LE PRESIDENT: Nous allons terminer le point 11 de notre ordre du jour qui concerne le Programme de travail et budget 1992 et 1993, C 91/3 et CL 100/4.
Après l'examen de ce point, nous passerons aux propositions de candidatures aux fonctions de Président de la Conférence et aux Présidents des commissions de la Conférence.
Je demanderai que l'on se le dise, à l'attention des délégués qui ne sont pas encore présents: tous ceux qui sont en possession d'un discours préparé à l'intention de leur Ministre pour la première semaine de la Conférence où un bon nombre de Ministres prendront la parole en séance plénière devraient avoir l'amabilité de transmettre ces textes à M. Tedesco le plus rapidement possible. Cela facilitera beaucoup le problème de traduction.
Je passe immédiatement la parole au représentant du Maroc.
Abdesseleme ARIFI (Maroc): Ma délégation tient d'abord à remercier M. Shah pour la présentation assez concise qu'il a faite du point qui est soumis à notre examen.
Comme ma délégation l'avait déjà exprimé lors de la dernière session du Conseil, elle regrette que le concept de croissance zéro vienne affecter le budget de l'Organisation à un moment où les pays en développement ont besoin d'une assistance accrue de la part de l'Organisation et à un moment où la famille des Nations Unies est plus que jamais déterminée à aller de l'avant pour résoudre les problèmes mondiaux.
Ma délégation, à l'instar d'autres délégations des pays en voie de développement qui l'ont précédée et notamment l'Indonésie, le Pakistan, le Congo et Madagascar, tout en manifestant son inquiétude quant au niveau du budget, n'a d'autre alternative à proposer que de donner son accord pour ce budget dans un souci de maintenir le consensus.
Ma délégation accueille favorablement les priorités retenues, et notamment celles concernant l'environnement, le développement durable et l'intégration des femmes au développement.
Ma délégation appuie et encourage les activités de terrain entreprises par l'Organisation pour renforcer la sécurité alimentaire conformément au concept élargi, et tient à rappeler la recommandation de la dernière session du Comité de la sécurité alimentaire qui invite la FAO à se concentrer davantage sur les activités essentielles pour lesquelles elle
dispose d'un avantage comparatif afin d'assurer une utilisation optimale des ressources.
S'agissant du PCT, ma délégation constate avec préoccupation que la Résolution 9/89 n'a pu avoir une suite, et appuie la proposition avancée par la délégation du Pakistan à ce sujet. Nous estimons que les augmentations allouées au PCT dans le cadre du prochain biennium, même si elles représentent le niveau le plus haut de façon générale, sont loin de répondre à l'objectif de 17 pour cent tracé par la Conférence et encore à celui de 14 pour cent.
S'agissant toujours du PCT, ma délégation rejette toute proposition visant à sa répartition par pays ou par région.
Enfin, ma délégation tient à encourager les efforts déployés par le Directeur général qui ont permis de réduire l'accroissement des taux jusqu'à son niveau actuel.
Waleed A. ELKHEREIJI (Saudi Arabia, Kingdom of) (Original language Arabic):
Allow me first of all to express my thanks to the Director-General for the efforts he has made in order to present this Programme of Work and Budget. I would also like to thank Mr Shah and all those who have collaborated in the preparation of this document. We welcome the proposed priorities, but we would like to say that we should not give any one of them a greater importance than other priorities.
As for the level of the proposed Programme and Budget, my delegation would like to support zero growth because of the current economic situation in the world, and because it is the only possible way in which we can reach consensus. We would like to say that we support this zero growth. As for the increase in costs which has been estimated to be US$87 million we welcome the response given by the Organization to the requests made by some countries in order to review this amount and to do whatever is possible in order to make some cuts and to reduce the costs.
The proposed increase will lead us to consensus. Some might think it is possible to make further reductions, but the question which remains is, can we make bigger reductions without harming the essential and major programmes of the Organization?
Because of the current situation, we are in support of maintaining the lapse factor at the proposed 3 percent, and the time when the matter is further discussed and studied should be when we prepare the next Programme of Work and Budget.
I would like to refer to two other items regarding the increase in the Working Capital Fund and the Special Reserve Fund. I do not want to make any detailed comments on them now because we will deal with them when discussing the Programme and Budget in Commission II of the general Conference. As for the proposed allocations in the Technical Cooperation Programme we would have liked to see a bigger increase in the TCP than the one now proposed because of the absolute importance given by the developing countries to this Programme. Because of the current financial situation we think the proposed increase is acceptable to our delegation.
In conclusion, my delegation hopes that a decision to approve the Budget will be achieved by consensus.
Josias P. LUNGU (Zambia): Being one of the last speakers, I will try to be very brief by restricting my comments to a few issues.
My delegation had originally planned to reserve its comments on this agenda item since it will be discussed in greater detail in Commission II of the Conference. However, after listening carefully to various speakers on this very important subject we find it appropriate to make some preliminary comments which in general terms will be indicative of our position on the proposed Programme of Work and Budget. Nevertheless, we feel that in the case of the TCP funds the Director-General is under an obligation to implement Council Resolution 9/89 which seeks to increase the financial cooperation to the TCP. Although it may not be possible to achieve the 14 percent or 17 percent increase now, the obligation on the part of the Director-General to achieve these targets in the future should still stand.
On the question of zero growth, my delegation has never in the past supported that this concept should be applied and we will never do so in the future. This is because we are aware of the ever-increasing needs in the developing countries which require additional financial resources for projects. Therefore, we hope our friendly developed countries, who are also major contributors to the FAO Budget, will relent and consider going along with the aspirations of the developing countries.
My delegation will reserve comment on the lapse factor and on the proposed methodology to be used in the allocation of the TCP funds to various regions of the developing countries. These issues received great attention from many delegations who have spoken both yesterday and this morning.
Tadeusz STROJWAS (Poland): My delegation spoke at length on the proposed Programme of Work and Budget during the Ninety-ninth Session of the Council last June, and is going to substantially develop the subject again during the forthcoming Conference which is why, on behalf of the Polish delegation, I wish to signal only one point after my consultation yesterday with Warsaw.
We generally share the view that the funds of the TCP are not sufficient. In recent years, Poland has benefited from the Technical Cooperation Programme. We are surprised in this connection to hear - I think the delegate of Japan provided some data - that only 8 percent of these funds have been utilized for emergency purposes. Furthermore, we support the proposal for the distribution of TCP resources in the indicative country allocations between regions. The UNDP system of IPFs with specific criteria has been largely accepted as a model in the allocation of UNDP funds. Therefore, my delegation considers that application of the same system will constitute an interesting approach and a good method of allocating the indicative country allocations from TCP funds.
LE PRESIDENT: Je vous remercie de votre intervention brève et constructive. Maintenant, avant de tenter de dégager une synthèse de cet intéressant débat, j'ai noté la préoccupation de nous tous et je n'ai entendu aucune
voix discordante en ce qui concerne les nécessités d'aboutir à un consensus lors du vote par la Conférence du Programme de travail et budget, je demanderais à M. Shah, Assistant du Directeur général de bien vouloir répondre à certaines questions précises et je m'efforcerai de dégager une synthèse, qui n'est pas difficile à faire, compte tenu de la qualité des interventions d'hier et de ce matin. Vous avez la parole.
V.J. SHAH (Assistant Director-General, Office of Programme, Budget and Evaluation): First of all may I on behalf of the Director-General and through you, Mr Chairman, thank the Council and in particular the distinguished representatives who have participated in this important debate on the Programme of Work and Budget for 1992-93. The Director-General is very sensitive and very attentive always to the views expressed by this august body, and he ventures to hope that the on-the-whole very positive action which has been given to his proposals will find a similar response in the Conference for the consensus adoption of the Programme of Work and Budget.
First of all, let me say, Mr Chairman, there are three points I would propose not to respond to - firstly, the comments about the Working Capital Fund; secondly, the comments about the replenishment of the Special Reserve Account. These are two items you have directed you will consider under Item 15 of your Agenda, and at that time with your permission I would like to provide clarifications. The third subject is that of the Programme Budget process. I have listened very carefully to every view expressed about the desirability or otherwise of continuing the Budget outline step. But this is a matter which is addressed to you through the Report of the Programme Committee which you will be considering under Item 15, and at that time, Sir, I would like to provide also some clarifications. For now I will limit my responses to five subjects which have been referred to most frequently in the debate. I hope I will not be considered disrespectful if at this time I do not respond to any other point which is not covered under these five.
The first is the question of cost increases, and let us spend a few minutes on that. I think every Member who addressed this issue has realized that the proposed provision for cost increases has been included by the Director-General on the most conservative basis possible. You have the methodology before you; you have all the details that we have used and that were submitted to the Finance Committee in its detailed examination of this matter. I have not heard anyone saying that they disagree with this methodology or that they disagree with the facts that you have given, or that they disagree with the assumptions we state we have used. But in the debate there is certainly some concern about the level of these cost increases and I will be very frank in addressing these concerns.
First of all, some attention is given to the percentage of the cost increases and as the Ambassador of France - I think he was the first to raise this - pointed out very correctly, the percentage figure has changed. In the Summary Programme of Work and Budget the cost increases were estimated at 15.3 percent of the current budget base, and in the full Programme of Work and Budget they are now estimated at 14.6 percent of the budget base. With all respect, I would suggest to Members that they do not concentrate so much on the percentages, because we have not calculated the
cost increases on any simplistic percentage. We have given you the facts. That is one factor.
The second factor is that the cost increases in their dollar amount change according to the exchange rate used. For example, at an exchange rate of 1 335 you have seen that the cost increases are given as US$82.9 million, but on an exchange rate of 1 230 which was the rate yesterday, you would have to add some US$20 million more, and this is not because of any trick or any pack of tricks on the part of the Secretariat. As you know, the cost increases have elements which are responsive to the exchange rate.
To take the two key ones. Post adjustment - the post adjustment multiplier changes according to the exchange rate used and in working out the impact of the change - I have the figures to prove it to you - we take at each exchange rate the multiplier for each month of the next biennium. That brings us to the point that out of the US$20 million, US$10.7 million of the exchange rate impact is for the post adjustment multiplier. The general service salaries in Rome are lire based and lire accorded. The impact at 1 230 is some US$11 million, so as you proceed not only now but in the Conference to zero in on the budget level you will find the combination of exchange rates and the cost increases will result in percentages which are different, so please do not be surprised when these percentages change. I hope I have now given you the reasons for them. I will always be glad to give you more clarifications if they are needed.
The second point about the cost increases is about the validity of comparing cost increases in different organizations. The representative of Australia - my good friend because I deal with him very much in the Finance Committee - has mentioned that the cost increases in FAO in the proposed Budget are not only excessively high but are among the highest,if not the highest, in the UN system. I beg to disagree for three reasons.
Firstly, I disagree because, as I have tried to explain, the percentages cannot be compared; secondly, because, when each organization estimates its cost increases, where does it start? It starts with the location of its duty station. Of course, the cost increases in Switzerland will be different from those in Rome. Also, please bear in mind that it is not only one factor of the inflation in the country, the GNP deflator, which can be used. All these organizations use figures of the wage index or the consumer price index. We find that the results are obviously different. In the United States of America, the wages and earnings index over the period 1985-1991 has kept to under 4 percent. Fine. In Switzerland the wages and earnings index has come up to 4.5 percent. In Italy it is 7.8 percent. So this is the second reason why the cost increases in different organizations cannot be compared from their base.
The third factor why they cannot be compared is because, in making the estimate of the needs for the next two years, you start with the base. If the base budget provision is adequate in terms of cost coverage, then the additional amount to be included for the next two years can be relatively modest. But if the base budget provision is inadequate - I will demonstrate this to you for FAO - when that base provision is inadequate, how can you not include the cost increases for the next two years? Why is the provision and to what extent is the provisio'n in FAO inadequate?
-.83.-
Over the years - I take my share of the responsibility for this because this is the fifth Programme Budget that I have helped the Director-General to prepare, the Council has a hundred sessions under its belt, I have ten years of Programmes of Work and Budget - one lesson I have learned is that I underestimate the costs over and over again. Partly this is because the Director-General is responsive to your concerns and he does not want to include any excessive provision. He errs on the side of caution. What has been the result? In the current biennium in 1990-1991 the provision for salary costs of professionals and general service is under-budgeted by US$20 million, not counting further losses due to currency exchange rates. I will indicate two or three examples.
The professional salaries. Many members will remember that in the last Conference I was given a hard time because the Director-General felt it prudent to include in the budget for 1991 the impact of the increases in professional salaries which had been recommended by the International Civil Service Commission and were about to be decided by the General Assembly. We under-budgeted this provision by US$3.7 million.
General service salaries. We have under-budgeted this by almost US$9 million. There was a higher than expected impact of the general service salary survey, and there have been general service salary increases during the biennium in accordance with the increases in the National Statistical Index, which has led to increases in general service salaries of higher amounts and earlier in each month of the biennium.
Pension Fund contributions have been under-budgeted by US$3.3 million, because the Organization's contributions to the Pension Fund increased from 15 to 15.8 percent. Education Grant - US$2 million.
I will not go on in detail, but I felt that this was an important point for members to bear in mind when they further consider this issue of cost increases.
This brings me now to the second subject, Mr Chairman, which, with your permission, I would like to respond to. That is the issue of the lapse factor. The subject of the lapse factor has been considered by the Finance Committee at two Sessions during the last biennium, and it was considered at its September Session. The result of its consideration are in the report before you in CL 100/4.
I would submit once again that there is no theoretical ideal of lapse factor. We know very well that the amount of deduction for the lapse factor, in different organizations is different, but we know equally well that when the Conference decided for FAO to reduce the lapse factor to 3 percent,it was after taking into account the fact that there are other comparable organizations that have a lower lapse factor or one which is allocated in a different way, which results in a lower reduction. Given the fact that there is no theory and no magic formula, the Director-General's approach has been that the lapse factor deduction is an aspect of budgetary provision that has to be considered in the overall context.
In the case of FAO, as we reported to the Finance Committee, the lapse factor has varied over the years. In 1957 it was 2.5 percent; it then went to 4.5 percent, then to 5.5 percent. But at each occasion that the lapse factor was increased or kept at a certain level, there is one remarkable
consistency, and that is that this high lapse factor referred to periods when there were substantial increases, real programme increases, in the budget and substantial increases in the number of staff. Therefore, there is a rationale.
If you are increasing the staff establishment in an organization, the number of staff members, by significant amounts from one biennium to another, we can all recognize that there are possibilities for applying a lapse factor of 4, 5, 5.5 percent, because not all these new posts are going to be filled at the same time and simultaneously. But we are in the reverse situation; we are in the situation of a reduction of staff. In this situation, combined with the overall financial problems - I must come back to that because it is always the overall context that counts, the overall context of our financial problems - the Director-General submitted to the Conference and again to the Finance Committee at its last Session that it does not make sense to change the lapse factor.
If we are going to take this issue of the lapse factor as a part of the total package, then let me merely state that, while the Member Nations are working toward a consensus, the lapse factor is not an issue on its own. You have a Programme proposed to you, which you have all welcomed, which you support. That Programme involves a cost. Those costs are given realistically, modestly, conservatively in the proposals before you. If you change any of this, if you change the amount of the cost increases or if you change the lapse factor, what is the result? The result is that you will not appropriate funds necessary to carry out a Programme of no growth. You will be going for a reduced Programme and a reduced Budget.
I know that the debate does not end here;it will continue in Commission II, and I will try to help because the Secretariat is not taking sides between one group of Member Nations and another group of Member Nations. We are serving you all. That is why I cannot emphasize enough that the proposals before you should not be interpreted in the sense of the Secretariat trying to get something. The Secretariat does not get anything out of this. The Secretariat presents to you a Programme and seeks your approval, if you wish us to implement it. So any justification that I give or any clarification that I provide is addressed equally to any Member of the Council.
The third subject is in response to the comments made on the Technical Cooperation Programme. First of all, I know that if the Director-General were here he would say with the same intensity of feeling as I do that he regrets very much that in his proposals he has not been able to come up with a formula which would increase the share of the TCP in the total budget. He regrets this. In response to those Members who have expressed the hope that he will seek to respond to Conference Resolution 9/89 more positively in his proposals for the Programme of Work and Budget 1994-95, he has asked me to assure you that that is his intention; he will seek to do so.
At this stage let me clarify one aspect. In case it is felt by any Member Nation that the Director-General has disobeyed or flaunted the directive which was given to him in Conference Resolution 9/89, very respectfully we would point out that that Resolution did not say that the Conference decides to set the level of TCP at 14 or 17 percent of the budget level. I quote the words from the operative paragraph 3 of the Resolution: The
Conference "Invites the Director-General to make every effort in order to restore the resources available to TCP to the former level of 14 percent..."
With all respect, we would point out on behalf of the Director-General that he has been attentive to this resolution, that he made every effort. How does he show this effort? He shows this effort by providing an increase, a programme increase of US$4 million for the TCP; a real programme increase, higher than for any other programme component and he responds by making sure that the total provision for the TCP, that is to say the programme increase and the cost increases arises almost to US$10 million for the next biennium.
On the TCP there was one comment by the representative of Japan on which I would like to provide a clarification. If I understood the comment he made yesterday it was that his delegation is concerned that the TCP is managed in a different way from the rest of the Regular Programme, that it is not subject to the same management principles, procedures and safeguards as the rest of the Regular Programme. Thus my understanding of the comment that was made and my reply would be, very respectfully, that I cannot agree to that perception. The resources of the TCP are managed with the same care and with the same principles of management delegation as are the other resources of the Regular Programme. The TCP is not managed personally by the Director-General, as I think you all know and as we have tried to point out in successive evaluations and in the proposals for the TCP there are established criteria for project approval, there are established channels of who has to assess the project request received, not only at Headquarters but at the field level. Then the process of approval results in projects being approved or rejected and the person who exercises the delegation is my colleague Mr Rinville of the Development Department. The third aspect of the TCP is the responses that have been made on the proposal for an indicative country allocation. This does not call for any reply from me at this time. I have noted very carefully all the views expressed which in large measure were views of concern or of dissatisfaction but whatever the views they will be debated further in Commission II and we will respond to the wishes of the Conference.
The fourth subject was references by a number of delegations to the proposed Asian study and here again let me be very honest, the response to the request for this Asian study as given in the Programme of Work and Budget is what the Director-General and his colleagues felt was possible within the total programme budget proposals before you. We felt that it is possible to respond to this desire for a regional study in the context of the revision of Agriculture towards 2000, 2005, 2010 and so on but we have noted carefully the repeated request that an effort be made to embark on the study during the coming biennium even if it cannot be completed during the biennium. This is a request which I note, which I will refer to the Director-General. At this stage you will appreciate I cannot respond with either a yea or a nay. This is matter which will be looked into with utmost attention.
So this brings me now to the fifth subject and that is the level of the budget. Once again I am not surprised, the Secretariat is not surprised that there is not unanimity yet on the level of the budget which you would like to see the Conference approve. But here let me offer some thoughts; firstly to repeat the thought which the Director-General expressed
yesterday; the level of the budget, the Programme of Work and Budget you Member Nations will consider in relation to the other aspects, the other aspects which involve contribution assessments. What the Director-General has presented is a budget of no programme growth. This budget of no programme growth involves the cost increases which he has submitted to you. It involves also the preservation, and more than preservation, the re-establishment of safety nets, the safety nets of the Working Capital Fund to be increased by US$5 million and the safety net of the Special Reserve Account which will be non-existent from the first of January 1992. We need those safety nets in order to implement a programme of work even if it has no increase. As soon as you change those basic factors, any one of them; you may say, we accept the no programme growth but we want to reduce the provision for cost increases or you may say, we even accept the provision for the cost increases but we will not agree to the increase in the Working Capital Fund and to the replenishment of the Special Reserve Account. The result will be a negative budget, let us face it. I am not in a fever about this and I hope that the Director-General would not be in a fever about it because it is your Organization, it is your programme and it is your budget for the next two years. The Director-General has not proposed a negative budget. What he hopes you will all consider is a budget of no growth which requires a certain budgetary provision but if Member Nations in their sovereign wisdom and right decide to a different formula, provided it is realized that what the Conference approve would be a negative budget, we respect you and we will follow your directives.
There are so many aspects to these subjects which one can debate at greater length. I hope the few clarifications I have provided have been clear. We, the Director-General and we his colleagues, hope very earnestly that through the open facing of these issues Member Nations themselves will come to a conclusion that they can be happy with and which we can help them to arrive at.
LE PRESIDENT: Merci, M. Shah, pour ce brillant exposé et ces brillantes réponses. Je crois que vous avez bien souligné les différents points qui ont retenu l'attention du Conseil, et le Comité de rédaction aura l'occasion de se pencher sur la synthèse à dégager de la discussion qui a eu lieu à ce sujet.
Personnellement, j'ai un jour parlé d'un budget de résignation. Je crois que cette résignation doit être le plus possible enthousiaste, étant entendu qu'une volonté s'est dégagée d'aboutir à un consensus.
On a beaucoup parlé de croissance zéro. Vous connaissez mes sentiments personnels en ce qui concerne cette notion contradictoire: croissance zéro veut dire non croissance ou absence de croissance. J'ai toujours préféré l'expression "budget constant". Ce budget constant doit bien sûr - et cela personne ne l'a dit - être un budget d'équilibre et non pas un budget de décroissance.
Le point important qui a fait l'objet de discussions est celui relatif aux augmentations de coût. Je l'ai dit au départ, je crois que les augmentations de coût reposent sur des éléments absolument objectifs. Or je n'ai entendu aucune délégation mettre au cause l'objectivité des calculs qui ont amené aux propositions d'adaptation des coûts et aux augmentations de coût.
Il n'y a pas de désaccord sur le calcul, je crois qu'il est important de le noter. Il est important pour la Commission II de la Conférence de savoir que le calcul qui a mené aux propositions faites par le Secrétariat pour l'augmentation des coûts n'a été mis en cause par aucun membre du Conseil. C'est un élément important et je me devais de le souligner.
On a parlé du "lapse factor". Là, je n'aurai rien à ajouter à ce que vient de dire M. Shah très brillamment. Nous sommes tous conscients du fait que la FAO doit avoir des capacités de réponse et que l'excellence des moyens qu'elle doit mettre à la disposition de ses Etats Membres est fonction de son capital humain, de la formation, du recyclage et aussi du cadre fourni. Le cadre n'a pas été mis en cause. Le cadre très souvent, pour des raisons que vous connaissez tous, n'a pu être complété. Un effort vigoureux a été fait pour parvenir à obtenir que le cadre soit suffisamment étoffé pour répondre aux interpellations de ce monde et aux tâches que notre Organisation se doit d'assumer.
Beaucoup ont parlé du PCT. Je crois avoir dit qu'il existait un document, qui va être actualisé, reprenant tous les projets du PCT, et que le Service des opérations de terrain dirigé par M. Rinville est à la disposition de tous les Etats Membres pour fournir toutes les explications voulues sur la base du dernier rapport qui a été établi en 1989 et qui contient un "listing" complet des opérations du PCT. Bien peu d'interrogations ont été faites au service compétent. De toute façon, les pays qui estimeraient n'avoir pas suffisamment d'informations peuvent les obtenir sans aucune difficulté. J'en ai moi-même fait à de nombreuses reprises l'expérience et j'ai toujours reçu réponse aux questions que j'ai posées.
Certains ont inventé le terme de "Pnudisation", savoir s'il fallait effectuer cette répartition. Je crois que l'on peut difficilement le dire, mais la question sera débattue lors de la Conférence, s'il y a un accord, parce que cette répartition, pour moi, est un peu une répartition de boutiquier et elle changerait fondamentalement le rôle du PCT.
Je ne discuterai pas du montant, j'ai déjà dit ce que j'en pensais. Il est évident que les montants sont insuffisants, compte tenu des besoins du monde. Le Directeur général a dû faire des arbitrages, et il les a faits courageusement, pour obtenir un ensemble qui permette à l'Organisation de survivre, de vivre et de fonctionner normalement.
En ce qui concerne l'étude Asie, la réponse a été donnée, et en ce qui concerne le niveau du budget, nous aurons l'occasion, lorsque nous examinerons le rapport du Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques, de nous pencher sur un projet de résolution. En ce qui concerne la procédure à adopter ultérieurement, nous avons fait une expérience qui semble avoir rencontré un large agrément des membres du Comité financier et du Comité du programme. Je n'ai pas entendu d'objections fondamentales à la procédure telle qu'elle a été suivie. Elle est peut-être un peu lourde, un peu longue, peut-être faudrait-il à l'avenir la simplifier et l'alléger quelque peu. Notamment dans le sommaire du Programme de travail et budget, on pourrait quelque peu simplifier les choses. Mais je crois que les procédures qui sont proposées, telles qu'elles ont été appliquées, ont permis d'arriver à ce que tous les membres du Conseil ont demandé, un consensus qui permette l'adoption du Programme de travail et budget.
Je voudrais maintenant remercier tous les membres du Conseil de leurs interventions concernant ce point, qui était un des points particulièrement importants soumis à notre Conseil. Je suis convaincu que la synthèse qui a été faite par M. Shah qui sera reflétée, ainsi que l'opinion de tous les membres du Conseil, dans le rapport que nous présenterons à la Conférence, permettra à la Commission II un large échange de vues et un large débat qui contribuera au succès de l'opération entreprise: l'adoption du Programme de travail et budget par consensus. C'est mon voeu le plus sincère et je suis convaincu que c'est votre voeu à tous.
Nous passons maintenant au point 4: Propositions de candidature aux fonctions de Président de la Conférence et de Présidents des Commissions de la Conférence.
Comme vous le savez tous, il y a trois commissions. La Commission I s'occupe spécialement des problèmes de l'agriculture, la Commission II s'occupe des problèmes budgétaires et du Programme de travail, et la Commission III s'occupe spécialement des problèmes constitutionnels et juridiques. Les trois Commissions auront une tâche importante. De nombreux contacts ont eu lieu entre les différents groupes, et je voudrais vous faire une proposition en ce qui concerne la présidence des trois Commissions. Ce n'est pas à nous, Conseil de la FAO, de décider au sujet de ces présidences, mais c'est à nous qu'il appartient de faire une proposition à la Conférence, proposition qui je l'espère ne rencontrera pas d'objections de votre Conseil.
LE PRESIDENT: S'il n'y a pas d'autres remarques concernant le point 11, je déclare ce point clôturé.
En ce qui concerne la Commission I, il est demandé de proposer à la présidence de cette importante commission, M. Waleed A. Elkhereiji, Représentant permanent du Royaume d'Arabie Saoudite, dont je salue la présence.
S'il n'y a pas d'interventions sur cette proposition, nous proposerons donc pour la présidence de la Commission I notre ami et collègue Waleed A. Elkhereiji.
En ce qui concerne la Commission II, un accord est intervenu au sein du Groupe OCDE, après contact avec le Groupe des 77, pour proposer à la présidence de cette Commission, M. Hans Jorgen Kristensen, Président du Comité national danois pour la FAO. M. Hans Jorgen Kristensen a déjà participé à de nombreuses réunions de la FAO qu'il connaît bien et, sauf objection de votre part, nous proposerons à la Conférence la nomination pour la Commission II de cette personnalité.
S'il n'y a pas de remarques sur la présidence de la Commission II, nous considérons que vous l'approuvez. L'intéressé n'est pas présent mais je le félicite d'avance.
En ce qui concerne la Commission III, je crois que c'est celle qui a posé moins de problèmes.
Como Presidente de la Comisión III, se propone al Sr. don Samuel Fernández Illanes, Ministro Consejero de la Representación Permanente de Chile. Es un jurista de gran calidad y que conoce todos los problemas constitucionales y jurídicos de la FAO. Quisiera, en nombre de todos, congratular al Sr. don Samuel Fernández Illanes, y vamos a proponer su candidatura a la atención de la Conferencia.
S'il n'y a pas d'interventions, les propositions des présidences des Commissions seront transmises à la Conférence comme je viens de l'indiquer.
Je voudrais maintenant proposer un changement à l'ordre du jour de nos travaux.
Il est souhaitable que sur tous les points importants, nous arrivions à dégager de manière claire les positions que notre Conseil entend prendre, et je crois qu'il existe encore certaines discussions en cours en ce qui concerne le point 17.
Je proposerais donc d'entamer immédiatement - et ce serait beaucoup plus logique - le point 15 qui concerne les rapports de la soixante-troisième session du Comité financier. Je crois qu'il y a une interrelation étroite entre le point 15 et le point 11 qui traite du Programme de travail et budget que nous avons toujours bien présent à l'esprit. Ensuite, nous devrons décider sur la nomination du Commissaire aux comptes, nous devrons examiner un projet de résolution concernant l'administration du Fonds du PAM, nous devrons examiner les questions que nous avions réservées en ce qui concerne les deux Fonds: "Working Capital Fund" et "Special Reserve Account".
LE PRESIDENT: S'il n'y a pas d'objections, je passe au point 15 de notre ordre du jour, en saluant la présence du Président du Comité financier, notre ami Carlos Di Mottola, ici présent au podium. Je suis heureux qu'il puisse présenter les travaux particulièrement fouillés du Comité financier et du Comité du Programme ainsi que la session conjointe de ces deux Comités. Nous procéderons de manière systématique de façon à ce que nous puissions, au cours du débat aborder les différents points pour lesquels, soit des propositions devront être faites, soit des décisions devront être prises.
La parole est au Président du Comité financier.
Carlos DI MOTTOLA (Presidente del Comité de Finanzas): Gracias, señor Presidente, por darme el uso de la palabra. Presento mi saludo respetuoso a usted y a todos los señores delegados presentes en este período de sesiones. El Sr. Shah, en su brillante intervención, facilita mi tarea de entrar en detalles bastante importantes.
Tengo el placer de resumir para usted, señor Presidente, el informe del 72° período de sesiones del Comité de Finanzas, que figura como documento CL 100/4. Usted ya ha estudiado el Programa de Labores y Presupuesto para 1992-93, así como sobre los asuntos presupuestarios conexos. Ha recibido también usted un informe completo sobre la situación financiera de la Organización. Por ello, no me refiero a estos temas ahora ni a los asuntos
examinados por el Comité y que se presentan al Consejo únicamente para su información.
El 72° periodo de sesiones del Comité se celebró del 16 al 26 de septiembre de 1991.
Bajo el epigrafe "Asuntos financieros", el Comité examinó la propuesta del Director General de estimular el pago de cuotas, en respuesta a la Resolución 15/89 de la Conferencia y de las subsiguientes deliberaciones del Consejo y del Comité de Finanzas. En pocas palabras, dicha propuesta prevé que los Estados Miembros puedan obtener un descuento de su cuota correspondiente al año correspondiente. La cuantía del descuento sería fijada por el Director General teniendo en cuenta las previsiones del nivel general de los tipos de interés para el año en que se aplique.
El Comité convino en que la Organización debería ensayar el plan de descuentos. Sin embargo, algunos miembros expresaron el temor de que el plan no lograra su objetivo real de estimular a los Estados Miembros a pagar pronto sus cuotas, ya que no afronta realmente los problemas que provocan el retraso de los pagos, tales como las dificultades financieras de los Estados Miembros, los procedimientos administrativos con respecto a la aprobación del Presupuesto y, en algunos casos, consideraciones políticas. Otros miembros expresaron la opinión de que, al determinar la cuantía del descuento que habría de ofrecerse, el Director General debería contar con el asesoramiento del Comité de Finanzas.
El Consejo recordará que, en su última reunión, el Director General le indicó que examinaría la necesidad de incrementar la cuantía del Fondo de Operaciones. El Comité examinó las propuestas del Director General al respecto. La propuesta del Director General de que se aumentara el Fondo de su nivel actual de 20 millones a 25 millones de dólares y su justificación están incluidas en nuestro informe. El aumento tendría que costearse con una aportación adicional de Estados Miembros, de conformidad con el Artículo 6.2(b) del Reglamento Financiero.
Un miembro del Comité se opuso a la resolución y otro no pudo estar de acuerdo con la aportación especial. Otros miembros convinieron en la necesidad de un Fondo de Operaciones. Sin embargo, expresaron la preocupación de que una aportación adicional supusiera un ulterior esfuerzo para la capacidad de los Estados Miembros de los países en desarrollo y países que experimentan dificultades presupuestarias. El Comité acordó transmitir al Consejo el proyecto de Resolución de la Conferencia que figura en el párrafo 3.89 del Informe.
El Comité examinó también la propuesta del Director General relativa a la reposición de la Cuenta Especial de Reserva para 1992-93. El bienio de 1992-93 comenzará sin recursos en la Cuenta Especial de Reserva. A menos que se adopten medidas para reponerla, no habría protección alguna para la ejecución del Programa de Labores y Presupuesto, el Comité examinó las opciones para la reposición y la propuesta del Director General de que dicha reposición se efectuara mediante la asignación de cuotas especiales a los Estados Miembros. El total de tales cuotas ascendería a 32,6 millones de dólares para poder reponer la Cuenta hasta su nivel estatutario del 5 por ciento del presupuesto total efectivo de operaciones propuesto para el bienio subsiguiente.
Dos miembros del Comité se opusieron a la propuesta debido a que se requerían cuotas adicionales. Uno de tales miembros, citando la oposición de principio de su Gobierno a la asignación de cuotas especiales, expresó también reservas sobre la necesidad misma de una Cuenta Especial de Reserva teniendo en cuenta otras medidas disponibles en los mercados financieros para proteger a la Organización contra las fluctuaciones monetarias desfavorables. Los demás miembros del Comité apoyaron la propuesta considerando importante que esta Cuenta tenga el nivel necesario de recursos para cumplir su finalidad. Se expresaron, no obstante, ciertas quejas y reservas sobre la carga que supondría la asignación de una cuota adicional a los Estados Miembros para aquellos países que se enfrentan con graves problemas de deuda exterior. Por consiguiente, la mayoría del Comité apoyó el proyecto de Resolución de la Conferencia que figura en el párrafo 3.99 del Informe del Comité.
El Comité examinó también los Estados de Cuentas del Economato de la FAO correspondientes a 1988 y 1989. El Comité apoyó la recomendación de que se aumentara la cuantía de la Reserva de Operaciones del 12 al 13 por ciento del volumen anual de ventas y se elevara de 300 a 400 millones de liras la Reserva para la sustitución del equipo. El Comité aprobó también el proyecto de Resolución de la Conferencia que figura e \ el párrafo 3.113 del Informe, mediante el cual se provee a introducir una enmienda secundaria en el segundo Artículo de la Resolución 16/89 de la Conferencia. Con dicha enmienda se reconocerá la práctica de distribuir los beneficios netos del Economato al Fondo de Bienestar del Personal, después de haber asignado fondos para las reservas necesarias.
Señor Presidente, recordará usted que, de conformidad con el Artículo XXVII 7(m) del Reglamento General,el Consejo debe nombrar un Auditor Externo de la FAO para el bienio que comienza con la comprobación de las cuentas del año 1992. En respuesta a la invitación hecha por la Organización, dos miembros presentaron propuestas formales. Tales propuestas fueron presentadas al Comité por la Oficina Nacional de Comprobación de Cuentas del Reino Unido y por el Tribunal de Cuentas francés. El Comité quedó favorablemente impresionado de la profesionalidad y experiencia ofrecidas por ambas organizaciones. En sus deliberaciones el Comité examinó las necesidades de auditoría externa de la Organización y, en particular, la necesidad de una continuidad en la función de la auditoría externa en este momento en que se están produciendo cambios en los sistemas financieros. Por ello el Comité recomendó que se volviera a nombrar al Interventor de Cuentas y Auditor General del Reino Unido.
El proyecto de resolución que se somete a la aprobación del Consejo figura en el párrafo 3.119 del Informe. El Comité tomó nota de que el actual Auditor Externo desempeñaba su cargo desde 1951. Al mismo tiempo que agradeció los servicios prestados por el actual Auditor Externo, el Comité estimó que redunda en beneficio de la Organización tener la oportunidad de recurrir a la experiencia y conocimientos de auditores generales de otros Estados Miembros. A este respecto, el Comité pidió a la FAO que, para futuros nombramientos, presentara para su examen propuestas alternativas, incluido el actual Auditor Externo.
En lo que respecta a los Asuntos de personal, se informó al Comité de los cambios que se habían producido en las escalas de sueldos y los subsidios desde su reunión anterior y de las novedades recientes en las actividades de la Comisión de Administración Pública Internacional (CAPI), y del Comité
Mixto de Pensiones del Personal de las Naciones Unidas. La CAPI examinó, entre otras cosas, la remuneración del personal de las categorías profesionales y superiores, las condiciones de servicio de los subdirectores generales y subsecretarios generales y la remuneración de los servicios generales y categorías conexas en relación con el análisis detallado de la remuneración pensionable de dichas categorías.
En lo que respecta al Comité Mixto de Pensiones del Personal de las Naciones Unidas, hubo dos temas de particular importancia para las organizaciones y el personal: el examen de las modificaciones al sistema de reajuste de las pensiones y el análisis completo de la remuneración pensionable y las consiguientes pensiones del personal de servicios generales y categorías conexas. Se resume esta información en los párrafos 3.124 a 3.137 del Informe.
Señor Presidente, de conformidad con los deseos de la Conferencia, el Comité de Finanzas ha mantenido en examen los progresos hechos por la Organización en la aplicación de las recomendaciones presentadas por los consultores sobre gestión como parte del Examen de la gestión de la FAO. El Comité examinó los informes sobre los sistemas de imprenta, operaciones de tesorería, normas y procedimientos contables, políticas y prácticas de personal, recursos informáticos y servicios de mantenimiento y seguridad. El Comité aprobó en general las medidas adoptadas por la Organización.
Con respecto a los temas relacionados con el Programa Mundial de Alimentos, el texto completo del informe referente al PMA se incluye en la Parte IV del Informe del Comité de Finanzas. Se señalan a su atención los párrafos 4.14 a 4.25, relacionados con el examen que el Comité hizo del Reglamento Financiero propuesto para el PMA. El Reglamento General Revisado del PMA, que el Consejo refrendó en su 99° período de sesiones, prevé que el Director General continúe estableciendo el Fondo del Programa Mundial de Alimentos con arreglo al Artículo 6.7 del Reglamento Financiero de la FAO. Sin embargo, la gestión del Programa se regirá por su Reglamento Financiero distinto del Reglamento Financiero de la FAO. Dicho Reglamento requiere la aprobación de la Conferencia, para lo cual, en el párrafo 4.25 se incluye un proyecto de Resolución que se presenta a la aprobación de la Conferencia.
Deseo expresar el agradecimiento de todos los miembros de mi Comité por el honor que se nos ha concedido de realizar las tareas brevemente descritas y estoy dispuesto a ofrecer cualquier otra explicación que se necesite con relación a este informe.
V.J. SHAH (Assistant Director-General, Office of Programme, Budget and Evaluation): There are three subjects on which I would like to offer clarification to the Council. Two of them have been referred to in the debate you had on Item 11. Let me start with the first one - the subject of the Working Capital Fund. The proposal that the Director-General has submitted is to increase the level of the Working Capital Fund from US$20 million to US$25 million. Sometimes it has been felt by some delegations that perhaps what is involved here is an assessment of US$25 million. Very definitely not, Mr Chairman - very definitely not. The assessment that would be required would only be US$5 million to raise the Working Capital Fund from its present to its proposed level - US$5 million.
The second point which has been made repeatedly in the debate is about the need for an assessment. Is there any other way in which the Working Capital Fund level can be raised without an assessment? The Basic Texts and in particular the Financial Regulations are very clear on this point. I would refer to Financial Regulation VI, paragraph 6.2 (b)(iv) which reads: "If the Conference decides to change the level of the Working Capital Fund, there shall be a reassessment".
Members of long-standing will remember that when the Conference decided in 1987 to raise the level of the Working Capital Fund from what it was then - US$13.3 million - to US$20 million,there was an assessment. This matter seems to us absolutely clear so why, then,is the suggestion raised that the payment of contribution arrears be used to replenish the Working Capital Fund? Perhaps there is a clarification I can provide there.
We need to distinguish the raising of the level of the Working Capital Fund, which is what is proposed now, from payments to the Working Capital Fund when any amount is drawn from it. For this reason, Financial Regulation 6.1(b) says very clearly that:"Any cash surplus in the General Fund at the close of any financial period shall be allocated among Member Nations in accordance with the Scale of Contribution... and... shall be released and applied to liquidate, in whole or in part first any advance due to the Working Capital Fund; secondly, any arrears of contributions; and thirdly, contributions for the calendar year following the year in which the audit is completed". So the cases are very separate.
In the case of a cash surplus, yes, Member Nations can very well direct that their share of the cash surplus be used to fund the Working Capital Fund and specifically their share of the Working Capital Fund, but in this case the Texts are very clear.
In view of the recognition of the amount of contributions outstanding,in view of the recognition that certain Member Nations - among them, as has been referred to, the two largest contributors - for good reasons of their own make their contributions in the last quarter of the year,the Working Capital Fund at its present level is just not enough. At its present level the Working Capital Fund is 3.5 percent of the present Budget. For the next Budget, whatever level you decide on, the Working Capital Fund even at its higher proposed level, would still be under 4 percent;it would be 3.75 percent. If we are talking of percentages, the current level of arrears is 50 percent of the annual assessments for the biennium. If you have arrears of current contributions still outstanding, they are over 70 percent of the annual assessment in this biennium, so we are talking about a very modest increase, and I believe this point has been well recognized.
The second subject is that of the Special Reserve Account and a brief clarification may help Council Members who have referred to this point. The Special Reserve Account, according to the Conference Resolution which establishes it, has three purposes. One is to supplement the Working Capital Fund when the Working Capital Fund is inadequate. When its resources have been used, then the Special Reserve Account comes to the rescue to supplement the Working Capital Fund. The justification for this is on the same lines as the one I have given for the Working Capital Fund, and I think this is well accepted.
The second purpose is that of currency protection. Here it is sometimes suggested, "Oh well, if you adopt different ways of dealing with currency protection you do not need a Special Reserve Account". With all respect I would disagree. I think the Conference recognized this when it established the Special Reserve Account. When the Conference established the Special Reserve Account, it was very well aware that there was a Working Capital Fund. It was very well aware that there were effects of currency fluctuations which could not be faced in any other way. Certainly there are ways of dealing with exchange rate problems such as through a split assessment system - an assessment partly in one currency and partly in another. We are aware that the Vienna-based Agencies, the International Atomic Energy Agency and also UNIDO have been using this split assessment system in recent years, but the benefits of the system have not be proven even in their own eyes. The possibility in our case has been examined by the Finance Committee, by the Council and by the Conference over the last four years, and without prejudging what may be any future decision, at least at this stage you have not decided to apply a split assessment system.
Forward currency cover is another option. As you know, we have used the possibility of forward currency cover in recent years. But its availability and the terms of the forward cover depend on exchange rate trends and on interest rates, so it is not always possible to find a solution which is in the interests of the Organization. Of course, we will look for it. We do look for it whenever it is available. Moreover, forward cover, forward purchase of currencies is normally limited for shorter periods than for a whole biennium.
There is another alternative - forward cover option; that is, the Organization could decide at a future date whether to exercise an option for forward cover or not, but this has a cost. If you want to envisage this possibility we would have to include provision for its cost in the budget estimates and we have not done so.
The third purpose of the Special Reserve Account is to cover unbudgeted costs. Now, I have replied earlier with some clarifications on the extent to which our resources do not cover costs which we are actually incurring. The result of this is that in the last biennium, and in this one, we have had to cover unbudgeted costs and in this biennium since the resources of the Special Reserve Account are totally used up in the coverage of the currency losses, there is no possibility of meeting unbudgeted costs through the Special Reserve Account.
The issue then arises, are there ways of replenishing the Special Reserve Account other than through an assessment? Certainly the options have been laid down by the Conference and have been examined by the Director-General. The first option is that if there is any balance of funds remaining in the Special Reserve Account at the end of this biennium, we carry it forward. Well, this is just not the case. If the Special Reserve Account is zero we have nothing to carry forward.
The second option is when there is a cash surplus. When there is a cash surplus, before that money is returned to Member Nations the Conference has established that whatever sum is required for the Special Reserve Account is kept for that Account and the balance returned to Member Nations, but "magari" as our Host Country nationals say. There is no cash surplus
certainly in this biennium, nor one that I can see in the foreseeable future.
The third option is that, if there is no cash surplus, the Director-General is authorized to apply to the Special Reserve Account any sums received in subsequent biennia in payment of arrears of contributions for previous biennia. This is worth considering. Since there are substantial arrears of contributions, if one could be sure of the payment of these arrears and the extent of the payments, they could be utilized to replenish in part or in whole the Special Reserve Account.
Are Member Nations prepared to give us the guarantees, give each other the guarantees, of what payments will be made on the arrears in order that they can be used, first of all, to cancel the budget deficit that is carried forward to meet the obligations that the Organization already has, and then what is left over to replenish the Special Reserve Account?
Since that is not a possibility that the Director-General can envisage with certainty, he submits the fourth option, which the Conference itself realized would have to be exercised, and that is to replenish the Special Reserve Account through proposals submitted to the Conference,that is, through an assessment.
Nobody likes to pay more; everyone has difficulties. I submit to you that this is a matter of the common good,the common interest of all Member Nations. You have a Special Reserve Account; you established it in your wisdom. It has a purpose and a continuing validity. Would you consider a perspective over the last ten years? In 1980-81 there was a favourable currency effect of over US$18 million, which went into the Special Reserve Account. There was a cash surplus of US$1.1 million of this currency effect after the 5 percent that was retained in the Special Reserve Account. In 1982-83 there was a favourable currency effect of US$16.4 million, and after the 5 percent was left for the Special Reserve Account, US$13.7 million went into the cash surplus distributed to Member Nations. In 1984-85 there was US$10.6 million of a favourable currency effect. After the 5 percent retention, US$9.8 million went into the cash surplus returned to Member Nations. There were years of good luck and good fortune; Member Nations benefited from them. In 1988-89 we had a favourable currency effect of US$10.9 million.
That is not a bad record.If in four biennia Member Nations have benefited from favourable currency effects and the device of the Special Reserve Account permitted them to capture these benefits, then surely in the years of difficulty - not just for the Secretariat - for your Organization, there would be some equity in Member Nations accepting responsibility for the additional burden that falls on them.
The third subject that I need to draw to the attention of the Council is a matter that arises not only from the Report of the Finance Committee but also from the Report of the Programme Committee, and from the joint meeting. That concerns the Programme Budget Process. There are two issues that the Council may wish to consider.
The first one has been referred to extensively in your earlier discussions, and that is the continuation of the Budget Outline step. On that point the Programme and Finance Committees recommend that the "Outline step become an
established feature of the FAO Programme Budget Process", and "that appropriate amendments be introduced in the Basic Texts of the Organization". This recommendation was unanimous in the two Committees. Accordingly, the Director-General has submitted to the CCLM proposals for the amendment of the Basic Texts, which are submitted through the Report of the CCLM, and with your comments will go to the Conference.
The second subject is other improvements in the Programme Budget Process, other improvements in the documentation and the scheduling of their consideration by the Governing Bodies. The Director-General thought it fitting that he submit his suggestions on the subject. The Programme and Finance Committees have endorsed these measures suggested by the Director-General with a view to their implementation on an experimental basis in the next biennium, 1992-93, and for the budgetary exercise for the Programme of Work and Budget 1994-95.
These measures consist of: a) a shorter summary of the Programme of Work and Budget, which would avoid duplication with the full Programme of Work and Budget, as you yourself have often suggested; b) a more uniform and meaningful involvement of the Technical Committees of the Council - the Committees on Agriculture, Forestry, Fisheries; c) a consideration of the Medium-Term Plan by the Programme and Finance Committees and by the Council, respectively, at their May and June sessions, thereby addressing the longer term prospects in a more logical fashion and reducing the pressures in these bodies at their autumn sessions; and, d) an enhanced system of reporting that would involve a programme implementation report and a programme evaluation report, each one dealing with both the Regular and the Field Programmes, and coupled with an improved schedule of their consideration by the concerned bodies.
We hope that the result of these measures, the clearer impact of these measures, would be in terms of reduced duplication in discussions, more productive use of the time of delegations, and a more realistic schedule of programming. I emphasize that all of these suggestions are made for the benefit of Member Nations and their representatives in our Governing Bodies. None of these suggestions are made for the conceivable or potential benefit of the Secretariat. I can see very well that if you endorse these suggestions and if the Conference approves them, there would be no less work that we would have to do. We would just try to do better what we have done so far.
In the light of the reactions of the Programme and Finance Committee the Council may wish to consider endorsing these suggestions for examination by the Conference and, in that event, may I suggest that the extract of the Council's Report be drawn to the attention of the Conference, together with the extracts of the Report of the Programme and Finance Committees and the document that the Director-General submitted in order that the Conference has a full picture of what were the suggestions and reactions of each body that considered these suggestions.
LE PRESIDENT: Sur le point 15 de l'ordre du jour, nous avons une décision à prendre et nous devons émettre un certain nombre d'avis à la Conférence au sujet des différentes questions qui viennent d'être explicitées par M. Shah.
Si vous n'y voyez pas d'objection, je voudrais commencer par le projet de résolution du Conseil relatif à la nomination du Commissaire aux comptes. Je vous donne lecture de ce projet de résolution qui figure à la page 64 du document CL 100/4:
"Le Conseil,Notant que le Comité financier recommande de nommer à nouveau le Contrôleur et Vérificateur général des comptes du Royaume-Uni Commissaire aux comptes de l'Organisation;
Reconnaissant l'efficacité des services rendus par le Commissaire aux comptes,
Décide de nommer le Contrôleur et Vérificateur général des comptes du Royaume-Uni Commissaire aux comptes de l'Organisation pour une nouvelle période de deux ans commençant à la vérification des comptes de l'année 1992."
Y a-t-il des demandes d'intervention sur ce point précis?
Jacques WARIN (France): Il n'est pas dans mes intentions de faire objection à ce projet de résolution mais je veux simplement faire une brève intervention qui donne le point de vue de mon Gouvernement en la matière.
Je remercie tout d'abord très vivement le Président du Comité financier, M. Di Mottola d'avoir tout à l'heure parfaitement résumé la question de la nomination du Commissaire aux comptes. Je rappellerai que M. Di Mottola a résumé en trois points saillants les débats du Comité financier. Le premier point,c'est qu'il y avait, cette année, deux candidats pour assumer cette charge,la Cour des comptes française et le National Audit Office britannique, et que ces deux candidats ont été entendus par le Comité financier. Le deuxième point, c'est que pour des raisons conjoncturelles, à savoir les difficultés financières actuelles que connaît la FAO et les modifications qui sont apportées au système financier de la FAO, c'est-à-dire le système d'informatisation, il a été jugé utile de conserver le Contrôleur et Vérificateur général actuel, qui est celui du Royaume-Uni. Le troisième point sur lequel j'insiste, c'est que le Comité a noté que le présent Commissaire aux comptes est en fonction depuis 1951. Cela fait quarante ans. Nous allons fêter samedi prochain, au Capitole, les quarante ans d'installation de la FAO à Rome et nous pourrons fêter également les quarante ans d'installation du National Audit Office dans la structure de la FAO.
Cela dit, je note que le Comité financier a estimé qu'il était dans l'intérêt de l'Organisation d'avoir la possibilité de recourir à l'avenir à l'expérience d'autres vérificateurs des comptes.
Je crois que cette remarque est importante, et également la remarque selon laquelle la demande exprimée par le Comité financier de voir de nouvelles candidatures se présenter à lui.
C'est là dessus que je voulais vous rassurer et que vous en preniez acte.
La Cour des comptes française, qui avait présenté une très bonne demande, étayée à la fois sur le plan formel et sur le plan financier, et qui d'autre part jouit d'une bonne expérience de la vérification des comptes dans le système des Nations Unies, puisqu'elle a déjà assumé cette charge pour le PNUD et pour une autre institution spécialisée de Genève, a l'intention de représenter sa candidature en 1993. Je ne sais pas si je serai encore là pour la défendre, mais en tout état de cause je souhaite que la troisième fois soit la bonne.
EL PRESIDENT: Je remercie M. Warin de son intervention. S'il n'y a pas d'autres interventions nous pourrons considérer que ce projet de résolution est adopté par consensus. Le projet devient une résolution du Conseil.
Nous devons fournir un avis en ce qui concerne le "Working Capital Fund". Il y a un projet de résolution qui se trouve dans le rapport que vous avez sous les yeux. Il existe également un projet de résolution de la Conférence en ce qui concerne le "Special Reserve Account".
Vous pouvez l'aborder dès maintenant, mais la procédure fait l'objet d'un projet de résolution de la Conférence annexé au Projet de rapport du Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques. Je vous demanderai de le discuter après le point 15 lors de la discussion du point 17, qui viendra après la discussion du point 15.
Il y a également un projet de la résolution de la Conférence concernant l'administration des fonds du PAM. Dans le programme de ce mercredi, il est indiqué "pour décision". En fait, il n'y a pas de décision à prendre, il y a des commentaires à transmettre à la Conférence, qui prendra, elle, la décision sur la base de la proposition du projet de résolution que nous soumettrons à la Conférence.
Je donnerai immédiatement la parole au représentant du Pakistan en présentant nos excuses au délégué du Liban, car notre ami pakistanais doit se rendre à l'aéroport pour recevoir son Président.
Mohammad Saleem KHAN (Pakistan): I would like to thank the Chairman of the Finance Committee and Mr Shah for their extensive presentation on the various issues and I fully share the view expressed by Mr Shah at the end that gave the importance of the issues. We must transmit the extract of the Report from Council to the relevant Commissions of the Conference along with all the other documents he noted.
My delegation in its intervention yesterday under Agenda Item 11 had touched upon certain key points in relation to the Programme of Work and Budget 1992-93. In the interests of brevity we do not wish to repeat the same but would request that our views expressed under that item be kept under consideration while preparing the report under Agenda Item 15.
The delegation of Pakistan would like to start by noting its appreciation for the extremely thorough scrutiny carried out by the two Committees of the various issues placed before them and the concrete proposals they have made for the consideration of the Council and Conference. It has greatly facilitated our task. My delegation in general shares the consensus within the two Committees and do not wish to go into any points of agreement. At
this stage we would like to take particular note of the views of the UNDP support costs successive arrangements noted at para. 1.17 and para. 1.19 of the report. We agree that while national execution within the parameters of operational capacities of governments is desirable FAO will have to play an important role in capacity building and advisory services, while continuing to participate in projects. We would also agree with the view that in the adjustment phase towards the new situation a degree of uncertainty prevails and that the Director-General should have the flexibility during this transitional stage to manage the staff establishment for field operations within the resource available.
The delegation of Pakistan also wishes to endorse the desirability of institutionalizing the additional step in the programme budget process and adoption of the linked resolution provided we are able by the end of the Conference to adopt the budgetary proposals with consensus. In this context we would recall the underlying objective of consensus building with which this step was initially conceived as an experimental measure.
My delegation in its statement under Agenda Items 3 and 11 had also noted that in the interest of sound operations of the Organization and with past experience in view, we support the proposals for replenishment of the Special Reserve Account and the US$5 million increase in the Working Capital Fund. On the same note my delegation see the logic behind and support the proposal to maintain the lapse factor at 3 percent. We appreciate the additional financial burden that these three measures which I have noted would entail for Member States, particularly keeping in view the present financial difficulties of a large number of developing countries. Nevertheless we all agree that services of FAO are necessary and irreplaceable and to enable the administration to maintain this quality certain measures are necessary. Pakistan therefore is willing to undergo this sacrifice in the greater interest of the Organization and would hope other members would do likewise.
The delegation of Pakistan would also like to note its appreciation for the diligent manner in which the present External Auditor has absolved himself of his duties and endorse the proposal for his re-appointment for the next biennium. However, we would like to note that in future appointments due consideration shall also be given to available audit services in the developing countries. The Auditor General of Pakistan, for example, has been auditing accounts of various agencies of the United Nations family and could certainly provide similar services to FAO if required.
Turning to matters relating to WFP we do not at this stage wish to go into greater details since as members of the CFA Pakistan would have the opportunity to do so in the CFA. At this moment we would confine ourselves to endorsing the appended draft resolution on the administration of the WFP Trust Fund.
The Finance and Programme Committees constitute an important stage of inter-governmental deliberations over issues relating to the finances and programmes of the Organization. The two Committees beyond doubt have done well in the performance of the task assigned to them. Nevertheless for decisions of the two Committees to be representative and widely acceptable the principle of just and balanced geographical representation enshrined in the Basic Texts of FAO is important.
You will recall from the intervention of my delegation yesterday morning which we made on behalf of the members of the Asian region on the Council expressing our concern that the Asian region has not been adequately represented in the Finance Committee for several terms now and we requested the Council to review the arrangements for election to the two Committees in pursuance of Conference Resolution 11/87 and para. 281 of the report of the Twenty-fifth Session of the FAO Conference. I would like to clarify that it is not the intention of the Asian region to deprive any other region of its due and rightful representation on any inter-governmental body. All we seek is respect of the same right for our region. We respect the principles enshrined in the Conference Resolution 11/87 and endorse the urgings of the report of the Twenty-fifth Session of the Conference for greater rapport and consultation between the various regions and the various countries to respect these principles. It was in this spirit that following the unfortunate upset in 1987 When Asia got three seats on the Programme Committee to the detriment of Africa that for elections in 1989 we disciplined ourselves and put up only two candidates for the election to the Programme Committee, thus restoring the balance which had been upset in 1987. In seeking a separate agenda item it was never our intention to force a decision on any one region. We only wished an opportunity to voice our own grievances and to seek the assistance of the Council and Conference in redressing these as the informal negotiations had not been able to achieve much success in the past. We therefore feel sorry that some of our colleagues misunderstood us and denied us this right to express our views in the Council. The Asian region wishes to thank the Chairman and members of the Latin American group for their understanding of the issue of rotation of one seat between our two regions and meeting with us to have a dialogue on this issue. We would continue to maintain this informal dialogue with them in seeking a mutually amicable solution to this problem. Nevertheless the susceptibilities of informal arrangements are not only apparent but lead to unnecessary bitterness between regions and countries. The Asian region therefore beseeches all members over here, particularly those within the Group of 77, to work jointly with us in evolving a just and durable solution over the eight seats on the Programme Committee and the six seats on the Finance Committee earmarked in the General Rules of the Organization for our four regions of Africa, Asia and the Pacific, the Near East, and Latin America and the Caribbean. We are sure such an arrangement could improve the accord and understanding between the regions and allow us to focus better on the basic issues relating to food and agriculture.
We appreciate the constraints of time available to the Council at the present session and would not insist in a discussion on this item but would request that the views which we have expressed now and earlier during the adoption of the agenda should find a place in the report of the Council and that we should have an opportunity to continue the discussion between now and the Conference and if possible during the Conference.
LE PRESIDENT: Puis-je demander aux membres du Conseil de faire un effort pour être concis. Il faudrait nous limiter aux commentaires sur les propositions de résolution de la Conférence concernant le "Working Capital Fund" et le "Special Reserve Account". En ce qui concerne la procédure de budget et programme, je crois qu'il serait bon d'en discuter lorsqu'on abordera le point 17 de notre ordre du jour, après avoir entendu l'exposé du Président du Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques.Il
en est de même en ce qui concerne l'administration du Fonds du PAM. Essayons donc de nous limiter aux deux propositions de résolution que je vous ai citées.
Amin ABDEL MALEK (Liban) (Langue originale arabe): Tout d'abord je tiens à remercier M. di Mottola sur les travaux de son Comité dont j'ai l'honneur d'être membre. Et je tiens à féliciter M. Shah pour les informations très claires qu'il nous a présentées sur cette question. Je pense qu'après tout cela je pourrai être très bref sur deux questions très importantes. La délégation appuie ce qui a été dit dans le rapport en général et nous appuyons tout particulièrement la proposition du Directeur général pour augmenter le Fonds de roulement de 20 à 25 millions et aussi de faire passer à 32 millions de dollars le Fonds de réserve spécial,ce qui représente 15 pour cent du niveau du budget, ce qui est nécessaire pour qu'il remplisse son rôle et pour faciliter les travaux de l'Organisation. L'augmentation de 5 millions de dollars pour le Fonds de roulement qui représente 5 millions de dollars par an ne touchera pas les pays en développement, surtout le Liban, qui ont une petite contribution; donc ces pays en développement ne paieront que 250 dollars et cela ne permet de payer qu'un bon repas dans nos restaurants. Donc nous ne pouvons nous satisfaire de cette augmentation ainsi que de l'augmentation d'autres propositions pour accroître le Fonds de roulement ainsi que le Fonds de réserve spécial.
Gerald J. MONROE (United States of America): Mr Chairman, I will heed seriously your admonishment and cue only those substantive resolutions with respect to the replenishment of the two special accounts. I think I can do that in good conscience as a member of the Finance Committee. Our views on all of these subjects have been exhaustively aired.
Let me say, however, from the outset that regrettably the United States opposes both resolutions in their present form. This is not a new position; we made clear our concerns at the June Council Session, as we did at the Finance Committee Meeting in September.
Let me make quite clear what our problems are. They relate primarily to the funding of the Working Capital Fund increase and the purposes of the Special Reserve Account as well as the character of the proposed funding mechanism, i.e. special assessments.
Mr Chairman, we have problems with special assessments. Let me turn first to the Special Reserve Fund. It was established in 1977 to mitigate the adverse effects of currency fluctuations. Since that time the FAO has engaged in the practice of entering into contracts for forward purchase of lire. This has proven to be an effective tool in dealing with many of the effects of currency instability. In general, the United States supports international organizations taking reasonable measures to minimize the adverse effects of currency fluctuations. As Mr Shah has pointed out,there are several approaches adopted within the system.Some convert their budgets to local currency, and I refer to the ITU, the WIPO, UPU and the IMO. Some, as Mr Shah pointed out earlier, use a split assessment system, the IAEA and UNIDO. Others, as we have noted before, engage in extensive forward purchasing activity. They include the ILO as well as the FAO.
Taking those considerations into account, the United States is sceptical about the need for the continuation of the Special Reserve Account in so far as it deals with exchange rate adjustments. If the membership approves this increase, we must confront the fact that Member Nations will pay significantly higher assessments. We have noted, as we have discussed here before, that a majority have difficulty paying their regular assessed contributions to the Budget. Against this background, approving such an increase in aggregated assessments strikes us as counter-productive.
We note that Special Reserve Account is used to finance budgetary expenditures pending receipt of contributions. In our judgment - and this is a general principle we pursue inasmuch as the FAO Working Capital Fund serves the same purpose - we find the use of the Special Reserve Account redundant and would risk,in our judgement, certain inefficiencies.
Moving on to the Working Capital Fund, we support the use of the Working Capital Fund by international organizations such as the FAO to bridge the time and gap between payment of budgeted expenditures and receipt of contributions, but we cannot support a proposal which will increase assessments on Member Nations by US$5 million provided it is funded via surplus funds available to the Organization.
I might add the proposed overall US$25 million level of the Working Capital Fund would be in line with the previous recommendation of the JIU, which we support. We are fully cognizant of the apparent contradiction in terms of the current provisions within the FAO's Basic Texts. We think, however, those can be dealt with by the Conference. Conference put the regulation there in any case, we would presume.
In constant dollars, the current proposed 1992-93 Budget, as we now have it before us, could raise assessments by 15 percent. The special assessments for the SRA and the Working Capital Fund will add another six percent to this already significant increase. Under an increasingly unfavourable scenario, assessments on Member Nations could increase by significantly more than that figure.
Therefore, we retain our opposition to the special assessments.
C.B. HOUTMAN (Netherlands): We have a problem with the special assessment on the Working Capital Fund. Despite the lucid introduction by Mr Shah, we have not seen the light so as to be able to go along with it. Therefore, we shall have to reserve our position on this increase to US$25 million on special assessments until the Conference.
On the Special Reserve Account, we are in line with what the United States has said on the losses incurred due to currency exchange rates. We would not oppose replenishment of the Special Reserve Account, but we would impose a type of condition which could possibly be aired. We shall have to discuss that during the Conference. There is a sentence in the resolution where we request the Director-General to submit proposals which in future exclude the losses incurred through currency exchange rates. If that were the case, we would endorse such a resolution because we have some reservations about the losses due to exchange rates because it smells a little of speculation now and then. For good planning of the financial situation in the Organization, we should try to exclude that.
That is the position of the Netherlands.
Ray ALLEN (United Kingdom): I would first like to welcome the document and the information it provides to members on the important deliberations of the Programme and Finance Committees. I would like to thank the Chairman of the Finance Committee and Mr Shah for their very clear introductions.
I will not, as we agreed yesterday, address all those elements in the report that refer to the reviews of the Regular and Field Programmes. We will address these at the Conference.
My delegation is particularly pleased to note the recommendations that the outline budget step becomes an established feature, and that amendments be made to the Basic Texts to allow for this. We are also very pleased to see the inclusion of Appendix A which gives a more detailed account of the Programme Budget Process and the proposed changes to streamline the procedures. We note that these proposed changes introduce economies without sacrificing quality of information to the membership. We endorse the conclusions of the Committee and look forward to seeing these changes introduced on an experimental basis for the 1994-95 budgetary exercise.
We welcome the comments on the Medium-Term Plan, and again we will address these further at the Conference; likewise the Programme of Work and Budget where,like most delegations, we hope the Conference can arrive at a consensus decision balancing the need to protect the Programme of Work and the need to contain increases in assessed contributions.
We note from paragraphs 3.17 to 3.23 the proposals regarding the lapse factor. We also note that the Finance Committee was not able to reach a consensus on the level of this. My delegation would like to add their voice to the concerns expressed by some members at that Committee.In our view, the lapse factor should not be used as a supplement due to the inadequacy of overall resources, but it does have a direct bearing on the vacancy rate. That is what it is there for. We strongly urge that the level be increased more correctly to reflect the actual vacancy rate.
Regarding the measures to encourage prompt payment of contributions, we will address these further at the Conference. I would however, like to highlight here that my delegation would have difficulty accepting the proposal for a discount for early payment. This would suggest that assessments are set at a level higher than the Organization requires. FAO cannot afford to sacrifice part of its income in the form of discounts.
I would now like to turn to the proposals to increase the Working Capital Fund and the Special Reserve Account. My delegation opposes any increase in these funds which would entail additional assessment on Member Nations. Members who pay their contributions in full should not be penalized by the imposition of additional assessment to cover for those members who have not paid. We are not opposed per se to the increase in the Working Capital Fund, but in our view this should be met from surplus funds as and when they arise. We have taken note of Mr Shah's comments in his introduction regarding the use of surplus funds and the financial regulations, but,like my American colleague, we consider this is something the Conference could address and pass a resolution on accordingly. We cannot support a special
assessment on Members at a time when contributions to the Organization already represent a significant burden to many.
Regarding the Special Reserve Account, again we cannot support a proposal which would entail a special assessment on Member Nations. We consider that the Organization should seek alternative ways to minimize the adverse effects of exchange rate fluctuations.
My delegation is concerned by the Report on the Implementation of FINSYS, mentioned in paragraphs 3.155 to 3.158. We are disappointed to see that despite repeated reassurances at earlier Council Sessions there are still significant problems with FINSYS. We would be grateful if the Secretariat would inform this Council how much it has cost so far to remedy the problems of FINSYS in terms of hardware, software and staff costs, and how much it is likely to cost - an approximate figure will do - to implement all the system modifications referred to in the Report.
We would also be grateful to know when the Secretariat expects all the problems to be finally overcome.
LE PRESIDENT: Je crois qu'il n'y a pas que la FAO qui a des problèmes avec son système informatique et avec le système FINSYS-PERSYS. Certains pays, et on en a d'ailleurs parlé dans la presse, ont eu également certains problèmes, c'est une question générale, et des progrès ont été faits et vous serez tenus au courant de ces progrès.
John Bruce SHARPE (Australia): Australia's views on the increase in the Working Capital Fund and the replenishment of the Special Reserve Account, and our opposition to them and also to external borrowing, have been made known in the Finance Committee and also as recently as yesterday when the financial position of the Organization was discussed under Agenda Items 3 and 11. You also had our views at that time on the TCP, the lapse factor and the cost increases. We would like those views to be taken into account when the Report of the other Council is being prepared.
On the question of the proposals to encourage prompt payment of contributions which are contained in the Finance Committee's Report, Australia considers that all members should endeavour to meet their financial obligations to the Organization. Without a cash flow, many of the very positive elements of FAO's work cannot be achieved. As a member of the Finance Committee, Australia has been party to the careful consideration which has been given to this matter by the collect Committee. It looked at a number of alternatives. Those that involve penalty elements were rejected because they were considered inequitable: firstly, they disadvantaged those developing countries who, because of economic circumstances, were having difficulty in meeting their payments; secondly, they disadvantaged those countries who, because of their domestic budgetary arrangements and timing, were required to make their payments later or in the second half of the year. Australia, who always makes its annual contribution and is never in arrears, falls within that category.
The Finance Committee, in putting forward its proposals based on incentives, also complied with Council Directives that penalty schemes not be included in measures proposed. There is however one area of the proposal
which we would wish to see changed. We consider that the Finance Committee should have the opportunity to advise the Director-General on the amount of the discount to be offered to eligible countries. The proposal does not outline that.
Unfortunately, we have some reservations about whether the proposals will accomplish the desired objectives of encouraging Member Nations to pay their assessments promptly. There are too many other factors involved. We hope that it will. As a country which wishes to see members fully meet their financial obligations, we support FAO trying the discount scheme proposed.
Australia supports the proposed changes to the Programme Budget Process, and to the permanent retention of the Outline.
Our views, and the reasons for holding them, are contained in the Report of the Finance Committee where the views of the members were unanimous. We noted in particular that the proposed changes will not diminish the quality and quantity of the information available to Member Countries for their consideration.
LE PRESIDENT: Il est évident que si tous les pays suivaient l'exemple de l'Australie de payer les contributions à temps, on n'aurait pas de problèmes. Hélas, il y en a.
Milad Abdessalam SCHMEYLA (Libya) (Original language Arabic): I would like to congratulate the Programme and Finance Committee on the work accomplished by this Committee, which is excellent. I would also like to thank Mr. Shah for his presentation of the subject.
My country has contributed to the discussion of the Working Programme and Budget when this was discussed in the Programme Committee and the Joint Meeting of the Programme and Finance Committee. We agree with the proposals of resolutions which are in the Reports of the two Committees and we approve the Director-General's proposal to increase the Working Capital Fund in order to make up for the sums withdrawn from the Special Reserve Account.
Earl WEYBRECHT (Canada): My delegation shares the concern expressed by many other delegations over the proposals to levy a special assessment on Member Nations to provide for the replenishment of the Special Reserve Account, as well as the assessment resulting from the proposed change to the Working Capital Fund. These additional assessments would impose a substantial additional financial burden on the membership over and above the increases already proposed in the budget level itself. We are not in a position to support these two resolutions.
We have a number of general concerns over the Terms of Reference and the operation of the Reserve Account itself and over the use of funds from the Working Capital Fund and we may pursue these in the discussions in the Conference. Several of these concerns have already been raised. While we have noted the clear explanations given by Mr. Shah, we feel that there are other mechanisms that may be more effective in protecting the Organization
against currency fluctuations and believe it would be useful to have a close look at the experiences in other organizations.
Finally, we have studied the proposal put forward in the Finance Committee Report on an incentive scheme to encourage the early payment of contributions. In principle we support the idea of an effective scheme to encourage early payments and would be supportive of efforts to reach a consensus on an effective scheme. Our general preference however would be to try to avoid a proliferation of different schemes within the UN system.
Haruo ISHII (Japan): We mentioned yesterday that we are opposed to the increased burden placed on Member States because of the Working Capital Fund and the Special Reserve Account.
LE PRESIDENT: Quelqu'un désire-t-il encore intervenir sur ce point? Il reste quatre orateurs et je vais clore la liste des orateurs.
Assefa Yilala (Ethiopia): The Ethiopian delegation would like to thank the Chairman of the Finance Committee and Mr Shah for the explanation provided on Item 15. We would however like to make some specific remarks on some of the points in Item 15.
We agree with the recommendations of the Finance Committee for raising the level of the Working Capital Fund from US$20 million to US$25 million, this US$5 million proposed increase being met through assessed contributions.
We fully share the view that the Special Reserve Account should be kept at five percent of the total Capital Budget, as was decided in earlier Conference deliberations, the present level of US$32.6 million being five percent of the total Budget. As decisions have been made on this matter in earlier deliberations, we are just bringing it to the attention of the Conference. In this connection we fully share the view that none of us are pleased to see assessed contributions increased, but the hope of seeing successful implementations of programmes which have been approved is forcing us to accept this difficulty, which is particularly unfortunate at a time when the economic situations in our countries are extremely serious and difficult.
We have examined the proposed measures to encourage prompt payment of contributions through discounts on assessed contributions. Even though the discount envisaged is to be covered either through this measure or through the interest rate which will be earned, we fear that Member Countries might be forced to pay higher assessed contributions. We would like to express our reservations on this, because we fear that unless we have a guarantee that the discount to be made is going to be covered through interest to be earned, we have no way of increasing our assessed contributions because Member Countries fail to fulfill their obligations on time and in full.
Jacques WARIN (France): Je m'efforcerai également d'être bref. En fait, je n'ai à faire que deux brèves remarques sur le Fonds de roulement et le Compte de réserve spécial. Je crois qu'il faut distinguer les deux cas. Nous n'avons pas la même position de principe à leur sujet.
Pour ce qui est du Fonds de roulement, je note que l'augmentation demandée est relativement modeste - elle est de 25 millions de dollars - et que cela situe le Fonds de roulement à un niveau tout à fait acceptable qui est de moins de 5 pour cent du budget annuel, ce qui me parait tout à fait compatible avec les règlements en vigueur dans les autres grandes organisations. Donc, je soutiendrai cette augmentation du Fonds de roulement.
Pour ce qui est du Compte de réserve spécial, je suis un petit peu plus sceptique pour deux raisons essentielles: au fond, ce Compte de réserve spécial - cela nous a été expliqué par M. Shah - a pour objet essentiel de limiter les effets des fluctuations de change. Ma première raison pour m'en inquiéter, c'est que je me demande s'il n'y a pas d'autres moyens de se garantir contre les effets des fluctuations de change. Un autre moyen, ce sont les achats à terme de devises qui sont pratiqués dans d'autres grandes institutions spécialisées des Nations Unies, notamment, je crois, l'OMS, à Genève. Je me demande si la FAO ne pourrait pas étudier un schéma de ce genre au lieu de nous proposer tout de suite la reconstitution à un niveau élevé du Compte de réserve spécial.
Ma deuxième inquiétude vient de ce que j'ai entendu certains grands pays qui ont parlé avant moi dire qu'ils étaient opposés à une contribution spéciale. S'ils y sont opposés, ils risquent de suivre l'exemple pratiqué dans le passé par leurs gouvernements: lorsqu'ils votent contre le budget, ils ne paient pas leurs contributions. Donc, s'ils s'opposent à une contribution spéciale, ils ne verseront pas cette contribution. Et qui la versera? Ceux qui auront voté en sa faveur et qui seront encore une fois les bons payeurs. D'où la réticence que j'éprouve à l'heure actuelle à conseiller à mon Gouvernement de voter pour ce projet de résolution. Je prends une position réservée. Je demanderai des instructions à ma capitale et je vous en parlerai plus tard, au cours de la Conférence.
LE PRESIDENT: Je me permettrai de faire remarquer que le budget de l'OMS est établi en francs suisses et que les fluctuations du franc suisse n'ont que peu de rapport avec les fluctuations de la monnaie dans laquelle le budget de la FAO est établi. Il s'agit d'un vaste problème et nous aurons certainement l'occasion d'en discuter à la Commission II.
Gian Luigi VALENZA (Italie): Je voudrais, moi aussi, être bref et je me limiterai à féliciter tant le Président du Comité financier que M. Shah, dont l'exposé a été brillant comme toujours.
La délégation italienne souhaite qu'à partir de l'année prochaine, les contributions ordinaires à la FAO soient payées par tous les Etats Membres sans le retard de ces dernières années. Je ne peux donc qu'appuyer, à ce propos, ce qu'a dit mon collègue de l'Australie. En effet, si tout le monde faisait son devoir, comme il est du reste prévu par le Règlement,la FAO ne serait peut-être pas appelée, dans un futur immédiat, à faire d'autres emprunts ou à demander d'autres ouvertures de crédit, comme l'a expliqué hier M. Shah.
Joseph TCHICAYA (Congo): Je tiens à féliciter le Président du Comité financier et M. Shah pour leur brillante introduction de la question soumise à notre examen.
Je serai bref pour dire que, en ce qui me concerne, nous nous sentons un peu coupables face aux propositions qui sont faites ici. Je dis un peu coupables parce que, nous-mêmes, nous n'avons pas payé à temps notre contribution. Par conséquent, notre culpabilité est évidente et c'est cette culpabilité qui amène la délégation congolaise à appuyer fermement les deux projets de résolutions.
Srta. Mery HURTADO (Colombia): Queria, en nombre de mi delegación, felicitar al Sr. Shah y al señor Presidente del Comité de Finanzas por estos informes y, como Ud. dijo, voy a ser muy breve. Es para apoyar la declaración del delegado del Congo en el sentido de que se apoyen las dos resoluciones propuestas por el Consejo.
LE PRESIDENT: Je voudrais signaler que le projet de résolution concernant l'administration du Fonds du PAM sera examiné avec le rapport du Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques et que le projet de résolution relatif à la procédure du budget-programme sera également examiné dans ce cadre.
En ce qui concerne les projets de résolution présentés à la Conférence au sujet du Fonds de roulement et du Compte de réserve spécial, nous avons entendu des points de vue assez divergents mais clairement exprimés par un certain nombre de délégations. Je crois que le problème sera longuement discuté à la Commission II. Je demanderai seulement à ceux qui ont marqué une opposition de présenter des solutions constructives et valables permettant d'aboutir à un consensus sur ces deux questions importantes, à savoir la reconstitution du Fonds de roulement et celle du Compte de réserve spécial. Il faudra trouver des formules mais cela ne peut pas se faire dans le cadre du Conseil.
On a lancé un certain nombre d'idées quant aux moyens d'éviter les fluctuations des taux de change. Je crois qu'il est très difficile d'éviter ces fluctuations et que même la formule des achats à terme n'est pas une solution miracle parce que, si tel était le cas, les spéculateurs seraient certains de gagner en faisant des achats à terme. Or ce n'est pas toujours le cas, la spéculation étant essentiellement fondée sur un jeu de hasard. Personne ne peut dire quelle sera, dans les deux années à venir la fluctuation de la monnaie de référence dans laquelle est établi le budget de la FAO. Je note toutefois beaucoup de bonne volonté. Je constate que certains pays s'opposent à la formule actuelle. Je crois que, dans le cadre de la discussion, il sera bon de ne pas maintenir une opposition purement négative et d'en arriver à une opposition constructive, c'est-à-dire progressive et concrète, de façon à permettre à l'Organisation de fonctionner. L'appel qui a été lancé par les représentants de l'Australie et de l'Italie réglerait tous les problèmes. Hélas, il ne pourra pas être entendu par tous et je crois qu'il faudra en tirer un certain nombre de conclusions.
Une question précise a été posée au sujet du système FINSYS/PERSYS. Je crois que, dans le rapport du Comité du programme et du Comité financier se trouve un passage sur la mise en oeuvre du système FINSYS. Des progrès incontestables ont été faits et nous aurons l'occasion d'en parler au cours de la Conférence. Je me permettrai de renvoyer l'honorable représentant du Royaume-Uni à ce passage du rapport. Le Secrétariat se tient, bien sûr, à son entière disposition pour lui fournir tous les éléments utiles concernant l'évolution de la situation ou l'application du système. M. Mehboob pourra prendre contact avec lui pour lui fournir toutes les explications voulues.
Quant à l'exposé introductif de M. Shah, il a été tellement complet qu'il ne nécessite pas de conclusion.
S'il n'y a pas d'autres remarques en ce qui concerne le point 15 de l'ordre du jour, nous allons immédiatement passer au point 17, que nous avions quelque peu reporté ce matin.
Fotis POULIDES (Chairman of the Committee on Constitutional and Legal Matters): Mr Chairman, it is with great pleasure I shall introduce the Report of the Fifty-seventh Session of the Committee on Constitutional and Legal Matters over which I have had the honour to preside for the past four years.
This session of the CCLM was certainly among the most important of the last four years. The Committee had before it a wide range of subjects including a number of matters which could have important implications for our Organization. As these matters are numerous and each requires a very great deal of attention,I shall introduce them individually before your discussion,item by item.
Item 2: Proposed amendments to the Constitution and the General Rules of the Organization to allow for a form of membership for Regional Economic Integration Organizations in FAO, including the reports of the Committee established pursuant to the decision of the Ninety-ninth Session of the Council. The first item on our Agenda was that of the possible form of membership for Regional Economic Integration Organizations in FAO. The CCLM had already considered this matter at its Fifty-fourth Session in May 1990, at its Fifty-fifth Session in September 1990 and at its Fifty-sixth Session in April 1991. The Report of the Fifty-sixth Session was presented to the Council in June 1991 at its Ninety-ninth Session. At that Session the Council agreed to transmit to the Conference proposed draft amendments to the Basic Texts of the Organization to allow of membership for Regional
Economic Integration Organizations in FAO. It also decided to establish a Committee consisting of a limited number of Member Nations to review the Texts.
The Council decided further that the Texts subsequently be reviewed by the CCLM at its Fifty-seventh Session. The Report of the Committee of Member Nations established by the Council known as REIOC was also to be submitted to the CCLM. Thus, the CCLM had before it a great number of documents on the subject which it was to consider in its Report to the Council. The Committee of Member Nations established to review the proposed amendments to the Basic Texts of the Organization to allow of membership of REIOC held two sessions prior to the Fifty-seventh Session of CCLM and their reports were considered by the CCLM. I should like to suggest that it might facilitate the understanding of delegates to the Council if the Chairman of REIOC, Ambassador Bula Hoyos, be allowed to present the report of the two sessions of REIOC at this stage since they constitute an essential element of the CCLM Report on this subject.
LE PRESIDENT: Je salue le Président du Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques et je le remercie de sa gentillesse habituelle. Pour des raisons techniques nous avons proposé ce matin de modifier quelque peu l'ordre du jour de notre séance plénière en joignant le point 15 au point 4 et nous avons donc dû remettre le point 17 à plus tard. Cela peut arriver dans l'organisation de n'importe quelle réunion. Je présente donc mes excuses au Président du Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques, je le remercie de sa présence et je lui passe la parole.
Fotis POULIDES (Président des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques): M. le Président, je vous remercie infiniment, mais avec tout le respect que j'ai pour la présidence du Conseil et l'amitié qui me lie personnellement à vous, je dois faire remarquer que ce sujet du rapport du Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques qui contient des questions très importantes pour l'Organisation était inscrit comme premier sujet à examiner ce matin, et vous me donnez la parole à 12h25... De toute façon je pense que malgré cette heure tardive, on peut commencer.
Resolution 46/57 and the Appendix thereto, Part R, Volume II of the Basic Texts. This Resolution laid down a number of principles and procedures which concern conventions and agreements concluded under Articles XIV and XV of the Constitution, as well as Commissions and Committees established under Article VI of the Constitution. The purpose was to introduce a measure of uniformity into such agreements.
The Resolution was adopted by the Conference in 1957, and the CCLM noted that, since that time a number of important developments had taken place within the Organization, and that the type and nature of agreements had evolved substantially. In particular, there had been a development of commissions established under Article XIV which had independent budgets outside of the framework of the Regular Programme of the Organization. Moreover, other commissions now being revealed should be given a broader range of responsibilities and increased authority.
The CCLM agree that it would be opportune and legally acceptable to modify Conference Resolution 46/57, particularly with respect to agreements establishing bodies that would have autonomous budgets. The CCLM noted that the matter had become quite urgent since new commissions were being discussed, particularly in respect of fisheries management. Moreover, the Member Nations that were interested in establishing said commissions had specifically requested that the Secretariat take measures to amend the Council Resolution in the sense that was being proposed.
The CCLM recommended that the amendments that are set out in Appendix Β to its Report be transmitted to Conference for adoption.
LE PRESIDENT: Je remercie le Président du Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques de sa présentation. Nous pourrions examiner ce point précis de la proposition de révision de la Résolution 46 de la Conférence de 1957 qui se trouve dans les Textes fondamentaux. Cette proposition de révision de résolution doit être transmise par le Conseil à la Conférence qui prendra sa décision. Il serait souhaitable qu'elle puisse la prendre avec l'éclairage de la position que pourrait prendre votre Conseil. Aussi, je vous demanderai de nous faire connaître vos avis et considérations sur cette proposition de révision de la Résolution 46/57 qui vise à modifier l'article 14 des statuts régissant la FAO.
Y-a-t-il des observations sur ce point?...
Puisque personne ne demande la parole, il ne nous reste qu'à transmettre cette proposition de modification de la Résolution 46/57 permettant l'adaptation de l'Article 14. Nous la renvoyons à l'attention de la Commission III et de la séance Plénière de la Conférence. La Commission III aura l'occasion d'en délibérer sur la base du rapport du Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques et de la présentation qui vient d'en être faite par son Président.
Je demanderai maintenant au Président Poulides de poursuivre son exposé.
Fotis POULIDES (Chairman of the Committee on Constitutional and Legal Matters): Item 4, Draft Conference Resolutions concerning financial matters. The CCLM was requested to review three resolutions concerning financial matters: A proposed increase in the level of the Working Capital Fund, the replenishment of the Special Reserve Account, and an authorization to allow the administration of the Working Capital Fund to be carried out in accordance with separate financial regulations to be approved by the Committee on Food Aid Policies and Programmes.
The CCLM noted that these Draft Resolutions have been approved by the Finance Committee at its Seventy-second Session and were annexed to the Report of that Session.
The CCLM considered the resolutions from a strictly formal point of view, and concluded that they were legally correct.
LE PRESIDENT: En ce qui concerne les deux propositions concernant le "Working Capital Fund" et le "Special Reserve Account", nous venons d'en discuter. Le rapport reflétera les positions assez divergentes de votre Conseil en les transmettant à la Conférence, spécialement à la Commission III où certainement on discutera très longuement de ces deux propositions de résolution.
En ce qui concerne la troisième proposition de résolution examinée par le Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques, elle concerne la question du Fonds du PAM. Je demanderai aux membres du Conseil s'ils ont des commentaires à faire concernant l'administration du Fonds du PAM. Vous avez tous eu l'occasion de vous pencher sur cette question qui a déjà été examinée lors du Conseil précédent. Le projet de résolution a été examiné sur le plan juridique par le Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques. Peut-être l'un ou l'autre des membres du Conseil souhaiterait prendre la parole sur ce point, de façon à ce que nous puissions présenter à la Conférence ce projet avec les avis et les considérations du Conseil. Ou pouvons-nous estimer que le Conseil avalise le travail fait par le Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques en transmettant la proposition de résolution telle quelle à la Conférence?
Puisque personne ne demande la parole, nous transmettrons la proposition de résolution concernant l'administration du Fonds du PAM à la Conférence et je passe à nouveau la parole au Président du Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques.
Fotis POULIDES (Chairman of the Committee on Constitutional and Legal Matters): Amendments to the General Rules of the Organization regarding the Programme Budget Process. The CCLM reviewed the text of the Draft Conference Resolution that would introduce a new step in the proceedings of the Organization's Programme Budget Process.
The CCLM noted that, at their Joint Sessions in September 1991, the Programme and Finance Committees had recommended that a new Outline step, which had been introduced on an experimental basis, be introduced permanently into the Programme Budget Process.
The CCLM considered that the Draft Conference Resolution, which is attached to this Report as Appendix C, was legally correct.
LE PRESIDENT: En ce qui concerne la procédure du budget et programme, il a été souligné par plusieurs membres du Conseil que cette procédure a été suivie dans le but d'en arriver à l'approbation du Programme de travail et budget dans un esprit de consensus. La procédure est une procédure relativement lourde qui pourrait peut-être être quelque peu simplifiée dans l'avenir, notamment le sommaire de Programme de travail et budget pourrait être davantage synthétique. Mais le long cheminement de janvier à novembre qui est suivi, lors de la session de la Conférence, de façon à préparer l'adoption par la Conférence du Programme de travail et budget, se justifie par la volonté clairement exprimée par tous d'en arriver à trouver ensemble des formules de consensus. C'est non seulement le voeu de votre Président mais c'est certainement le voeu de tous les membres du Conseil et ce sera le voeu de tous les membres de la Conférence, d'en arriver à une adoption par consensus du Programme de travail et budget pour l'exercice 1992-93. Je
crois qu'il était important de souligner que la nouvelle procédure proposée qui entraîne des modifications de textes qui font l'objet d'une proposition de résolution qu'a examinée avec beaucoup d'attention et de soin le Comité de questions constitutionnelles et juridiques, sera transmise à la Conférence dans l'éclairage qui a été donné. Nous avons déjà eu l'occasion de parler de cette procédure du budget et programme. Il est possible que les membres du Conseil désirent ajouter certains commentaires en ce qui concerne la proposition de résolution qui devra être transmise à la Conférence et je vous demanderai de nous communiquer vos commentaires supplémentaires sur cette proposition concernant la procédure et le cheminement du budget et du programme.
Puisque personne ne demande la parole, nous transmettrons à la Conférence, suivant l'éclairage qui a été donné, la proposition d'adoption de la nouvelle procédure du budget et programme.
La parole est au Président Poulides qui poursuivra son exposé.
Fotis POULIDES (Président du Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques): Ce sont maintenant des observations personnelles sur la constitution du CCLM que je me permets de soumettre au Conseil.
In the course of its deliberations at its last session some questions arose in respect of terms of reference of the CCLM as set out in Rule XXXIV. Some members considered that the terms of reference have become too restricted and had been outdated to some extent by the evolution of the scope of activities of the Organization. It was suggested that the terms of reference could usefully be reviewed in due course.
In the light of my experience as Chairman of the CCLM for the past four years I should like to add some brief personal remarks to what the Committee itself has stated in its report. The last four years have witnessed a marked increase in the number and importance of items which are being referred to the CCLM. The members of the Committee have responded to this new challenge in an exemplary fashion. However, the Committee has been restrained in many instances by the limits of its terms of reference. It is my conviction that these terms of reference should be reinforced in order to allow the CCLM to deal with a broader range of subjects and to allow it to make recommendations on certain matters, as is the case in respect of the Finance Committee.
LE PRESIDENT: Je remercie l'Ambassadeur Poulides de son intervention et également de ses suggestions qui pourront être utilement examinées en Commission III lors de la Conférence. Je crois que ses suggestions tiennent compte des évolutions de l'Organisation et sont très positives. Elles devraient, bien sûr, faire l'objet d'une note et d'un examen attentif. Il sera possible à la Commission III de se pencher sur les suggestions qui ont été faites par un Président sage et plein d'expériences. Il nous reste alors un point que nous n'avons pas traité dans le cadre du point 17, c'est le point 17.1 concernant les propositions d'amendement à l'Acte constitutif et au Règlement général de l'Organisation visant à permettre l'adhésion à la FAO des organisations d'intégration économique régionale, notamment le rapport du Comité établi conformément à la décision prise par le Conseil à sa quatre-vingt-dix-neuvième session. Je crois que des négociations sont en
cours. L'Ambassadeur de Colombie est très occupé en ce moment. De toute façon il est tard. Il est une heure moins dix. Je m'excuse encore auprès du Président, nous avons un horaire très court, avec un programme très chargé. Nous nous reverrons à deux heures trente précises si vous le voulez. Alors, à 14 h 30 je vous ferai une proposition précise sur le programme de cet après-midi. Nous avons un point qui pourra être traité assez rapidement, le point 5, le Rapport de la cinquante-huitième session du Comité des produits. Il y a le rapport intérimaire sur les préparatifs de la Conférence internationale sur la nutrition. Un point qui retiendra certainement davantage l'attention de la Conférence qui est le point 7 concernant les faits nouveaux pour le programme d'action pour les forêts tropicales. Nous examinerons le programme de terrain 1990 et 1991, aussi synthétiquement que possible. On émettra un certain nombre de commentaires en ce qui concerne une certaine notion que tout le monde connaît bien parce qu'amplement discutée, les "support costs" du PNUD. On examinera le point 13, "Mise en oeuvre des conclusions de l'Examen de certains aspects des buts et opérations de la FAO". Ce point a déjà été amplement examiné et discuté. Tous les membres du Conseil sont au fait de la question et nous situerons le point 17.1 en fonction de l'état d'avancement des travaux. Mais peut-être vais-je passer la parole au représentant de la Colombie.
Srta. Mery HURTADO (Colombia): Quisiera presentar las disculpas a usted, señor Presidente, y al Consejo, por la ausencia del Embajador Bula Hoyos, a quien asuntos privados de la oficina le impiden estar aqui en este momento para rendir su informe. Les puedo garantizar que esta tarde estará presente en este Consejo.
Juan NUIRY SANCHEZ (Cuba): Perdóneme que haya solicitado la palabra, señor Presidente, pero fue tan rápido el pase de la terminación del Embajador Poulides a que se abordara otro tema, que no me dio oportunidad de levantar el letrero de mi pais.
Como todos sabemos, próximamente habrá elecciones para la Presidencia del CACJ, y no quisiéramos que pasara esta oportunidad sin, en nombre de mi delegación, hacer un reconocimiento del Embajador Poulides. Creo que su trabajo ha sido excelente, que su talento, su personalidad y su profesionalidad han estado presentes en todo momento en estos cuatro años de algunas veces reconocidos y otras ocultados triunfos de este tan importante CACJ. Pero, al mismo tiempo que estamos de acuerdo con lo que acaba de expresar el Embajador Poulides, queremos que también en el CACJ se plantee, se tome en consideración y se discuta la responsabilidad por regiones. No sé si esto está recogido, pero nosotros lo hemos sufrido en nuestra región de América Latina y el Caribe, que no ha estado representada en el CACJ. Eso ha sido un talón de Aquiles que hemos tenido en nuestra región, y yo quisiera que en este momento, unido al reconocimiento del Embajador Poulides, se tomara en cuenta este aspecto, que es muy importante para el equilibrio que debe tener toda dirección de la FAO, y fundamentalmente ésta en especial.
LE PRESIDENT: Je crois que le Représentant du Maroc désire prendre la parole. Je lui demanderai d'être très bref car l'heure avance. Mais je voudrais dire que la question soulevée par le représentant de Cuba fera l'objet de la cent et unième session du Conseil qui se tiendra
immédiatement après la Conférence, sous une présidence encore inconnue puisque mon mandat arrive à son terme à la fin de la Conférence et il sera fonction d'une réélection et donc nul ne sait qui sera en charge de la cent et unième session du Conseil.
Srta. Mery HURTADO (Colombia): Un minuto, Señor Presidente, sólo para apoyar lo expresado por el representante de Cuba en el sentido de velar porque exista un equilibrio regional más adecuado.
LE PRESIDENT: Je crois que nous avons bien travaillé ce matin. Nous allons nous retrouver pour la quatrième session plénière à 14 h 30 précises. La troisième séance plénière est levée.
The meeting rose at 13 hours.
La séance est levée à 13 heures.
Se levanta la sesión a las 13 horas.
