué à la très bonne tenue de cette session. Je voudrais également dire quelques mots spécialement à votre


intention, à votre adresse, pour vous remercier et vous féliciter de la grande compétence et du sens élevé de la négociation, de la patience et parfois de l'indulgence dont vous avez fait preuve.

Joseph TCHICAYA (Congo): Effectivement, toutes les régions se sont exprimées. Je souhaite pour ma part prendre la parole au nom de mes amis et frères d'Afrique membres de ce Conseil, afin de m'associer aux hommages appuyés qu'a rendus l'Ambassadeur Bula Hoyos et d'autres, au secrétariat et au Bureau que vous représentez. A cet égard, je voudrais mol aussi dire combien votre expérience et votre savoir-faire ont servi au cours de cette session.

Comme l'a dit mon collègue de Colombie, je termine aujourd'hui la session de mon mandat. Avant de partir, je voudrais remercier tout le monde pour l'esprit de dialogue et de concertation qui nous a animés au sein de ce Conseil. Je voudrais aussi dire combien, nous autres Africains, nous avons trouvé cette session fructueuse. En effet, voue avez, au cours de cette session, examiné les principaux résultats de la 14ème Conférence de la FAO pour l'Afrique. Principalement, le Conseil a appuyé la proposition que nous avons adoptée à Yamoussoukro de faire en sorte qu'une étude de faisabilité soit faite pour ce qui concerne l'aide en nature. Il y a là un résultat palpable, nous autres Africains nous ne l'oublierons pas; nous espérons tout simplement que cette étude aboutira et contribuera à drainer vers l'Afrique une aide additionnelle dont elle a besoin pour son développement·

Je tenais à le dire; je voudrais a nouveau m'associer à l'Ambassadeur Bula Hoyos et aux autres pour remercier les interprètes, les messagères qui nous ont aidés dans la communication dans cette salle; 11 s'agit là d'éléments très importants. Encore une fois jè m'associe également aussi aux félicitations adressées au Président du Comité de rédaction, au Président du Comité du Programme, au Président du Comité financier, au Président du Comité juridique pour le travail qu'ils ont accompli ' et pour la manière dont ils accomplissent leur mission.

Encore une fois merci; et à ceux qui partent je dis au revoir; ma collègue des Etats-Unis me regarde… il me semble qu'il y a eu une incompréhension, on a pensé que je rentrais chez moi maintenant; je ne suis plus membre du Conseil l'année prochaine; j'espère pouvoir revenir en 1988-89·

LE PRESIDENT: Je remercie M. le délégué du Congo. Nous voici arrivés au bout de nos délibérations. Je voudrais, pour conclure, adresser mes très chaleureuses félicitations et remerciements à tous les délégués. C'est la première fois que j'ai le plaisir et le privilège de présider pendant deux semaines ce Conseil de la FAO. Je dois dire que la qualité des interventions, leur sérieux et quelquefois la passion avec laquelle les délégués ont exposé leurs points de vue m'ont impressionné. Je suis persuadé qu'avec cette qualité, cette compétence exceptionnelle, quels que soient les problèmes financiers ou techniques qu'aurait à aborder l'Organisation, elle trouvera, dans le Conseil, un réel organe approprié pour la conseiller, l'orienter et la guider.

J'ai noté en particulier que toute l'activité de la FAO a été analysée de très près par toutes les délégations; chaque délégué a essayé, par ses organes et par ses administrations, d'apporter son concours á l'Organisation.

En fin de compte, tous nos travaux concourent envers un seul objectif: l'Organisation, aider les agriculteurs à augmenter leur production et l'alimentation dans le monde. C'est là notre objectif. On parle de rentabilité, de productivité de la FAO. On la voit à travers ses effets et ses retombées chez les producteurs de tous les pays du globe.

Je voudrais remercier Messieurs les délégués; les débats ont été parfois passionnés; on a été obligé, à notre corps défendant, de passer dans certains cas au vote. J'espère que ce sera l'exception, que cela se renouvellera le moins possible, et que nous essayerons dans toute la mesure possible d'aboutir à une convergence d'opinions; car la solidarité n'est pas un vain mot; c'est une nécessité pour nos travaux; et je suis persuadé que chaque délégué qui est intervenu, quelquefois avec passion, l'a fait uniquement dans le but de faire du bon travail, d'améliorer notre activitéι de faire face è noe obligations dans les meilleures conditions morales et techniques.

Quellen los ftieril los NlifieuUie que l'adavance eeffdetfêi elle fcveuvea dans la emiteeu los alimente sages, constants, endurants, car malgré tout pendant deux semaines le Conseil a été amene a faire un travail sérieux, et pendant de longues heuress et je pense que si on devait analyser le rôle des organes directeurs, je suis persuadi que ce que nous avons fait depuis deux semaines démontre de manière claire l'importance des travaux faits dans ce Conseil.

Je, voudrais également m'associer à tous les intervenants et adresser mes remerciements et ma reconnaissance au Secrétariat de la FAO, à commencer par le Directeur général et par tous les eminente experts qui sont venue noue exposer leurs programmes, ici, répondre en profondeur à toutes


nos demandes d'explication et qui se proposent de continuer à répondre à toutes nosfutures demandes. Tant que nous aurons ce climat de contact, de confiance et d'explications franches et loyales (franches pris dans le terme diplomatique bien entendu), nous ferons du bontravail.

Merci infiniment pour votre indulgence envers votre Président qui est un néophyte dans ce domaine, merci pour ce que vous avez pu faire pour m'aider pendant ces deux semaines. Ceci dit je lève la séance·

Applause
Applaudissements
Aplausos

The meeting rose at 20. 15 hours
La séance est levée à 20 h 15
Se levanta la sesión a las 20. 15 horas

Previous Page Top of Page