Hamm HALINEN (Finland):On this item I have the honour to speak on behalf of the Nordic countries. We consider that the recently adopted process of giving the Programme and Finance Committees enhanced possibilities to discuss thedraft Programme of Work and Budget certainly facilitates the decision-making process biennially, which will give an appropriate basis for the preparation of the full Programme of Work and Budget which we hope will lead to a consensus solution at the next Conference·
Priorities and priority setting within FAO have been the main topic of discussion within the Nordic countries for a number of years.On several occasions we have already stressed that to be done prudently, priority setting requires a medium-term perspective.Therefore, we are concerned that the summary contains no indications as to medium-term activities, and hope that this can be changed in the future.We should spend more time discussing F AO's medium-term activities and less time discussing the coming biennia of the Programme of Work and Budget.We welcome the fact that the Programme of Work and Budget contains a concentrated set of priority areas for the next biennium. However, knowing that sustainable development, policy advice and women in development are set as individual priorities per se, we wish to stress that these themes should be considered and reflected in all aspects of the work of FAO, and not interpreted merely as separate priorities.Furthermore, we would raise some questions regarding the analytical bases for selecting priorities.
First, have they been selected in a concentrated and integrated manner within the framework of the overall view of the activities of FAO, or on an ad hoc basis?Next, what is the compatibility and inter-relationship between them, if any?-and finally, are the additional allocations to these priorities distributed in a coordinated way and clearly reflected in the budget proposals, thus justifying the special priority labelling?
May I now turn to some specific questions.Contributing to sustainable development as defined in the Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development is at the core of the mandate of FAO.These problems are often of a transboundary nature and are particularly relevant in relation to agriculture, forestry and fisheries, which makes FAO a key agency for the enhancement of sustainable development.Therefore, we give our support to this priority.
Integrating environmental considerations more adequately in development efforts, as a basic concern, represents a particular challenge to FAO, as it requires a strongly integrated multidisclpllnary approach, as stressed by the 94th Session of the Council.To achieve this, it is necessaryto take specific action.We therefore welcome the introduction of the new Sub-Programme 2.1.1.6, "Sustaining Resource Potentials".We note that the purpose of this Sub-Programme is partly to make the efforts of FAO in this area more visible, and also to link activities in other units conceptually to the benefits of the new Sub-Programme.However, we would like to have more information on how these links are related to the work of the Environment and Energy Programmes Coordinating Centre.
The Council stressed FAO's important role in planning processes at global, regional and national levels.In this context, the contribution of FAO to the development of national conservation strategies was underlined.Experience so far shows that the strategies produced for the agricultural, fisheries and to some extent forestry sectors do not carry the weight they deserve in the overall picture.This should be given higher priority than seems to be the case in the Programme of Work and Budget.
The increased awareness of the pressing need to improve the management of natural resources and reverse the present rapid environmental degradation also represents a challenge to review mechanisms for integrating environmental concerns and to adapt programmes and project activities. Understandably, this major task is not fully undertaken in the preparation of the Summary Programme of Work and Budget.Therefore, we draw attention to the resolution on sustainable agriculture adopted by the UNEP Governing Council on 25 May this year.The resolution recommends that a joint UNEP/FAO meeting on sustainable agriculture be convened within the framework of the preparation of the proposed UN 1992 Conference with a view to reviewing the mechanism for integrating agricultural production and environmental policies world-wide, to elaborate a world strategy for sustainable agriculture and to formulate practical action that might be taken by UNEP, FAO and others within the context of their ongoing activities.We believe such an initiative will prove particularly valuable and suggest that the FAO Council supports the action recommended by the UNEP Governing Council.
The integration of women in development was discussed at length during the last session of the Council, and the approved Plan of Action was to be implemented within the mainstream of FAO activities, funded from the Regular Programme.The Council stated that the Programme of Work and Budget 1990-91 should take into account the implementation of the Plan.
Therefore, we are pleased to note that women in development has been listed as one of the nine programme priorities.However, we are concerned that this is not clearly reflected in the detailed description of the major programmes or their sub-programmes.In fact, women are hardly mentioned except in Sub-Programme 2.1.5.4, Women in Agriculture and Rural Development, which includes the establishment of a new P-4 post.
The Nordic countries pointed out this seeming discrepancy already in the COFI session in April 1989, and it applies also to the two other major programmes, Agriculture and Forestry.
The Summary Programme in paragraph 4.33 explains that it is not possible to add special sections dealing with cross-sectoral priorities such as women-in-development, given constraints of space and the status of programme formulation at the stage of summary.Noting the fact that Member Governments have expressed interest in being apprised of the extent of attention given to these priorities and further noting that ways to present these will be considered for the full Programme of Work and Budget document, we are looking forward to relevant presentations to be included in the full Programme.
The Nordic countries also wish to stress the importance of the updated Plan of Action clarifying more specific action areas needed and the progress report on the implementation of the Resolution at the next Conference.
The role of FAO in giving policy advice has been consistently emphasized by the Nordic countries. Here, as before, we have to ask:what warrants, in concrete terms, the priority status to the policy advice?Among major programmes, in Agriculture there are a number of shifts between the sub-programmes, without any significant increase in total allocation for policy advisory activities. In Fisheries, there are not even shifts, and in Forestry, there is a clear decrease in resource allocation for these purposes.As for the Headquarters personnel, the Policy Analysis Division is proposed to get one additional person, a P-4 Economist, while losing three, a Research Assistant and two other GS posts.
The Summary clearly reflects the readiness of the Organization to step up the policy advisory role of FAO in member countries, especially in connection with adjustment processes.To achieve this goal, we would like to distinguish two key areas, both of which are irreplaceable links in the chain.At the centre, the capacity of policy analysis is to be strengthened in order to give adequate backstopping to the field.At the country level, the FAO Representatives are to be provided with technical tools and entrusted with intellectual capabilities necessary to carry out their policy advisory tasks.
In general, we agree with the Summary stating that "the consolidation and strengthening of the existing FAO country representatives scheme will be a major concern."To be able to do this, we see a need for thorough discussion and clarification of the division of work between the Regional Offices and the country offices as well as cooperation and coordination with other country representatives at the country level.
To enable us to comment more on this issue, we would hope for a clearer presentation of the work and role of the Regional Offices.It would be helpful, for example, if the provision table for the Regional Offices at the end of the Summary would include, as elsewhere, the allocations for the preceding biennium.
Fisheries is a field where we see a particular justification for regional activities.We note with satisfaction that this, to a large extent, is reflected in the proposals.We also support aquaculture as one of the priorities, extending further the desirable global coordination approach in the fisheries sector.
Forestry has always been of special importance to the Nordic countries.This emphasis will continue.Therefore, we cannot be completely satisfied with the Summary proposals in this field. The share of forestry in the budget as a whole remains the same, although the Council at its last session clearly decided otherwise.And here I quote, "it agreed in particular with the Committee's recommendation that FAO allocate an increased share of its Regular Programme budget to forestry activities."We welcome especially the proposed increased resources for the Tropical Forestry Action Plan, which we feel are fully warranted.TFAP remains the example for an integrated, cross-sectoral approach within FAO which is, as we sincerely hope, showing the way to other concentrated efforts, for instance, in the form of Special Actions Programmes in the future. However, we would like to get some further clarification on how many important and valuable programmes are being covered, whether under the TFAP umbrella or outside of it.These include
forest harvesting and transport, appropriate wood harvesting systems, forest policies and Information, planning for fuel wood, forest policy analysis, Information materials and community forestry development, which are all subject to major budget cuts in the Summary.
We acknowledge the value of the TCP programme as such, to meet the need of member countries for urgent and small-scale assistance.At the same time, we stress that the activities under the Programme be in conformity with the priorities of the Regular Programme.The activities initiated under the TCP should be of such a nature that they can continue under the umbrella of the Regular Programme.
While we are looking at the development of the programme from this point of view, we find the rationale given for the proposed increase of this programme-that the level should be commensurate with requirements-somewhat lacking.
These are only a few remarks on a comprehensive and rather complex Summary Programme of Work and Budget.In the light of the ongoing review process, they understandably can only be regarded as preliminary.The consideration of the full Programme of Work and Budget is, to a large extent, subject to the outcome of the process, which cannot now be prejudged.However, the Nordic countries are confident that adjustments agreed upon could be attainable within existing resources.
Il ja HULINSKY (Czechoslovakia):Mr Chairman, permit me a few comments on the Summary Programme of Work and Budget for 1990-91.
Firstly, on the procedure, it goes from the documentation before this Council's session that a new procedure has been applied in preparation of the Summary Programme of Work and Budget for 1990-91. According to the document CL 95/4, the new procedure had been introduced on an experimental basis only. The Joint Programme and Finance Committees were not in a position to recommend its continuation beyond 1990-91.As for the Czechoslovak delegation, we will endorse the continuation of the process approved by the Council at its 94th Session, especially should it be clear from the outcome of the 25th General Conference that the new procedure would pave the way for consensus at the Conference. It is our understanding that similar procedures are being implemented by other UN specialized agencies·
Secondly, on "Evolution of FAO's Approved Budget in Programme and Financial Terms", let me start with mentioning the obvious fact that Czechoslovakia has always been supporting the interests of developing countries in FAO's providing a variety of growing technical assistance to them.The Czechoslovak contribution to FAO in convertible currencies is much higher than that to other specialized UN agencies.We fulfil our financial obligations strictly, regularly and in due time.
That is why we have to express our serious concern with the continuous contradiction between FAO's budget and the actual incomes.The table on the second blue page of document CL 95/3 regarding the evolution of FAO's Approved Budget in Programme and Financial Terms reflects only part of this contradiction.We appreciate the Director-General's efforts to ensure the required cash flow, but we do not share the optimism that the unfortunate pressure upon the Organization will be removed soon.In fact, the budgetary differences are larger than the actual reduction of the Programme by $ 25 or 20 million in the last two two-year periods.
On the other hand, we have noted that there was a reversal of the negative trend in the FAO/UNDP programme delivery in 1988 initiated at the start of the decade.We believe it to be a source of a financial improvement of the Organization's situation.Moreover, there are countries which exhibit some accumulation of their Government's voluntary contributions to the UNDP.According to our opinion, FAO should do more than it has done until now within the IPF for a utilization of these potential additional resources following the example of UNIDO and WHO.These resources can cover both the material supplies and the services to field programmes, apart from the possibility of being used for FAO's training programmes.
Thirdly, on staff policy, more than half of the FAO budget is actually directed to Personal Services.We have always doubted the value of the permanent contracts in some professional categories, and we believe that our attitude has proved to be right during the past two programme and financial periods.In the system of permanent contracts, the Organization can hardly react flexibly to new requirements without social consequences.The WHO has used effectively a different system for a number of years.We are of the opinion that the three-year contract with prolongation to five years should become a rule for the newly recruited professional staff.The positive results can be easily calculated.
On the selected priorities, my delegation endorses the nine priority areas under Chapter 2 selected to benefit from the proposed net increased allocations. The proposed priorities are obviously based on analysis of the conclusions of FAO Governing Bodies, particularly the main technical committees. We have no intention to propose any new ones. But while taking into account that in accordance with the guidance from the Conference, Council and Regional Conferences, the requirements of the small farm sector will remain of primary concern, we would welcome that assistance of FAO be increased to the large farming sector, especially to meet the growing demand for information related to management techniques and economic viability of large farm units.
On some technical and economic programmes, in carrying out its programmes and activities on sustainable development, FAO is confronting the fact that environment has become one of the very serious global problems. We have accumulated a considerable, often bitter experience in Central Europe, regarding the effect of development on the environment.
Czechoslovakia therefore subscribes to the view that environmental impact study should be an integral part of every development project with potential effect on the environment. That should not only strengthen the project proposals but speed up their approval process as well.
Regarding the remote sensing, Czechoslovakia fully supports the increased emphasis of FAO on activities related to food security. Recognizing the importance of remote sensing for improving the information on land resources and their changes, such as land use, land degradation, crop acreages, deforestation, etc., and in view of the proposed budget reduction for remote sensing, education and training, my Government offered to jointly organize with FAO and other interested parties remote sensing training courses for developing countries in Czechoslovakia. We consider it to be the first practical step in preparing the project document for the establishment of a sub-regional institutional network for agricultural applications of remote sensing in Central Europe. The main objective of the proposed network is to speed up development of remote sensing techniques appropriate for agriculture in European conditions through the exchange of experience and cooperation in research and training. It would also continue to provide assistance to developing countries through the organization of training courses and advisory services.
Czechoslovakia welcomes the innovative proposals for starting the FAO programme dealing with non-infectious production diseases aimed at the reduction of food losses due to animal diseases. FAO emergency measures following the confirmation of the presence of the screwworm fly in North Africa have demonstrated the ability of the Organization to react promptly and in a proper way. The main technical responsibility in this field lies with the Animal Health Service where the freezing of vacant professional posts has resulted in making it difficult to cope with all the Regular Programme activities both with regard to field projects backstopping as well as emergency situations. As a result of the Director-General's decision to start defreezing professional posts, the staff situation in the technical divisions and services will hopefully improve. But the processes for filling vacant posts should be made more flexible, at least as a temporary measure. Special assistance should be given to those units responsible for FAO emergency action programmes in order to fill all vacant posts on three years' contracts with prolongation to five years, as 1 have mentioned above with the very minimum of delay.
As 1 have already stated, Czechoslovakia firmly supports the FAO's programmes and activities related to farming systems development. As a matter of fact we do share the position explained on page 41 of document CL 95/3 that it is necessary for FAO to meet the growing demand of member countries for information related to management techniques of large farms. We suggest also that the FAO assistance provided to the large-scale farming sub-sector in developing countries be strengthened so as the large farm units should become economically viable. The FAO should provide for the exchange of experiences and management practices of large farms operating in different member countries. That is why Czechoslovakia strongly suggests that the full Programme and Budget 1990-91 has to reflect the above-mentioned notions in even more concrete terms as does the document CL 95/3.
Let me add one general remark to Chapter 2 of Summary Programme of Work and Budget. Czechoslovakia attaches great importance to the FAO field activities, the cornerstone of the cooperation between FAO and developing countries. We subscribe to the view of the Group of 77 that "FAO should strengthen its field programme and thus improve its efficiency and effectiveness".
On TCP. The Technical Cooperative Programme has obviously proved to be efficient. As this programme is intended mainly for unexpected, urgent needs, for small-scale action preferably for the economically weakest member countries, we would suggest to indicate in the commentary to the full Programme of Work and Budget the distribution of TCP among the least developed countries in percentages out of the total costs. The FAO should explain the decrease in the proportion of the emergency cases which dropped to 21.5 percent in 1988, and to specify what are the two projects exceeding $ 250 000 mentioned on page 119 of document CL 95/3 with the indication whether they could be covered by the UNDP contribution or not.
On the FAO's regional activities in Europe, at this stage I shall limit my comments on the European part of Summary Programme of Work and Budget to the general remark of principle. Because of the very limited share out of the total budget covering the FAO's regional activities in Europe, the Czechoslovakian delegation recommends to include into the full Programme of Work and Budget only the programmes and activities involving the whole of Europe. It means only those in which all European countries are interested, or at least an overwhelming majority of them. At the same time we would suggest to coordinate more effectively the European activities of FAO with those of the UN Economic Commission for Europe (ECE) in the field of agriculture and nutrition. For that purpose we think it would be useful to discuss this matter at the next European Regional Conference to be held in Venice next year.
Finally Mr Chairman, one very concrete demand. As to the Chapter "Major Programme 2.3 Forestry" Sub-programme 2.3.2.7 Europe (page 108 of the document CL 95/3)", we would ask for a specification in the full Programme of Work and Budget what kind of study is meant by "next study on long-term prospects".
On the activities of Regional Offices and Country Representatives, Czechoslovakia subscribes to the view that regional offices should work in close relations with the UN Regional Commissions. The better coordination of the headquarters, regional offices and representatives in local offices is also to be required as well as the better cooperation between UNDP and FAO representatives. We have doubts about the usefulness of global meetings of FAO representatives which are very costly and are associated with high travel costs as well as administrative expenditures. In this connection we understand the concern expressed by the group of Nordic countries that country offices' resources are spent too broadly, and we understand also their suggestion for a redefinition of the role of the FAO representatives.
Lastly, Mr Chairman, on the proposed budget level. The Czechoslovak delegation is aware of the fact that the proposed budget level had been formulated with the intent of leading to a consensus. While reserving our definitive position for the Twenty-fifth Conference of FAO, my delegation would like to express its general support for the Summary Programme of Work and Budget. We agree with the recommendation contained in the paragraph 1.10 of the document 95/8 that the Council should request the Director-General to proceed with the preparation of the full Programme of Work and Budget on the basis of the document CL 95/3 while taking into consideration the views expressed by the Council Members. 1 thank you, Mr Chairman.
Daniel D. C. DON NANJIRA (Kenya): Sir, we are in the second day of our deliberations of a very important item on our agenda at this session of the Council. 1 have already expressed my delegation's appreciation to the FAO Director-General for his introductory statement which actually described to us the critical financial situation that the Organization is going through.
Yesterday afternoon, also, Mr Chairman, Mr Shah of the FAO, and my very good friend His Excellency Ambassador Bukhari, Chairman of the Finance Committee, made important introductory statements which we noted carefully and for which now 1 wish to thank them.
Mr Chairman, we are all agreed, I think, that FAO is undergoing a critical financial situation. 1 think also that we are all agreed that the Director-General is doing everything he can to contain this crisis. I believe furthermore, sir, that nobody in this hall would dispute the fact that for FAO - and for that matter any other UN agency - to perform its tasks competently the Organization must have the necessary and adequate resources. What we are still to reach a consensus upon, however, is how to alleviate the situation and ensure that FAO's work is not hampered. This is the challenge that is on our table today.
Payments of contributions must be made that would at least reduce FAO's straitened fiscal standing. On the substantive issues on the agenda items for discussion this morning, the Kenya delegation attaches the greatest of importance to the sub-programme on livestock. We welcome the sub-components focusing on grassland, forage and feed resources, animal health and genetics. We believe there is still room for transfers and adjustments to increase resources to livestock components in order to enable a more effective development of rangelands and animal feeds. In the latter case, every effort should be made to obtain alternative commodities that do not compete with staple foods. The development of animal feeds for many countries would expand the livestock resources, especially of the dairy sector, of pork and of small ruminants. This would also help reduce protein deficiencies, among other things, in developing nations.
We therefore reiterate our support here, which we first voiced during the session of the IGG on Meat and its Sub-Committee on Hides and Skins, where strong recommendations were made to increase support for training, for example, in meat technology and for quality production. It is regrettable that these views have not been sustained.
My delegation notes with concern the reduction in emphasis in the control of rinderpest and foot-and-mouth disease.The screwworm threat in Africa is also very serious, and, unless timely and effective measures are taken to contain these threats it will be very difficult and even too late to solve the problems posed in that regard to the African countries.We believe it is essential that concrete action be taken at national, sub-regional, regional and International levels to address these problems.
My delegation, in general, supports the proposals in the Secretariat documentation relating to plant genetics, including animal genetics, and aquaculture, under the fisheries sector the Council discussed yesterday morning, and the development of marine fisheries, especially within the 200-mile exclusive zone, which requires surveillance and protection.In discussing the subject yesterday morning a number of delegations expressed views that are shared by this delegation.We deem it necessary that research and development on marine fisheries be made and that the appropriate financial and technical assistance that is requiredbe made available in order to enable the developing nations to actively explore, exploit, develop and utilize more extensively fisheries resources, which provide food security and offer good protein intake for both human and animal feeds.The resources and species also need to be researched, and Information on them should also be made available and disseminated as widely as possible.These resources also need to be conserved, and the use of their products in food components should be made on a wider scale.Similarly, fisheries species not usually popular for human consumption should be used in animal feed industries·
More Information, especially on natural resources, inland fisheries and aquaculture, as well as training in marine fishery development, is essential.
On natural resources, the sub-programme also deserves our special attention, particularly in respect of sub-Saharan Africa where development of water for irrigation, for human and livestock consumption remains very critical.The development and settlement of many of the lands in Africa can be obtained effectively through the provision of water.It is because of this that we call upon the FAO to maintain a high priority for water development and for assisting concerned countries to formulate and implement sound management policies and programmes on water development.In our opinion, Mr Chairman, support to small-farm irrigation development in Africa should be maintained.
With regard to fertilizers, soil management and plant nutrition activities, we support the idea of grouping them together because of their interrelated nature.
With regard to crops, the reduction in the activities supporting training in plant genetic resources is regrettable. The developing countries need that type of training and we hope that the Commission on Plant Genetic Resources will be strengthened even more.
Stress should also be placed on crop protection, through which post-harvest losses would be halted. This will, inter alia, require post-harvest pest management and vertebrate pest management.It will also be necessary to maintain on-farm storage and farm structures.This will enable farmers to maintain sufficient stocks for their families, to regulate produce sales to achieve the best returns from the markets, and thereby reduce the cost to government for storage of short-term needs.
On forestry resources, we welcome the proposed FAO significant resource increases.The forestry programme should also benefit from the natural resources component.Protection and conservation of the environment also requires that forests be protected from fires and from phyto-sanitary complications.
The programme on mangrove management should feature more prominently since mangrove forests offer a unique ecology including the natural habitat for lobster production.
Biotechnology is another area of interest to my delegation.We attach considerable significance to the strengthening of the national capacities of the developing nations.This can and should be done inter alia through the maintenance and strengthening of applied research, especially in support of national institutions and also in regard to arid and semi-arid areas.We believe that research is required in drought-escaping crops. The improvement of rangelands is necessary, as is the development of appropriate farming systems in arid and semi-arid lands, especially of sub-Saharan Africa.
With regard to support programmes, we attach great importance to the work of the FAO Investment Centre which has just celebrated its Silver Jubilee.We deem it essential that the activities of the Centre be strengthened even more, especially in the field of training planners of developing countries and in providing advice on investment in the private and public sectors of our economies. The Centre should also step up its activities through workshops and seminars for officials from developing countries.
To sum up, this august body is meeting at a very critical time in the life of FAO.The world's poor and malnourished are on the increase.The world population is constantly on the increase, and so long as population growth outpaces food and agricultural production, our problems are bound to get worse.
The problems of debt, debt servicing and structural adjustment do not seem to be abating.Then there are the problems of disasters, including the locust menace in Africa and elsewhere, and environmental degradation.All of these difficulties pose serious challenges to the international community and to individual governments, including my own. Their durable resolution can only be achieved through concerted International action, among others, through the FAO.
It seems to me that, given the reports of the Secretariat submitted on the items for discussion and the recommendations contained therein, and the majority support shown so far by the delegations, this Council should at its current session endorse the Summary Work Programme and Budget of FAO for 1990-91.The Council should also endorse the new approach to FAO'sProgramme of Budget process in order to see whether it could be sustained on a longer term basis.
The Kenya delegation is one of the delegations in favour of increasing resources for TCP activities in developing nations.We believe that the selection of sustainable development, crop/weather monitoring, biotechnology, crop protection, agricultural data development, policy advice, women in development, acquaculture and the Tropical Forestry Action Plan as priority areas of action was a good one, even though the sequential enumeration does not in any way signify the importance of those sectors in that order.
The Council should further endorse the priorities as agreed by the Programme and Finance Committees at their 56th and 64th sessions respectively.
In like manner, the Kenya delegation in general agrees with the proposal to devoteattention of resources to technical and economic programmes, and we pay special attention to the programme components outlined in pages 9-25 of the report of the Programme and Finance Committees as contained in document CL 95/8.All of the programme components on agriculture, natural resources, crops, livestock, research and technology development, rural development, nutrition, food and agricultural information analyses, food and agricultural policy, fisheries and forestry are very important to my delegation.
Last, but not least, the Kenya delegation welcomes with appreciation the assurance that Africa will retain priority attention, and we look forward to witnessing emphasis by the FAO on those activities in Africa which have not hitherto received the priority treatment that they deserve.
I hope that this Council will give clear policy guidelines to the FAO so that FAO can prepare a full Work Programme and Budget for the 1990-91 biennium.
LE SECRETAIRE GENERAL ADJOINT: Je suis désolé d'interrompre cette discussion très importante mais on m'informe que le nombre de réponses reçues pour l'excursion à Arezzo et Loro Ciuffenna est assez bas. Je ne vous cache pas que nous sommes un petit peu déçus car nous aurions souhaité plus de réponses à la généreuse invitation des autorités Italiennes.
Il s'agit d'une excursion très agréable qui a été organisée spécialement pour vous, participants, délégués et observateurs de cette session du Conseil. Je voudrais par conséquent vous inviter cordialement à vous inscrire et, avec votre permission, Monsieur le Président, je vais donner quelques renseignements supplémentaires.
Tout d'abord, je peux vous garantir que le temps sera beau; nous avons pris des dispositions pour cela. Et quand le temps est beau, l'Italie est très belle. Etant donné que, pour visiter Arezzo et Loro Cluffenna, vous avez des guides locaux, vous aurez l'occasion de voir des monuments qui ne sont généralement pas ouverts aux touristes normaux. Je peux aussi vous garantir une excellente nourriture parce que, en Toscane, on mange très bien et, en Italie, la Toscane est renommée pour sa cuisine.
Et surtout, nous ne voulons décevoir ni les autorités locales, qui ont déployé des efforts considérables pour organiser cette excursion, ni nos collègues membres du choeur de la FAO, qui se sont préparés avec diligence pour vous faire écouter un concert d'un niveau élevé. Et puis, ne nous découragez pas d'organiser d'autres excursions dans le futur.
Je sais que nous pouvons compter sur une adhésion plus enthousiaste. La date limite est aujourd'hui, 14 h 30, pour que nous puissions prendre les arrangements voulus avec les autorités locales.
Eduardo PESQDEIRA OLEA (México): Me complace, Sr. Presidente, hacer uso de la palabra sobre este tema inmediatamente después que nuestro país vecino y espero que con nuestros comentarios demos una muestra más de las buenas relaciones que existen entre ambos países.
La delegación mexicana felicita a los Comités y de Programa de Finanzas por el excelente trabajo realizado y a la Secretaría por la presentación de los documentos, cuyo formato y bien destacado temario permite un análisis muy comprensivo de los mismos. Complace ver los esfuerzos que cada día realiza la Organiaclón para dar una imagen clara y transparente de cómo se constituye y cómo se aplica el Programa y el Presupuesto.
Como lo sefialara el Director General en su discurso inaugural el futuro de la Organización lo estamos modelando ahora con la preparación del Programa de Labores y Presupuesto para 1990/91; por lo tanto es una tarea que tenemos que hacerla con espíritu abierto, comprensión y congruencia, y con la convicción de que de nuestro debate depende la preservación misma de esta nuestra maravillosa Organización, a la cual debemos aprestarnos a defender con todos nuestros recursos. Repito, todos nuestros recursos, entendiendo por ello dinero y voluntad.
De una parte, la magnitud de los problemas agrícolas y alimentarios que vivimos exigen que la Organización dé una respuesta rápida y eficiente para atender a los multiples y variados problemas, particularmente en los países en desarrollo, pero como la FAO lleva a cabo acciones de gran interés para los países industrializados, necesitamos pues una FAO fuerte para todos.
El Director General nos ha presentado una propuesta que denota verdaderos malabar!smos tratando de satisfacer a todos en busqueda de un consenso que le dé verdadera fuerza y estabilidad a la Organización y a su gestión. Nuestra función es dar luces a través de un diàlogo constructivo, buscando compromisos; sin embargo el clima no escasea de incertidumbres.
Ante un entorno de hambre y desnutrición creciente, de una dificultad cada vez mayor de nuestros países para tener acceso a los alimentos, porque el peso de la deuda consume todas las divisas para su pago, el mercado es manipulado con prácticas proteccionistas, la inflación y la crisis desincentivan la producción de nuestros agricultores, en su mayoría dependientes de factores climáticos sin tecnología ni insumos.
Es, pues, lamentable que ahora países que lo pueden hacer, cuando menos muchos de ellos, condicionen la ayuda para el desarrollo. Se ataca al sistema multilateral y se cuestiona a nuestra Organización cuya función es la de apoyar a los países en desarrollo para su autosuficiencia alimentaria y mejorar la agricultura mundial y las condiciones de vida de los campesinos y de los consumidores, garantizar verdaderamente la paz a través del pan, garantizar la supervivencia del género humano. Desalienta tener que luchar para alcanzar un mínimo de programa y de presupuesto, el cual se ve posteriormente recortado y ejercido con incertidumbre y con insuficiencia.
Hay la tendencia de preferir la ayuda alimentaria que permite colocar excedentes que con frecuencia afectan hábitos alimentarios y productivos, que reflejan la imagen misericordia de dar de comer al hambriento para sentir la conciencia feliz por el aplauso logrado por los medios de comunicación. Los programas de asistencia al desarrollo dan frutos lentos y a largo plazo, se adelanta y se retrocede, se requiere de articulaciones difíciles que maduran lentamente, dan lugar a muchas críticas y a pocos elogios, desaniman con frecuencia a los técnicos que han comenzado ya el éxodo por la incertidumbre que vive la Organización. Pero el hecho de que las voces de los países en desarrollo, que nos beneficiamos de los programas y trabajos de la FAO, estemos aquí luchando por esos programas, significa que eso es lo que queremos porque es lo que necesitamos y eso tendría que contar para la Comunidad Internacional.
Desde 1987 la Organización no ha podido cumplir con su programa porque ha tenido que aplicar recortes debidos a las presiones financieras que ha recibido. En ese año se recortaron 25 millones de dólares; en 1988, 20 y en lo que va del año 1989, 15 millones mas. El Director General nos dice que estamos en un período de frágil paso a la convalecencia financiera, ya que tenemos facturas pendientes por 160 millones de dólares. Por más optimistas que queramos mostrarnos no podemos dejar de sañalar el impacto que ha causado en los países y en la moral del personal y de las delegaciones ante este Organismo.
La magnitud de los ajustes efectuados hasta el momento en los programas, y las repercusiones negativas ya existentes, así como las futuras probables, la interrupción deprogramas, la fuga de personal preparado y la congelación de puestos, no pueden considerarse ahorros, sino serlas pérdidas que aunque tuviésemos el dinero mañana no habremos de recuperar sino en varios años. Asimismo la asistencia técnica que se nos ha tenido que diferir o negar a nuestros países ha llevado consigo desprestigio y malestar.
La delegación mexicana, Sr. Presidente, considera que el Consejo debe responder positivamente al llamamiento que nos hace el Director General al presentar la propuesta de programa y presupuesto. Nos ha indicado haberlo hecho con cierto dolor y opresión sin haber ahorrado ningún esfuerzo en aras de la búsqueda de un consenso, está invitando a un compromiso en el que, a decir verdad, los países en desarrollo tenemos que ceder sobre los aspectos que necesitamos para el desarrollo de nuestras clases tan necesitadas. Para los países desarrollados estos ajustes representan únicamente adaptaciones político-administrativas de cómo colocar las grandes cantidades de que disponen para la asistencia como efecto de porcentajes de sus altísimos productos internos.
Las argumentaciones que aquí nemos escuchado nos preocupan seriamente porque el concepto de fijación de prioridades es mas bien una forma de imposición de estas. Mi gobierno, Sr. Presidente, considera que cuando se habla de la permanencia o eliminación de programas para adecuar los trabajos de nuestra Organización a las disponibilidades presupuestales, lo que debemos tener en cuenta es la prioridad que asignan los estados receptores s esos programas en función de sus políticas y planee nacionales y no un simple recorte en virtud de grandes intereses comerciales de poderosos o de capitales trasnacionales· Son los países receptores los que deben decidir respecto de la prioridad de los programas que concertan con la FAO. Por ello creemos que la reflexión se impone y de manera cortés, pero firmemente, invitamos a todos a hacer un esfuerzo de entendimiento y solidaridad. Algunas veces se ataca al sistema multilateral y a la FAO cuya función es apoyarnos. Por otra parte hay que señalar respecto de las prioridades que la programación multilateral de nuestros paíees impide ajustar nuestras acciones a las prioridades fijadas por agencias o interés distintos a los nuestros·
Después de esta introducción que ha tomado un tiempo que preferimos usar en justificar nuestros apoyos a los rubros programáticos, pero que creímos necesario repetir buscando fórmulas de concertar voluntades, paso a dar el voto aprobatorio de mi Gobierno a la propuesta del Programa y Presupuesto que se nos ha sometido, permítaseme, sin embargo, hacer algunas consideraciones sobre criterios a ciertos elementos del Programas que nos merecen particular atención.
En términos generales, Sr. Presidente, a mi delegación le parecen afortunados los planteamientos fundamentales del documento, tanto en lo que se refiere a criterios generales, como al aumento de los recursos para los Programas técnicos y económicos, como Agricultura, Pesca y Montes. Consideramos, sin embargo, que en el caso del Programa de Cooperación Técnica, el aumento es muy insuficiente, ya que se trata de un programa sumamente valioso que permite sentar las bases de proyectos de amplia magnitud, así como por su acción catalítica en la solución de problemas específicos que con frecuencia se presentan en el sector de la producción de alimentos en los países en desarrollo.
Estamos también de acuerdo con los criterios seguidos en las asignaciones a las nueve esferas prioritarias señaladas en el párrafo 4.6, en particular los relativos a biotecnología, protección de cultivos, plan de acción forestal tropical, el programa de la mujer en el desarrollo y la acuicultura.
En lo que respecta al Programa principal de agricultura, fundamental en las operaciones de la FAO, consideramos importante el reforzamiento de los programas de fertilizantes, el apoyo a los países en los planes y políticas integrales de riego y agricultura, con el fin de hacer mas eficientes los sietemas e impedir el deterioro de suelos.
Con relación a los cultivos, consideramos necesario mantener enfoques integrados de plagas, así como un control preciso de las implicaciones del uso de plaguicidas y pesticidas. En materia de investigación, consideramos necesario impulsar el área de la biotecnología, tanto en el sector agrícola como en el ganadero y la transferencia a los países en desarrollo.
En lo relativo al Programa de Ganadería es muy importante que en materia de sanidad animal, se revitalice la capacitación a los productores en aspectos de prevención y control de enfermedades, con una orientación al manejo de ganado y de las áreas de pastoreo. Consideramos que este es un importante campo para la CTPD, que la FAO debe fomentar y en la que México está dispuesto a participar, ya hemos expresado, Sr. Presidente, el apoyo del Gobierno mexicano en la lucha contra le gusano barrenador del ganado. Actualmente trabajan en Libia técnicos mexicanos con ese propósito.
Sobre el fomento de la carne, debe considerarse prioritario el apoyo al fomento de pequeños rumiantes, aves y cerdos en sistemas de producción de traspatio que contemplen como puntos importantes el uso de esquilmos y sus productos agrícolas, así como sanitarias.
En lo que respecta al Programa de Montes, reiteramos nuestro apoyo a la orientación que se observa en esta materia, a partir del Plan de Acción Forestal Tropical. México se ha integrado plenamente a este programa.
En materia de recursos de pastizales, forrajes y piensos, sugerimos que la FAO dé prioridad al establecimiento y formación de semilleros de plantas forrajeras adaptadas a cada región o autóctonas de las misma, así como a la formación de bancos regionales de germoplasma forrajero nativo. Igualmente debe darse prioridad a la producción de proteína unicelular mediante sus tratos de origen local, como la melaza de azúcar.
México le da gran importancia a los recursos genéticos tanto vegetales como animales. Hemos ya expresado nuestro apoyo en relación con ello en los temas 6 y 8 de este programa. Seguiremos con atención que se den los pasos para analizar y materializar las iniciativas propuestas ya que como vimos en las deliberaciones, no se han hecho las prevenciones presupuestarias que deberán reflejarse en la versión final, y asimismo las relativas al Programa de Nutrición y al Codex Alimentarius, a las cuales la delegación de Mexico, como tantas otras, expresaron su mayor apoyo durante la ultima reunión del COAG.
Citando estos varios ejemplos, Sr. Presidente, deseamos referirnos a uno de los aspectos sobre los cuales se nos ha pedido pronunciarnos y que se refieren al experimento de la sesión temprana de enero del año de la Conferencia para fijar orden de prioridades y nivel presupuestario.
Mi delegación, Sr. Presidente, considera que la validez del sistema actual queda una vez más demostrado. Creemos que el flujo de información proveniente de los debates de las Conferencias Regionales y de los Comités Principales, los cuales, a su vez, se alimentan de órganos subsidiarios, son los que a la luz de los debates orientados por la situación existente en correlación con el marco de mediano plazo, deben dar las bases para que los Comités del Programa y de Finanzas en sus sesiones ordinarias de mayo y septiembre, hagan primero la propuesta y después la versión definitiva a fin de evitar al máximo problemas de adjudicación y reajustes entre los varios programas causando con ello malestar y forcejeo.
De otra parte, cuando se recortan o no se pueden celebrar reuniones que la mayoría de los países consideramos relevantes, creemos que dedicárselos a un ejercicio que viene a alterar los procesos normales es aun menos justificado.
Regresando a las consideraciones programáticas, permítaseme expresar el apoyo al Programa de Integración y Capacitación de la Mujer, que mi Gobierno considera como prioritario, así como también al de Pesca, sobre el cual ya nos hemos pronunciado.
En lo que toca al personal, mi Delegación se siente preocupada, por una parte, porque en el contexto global habrá una incidencia presupuestal difícil de prever; pero, por otra, ocurre que por varios años consecutivos la reducción del personal nos parece peligrosa. Creemos que se tienen que resistir las presiones para recortar indiscriminadamente en la Administración, pues tratar de dar satisfacción en ese sentido buscando aún explicaciones en la computerización, no es realista. Hay que evaluar hasta dónde la eficiencia del personal profesional calificado es menguada por la falta de personal de apoyo. En una Organización de asistencia técnica, la productividad es un factor cuyo valor no va en relación directa con el de los costos, y hay que analizar bien esa perspectiva en la toma de decisiones.En ese contexto, nos congratula que el programa de campo de la FAO se vea apoyado por una revitalización de la entrega de programas FAO-PNUD, y esperamos verdaderamente que sea el presagio de mayor asignación de proyectos.
Vemos con agrado que varios países donantes siguen aportando fondos fiduciarios para que la Organización los canalice en asistencia técnica a los países.Esperamos que aquéllos se aumenten y, asimismo, la flexibilidad en su aplicación programática y regional. Entendemos la preocupación expresada por algunas delegaciones respecto del costo operativo de algunas representaciones regionales y nacionales de la FAO. Se deben racionalizar; sin embargo, debemos entender que son mecanismos fundamentales para la operación regional de los programas, y no hay que olvidar que deseamos una FAO fuerte y operativa, no una institución con mezcla de burocracia y computadoras.
Finalmente, al reiterar nuestro apoyo al Programa de Presupuesto que nos ha presentado el Director General, hacemos un llamado a todos los países a unirnos en el consenso, como señal de solidaridad en la búsqueda de un objetivo que debe ser común, como el del derecho a la autosuficiencia alimentaria de nuestros pueblos.Este problema de los recortes presupuéstales en función de las retenciones de cuotas nos recuerda el cuento del niño que inventa al coco y luego se espanta con él. Así, los países que retienen cuotas y luego acusan a la Organización de insuficiencia de fondos y le exigen reestructurarse,por la difícil situación económica por la que atraviesa.
Para terminar, Sr. Presidente, deseo mencionar que mi Delegación se reserva el derecho de solicitar más tarde el uso de la palabra, para el caso de que nuestros debates así lo requieran.
Istvan DOBOCZKY (Hungary):The Hungarian delegation has carefully studied the Director-General's Summary Programme of Work and Budget for the 1990-91 biennium.At our present session our task is to review this Programme of Work and Budget which has already been endorsed by the Programme and Finance Committees of FAO, and also emphasized by Dr Saouma in his Introductory Statement made on Monday morning.
At the outset, we especially support the selection of priorities or priority areas among which we particularly welcome biotechnology, crop production, women in development, and also freshwater aquaculture.But in many respects we really miss the issue of environmental protection which should be supported by conservation of valuable resources.This is a vital problem and it is justifiable to select it as the subject for World Food Day this year.We are fully aware of the fact that this issue can be linked to other priority areas; my delegation proposes to take it up as the tenth priority area.
The proposal to increase the real programme by 1% or by US$ 5.5 million seems to us really symbolic in the first instance.However, we agree with those who say that every additional payment would cause problems for Member Nations and genuine difficulties, especially for the developing countries who are already crushed under the weight of debt.An increase in the present budget level could create difficulties for my country too, which also has serious budget constraints.I feel that some of the countries even from Eastern Europe share this view.But in spite of this, Hungary is not against the programme increase and we support the recommendation.
Of course, we understand that some of these factors are beyond the control of the Organization. We also accept that there are other measures which cannot be neglected, namely, that of the UN General Assembly and the initial International Civil Service Commission.
To summarize, we can accept the first indications on the Programme of Work and Budget for 1990-91 at this stage.The final decision will be made by the Conference in November of this year.
Ms Joan Wallace DAWKINS (United States of America):We compliment the Secretariat for the preperation of the Summary Programme of Work and Budget document end its early distribution to members.We believe the special meeting of the Programme and Finance Committees in January 1989 allowed for an early focus on the budget which resulted in the earlier preparation and distribution of the Summary Programme of Work and Budget.A number of other members have already commented on the evident usefulness of that meeting as a means of allowing an earlier dialogue between the Secretariat end members both on programme priorities and budget levels.For this reason, we strongly recommend that such a meeting be held again in 1991.
Our goal as FAO members is to arrive at a Programme of Work and Budget that can be supported by consensus et the Conference.The role of the Director-General is crucial in resolving any differences that may remain among members on aspects of the Programme of Work and Budget, end we urge him to continue using his influence to bring all members together to achieve budgetary consensus.
Before addressing the programme content of the Summary Programme of Work and Budget, we would briefly comment on the budgetary cost increases of some US$ 60 million, as outlined in pages 20-26 of the document.Although these cost increases have been discussed et some length in the Finance Committee, and Mr Shah has made reference to them in his presentation, we still do not have e sufficiently clear understanding of the reason for such a significant budgetary cost increase of 12%.We ask the Secretariat please to submit to members in the full Programme of Work and Budget document considerably greater detail on these increases.
A particularly helpful new feature of the Summary Programme of Work end Budget is the inclusion of budget figures for programme elements. This has improved the Summary Programme of Work end Budget end we commend the Secretariat for this change.
In general, we support the nine programme priorities for 1990-91, namely, agricultural data development, crop protection, women in development, sustainable development, crop/weather monitoring, biotechnology, aquaculture, the Tropical Forestry Action Plan, and policy advice-although we do have some qualifying points to offer regarding some of these priorities.
We support policy advice as a priority, but it is not completely clear whether there ere increased resources for enhancing the Organization's capacity for agricultural policy analysis and advice. Moreover, we are pleased to note that in his proposal of policy advice as a programme priority the Director-General foreshadowed a later, and similar, strong recommendation by the experts assisting in the review of FAO.The Conference, efter consideration of the FAO review, may find it desirable to shift even more resources into policy advice functions.Decisions by the Conference on the FAO review will almost certainly have other effects on the Programme of Work and Budget, and members should bear this in mind.
We continue to place high priority on Codex Alimentarius, AGRIS and CARIS, and the development of the World Agricultural Information Centre.
Fisheries information is also of importance to us, and we support the budgetary increases in that area.
The priority for women in development has received strong support by the United States and seemingly unanimous support by members who have specifically addressed it both et the present Council and in the 94th Council.We look forward to visible results from increased emphasis by FAO on women in development activities.
At COAG and COFI we have addressed in more detail the sections of the Summary Programme of Work and Budget on agriculture and fisheries and we need not reiterate most of the points made previously; this is our first opportunity, however, to comment on the major programme of forestry in the Summary Programme of Work and Budget.We support the overall increases in the forestry programme;in particular, we support FAO's work on a global forest resource assessment, as available data does need to be updated.The reason for the significant cut in forest policies and information and community forestry development is not clear in the Summary Programme of Work and Budget, and this cut is of concern to us.
We fully support the large increase in funding for the Tropical Forestry Action Plan.
Having expressed our support for a number of budgetary increases, we must not neglect our responsibility to provide suggestions on areas for possible budgetary savings.We realize that reaching decisions on areas of reduced budgetary priority is a difficult and painful exercise; nonetheless, it is one that we must undertake as responsible members of the Organization.We ask other members to bear this in mind and to view our suggestions in the careful and constructive spirit in which they are presented.
As some members are aware, in the fight against the locust plague, the United States has provided both extra-budgetary support to FAO and considerable bilateral assistance to a number of member countries.In fact, our team of 28 obtained special recognition from the Secretary of Agriculture. Our commitment to resolve the locust problem is evident.Due to recent successes in the locust campaign, however, experts are now generally of the view that the locust plague is well on its way to being checked.While we must keep a watchful eye, this success may obviate the need for the proposed budgetary increase.
In indicating support for sustainable development as a FAO priority, the United States, along with other members, has advocated the integration of sustainable resource considerations in all relevant offices of FAO as the most effective way to ensure the implementation of this important principle. Thus, we question the need for a separate sub-programme for sustaining resource potentials for which $ 560 000 is proposed in the Summary Programme of Work and Budget.
Biotechnology, a popular broadnew complex field, holds promise and challenges for the world.FAO has quickly become involved, sponsoring a number of conferences with experts on the subject.We also want to be sure that knowledge is gleaned and disseminated from the International and other research bodies, both public and private, to national centres by FAO.We also note that a total of $ A 832 000 has been requested for various programmes in this field, an increase of $ 988 000.We would suggest caution and a potential for reduction, since the real issue is access to information and new knowledge for the farmers.
In regard to the Technical Cooperation Programme, we note that historically only 23 percent of TCP resources are devoted to emergencies, which are vitally important to member countries.We believe that substantially greater effort should be made to the programme of TCP training and advisory services as part of the FAO regular budget or funded through other means, such as the UNDP.TCP training and advisory services should be more the exception than the rule.This could provide savings.TCP employs assessed contributions for unprogrammed activities.Although we do not deny the value of TCP as an emergency or bridging mechanism, it should be generally limited to those roles.
The United States has endorsed the programme priorities proposed by the Director-General and the proposed increases in the programmes for agriculture, fisheries and forestry.At the same time, we are committed to the principle of zero real programme growth in FAO as well as in United Nations system organizations in general.We have already suggested some areas for budgetary savings.
The United States remains convinced that FAO, along with the rest of the UN system and the development assistance community, must understand the reality that public monies are very limited and will remain so for the foreseeable future.National governments, including our own, and international organizations are confronted with a difficult choice.It would be unrealistic and ultimately damaging to those who benefit from the important work of FAO not to face this fact.For this reason, the United States is of the firm conviction that the only prudent budget policy for FAO and other UN organizations is that of zero real programme growth.The UN system is adapting to this principle.The United Nations itself has just approved a negative growth budget.FAO must also adapt to the current environment of budget stringency.
Finally, in regard to the financial resources for funding the budget, we would like to inform the Council members that the President of the United States has presented to our Congress a request for full funding for our 1989 assessed contribution to FAO.This request includes $ 61 million for our assessed contribution and also includes $ 8.3 million for a first installment on a plan for payment on our arrearages to FAO.We are hopeful that our President's budgetary request will be approved by our Congress which under law has final authority for appropriation of all government funds.
We are confident that the Organization can achieve the budgetary savings that would result in e zero real growth programme budget for the 1990-91 biennium, a budget we can all support.
Ray ALLEN (United Kingdom): We are pleased to see the improvements made in the method of presenting the proposed Programme of Work and Budget.The inclusion of comparative budget figures between biennia makes the proposed budgetary changes much easier to follow.I reiterate the comments made by the United Kingdom at previous Council meetings.The United Kingdom policy towards the role of FAO is clear.We consider that the improvement of agriculture in the developing countries, particularly in Africa, will remain the main global challenge well into the next century.
While we recognize that FAO has a role to play in relation to the industrialized countries in areas of statistics and technical issues which have a global aspect, we consider that the Organization should primarily be orientated towards the needs of the developing countries.In this respect, we welcome the fact that technical and economic programmes have been highlighted for more attention. We also consider that the Organization has an important role in giving policy advice, especially of a country-specific nature.Such advice should normally be made available on request or as part of some general involvement in the donor system.We are disappointed that there appears to be a reduction of staffing in this area.
As I said in my intervention on the Committee on Agriculture, we are particularly pleased that an attempt has been made to classify priorities.We welcome these moves, but although there has been a reallocation of resources within and between programmes as I pointed out with COAG, it appears that most programme elements have been retained in one form or another and any savings reabsorbed.There is little evidence of change in the work to be undertaken and few signs of programmes ending and new ones beginning.We think there is a clear need for setting much stricter priorities, gearing the programmes to those priorities and ensuring that the more valuable programmes are protected from the possible effects of lack of staff and funds.
The paper before us identifies a number of priority areas.These have our general support.It is, however, not clear from the paper how these priority areas are reflected in the budgetary proposals. We welcome the comments made in paragraphs 4.32 and 4.33 on page 17 of document CL 95/3 that ways of presenting the special sections dealing with cross-sectoral priorities such as policy advice, sustainable development and women in development, will be considered in the full Programme of Work and Budget document, and we hope this will give us a clearer picture.We recognize the difficulties regarding priority setting within programmes of the budget, but we consider this essential if we are to have a clear picture of how the priorities are reflected in the Programme of Work and Budget.
As was said by the Finnish delegation, we think that the Organization should consider the reintroduction of medium-term planning.This plan could cover a period of, say, six years and be prepared on a rolling basis, amended or updated each biennium.Priorities between sections or between different cross-cutting aspects such as the environment or sustainable development, could be dealt with in this medium-term planning process.
While, as I said earlier, we generally support the priority areas selected, particularly those areas relating to environmental protection and sustainable development, we would have liked to have seen a little more explanation of the rationale for the selection.We think, in setting priorities, FAO should be selective and concentrate on those areas where it has established a comparative advantage or can demonstrate a unique competence.Budget increases are not always necessary if proper prioritizing and more selectivity are practiced.We think that Special Action Programmes like that of the Tropical Forestry Action Plan, can lead to better focusing on priorities, particularly in the field programme, and we urge that more such programmes be adopted.Priorities set by the Governing Bodies should be applied to the regular budget, the field programmes and the TCP alike.
We see no reason to increase resources allocated to the TCP.Better forward planning would allow for more funding from other sources and less recourse to short-term financing.We also think that there should be a clear link between the Regular Programme and the Field Programme.In this respect, we consider that the Governing Bodies should have a more active role in monitoring the Field Programme, and an appropriate mechanism needs to be found to achieve this.
We note the large allocations to the Regional Offices, and question the necessity for these increases.We would like to see some clarification of the role of these offices since we consider that more emphasis should be given at the country level and the strengthening of country offices. Cost increases for this could be kept down by more use of shared offices and general services with other UN organizations.
I commented earlier that we were pleased to see the improvements made in the method of presenting the Programme of Work and Budget.We have many times commented that we feel a need for a side-by-side presentation of the proposed expenditure with actual expenditure on proposed outturn,
comments on the effectiveness of the programme, and Information on the availability of funds to be carried forward.We think this Information would greatly add to the improvements already made.An additional improvement to the process, in our view, was the introduction of the additional step of an Outline Programme of Work and Budget.We note the comments made in paragraphs 1.9, 1.10 and 1.11 of document CL 95/4 regarding continuation of this procedure beyond 1990/91, but would like to put on record that the United Kingdom thought that this was a useful process, and wholeheartedly supports the delegation of France in this respect.
The financial constraints of the Organization have been in the forefront of discussions for some time and while, as mentioned in paragraph 3.8 on page 10 of document CL 95/3, it may be-and I quote here from the document "permissible to expect that the next biennium will see a gradual normalization in the payment of contributions by all Member Nations"·It goes on to say that "at the same time, the burden on Member Nations in meeting their financial obligations remains a factor which continues to warrant constraint".We echo these sentiments of restraint, and in this respect we would like to associate ourselves with the USA delegation in relation to budget growth.
Mr Chairman, we are unclear about the methodology used to calculate the cost increases, particularly that used for the calculation of inflation.For exmple, under "General Service Salaries", the inflation factor appears to us to be applied more than once per annum and we would appreciate some clarification of this.
We note that "post adjustment" costs seem to require a 77 percent increase over the 1988-89 figure, and the reason for this again is not entirely clear in the paper and we would be grateful if there could be some expansion on this.
Reference was made to the fact that the cost increases did not represent a record.Are we to read from this that because they are less than in previous bienniums we should automatically accept them. I have to say Mr Chairman, that the United Kingdom delegation still finds the cost increase of the Programme of Work and Budget of 12.2 percent unacceptably high, and ask that this is looked at carefully before the programme is finalized.
We also note the comments on pages 10 and 11 of the document which refer to the exchange rate fluctuations.Again we are not sure of the rationale for choosing an exchange rate pinned to single day.We would like some explanation of why perhaps an average rate for a representative past period cannot be chosen.
The comments made on page 35 of the document say that due account will be taken of the recommendations of bodies such as the Committees on Fisheries and on Agriculture as well as such views as the Programme and Finance Committees and the Council may wish to offer on the Summary Programme of Work and Budget.I would simply like to add that the final Programme of Work and Budget will also need to take account of any implications which may arise from the current review of FAO.
Mme Josefa COELHO DA CRUZ (Angola): Tout d'abord, nous tenons à féliciter M. Shah de son introduction très brillante du Sommaire du Programme de travail et budget pour 1990-91. Ce document concis et précis nous fournit des informations sur le choix des priorités, les propositions de programmes, les augmentations de coûts et l'utilisation proposée des ressources.
Nous ne pouvons passer sous silence les efforts déployés par le Directeur général pour l'élaboration de ce sommaire et nous lui rendons hommage. Ainsi, ma délégation approuve les neuf domaines prioritaires,car ils répondent aux directives données aux différents organes de l'Organisation, ainsi que l'accroissement des ressources affectées aux programmes techniques et économiques.
Nous appuyons le Programme de la santé animale mais nous voudrions attirer l'attention de la FAO sur une maladie que l'on oublie tout à fait, la peste suine africaine, qui est un fléau dans notre pays. Nous espérons son inclusion dans les priorités de l'Organisation, comme la peste bovine.
Le Programme international d'approvisionnement d'engrais était d'une importance capitale et nous ne pouvons qu'exprimer notre regret suite à son éviction.
S'agissant du problème du développement durable, nous souscrivons aux propos tenus hier par le délégué de Madagascar. Nous réitérons aussi notre appui au Programme des forêts, et en particulier au Plan d'action forestier tropical.
Parlant du Programme de coopération technique, nous exprimons nos regrets de voir que les ressources affectées à ce Programme sont très faibles, car le succès déjà enregistré depuis sa création a suffisamment démontré son dynamisme. Nous souhaitons voir accroître les ressources du PCT et nous croyons que le Directeur général reverra cette situation dans la version intégrale du Programme de travail et budget pour 1990-91.
Nous appuyons l'augmentation du budget ordinaire pour la coordination des activités de lutte contre les infestations acridiennes; et vu la persistance des infestations, nous pensons qu'un programme â long terme devra être élaboré pour une intervention rapide et continuelle. Nous appuyons aussi l'augmentation proposée pour le Plan d'action de la FAO pour l'intégration de la femme dans le développement agricole et rural. S'agissant des bureaux régionaux, leurs activités sont clairement décrites dans le Programme de travail et budget pour 1990-91 et notre appui est sans réserve.
Pour terminer, nous estimons que l'augmentation minime du niveau du budget de 5,5 millions de dollars, soit un pour cent, proposée par le Directeur général, ne répond pas aux besoins ressentis par les Etats Membres et ne comblera même pas les lacunes causées par les compressions de programmes opérées au cours des deux derniers exercises. Malgré cette faible croissance, nous appuyons le Sommaire du Programme de travail et budget et nous invitons le Directeur général â poursuivre l'élaboration de la version intégrale du Programme de travail et budget sur la base de ce sommaire.
Suniji NAKAZAWA (Japan): Thank you Mr. Chairman. To begin with I would like to express our tribute to the Secretariat for the well prepared document, "Summary Programme of Work and Budget 1990-91" which is before us. I would also like to thank Mr. Shah for his lucid introduction of this most important agenda item.
We are well aware that this document is the result of long work by the Secretariat which I suppose started at the end of last year, even if it is not the final document. Unfortunately since we are not a member of the two important committees, namely the Programme and Finance Committee, we participate only from this stage in the very important work on the FAO's activities in the next biennium.
However, I have no hesitation to express our high appreciation to the Secretariat for the efforts to follow a long way in order to achieve consensus among member countries in the preparation of the Programme of Work and Budget which is the new procedure of our Organization. I hope that this experiment will be very successful and fruitful.
Mr. Chairman, we have carefully studied this document and have found that it is very useful for the preparation of the final programme of work and budget for the next biennium.
First of all I feel that we should touch upon the budget level and the priority setting which were already discussed early this year in the two committees.
As regards the budget level, we wonder if the Secretariat's proposal of the real growth by 1.1 percent is appropriate. We should take into account that this real increase is added to by 12.2 percent cost increase and the eventual increase of the percentage of assessed contribution in the case of many countries.. And the most important thing that we should consider is the overall very serious financial situation of Member Nations, of which my government is not an exception. Therefore, we would like to ask the Secretariat for further efforts to retain the same budget level as the last biennium. I would like to stress that even this level could pose heavy burdens on member countries. My government sticks to the principle of real zero growth.
In this connection I would like to refer to the Director-General's statement in which he mentioned the necessity of additional financial resources in implementing the recommendations which come up from the FAO Review. But in our understanding, the main objective of the FAO Review was to enhance the efficiency of FAO, as formulated in paragraph 1.5 of Document CL 94/4 of the last Conference. In other words, how to make FAO strengthen its capacity within the limited resources. Therefore, I am afraid that the Director-General's suggestions may well undermine the objective of the FAO Review. In this regard, as we have already suggested in the Agenda Item 8, measures such as the reduction of low priority projects, the avoidance of duplication with other organizations, more concentrated allocation of resources to high priority areas, setting an implementation period for new programmes, the evaluation and reconsideration of the implementation period for on-going programmes are all inevitable to avoid unnecessary budget increase.
As to the impact of the FAO Review on the budget, however, since we have to wait longer for the report of the Special Joint Session, at the moment we reserve our position.
Mr Chairman, as regards the priority-setting, our basic standpoint is that in order for FAO to respond promptly and effectively to the problems of world food and agriculture, FAO should firstly further promote coordination with other UN organizations and aid organizations; secondly it should strengthen the capacity of analyzing, evaluating and disseminating information as the world agricultural forum and agricultural information centre, and thirdly it should establish the efficient and effective management system of a great deal of projects, including field projects, as the expert organization. From these viewpoints, we are pleased to generally support those nine priority areas presented in the document. However, we feel that these areas are not made sufficiently clear in the individual programmes which need to be further improved.
In this connection, concerning the priority-setting, I feel we have to recall that the discussions in the regional conferences should be reflected in preparing the Programme of Work and Budget, but there is no reference in the document. Therefore, I would like to ask the Secretariat for clarification.
Now I would like to go into the individual priority areas. But before that, I wish to touch upon TCP, which is not presented as a priority area but its budget increase is outstanding and larger than that of priority areas. I think that I need not reiterate the problems of TCP, which have often been discussed. On the other hand, we do not ignore the fact that TCP is much appreciated, especially by recipient countries. But we believe that the problems remain the same and the transparency essential, which also benefits recipient countries.
In this regard we would like to ask the Secretariat to present sufficient Information on the implementation of TCP, including the contents of projects by programme area and by region, criteria and priority areas in adoption and a list of ongoing and completed projects, which should be presented to governing bodies.
We also think that the role of TCP should be clarified in relation to UNDP and the Trust Fund from donor countries. As to the budget level for TCP, such a large increase as is proposed is not acceptable as we think that scarce resources should be allocated to the priority areas.
Let us now turn to each individual priority area. Firstly, sustainable development. We recognize that it is both important and beneficial to ensure food production increase by practising ecologically sustainable agriculture for food security as an environmental issue of world concern on a global basis. When developing countries mobilize various policies for food and agricultural development it is important not only to endeavour to develop and disseminate the technology needed for ecologically sustainable agriculture, but also to pay full attention to adjusting policies in harmony with the ecosystem, including regulations by governments and other authorities. We expect FAO to take a leading role in this field.
With regard to crop/weather monitoring and agricultural data development, as mentioned earlier in Agenda Item 8, COAG Report, we fully support the strengthening of FAO's activities in this field with a view to enhancing its function as a world food and agriculture information centre.
As for biotechnology, it is our view that FAO should give priority to this area so as to promote world food and agricultural development, especially in handling policy and institutional issues of utilization in the field. Owing to its highly technical nature, FAO should pay attention to the relationship with relevant research institutes.
As concerns crop protection, we highly appreciate the FAO's activities such as the collection, analysis and dissemination of information for the desert locust. Japan has been actively assisting the FAO desert locust control programme through contribution to the Trust Fund and executing increased production aid on a bilateral and multilateral basis, with the donation of pesticides, and other materials. A recent example is the additional US$ 8 million which was contributed through FAO to assist the desert locust control in African countries.
With regard to policy advice, this is one of FAO's most important activities in assisting the self-supporting efforts of food and agricultural development in developing countries. We feel some concern towards the proposed budget decrease in this field.
As concerns the area of women in development, we support the Resolution 1/94 of the last session of the Council and also the individual activities backed by FAO. We recognize that this activity should be incorporated into the development programme in general, and we therefore anticipate that every effort should be made in FAO activities as a whole.
As to aquaculture, we support the strengthening of activities in this field as the role of aquaculture will continue to be important in fulfilling the need for protein resources.
Finally, with regard to the Tropical Forestry Action Plan (TFAP), in recognizing the importance of establishing national tropical forestry action plans to promote concrete activities based on the TFAP and contributing a trust fund to FAO for TFAP, we support the priority given to that activity.
Igor MARINCEK (Suisse): J'aimerais d'abord remercier M. Shah et M. Bukharl pour leur introduction â ce point important de l'Ordre du jour.
Dans mon intervention, j'aimerais traiter les questions suivantes: premièrement, l'orientation du Programme ordinaire; deuxièmement la concentration sur les domaines prioritaires et l'augmentation de l'efficacité; troisièmement les domaines où des coupures et des économies seraient possibles; quatrièmement, la question des augmentations des coûts et cinquièmement, le PCT.
Avant d'aborder ces questions, j'aimerais préciser que mon pays, bien que soutenant l'objectif de croissance réelle 0, peut accepter la faible croissance réelle proposée par le Directeur général. Avec ce geste, nous voulons souligner que notre objectif n'est pas une FAO coûtant moins cher, mais une FAO donnant de meilleurs résultats.
J'en viens au premier point de mon intervention: l'orientation du Programme ordinaire.
L'action de la FAO doit viser les grands défis qui se posent dans le domaine de l'agriculture, des pêches et des forêts, et je pense qu'il y a un consensus parmi les Etats Membres sur cette question. Le défi principal est de combattre la faim et la pauvreté, comme cela est stipulé dans le Préambule des textes fondamentaux de la FAO. Notre Conseil est donc appelé à oeuvrer en faveur d'une concentration de l'action et des programmes de la FAO sur lee domaines où celle-ci peut apporter la meilleure contribution à un objectif aussi fondamental.
Dans le paragraphe 4.6, on nous a proposé neuf domaines prioritaires qui devraient profiter de crédits accrus. Bien que s'agissant l en partie de moyens plutôt que d'objectifs, comme l'a dit le représentant de la France, nous pouvons soutenir ces priorités en général. Nous aimerions cependant qu'on les mette en rapport étroit avec l'objectif principal qu'est la sécurité alimentaire.
Ma délégation aimerait, par ailleurs, souligner qu'il y a intérêt á améliorer l'interaction entre programme ordinaire et programme de terrain, ce qui favorise les synergies. Un bon moyen pour cela sont les programmes spéciaux d'action du type PAFT.
Parmi les domaines prioritaires présentés au paragraphe 4.6, trois nous semblent particulièrement importante. D'abord l'analyse et les conseils en matière de politique agricole au niveau des pays, ensuite le développement des informations agricoles, notamment les statistiques, et finalement le développement durable.
Concernant ce dernier point, nous soutenons l'idée, avancée dans une récente résolution du PNUE, portant sur la tenue d'une réunion conjointe FAO-PNUE en vue de la préparation de la Conférence des Nations Unies sur le développement durable, prévue pour 1992. Une telle réunion permettrait de mieux définir le concept du développement durable, comme l'a demandé à juste titre le délégué de Madagascar·
Pour ce qui est de l'allocation des ressources aux domaines prioritaires que je viens de citer, elle ne ressort pas clairement des propositions, comme l'a aussi souligné le délégué du Royaume-Uni. Nous souhaitone que la plus grande partie possible des ressources budgétaires y soit allouée, et pas seulement l'augmentation réelle du budget.
Je me trouve donc déjà au deuxième point de mon intervention, c'est-à-dire la concentration sur les domaines prioritaires et l'augmentation de l'efficacité.
Ma délégation se félicite de l'amélioration de la transparence dans la présentation du Sommaire du programme et budget, amélioration qui est due notamment à la présentation détaillée des élements de programme. Il y a là un progrès indéniable. Une simple analyse quantitative nous apprend cependant qu'on nous propose une augmentation du nombre de ces élements de programme.
Dans le seul grand programme agriculture, 11 y aurait une augmentation des éléments de programme de 213 actuellement à 218. C'est dire que l'on nous propose un éparpillement des ressources.
Monsieur le Président, nous cherchons tous à faire de notre Organisation un instrument plus fort dans la lutte contre la faim et la pauvreté. Nous ne pensons pas qu'un éparpillement des ressources nous rapprochera de ce but. Pour rendre la FAO plus efficace et plus forte, il faudra renoncer à certaines activités et tirer mieux profit de la division du travail dans le système multilatéral. L'augmentation du nombre d'éléments de programme dans le programme de travail proposé montre que notre Organisation a beaucoup de difficultés à remettre en question des programmes existants, difficulté qui s'est déja manifestée lors de la crise financière de l'Organisation.
Pour agrandir la flexibilité on pourrait limiter les éléments de programme dans le temps et leur fixer en même temps des objectifs prêcie. Dans les activités européennes de la FAO, cette approche a donné de bons résultats, comme en témoignent les réseaux coopératifs de recherche appelée ESCORENA.
Le manque de flexibilité dans l'orientation des activités tient en grande partie aux rigidités liées à ses ressources humaines comme l'a expliqué M. Shah lors du dernier COAG. Il est clair qu'un spécialiste des maladies animales ne peut pas faire des analyses de politique agricole. Il semble qu'aujourd'hui la FAO n'ait pas encore de plane à moyen terme de ses besoins en personnel. Elle ne se pose donc pas la question d'une manière organisée de quels spécialistes et généralistes elle aura
besoin dans le futur. Cela est étonnant car pour avoir une FAO efficace et capable d'ajuster son cap, il faut une gestion rationnelle de ses ressources humaines, gestion qui doit être liée à une planification à moyen terme des activités de l'Organisation.
L'actuel manque de flexibilité dans l'utilisation des ressources humaines de la FAO rend les réorientations de notre Organisation très difficiles. Aussi nous devenons otages de nos choix précédente, et il ne reste qu'une petite partie du budget que nous pouvons effectivement utiliser pour ce que nous considérons comme priorité, M. Shah pourra nous dire, et je lui demande de le faire, quelle partie du budget est effectivement ouverte à une nouvelle programmation.
Monsieur le Président, nous sommes face à la question: comment assurer que la production-si je peux utiliser ce terme-de la FAO puisse s'adapter sans prendre du retard aux exigences d'un monde en changement.
Nous pensons qu'il n'est pas nécessaire que la FAO puisse offrir chez elle une réponse à tout problème reconnu comme prioritaire dans les débats de ses organes. A notre avis, il suffit dans bien des domaines que la FAO sache où trouver l'expertise nécessaire pour tel ou tel problème et comment la mobiliser, c'est-à-dire assurer la fonction de ce que j'appellerai un "clearing house"·
Heureusement, la FAO n'est pas seule. A la différence de 1945, moment où elle a été créée, il existe aujourd'hui d'autres organisations spécifiques qui s'occupent de l'agriculture et du développement rural et qui offrent à la FAO la possibilité de se décharger de quelques responsabilités de réduire des capacités de caractère "stand by" pour mieux concentrer son action. Je pense notamment aux centres internationaux de recherche agricole, y compris l'IFPRI, je pense aussi à l'IFAD et j'en passe.
Monsieur le Président, pour illustrer notre souci de meilleure définition des activités prioritaires et indiquer des possibilités d'économies, permettez-moi de vous donner brièvement quelques exemples:
Le Sous-programme 2.1.15 "Conservation et bonification" a été flanqué d'un nouveau sous-programme 2.1.1.6 "Sauvegarde du potentiel naturel". A nos yeux, les activités de ces deux sous-programmes ne nécessitent pas une séparation qui risque d'engendrer des double-emplois.
Autre exemple: dans le sous-programme 2.1.3.1 "Pâturages, fourrages, et aliments du bétail", l'élément du Programme 03 "Fixation biologique de l'azote" a une dotation de 128 000 dollars. Nous nous demandons ce que la FAO peut apporter aux pays membres dans ce domaine, vu le budget trés limité en regard de ce qui se fait dans la recherche internationale. S'agit-il de diffusion d'information, de formation?
Ensuite, sur le plan plus général, nous nous demandons si l'équilibre entre les différents grands programmes ainsi qu'entre les programmes, équilibre qui paraît pratiquement immuable, ne mériterait pas de faire l'objet d'une discussion plus approfondie dans le cadre d'une planification à moyen terme prenant en compte l'évolution des besoins.
Monsieur le Président, nous apprécions le travail qu'a fait le Comité du Programme dans l'appréciation du Programme proposé. Malheureusement, son rapport reste assez imprécis. Je prends au hasard les paragraphes 2.54 á 2.56. Dans le paragraphe 2.54, le Comité du Programme dit par exemple que l'une des priorités est d'améliorer le potentiel pastoral dans les régions arides et semi-arides. C'est effectivement une priorité très importante dans de nombreux pays. En fait, il y a beaucoup de questions très importantes pour les divers pays. Malheureusement, le rapport ne nous dit pas en quoi la FAO est particulièrement capable de fournir une contribution significative. On aurait aimé trouver quelques références au rôle des politiques des pays intéressés ainsi que des recommandations sur une division du travail entre la FAO et le CGIAR dans le domaine technique, par exemple dans le sens que la FAO serve de "clearing house" ou d'agent de vulgarisation entre le CGIAR et les pays.
Le paragraphe 2.55 du rapport du Comité du Programme parle de l'importance des campagnes contre les maladies animales. Voila un domaine classique où la FAO a un avantage comparatif dans la coordination de telles campagnes. L'action de la FAO dans ce domaine reste très importante, comme nous le rappelle par ailleurs la menace du ver taraudeur. Le paragraphe 2.56 parle de la nécessité d'exploiter au maximum les possibilités d'application des biotechnologies. Là encore, on doit se poser la question si la FAO est vraiment le bon partenaire pour les pays qui s'intéressent à c es techniques. Il faudrait spécifier ses possibilités de contribution. Dans l'ensemble, le rapport du Comité du Programme reflète surtout les espoirs mis dans la FAO. Pour partir dans ces expectations d'une base réaliste, chaque pays devrait peut-être davantage se poser la question: Quelle est aujourd'hui la contribution effective de la FAO à son propre développement?
Il y a des économies possibles dans les services généraux de notre Organisation qui n'affectent pas les programmes. Je pense aux services d'imprimerie, aux services d'entretien et de sécurité, et j'en passe. Il semble qu'il y ait là des possibilités d'économies se chiffrant à plusieurs millions de
dollars par an. De telles économies devraient être réalisées au plus vite et pourraient de préférence profiter au chapitre 2.1.8 "Politiques alimentaires et agricoles" qui abrite les activités d'analyse et conseil en matière de politique agricole. Activités reconnues, 11 me semble, par consensus comme très prioritaires, et qui d'après les propositions du Secrétariat subiraient même une diminution budgétaire. Cette diminution est regrettée par de nombreuses délégations.
J'en viens á mon quatrième point: la question de l'augmentation des coûts. Le tableau dans le paragraphe 6.8 nous informe par exemple qu'il y a un accroissement des coûts de près de 80 pour cent dans l'ajustement de postes. Il y a presque 13 000 000 de dollars pour la période 1988-89. Il semble que ce chiffre soit additionnel à ce que la dernière conférence a déjà autorisé pour le biennium en cours. Il est vrai d'autre part que les ajustements de postes sont décidés à New York et que nous n'avons pas de possibilité, ici, d'influencer ces décisions. Permettez-moi cependant quelques questions. La première question: le montant de rattrapage pour 1988-89, c'est-à-dire les 12,8 millions de dollars corespondent-ils à l'effectif de personnel tel que prévu dans le Programme de travail et budget? Ou est-ce que ce chiffre est déjà corrigé pour ne tenir compte que du personnel effectivement employé par la FAO après les coupures qui ont dû avoir lieu en raison de la situation financière?
Deuxièmement, en page 25 du rapport en français, nous lisons la phrase suivante; je cite: "Dans l'attente de la fixation définitive du coefficient multiplicateur en 1989, des crédits sont prévus pour couvrir en 1990-91 les coûts correspondant à l'entrée en application de la classe 11 en janvier 1990, de la classe 12 en janvier 1991 et de la classe 13 en décembre 1991". Il semble donc que toutes les décisions pour l'année en cours ne soient pas encore prises et que l'évolution pour 1990 et 1991 reste encore très ouverte.
Vu cette incertitude, il me semble qu'une autorisation définitive des augmentations des coûts ne serait pas justifiée. Notre autorisation devrait plutôt être conditionnelle à l'évolution effective des coûts, évolutions qui devrait être vérifiée par le vérificateur des comptes. Cette proposition concerne évidemment l'ensemble des accroissements des coûts. On pourrait également envisager la création d'un fonds spécial pour les accroissements des coûts, dans lequel l'Organisation pourrait puiser dans la mesure des accroissements effectifs, sous contrôle du vérificateur des comptes. Ma délégation propose que le Comité financier étudie cette question et propose à notre prochain Conseil une formule pratique et flexible dans le sens proposé. Finalement, pour ce qui est des chiffres concrets, nous aimerions connaître du Secrétariat l'augmentation effective des coûts dans le biennium précédent, c'est-à-dire 1986-87, et en 1988. Cette information nous semble indispensable au Conseil et à la Conférence pour voir plus clair et pour pouvoir apprécier la question des augmentations des coûts.
Finalement, quelques mots concernant le TCP. Le montant budgétaire nous semble élevé, en particulier par rapport aux dépenses passées de ce programme. Maie l'important pour noue c'est de bien orienter et utiliser le TCP, c'est-à-dire en fonction des grandes priorités et comme lien étroit entre programme régulier et programme de terrain, de préférence dans le cadre de programmes d'action spéciaux du nouveau type caractérisés par le PAFT.
Nous pensons aussi que les pays membres sont en droit d'avoir des rapports plus détaillés sur l’utilisation du TCP et nous sommes en faveur d'une plus grande transparence dans le TCP comme demandé par l'honorable délégué du Japon. A notre avis, une très grande partie du TCP, par exemple 80 pour cent, devrait être réservée à l'usage exclusif des priorités mentionnées dans le paragraphe 4.6; notamment pour financer des travaux préparatoires dans ces domaines. Nous pensons, dans ce contexte, en particulier à l'objectif de la sécurité alimentaire, notamment aux analyses et conseils en matière de politique agricole pour des pays individuels et à l'assistance aux pays qui se trouvent dans un excercice d'ajustement structurel.
Permettez-moi aussi de soutenir la proposition pertinente de la Tchécoslovaquie concernant un renforcement de la coordination entre le Bureau régional de la FAO pour l'Europe et la CEE à Genève. Nous partageons également les remarques de cette délégation sur le rôle des bureaux des représentants de la FAO dans les pays. J'aimerais aussi soutenir les observations du délégué du Royaume-Uni sur le rôle des bureaux régionaux.
Pour finir, l'approbation du Sommaire du Programme de travail et budget par le Conseil devrait se faire sous réserve des résultats des débats sur la réforme et les ajustements de la FAO. Dans ce contexte nous ne pensons pas que la mise en application de recommandations de réformes, qui seront, nous l'espérons, le résultat de cet excercice, doivent amener des coûts supplémentaires. Ma délégation s'est déjà exprimée à ce sujet dans son intervention concernant le rapport du COAG.
Bashir EL MABROUK SAID (Libya) (Original language Arabic): First of all, 1, on behalf of my delegation, would like to warmly congratulate my friends Mr Shah and His Excellency Ambassador Bukhari for the two excellent presentations which they have made to the Summary Programme of Work and Budget and the report of the Joint Meeting of the Programme and Finance Committees.
I will be brief, because my delegation has discussed this matter in detail during the meetings of the Programme Committee, of which I am a member. I would like to affirm that those who have followed the preparation of the Programme of Work and Budget from the very beginning are satisfied with the valuable and constructive efforts made by the Secretariat, and are appreciative of the commendable efforts made by the Director-General and his staff in order to reconcile two diametrically opposed situations. On the one hand there is the urgent and increasing needs of developing countries. There is the increase in world population-80 million additional mouths to feed every year. Desert locust swarms have spread in many countries in Africa.
In addition there is the spread of the screwworm fly in some countries of North Africa which has been seen recently in Libya. With all these problems we have very limited resources. On the other hand, voices are calling for zero growth, and I think the Secretariat is in a difficult position. The programme we are discussing now is the result of the joint effort of the Secretariat and the recommendations of the regional meetings of COAG, COFI and COFO in which all members are actively participating. All these commissions and committees form the basis on which the Secretariat and the Programme and Finance Committees can put together the different elements of the Summary Programme of Work and Budget.
I agree with the idea that the Council is not required to take a decision on this Summary Programme of Work and Budget in its current session, but is called upon to prepare objectives and priorities. I do not think we are going to vote on the budget level, but will just define the priorities.
I join with those who have said that we should be very flexible at this time. We have to strive to achieve consensus. I think the Secretariat has always sought consensus, and is always trying to find a formula acceptable to all members. We hope the Council will follow the example of the Finance and Programme Committees in reaching consensus.
Although my delegation in the past has objected to the zero growth principle, and it affirms that a 1.1 percent growth rate is necessary at a time when we can see the problems are increasing, out of respect for the wish of the majority and for the consensus I would like to join those who have supported this level and also the nine themes and priorities mentioned in the document.
Allow me to make some remarks which I deem necessary. My first remark concerns the Technical Cooperation Programme. This Programme has commanded the support of all the delegations. I hope it will be given adequate priority in the Summary Programme of Work and Budget, and that additional allocations will be made in order to enable this Programme to carry out activities which will be satisfactory to member countries.
My second remark concerns the spread of the screwworm fly in North Africa. This pest is spreading very easily in all the neighbouring countries, and in Libya, of course. Unless urgent measures are taken and unless a major programme or sub-programme is established within this programme, this threat will spread and the damage will be enormous. I take this opportunity to commend the efforts made by FAO in the past to combat this pest. I would like also to thank the Agriculture Department, Mr Bonte-Frledhelm and his collaborators for all their efforts in combatting this pest.
Those who say that the Organization should have a long-term plan do not take into account the fact that the Organization is not dealing with a rigid, unchanging thing. The Organization has already proved its ability, and the field workers who are working in rather unfavourable conditions in some countries have made every possible effort in the past to prove in this biennium that we have a flexible organization. It is a very flexible organization, and quickly responds to the needs of the developing countries. Therefore, I join previous speakers who expressed satisfaction and who gave their support to this Summary Programme of Work and Budget. I hope that the majority of delegations will accept it.
At if Y. BUKHARI (Saudi Arabia, Kingdom of) (Original language Arabic): I shall not deal with this document in a detailed manner because I am a member of Finance Committee, and because we have had ample opportunity to review the Summary Programme of Work and Budget. If I may, I would like to state that the Summary Programme of Work and Budget for 1990-91 is the final stocktaking of joint efforts which have borne fruit. We now have this document before us. I wish to avail myself of the opportunity to express my thanks to the Director-General and his collaborators for this creative piece of work and for having responded to the needs of member countries.
Likewise, I wish to address my most sincere thanks to the loyal efforts made by the Finance and Programme Committees since the very famous meeting held in January and until the publishing of this Summary. We know how heavy a burden these two Committees have borne in carrying out their tasks. My delegation wishes unreservedly to support this Programme of Work and Budget for the coming blennlum.
Our approval is given on the basis of our conviction that FAO is indeed the main channel through which solidarity and international cooperation can be achieved, especially in the area of food and agriculture. Whenever technical means are available, this main channel can achieve the transfer of technology, and can develop the role of agriculture in developing countries. But we should be realistic. We should live with reality. International economic recovery, which unfortunately has started slowing down in the past few years, has left a negative trace in the economies of developing countries. This has weakened the development plans of the latter and has not allowed those countries to proceed to the expansion of the food and agriculture sector. Whatever the efforts of developing countries may be to make up for these economic difficulties (which may be of a different nature), nonetheless the unforeseen changes in the strategies and policies of developed countries become an obstacle to those efforts, and the problems met by developing countries increase.
This is why we are convinced that FAO, which has the lead in the field of food and agriculture, is in fact the only hope, the only door on which developing countries may knock to receive unconditional support. It is our duty to give our support to FAO so that it may fully play its leadership role in this particular instance to the benefit of all countries of the world, especially developing countries, which need more and better justice in the sphere of international economics.
As you may know, Mr Chairman, the international community must be seen as a whole. It is a chain, and a single weak link in that chain can disrupt all the work of that particular chain. The budget established by FAO and the net increase in resource allocations for the Technical Cooperation Programme-all these different items will not be sufficient to eradicate hunger and malnutrition in the world. We still have a very long and harsh way ahead and cannot eradicate hunger and malnutrition unless there is a common political will, unless joint efforts are made to improve the situation which becomes constantly degraded, and unless we respect the legitimate expectations of developing countries.
Both developed and developing countries must invest more and more in the agricultural sector and ensure that the population in developing countries have the food security they require. National skills must be adapted on a regional, national and International basis. In recent years, FAO has been faced with extremely difficult situations which have led to a cash-flow crisis. Although FAO, thanks to its goodwill and management, has been able to safeguard its future and continue with its work, nonetheless cuts have become necessary in economic and technical activities which were carried out in favour of developing countries. These cuts have a negative impact on countries receiving FAO assistance. Of course, this is worsening the burden of hunger and malnutrition in these countries. This is why 1 would like to launch an appeal to all countries and to the biggest contributors to the FAO budget. I call on them to pay their contributions to FAO in due time and in an unconditional manner.
1 would like to ask these countries to avoid policies based on pressure and menaces because the alms of FAO are humanitarian in nature, and if these pressures are removed FAO will find its dignity and freedom.
Now 1 would like to express the full agreement of my delegation to the nine priority areas and join all those who believe that sustainable development should not be at the top of the list. We fear that this might be prejudicial to other FAO priorities. Furthermore, this might lead to an overlapping with the specialized activities in this field such as the activities of UNIDO. UNIDO is now preparing an extended and comprehensive programme to provide assistance to developing countries, especially in the field of the environment.
Now I would like to speak very briefly about the Special Joint Session of the two Committees, the Finance and Programme Committees, which was held last January. We hope that this meeting has attained its objectives, but we would like to say that the time is not ripe or appropriate to decide now on the results of this meeting. This might be done during the next general Conference. This experience could be extended over the next two years so that we can judge this new approach.
I would like to comment on what was stated by some speakers to the effect that there must be a way of linking the results of the Council, general Conference, Programme and Finance Committees to the review of FAO activities. We are convinced that a review of FAO activities is a completely independent sector which has nothing to do with the Programme of Work and Budget for 1990-91.
Bernd von SYDOW (Germany, Federal Republic of): Let me start by thanking Mr Shah and His Excellency Mr Bukhari for very helpful introductions to the Summary Programme of Work and Budget. It was so comprehensive and enlightening that we were inclined to re-write our statement.
To begin with the FAO programme for 1990-91 as proposed, and specifically the priorities selected, I am happy to state that we are quite satisfied with the Director-General's proposals and choices. In this respect, we already fully shared the judgement of the Programme and Finance Committees at the
Special Joint Session in January this year when the Committees examined the budget Outline for the 1990-91 biennium.
On some points of the Summary Programme of Work and Budget, however, we have some comments to make which seem important to us. My first comment concerns the regional and country representatives' offices of the Organization. In view of the large financial share of both sectors in their respective chapters, we are of the opinion that we should see and evaluate first the results of the review process under way before making up our mind on the budgetary allocations for the next biennium. As we are expecting a report on the field activities of FAO, it would be very interesting to know what role the experts who wrote this report attribute to these two types of representation of FAO.
My Government welcomes the inclusion of a sub-programme, Sustaining Resource Potentials, into the overall Programme of FAO. The following points are, in our opinion, of special importance:
- Elaboration of methods to record and assess environmental impacts and environmental damage;
- strategies and technologies for an environmentally sustainable agriculture with regard to areas with different natural conditions;
- studies of the relationship between growing agricultural production and compatibility with the environment;
- finally, inclusion of environmental aspects into the criteria for the assessment of field projects·
The Federal Government is impressed by the many positive judgements on the Technical Cooperation Programme. Nevertheless, we still have reservations towards the fact that the programme continues to be financed through Regular Programme resources of FAO. Extra-budgetary funds should be mobilized to execute TCP projects, as this is being done in other UN organizations.
Mr. Shah already mentioned the relative value of the financial data deriving from the document before us. Exchange rate fluctuations and other trends beyond our influence can change considerably the data set. We therefore follow Mr. Shah's advice and desist from discussing the figures. We feel obligated, however, to mention a few of the principles guiding our attitude towards the budgets of the United Nations in general.
First, we expect that secretariats do not spare any effort to find ways and means to absorb at least part of the unavoidable cost increases in the budgeting process.
Second, considering the financial situation of the major part of Member States, approximate zero growth in real terms is, like in national budgets, the indicated aim for budgetary planning.
Third, as a matter of principle, we recommend that new programme priorities, also those probably resulting from the review process, should be financed through reallocating within the given budget.
Fourth, the recosting of the budget will, we are quite sure, as always, be extensively described in the full Programme of Work and Budget. Especially for certain aspects of staff costs, we are looking forward to further Information.
To conclude, I would like to make a more general remark. On several occasions it is stated in the Summary Programme of Work and Budget that the field work of FAO is the most important task of the Organization in favour of the developing countries. On the other hand, it is, however, quite clear that no other organization is equally qualified by its knowledge and experience to provide policy advice to governments and data on world agriculture of comparable quality than FAO. These are core tasks of FAO where the Organization by its very nature has a comparable advantage. In planning FAO'e future work, this should not be lost out of sight.
The meeting rose at 12.30 hours
La séance est levée á 12 h 30
Se levanta la sesión a las 12.30 horas
