LE PRESIDENT: Honorables délégués, Mesdames, Messieurs, nous allons poursuivre nos débats sur les points 6 et 7 de l'ordre du jour. Je voudrais dire que nous avons encore 18 orateurs inscrits au titre de ces deux questions sur les points 6 et 7. Notre calendrier prévoit le point 8 "Ressources phytogénétiques"· Je demande la collaboration fraternelle de tous les délégués pour essayer de rester dans le temps imparti par l'Agenda. En principe le travail finit à 17 h 30, mais si nous n'arrivons pas à terminer les points 6 et 7 d'ici 17 h 30 nous serons amenés à poursuivre la séance jusqu'à 19 heures de manière à respecter le calendrier. Tout dépend donc du Conseil et des honorables délégués. La question est importante, elle mérite toute notre attention. Donc nous laissons aux délégués la possibilité d'essayer de permettre à l'Organisation de tenir le calendrier initialement prévu. Je voudrais passer la parole au Canada. J'ai oublié Monsieur Brader qui doit faire une communication.
L. BRADER (Director, Plant Production and Protection Division): It has been brought to my attention that there is a discrepancy between the text of the Code of Conduct in the report of COAG compared with the one being published in document CL 95/15. I am referring particularly to page 49 of the COAG report in English, to Article 9.11.2 where, in the COAG report, it reads: "take appropriate measures, within their authority and legislative competence, designed to ensure that exports ···", etc.If one looks at page 7 of document CL 95/15, the word "designed" has accidentally dropped out under Article 9.11.2 and has to be added again.
Earl W. WEYBRECHT (Canada): The report of the tenth session of the Committee on Agriculture contains a large number of matters for the attention of the Council. We note that matters relating to the Summary Programme of Work and Budget will also come up for discussion under another agenda item in this Council session. We expect to make further comments on the agriculture programme at that time.
We had an opportunity to participate in the tenth session of COAG and to provide our comments on the substantive issues on that occasion. I might emphasize that Canada places great importance on the technical nature of COAG for setting the course of FAO's programming in agriculture. We support the points made by the delegate of the United Kingdom to encourage an increase in the participation of technically experienced personnel from Member Nations in the Committee sessions. We would like to comment briefly on a number of the points raised in the report.
We support the emphasis placed on the continued priority to be given to training and to the strengthening of extension services. We share the concern that was expressed over the drop in training activities in the implementation of the programme of work in the period 1986-88. Training is clearly one of the major functions of the Organization.
We fully support the recommendation that FAO's collaboration with other international organizations and U.N. agencies and cooperation with international research centres be continued. We are pleased to note the recognition given to this cooperation to ensure efficient use of scarce resources.
We welcome the emphasis placed on environmental concerns relating to sustainable agricultural development. The request that priority continue to be given to environmental subjects in the future is in line with the overall priority proposals as set out in the Outline and the Summary of the Programme of Work and Budget. The proposal to create a new sub-programme on Sustaining Resource Potentials will help to increase the focus of FAO's important work in this area.
We re-emphasise the importance of the statistical and information work of the Organization and its efforts to develop a World Agriculture Information Centre.
We are pleased with the proposal that a separate item be included on the agenda of the 11th Session of the Committee on Agriculture to discuss the topic of women in development. The Committee's consideration of the many activities of the Organization related to this important topic would be very appropriate and timely.
We support the initiative of FAO to develop a strategy for preserving animal genetic resources and look forward to the planned Expert Consultation to examine the many aspects of the proposals for a global FAO programme. We feel that the report as it stands reflects accurately the discussion that took place on this subject in the Committee.
We attach importance to the emphasis placed in the report on increased collaboration with NGOs.
The Canadian delegation fully supports the proposed modifications to the International Code of Conduct on the Distribution and Use of Pesticides. We note the high level of exchange and cooperation with UNEP and other international organizations in this endeavour.
Canada believes that close coordination of the PIC Procedures adopted by FAO and UNEP is of vital importance to achieving the compliance of members and therefore, is critical to the success of this initiative.
Regular progress reports on the operations of the PIC and interactive linking with UNEP's International Register of Potentially Toxic Chemicals to prevent duplication will enhance confidence in its operation. The operation of PIC and its implementation is feasible in Canada.
Joao Augusto DE MEDICIS (Brazil): I am pleased to reiterate the appreciation of my delegation for the excellent work reported on the Agricultural Department's activities from 1986 to 1988 and our thanks for the activities implemented in Brazil during that period. Cooperation with FAO has proved to be worthwhile, and special mention was made during the COAG session of products developed in the city of Sao Paolo regarding urbanization, food consumption and nutrition. The importance of improving access to food for the poor and educating families in better nutrition habits cannot be over-emphasized. That is why my delegation wholeheartedly supports FAO's efforts to assist member countries in developing nutrition education programmes, in particular envisaging the use of indigenous foods. We also endorse the recommendations listed in Items (i) to 0(ix) in pages V to VI of document CL 95/5. In that regard, the Brazilian delegation wants to strongly support the concern of the Portuguese-speaking countries in Africa with the establishment of a specific sub-regional centre for the formulation of nutritional policies for those countries. Brazil undoubtedly is ready to take an active part in FAO's efforts in that direction, especially taking into consideration not only our language and historical ties to the five Portuguese-speaking countries in Africa, but also our common ethnic roots and similar climatic and edaphlc prevalent conditions. In relation to the preservation of animal genetic resources, I want to stress once again the importance the Brazilian Government attaches to animal genetic preservation programmes and furthermore to restate the acknowledgement of the relevant role played by FAO and UNEP in fostering those programmes around the world. My delegation therefore strongly supports the proposal made here by the distinguished representative of Peru, to the effect that the Commission on Plant Genetic Resources, during its next session, should decide on the inclusion of animal genetic resources as a topic for its concern and studies. It is in this as well as in other fields that my delegation very much welcomes the inter-agency approach and fruitful cooperation, and we strongly hope that efforts will be always added up, therefore avoiding overlapping and consequent duplication of activities and waste of scarce resources. During the COAG session, stress was placed on the Brazilian stand on the establishment of policies related to the preservation of genetic resources. It is our view, however, that any policy decision on that as well as on any related subject must be taken on a national basis. My delegation nonetheless supports FAO's efforts and welcomes the establishment of a world watch system on Indigenous livestock breeds to identify the need and promote action when valuable or unique breeds are approaching risk.
In my intervention at the COAG concerning the introduction of the PIC clause in the Code of Conduct on the distribution and use of pesticides, I mentioned the hearings which were being held by the US Congress regarding inadequate notification and monitoring of pesticides exported from the United States. The report of the US General Accounting Office presented at these hearings highlights a few points that might be of interest to the Council: about 25 percent of pesticides exported from the US are not registered in the US and so cannot be sold there. Two hundred and sixty two unregistered pesticides were exported from the US in 1987. Out of 209 pesticides investigated by GAO, notices were sent to importing countries for only 54. I made those remarks with some reluctance since the US is not the only exporter of pesticides and certainly not the only one not to properly notify the importing countries on the dangers they are facing. The conclusion, however, is that importing countries cannot rely on the EPA to adequately inform them about hazardous pesticide exports, and in
particular about the harmful effects of these pesticides. The situation is very serious indeed. The figures given are just an example. Even in a country which has one of the world's best developed registration and export notification systems for exports, the system does not work adequately.
The Brazilian delegation is therefore glad that COAG reached consensus on the introduction of the PIC clause in the Code. We endorse the modification of the Code suggested by COAG and favour an early start in the implementation of the Prior Informed Consent procedure. In regard to the definition to be added to Article 2 of Paragraph I as in paragraph 172(c) of COAG's report, my delegation favours the deletion of the word "participating". The PIC is basically an ethical commitment, and ethical commitments cannot exclude some countries just because they do not participate in the Code. Finally, we would like to draw the attention of this Council to two other suggestions of COAG, mentioned in paras. 7 and 8 of document CL 95/15 and which we consider of capital importance: the one which regards the necessity that FAO and UNEP work closely together in the implementation of the PIC procedure, and second, the one concerning the requirements of many countries for technical assistance and training of staff necessary for full implementation of the Code and the PIC clause. We therefore endorse the report of the Tenth Session of the COAG and once again reiterate our compliments for the objectives fulfilled.
Mauricio CUADRA: (Nicaragua) Nuestra Delegación ha estudiado con detenimiento el documento del Comité de Agricultura, el cual consideramos que es un análisis rico y profundo de la temática general de la agricultura del programa de la FAO para el próximo bienio, asi como información importante sobre los temas priorizados y el impacto que algunos de estos programas tendrán para el desarrollo del sector agropecuario, con su correspondiente influencia en el desarrollo general de nuestras economías. El Comité ha realizado una gran labor que facilita nuestra discusión. En general estamos de acuerdo con las conclusiones a que se ha llegado. Sin embargo, quisiéramos señalar algunos aspectos que son de particular interés para nosotros, sin pretender, por supuesto, ser exhaustivos.
La disminución de las actividades de capacitación es preocupante. Esta situación afecta, sobre todo, a los países en desarrollo, donde el atraso tecnológico y la escasez de recursos propios hacen que estos programas de capacitación sean de gran importancia. Lo apoyamos, pues, y quisiéramos que se revise y se dé prioridad a esta área de trabajo de la FAO, que es de por si una de sus areas principales. Creemos acertada la recomendación de que se continúe profundizando la colaboración de la FAO con otros organismos internacionales, tanto de las Naciones Unidas como organismos regionales que trabajan en el sector, logrando con esto un mejor aprovechamiento de los ya escasos recursos. Creemos que el avance en la coordinación de los organismos de cooperación en el área centroamericana que trabajan en la agricultura es una experiencia valiosa, de la cual podemos sentimos orgullosos. Es importante también la ayuda de la FAO a los Estados Miembros en la realización de análisis agrícolas, estudios sectoriales y formulación de estrategias políticas de planes agrarios. El señalamiento sobre los efectos perjudiciales del proteccionismo y la necesidad de que se amplíen los mercados para los productos básicos de exportación de los países en desarrollo es un tema de principal atención para nosotros. Saludamos que haya quedado recogido en el informe con claridad.
Consideramos que el Programa de Labores y Presupuesto ha sido analizado a cabalidad y que habrá oportunidad de hacer otros comentarios cuando se aborde el tema especifico. Sin embargo, expresamos nuestra particular satisfacción por la orientación de las esferas priorlzadas en el programa principal, Agricultura; sobre todo, con la importancia que se asigna al tema de la biotecnología. Consideramos que la FAO debe jugar un papel fundamental para impedir que los países en desarrollo quedemos al margen de los rápidos avances que se están dando en esta área, que vendrán a transformar las estructuras de producción, con el peligro de que se incremente la ya grande brecha tecnológica entre los palees desarrollados y en desarrollo.
Los programas de asistencia técnica para reforzar los sistemas nacionales de control de calidad de los alimentos exportados e importados, asi como para la formulación de políticas y alimentación y nutrición, junto con el fomento de cultivos alimenticios tradicionales, son de nuestro especial interés. Asimismo, las experiencias realizadas para la producción de pan a partir de productos básicos obtenidos en el propio país consideramos que son bastante encomiables.
Vemos con interés el programa de la FAO para la preservación de los recursos zoogenéticos, utilizando nuevos métodos de biotecnología aplicablesda. En este sentido, por lo que se refiere al párrafo 140, nuestra Delegación apoya la propuesta de la distinguida Delegación del Peru para que este Consejo tome la decisión de que un grupo de trabajo de la Comisión de Recursos Fitogenéticos se reúna en octubre para analizar la introducción de los recursos zoogenéticos en el sistema global de la FAO para recursos fitogenéticos, como un primer paso para el establecimiento de un sistema global de diversidad biológica, y que los resultados sean presentados al próximo Consejo y a la Conferencia.
Apoyamos, Sr. Presidente, los planteamientos hechos por el Comité, sobre la necesidad de fomentar la participación popular en el desarrollo agrícola y rural, instando a los Estados Miembros a que presten todo su apoyo al sector publico, con objeto de promover y movilizar a los grupos de participación popular. Consideramos, por experiencia propia, que el movimiento cooperativo es uno de los principales, si no el principal, instrumento para intensificar la participación popular.
Apoyamos firmemente la inclusion del tema de la mujer en el desarrollo, como un punto especifico del 11° período de sesiones del Comité de Agricultura, y todos los trabajos que sobre el particular se realicen en cumplimiento de la Resolución 194. Consideramos que la FAO debe aportar todos los fondos que sean necesarios para el apoyo de este programa.
Nicaragua ha tenido vasta experiencia en esta área. Son muchos los programas que en nuestro país existen relacionados con el papel de la mujer en todas las esferas de nuestra vida política, económica y social. Las mujeres en Nicaragua se han ganado su lugar en la lucha diaria de nuestro pueblo por su libertad, su desarrollo y sobre todo en la defensa de nuestra soberanía contra la agresión imperialista. Humildemente estamos abiertos a poner a disposición de la FAO y de todos los Estados Miembros toda nuestra experiencia en esta área tan valiosa como es la integración y el desarrollo de la mujer.
En cuanto al principio de información y consentimiento previo, nuestra Delegación ha revisado el contentivo del resultado de la consulta intergubernamental, y consideramos que la incorporación de este principio es un paso valioso para las medidas que hay que tomar en defensa de los intereses de los paises que utilizan o che importan este tipo de pesticldas. Los beneficios sobre la regulación del uso de plaguicidas son de sobra conocido, así como son de sobra conocidos los perjuicios que tiene este tipo de pestlcidas prohibidos en la salud humana y en el medio ambiente.
Apoyamos, por tanto, la promoción de la adopción del código internacional para la distribución y utilización de plaguicidas y creemos que la FAO debe intensificar las estrategias para la promoción de esta opción en todos los países, en colaboración con instancias regionales que operan, como en nuestro caso, en el área latinoamericana: el IICA, el OIRSA y otras organizaciones. Consideramos que la introducción del PIC viene a ser un salto importante, pues, en este tema tan sensible para la salud humana y el medio ambiente. Nuestra Delegación apoya las recomendaciones hechas para la introducción en el código internacional de conducta para la distribucion y utilización de plaguicidas, que se someterá a consideración del 25° período de sesiones de la Conferencia.
Consideramos nuevamente, para finalizar, que es Importante que la FAO, de acuerdo nuevamente con organizaciones regionales, dé todo el apoyo a los países para que puedan crear las estructuras pertinentes para la aplicación de esta medida y para los esfuerzos de divulgación de las metodologías de este nuevo principio, que vendrá a beneficiar la salud de la humanidad y del medio ambiente.
Mohamad Saleem KHAN (Pakistan): We would like to start by thanking Mr. Bonte-Friedheim and Mr. Brader for their respective presentations of the two reports. Pakistan had participated in the session of COAG as well as the intergovernmental consultations on PIC. My delegation would therefore not like to impinge too long on the time of the Council through a further lengthy intervention. We will try to confine ourselves to comments and views on some specific points relating to the two presentations.
First and foremost, we would like to congratulate Dr. Hamdi on the excellent manner in which he chaired the proceedings of the Committee on Agriculture during its tenth session. We hope we will continue to have the benefit of his experience and his competence in numerous other equally important sessions of FAO and the other agriculture-related organizations.
In our intervention during COAG on the implementation of the programme of work 1986-88 and the Summary Programme of Work and Budget for 1990-91 relating to Major Programme 2.1: Agriculture, while appreciating the efficient manner in which FAO had used the available resources to the benefit of Member Nations and endorsing the proposals for the 1990-91 Programme of Work and Budget, we had joined several other members in expressing our concern on the continuing financial crisis of FAO which has impaired its capacity to respond more adequately to the needs of the developing countries and millions of poor in these countries. The Director-General, in his statement before this august body of nations yesterday morning, highlighted some of the unavoidable cuts which FAO had to enforce on its activities to remain within the available resources. The forced reductions in assistance to AGRIS and CARIS member countries and centres and the suspension of publications like CERES, UNASYLVA, etc., are all unfortunate losses which could have been avoided. Improvements in the functioning of the Organization and ensuring economic use of resources is a necessary and continuing process for the health of any organization. We do not differ with this view. However, we can carry out our reviews and reforms while allowing the Organization to function normally in this period.
Institutions and programmes so carefully built up over a prolonged period of time are not always easy to restore if abruptly suspended. My delegation sincerely hopes that the process of review and possible reform set up during the last Conference would successfully culminate during the forthcoming Conference session, and we would be able to restore the capabilities of FAO by alleviating its present state of financial crisis.
I had recorded my delegation's endorsement of the proposals for the 1990-91 blennium Programme of Work and Budget, albeit with some hesitation. We did so, not because we felt that we were satisfied to prioritize in the situation of plenty, but rather being sensitive to the overall crunch on resources faced by the Organization. We would have liked to see a number of new initiatives and more emphasis on some of the ongoing programmes. However, we knew that these could not be perceived without additional funds. We therefore bowed to the realities and refrained from making any such suggestions. The issues, however, need to be looked into in their macro-perspective, and we would reserve our further comments for discussion under Agenda Item 14.
Within the ambit of the existing programme we welcome the prominence given to the Regional Study for Asia and the Pacific, the most populated region of the world with the largest sector of poverty and consequent vulnerability to food insecurity in the future. We also extend specific endorsement to the proposals relating to the strengthening of the anti-locust campaign, the campaigns against the screwworm and other livestock-related pests and diseases, to the improvement of marketing systems to the benefit of small farmers, the proposed technical assistance programmes for the formulation of food and nutrition policies, as well as to strengthen national food control systems, and the proposed plan to develop a world agricultural information centre.
Sir, water logging and salinity is a growing menace resulting from expanding irrigation networks in several regions of the world, particularly the Near East and South Asia. In Pakistan alone according to a June 1986 estimate, 21,886 million acres were assessed to be water logged and suffering from salinity. Every day we are losing several acres of good agricultural land to this twin menace. We are pained to note that despite the specific importance attached to this problem in para 58 of the Report, it could not find mention in the summarized issues identified in the preamble for the attention of the Council.
On the Preservation of Animal Genetic Resources we have no difficulty in supporting the proposed strategies and recommendations contained in the CQAG Report.
We agree that documentation and preservation programmes be developed concurrently to avoid the risk of losing valuable breeds. We support the proposals regarding the technical support for accurate surveys, genetic classifications and risk status assessments as well as those relating to census.
We welcome the proposal for a World Watch System. Pakistan has already agreed to join the FAO/APHCA Frozen Semen Bank for Asia being set up in Bangkok, and would also interestingly look forward to consider joining the proposed World Watch System. We recognize the importance of cryogenic storage methods and support for the setting up of regional animal gene banks as a safeguard arrangement to bank up national efforts, as well as a measure of support to countries who are not in a position to set up their own independent programmes. Such banks of course should be subjected to the necessary legal and animal health protocols. We fully agree with the recommendation that FAO should develop appropriate methodologies to assist, where desired and where appropriate, countries to establish live animal reserves. Likewise technical support and intensive training programmes are crucial for the success of the preservations programmes. We therefore stress a special emphasis on such activities. We recognize the importance of inter-agency cooperation in the venture as well as the need for immediate financial support, and endorse the proposals in this regard.
Mr. Chairman we have several items before us, and all items in the COAG's Report are highly important and merit considerable commenting. However, as I have earlier stated, we have had the benefit of participating in the COAG proceedings, and keeping this factor in view and the constraints of time, my delegation would like to record its general support for the proposals before us on Urbanization, Food Consumption Patterns, Nutrition, People's Participation in Agriculture and Rural Development, and the introduction of the concept of Prior Informed Consent in the Code of Conduct on the Distribution and Use of Pesticides.
In the case of the People's Participation Programme we would simply like to specifically stress special emphasis on the role of women in such programmes, keeping in view the country's specific social requirements.
We would also like to underline the significant role of elected local government institutions in local development activities through people participation.
Finally Mr. Chairman on the concept of PIC, while endorsing the consensus reached we tend to agree with those delegates who have stressed on a humane principle that non-participating importing countries should not be excluded from the purview of PIC. Further we would also like to see a clarification from the Secretariat on whether the proposed clause on PIC, read with other clauses of the Code of Conduct, covers exports of pesticides which have either not been registered or have been voluntarily withdrawn in the exporting country, and in case these do not stand so covered we would request FAO to review such pesticides with a view to their future inclusion within the ambit of the PIC clause and the Code of Conduct on distribution and use of pesticides. I thank you Mr. Chairman.
Pedro Agostino KANGA (Angola): Prenant la parole pour la première fols, je voudrais joindre ma voix aux délégations qui m'ont précédé pour exprimer, Monsieur le Président, ma satisfaction de vous voir à la direction des travaux de cette 95ème session du Conseil.
Je profite de cette occasion pour féliciter également les trois vice-présidente, ainsi que M. Brader et M. Bonte-Friedheim de la présentation très claire du document dont nous sommes saisis.
Je voudrais enfin remercier les délégués qui nous ont souhaité la bienvenue au Conseil.
Nous n'allons pas nous étendre sur l'analyse de ce document car nous l'avons fait durant la lOème session du COAG. Nous allons simplement nous borner à reprendre certains problèmes que nous avions posés lors de cette Session.
Comme cela a déjà été dit par d'autres, notamment par Monsieur l'Ambassadeur du Brésil, lors de la lOème session du COAG nous avions formulé quelques observations. Pardonnez-moi de revenir sur l'une d'elles dont la réponse ne nous a pas donné satisfaction. Il s'agit de l'établissement de centres sous-régionaux d'analyse et de formation des politiques nutritlonnelles en Afrique anglophone et francophone·
Il nous a été répondu que l'Afrique lusophone serait incluse dans le centre de l'Afrique francophone.
Nous voudrions savoir, Monsieur le Président, sur quels critères le Secrétariat s'était basé pour donner cette réponse, car le nombre de personnes parlant français dans les pays d'expression portugaise est insignifiant.
Bien que ces pays appartiennent à des sous-régions différentes: le Cap-Vert et la Guinée-Bissau sont en Afrique occidentale, Sao-Tomé et Principe en Afrique centrale, le Mozambique et l'Angola en Afrique australe, ces pays voudraient avoir un centre lusophone pour permettre une participation nombreuse de leurs ressortissants.
A cet égard, Monsieur le Président, nous suggérons que notre proposition figure dans le rapport du Conseil.
Pour terminer, nous appuyons les conclusions et recommandations de ce document, car ce dernier reflète clairement ce qui a été dit à la lOème session du COAG.
S'agissant de l'introduction de la clause de l'information et du consentement préalables, nous appuyons son inclusion dans le Code de conduite pour la distribution et l'utilisation des pesticides, ainsi que les amendements aux articles 2, 9.8.1 et 9.8.4.
Bashir EL MABROUK SAID (Libya)(original language Arabic): Thank you very much Mr. Chairman. Sir, allow me first of all on behalf of my delegation to congratulate Mr. Bonte-Friedheim most warmly and also Mr. Brader most warmly for the excellent introduction on both these very important items on our agenda.
Our delegation has already had an opportunity to put forward its comments on these two items at their relative sessions, and since we have already accepted the conclusions reached by the respective committees I can be really very brief.
As regards the implementation of the Programme of Work and Budget 1986-88, we feel that the implementation of this Programme of Work proves quite conclusively that FAO can manage with the resources but still meet the requirements of countries quite effectively, which shows how efficient FAO is and how hard working its staff. But this being said, we must not forget that the world financial crisis has had a very bad impact on the developing countries particularly in the area of training, and this is a field of crucial importance. This world financial crisis, if it goes on, will make it impossible for FAO to perform its task properly in eradicating hunger and malnutrition
in the world, so FAO must be given more resources. This is in regard to the operation of the Programme of Work 1986-88.
With regard to sub-programmes I would like to pay tribute here to the efforts made by FAO in their fight against the screw worm fly in spite of the shortage of resources, and we would like to appeal to all organizations and all donors who are able to do so, to help FAO so that sufficient funds may be available to carry forward with the control campaign against this pest and stop it spreading.
As regards the Summary Programme of Work and Budget for the 1990-91 blennium, my delegation will have an opportunity to make its comments when we consider the specific item on our agenda, so I will not go into this now.
Now as regards the preservation of animal genetic resources, document CL 95/9, we are very much aware of the importance of this sector for developing countries and the importance of such preservation of resources, and we would like to stress the role which FAO can play in this matter and we would like to take this opportunity to welcome the efforts being made by FAO in this activity.
Now as regards People's Participation in Agricultural and Rural Development, I would say that my delegation is convinced that as long as rural populations are not involved in the designing of plans and the taking of decisions, a policy imposed from above can only be a failure, and therefore we stress strongly the need to ensure balanced development with People's Participation so as to slow down the flight from the land to the cities, because that flight is due to wrong development policy.
Now to turn to the Code of Conduct on the Distribution and Use of Pesticides, and specifically the introduction of the Prior Informed Consent clause, I would like to agree with Mr. Brader in the sense that the Council should do what the COAG have done. In other words accept this clause by consensus-accept the introduction of that clause by consensus. Thank you very much, sir.
Bernd vοn SYDOW (Germany, Federal Republic of): The Tenth Session of COAG has, to our view, covered very relevant items and arrived at notable results. My delegation welcomes, for example, the discussions on the preservation of animal genetic resources and the proposed programmes. We agree to the proposal to establish regional gene banks and we welcome the development of training courses in this field, and of a world watch list of endangered animal breeds. We also recommend the establishment of a Global Animal Genetic Data Bank. In this context we renew our offer to expand the European data bank in Hanover for worldwide purposes.
Discussions on organization food consumption patterns and nutrition have shown that in general measures should be geared towarde the improvement of conditions in rural areas in order to reduce migration. With regard to urban areas, specific food and nutrition policies should be introduced to help those sections of people which are under or malnourished.
Mr. Chairman, my delegation welcomes the somehow unexpected great echo the item "People's Participation" received during the COAG session and also in today's session. We certainly welcome it if this subject gets further attention by FAO.
Mr. Chairman I am now coming to PIC. The Federal Republic of Germany has reiterated on several occasions its willingness to see to it that the Code of Conduct will be supplemented by a suitable prior informed consent principle.
My country holds the view that PIC is very useful for those countries which neither possess sufficient regulatory and control infrastructures, nor a procedure for the registration of pesticides. The introduction of the PIC principle should, however, not dispense importing countries from establishing such regulatory and control mechanisms. Such mechanisms are necessary to assess adequately whether specific pesticides can be imported or must even be imported for specific cases. They are also indispensable for proper use. PIC should thus not lead to the cessation of efforts to establish such regulatory and control mechanisms where they do not yet exist or where they are inadequate.
The proper formulation of a useful, practicable PIC principle is certainly a difficult task. The deliberations in FAO and UNEP have shown this clearly. There is no doubt that the application of the PIC principle will show that one or the other formulation in the Code of Conduct must be adjusted at a later date.
To sum up Mr. Chairman, let me state that the Federal Republic of Germany agrees to the amendments to the Code of Conduct relating to the introduction of the PIC principle which were formulated at previous sessions. We particularly support the formulations of the last COAG session. In this context we welcome the corrections announced by Mr. Brader at the beginning of this afternoon. We now suggest that the text before us should be submitted to the next Conference session for decision.
Mr. Chairman, we are not commenting on the Programme and Budgets since this will be dealt with separately. I should like however to point out that among the subjects proposed for the next COAG session, which are all very important, four seem in our view to have some preference. Those subjects are (a) agro-forestry, (b) agricultural credit, (c) home gardens and their contribution to nutrition, and (d) technological advances and their effects on agriculture in developing countries.
Paul R. BEYHEN (Australia): My delegation is happy to broadly endorse the COAG Report as a good reflection of the discussion at that meeting. Mr. Chairman, we continue to see a need for stronger prioritization in the Programme of Work and Budget process as mentioned by other delegations, notably the United Kingdom. We also continue to see a need for strengthened medium-term planning as mentioned by the Finnish delegation.
We endorse the remarks made by a number of delegations, including Canada, regarding the importance of training.
Mr. Chairman, with regard to the suggestions that paragraph 140 of the Report be modified, clarified or revolved in some way, my delegation has some misgivings and would hope that a clearer exposition of any proposals could be made before Council takes a position. At this stage, to be frank, my delegation is unclear of what is in mind, and in any case we may need to reserve the right to seek guidance from our authorities.
In lending our support to the COAG Report recommendations on urbanization, food consumption patterns and nutrition, we would stress the warning in paragraph 113 against the overregulation of the informal street vendor food sales industry. This sector plays an important role in urban nutrition levels, and we believe has been successful in many developing countries simply because of the relatively unrestricted nature of the industry.
Turning to PIC, Prior Informed Consent, Australia has supported information exchange between countries on pesticides issues. The proposed amendments to Articles 2 and 9 of the Code of Conduct endorsed by COAG to incorporate the principle of Prior Informed Consent addressed to complex issues associated with the principle. Australia supports the proposed amendments to Articles 2 and 9, which will give effect to the principle of Prior Informed Consent and adoption of the procedure for and guidelines on the operation of Prior Informed Consent.
We support other delegations that have called for avoidance of duplication of data bases regarding toxic chemicals.
Monica DEREGIBUS (Argentina): Atento a la riqueza de la documentación que se nos ha presentado y que habla por si sola de la fecunda labor que la FAO se propone continuar realizando en el proximo bienio, y la propia riqueza del debate a que hemos asistido, nos limitaremos a señalar sólo algunos aspectos puntuales que han sido evocados durante el mismo.
Quisiera aclarar, Sr. Presidente, que nuestra delegación se abstendrá de referirse en este momento al capitulo dedicado al Programa de Labores y Presupuesto del Informe del COAG, pues lo haremos en el punto pertinente del Programa. No debe entenderse, sin embargo con ello, que aceptamos los listados de prioridades dada por otras delegaciones.
Con relación a la introducción del Principio de Conducta para la distribución y utilización de plaguicidas, permítanos hacer nuestra la declaración del Sr. Embajador de Brasil y los comentarios de la delegación de Pakistán. También coincidimos con la propuesta formulación de las actividades que deben encararse con relación a los recursos zoogenéticos, como las describiera el Sr. Embajador De Medicis. Coincidimos con las Delegaciones de España, Canadá y otras, en la necesidad de continuar poniendo énfasis especial en programas de capacitación y extensión. En conexión con ello estimamos sumamente importante que se inicien durante el próximo bienio las labores de estudio de las organizaciones de base con los fondos fiduciarios gentilmente ofrecidos por Suiza, a fin de que se pueda mediante dicho estudio determinar cómo la FAO podría, de la manera más eficaz, ayudar a la efectiva participación de la población beneficiaria en los programas y proyectos de desarrollo agrícola y rural. Estimamos que dicho estudio podría tal vez estar terminado para la próxima sesión del COAG, y este podría entonces continuar analizando la problemática sobre bases más concretas y recomendar acciones específicas al Consejo y a la Conferencia que se reunirán en 1991.
En otro orden de cosas, Sr. Presidente, quisiéramos apoyar lo dicho por el Sr. Representante de Pakistán en relación con los problemas de encharcamiento y salinidad, dado que este es un grave
problema que reduce las tierras cultivables a ritmo alarmante. Ml propio país, Sr. Presidente, esta sujeto cada tanto a inundaciones cíclicas de grandes proporciones, que ocasionan las consecuencias señaladas por el Sr. Khan.
Por ultimo, Sr. Presidente, quisiéramos comentar brevemente sobre dos puntos incluidos en la intervención de la distinguida delegación del Reino Unido. El primero de ellos referido a las tareas de la Organización en lo relativo a la incorporación de la mujer en el desarrollo agrícola y rural. De conformidad con la Resolución 1/94 del Consejo, es evidente que hay acuerdo entre todos los miembros de dar alta prioridad a esta cuestión. Apoyamos su sugerencia de proporcionar recursos humanos adecuados en la Secretaría para esta tarea.
En segundo lugar, Sr. Presidente, nos unimos a su preocupación por la disminución de la asistencia de expertos de las capitales a las reuniones del COAG. Quisiéramos señalar al respecto, que ello no ha sucedido en los últimos tiempo sólo en el COAG y que ha sido patente el mismo fenómeno en los diversos grupos intergubernamentales que se han reunido en la primera mitad del año. La dificultad de los países en desarrollo de enviar a sus expertos a las reuniones de los grupos intergubernamentales, a las reuniones de los Comités y a las propia reunión del COAG, atenta claramente contra la calidad del resultado de los trabajos de estos órganos, de estos comités y de estos grupos. Nosotros sabemos de donde deriva esto. El mismo problema ocurre en prácticamente todos los países en desarrollo. Son los países que estén en Europa, o los países más adelantados, los que tienen posibilidad de acercar a sus delegaciones expertos competentes en las diversas materias que se traten. Por consiguiente, Sr. Presidente, nosotros creemos que ésta es una cuestión que el Consejo debería tratar de analizar en adelante para ver de encontrar soluciones adecuadas, como por ejemplo, que pudiera encontrarse la manera de financiar parte de los gastos de algunas reuniones de algunos expertos de las reglones en desarrollo.
Philippe PIOTET (France): La France approuve les conclusions du rapport du Comité de l’agriculture·
Ayant participé aux travaux de ce Comité, nous ne reviendrons pas en détail sur les différentes questions qui ont été déjà traitées lors de sa dernière session.
Ma délégation limitera donc son intervention à deux points principaux: d'une part les ressources génétiques animales, d'autre part l'introduction du principe de l'ICP dans le Code des pesticides.
En ce qui concerne tout d'abord les ressources génétiques animales, nous approuvons la priorité à réserver leur protection, comme l'a souligné à juste titre le Comité de l'agriculture.
Le parallèle fait avec les ressources phytogénétiques est intéressant puisqu'il s'agit dans les deux cas d'un même objectif: à savoir protéger les écosystèmes.
Toutefois les problèmes posés pour atteindre ces objectifs sont très différents sur les plans scientifiques et techniques.
Aussi ma délégation pense qu'avant toute décision concernant une éventuelle expansion du mandat de la Commission des ressources phytogénétiques, une consultation d'experts techniques est nécessaire, en étroite liaison avec le PNUE et le GCRAI.
J'en viens au Code des pesticides. La France a toujours soutenu ce Code. Depuis son adoption en 1985 et à la suite des débats de la dernière Conférence en novembre 1987, des progrès importants ont été accomplis tant dans la mise en oeuvre des dispositions existantes que dans la réflexion et la concertation indispensables avant toute révision.
Le Code concerne en effet un domaine très complexe, mettant en jeu de multiples partenaires dans des secteurs aussi divers que la santé, l'environnement, le développement agricole, les activités industrielles et le commerce international.
La France est très attachée au maintien d'un juste équilibre entre les responsabilités de tous les partenaires, comme elle est attachée au consensus que nous rappelait le Directeur général hier et qui a prévalu dans l'adoption du Code et devrait de la même façon prévaloir dans sa révision.
Des experts de mon pays ont participé activement aux réflexions engagées par le PNUE et la FAO qui aboutissent aujourd'hui à des propositions de révision du Code des pesticides.
La France appuie les modifications qui sont proposées notamment au paragrahe 11 du document CL/95/15. Nous pensons en effet que la FAO a un rôle important à jouer dans la concertation entre les Etats Membres pour que leurs décisions en matière d'ICP soit fondée sur des bases solides, scientifiquement établies et cohérentes avec les dispositions du Code.
En conclusion, la délégation française souhaiterait appeler l’attention du Comité sur deux points. Le premier concerne l’indispensable cohérence et la nécessaire complémentarité entre les travaux de la FAO et du PNUE. Nous nous félicitons á cet égard de ce que nous a indiqué ce matin M. Brader en matière de consultations prévues entre les deux organisations et nous pensons que c'est un excellent moyen que de mettre au point un memorandum qui définira les responsabilités respectives de la FAO et du PNUE dans ce domaine.
Le second point sur lequel je voudrais attirer l'attention concerne l'application effective du Code qui implique que les pays disposent non seulement d'un cadre réglementaire et administratif mais aussi de techniciens compétents et de laboratoires suffisamment équipés.
La France pour sa part est prête á renforcer la coopération déjà engagée dans ce domaine avec les pays qui se doteront des dispositifs administratifs et techniques pour la mise en oeuvre du Code et notamment de la clause de l'information et du consentement préalable.
Abdul Kuddus ABMAD (Malaysia): The delegation of Malaysia wishes to express its appreciation to Mr. Bonte-Friedheim for the excellent presentation of the report and to Mr. Brader for his report on the Prior Informed Consent.
As a member of the Committee and a participant in the deliberations of the Plenary we support the Report·
We review with concern the negative effects of the financial crisis in the major agricultural programmes. We therefore join other delegations in the often-repeated appeal that Members pay their contributions on time.
We wish to reiterate the importance of a stable resource position for FAO within the regular and field programmes to enable FAO to respond to the requirements of Member countries. The development of human resources is very important to agriculture, as in any other field, and we therefore urge the continuation of time priority to training and extension services. Similarly, the role played by TCP in the dissemination of knowledge and other activities can never be adequately stressed, and therefore should be allocated an appropriate provision.
To turn to some specific items, we are happy to note that a better balance is to be established between the livestock sector and other sectors in agriculture bearing in mind the importance of the sector in the life of small scale farmers. FAO's initiatives in the implementation of new biotechnologlcal methodology will make a valuable contribution to livestock production through its impact on animal breeding, disease control and the preservation of animal genetic resources.
Animal diseases remain a major inhibiting factor in animal production. My delegation, therefore, reiterates the importance of the control of foot and mouth disease, rinderpest, ticks and tick-borne diseases, and so forth. We congratulate FAO for the timely action taken against the appearance of the American screw-worm fly in North Africa and urge FAO to be constantly vigilant against such diseases of livestock or agricultural crops.
Issues related to environmental degradation deserve considerable attention. My delegation is happy to note that the Committee has focused on some of these issues. Attention on in-house and external training on environmental problems related to agricultural and rural development, the impact of development on the rural environment, environmental aspects of bio-technology, sustainable development on land tenure, and so forth, deserve proper attention.
A pleasant, conducive rural environment with improved living conditions will help to arrest the drift of the rural population into urban areas with the attending socio-economic probleme.
Turning to item 7, Prior Informed Consent, Malaysia fully supports the Code of Conduct on the Distribution and Use of Pesticides. The Malaysian Government, and in particular, the Pesticides Board, has held several discussions on the subject with members of the pesticide industries, research and academic institutions and environmental groups with the objective of implementing the provisions of the Code. Malaysia has a pesticide registration scheme whereby only pesticides that are registered under the Pesticides Act 1974 are permitted to be imported, manufactured, packed or repacked for sale in the country. The various guidelines provided by the FAO in particular have indeed assisted Malaysia in formulating an effective system for making available pesticides that are effective against the target pest while posing relatively little hazard to users of the pesticide, consumers of the treated produce and the environment as a whole.
Malaysia ls an active participant in the FAO's Asia/Pacific regional project for the implementation of the Code and will continue to work closely with the FAO on this matter. With regard to the principle of PIC, although Malaysia will not benefit as much as other developing countries, primarily due to its pesticide registration system, Malaysia will give its wholehearted support to the implementation of PIC in the form proposed.
Towards this end it must be pointed out that there should be a concerted effort from all quarters, namely, the industry, Member governments, environmental groups, agencies within the UN system and all other agencies concerned. Thus, there must be close cooperation and coordination among those agencies.
Malaysia supports the proposals as narrated in this paper on agenda item 7.
Finally, among the possible topics for future discussion in COAG my delegation would support the following topics: agro-forestry and agro-silvaculture, small scale agriculture, marketing and home gardens and their contribution to nutrition.
Alberto MURILLO MORANTES (Venezuela): Debemos reconocer la presentación hecha de los documentos, los cuales contienen muchos temas, pero seremos concretos. Debemos expresar nuestro apoyo a lo puntualizado en el párrafo 7 del documento. Lamentamos verdaderamente las repercusiones sufridas en la reducción del programa de la FAO, en particular en cuanto a la capacitación, en momentos de mayor necesidad para los países en desarrollo, y sobre todo en aquellos países que iniciaban, gracias a la acción de la FAO, el mejoramiento de sus condiciones de vida, por medio, entre otras vías, de sus esfuerzos hacia la autosuficiencia y la seguridad alimentaria.
Deseamos valemos de esta intervención para dar nuestro apoyo a los planteamientos hechos por el Delegado del Perú, en relación con su propuesta sobre la modificación del párrafo 140 del documento, a fin de permitir optimizar el uso de los recursos y evitar las duplicaciones. En este sentido, esperamos que este Consejo tome la decisión de que el grupo de trabajo de la Comisión de Recursos Fitogenéticos se reúna en octubre para analizar la evolución, incluyendo los recursos zootécnicos y lograr así un sistema global de diversidad biológica en la FAO. De esta manera, el Director General podrá presentar los resultados al Consejo de noviembre, al objeto de ser transmitidos a la Conferencia.
Deseamos apoyar igualmente la posición del Delegado de Suiza sobre la participación popular, fomentando actividades juveniles, a través, por ejemplo, de las cooperativas, y de esta manera ayudar a los países en vías de desarrollo a movilizar sus propios recursos.
Por último, Sr. Presidente, en cuanto a plaguicidas, deben regularse también aquellos que no están registrados, ya que muchas veces son éstos los más peligrosos.
Kyu IL JO (Korea, Republic of): My delegation would like to join other delegations in expressing our appreciation to the Assistant Director-General, Agriculture, for his excellent introduction this morning, as well as giving our compliments to the Chairmen and members of COAG and the Committee on Plant Genetic Resources.
With regard to the subjects mentioned in the report, we reviewed and scrutinized the programme during the sessions in which my delegation took part. Therefore, I do not have much to say in this regard. Along with other delegations who have spoken before me, the Korean delegation wishes to fully endorse the report without reservation. However, in this context, I would like to underline one important aspect, that we need to make an effort to seek ways and means for the practical use of the thoughts and recommendations presented in the report.
With regard to views on the various individual subjects, since many delegations have referred to these earlier, I will not touch on them now-it will save time.
E. Wayne DENNEY (United States of America): The United States endorses the report of the tenth session of COAG. While conflicting views were often espoused and different solutions offered to problems raised, the final report does a good job in capturing the flavour of the discussions.
We believe FAO has done a commendable job in re-evaluating programme priorities and manpower requirements in consultation with Member countries during recent periods of financial uncertainty. The Secretariat has also proposed a programme of work for the 1990/91 biennium that reflects priorities agreed to in the Special Joint Session of the Programme and Finance Committee in January.
Animal genetic resources was an agenda item that was enthusiastically received by all members. The experience of FAO in dealing with plant genetic resources should enable the Organization to develop a similar programme on the animal side. The United States believes that an Expert Consultation to facilitate a technical discussion by competent technicians is a logical first step to developing a sensible, manageable programme that can be carried out with the resources available. The United States does not object to the initial Working Group of the Commission on Plant Genetic Resources also exploring the matter, since many delegations and the Secretariat supported such a proposal during COAG. However, we fall to see the logic or usefulness of such an approach. The suggestion that the Working Group of the Commission on Plant Genetic Resources should meet in early October to facilitate reporting to Council and Conference is puzzling to us. Our understanding is that the Working Group only reports to the Commission. Clarification from the Secretariat would be useful.
We would prefer that the existing language of paragraph 140 be retained. It would be easy to reiterate a number of points which we made during COAG regarding programme proposals for the 1990/91 biennium. Instead, we will expand on the comments during the agenda item set aside for that purpose. However, we do associate ourselves with the comments made by the delegates of Japan, the United Kingdom, Canada and Australia, among others, on this subject.
The concern expressed by the delegate of Switzerland on the people's participation issue is also shared by our delegation. As noted by the Director-General yesterday and by Mr. Bonte-Friedheim in his introduction, a major result of COAG was that a Prior Informed Consent addition to the Pesticide Code was agreed to enable FAO and UNEΡ to incorporate similar language. The importance of continuing collaboration between FAO and UNEP will be essential in implementing PIC to other provisions of the Code and in avoiding substantial overlap in activities.
We thank Mr. Brader for his informative presentation on PIC. The United States is a firm supporter of measures to improve international availability of reliable Information on pesticides in order to assist in achieving their safer use in all countries. For this reason, the United States supports the International Code of Conduct on the Distribution and Use of Pesticides. We can agree to modalities to strengthen the Code that are administratively simple, preserve flexibility to accommodate various institutional means of implementation within each country, which are trade neutral and which reinforce basic elements of information exchange and development of assessment and decision-making capability in each country. Such modalities are contained in the recommendation of the Committee on Agriculture for incorporating the principle of Prior Informed Consent in the Pesticide Code. We support the COAG recommendations.
Of particular importance, the COAG recommendations on PIC are consistent with the decisions on PIC taken up by UNEP. Since FAO and UNEP plan to coordinate their work regarding PIC, it is essential that the two organlzatons adopt the same PIC procedures, which is what COAG recommended and what the United States fully supports. Continued cooperation between FAO and UNEP is essential if PIC is to be implemented successfully and without duplication, as I indicated earlier.
Regarding the proposal made a few minutes ago by the delegate of Brazil to delete the word "participating" from Article 2 in the proposed change to the Code, we believe the Code would be clearer and more precise with the word "participating" included. After all, how can this voluntary Code be applied to a country which does not want to participate in it?
In closing, the United States would like to follow up on a point made by Mr. Brader in his opening remarks when he referred to PIC as an interim measure. The United States agreed with Mr. Brader's assessment that many countries will need assistance to develop the capacity for assessment and decision-making that will be necessary to successfully implement PIC. We also recognize that many countries will need assistance to build the infrastructure and capacity needed to ensure the safe labelling, transportation, storage, formulation, use and disposal of pesticides in their countries. The United States, through its bilateral programmes, has provided and will continue to provide assistance to developing countries in performing assessments, making decisions on chemicals and improving infrastructure.
C. Srinivasa SASTRY (India): Before dealing with the content of the two documents relating to Agenda Items 6 and 7 now under consideration by the Council, we would like to thank and compliment the Assistant Director-General, Agriculture, Mr. Bonte-Friedheim, for presenting the 93 matters emerging from the tenth meeting of COAG briefly and succinctly, drawing the attention of Council to the salient aspects that merit special consideration. Similarly, Mr. Brader very clearly presented the proposals relating to the Code of Conduct and PIC. With his known penchant for going straight to the point, and his clarity of thought Mr. Brader made the complicated question of PIC for us very simple, elementary and obvious. Permit me to mention, Mr. Chairman, that in the wake of the results of the elections to the European Parliament, this subject seems to have become not only topical, but has also assumed some special importance and significance.
India participated in the tenth meeting of COAG, and was also a member of the Drafting Committee. On the complicated question of PIC the Chairman of COAG, the delegate from Egypt, appointed a small contact group, of which India was a member. India fully supports all the proposals contained in these two documents now under discussion. We would particularly draw to the attention of Council paragraph 24 of the COAG report, and emphasize the importance of controlling various emergencies animal diseases and more particularly, the American screwworm fly in North Africa, to which the Director-General referred yesterday in his statement.
While we support COAG's views on the proposals relating to the programmes and activities as presented in the Summary Programme of Work and Budget for the years 1990 and 1991, we would especially invite Council's attention to paragraph 64 of the report, which refers to the need for FAO to increase its efforts in the field of biotechnology. Biotechnology is an area and activity where, in the context of the widening gap between the north and the south, we would like to see allocation of more resources by FAO. In our view, this would be the only way by which the developing countries, which would not be able otherwise to make the necessary investments in terms of monetary, research and technical manpower resources, could be helped by FAO in concert with the CGIAR system to keep abreast of the latest developments in this frontier area of scientific endeavour. Biotechnology is also an area in which while the potential is immense, breathtaking advances are taking place mainly in the developing countries. What is particularly important, however, is that in biotechnology a progressively increasing role is being played by the private sector in developing countries. This is in marked contrast to the earlier agricultural research developments in the developed countries which took place either in the governmental sector or in the parastatal sector. We hope that FAO will strive to do its best to live up to the expectations of the developing countries in this crucial area of scientific achievement.
We endorse the COAG recommendations in paragraph 106 which refers in laudatory terms to the regional policy studies, whether in Africa or Latin America, and specially urge that a similar study be taken up for Asia and the Pacific Region in the biennium 1990-91.
Some delegates made reference to the TCP. We find that TCP comes up as a specific item before the Council in document CL 95/3 on the Summary Programme of Work and Budget for 1991 in pages 119 and 121. TCP has been discussed repeatedly in the governing bodies of FAO, and has also been evaluated. We suggest it might be more appropriate to deal with this aspect when Council considers the Summary Programme of Work and Budget under Agenda Item No. 14.
Similarly, some of the delegates during their interventions referred to the Summary Programme of Work and Budget for the 1990/91 blennium as relating to the activities covered by COAG. Certain views were expressed about the reorganization, restructuring and allocation of manpower and programme resources by FAO. As has been observed by the delegates of the United Kingdom and Canada, COAG is rightly perceived to be and regarded as a technical committee of FAO. That is why at the COAG meeting the chief Indian delegate was the Agriculture Commissioner of the Government of India. The issues relating to levels of funding and allocation of resources, staffing, etc., relating to the specific items considered by COAG in our view would appear to be common to many other programmes and activities. All these aspects are coming up before the Council separately with the recommendations of the Programme and Finance Committees. We submit that we would like to offer our commente on these aspects when the Summary Programme of Work and Budget is discussed by Council under Agenda Item 14.
On animal husbandry genetic resources, which is considered by COAG as one of the selected developmental problems, we especially endorse the increased role which COAG wants FAO to play, as indicated in paragraphs 127 and 128 of the report, namely, to develop a Worldwide List of endangered animal breeds, and update and publish it regularly and secondly, to develop documentation and preservation programmes concurrently. We also endorse the role of biotechnology as contained in paragraph 134 of the report. We suggest that FAO should play a leading role in extending the results of biotechnology to the developing countries, particularly in the area of stepping up milk yields through the administration of hormones to the available milk animal stock. This programme would have a significant impact on dairy production and also on nutrition levels in the developing countries.
However, we are disappointed to learn-as indicated by Mr. Bonte-Friedheim-that the extra-budgetary resources anticipated by COAG in paragraph 140 of the report are not yet forthcoming and there is little hope of anything being done on this behalf during the next blennium. We urge that FAO should not give up, but should continue its efforts in this direction, keeping in view the importance of this programme.
We endorse the proposal that the preservation of genetic resources, whether animal or plant, as far as possible should be integrated into a joint approach as recommended by COAG in paragraph 132.
On people's participation in agricultural and rural development, we strongly support the emphasis laid by COAG on giving more powers to local governments in decision-making (para. 144) and the importance of cooperatives in para. 145. May I submit to you, Mr. Chairman, and to the Council,
that in India the devolution and decentralization of powers to the local government institutions is now being given the highest priority. This is likely to be given a special sanctity by incorporating suitable provisions in our country's basic law, our written constitution, through an amendment to the Constitution. This amendment is expected to ensure that these local authorities would continue to be in a position and will be allowed to function freely, that elections are held regularly and the local authorities would exercise the powers and functions vested in them through the country's written Constitution.
For the next COAG, we would suggest that in addition to the integration of women in agriculture, two subjects be considered: (1) technology advances and their effects on the agricultural sector in developing countries, and (2) biotechnology.
On PIC we would support the consensus that was hammered out at the COAG to the efforts of the contact group set up by the Chairman of COAG to assist the Drafting Committee.
We are happy to see the key role being assigned to FAO in this area of activity. We note that this role is to be discharged in cooperation with UNEP, for which a joint division is being contemplated. As you are aware, the developing countries rightly constitute the main focus of PIC. The objective of PIC is to ensure that banned pesticides and pesticides with use restrictions as well as with restrictions in use are not dumped in the developing countries. It is well known that environmental concerns are seemingly more evident and are more widely voiced in the developed countries rather than in the developing countries. In contrast, FAO's presence is greater and more visible in the developing countries as compared to the developed countries. So are the programmes and activities of FAO concentrated in the developing countries. These facts, we submit, have some definite implications in terms of the relative roles to be assigned to FAO and UNEP in implementing PIC, whose main aim is to help the developing countries. We would urge that, consistent with the London Guidelines, the comparative advantages which FAO enjoys in the UN system should be kept in view while defining the roles and allocating and detailing the jobs and functions to be entrusted to UNEP and FAO in implementing the Code of Conduct and PIC. While we support the consensus on PIC, we expect that whatever developments take place between now and November 1989 will be kept in view and taken into consideration by the 25th Conference when the COAG deliberations developed on this issue go before the November 1989 Conference.
Ruyat WTRATHADJA (Indonesia): Speaking for the first time, allow me first of all to join the previous speakers in congratulating you, sir, for presiding over this important Council meeting as well as to the members of the bureau. I am fully confident that under your astute direction, our deliberations will be guided towards a most productive conclusion. My delegation also would like to congratulate the Vice-Chairmen that we elected yesterday. On behalf of the Indonesian Delegation, I should also like to convey our sincere gratitude and appreciation to the Director-General of FAO, Mr. Edouard Saouma, for his thought-provoking introductory statement, especially the elaboration on the important issues, namely the current world food situation, famine and malnutrition in the world today, the present situation of our Organization and the programme that will be taken up for next year. My delegation supports several of the items highlighted by the Director-General.
The Indonesian Delegation is very pleased to receive and have the opportunity to read carefully the report of the Committee on Agriculture. Our representative participated in the discussion and preparation of the report. Therefore, my delegation shares the same view of the Committee on most of the issues and supports the recommendations on priorities and strategies for achieving more benefits for member countries.
I would like to reiterate and emphasize some important points with related illustrations of our experience in agricultural development in Indonesia. The agricultural development experience in Indonesia has been very positive, especially in the last five years. The agricultural sector has grown at an average rate of 3.8 percent. The most important part of this success story was the extraordinary growth of rice production experienced between 1975 and 1984. At present, in addition to maintaining rice self-sufficiency, the efforts to develop the production of secondary food crops is a complementary effort to diversify basic foodstuffs in order to balance the supply of calorie intake, to make efficient use of land resources according to its agro-ecological zone as well as to strengthen food adequacy.
Allow me also to underline that to achieve firm agricultural development measures, a strong political commitment that should be reflected in manpower and budget allocation as well as policy decisions in favour of food and agricultural development is necessary. This commitment is required in order to be able to support technical programmes with adequate infrastructure development which is very much needed, such as fertilizer and pesticide industries, agricultural tools and machinery manufacturing, research and extension activities.
The financial institutions and distribution systems have to be complemented, if necessary, with subsidies at the initial stage and price support through floor and celling prices of main staple foods. Above all these measures, however, success would be determined by the farmers' and private sector's participation as well as effective and efficient management of agricultural development. In this connection, we support the Committee's recommendation to improve the strategies of education and training for agricultural development which include youth, women, small farmers and managers of agricultural development and farms. Redevelopment of human potentials is no doubt the core of development. In this case TCP would be very beneficial to developing countries and at least should be carried out at the same level as in the past.
My Government strongly supporte the farmers' initiative and would like to promote further farmers' participation in cooperative activities. In this respect we fully support the recommendations of the Committee on people's participation in agricultural and rural development.
One of the cornerstones of agricultural policy making in Indonesia has been the strong emphasis on equality in the application of policy instruments. This has resulted in a pricing mechanism where both agricultural input prices and commodity support prices have been maintained at the same levels throughout the country, regardless of the variations in the costs of marketing. As a consequence, there have been extra economic costs, but it has also resulted in other, perhaps more important, social and political benefits. There has also been a determined effort to develop the infrastructure on an equitable basis throughout the country.
The present Indonesian development plan is taking further steps to develop a solid base for continued progress in the development of the agricultural sector. Among the new initiatives is a strong effort in the procese of deregulation of various aspects of marketing, processing and transportation to promote more appropriate adjustment by way of natural market forces. Decentralized planning is also being encouraged in the belief that local officers are better able to judge the merit of various development programmes and strategies. Local level planning is being encouraged to design development programmes which create additional employment opportunities. In this connection, we hope that FAO would increase and improve assistance in agricultural policy analysis and recommend more effective and efficient policy options.
With regard to the Code of Conduct on the distribution and use of pesticides, my delegation fully supports the introduction of the Prior Informed Consent clause. The Indonesian Government has been very consistent in dealing with the use and distribution of dangerous chemicals. Strict regulation on the import of pesticides has been applied consistently. Therefore, the introduction of PIC would create no problem for implementation in my country.
Alejandro ORTIZ MARTINEZ (Mexico): Durante esta reunion del Comité se abordaron los temas siguientes: tercero: Ejecución del Programa de Labores 1986/88; cuarto: Resumen del Programa de Labores y Presupuesto para 1990-91; quinto: Urbanización, modalidades de consumo de alimentos y nutrición; sexto: Preservación de los Recursos Zoogenéticos; séptimo: Participación Popular en el Desarrollo Agrícola y Rural; octavo: Código de Conducta para la distribución y utilización de plaguicidas-Introducción de la cláusula del consentimiento previo.
Al respecto, cabe añadir que la delegación mexicana en esta reunión del Comité de Agricultura fue presidida por el Ciudadano Subsecretario de Agricultura, Ingeniero Sergio Reiz Osorlo y al efecto la Dirección General de Asuntos Internacionales le preparó una carpeta con notas sobre los distintos puntos del temarlo. Dichas notas también se remitieron a la Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores. En el informe breve que elaboró el Ingeniero Reiz Osorlo destaca lo siguiente: considera que fue de utilidad la participación de la delegación mexicana, tanto por el hecho de hacer sentir ante la comunidad internacional el interés de México de colaborar y obtener apoyo en los multiples problemas que afectan al sector agropecuario, como por hacerles ver algunos puntos de vista que consideramos importantes para nuestras relaciones en materia de política agrícola. Así, dentro del Programa, pudo insist irse en mayores programas de fertilización y apoyo a esa industria y en el apoyo para la realización de políticas interiores de regularización de riego y agricultura, con el fin de hacer eficientes los sistemas no integrados en el uso de agua. Persistentemente, se insistió en la necesidad de que la comunidad internacional apoye los objetivos nacionales de soberanía y seguridad alimentarla sin descuidar las necesidades planteadas por un esquema moderno de interdependencia de productos y ventajas comparativos. De igual forma se insistió en mantener enfoques integrados en el combate de plagas, así como un control preciso de las implicaciones del uso de plaguicidas y pesticidas.
En materia de investigación, se planteó fortalecer el impulso de la biotecnología, tanto en el sector agrícola como en el ganadero, así como reforzar, con la participación de las instituciones financieras, los programas para control de enfermedades que se están realizando en diversos países de la comunidad internacional, en particular el caso del gusano barrenador del ganado. Se subrayó la importancia de desarrollar y fortalecer mediante la infraestructura de investigación de los países en desarrollo y las actividades de transferencia de tecnología, las actividades del grupo consultivo sobre investigación agrícola internacional.
En esta reunión del Comité también participó el Dr. Moises Félix Ortiz, Director General de Sanidad Vegetal, cuya exposición sobre el código de conducta para plaguicidas se expone en la nota sobre el tema 7 de esta reunión del Consejo relativo al mismo tema.
No debemos olvidar que es la FAO la Organización de la comunidad internacional encargada de atender todoe los temas vinculados a la agricultura y la alimentación. Esto dicho, no debemos caer en el supuesto de que, siendo el Banco Mundial o el Fondo Monetario Internacional, por ejemplo, las instituciones financieras, sean ellas las que definan las políticas o programas en materia alimentarla o agrícola.
Finalmente, lamentamos que, al margen de lo argumentado y solicitado, con respecto al párrafo 140 del 10° COAG, éste no haya reflejado adecuadamente los debates y conclusiones a que se llegó sobre el tema, por lo cual en esta ocasión solicitamos que quede claramente establecido en este foro rector que es urgente que el Grupo de Trabajo de la Comisión de Recursos Fitogenéticos se reúna, para que en el próximo período de sesiones del Consejo se cuente con la opinión que ha merecido a dicho grupo la posibilidad de incluir en el sistema global de la FAO para Recursos Fitogenéticos, es decir, que tanto en el compromiso como en la comisión y en el Fondo Internacional se incluya la problemática de los recursos zoogenéticos como un primer paso conducente al establecimiento de un sistema global de diversidad biológica en el seno de la FAO.
Muchas gracias.
Amin ABDEL MALER (Liban) (langue originale arabe):Je voudrais tout d'abord féliciter le Dr Bonte-Friedheim ainsi que M. Brader pour leur présentation éclairée et concise des documents don’t nous sommes saisis.
Monsieur le Président, j'aimerais vous présenter un certain nombre de remarques en marge du sujet que nous discutons.
Tout d'abord, en ce qui concerne les ressources naturelles, nous approuvons les mesures proposées pour la gestion des exploitations ainsi que les activités touchant aux pesticides, aux réseaux d'irrigation. Pour ce qui est du programme des réformes, nous approuvons l'augmentation proposée aux crédits consacrés à la technologie et à la meilleure sélection des semences ainsi qu'à leur protection.
Pour ce qui est des ressources animales, nous appuyons les activités prévues dont il est fait mention dans le résumé du Projet de programme et budget pour le blennium 1990-91. Nous attachons le plus vif intérêt aux activités touchant à la lutte contre les épizooties et â la protection phytosanitaire.
J'aimerais maintenant attirer l'attention des responsables du Département des Ressources animales. Il ne s'agit pas d'une critique négative, bien au contraire, 11 s'agit d'une critique amicale et constructive. Je veux parler de la routine administrative en marge des activités nécessaires en cas d'urgence. Parfois, c'est long, trop long. Il appartient de raccourcir les délais notamment quand les éplzooties sont là et déciment les cheptels des pays en vole de développement.
J'évoque ce sujet parce que récemment la Syrie, un pays frère et limitrophe du Liban, a été frappée de plein fouet par un virus qui a décimé le cheptel. La Syrie a présenté une demande pour obtenir des experts de la FAO sur le terrain. Le Directeur général a répondu rapidement et favorablement. De même, le Dr Bonte-Friedheim a chargé son Département d'exécuter la demande. Toutefois, la routine administrative a fait qu'une grande partie du cheptel a été décimée. Nous avons beaucoup craint que ce virus passe la frontière syrienne et atteigne la frontière du Liban qui souffre déjà de cette guerre affreuse que nous connaissons tous.
J'adresse donc un appel au Secrétariat pour qu'il agisse rapidement et sacrifie quelque peu la sacro-sainte routine administrative puisqu'il s'agit d'urgence.
En ce qui concerne le point 2.1.4, la délégation du Liban approuve l'augmentation prévue de ce programme auquel nous attachons une haute priorité puisqu'il s'agit de l'augmentation de la production agricole.
Pour ce qui touche au développement rural, nous en sommes tout à fait partisans puisqu'il donne une impulsion à la socio-économie et à la formation dans les zones rurales.
Nous nous félicitons également de l'attention bienveillante accordée par le Conseil à la femme et son rôle, notamment, dans le développement rural. Nous mettons en exergue la nécessité de consacrer les crédits généraux pour la vulgarisation agricole ainsi que pour les crédits agricoles. Pour ce qui est du point 7, touchant au Code international de conduite, l'utilisation des pesticides ainsi
que le principe du PIC, la délégation du Liban approuve les recommandations du COAG. Nous espérons que le Conseil entérine ces mesures afin qu'elles soient adoptées définitivement au cours de la Conférence.
En ce qui concerne l'initiative adoptée à l'unanimité au cours de la réunion du Comité agricole, nous espérons qu'elle obtiendra un écho favorable également au Conseil; ainsi nous aurons servi une fols de plus la grande idée pour laquelle a été créée la FAO.
Horacio CARANDANG (Philippines): The Philippines' delegation endorses the Report of the COAG. The Philippines' delegation also endorses the proposals of the Code of Conduct on the Distribution and Use of Pesticides as contained in the document CL 95/15. These proposals are the result of a long process of consultation and represent the consensus of Member Nations on this issue.
I should however like to raise the issue relating to pesticides which are not registered or withdrawn. Some surveys show that some of these pesticides are among the most toxic pesticides which have been withdrawn precisely because of their high toxicity. There are no adequate provisions in the present Code to cover this category of pesticides.
The Philippines' delegation is of the view that the Secretariat should look into this matter and come with proposals to deal with the issue for the consideration of Member Countries at a future session of the COAG. Thank you very much Mr. Chairman.
Mme Anna Teresa FRITTELLI ANNIBALDI (Italie): Avant tout et très brièvement, la délégation de l'Italie remercie M. Bonte-Friedheim pour la brillante présentation du texte. On ne pouvait pas manquer de joindre notre voix pour appuyer le rapport du Comité de l'agriculture. On a suivi les travaux de ce Comité avec beaucoup d'intérêt et nous croyons avoir réellement fait du bon travail sur les excellente documente préparés par le Secrétariat.
Les résultats du COAG sont donc à notre avis très intéressants, très bons pour la poursuite de nos activités. Si vous le permettez, je voudrais très brièvement souligner simplement quelques points. Avant tout, je saisis l'occasion de revenir au problème de la formation et de la vulgarisation, dont on a parlé au cours des travaux du Comité pour rappeler aussi l'importance de l'approche culturelle de base. Nous nous rendons compte que des problèmes peuvent être plus urgents et que des lignes plus ciblées de formation peuvent s'Imposer. Mais nous pensons aussi à la préparation du terrain pour une meilleure récolte future et en disant cela nous pensons surtout aux problèmes de l'environnement et du développement durable.
Enfin, en ce qui concerne le Code de conduite pour les pesticides on a eu l'occasion de parler de l'importance du thème, du PIC, du consensus et de bonne volonté. On est heureux de pouvoir constater les progrès qu'on a faits sur ce chemin. Nous voudrions saisir cette occasion pour faire part du fait que l'association italienne qui relie la presque totalité des industries du secteur a appelé ses affiliés à l'application du Code et a même pourvu à ce que les principes du Code soient traduits et distribués pour l'usage et la ligne de conduite.
Gerard KIKLY (KEC): Thank you Mr. Chairman for giving me the opportunity of making some brief comments on behalf of the European Community. As the European Community participated in the work of COAG, and we can endorse the Report of that meeting as a good reflection of the COAG discussion, I will confine my remarks to the question of the introduction of the Prior Informed Consent clause into the Code of Conduct on the Distribution and Use of Pesticides.
The Council of the European Communities adopted in June 1988 a Regulation concerning export from and import into the Community of certain dangerous chemicals. Under this Regulation a notification procedure is introduced for the export of dangerous substances whereby the importing country is informed of the regulatory restrictions in the Community and the reasons for them. The dangerous substances covered are listed in the Regulation, as are those which are banned or severely restricted in the Community. More than half of the substances are pesticides; the others are industrial chemicals such as polychlorinated biphenyls and asbeetos.
The Council also adopted a Resolution at the same time as the Re.Lation, inviting the European Commission to examine the question of Prior Informed Consent in greater detail and to submit, where necessary, in the light of the information supplied by the Member States and developments in the relevant international bodies, an appropriate proposal with a view to the possible amending of the Community Regulation.
The European Community has actively participated in the discussions held at international level, particularly those conducted under the auspices of UNEP and FAO.
The Community recommends that the PIC procedure on the lines of the basic principles adopted at the governmental consultation in Rome in January 1989, be introduced into the International Code of Conduct on the Distribution and Use of Pesticides. This, we believe, would be a major step towards the better protection of the population and the environment in developing countries.
The introduction of "Prior Informed Consent" into the Code will widen the field of application and the effectiveness of the Code, and indeed will reinforce the responsibilities of the FAO in this domaine
In revising Article 9 of the Code of Conduct the European Community believes that account must be taken of the FAO's increased responsibilities and widened activities which should go further than a mere exchange of information between national authorities and international organizations.
I would like to thank you Mr. President for affording me the opportunity of presenting the views of the Community on this subject. Thank you.
Mrs Giuseppina PELA (Observer for the International Federation of Agricultural Producers): I am speaking on behalf not only of my organization, the International Federation of Agricultural Producers, but also on behalf of the whole group of the international NGO representatives residing in Rome. I will limit my remarks to the Report section on People's Participation.
The group of international NGOs who originally proposed this item for COAG discussion would like to express appreciation for the preparation and discussion of the item on People's Participation at the Tenth COAG Session. The lively debate and the interest shown by a great number of Member Governments augur well for the future cooperation between governments and NGOs at the national level as well as between FAO and international NGOs. For our part we stand ready to continue cooperation and contribute to the preparation of the Plan of Action.
The one point we would like to re-emphasize is that People's Participation should not be seen as a separate programme with additional costs if any. People's Participation is indeed a vital aspect of agricultural and rural development programmes. It is not a separate element or an alternative to projects dealing with basic needs. People's Participation must be an integral part of development projects so that it will not only ensure project sustainability but will also result in financial saving
People's Participation is indispensable if we really want to progress from development based on assistance to one based on self-reliance. Thank you Mr. Chairman.
L. BRADER (Director, Plant Production and Protection Division): At the Secretariat we are certainly extremely grateful for the strong support expressed by Council on the proposals developed to include the PIC clause into the Code, and also the guidelines for the operation of the Prior Informed Consent system. I would almost say we feel somewhat relieved that the tremendous amount of energy we have put into all these matters, together with many of the Member Countries and other organizations, seems gradually to bear fruitful results, and that of course for the benefit of keeping the rather unique consensus that existed on the Code of Conduct and gives it its strength. We are certainly very pleased with the strong support expressed.
I need to answer or comment on a number of remarks, particularly those related probably to collaboration with UNEP. Let me first of all say that when FAO started this work on the Code of Conduct, which is now about eight years ago, early 1981, one of the very first steps we took was to send an official letter to all heads of relevant agencies, not only UNEP but WHO, UNIDO, ILO, Unesco-all of those who have potential interest in this matter-to inform them that FAO was trying to start this process and we would seek for their collaboration, and ask if they would like to collaborate with FAO so that we could bring this to a good end, and without any exceptions these various agencies have endorsed these efforts right from the beginning and worked closely with us, and have recognized at the same time that FAO would serve as the lead agency in all this work on the Code of Conduct.
As I said in my opening statement, in fact in much detail I thought, we are now working with UNEP on the detailed arrangements for these cooperative efforts in an earlier discussion that we had on this matter. It is good to discuss cooperation, but one has to be absolutely sure that we know on what one wants to cooperate, and that is why I think we need to some extent the final result of the discussions before coming to definite arrangements. But the letters exchanged between the
Director-General of FAO and the Executive Secretary of UNEP have clearly stated the wish of both agencies to set up a joint programme on this matter with the specific purpose to avoid duplication, and to use each others capabilities to the best possible extent. Although it was not highlighted in these letters, it is quite clear nevertheless that each organization would of course pursue its particular mandate in the matters relating to all this work. I think we want to cooperate, but ve also want to make it very clear that the purpose of FAO and some of these matters related to pesticides are not always exactly the same as those of UNEP; they are complementary. We have different responsibilities. I think It was also highlighted by the intervention of the delegate from India and we should take them into account.
A very specific remark was made on the data base question; not setting up a new data base. It is one of the very first methods we have extensively discussed with the Secretariat of the International Register on Potentially Toxic Chemicals which has been set up by UNEP for some time now. It is quite clear from the earlier discussions that on the one hand the information in the Register itself is not covering all the needs of a data base of the data that is required for the Code of Conduct, so an additional or sub-data base has so to be set up, and in addition the number of countries that have so far provided information to the International Register is still very limited, but once again I can assure the Council that this will be a joint action to use the International Register fully in the most practical way.
Other specific items were raised. Two additional items in particular I have noted here. Brazil noted that the participating country was most probably not needed in Article 2 of the Code. Other countries noted that it was important to be in this Article. Let me try to explain why it is there. Already in the expert consultation we held in January 1988, we spent a lot of time in looking at the practical implementation of this Prior Informed Consent. Including it in the Code is an easy thing; operating it will be a rather difficult one, and while discussing this the example was taken of one country that was already implementing a Prior Informed Consent system around the export of pesticides, and it was quite clear from that experience that this system will be a failure if the developing importing countries in general are not actively participating in this scheme. It has to be an Interactive exercise, and that is also why, as a very first step of the guidelines as they have been proposed gradually, is the assurance that the country wants to participate in this matter. Now one can argue further does the word "participating" need to be here or not. That may be another matter, but this explains the reasons why the word "participating country" has been put in. If the countries do not participate actively we are afraid it may not lead to the desired results.
An important question was raised by Pakistan and also by the delegate of the Philippines, on what may happen with pesticides not registered or withdrawn. In the Code of course, the definition of "banned" now reads that "banned" means a pesticide for which all registered users have been prohibited by final government regulatory action, or for which all requests for registration or equivalent action for all users have, for health or environmental reasons, not been granted.
It would seem that most pesticides would fall under this definition of vans, but I fully agree with the comments made by the delegate of Pakistan and the delegate of the Philippines that this is a very important matter that we should follow as the Secretariat, and determine at the appropriate whether the current arrangements are adequate or whether additional proposals should be developed. Also, of course, these pesticides which apparently from the statement made during the Council can be quite an important part of the exports of countries, should be well covered under the scheme.
I think this covers most of the questions or points that were raised in the debate.
B.F. DUTIA (Assistant Director-Cenerai, Economic and Social Policy Department): Firstly I would like to thank the Members of the Council for giving their general support to the work programme of the Economic and Social Department. I have a few specific questions to answer, and I hope I will be able to do it briefly.
I would like to refer to observations by the Delegate of Peru concerning the need for assistance in carrying out agricultural census in his country. In this context I would like to clarify that FAO's assistance to countries in carrying out agricultural censuses is normally provided through census manuals and training through national demonstration centres. TCP assistance for preparatory work on agricultural censuses is also provided within the limit of available resources. In this context I would like to mention that FAO has organized three national demonstration centres for Latin America and the Caribbean, two of which were for the Spanish-speaking countries and one for the English-speaking countries. I am happy to report that in the most recent national demonstration centre which was held in Santiago, Chile, three statisticians from Peru were trained for three weeks on agricultural censuses last year.
A TCP project was also implemented at the request of the government of Peru in 1988, and its aim was to initiate the preparatory work for agricultural census. As a result, a plan for the census has been prepared and we are hoping to obtain donor support for implementing this plan. So far we have not been able to find a donor, but our efforts are continuing.
I would now like to refer to the question raised by the delegate of the United Kingdom regarding the staff resources for supporting the action plan for the Women in Development. I am glad to say that the staff resource constraints that existed during the current blennium are likely to be less severe in the next blennium. Two of the posts that had been frozen because of budgetary constraints in the Service supporting this Action Plan are now being filled and the Director-General's proposals for the Programme of Work and Budget for the next blennium include the establishment of one additional post in this Service.
The Delegate of the united Kingdom also referred to the data collection regarding the people's organizations. In this context I would like to clarify that what was intended is a flexible pragmatic approach in collecting information, and we do not intend to have a comprehensive, all-inclusive data base.
We also have taken note of the suggestion made by the Delegate of the United Kingdom concerning the case studies, with which we are in general agreement.
The delegate of Switzerland referred to the Plan of Action for People's Participation, and we have also noted the support that has been expressed by a large number of members who spoke to the people's participation programme.
The delegate of Switzerland wanted to know what exactly has been done after the COAG meeting in response to the suggestion for the Plan of Action. Not much time has elapsed since then; I counted that exactly 32 working days have passed since the closure of the COAG meeting. During that period we have started internal discussions on how to go about responding to the suggestion made by the Committee on Agriculture.
We are very appreciative of the offer made by Switzerland to provide support for developing a Plan of Action. Of course, we also have to take into account the fact that at the moment our resources, particularly the staff resources, are concentrated on the implementation of another very important Plan of Action, namely, the Plan of Action for Women in Development. We have to determine how best we can include this new activity that has been proposed. However, we are giving due consideration to it.
We have also noted in this context some suggestions made by the delegate of Argentina. We do hope that at some appropriate point in time we can get in touch with the representative of Switzerland in following up on these questions.
I would now like to turn to the specific question raised by the delegate of Angola about the sub-regional training centre for Africa, particularly for the Portuguese-speaking countries of Africa. We have noted his comments with great care, and we will certainly explore the possibility of finding out what facilities are available at the moment in the Portuguese speaking countries in Africa that would help in the establishment of training centres for the Portuguese-speaking countries.
I would like to mention that provision which has been made in the 1991 budget proposals even for the Francophone and Anglophone countries is only to undertake exploratory work for establishing such sub-regional training centres. The actual establishment of the training centre would depend on the availability of extra budgetary funds. But we do hope to be able to accommodate within the next blennium the possibility of doing similar exploratory work for the Portuguese-speaking countries.
In the meantime we would also consider the possibility of repeating the initiative that was taken three years ago to have a core of Portuguese-speaking medium-term professionals trained in some Brazilian university and in this context we noted with appreciation the observations made by the Ambassador of Brazil.
Lastly, we have also noted that several delegations have referred to the request for undertaking a study on Asia and the Pacific region which appears in paragraph 106 of the Report of the Committee on Agriculture. Certainly we will give consideration to that proposal, as has been pointed out in the Committee Report, but we would like to mention that Asia and the Pacific region is a very important region. It is also a very complex region, if I may say so. It is complex in that there is a great diversity of conditions prevailing in that region and the approach to the study has to be thought through very carefully so that we are able to address the issues that are of particular concern to the countries of that region.
CH. BONTE-FRIKDHEIM (Assistant Director-General, Agriculture Department): I would like to start by adding three points to what Mr. Brader has said on PIC.
Firstly, the comment was made that the document on PIC was late. The document on PIC for agenda item 7 was just a duplication of what is found in the COAG Report. We hope that those delegations that have approved the COAG Report will have no difficulty approving the PIC report which is an extract of the COAG Report. Secondly, the suggestion has been made about whether it would be good to have only one contact point between UNEP and FAO with regard to receipt of information. That sounds good in theory; in practice, there are a large number of developing counties that have either no contact points in their countries and depend on the contact through the Minister of Agriculture or Minister of Environment for UNEP, or they have one contact point for importation of all chemicals, or they have two contact points, one for the importation of chemicals for industry and one for agricultural chemicals. I think it would be very bad to force those countries that have an agriculture register for chemicals to suddenly start writing to UNEP on matters they previously brought to FAO. In other words, I do not think that the costs of having UNEP as well as FAO as a contact point for the countries are so big that they cannot be borne. I think it is much more important to have a contact point for all countries than to force our system onto them.
My third point is that, while in the introduction Mr. Brader acknowledged gratefully the support of Japan in the Far East, I would like to acknowledge the offered support of France in the implementation of the Code of Conduct, and also of PIC, in the future. I hope that other bilateral donors will make similar offers.
The COAG Report was well received in Council, which was to be expected as we had a very good discussion in COAG.
The delegate of Peru made a proposal with regard to an amendment to the COAG Report in paragraph 140. Strictly speaking, legally speaking, this is not possible. The COAG Report was adopted by COAG and cannot be amended by other bodies. However, the Council has a prerogative to reflect in its own report the wishes of a large number of delegations to proceed differently from that indicated in paragaraph 140 of the COAG Report. The Secretariat's position on the proposal made by Peru and supported by many other delegations is as follows: as I have stated in my introduction, a technical consultation will be held at the beginning of September in Rome. It is hoped that many of the world's specialists in the technical fields related to animal genetic resources will be available and that extra-budgetary resources will be offered for the important consultation. Many of the developed countries from which some of these specialists come will be able to pay their way to and from Rome.
Secondly, subject to availability of funds, the Director-General will invite the Working Group of the Commission on Plant and Genetic Resources to meet in October to review the outcome of the technical consultation with a view to the possibility of expanding the FAO Global System of Plant Genetic Resources to Include animal genetic resources. In this connection I should indicate that the cost of such a meeting could conceivably amount to about $50,000 · Extra budgetary resources for this meeting would be welcome.
Thirdly, the Director-General will report to the Council and Conference in November on progress made-I think this is the answer to the question from the United States-and he is free to be advised by any group on any meeting held in FAO.
Fourthly, although the Director-General agrees with Member countries about the importance of animal genetic resources and the need to take urgent action not to lose the momentum, it seems advisable to be guarded about main technical, legal and coordinating issues. These must be reviewed and solutions must be found. That can hardly be possible by November.
In this context, three issues are of considerable concern to the Secretariat: (a) the need for the widest possible consensus by Member countries on action by FAO in the field of animal genetic resources; (b) decisions on how far fishery resources and wildlife resouces are to be included; (c) coordination with action by other international organizations. In this respect I refer to a resolution by the UNEP Governing Council in May this year on the preparation for an International legal instrument for biological diversity of the planet. I have the resolution in front of me; it talks very little of FAO, and sometimes I wonder if those who tell us that we should always coordinate with UNEP, should talk about cooperation with FAO when they have a meeting. It states that the Governing Council is aware of the establishment of the Commission on Plant and Genetic Resources; it does not say a word about the work done in the last meeting or in other meetings. It requests the Executive Director of UNEP to take certain action and to report on the progress on this to the Preparatory Committee for the 1992 Conference on Environment and Development. FAO, of course, will report to its governing body, the Council, at the next Council meeting on what the Governing Council of UNEP has stated It wants to do, hopefully with FAO.
There are a number of points that have been made, which are very tempting for me to talk about. On behalf of the Secretary, I shall pick out one or two and then answer one or two questions.
Firstly, I think that the representative of Peru reminded us of the sovereign rights of countries to administer and to develop their natural resources. The need for sustainabillty and environmental concerns are recognized by all but no solutions have yet been indicated as to how these concerns can be translated into alternative forms of development without burdening the poor countries further or diverting scarce resources from development to conservation purposes, in fact, imposing only another condìtlonallty on development. I think we have tried to say that in the COAG Report but I think it has not come out as clearly as stated by the representative of Peru.
Czechoslovakia and others have urged close cooperation with international organizations and resource institutions on environmental aspects. The delegate of Czechoslovakia said that FAO should work closely with UNEP and regional commissions. I would like to report that FAO has just co-sponsored together with UNEP and the Regional Commission for Africa an environmental conference held from 12 to 16 June in Rampala. I confirm here that environmental aspects, as well as sustainabillty questions, are taken and have been taken into account in all of our relative sub-programmes of the major programme, 2.1, Agriculture. I would like to acknowledge with thanks the offer of the Czechoslovakian Deputy Minister of assistance in having training courses in developing countries and facilities in his own country to train people.
There was a specific question on unconvertible currencies. FAO has made several moves towards UNDP, especially in emergency cases, to use unconvertible currency held by UNDP in many countries. The governing Council of UNDP has decided these unconvertible currencies can only be used as part of the IPF. Perhaps it would be a good thing if those countries who are members of this Council and also members of the governing Council of UNDP could put pressure on to change this. To give one example, we tried to facilitate the import of fertilizers to countries where we could see there was great need and food shortages, but we were told that this was impossible because of the governing Council of the UNDP. So the answer here unfortunately is that it is not possible to use those currencies for any purpose outside the IPF.
Two more points-first of all, the delegate of the united Kingdom warned us about biotechnology, saying that we should not regard it as a panacea, as an aspirin for all the diseases which we might have. The Secretariat confirms this. It is grateful for the answer that the delegate of India has given on this one, but in the Secretariat we are concerned that the scientific advances made in biotechnology do not by-pass the developing countries, that the developing countries are not excluded, that they should benefit and should not pay at the end for advances made in science and technology which are being exploited by others. We think this is one of our functions.
Secondly, the proposal has been made-or a question was asked-on the subject of agro-forestry and livestock production in arid and semi-arid areas. In 1987 COAG talked about arid area development, and this study will be the follow-up. Most likely it will be undertaken in the next two years.
Finally, there was a specific question from the delegate of the Lebanon. I can answer that the consultant is in the Near East Region to look at the animal disease problem.
LE PRESIDENT: Je remercie le Dr Bonte-Friedheim pour sa contribution.
Nous sommes arrivés a la fin de la discussion d'un point très important de l'ordre du jour et permettez-moi d'y participer à mon tour.
A la fin de nos débats, je crois me faire votre interprète en disant que le Conseil se félicite du travail remarquable réalisé par le COAG, qui a donné lieu à un consensus sur des questions d'importance particulière telles que l'ICP, et considère que la mise en place d'une stratégie de protection et de préservation des ressources génétiques animales revêt une importance considérable. Il demande donc au Secrétariat de réfléchir aux voles et moyens propres pour intégrer cette stratégie dans l'ensemble des réflexions sur les ressources génétiques de la FAO.
Le Conseil soutient par ailleurs toute mesure propre è renforcer la participation des populations dans le développement rural, comme cela a été souligné par de nombreux délégués, et rappelle l'Importance, qui a été déjà rappelée dans la résolution 1.94, du rôle des femmes dans le développement·
Je crois pouvoir dire que le Conseil a noté cependant avec préoccupation que l'action de la FAO en matière de formation est en baisse en raison des contraintes budgétaires. Le Conseil lance donc un-appel pour qu'on puisse donner à la formation l'importance qu'elle requiert pour les pays en voie de développement·
Il serait bon également que le Conseil puisse dans son rapport appuyer l'appel du COAG pour que tous les pays membres versent ponctuellement leur contribution afin d'éviter les aspects négatifs que l'on a pu constater dans le programme de la FAO par suite de la crise financière.
En ce qui concerne l'introduction de la clause de l'information et du consentement préalables dans le code de conduite pour l'utilisation et la distribution des engrais, je crois que le Conseil se félicite du consensus obtenu. Il considère qu'il s'agit d'un grand pas dans la bonne direction, d'autant que cette question est débattue depuis plus de cinq ans. C'est donc un acquis très important pour tous. Le fait d'insérer cette question dans le code de conduite ne veut pas dire que cela est appliqué ipso facto. Le Conseil a noté avec intérêt la disponibilité de certains pays développés pour fournir une assistance appropriée aux pays en vole de développement et importateurs qui voudraient mettre rapidement en place le dispositif de l'ICP.
Enfin, on pourra dire qu'une autre condition de succès de la réalisation de cette procédure d'ICP est de pousser plus avant la coordination entre la FAO et le PNUE, ce qui permettra d'assurer le plein succès de cette importante question.
En résumé, le Conseil approuve à l'unanimité le rapport de la lOème session du COAG et félicite celui-ci pour le remarquable travail accompli.
Nous pouvons considérer que les points 6 et 7 de l'ordre du jour sont épuisés. Je propose une interruption de dix minutes et que le Vice-Président Roberto E.E. Dalton vienne ensuite présider notre Conseil pour l'examen du point No 8 de l'ordre du jour relatif aux ressources phytogénétiques.
The meeting was suspended from 17.15 to 17.40 hours.
La séance est suspendue de 17 h 15 è 17 h 40
Se suspende la sesión de las 17.15 a las 17.40 horas.
Roberto E.E. Dalton, Vice Chairman of the Council, took the chair.
Roberto E.E.Dalton, Vice-Président du Conseil, assume la présidence.
Ocupa la presidencia Roberto E.E. Dalton, Vicepresidente del Consejo.
EL PRESIDENTE: Comenzamos la sesión del Consejo para iniciar la consideración del tema 8 de nuestra agenda: Informe del tercer período de sesiones de la Comisión de Recursos Fitogenétlcos. El Sr. Bonte-Freidheim, Subdirector General del Departamento de Agricultura hará la presentación del tema.
CH. BOffTE-FRIKDHEIM (Assistant Director-General, Agricoltore Department): Before I introduce the Agenda Item, may I just make one correction. I think I said before that the expert consultation on the preservation of animal genetic resources will be held at the beginning of September. In fact, it is at the end of September. The proposed dates are 26 to 28 September 1989.
Mr Chairman, it is my pleasure to introduce to you under Agenda Item 8 the report of the Third Session of the Commission on Plant Genetic Resources. The Commission met in Rome from 17-20 April 1989. Just allow me a word of background. The 85th Session of the FAO Council in November 1983 established the Commission and requested in the Resolution the Commission to submit to the Director-General the report of its activities and recommendations. Accordingly, the Director-General is requested to bring to the attention of the Conference through the Council any recommendations adopted by the Commission which have policy implications or which affect the programme or finances of the Organization.
It is possible-it may be stronger to say it is unlikely-that the Third Session of the Commission on Plant Genetic Resources will prove to have been one of the most important FAO technical meetings of member countries in the present bienni urn. Most recommendations of the meeting are likely to influence for many years to come policies, programmes and activities of FAO and of other international organizations, of NGOs as well as of member countries. It is for this reason that the Director-General decided to present to Council not only a summary of major conclusions and recommendations of the Third Session of the Commission, but to submit the full report of the meeting.
The Third Session of the Commission, chaired by Mr. Carandang of the Philippines was preceded by a meeting of the Commission's Working Group. The Working Group also met for a special session during the Commission meeting in order to find a compromise on a specific text.
The Commission at present has a total membership of 96 countries. In addition another 23 member countries indicated their adherence to the International Undertaking but so far have not become members of the Commission. The Third Session was attended by 63 Member Nations. In addition, 13 other Member Nations of FAO attended as observers.
The agenda of the Third Session dealt with a number of important issues all duly reported in document CL 95/14 in front of you. I would like to highlight in this introduction some of the major conclusions and recommendations.
The Commission agreed on the importance of the Global System on Plant Genetic Resources developed by FAO, consisting of the Undertaking, the Commission and the International Fund.
Regarding the wider acceptability of the system, specifically the wider acceptance of or adherence to the Undertaking, the Commission approved the text for an Agreed Interpretation of the Undertaking. Furthermore the Commission also adopted a draft resolution defining and endorsing the concept of farmers' rights. Tou will find both texts in paragraphs 57 and 59 of the report. It is proposed that both paragraphs be approved by Council, be forwarded to Conference and after approval by Conference that they become annexes to the International Undertaking. Let me repeat: it is the proposal of the Secretariat that both paragraphs, once approved by Council, be forwarded to Conference for approval and that they become annexes to the International Undertaking.
The aim of the Undertaking is to strengthen the conservation, use and availability of germplasm. The Commission has endorsed mechanisms recognizing and legitimizing the rights to compensation of both germplasm donors and donors of funds and technology. This has been accomplished through the simultaneous and parallel recognition of plant breeders' rights and farmers' rights. The agreed interpretation is intended to lay the bases for an equitable, lasting, global system, and thereby to facilitate the withdrawal of reservations which countries have made with regard to the International Undertaking, and to secure adherence of others.
Farmers' rights mean rights arising from the past, present and future contributions of farmers in conserving, improving and making available plant genetic resources, particularly those in the centres of origin or diversity. These rights, according to the Commission, are vested in the International Community, as trustees for present and future generations of farmers, for the purpose of ensuring full benefits to farmers, and to support the continuation of their contributions, as well as the attainment of the overall purposes of the International Undertaking.
This could be achieved through appropriate support to the International Fund on Plant Genetic Resources already established by FAO. The adhering governments which have benefitted from the use of germplasm may contribute to the Fund, on a basis to be agreed upon. The Fund should be used to support plant genetic conservation, management and use, particularly within the developing countries. Emphasis will be placed on training and strengthening national capabilities.
In addition, the Commission made a large number of proposals and recommendations for the future work of the FAO Secretariat. Most of these proposals will cover more than one biennium. May I highlight the following:
(1) preparation of a report on the state of the world's plant genetic resources, based mainly on the establishment of a comprehensive global information system;
(2) arrangements with national institutions including governments to put their base collections with the network under the auspices of FAO;
(3) the development of a code of conduct on biotechnology in relation to plant genetic resources;
(4) the development of a code of conduct for International collectors of germplasm; and
(5) the establishment of an Advisory Committee, including representatives from intergovernmental, International, regional and non-governmental organizations involved in plant genetic resources work in order to foster dialogue between the various organizations, to harmonize responsibilities and to promote coordination.
The proposed Code of Conduct on biotechnology needs a few introductory remarks. The Commission discussed the great potential of new biotechnologies for conservation and use of plant genetic resources including their technical, economical, social, ethical, legal and political implications for the internationl Undertaking and the Commission expressed concern about possible negative consequences. Taking all these into account, the Commission requested FAO, in cooperation with relevant organizations, to continue to monitor actively the evolving new biotechnologies, in line with the International Undertaking. The Commission also requested FAO to develop a code of conduct for biotechnology, as it affects conservation and use of plant genetic resources. The Commission felt strongly that developing countries should be able to draw the full benefits from the new biotechnologies·
Finally, the Commission discussed the activities of the IBPGR and expressed its surprise at the sudden decision of the IBPGR Board to relocate its Headquarters from FAO Rome to Copenhagen. The Commission recommended that a Memorandum of Understanding be prepared, taking into account the objectives of the International Undertaking on Plant Genetic Resources, covering the proper arrangements for continued effective cooperation between IBPGR and FAO. The arrangements should also include the relationship between the Commission of Plant Genetic Resources and the IBPGR. The Commission furthermore proposed that its Working Group should monitor progress.
The FAO Secretariat has indicated its readiness for a dialogue on the future of the IBPGR.
The long list of activities proposed by the Commission in April, as I said, cannot all be financed from Regular Porgramme resources foreseen for the next biennium. Yet there is little doubt about the importance of most of the activities proposed-I would say of all of the activities proposed. The Secretariat therefore appeals to donor governments, to financing institutions, to industry and others to manifest their concern for plant genetic resources by contributing extra-budgetary resources to these activities which I have outlined before and which all have been strongly recommended for action by the Third Session of the Commission on Plant Genetic Resources and that you find in the report of that session.
EL PRESIDENTE: La lista de oradores esta abierta y consulto a las Delegaciones.
Alejandro ORTIZ KARTIHEZ (Mexico): Nos complace verle presidir nuestras reuniones. La Delegación mexicana, como la argentina, expresa por mi conducto la gran satisfacción por los resultados obtenidos en la tercera reunión de la Comisión de Recursos Fitogenétieos, conocidos como un triunfo de la moderación, compromiso y espíritu de cooperación internacional. La importancia de los recursos fitogenéticos es indiscutible para el desarrollo agrícola y forestal sostenidos y viables, la seguridad alimentaria y la conservación del medio ambiente.
Se ha reconocido que, en materia de recursos fitogenéticos, ningún pais es autosuficiente, y, por lo tanto, la cooperación internacional es de vital importancia. Todos los países son donantes y receptores a la vez. De ahí, la importancia del papel de la FAO en la materia, ya que, siendo el organismo responsable de la alimentación y de la agricultura y teniendo una labor pionera en la <materia desde 1947, cuenta, ademas de la capacidad y la experiencia, con la visión que la integración requiere.
Todo ello ha permitido evolucionar en forma rápida, conforme la voluntad política de sus Estados Miembros le ha permitido, en la decisión de llegar al sistema global de la FAO desarrollado a partir de 1983, que comprende: el compromiso internacional que le da el marco legal; la Comisión, que es el foro intergubernamental, y la creación del Fondo Internacional, como mecanismo financiero que viene a consolidarse en esta tercera reunión, como lo concluye el informe, al que México da su pleno apoyo.
Deseamos, por lo mismo, destacar ese apoyo a las siguientes decisiones emanadas de esta reunión: al texto de la interpretación concertada del compromiso y a la resolución sobre los derechos del agricultor incluidos en los párrafos 57 al 59; apoyamos asimismo la publicación periódica sobre el estado mundial de los recursos fitogenéticos, a fin de que sirva de base a las discusiones de la Comisión; apoyamos el establecimiento del sistema global de información y del sistema de alerta rapida, según el artículo 7 del compromiso, incluidos en el párrafo 16.
Reiteramos nuestro apoyo al establecimiento de la red de colecciones base, bajo los auspicios o jurisdicción de la FAO, según el artículo 7 del compromiso. En ese sentido, mi Delegación expresa su satisfacción por los progresos realizados y por las ofertas de numerosos países de poner sus bancos de germoplasma en dicha red y/o el ofrecimiento de espacio y germoplasma para colecciones internacionales, conforme se indica en los párrafos 38 al 46.
De la misma manera, apoyamos el papel de la Comisión para desarrollar acuerdos internacionales para conservación y uso de recursos fitogenétlcos, teniendo en cuenta implicaciones técnicas, económicas, sociales, legales, políticas y éticas. Apoyamos en este sentido la recomendación de la Comisión de preparar, primero, un código de conducta para colectores internacionales de germoplasma (párrafo 21), y, segundo, un código de conducta para biotecnología (párrafo 54).
Respecto al tema de las nuevas biotecnologías que estén transformando el panorama de la producción agrícola con repercusiones para los países en desarrollo, apoyamos firmemente la función de monitoree de la Comisión sobre el desarrollo en este terreno de biotecnologías y las implicaciones de las mismas para nuestros países, conforme a lo convenido en los párrafos 47 a 53.
Asimismo, damos nuestro apoyo a los trabajos de la FAO para la conservación y uso de los recursos genéticos "in situ" y al establecimiento de una red de áreas de conservación "in situ" que incluya plantas y animales (párrafo 36). Entendemos esto como una forma de proteger los ecosistemas en los que no se pueden separar los recursos genéticos vegetales y animales. En este sentido, expresamos la necesidad de ampliar el sistema global de la FAO para recursos genéticos vegetales, para cubrir también los animales y la conveniencia de que se amplíe hasta cubrir toda la diversidad biológica de interés actual o potencial para la agricultura, el uso forestal, en la ganadería y en la pesca.
Consideramos que el tema es complejo y requiere la mayor claridad y concertación, porque no todos los paises están en posibilidad de contar o enviar especialistas gubernamentales en la materia. Por ello expresamos nuestra preocupación por la proliferación de iniciativas en el campo de conservación y uso de recursos fitogenétlcos y diversidad biológica en foros tales como el PNUMA, el UICN y otros que en general puede llevar a duplicación de actividades.
Por ello, solicitamos al Secretariado que mantenga informadas a las instituciones de los Gobiernos de la FAO sobre estos desarrollos. En función de esto, solicitamos que el Consejo haga suyas las recomendaciones de la Comisión para estudiar: primero, el establecimiento de un Comité asesor de la Comisión, que incluya a las principales organizaciones involucradas en estas actividades conforme lo expresado en los párrafos 19 y 20; segundo, la forma e implicaciones financieras de un plan de acción sobre recursos fitogenétlcos que se prepare y lleve a cabo en cooperación con dichas organizaciones (párrafo 17). Queremos resaltar que tanto este Comité asesor como el plan de acción estarian orientados a fomentar el diálogo, armonizar responsabilidades y asegurar cooperación entre todas estas organizaciones.
Coincidimos en la expresión de preocupación por el hecho de que, a pesar de todas las señales de diálogo y buena voluntad de compiementariedad de las instituciones, de forma unilateral y en cierta manera abrupta, el CIRF haya decidido abandonar la FAO. Si bien la acción y función de las organizaciones no gubernamentales puede ser muy positiva y deseable en una materia tan delicada que tiene, además, implicaciones legales, es natural cuestionar que una organización como el CIRF pueda llevar a cabo, fuera del sistema de las Naciones Unidas, actividades que requieren libre acceso a todos los países y conllevan responsabilidades mundiales en un tema de vital importancia para el desarrollo agrícola, la seguridad alimentaria y la estabilidad del medio ambiente. Por ello hemos reiterado la importancia de la compiementariedad, ya que inclusive fuera del marco de la FAO el CIRF podría encontrar dificultades para colectar en muchos países.
Todos los paises son donantes del CIRF, unos de fondos y otros de germoplasma, y es por ello que el CIRF debe responder a todos ellos de sus actividades, a través del unico foro intergubernamental en recursos fitogenétlcos, que es la Comisión. Esto es muy importante, ya que el reconocimiento del papel de donantes de germoplasma de los países en vías de desarrollo debe tener profundas implicaciones en la manera en la que el CIRF establezca prioridades y apruebe sus programas e informes. Después de todo, los donantes de fondos y de germoplasma al CIRF y a la FAO son los mismos, y la separación del CIRF llevaría a un innecesario incremento y duplicación de los gastos y a una reducción de la eficacia, como se señala en los párrafos 74 al 78.
En todo caso, después de todos los atentos llamamientos que los países hemos reiterado, consideramos que si el CIRF insistiera en separarse de la FAO, esto deberá realizarse sin gasto alguno para nuestra Organización y que habrá de asegurarse que los bancos de datos desarrollados quedan en el seno de la misma y que el incremento de gastos para el CIRF no vaya en detrimento de los países en desarrollo. Si ese fuese el caso, apoyaríamos la recomendación de la Comisión de preparar un memorando de acuerdo entre la FAO y el CIRF que tenga plenamente en cuenta los objetivos del compromiso internacional y que esto se haga con el apoyo de la Comisión y su grupo de trabajo. Asimismo, deseamos hacer hincapié en que si la separación tuviese lugar, la FAO deberá incrementar su programa de trabajo y el presupuesto asignado a las actividades de recursos fitogenétlcos para hacer frente a las necesidades de los países miembros (párrafos 79 a 81).
Como es de todos conocido, Sr. Presidente, Mexico le da una gran importancia a este tema, ya que nuestro pals es un centro de diversidad genética y biologica. En función de ello, ha creado una Comisión Nacional de Recursos Fitogenéticos, integrada a un marco de cooperación regional en la materia que es el CARFIT, y ha sido pionero de esta Comisión, por lo que le damos todo nuestro apoyo. Al mismo tiempo, deseamos expresar agradecimiento a la FAO por el apoyo recibido en nuestros esfuerzos.
EL PRESIDENTE: Agradezco a la distinguida Delegación de México, que habló también en nombre de mi propia Delegación. Y antes de dar la palabra al próximo orador, que es el distinguido Delegado de Australia, voy a leer la lista de oradores hasta este momento inscritos, con el animo de hacer una ultima consulta antes de cerrar esta lista: Australia, Etiopía, Reino Unido, Checoslovaquia, República Federal de Alemania, India, Finlandia, Nicaragua, España, Japón, China, Francia, Italia, Estados Unidos y Canadá.
Paul R. BRIDEN (Australia): Thank you Mr. Chairman. May I also say what a pleasure it is to be seeing you from a different angle!
We recognize that plant genetic resources is an important area for the world and for Australia, and FAO has an important role to play in international consideration of PGR issues. At the outset I must mention that due to the very late arrival of the documents, in fact I received this copy yesterday, my delegation must reserve or is unable to react in a full way to the body of the Report, and I will have to reserve our position for subsequent discussions. However, could I also say that we find the summary of the implications for FAO arising from the Commission very helpful indeed, and we have been able to focus on those pages 111 to vil, and it is to those I will devote my remarks.
Mr. Chairman, we are concerned that the Secretariat appears not to have endeavoured to include these activities, in at least a broad sense, in the Programme of Work and Budget, and perhaps the Secretariat could comment on that later. We would not support suggestions of an increase in the overall budget level to accommodate these activities. In our view any funding for PGR work should come from a rearrangement of priorities. We note that there is funding being sought for genetic resources in the draft Programme of Work and Budget, sub-programme 2.1.2.1 under Agriculture which has an allocation of US$914,000 to meet the cost of the Commission's secretariat to support Member Countries on PGR and to provide training and information on genetic resources, and we would expect that there should be some flexibility in this allocation to accommodate some of the activities proposed.
In our view most of the areas for FAO to concentrate on would not involve substantial funding. FAO should maintain a coordinating role rather than a major field role.
We would query the need for FAO to significantly strengthen its PGR programme because of the separation of FAO from IBPGR as suggested in paras 18 (iv) and 19 (vii). There appears to be a danger of duplication unless the MOU with IBPGR can ensure that it does not occur. Mr. Chairman, turning to some detailed comments on the section on page iv, vi and vil relating to policy, programming and financial implications for FAO, my delegation would offer the following observations. Firstly, the policy and programme matters in paras 17 and 18 are all valid issues and should be included as part of FAO policy activities. Secondly, item 17 (ill) and (iv) relating to the code of conduct on biotechnology and the code of conduct for International collectors of germplasm, should be done in conjunction with IBPGR and other relevant organizations. Thirdly, regarding financial priorities, in our view the major role for FAO should be related to items 19 (11), the development of a proposal for the establishment of an Advisory Committee, and so on, and 19 (ill) relating to the preparation of a Code of Conduct for international germplasm, and item 19 (v) the development of a Global Information System. In our view item (ill) could be based on existing codes used by IBPGR, and should not involve a major financial input from FAO.
Items (iv) and (v) of paragraph 19 would be included in sub-paragraph (11) with the coordination of (v) being a priority area for FAO.
Similarly items (iv) and (v) would be based on information provided by other organizations, and FAO's role would be one of collation and dissemination. Costs should not be high.
Regarding item 19 (vii), namely the plant genetic resources programme of FAO and the operational capacity with IBPGR being relocated, we feel it would require considerable justification if large resources were sought to be allocated. In our view FAO has a coordinating role rather than a major field role in plant genetic resources. The MOU with the International Board for Plant Genetic Resources should ensure that there is no duplication between the two programmes, and the cost to FAO as a result of the IBPGR move should be minimal If the existing cooperation remains intact through an MOU.
Finally, Mr. Chairman, most of these issues in our view should have been foreseen and in some way included in the budget, at least in some outline form, and perhaps we could have some comment on that. Any further contributions in our view should be to support the coordination of existing work, and to develop item 19 (11)-that is the establishment of an Advisory Committee to include long term budget estimates, should receive consideration at the next Council meeting.
In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, we feel that there is scope for more discussion and more explanation.
Assefa YILALA (Ethiopia): The Ethiopian delegation is pleased to see you chairing the discussion of this extremely important item. We would also like to use this opportunity to congratulate you for having been elected as Vice Chairman of the 95th Session of the Council.
The Ethiopian delegation is fully convinced that the Third Session of the Commission should be congratulated for having achieved a consensus in the text for an agreed interpretation and a Draft Resolution on the concept of farmers' rights.
We would also like to thank Mr. Bonte-Friedhiem for the introduction that was just made. We have participated both in the working group and in the Third Session of the Commission on Plant Genetic Resources. The Report thus placed before us is a reflection of the discussions that we had in the Working Group and also in the Third Session of the Commission. Therefore, we support the submission of this agreed interpretation and the Draft Resolution by the Director-General to the Conference with no reservation.
The proposed funding mechanism for conservation and management of plant genetic resources we hope will have the support of the international community as this is essential input that will contribute towards the success of the Commission's work.
While talking about our satisfaction in the above area, we were also able to observe some areas where we are worried, particularly with recent decisions of the Board of Trustees of IBPGR on separation from FAO. The concern expressed by the Commission during the third session is well founded and we hope that the recommendation in paragraph 15 is carried out as soon as possible.
We understand that the policy, programming and financial implications of the recommendations contained in section III are not incorporated in the Summary Programme of Work and Budget because of its appearance after the Summary had been prepared.
We also know that the Summary Programme of Work and Budget is subjected to the scrutiny of zero growth, thus reducing the chance of incorporating it even if the work was to be redone.
We, therefore, would like to appeal to the international community for special funding mechanisms for this important area of heritage rather than the proposed screening due to financial shortcomings. We say this because the Commission is just beginning its work and the inability to carry out its planned programme of work at this early stage will have repercussions on its future successes and confidence of Member countries in the mechanism that we have established.
Michael McGILL (United Kingdom): Mr. Chairman, the UK delegation is pleased to see you chairing this item, and my intervention will be extremely brief.
The United Kingdom delegation wishes to thank the Secretariat for the production of this important paper which we find helpful and interesting. Unfortunately, because of the late receipt of the paper we have not had the time to consider it fully. Therefore, we wish the right to reserve our position on the paper until we have had time to assess its implications fully.
Miroslav DOLEZAL (CZECHOSLOVAKIA): We highly appreciate the results of the Third Session of the Commission on Plant Genetic Resources. Important achievements have been obtained in work with world gene pools during the time of the existence of the Commission. We especially appreciate the activity of the Commission in preparing the legislative prerequisites for International cooperation and creating the world network of basic collections where in our view the function of the FAO is irreplaceable.
As can be seen from the discussion that took place at the Third session, resolution 8/83, International Undertaking on Plant Genetic Resources, creates a good basis for such cooperation. However, an adjustment should be made in its point 2.1 (a). In our view, no free exchange of breeding materials can be expected because free exchange would affect breeders' rights. The
Commission has achieved very good results in developing a world network of basic collections of genetic resources. We consider model C as the best form of cooperation as it enables FAO's coordinating and methodology activity to continue while respecting national autonomy in the ownership of the collections. In 1988 Czechoslovakia finished its efforts in building a national gene bank, having high technological parameters and sufficient storage capacity. We are ready to take an active part in international cooperation. In the opinion of our delegation the separation of the International Board for Phytogenetic Resources from the FAO is a serious problem. Cooperation of both organizations in the future remains an open question. Our opinion is that an agreement on cooperation should be concluded between the FAO and the Board to define their mutual relationships and areas of activity. Activities of both organizations should be closely coordinated in order to allow for effective utilization of their forces and to avoid duplicity.
We also appreciate the Commission's orientation on the problems of conserving reproduced vegetable plant species and the use of the latest biotechnological methods in work with the gene pool. Czechoslovakia is interested in work in these fields.
The Commission on Plant Genetic Resources in the future should in our view continue to play an important role in organizing collection expeditions. We would also like to take part in these activities.
In conclusion, I would like to say that Czechoslovakia highly appreciates FAO'S efforts to save and conserve the gene pools of cultivated plants. We want to take part in these efforts in international cooperation, and in the work of the Commission.
Bernd von STDOW (Germany, Federal Republic of): Mr. Chairman, we are also happy to see you in the Chair.
The German delegation welcomes the endeavours of the Commission on Plant Genetic Resources to coordinate existing public and private, national and international activities to preserve genetic resources. We are of the opinion that this can best be achieved if close cooperation between FAO and the IBPGR continues to be ensured.
The German delegation holds the view that the International Fund for Plant Genetic Resources can be only one of the means to implement the aims laid down in the International Undertaking on Plant Genetic Resources. The voluntary financial support of this fund is to be welcomed. We are, however against remuneration for the use of genetic resources in breeding for agriculture and biotechnology as it is not possible to adequately assess in the past, at present or in the future contributions to the development of the genetic material. In our opinion a remuneration for the use of genetic material would also be inconsistent with Article 1 of the International Undertaking on Plant Genetic Resources, which should ensure the availability of plant genetic resources as a heritage of mankind.
Governments should continue to be free to choose the ways to improve the situation in order to make the greatest possible use of their financial resources. The Federal Republic of Germany is however always prepared to consider FAO's advice on its own programmes.
An extension of the mandate of the Commission on Plant Genetic Resources to all fields of genetic diversity can be considered to be a possible approach, in particular with regard to animal genetic resources. An extension of the International Undertaking on Plant Genetic Resources in that sense seems, however, problematical as the undertaking applies to plants. A comparable undertaking on animal resources would, however, be conceivable.
V.K. SIBAL (India): Mr. Chairman, it is a special pleasure for me to address the Council through you.
I would like to express the appreciation of the Indian delegation to Dr. Bonte-Friedheim for his very clear presentation and also compliment the Secretariat for their excellent summary of the Commission's significant conclusions and recommendations, as well as their policy programme and financial implications.
We took part in the Commission proceedings and are a party to its report. We endorse the recommendations. We do not intend to touch on each one of them but would like to confine our observations to those that we consider of particular importance.
We agree with Dr. Bonte-Friedheim that this meeting of the Commission was one of the most important technical meetings in the current biennium because of the very large implications for action in the coming biennium and further years,flowing from the recommendations of the Commission.
We would like to express our appreciation for the important work done by FAO in the crucial area of plant genetic resources in establishing: (a) the International Undertaking to ensure conservation, use and availability of plant genetic resources; (b) the Commission to provide an intergovernmental forum for concerting policies and approaches; and (c) the International fund for plant genetic resources for funding conservation, and management of these resources. These are excellent initiatives but we are also conscious that these are of varying degrees of maturity and will need development in order to effectively address the objectives for which they have been set up.
The Indian delegation would like to express their appreciation for the Commission's work in achieving consensus on the text for an agreed interpretation of the undertaking, as indicated in paragraph 57 of the report, aimed at attracting wider acceptance of the undertaking. We hope that this will have the approval of Council and Conference and pave the way for those who have so far not agreed to become members of the Commission and accept the undertaking. The agreed interpretation gives simultaneous and parallel recognition to plant breeders' rights and farmers' rights and can therefore constitute the basis for an equitable and just global system protecting all legitimate major interests. We hope that this will enable the Undertaking to draw within the Commission the 23 nations that have shown some hesitation.
The draft resolution endorsing the concept of farmers' rights in paragraph 59 of the report is one of the most significant developments achieved in the Commission.It is the first time that an International forum has recognized the concept, and we hope that the consensus backing this concept would find endorsement in the Council. In the context of these two developments we fully support the proposal that the agreed interpretation of paragraph 57 and the concept of farmers' rights in paragraph 59 should be endorsed by the Council to the Conference for its approval and then become an annexure to the Undertaking.
The Indian delegation would like to endorse the recommendations of the Commission in paragraph 15 of the report calling upon FAO to prepare a report on the state of the world's plant genetic resources and for the establishment of a global Information system, including an early warning system as per Article 7 of the Undertaking, recommended in paragraph 16 of the report. The information system would also be useful for monitoring developments in biotechnology, particularly in their implications for developing countries. There is a serious fear among the developing countries that the working out of progress in biotechnology may widen the gap between the developing countries and the developed countries. Therefore, FAO will have a very important monitoring role to play in watching over these developments and working for the benefit of the developing countries.
The Indian delegation is concerned that there should be well defined responsibilities in the areas of plant genetic resources so as to avoid duplication, overlapping and therefore a wastage of financial and technical resources. We would therefore underscore the need for the establishment of an advisory committee to provide a forum to promote and establish such coordination between the various organizations working in the area of plant genetic resources such as UNEP, ICUN and so forth.
The Indian delegation is also convinced that a study should be carried out to work out the implications of establishing an action programme on plant genetic resources on the lines of TFAP.
We also agree that FAO should conduct a study for the establishment of a network of in situ conservation covering both animal and plant genetic resources.
The Indian delegation is also of the view that the Commission' s recommendations to FAO to develop a draft code of conduct for the collection of germplasm and another on biotechnology, as it affects conservation and the use of plant genetic resources, are timely and need to be pursued.
The Indian delegation takes note of the IBPGR decision to move to Copenhagen and to separate from FAO. We do wish this decision could have been taken after fuller consultation, and would like to underline the need to ensure that the new arrangements do not have any negative effects on the interests of the developing countries or affect the free exchange and security of germplasm. In this context it is most necessary that every effort be made to develop proper arrangements for continued effective cooperation between FAO and IBPGR with the legal and political aspects looked after by the FAO Commission on Plant Genetic Resources and the technical aspects taken care of by the IBPGR.
The Indian delegation would like to emphasize that the two organizations must work and collaborate closely with the required complementarity in their efforts, in a team work clearly defining their respective roles and responsibilities. In this context, in keeping with the universality of membership of FAO and the restricted membership of IBPGR-India is a member of both-care is necessary to ensure that the interests of developing countries in terms of access to germplasm, and the need for assistance to them to build institutional capacity to benefit from it are protected.
We recognize that the Commission is setting a scorching pace in the number and variety of its proposals which are an index of its sensitization and a recognition of the crucial importance and implications of the issues involved.
We are disappointed to note that the proposed activities, however, have not found a place in the Summary for the reasons that have been explained. However, these are important and need to be addressed either through the re-allocations within the budget or through extra-budgetary resources. To enable the Council to make informed choices between the various items of work we would need more analysis and information. At this stage we would not rule out resource allocations through appropriations to the extent to which it may be feasible, to be supplemented by a generous response from donors to FAO's call for additional funds to enable the Organization to attend to these issues in this area with the seriousness they deserve.
We hope that the Council will endorse the recommendations. The Indian delegation supports them.
Antti NIKKOLA (Finland): Mr. Chairman, my delegation is pleased to see you in the Chair.
The third session of the Commission on Plant Genetic Resources has made good progress in its work and has achieved concensus on important issues. An agreed interpretation of the International Undertaking had been reached and a draft resolution accepted endorsing the concept of farmers' rights.
A number of International organizations are involved in the work related to the conservation and use of genetic resources. I am now referring to the matter already mentioned by Mr. Bonte-Friedhelm, namely, that at the UNEP governing Council in May this year it was decided to convene working sessions of an ad hoc working Group on Biological Diversity. It was decided to do this in close cooperation with FAO and other relevant institutions. I emphasize that the Nordic countries stressed this point very much in the UNEP meeting-the obligation of coordination from the UNEP side. One aim of the ad hoc working Group will be to consider elements of the new international legal instruments for the conservation of biological diversity. On behalf of the Nordic countries we request that FAO takes an active part in this work. Ve request that FAO activities in this sphere are further coordinated with the work being undertaken by UNEP and other International institutions.
We agree with Mr. Bonte-Friedheim that this obligation on coordination should not lie solely with FAO. I refer to paragraph 140 of document CL 95/9 where it is proposed by COAG that the working Group, or the FAO Commission on Plant Genetic Resources should study the possibility for FAO to establish a global system of genetic resources, including animal genetic resources. It is our view that this proposal should be further considered in the light of the UNEP undertaking I have mentioned.
Finally, the relationship between FAO and IBPGR was extensively discussed at the meeting of the Plant Genetic Resources Commission. We understand that important decisions on this issue were taken at the May meeting of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research. We request the FAO Secretariat to provide Council with information on these recent developments.
Mauricio CUADRA (Hicaragua): Ml delegación se suma a las expresiones de satisfacción por verlo presidir a Usted nuestra labor de esta tarde.
Sr. Presidente, hemos considerado de gran valor el Informe de la tercera reunión de la Comisión de Recursos Fitogenéticos y estamos de acuerdo en las recomendaciones y conclusiones contenidas en el mismo.
En aras del tiempo vamos a ser sumamente breves. El tema es realmente importante y habría mucho que comentar, por las grandes implicaciones que contiene la regulación de los recursos fitogenéticos para países en desarrollo que tradiclonalmente han sido objeto de saqueos de sus riquezas vegetales, recursos genéticos, alimenticios, forestales etc. Haremos algunas precisiones.
La capacidad de desarrollo de una agricultura depende de la variabilidad genética que tengan los cultivos a los cuales se dedica la producción de esa agricultura.
Algunos países industrializados.tradiclonalmente se han empeñado en acaparar el material genético proveniente de países en desarrollo en detrimento del patrimonio de estos países. Algunas zonas de América Latina son especialmente muestra de esta triste situación. De tal manera que es primordial la conservación de estos recursos y la variabilidad genética de nuestras especies para dar respuesta a los posibles problemas agrícolas de nuestros países. En este sentido la asistencia técnica es fundamental para que los países en desarrollo podamos lograr avances serios en esta materia.
Vemos con satisfacción que el documento recoge con claridad en sus párrafos 47 a 54 las implicaciones que las nuevas biotecnologías pueden tener, o que ya están teniendo en el uso, conservación, transformación, y transferencias del material genético.
Queda claro, asimismo, que los países en desarrollo debemos beneficiarnos de estos métodos y de estas nuevas tecnologías, pero también está clara la necesidad de un compromiso internacional sobre recursos fitogenéticos que garantice que el uso de estos nuevos recursos biotecnológicos no va a convertirse en un instrumento adicional de saqueo de recursos de los países en desarrollo, con las graves consecuencias que sabemos tendría para sus economías.
De nuevo creemos que la FAO debe continuar jugando un papel fundamental, pionero, como garante de un trato equitativo y de las transferencias de tecnología a los países en desarrollo.
Creemos que los recursos genéticos deben ser patrimonio universal bajo normativa internacional que asegure un adecuado aprovechamiento y una adecuada distribución a todos los países.
La conservación de los recursos genéticos y su libre intercambio, no deben ser objeto de manipulación política, económica o social bajo ninguna circunstancia. En este sentido creemos que los avances de esta tercera reunión son muy importantes.
Los países desarrollados están en la obligación, creemos, de poner a disposición de los países en desarrollo los recursos genéticos que han sustraído durante décadas de nuestros países, con lo cual han contribuido a la erosión genética, que mencionábamos.
Nos preocupa también la industrialización de los recursos genéticos que lleve por objeto programar el consumo de los países en desarrollo.
Consideramos, Sr. Presidente, que de acuerdo al Compromiso Internacional, los países en desarrollo deben incrementar la cooperación y el intercambio en la conservación de los recursos genéticos que garantice el desarrollo armónico de la agricultura en estos países de acuerdo con los intereses y necesidades de los propios pueblos.
Apoyamos el concepto de la interpretación concertada del Compromiso Internacional, y apoyamos firmemente el proyecto de resolución sobre los derechos del agricultor que reivindican el papel que han jugado las generaciones de agricultores en los países en desarrollo y garantice que reciban finalmente un beneficio por su labor y un trato justo.
Consideramos que este es un paso de gran magnitud en el avance por lograr la equidad en el uso y conservación de los recursos fitogenéticos, como patrimonio de las futuras generaciones y para beneficio de toda la humanidad.
Francisco ZAMÀRRIEGO CRESPO (España): Nuestra delegación desea felicitar al Dr. Bonte-Friedheim por la presentación del tema y al Sr. Horacio Carandang, de Filipinas, por la excelente labor desarrollada como Presidente de la Comisión de Recursos Fitogenéticos, y al mismo tiempo mostramos nuestra satisfacción por el hecho de que para la vicepresidencia fuera elegido el Sr. Don José Miguel Bolivar, de nacionalidad española, que fue el anterior presidente de dicha comisión.
Celebramos los acuerdos adoptados y aceptamos globalmente el documento elaborado y las distintas recomendaciones del mismo.
Dicho esto, solamente queremos enfatizar expresamente algunos de los aspectos incluidos en el documento·
Apoyamos plenamente la recomendación de que se presente a la Conferencia la interpretación concertada del Compromiso Internacional, así como el proyecto de resolución que suscribe el concepto de derechos del agricultor.
Consideramos como muy importante la preparación de informes periódicos sobre el estado de los recursos fitogenéticos en el mundo como forma de que la Comisión esté en mejor situación para recomendar prioridades·
Reiteramos el ofrecimiento hecho ya por nuestra delegación de espacios en nuestros bancos de genes para el establecimiento de colecciones.
Al tratar en el tema 7 de este Consejo el Código de Conducta para la distribución y utilización de plaguicidas, se ha visto la importancia de un código de tal naturaleza y paralelamente merece todo nuestro apoyo la recomendación de la Comisión en el sentido de que la Secretaría en cooperación con el Grupo de Trabajo redacte un código de conducta para recolectores internacionales de germoplasma, comprendiendo también la conservación y el uso de los recursos fitogenéticos.
Apoyamos la recomendación de preparar un estudio sobre sistemas innovadores informales.
Para finalizar, no podemos sino lamentar la decisión de la Junta Directiva del CIRF de separarse de la FAO, y en consecuencia, en caso de concretarse, se hace imperioso el tomar medidas para asegurar una efectiva compiementaciÓn de tareas en lo que respecta a la conservación y utilización de los recursos fitogenéticos para evitar duplicación entre otras cosas en las donaciones, asegurando la permanencia en la FAO de las bases de datos y la documentación preparada por el CIRF dada la importancia que esto tiene para el Sistema Mundial de información sobre recursos fitogenéticos de la FAO.
Para soslayar todas las dificultades derivadas de la escisión del CIRF, nos hacemos una pregunta: ¿No sería factible que el CIRF se constituyese en el cuerpo técnico asesor de la Comisión?
Horborn SAITO (Japan): My comment will be very brief. My country appreciates the efforts made by the Working Group of the Commission in establishing the agreed interpretation of the international undertaking on plant genetic resources. We recognize some progress in interpretation such as the rights of breeders, farmers' rights and free exchanges. My country is considering participation in the committee, taking all this progress into account.
Youglong WANG (China) (Original language Chinese): I would like to thank Mr. Bonte-Friedheim for his introduction to the document. My delegation noticed with satisfaction the consensus achieved during the third session of the Commission on Plant Genetic Resources. Since we have only just received this document, I would like to make some general comments on it. There are some concrete matters on which I reserve the right to make further statements.
Plant genetic resources are a valuable property of mankind. With the continuous development of modern technology, the protection and rational utilization of resources has become increasingly important. The Commission on Plant Genetic Resources has made a very effective contribution to this. In the light of the current distribution, protection and utilization of resources, it is essential to increase international exchange in this sphere. The international undertaking drawn up by FAO is of great importance in carrying out activities in this field.
We fully agree to the three proposals in paragraph 8 of document CL 95/9, and also to the proposals in paragraph 15. We hope that FAO will cooperate fully with IBPGR and other international organizations in coordinating their cooperation and taking coordinated action for the common target. Although China is neither a member of the Commission on Plant Genetic Resources, nor a party to the international undertaking, we shall follow with great interest the action taken by FAO.
Philippe PIOTKT (France): Permettez-moi de vous adresser toutes les félicitations de ma délégation. J'aborderai quelques points rapidement car nous n'avons eu ces documents que tardivement. Ma délégation apportera des indications complémentaires lors de réunions ultérieures si cela est nécessaire·
J'aborderai trois points. Tout d'abord, en ce qui concerne l'interprétation concertée de l'Engagement international et la Résolution sur les droits des agriculteurs, la France est prête à se joindre à un consensus sur ces documents. Ils constituent une référence et donnent des définitions qui représentent un compromis tout à fait équilibré des différents points de vue exprimés à ce sujet. Nous sommes donc disposés à examiner plus en détail les questions qui restent en suspens de telle manière que l'on puisse aboutir au consensus recherché.Second point qui fait le lien avec le point précédent de l'ordre du jour, c'est-à-dire le rapport du Comité de l'agriculture, nous pensons qu'il convient pour l'instant de maintenir le mandat de la Commission des ressources phytogénétiques tel qu'il est actuellement. Le problème de compléter ce mandat par la prise en compte des ressources génétiques animales a déjà été évoqué. Je rappelle que pour ma délégation il s'agit d'un domaine très différent qui fait appel à une expertise et à des concepts scientifiques également très différents. Donc cela pose des problèmes qu'il convient d'étudier en détail et à cet égard, je souhaite appuyer la proposition qui a été faite par le délégué de la Finlande qui a suggéré de discuter de ces questions avec le programme des Nations Unies pour l'environnement car elles sont liées à des questions plus générales de protection des écosystèmes. Troisième point: 11 s'agit du siège du CIRP. Cette question a été évoquée ici en avril, au sein du Comité dont nous examinons le rapport aujourd'hui. Elle a également été examinée lors d'une réunion qui s'est tenue tout récemment à Canberra, sous l'égide du GCRAI. Il a été convenu à ce sujet d'étudier ce problème plus en détail et de demander à des experts de prendre des contacts. Je pense que, dans ces conditions, la solution la plus sage consiste à attendre les résultats de ces contacts. Néanmoins, ma délégation souhaite rappeler un point qui, pour nous, est essentiel et qui a été évoqué aussi par de nombreux autres pays. Il faut certainement, quel que soit le choix qui sera finalement arrêté, maintenir une collaboration très étroite entre le CIRP et la FAO car il est bien évident que les actions de ces deux organisations sont très complémentaires et qu'il importe de maintenir cette complémentarité.
Mne Anna Teresa FRITTKLLI ABNIBALDI (Italie): Monsieur le Président, je tiens avant tout à vous féliciter d'être à la présidence et à remercier le Secrétariat de sa brillante introduction du point à l'examen.
Nous nous réjouissons des travaux de la Commission des ressources phytogenétiques. Nous considérons en effet que l'on marche en avant sur un chemin qui, selon notre conviction, nous conduit loin dans la recherche d'un développement durable. Il suffit ici de rappeler, par exemple, l’individuation d'une interprétation concertée de l'engagement aux fins de consensus et les suggestions pour la constitution des réseaux de collection de base.
Un mot enfin pour souligner l’importance de la coopération et la complémentarité les plus étroites entre le CIRP et la Commission afin qu'ils soient en mesure de travailler dans la concertation et le contact les plus étroits et directs, dans l'esprit de s'efforcer d'exploiter au mieux toutes les ressources disponibles.
Ms. Joan WALLACE DAWKENS (United States of America): Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and congratula.tions on your election.
The United States participated in the Third Session as an observer. The Commission's growing membership and ambitious plans for the future suggested that members want FAO's work on plant genetic resources to increase. We were encouraged with the increased participation of technical representatives at the Third Session, a trend that must continue if meaningful discussions are to take place. Unfortunately, if our records are accurate, fewer than half of the Commission's members intervened in the debates.
Having observed the Third Session and having read the final report, the United States has the following specific comments: the Working Group has already demonstrated its importance to Commission proceedings and appears to be a powerful force, essentially setting the agenda and offering numerous proposals for the Commission. Preparing periodic reports on the state of the world's plant genetic resources is a useful initiative and represents the type of activity that FAO does very well. We also support the establishment of a global information system on plant genetic resources. The simultaneous development of a Code of Conduct on biotechnology and a Code of Conduct for germplasm collectors may be overly ambitious. We trust that the dual effort will not result in documents that have difficulty reaching consensus. We wondered if the Secretariat had estimated what the costs of preparing these codes would be, whether expert consultations are envisioned and if funding problems are envisioned. If they are envisioned, then which Code has priority? In this regard, the United States has developed operational procedures for germplasm collectors to follow, as well as a draft Code of Conduct on biotechnology. We would be pleased to share these documents with FAO. Regarding the proposals to expand the Commission on Plant Genetic Resources into a Commission on Biological Diversity, we are not yet convinced that such proposals are advisable or practical, as we indicated during the COAG item. The Commission's recommendation to form an advisory committee to work with other organizations concerned with plant genetic resources and biological diversity is commendable. Concerns over possible duplication and overlap are important to all of us. We wonder if FAO should use the Office for Inter-Agency Affairs to coordinate with other bodies on this matter. Considerable progress has been achieved in reaching a consensus to an agreed interpretation of the International Undertaking. We commend Commission members for the progress made in this regard. The United States has not finalized its position on the agreed interpretation but would like to offer three comments at this time:
(1) much more attention has been given to farmers' rights-a relatively new concept-and more attention was given to that concept than to plant breeders' rights.
(2) the idea of limiting benefits of the Undertaking to countries adhering to it appears decisive. We would prefer less threatening language.
(3) The issue of mandatory contributions to an international fund has already provoked controversy during Commission deliberations and is not a proposal that the United States can support. We support our colleagues from Australia regarding funding issues.
If the Commission is to gain further momentum and increased future support from non-adhering FAO members or those adhering with reservations, we believe that future Working Group sessions should solicit minority views. The views and concerns of certain non-FAO members, such as the Soviet Union and the German Democratic Republic, are also relevant to the Commission's mandate. The Working Group has already demonstrated its importance to Commission proceedings. We trust that the Working Group will consider the potential benefits of maximizing consensus on several delicate issues before those issues are brought before Council and Conference.
Finally, my Government shares the concerns voiced by many delegates on FAO/IBPGR relations. At a recently concluded meeting of the CGIAR, the United States agreed to chair an ad hoc Working group to review the situation and to report its findings to the Board of the CGIAR at its next session.
Real LALANDE (Canada): Monsieur le Président, étant donné que je suis le dernier orateur, comme vous l'avez déclaré, je serai bref. Permettez-moi tout d'abord de vous féliciter de votre élection à la Vice-Présidence du Conseil.
Permettez-moi également d'intervenir au Conseil, au nom de la délégation canadienne, sur ce point concernant le rapport de la troisième session du Comité des ressources phytogénétiques· Je désire tout d'abord indiquer que c'est à titre d'observateur que le Canada a assisté aux débats de la troisième session de ce comité et que cette participation montre l'intérêt que mon pays accorde à la question des ressources phytogénétiques. C'est donc avec un réel intérêt que nous avons suivi les débats de ce comité et que nous suivons aujourd'hui la discussion au Conseil.
Ma délégation a déjà parlé lors de l'examen d'un point précédent de l'ordre du jour de l'arrivée tardive de certains documente soumis au Conseil et indiqué les difficultés créées à notre délégation à ce sujet. Le document CL 95/14 est malheureusement l'un de ces documents qui n'ont pu faire l'objet d'une analyse adéquate dans notre capitale avant sa discussion au Conseil de la FAO, et cela malgré les consultations que j'ai tenues moi-même au téléphone, aujourd'hui, avec Ottawa. J'aimerais donc indiquer l'intention de mon gouvernement de réserver sa décision sur les propositions contenues dans le document CL 95/14.
LE SECRETAIRE GEHERAL: Le Secrétariat a reçu une intervention avec demande d'insertion au procès-verbal dans le cadre du débat sur le point 8 de l'ordre du jour. Il s'agit de la déclaration de M. Amador Velásquez García-Monterroso, Représentant permanent adjoint du Pérou auprès de la FAO, qui n'a pas été en mesure de prononcer sa déclaration durant la discussion de ce point.
Si le Conseil n'y voit pas d'objection et avec votre autorisation, Monsieur le Président, nous feront insérer cette déclaration dans le procès-verbal.
Amador VELASQ.UEZ GARCIA-MONTERROSO (PerÚ): El Peru manifiesta su satisfacción por el consenso alcanzado en la propuesta de Resolución sobre los Derechos del Agricultor; así como, de otro lado, su disconformidad por el alejamiento del CIRF. Reconocemos el valor de los recursos fitogenéticos como patrimonio de la humanidad pero, a su vez, estimamos necesario que la libre disponibilidad esté dentro de un marco de reciprocidad. El Perú es reconocido como una de las áreas de mayor diversidad genética y por esta razón viene realizando esfuerzos, particularmente, en el area andina. Consideramos que es necesario establecer los mecanismos que garanticen la disponibilidad de fondos para asegurar el mantenimiento eficaz de un Centro y de la toma de decisiones internacionales urgentes para proteger el material mantenido en los centros; así como, para ayudar también a aquellos países que no cuentan con centros para proteger sus recursos vegetales. Apoyamos la mayor adhesión posible de países al Compromiso Internacional. Creemos que la conservación in situ debe separarse entre la clásica y la de variedades tradicionales. Con respecto al área de la biotecnología, estimamos que el mejoramiento genético y la conservación del germoplasma son las áreas donde el Perú viene aplicando dicho avance tecnológico. Institutos nacionales peruanos han colaborado para la elaboración del inventarlo de proyectos de biotecnología y su relación con los recursos fitogenéticos. Por ultimo, Sr. Presidente, mi delegación deja constancia de su satisfacción al haber escuchado, en el debate de este tema 8, a tres delegaciones que, en el debate del tema 6 cuando muchos países expresaron su deseo que el Grupo de Trabajo de la Comisión de Recursos Fitogenéticos ampliara su campo de acción a los recursos zoogenéticos, manifestaron ciertas dudas; pero que, repito, en este tema, han señalado claramente lo positivo de dicho avance que incluiría en el Sistema Global, creado por la FAO, para los recursos fitogenéticos a los zoogenéticos, como un primer paso hacia el Sistema Global de la diversidad biológica; e, inclusive, compartimos la preocupación de aquellas mismas delegaciones, o por lo menos dos de ellas, en el sentido de que se eviten duplicidades, particularmente con el PNUMA; pero, complementariamente, añadimos que no dudamos en la capacidad de la FAO para evitar esa eventual pérdida de esfuerzos, con una coordinación eficiente, y-de hecho-confiamos en que la comunidad internacional sabrá reconocer la labor pionera de la FAO en este campo donde de ninguna manera deberá aceptar la separación entre la conservación y el uso de los recursos genéticos, y diversidad biológica en general, de los aspectos de desarrollo agrícola y forestal a los que están vinculados.
EL PRESIDENTE: Muchas gracias al distinguido Delegado de Canadá. Paso, entonces, la palabra al Subdirector General del Departamento de Agricultura, Sr. Bonte Friedheim, para dar respuesta a las preguntas presentadas por las Delegaciones.
CH. BONTE-FRIKDHEIM (Assistant Director-General, Agriculture Department): Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and my special thanks to those members of the Council that have participated in the discussion. First of all, I would like to apologise for the late arrival of the document which led a number of delegations to indicate that they were not ready with any final observations on these matters·
There will be two opportunities to discuss this again, the way I can foresee it. One is that the full Programme of Work and Budget to be discussed by Conference will have some changes in Programme 2.1.2: Crops, which includes Genetic Resources 1.2.1. When the Summary Programme of Work and Budget was prepared and was at the printers, the Commission on Plant Genetic Resources had not yet met, and it was impossible to foresee by any one in the Secretariat what the outcome would be. Therefore, it is the Secretariat's feeling that some of the major recommendations which have been made and which have been also accepted here this evening must find their way into the full Programme of Work and Budget. That is number one. Of course, we recognize that, as I have said in the introduction, these tasks cannot be undertaken in one biennium. They are long-term tasks, many of those. They cannot be undertaken by FAO alone. They will be undertaken in cooperation with international institutions, international organizations, national governments, anybody who is willing to assist FAO in some of these things for the benefit of the conservation of plant genetic resources. Some of these tasks which we have certainly will require extra-budgetary resources, and we hope, as I said, that those who have great concern for it will also underline this concern with financial resources. Let me say one more word. If you look at the present Summary Programme of Work and Budget you will see that there is a reduction foreseen between 1990-91 and 1988-89 in the training on genetic resources. It was meant that the IPBGR would pick it up. We are not quite certain that the IPBGR will pick it up. Having heard and listened carefully to the discussion of the COAG report, we were told that training should certainly not suffer. I cannot see that I can leave this as it is with a reduction on this particular item without having any assurance from the IPBGR.
The second opportunity for member delegations to discuss the issue is when in Conference we discuss the proposal which is in paragraphs 57 and 59, that is the Agreed Undertaking as well as the Resolutions to be annexed. That has to be approved by Conference. I think I would urge those who have some reservations to carefully study the text again because I think that the text is not quite what has been said here this evening, limiting and excluding certain countries, those that are not members or who have not adhered to the Undertaking. I do not think it says that, but I leave it, please, to all delegations to undertake a study by the time that Conference comes around. I hope that the consensus that we have achieved and the breakthrough which we have achieved in the Third Session of the Plant Genetic Resources Commission will hold through Conference and that we will have two new Annexes to the Undertaking which will make it easier. I very much appreciate the statement by the representative of Japan that in view of these we might consider joining and adhering.
So here there will be two possibilities for discussing again aspects on plant genetic resources. In addition, there will be some forum-and I am not so sure which forum has to be found-to report to Council and Conference at its next session on the future of IPBGR.
The delegate of Finland has requested information on what happened in Canberra at the meeting of the CGIAR. It has been provided by the delegate of France and the delegate of the US. A Working Group has been established by the CGIAR, and the final decision regarding the finance of CGIAR will be taken at the meeting in November in Washington in Centres Week at the next meeting of the CGIAR. That meeting is preceding Conference, and therefore the Secretariat will be in a position to inform Conference and the preceding Council of the decision taken by the donors of the CGIAR. I would not be in any position to predict the outcome of the discussion. As I have said, FAO has indicated its readiness for a dialogue because we also believe there should be as little duplication as possible and as much cooperation for the benefit of developing countries and for the heritage of plant genetic resources for future generations.
I would like to answer one or two specific questions. I would like to say that as of today the Secretariat has not done the calculations for budget considerations of all the proposals that you find in the report on the Third Session. I believe that before we do this, we will have to discuss with other organizations and other of our member countries, and I accept the great offer from the delegate of the United States that they have done some work on the Code of Conduct on Biotechnology and also on collectors of germplasm.
There is one other meeting which starts next Monday, an FAO meeting together with the EEC financed by the Dutch on Biotechnology in Plant Production, which certainly will also have something to say on some of these issues which we have discussed today.
The cooperation with UNEP-and it comes up again and again-will certainly be undertaken. I think that at some stage the governing body of this Organization has to decide who is responsible for what in regard to genetic resources, whether animals or plants or both, because if I listened to some interventions and listened carefully, I wonder whether that does not mean to give up animal genetic
resources and biodiversity to UNEP, and that means to also give up plant genetic resources. But I just raise that as a question because it was lingering in the back of my mind whether we should not see if the preservation of genetic resources is closely linked to the use-and do not split this, too; you can split many things, but do not split the use and the preservation and have the responsibility in different International fora. So as I said, certainly there is a decision by UNEP's Governing Council. Certainly we will cooperate; we have cooperated before, and we will cooperate, and we will see if there will be a huge umbrella on biodiversity with room for small umbrellas to cover specific aspects of that biodiversity, because it is even larger than what we have been talking about so far. At the end, it includes single cells on one hand, and human beings on the other, because we are all part of biodiversity.
I think we have listened carefully to those warning voices not to mix our Commission on Plant Genetic Resources, the plants and the animals. I look forward to the discussion, (a) of the technical consultations in order to get technical advice, and (b) to a discussion in the Working Group. I must admit that the Working Group in my book has done fantastic work, especially in the last session, in prepartion. We are not setting the agenda as proposed here. If you look at the agenda for the next meeting on the Commission on Plant Genetic Resources, it is alsready in the report because it has already been decided at the last meeting what they wanted to discuss at the next one. But in the preparation and in trying to find consensus, I would like to pay my greatest respect to the work of the Working Group in the last session.
I plead that it will be possible to approve paragraphs 57 and 59, the Agreed Undertaking and the Resolution in Conference for one step forward to help us to secure, to preserve and to use-all of us-the heritage which we have received from our parents.
EL PRESIDENTE: Le agradezco al Sr. Bonte-Friedhaim sus explicaciones, que entiendo satisfacen las consultas y las preocupaciones manifestadas por distintas delegaciones en este Consejo.
Me toca ahora formular algunos pequeños comentarios de cierre sobre el tratamiento del tema 8. Creo que los miembros del Consejo han coincidido en señalar, aun cuando la demora en la recepción de la documentación relativa les impidió en algunos casos formular consideraciones más en profundidad, la importancia de la tarea realizada por la Comisión de Recursos Fitogenéticos en su tercera reunión. Particularmente, queda coronado su esfuerzo con el consenso sobre el texto de la interpretación concertada del compromiso así como el Proyecto de Resolución sobre los Derechos del Agricultor. Estos dos importantes progresos alcanzados por la Comisión creo que han merecido generalizada aprobación. También hubo menciones, particularmente respecto al establecimiento de la red internacional de colecciones base en bancos de genes, bajo los auspicios o jurisdicción de la FAO, así como por el Código de Conducta para Colectores de Germoplasma y se tomó nota, como lo dice la propia Comisión, de la posibilidad de designar una comisión para estudiar una propuesta de plan de acción. Hubo también voces generalizadas que manifestaron su preocupación por la separación del CIRF de la Sede de la FAO y también coincidieron las delegaciones en señalar su preocupación por que esta separación física no signifique duplicación de esfuerzos y que se alcance un grado de complementariedad elevado.
En general las delegaciones han agradecido la tarea de la Secretaría por la preparación de un resumen, si bien lamentablemente el tiempo jugó en contra de esto en alguna medida, pero sí fue generalizado el reconocimiento de la labor pionera de la FAO en la materia.
Hubo, finalmente, alguna preocupación señalada sobre la posibilidad de una ampliación en la brecha tecnológica que separa a los países industrializados de los países en desarrollo. Y también aquí se considera que la FAO tiene un rol importante a jugar.
Creo que con este somero resumen, tenemos una idea de que nuestro debate sobre el tema 8 ha sido positivo y ha recogido con beneplácito el informe y las recomendaciones de la Comisión de Recursos Fitogenéticos en su tercera sesión.
Si no hay ninguna delegación que quiera usar la palabra sobre este tema y no hay ningún anuncio de Secretaría procedo a levantar la sesión.
The meeting rose at 19.15 h.
La séance est levèe à 19 h 15.
Se levanta la sesión a las 19.15 horas.
