LE PRESIDENT: Je vais demander au Directeur général adjoint, M. Dutia, de nous présenter, avec sa compétence habituelle, le point 5.
B.P. DUTIA (Assistant Director-General, Economic and Social Policy Department): Mr Chairman,I have the honour to present to Council the Report of the Fifty-eighth Session of the Committee on Commodity Problems which met in Rome 15-19 July 1991. The report is represented to you in Council document CL 100/6.
The Committee, as required by its terms of reference, reviewed the world commodity situation and outlook. Among the highlights, it noted that the situation in agricultural trade had continued to deteriorate. It expressed particular concern over the continuing decline in the real prices of agricultural exports during the past year. The prices for exports from developing countries were some 35 percent lower than those prevailing at the beginning of the 1980s, and prices for exports from developed countries were 17 percent lower. The decline in prices of coffee and cocoa had been particularly large both between 1988 and 1990, and also over the past decade as a whole. Among other important export commodities of the developing countries, the real export prices of sugar, oilseeds and natural rubber had also continued to decline. Furthermore,the Committee noted that in the cases of coffee, cocoa and natural rubber, large stocks had been accumulated which would continue to place downward pressure on the international market with devastating effects on the economies of the producing countries.
The Committee also noted that the value of food imports by developing countries had continued to rise and they now exceeded the value of their food exports by an unprecedented amount. Delegations from developing countries expressed deep concern over this deterioration which had further exacerbated the severe debt problem confronting many of these countries, including the low-income food-deficit countries, had led to undesirable changes in dietary patterns, and reflected a growing dependency on imports.
The Committee considered the short-term outlook for agricultural trade to be unpromising. For 1991 it noted that the world economy would experience only slow growth and that it was forecast that the likelihood was for higher prices of manufactured goods than for an overall increase in agricultural commodity prices.
The Committee endorsed all of the reports submitted to it by its subsidiary bodies, that is the Intergovernmental Groups on jute, kenaf and allied fibres, rice, oilseeds; oils and fats, hard fibres, bananas, grains, tea
and citrus, as well as the report of the Consultative Subcommittee on Surplus Disposal. The review of these activities is included in paragraphs 16 to 36 of the Report of the Committee and I will not go into the details. It may be noted, however, that a wide range of issues have been considered by the various Intergovernmental Groups and that the CCP expressed appreciation for the continued usefulness of the Groups in enhancing market transparency, in identifying and analyzing problems and in seeking suitable remedial measures.
I would also like to inform the Council that the Groups on both jute and hard fibres are giving increased attention to environmental activities which stress the environmental friendliness of natural fibres compared to competing synthetics. This advantage could in time help to restore the competitive position of the natural fibres with consequential benefits to a considerable number of low-income developing countries.
The Committee also welcomed the designation in February 1991 of eight Intergovernmental Commodity Groups, plus the Sub-Group on Hides and Skins and the Sub-Committee on Fish Trade, as International Commodity Bodies by the Common Fund for Commodities. It considered that this development provided an opportunity for FAO to make a significant contribution to improving the competitive position in agricultural trade of developing countries. In this connection the Committee took note of work that was already under way in the Groups on project identification and development. I may add that a first project, on bananas, has recently been formally submitted to the Executive Board of the Common Fund and is under evaluation. We expect that additional projects for other commodities will also be finalized in the near future.
Mr Chairman, as at its previous sessions the Committee considered special topics of importance to international trade. At the last Session, the Committee considered the implications on trade of a European single market. This is summarized in paragraphs 37 to 41 of the Report. The Committee recognized that the process leading to the single market was not yet complete, and therefore that it was not yet possible to undertake a full assessment of the implications of the single market. It recognized that the European Communities had a number of special policies for particular commodities that led to differences in the way that these commodities were treated among Member Nations and that the EC Commission had not yet made proposals on common rules for certain commodities. Several delegations stressed the need for careful monitoring of developments in the single market by the CCP and for extensive consultation on the single market process. The Committee welcomed the assurance given by the Observer of the EC to provide the CCP with information on the single market process and to hold consultations with interested countries.
The Committee also undertook its regular review of agricultural protectionism and additionally it considered developments in the Uruguay Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations. These deliberations are covered in paragraphs 42 to 62 of the Report. The Committee noted that in the two years since its previous session there had been numerous moves toward a greater orientation of agricultural production to market conditions. However, overall there were still high levels of protection of domestic markets in many agricultural products. In particular the level of agricultural protection in OECD member countries had risen to a record level in 1990. The Committee also noted that changes in the level of
protection, as measured by the PSE, were more a reflection of movements in the levels of prices in international trade than due to changes in policies bearing on protectionism. When discussing the high levels of protection many delegations stressed the economic and social dimensions of problems associated with protectionism, especially in many Third World countries.
Overall, the Committee deplored that agricultural trade protectionism had grown during the past decade as reflected in measures of support and protection. While there had been few instances of significant improvements in market access conditions for some developing countries, subsidization of exports had caused even greater distortions in world agricultural trade. The Committee also noted with concern that increased taxes on coffee and cocoa in certain countries could impede market access for these products and urged that all possible measures be taken to assist producers of these commodities, the majority of whom were Third World countries, in obtaining market access.
In its review of developments in the Uruguay Round relating to agriculture, the Committee emphasized the need to intensify efforts for a successful and rapid conclusion as this was essential not only for agriculture, but also to ensure a successful conclusion of the Uruguay Round as a whole. It agreed that failure to conclude a successful negotiation on agriculture or to agree on only weak provisions would have a highly negative impact on agricultural trade,including a likely increase in protectionism and use of export subsidies. In conclusion, the Committee urged that FAO continue its support for the Uruguay Round and for the provision of technical and other assistance to interested participating countries.
Finally, the CCP reviewed recent international action concerning agricultural trade and the related role of FAO. This included inter alia activities connected to the Common Fund as mentioned earlier and the institutional and operational arrangements being developed by the Fund. The Committee also noted the growing number of regional trading and international arrangements which were coming into force, and the expansion of generalized preference schemes. In particular, the Committee urged FAO to continue and strengthen its activities to promote economic cooperation and regional and subregional economic integration among developing countries. At the multilateral level, the Committee supported the continuing collaboration of FAO with other international organizations and in particular stressed the importance of close collaboration with the GATT, especially on sanitary and phytosanitary issues.
In conclusion, and on behalf of your important Committee on Commodity Problems, I submit this Report to the Council for its consideration and endorsement.
CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much for that very substantial and interesting introduction.
Nous sommes saisis du document CL 100/6, qui est un document de synthèse particulièrement complet et qui nous permettra probablement d'avoir un débat relativement bref sur cette question.
A la page ii de ce document, vous trouvez les questions de nature à retenir particulièrement l'attention du Conseil: l'examen par le Comité des principaux aspects de la situation et des perspectives mondiales des produits; son examen des activités des Groupes intergouvernementaux sur les produits et du Sous-Comité consultatif de l'écoulement des excédents; son examen de la mise en oeuvre d'un marché européen unique; son examen des faits nouveaux survenus en matière de protectionnisme dans le commerce agricole et de certaines questions touchant à la réforme des politiques agricoles comme le suivi de la Résolution 2/79 de la Conférence et des Négociations dites d'Uruguay; et son examen de l'action internationale concernant les produits agricoles menée dans d'autres organisations.
M. Dutia en a parlé dans son exposé introductif.
Je demanderai maintenant aux délégués qui désirent intervenir dans la discussion de ce rapport de bien vouloir se faire inscrire sur la liste des orateurs.
Elias REYES BRAVO (México): Para mi delegación, este Informe ha merecido nuestra atención porque plantea la situación reciente y las perspectivas de los productos básicos en un mercado internacional urgido, de sentido y de eficacia. La baja de los precios reales, asi como la pérdida de poder adquisitivo de los productos agrícolas, constituyen una muestra de la necesidad clara y permanente de conciliar posibilidades productivas con posibilidades de mercado. A ese propósito, es necesario que haya avances y resultados útiles en la Ronda Uruguay de Negociaciones Comerciales Multilaterales. Los avances esperados en el GATT y la participación y reconocimiento de los grupos intergubernamentales por el Fondo Común son factores que coadyuvarán a mejorar las condiciones de comercio y desarrollo de los productos agrícolas, con particular referencia a los considerados por este Comité.
Por otra parte, consideramos que, como ya ocurre en otros Comités, es recomendable que este Comité de Problemas de Productos Básicos aborde, en sus sesiones, aspectos de campo que inciden en la producción, el comercio y el consumo de los productos básicos.
S. NAJMUS-SAQIB (Pakistan): Document CL 100/6 has been prepared comprehensively. We have been taking an active part in the Committee on the Intergovernmental Group on Rice, and have also been following deliberations in other groups very closely; the outcome we see today in the shape of a Report by the Committee.
We share the Committee's overall satisfaction as well as concern on the various important issues highlighted in the said Report. The size of the value of import of food in developing countries is marked by a rising trend - this went up by 14 percent in 1989. At the same time, the earnings of the developing countries from food items experienced a declining trend. This situation was further accentuated by a host of other problems faced by the developing countries, debt problems being one of these. This unfortunate trend is likely to go on even as we step into the next century.
We also concede to the proposal urging greater attention to the production of traditional foods in the developing countries, for which, we feel,
institutional, as well as bilateral, technical and financial assistance should be provided. Also, major trade reforms as envisaged under the Uruguay Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations should be speeded up.
Accordingly, efforts have to be made and solutions found for the problems being faced by the peoples of the developing countries.
We feel that assistance in the formation and building up of various viable projects for sustainable development in this sector in the developing countries should be provided. Rules of the Common Fund should accordingly be geared so as to help develop projects based on urgent respective requirements of the developing countries concerned. For instance, for oilseeds and tea particular attention is required in countries like Pakistan - these two items adversely affect the country's balance of payments position.
In this respect, possibilities for the use of the Common Fund should be so explored where the developing countries are not at a disadvantage.
Fruits and vegetables produced in the developing countries is a case in point. This needs particular attention as the export of these commodities (although of good quality) is totally restrictive - this is because of the sanitary and phytosanitary restrictions rules of the developed countries.
We would like to state that we concede with the findings of the Committee.
C.B. HOUTMAN (Netherlands): During the considerations of the Committee on World Food Security, we commented on the Sub-Committee on Surplus Disposal. In this Report,in paragraphs 32 to 36, some nice things are said about the functioning of the Committee on Surplus Disposal. The only thing that we would like to state here is that we would still like FAO to make a study of the various matters, particularly, as mentioned in the Report on the functioning of the Committee on Surplus Disposal,the value of the use in the present, and possibly in the future, of the usual marketing requirements. We still consider that this is something that needs study.
CHAIRMAN: Mr Dutia will answer that question afterwards.
Dato WAN JAAFAR ABDULLAH (Malaysia): At the outset my delegation would like to commend Mr Dutia for his lucid presentation of the Report of the Fifty-eighth Session of the Committee on Commodity Problems. Although my delegation has no difficulty in endorsing the Report, we would like to make some comments on this agenda item.
We note with regret that world agricultural trade has performed dismally during the whole of 1990, particularly for the developing countries. We note also that overall economic growth was primarily favourable to developed countries, while growth in many developing countries slackened as a result of unresolved external debt problems, declining income in terms of trade, and the protectionist policies of developed countries. Between 1989 and 1990 the real prices of commodities primarily exported by the developing countries had declined by 9 percent as compared to 5 percent for the developed countries. Indeed, it is alarming to note that most
indicators of trade performance continued to favour developed countries. Therefore, my delegation feels that the need for major trade reform to improve the divergent performance in world trade between developing and developed countries is vitally significant.
With regard to the review of the activities of the Intergovernmental Group on Oilseeds, Oils and Fats, Malaysia views with concern the so-called rebalancing proposal of the EC agricultural commodity sector which includes the oilseeds sector. We consider this proposal would introduce a high level of protection for EC oilseeds and cereal substitutes. In this respect, Malaysia wishes to reiterate its strong opposition to the rebalancing proposal of the EC as it will discriminate against and restrict access to the Community for our palm oil.
On the work of the Consultative Sub-Committee on Surplus Disposal, my delegation agrees with paragraph 34 of the Report which stresses the strengthening of the application of the Principles of surplus disposal, especially in regard to the notification and consultation procedures. This is important to ensure that food aid will not have an adverse effect on the domestic market of the receiving countries, but also on the commercial agricultural market as a whole. As a member of the Cairns Group we are in full agreement with the call for a successful conclusion to be reached at GATT. Such progress would contribute to the momentum of trade liberalization and would slow down further protectionism in agricultural trade.
We support paragraph 62 of the Report where it is suggested "the Secretariat analyse the impact of trade liberalization, including changes in sanitary and phytosanitary regulations, on developing countries and particularly the low-income countries, and the effects of closer linkage of domestic and international agricultural markets on low-income countries".
My delegation notes that the Committee also reviewed the international action relating to agricultural commodities in other organizations such as UNCTAD, the Common Fund and GATT as mentioned in paragraphs 63 to 72 of the Report. We also support the continuing collaboration of FAO with GATT, in particular on the sanitary and phytosanitary issues through its significant contribution to the work of the Codex Alimentarius Commission and the International Plant Protection Convention.
José V. ROMERO Jr. (Philippines): I associate myself with the members of this august body who have congratulated Dr Dutia for a very expert and comprehensive presentation of the commodity picture in the world today and the more important issues. One thing we note with interest is the continuing validation of the single commodity doctrine which is not yet obsolete. We are all familiar with the doctrine which says that terms of trade of developing countries, particularly in the area of primary exporters, tend to favour their partners'importing countries because prices of commodities are affected by the supply situation, as we have seen last year in cocoa, coconuts and other products, and the supply situation tends to produce an imbalance in the supply and demand conditions, bringing down prices. It is difficult for poor countries to continue to be hewers of wood and carriers of water, which brings us to the subject of the Common Fund for Commodities. As an Executive Director of the Common Fund we are very grateful to FAO for providing us with the intergovernmental commodity
groups which have been very useful not only in identifying projects, but also in the preparation of project feasibility studies which, at this stage of our development in the CFC, we cannot afford to produce in any great quantity.
Dr Dutia mentioned that the CFC is looking at bananas. I am very glad to report that at the eighth Executive Board meeting which ended only a couple of weeks ago,in fact the CFC has approved eight projects of the intergovernmental commodity groups; these include bananas, rubber, jute, palm oil, and a few other items which escape my mind at the moment. What is significant is that the CFC is not looking at the first window because the first window does not have enough funds to be able to produce compensatory financing for specific commodities, nor to engage in strategic stockpiling and buffer stocking. So at present we are content to deal with the second window which concentrates only on research and development projects.It is also significant that the second window is more interested in adding value to commodities.
I do not believe that we primary exporters of commodities will continue to be crucified on this cross of primary products. We will have to move up the agricultural ladder and add value to our exports. It is the only way we can improve terms of trade. This is something the CFC is trying to do with the help of FAO.
Finally, may I address myself to a small matter with regard to the Codex Alimentarius? My delegation is hoping that the very stringent application of standards that has been imposed by the Codex Commission will not act as a trade barrier, but will instead promote a freer flow of commodities.
Peter Gary FRANKLIN (Australia): Australia as an active member of the Committee on Commodity Problems endorses the Report of that Committee as presented in document CL 100/6. However, I wish to make reference to a few aspects of particular interest to us.
The review of the World Commodity Situation and Outlook as contained in document CL 100/6 makes depressing reading. This is especially so for countries such as Australia which have a high level of economic dependence on the exports of agricultural and food commodities.It is depressing because it seems that regardless of how much effort we as individual nations of FAO devote to improving the efficiency of our agricultural sectors through the adoption of appropriate technology, sustainable agricultural practices and domestic policy reform, we are inevitably confronted with distorted and artificially depressed international commodity markets, markets which do not adequately or fairly reward effort, efficiency, or comparative advantage.
It is for this reason that Australia is,and will continue to, both as an individual nation and as a member of the Cairns Group, press for substantial reductions in trade-distorting protection and export subsidies as well as in border protection. The extent of our concern is reflected by the fact that we, along with our Cairns Group partners, have made it clear that in our view there cannot be any successful outcome of the Round without a substantial result for agriculture. The prerequisite of any such agreement is a structure which generates long-term reform and increases market access.
In this forum, a particular and on-going concern for us has been the continuing threat of the EC rebalancing proposal on oilseeds and cereal substitutes. We thus reiterate our call, and that of others, for the EC to withdraw this proposal which we see as one of the more significant stumbling blocks on the way to achieving a successful Uruguay Round outcome.
The only other substantive comment I wish to make relates to the suggestion in paragraph 34 of the CCP Report that the efforts of the Sub-Committee on Surplus Disposal should be strengthened and for increased cooperation between the CSD and GATT. We see this suggestion as having considerable merit. However, we note that if this is accepted it is then a matter of judgement whether the enhanced role for the CSD is best facilitated by remaining with FAO, or by being more directly incorporated in GATT and accordingly subject to GATT disciplines.
Nusyirwan ZEN (Indonesia): My delegation wishes to express its appreciation to the Secretariat for preparing this document and to Dr Dutia for his clear presentation on matters now under consideration by Council. My comments will be brief.
With regard to the Review of the World Commodity Situation, document CL 100/6 stated that the real price of commodities primarily exported by developing countries declined about 9 percent between 1989 and 1990, while those exported by developed countries fell by 5 percent. This is of deep concern to us, since the export of Indonesian agricultural products has been gradually increased. We appreciate the efforts of FAO to complete in 1992 the projections of prospects for all the main agricultural commodities to the year 2000.
But at the same time underline the need for major trade reform and the importance of achieving an early and successful conclusion to the Uruguay Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations that is acceptable to all parties concerned. My delegation appreciates the designation of eight FAO Intergovernmental Groups, plus the Sub-Committee on Fish Trade as International Committee Bodies (ICBs) by the Executive Board of the Common Fund for Commodities.
As regards oilseeds, oils and fats, we wish to reiterate the appeal made by the Philippine delegation at the Twenty-fourth Session of the IDG on Oilseeds, Oils and Fats to the EC Commission, the EC Council of Ministers and the governments of the EC member states to withdraw officially, categorically, definitely and definitively the rebalancing proposal.
We welcome the study by the Intergovernmental Group on Rice regarding the cost of producing rice, as well as identification of new technology in selected countries.
Regarding the IGG on Tea, my delegation would like to support the view that promoting tea as a healthy drink would be an essential component in any general promotion campaign for tea.
As noted by the Committee, my country also follows with concern the development in the Community with regard to implementation of directives concerning harmonization in sanitary and phytosanitary regulations. We
share the view and concerns that the possibility of harmonization of sanitary and phytosanitary regulations could lead to a reduction in excess of EC markets for third country exports. We also share the view that the process of harmonizing should not lead to the adoption of unnecessarily strict standards or standards not based on sound scientific principles.
Therefore, we join the Committee in urging that the process should be as transparent and open to third country comments as possible.
We are pleased that the Committee delivered a clear message on the need to intensify methods to achieve a fair and market-oriented agricultural trading system, and stresses the importance of achieving successful progress in the Uruguay Round of GATT.
Indonesia attaches high importance to achieving improvements in the international trade environment in agricultural products in the current MTN Round, and we feel that there is an urgent need to achieve early reform through a substantial and progressive reduction in support and protectionism, and the establishment of stronger and more effective GATT rules.
My delegation sincerely hopes that the Uruguay Round of MTN arrives at a satisfactory result. In pursuing its trade policies Indonesia has always adhered to the guidelines of GATT. One of the most recent steps taken by Indonesia is the implementation of a package of policy reforms in June 1991 governing the liberalization of trade on some agricultural commodities such as palm oil and citrus.
My delegation follows the Committee's suggestion that FAO continue to assist in technical matters the developing countries in their efforts to successfully participate in the Uruguay Round MTN negotiations.
David Sherwood (Canada): We would like to express our appreciation for Dr Dutia's concise review. In endorsing this report, Canada will keep its remarks brief.
We have a number of comments and suggestions to make on document CL 100/6.
Canada views the work of the Committee on Commodity Problems as an important activity of the Food and Agriculture Organization, and is very supportive of its work. In particular, we find that this review is a very useful umbrella to the Intergovernmental Commodity Groups, providing an integrated and overall assessment of world agricultural commodity markets.
Canada actively supports a number of intergovernmental commodity groups, particularly those where it is an important producer or exporter of those commodities. However, we must express our disappointment about the cancellation of a Meat's Group during the last year.Canada would like to ensure that this Group convene regularly on a biannual basis.
The designation of eight Intergovernmental Commodity Groups to advise on the Second Account of the Common Fund is a valuable development.Canada will support these activities.
It will be important for the Secretariat to provide technical support to allow the Group to provide effective decisions on priorities. One area where Canada believes that the Committee on Commodity Problems could be more effective is to improve its forecasting information. First, we would be very supportive of a proposal made in the Committee to improve the medium-term forecasting. We understand that the Secretariat is doing both longer-term commodity forecasts and updating the Agriculture Toward 2000 study for the Twenty-seventh Conference in 1993. We would like to see these forecasts updated on an annual basis and distributed to Member Countries.
Canada would like to congratulate the Consultative Sub-Committee on Surplus Disposal for its good work. The Sub-Committee provides an excellent forum for the coordination of food aid and the protection of commercial markets. We strongly encourage the Committee to continue its good work.
In commenting on the special project on European Economic Community integration, we consider that this is clearly an important area of work. We would suggest that this work continue with more analysis of the impact of integration and with more focus on the processing sector, and include reference to competition policy.
A number of projects have been prepared for the Secretariat to carry out the impact of trade liberalization arising from an eventual GATT agreement. This is the kind of analysis and the kind of work for which the Secretariat has considerable expertise. Canada would support this work, but we would also encourage the Secretariat to draw on work ongoing in other international agencies in carrying out this work.
Gonzalo BUIA HOYOS (Colombia): Señor Presidente, en su Informe este Consejo debe lamentar que el descenso en los precios de los mercados mundiales de los productos básicos haya afectado, particularmente en forma considerable, a los paises en desarrollo. Todo ese proceso ha conducido, como lo afirma el párrafo 11, a un nuevo deterioro en la relación de los términos de intercambio.
Señalaremos con preocupación, como lo dijo el colega de Indonesia, que no obstante los esfuerzos que venimos haciendo por aumentar el volumen de nuestra producción, el poder adquisitivo de las exportaciones agrícolas de muchos países en desarrollo, ha disminuido considerablemente. Que las regiones más afectadas fueron: Africa, 28 por ciento y América Latina y el Caribe, 18 por ciento. De acuerdo con el párrafo 45 el Consejo debe deplorar que el proteccionismo comercial agrícola haya aumentado durante el pasado decenio.
Este Consejo debe expresar su preocupación porque, no obstante las promesas, los compromisos, las declaraciones de muy alto nivel, según las cuales representantes de importantes Gobiernos vienen comprometiéndose a reducir gradualmente el proteccionismo, aún siguen existiendo muy altos niveles de proteccionismo. El grado de proteccionismo agrícola en los Estados Miembros de la OCDE, los 24 países más ricos del mundo, alcanzó en 1990 niveles sin precendentes. Hechos como esos confirman que la teoría y la literatura que se vierte al respecto se contradice con hechos decepcionantes como estos.
Al tiempo que la Ronda Uruguay sigue estancada - la reunión del Comité tuvo lugar en julio pasado - muchos acontecimientos han tenido lugar, De todos modos el buen éxito de las negociaciones sobre la agricultura sigue siendo definitivo para todo resultado positivo en la Ronda Uruguay.
Apoyamos lo que dijo al respecto nuestro colega y amigo, Peter Franklin, de Australia, con la autoridad de ese país, Australia, que es dignísimo Presidente del Grupo de Cairns, al cual pertenece Colombia.
El Consejo debe reafirmar la máxima prioridad al adecuado cumplimiento de los propósitos básicos de la Ronda Uruguay prioridad que ha sido unánimemente reconfirmada al muy alto nivel ministerial en la declaración del Consejo de la OCDE, de los Ministros del Consejo Mundial de la Alimentación y del Grupo de Cairns.
En cuanto al banano, los representantes de Colombia reafirmamos la preocupación de muchos Gobiernos en el sentido de que hay que salvaguardar el derecho de los países productores de banano a seguir teniendo libre y aún más amplio y progresivo acceso a sus mercados tradicionales y, particularmente, que es necesario pedir a la Comunidad Económica Europea que al realizarse el mercado único a partir de 1993 el ingreso de bananos procedentes de los países de América Latina y el Caribe, no se vea afectado por ninguna de las medidas que conlleve el establecimiento del mercado único europeo.
En nuestro Informe deberemos insistir en la necesidad inaplazable y la conveniencia común de liberalizar el comercio mundial del banano. Y ante cualquier posibilidad de exceso de producción en el futuro,se estime y apoye por todos los medios la diversificación,sobre todo en aquellos países donde el banano ocupa lugar preponderante en sus economías.
A ese respecto nos complació la información del Dr. Dutia en su magnífica presentación, que ya nos había sido transmitida por el Sr. Perkins, Director de la División de Productos Básicos y Comercio,en el sentido de que ya se ha presentado al Fondo Común, el programa revisado del mejoramiento del banano. Esperamos que en Amsterdam, sede del Fondo Común, el resultado de la evaluación sea satisfactorio para que este proyecto pueda ser financiado adecuadamente.
El Consejo debe,también, consignar su inquietud en el Informe, ya que son, señor Presidente, hechos muy actuales y preocupantes, por la forma como se está procediendo a unificar los reglamentos sanitarios y fitosanitarios, y como se irán a aplicar las normas de calidad sobre todo en el mercado único europeo.
A principios de este año los países de América Latina y el Caribe productores de banano, en el seno de los países de la Comunidad Económica Europea, fueron sometidos a injustas y generalizadas medidas sanitarias demasiado severas que pusieron en peligro la importación de banano y otras frutas a los mercados de algunos Estados europeos,todo por reacción frente a la epidemia del cólera que en nada afectaba realmente esas exportaciones. Si a la desgracia del cólera y a sus inmensas y desastrosas consecuencias humanas, sociales y económicas se agregan estas restricciones, ciertamente no se está procediendo con justicia.Pero es más grave todavía e inquietante,señor Presidente,que ahora, hace pocos días tenemos informaciones de otras medidas aún más restrictivas de la Comunidad
Económica Europea sobre la importación de frutas a los mercados de esos importantes doce países.
Con la cordialidad de la amistad y simpatía que nos une a los representantes de la CEE, quisiéramos pedirles que procedan con mano suave, con un mínimo de comprensión y consideración para los países productores de banano cuyas economías dependen tan sustancialmente de ese producto.
Apoyamos la oposición expresada ya, sobre todo por los grupos de ASEAN y el Grupo Cairns a la famosa propuesta de reequilibrio formulada por la CEE en la Ronda Uruguay. Tenemos la esperanza de que, seguramente al final de este debate, intervendrá el representante de la Comunidad Económica Europea y nos comunicará la grata noticia de que esa propuesta ha sido retirada, como venimos pidiéndolo tantos representantes de gobiernos.
Finalmente, señor Presidente, acerca de las repercusiones del mercado único europeo sobre el comercio de los productos básicos, los representantes de Colombia confiamos de que ese gran mercado único europeo será más abierto para que los principales productos agrícolas de exportación de los países en desarrollo puedan penetrar sin trabas ni limitaciones en los importantes mercados de esos países.
Apoyamos firmemente la declaración de nuestro colega y amigo de Malasia sobre la conveniencia y necesidad inaplazable de introducir reformas serias y profundas en el comercio internacional para hacerlo más justo y más equilibrado.
Kwang Wook AN (Korea, Republic of): Thank you very much for giving me an opportunity to express my delegation's opinion on the report of the Fifty-eighth Session of the Committee on Commodity Problems.
As is mentioned in the Report, growth of the world economy had slowed and there had been decreases in the world market prices of commodities. It was right when the Committee was concerned that since the beginning of the 1980s the real prices of agricultural commodities decreased by 35 percent for developing countries and for developed countries by 17 percent. Moreover, we are all concerned that imports of food by developing countries rose 14 percent in 1989 to US$61 billion. These imports exceeded their earnings from food exports of US$48 billion.
My delegation sincerely hopes that the Uruguay Round of GATT negotiations would be successfully concluded so that we could create the environment of a freer trade of world agricultural products.
However, we believe, that different nations should be given fair opportunities to develop their agriculture in terms of their different development stages.
We share the view of the Committee that cyclical shifts from surplus to tight supplies would remain a feature of the world grain economy after the Uruguay Round negotiations. It naturally leads us to the conclusion that even if global grain trade were more liberalized, government interventions would be indispensable to ensure a certain level of domestic supply, especially for the developing countries.
Under an unstable market situation after the trade liberalization, the agricultural price would fluctuate more substantially. It would lead us to a situation of volatile farm income accordingly. Consequently, each country should be allowed to compensate their farmers'income. In other words, an income safety net should be provided by the government if it is required by the changing world agricultural market situation.
Another aspect my delegation wants to note is that changes in the level of producer subsidy equivalent were more a reflection of movements in the levels of prices in international trade than due to changes in policies bearing on protectionism. In order to achieve a more liberalized international market for agricultural products, we should agree upon a better basic measurement system first.
Finally we sincerely hope that the international community would be able to design a better scheme to measure the overall support level of agriculture, other than one that heavily depends on the difference between domestic and international prices.
Ms Marasee SURAKUL (Thailand): The report of the Fifty-eighth Session of the Committee on Commodity Problems has given clearly the situation of various commodities that are a threat in the world markets.I believe that each country has paid a different degree of attention on different commodities, according to the need of individual countries. Therefore I shall not concentrate my comments on particular commodities but would remark on the commodities as a whole.
First my delegation fully agrees with the suggestion in para 12 of the document in front of us. We urge the FAO to pay more attention to the medium-term outlook for every commodity on which the FAO normally held meetings.
Secondly, concerning the Common Fund, we are very pleased to note that nine commodity bodies within the FAO have been designated as international commodity bodies. We also learn that project proposals on some commodities are being developed and would be submitted to the Common Fund in the near future. My delegation would encourage the Secretariat which is responsible for the commodities for which project proposals have not been planned to do as soon as possible in consultation with the intergovernmental group meetings.
Thirdly my delegation acknowledges the work of the Consultative Sub-Committee on surplus disposal and would encourage the CSD to continue its important function in monitoring transactions involving the disposal of surplus commodities and in ensuring that normal commercial trade is not dispersed nor agricultural production discouraged.
My delegation always believes that the practice of the developed countries in applying various managements in protecting their agricultural products has caused great distortions in the world's agricultural markets as successful agreement on agriculture and trade by all countries concerned and regional integration of economic organizations would lead to agricultural trade liberalization. We therefore urge all parties concerned to conclude the Uruguay Round as soon as possible.
Finally my delegation would like to associate with the others who requested the Secretariat to analyse the impact of trade liberalization on the developing countries as stated in para 46.
Sra. Monica DEREGIBUS (Argentina): La delegación argentina considera que el Comité de Problemas de Productos Básicos ha efectuado un gran trabajo durante su última sesión y que este Consejo debería expresar su aprecio por el texto del informe que nos ha sido presentado. En este informe se refleja también el sustantivo trabajo llevado a cabo por los grupos intergubernamentales que dependen del Comité, y que mi delegación valora altamente. Por ese motivo nosotros creemos que el Consejo debe endosar el documento que tenemos a nuestra consideración, y debe reafirmar también la necesidad de reformar la situación del comercio internacional y subrayar la importancia de concluir con éxito la Ronda Uruguay del GATT, tal como está expresado en los párrafos 15, 52, 55, 56 y 57 del Informe que consideramos. La tendencia hacia una mayor liberalización, tanto de la producción como del comercio internacional de productos agrícolas en general, llevará a una mayor transparencia de tales mercados así como a un marcado crecimiento de los niveles de precios fortaleciendo la posición de los países de característica agro-exportadora e incentivando la producción en otros países que hoy no pueden producir por resultar ello imposible con los actuales niveles de precios.
Nuestro país expresa su agrado por el hecho de que la FAO prevea llevar a cabo la actualización del estudio "La agricultura hacia el año 2000", para ser presentado en la 27a Conferencia de la Organización.
En lo relativo específicamente al Grupo Intergubernamental sobre Semillas Oleaginosas, Aceites y Grasas, nuestro país expresa su acuerdo, su coincidencia con la oposición manifestada por muchos países, incluidos los del Grupo Cairns, en oportunidad de la reunión de dicho grupo, respecto de la propuesta de reequilibrio formulada por la Comunidad Económica Europea en la Ronda Uruguay del GATT, como parte de su propuesta de octubre de 1990, y que según recientes declaraciones del Comisario Macharri seguiría aún vigente.
El proyecto de reforma del régimen de oleaginosas de la Comunidad Económica Europea aún no aprobado, presentado por la Comisión para adecuar el régimen de oleaginosos a las conclusiones del panel del GATT, no cumpliría para la Argentina con las conclusiones del panel por los siguientes motivos: el apoyo que se otorgaría, aunque no está vinculado directamente a la cantidad producida, alienta la producción interna de tal manera que se sigue menoscabando el valor de la concesión en frontera.
Para recibir el apoyo, el productor debe demostrar que tiene firmado un contrato de venta con un comprador. Esto fortalece la posición negociadora de los procesadores. Ante variaciones en los precios internacionales superiores al 8 por ciento, se ajustaría el precio de referencia proyectado que se utiliza para el cálculo del monto del subsidio. De esta manera, contraviniendo las conclusiones del panel, se mantendría el aislamiento de los productores locales frente a las fluctuaciones en los mercados internacionales.
Para la Argentina las exportaciones de oleaginosas y sus productos tienen una enorme importancia, y el principal mercado para esos productos es la
CEE. De allí, la prioridad que tiene para nuestro pais que la Comunidad Económica Europea adopte un régimen que cumpla plenamente con lo dispuesto por el panel del GATT.
Con respecto al informe del Grupo Intergubernamental sobre Cereales, se refrenda la posición sustentada por algunos delegados durante la reunión de este Grupo en el sentido que la actividad más constructiva y apropiada para los gobiernos es la de asegurar un sistema comercial libre y equitativo. Con respecto a lo informado acerca del Grupo Intergubernamental sobre frutos cítricos, mi Gobierno apoya el establecimiento de la red interamericana sobre cítricos que permitirá coordinar los esfuerzos de desarrollo en materia de producción e incrementar la transferencia de tecnología e información.
Finalmente, señor Presidente, con relación al Capítulo 5 del documento en debate, algunas cuestiones relativas a los productos básicos y al comercio, repercusiones de un mercado único europeo, la delegación argentina se permite exponer en este foro, coincidiendo con otras delegaciones, la preocupación de su Gobierno respecto de la posibilidad de que la armonización de los reglamentos sanitarios y fitosanitarios reduzca el acceso de las exportaciones de terceros países, como también respecto a que el proceso del mercado único afecte negativamente las oportunidades comerciales de los países no integrados a él.
Ulrich D. KNÜPPEL (EEC): First, I would like to thank Mr Dutia for the very comprehensive introduction he has given to an even more comprehensive document. It is an extremely rich document which covers a great number of subjects, and it is almost unjust not to approach it globally but to pick up individual aspects.
As I had the honour to speak on behalf of the Member Nations on most of the subjects in the Fifty-eighth Session of the CCP, I think I should reply to a number of points and questions raised by quite a number of delegations. I am somewhat astonished that the major part of the debate has concentrated on the Community again. Important as the Community may be, it is not that important that we should ignore other parts of the world. But let things be as they are. I will try to take up the points in the order in which they were raised.
The first point concerned rebalancing. The statement which we made during the Fifty-eighth Session of the CCP and which is reflected, although only briefly, in paragraph 58 of the Report, remains valid. We stated there that the Community had taken a flexible approach which was possible in the context of a global and balanced solution of the Uruguay Round. This situation has not changed. As other countries, the Community considers that agriculture is an important part of the Uruguay Round negotiations. The Community will take its responsibility to contribute to a successful conclusion. It is working very hard in various areas, including the GATT but also outside, to come to such a successful conclusion. Those who are dealing with GATT matters more closely are well aware of it. In our view, the negotiations are progressing, not just in agriculture but also in other important areas such as services and intellectual property rights. We hope a successful conclusion of the Uruguay Round is close.
- 133 -
The Ambassador of Colombia and others have pointed to various aspects of the Single European market, to sanitary and phytosanitary matters, but in particular also to bananas. Let me refer as to the substance to paragraphs 28, 40 and 41 of the Report which reply to those concerns, which were expressed regarding bananas. I can assure you that the Community will continue to look for a solution which will preserve the export possibilities of all traditional exporters to the Community and I hope you will take that assurance with some belief as the Community is not producing large quantities of bananas itself and has no intention of doing so in the future.
The same is true for large quantities of fruit and vegetables in general. As the Community is a major, if not the world's largest, importer of fruit and vegetables, and will remain so, it has a multi-billion dollar deficit in the trade of fruit and vegetables. Therefore, it would not be right to believe that the Community could wish to impose sanitary and phytosanitary measures under the simple aspect of protecting domestic production in the so-called evil sense. There are real health concerns as with the cholera epidemic. These are new experiences and I think we have to learn to deal with such measures as we go along. However, as the process of implementation of harmonized sanitary and phytosanitary measures is still going on, as we said during the CCP meeting, we think that the harmonized system will be of much advantage to third country exporters as well as third country investors who would wish to invest in the Community as it would avoid having to deal with an extremely difficult number of rules and approaches in the application. If there should be remaining difficulties which do not conform to standards otherwise recognized, for example, by Codex Alimentarius, there are two ways of dealing with the matter if bilateral contacts and consultations or negotiations with the Community are not sufficient. It is the legal system inside the Community and, as I hope, the Uruguay Round will come up with a special set of rules on sanitary and phytosanitary measures which will allow us to deal much better with those questions than we were able to do in the past. Still, we are looking forward to those countries which have concerns with one or the other measure, either as regards the rules as such or their application, that they come forward and deal with the Commission's services bilaterally through the normal channels. Our services certainly welcome such contacts.
As to the question of cooperation with the FAO Secretariat on the Single European market, obviously our offer stands. In so far as there are questions on major new developments, we are more than pleased to stay in contact with the Secretariat in order to give an up-date or to reply to questions that may arise.
Finally, just a brief comment on the Community's agricultural reform which is an important one. Negotiations inside the Community on those matters are progressing. People are working very hard in the Commission, together with Member States, and we are looking forward to finding ways to achieve those reforms which we ourselves consider important and which, I think, other countries will appreciate.
As regards the EC oilseed regime more specifically, we think that the proposals that we have put forward, and on which a certain orientation has been reached in the Council but which still needs Parliamentary opinion, reply to the conclusion of the GATT Soya Panel. Whilst I have great respect for the opinions of those delegations who may have different views, if no
better understanding and interpretation of our orientations can be found, obviously once those rules are adopted, the way forward for GATT members is to ask for a new consultation in the GATT context.
I would however not wish to close on that sort of note, Mr Chairman. I would like to say to you that my experience in the Fifty-eighth Session of the CCP, which was my first experience of that type, was a very positive one. I was very pleased to be able to cooperate in that Committee, to reply to questions, and I am looking forward to doing so in the future.
LE PRESIDENT: Nous avons encore comme orateurs inscrits la Côte d'Ivoire et le Soudan. Je propose de clore la liste.
La parole est à la Côte d'Ivoire.
Konan Daniel YOMAN (Côte d'Ivoire): A dire vrai, nous n'avions pas l'intention de prendre la parole sur ce point, mais il est difficile à un pays comme la Côte d'Ivoire qui, comme vous le savez, est producteur de cacao et de café et membre du Comité des produits, de rester sans rien dire sur ce point qui est à l'examen de notre ordre du jour.
En parcourant ce document, vous vous êtes certainement penchés sur les grandes questions qu'il inspire et qu'a su si bien traduire le Dr Dutia au cours de sa présentation liminaire.
De quoi pourrais-je parler?... Il s'agit d'abord de la montée vertigineuse du protectionnisme agricole dans les pays de l'OCDE. Il s'agit de la montée vertigineuse des importations alimentaires dans les pays à faible revenu et à déficit alimentaire. Il s'agit de l'augmentation vertigineuse de l'endettement des pays en voie de développement, notamment en Afrique. Il s'agit de l'augmentation vertigineuse des préoccupations des pays en voie de développement quant à leur sort, suite à la création prochaine du marché unique européen et à ses conséquences que même un expert en la matière comme M. Dutia, à juste titre, ne peut encore en ce moment délimiter avec précision. Il s'agit de l'augmentation vertigineuse de nos préoccupations quant au sort des négociations de l'Uruguay Round encore dans le flou. Il s'agit de l'augmentation vertigineuse des taxes sur le café et le cacao dans les pays européens, situation extrêmement dangereuse pour un pays producteur de café et de cacao comme le mien, malgré les limites du STABEX et des autres mécanismes compensatoires. Ce document est le reflet de l'injustice et de l'égoïsme que nous ne cessons de dénoncer. On ne paye pas les efforts de nos producteurs agricoles au juste prix, à un prix rémunérateur, qu'il s'agisse de la banane, des oléagineux, du cacao, du café et j'en passe.
La FAO devrait poursuivre ses efforts liés au mécanisme du Fonds commun des produits de base, et veiller, par exemple ici en son sein, à la création d'un groupe spécifique sur les racines et les tubercules.
Ce document est exhaustif. Nous l'approuvons dans ses lignes générales, nous appuyons ses différentes recommandations et nous appelons l'attention de ce Conseil sur les suggestions du Directeur général contenues dans sa déclaration du 15 juillet devant le Comité des produits, notamment en ce qui concerne la réforme du commerce agricole mondial.
Musa M. MUSA (Sudan) (Original language Arabic): Thank you for giving me the floor once again. I also thank you for including the item concerning the report of the Fifty-eighth session of CCP contained in document CL 100/6 in our agenda. Dr Dutia has made a clear, comprehensive presentation of the contents of that document.
In fact, the Sudanese delegation views the review of such activity as one of the important functions of FAO. Its impact is quite clear and it also reflects clearly on the people of many of our countries who rely on agriculture. It is for this reason that my delegation appreciates the inclusion of various agricultural crop commodities in the activities of intergovernmental commodities bodies and extension of the concerns of the Common Fund to support such commodities. For example we firmly believe that it is important to protect natural fibres from the predominance of artificial fibres and sharp market fluctuations. We also believe that cotton (the main cash crop in Sudan) which produces some 25 million tons of fibres annually, cultivated in extensive areas is a key element in the economies of many developing countries in all continents. It is therefore not surprising that we should underscore the need to give adequate attention to cotton, giving it a leading role and allocating funds to help cotton-producing countries. We hope that efforts will be made to protect our countries from the unhappy trade practices of certain large groupings.
We therefore believe that capable developing countries have an ethical role to play in assisting developing countries, not only by creating a just and favourable trade climate, but also by supporting their food producing capacities and promoting their exports and competitiveness. There is no doubt that these countries are aware of this situation and do not need any further reminders.
I do not think that the countries affected can wait indefinitely - without any further suffering - for GATT resolutions and the outcome of deferred Uruguay rounds. Immediate and decisive action has to be taken by FAO in cooperation with other organizations to spare our countries the consequences of rapid deterioration.
In conclusion, Mr Chairman, we hope FAO will continue its efforts towards expanding and developing intergovernmental commodity bodies and creating the necessary channels to solve the problems relating to such commodities and to increase their returns with a view to supporting the economies of the countries which rely on agricultural resources. Our country will certainly respond positively to such effects.
B.P. DUTIA (Assistant Director-General, Economic and Social Policy Department): First of all, through you and with your permission, Sir, I would like to thank the Members of the Council on behalf of the Committee, on behalf of my colleagues, and on my own behalf, not only for their endorsement of the work done by the Committee and its Report, but also for the appreciation that has been expressed for this Committee's work and the work of its intergovernmental groups. The debate has been substantive, it has been interesting, and a number of views have been expressed. I do not want to go into those aspects, because they will, as is the usual custom, be reflected in the Report which will be submitted to the Drafting Committee for its consideration. I would however like to refer to some of
the questions that have been raised and some of the remarks that have been made which do require some response from the Secretariat.
First of all, references have been made to the request by some Member Governments in the Committee on World Food Security as well as in the Fifty-eighth Session of the Committee on Commodity Problems about the need to undertake a review of the principles of surplus disposal, of its notification and consultative procedures, as well as the UMRs, in the light of the outcome of the Uruguay Round. The Secretariat has taken due note of the requests that have been made of this Committee, and we shall certainly assist the Committee to the fullest possible extent in undertaking such a study, depending on the outcome of the Uruguay Round.
Of course, if such a study were to be undertaken it is but natural that one should also take into account the new perceptions concerning food aid. Some references were also made to the impact of food aid on domestic production. That is one of the aspects, but there are several new perceptions of food aid that have emerged. There is also certainly a need to look at this whole question bearing in mind the fact that the last time that the Committee on Commodity Problems looked at the principles of surplus disposal was some time ago - sometime in 1969. I would therefore just like to tell Council Members that this is a subject which will receive attention as soon as possible after completion of the Uruguay Round.
A number of members have referred to the Common Fund and its recognition of the intergovernmental commodity groups and the eligible ICBs for promoting the projects for consideration by the Common Fund. This is certainly a new dimension to the work of the IGGs which we expect to become more and more important as years pass.
The banana project has already been submitted, as the distinguished Ambassador of the Philippines informed us some time ago. This was considered by the Common Fund Committee, and we understand that it has received its approval in principle. We are waiting to hear from the Common Fund, and if necessary we would revise this project and submit it again to the Common Fund for its final approval and financing, possibly on a co-financing basis.
We are also at the same time in the process of developing some more projects on other commodities, and we hope to bring them also to the attention of the Common Fund for consideration and eventual decision concerning financing. We do hope that in this way we shall be able to assist our Member Countries with the help of the Common Fund.
I would now like to refer to the concerns that have been expressed by a number of Members of the Council regarding the sanitary and phytosanitary restrictions on trade and the work of the Codex Alimentarius Commission in this respect. The standards developed by the Codex Alimentarius Commission are based on objective and scientific evidence, and in our view that is the only way to ensure that unjustified restrictions on trade are not enforced, restrictions based on some subjective considerations which are often not supported by facts. It is also the only way of really ensuring that the concerns of health are taken into account in their due sense, but they do not enforce any restrictions on trade. I would appeal to the Members of the Council to look upon the Codex Alimentarius work from this point of view. Again, these standards are developed after a rigid and professional review
by experts who are representing a number of Member Governments in a number of Codex committees. Because of this, it is also heartening to note that in discussions in the Uruguay Round Codex Alimentarius standards have been accepted in principle as the guiding principles for work on sanitary and phytosanitary matters.
I do recognize that some developing countries might be in a situation in which they regard the standards of the Codex Alimentarius Commission to be rather high, to be rigid, and which they may not be able to meet. We recognize that this is an important aspect which needs to be tackled; there, FAO already has a programme of giving technical assistance to the developing countries in reviewing their current standards, and also to help them by advising them so as to reach the Codex Alimentarius standards levels and strengthen their own food quality and safety activity. We already have, at the moment, some 30 countries to which we are providing assistance. Also, it is encouraging to note that in discussions on sanitary and phytosanitary matters in the Uruguay Round, there is a recognition of the need to assist developing countries in reaching the level of the standards so that they can take benefit from the opportunities that will be opened up as a result of the liberalization of world markets.
Lastly, I would like to refer to the citations that have been made by the distinguished delegate from Canada and some other members regarding the need for FAO to undertake medium-term forecasting work. As Members of the Council might be aware, we are at the moment engaged in a commodities projection exercise which will be looking forward up to the year 2000. We hope to complete this work next year and it will be ready for publication towards the end of the year.
At the same time, we are undertaking the revision of the Agriculture Towards 2000 study, and this time our intention is to look up to the year 2010. Of course, while the commodity projections will be looking at the outlook for production, consumption and trade as far as commodities are concerned, the Agriculture Towards 2000 will take a wider view of agricultural and rural development as a whole.
While this exercise is going on - and I can assure you there is a close link between the two works going simultaneously in FAO - at the same time, we are working with a group - or one might say a consortium - including other agencies engaged in forward-looking exercises, agencies like OECD and the World Bank, and we are involved in certain discussions going on in this respect between FAO and other agencies involved in this work. Hopefully, these consultations and the joint work will lead to more frequent assessments of the medium-term prospects of commodities. We hope to be able to make them available on a more cost-effective basis in the cooperative, mutual agency framework. I hope this answers all the questions raised, but if I have missed anything I shall be very happy to come back.
LE PRESIDENT: Je crois que nous avons examiné de façon approfondie le rapport de la session du Comité des produits dans tous ses aspects. Nous avons traité du problème du Fonds commun, des mesures sanitaires et phytosanitaires, du Codex Alimentarius, et M. Dutia a apporté des éléments importants concernant les travaux qui sont entamés. Pour le moment, en ce qui concerne les projections du commerce des produits jusqu'à l'an 2000 et l'adaptation de l'étude Agriculture 2000 dans une perspective 2010, ce sont
des documents importants et intéressants. Je crois que toutes les interventions faites au cours de cet intéressant débat seront reprises dans le rapport. Les suggestions faites seront toutes prises en compte. Je crois que nous avons été absolument comblés et nous remercions tous les membres du Conseil pour leur participation active à la discussion du point 5 de l'ordre du jour. Y a-t-il d'autres remarques ou d'autres questions qui n'auraient pas reçu de réponse de la part de M. Dutia? Une réponse complète et satisfaisante? Je suis convaincu que l'exposé introductif de M. Dutia ainsi que sa réponse auront été de nature à vous satisfaire.
Je crois que nous pouvons considérer comme clos le point 5 de notre ordre du jour. Il en est ainsi décidé.
6. Progress Report on Preparations for the ICN
6. Rapport intérimaire sur les préparatifs de la Conférence internationale sur la nutrition (CIN)
6. Informe parcial sobre los preparativos de la CIN
LE PRESIDENT: Nous allons passer immédiatement au point 6 qui est un point pour information et le rapport intérimaire sur les préparatifs de la Conférence internationale sur la nutrition (CIN). Je demanderai immédiatement à M. Dutia de le présenter.
B.P. DUTIA (Assistant Director-General, Economic and Social Policy Department): I appreciate very much this opportunity to inform the Council of the progress being made in preparation for the International Conference on Nutrition, the ICN. However, since Council has a very heavy agenda before it in a limited time, and also because this subject will be discussed more fully during the FAO Conference in Commission I, I shall keep my remarks rather brief and will highlight only a few points at this stage.
First of all, as Council Members are aware, the international conference itself will be held in Rome in the first half of December 1992. It will be preceded by a preparatory meeting of government representatives at a technical level in August 1992, and this preparatory meeting will be held in Geneva.
The ICN will not only be the first intergovernmental conference on nutrition, but it will also be a nutrition conference whose final results and recommendations will be based on extensive preparatory activities at both national and regional levels. I would like to stress this point. There has indeed been a very encouraging response by Member Countries to the ICN in initiating country-level preparatory activities. To date some 115 countries have appointed ICN country focal points and they are currently preparing country papers on their nutrition problems and the action needed to tackle them. Due to the multi-faceted nature of the nutritional problems involved - food, health care and many other aspects - national intersectoral committees or working groups have been established in the countries with representatives from a wide range of Ministries, including
agriculture, health, education, planning, economy and trade. These committees have been formed in order to assist with the country-level ICN preparatory activities.
In addition, some 59 countries have indicated that they have convened or are planning to convene national ICN-related seminars or workshops. These numbers in themselves are indeed encouraging, but of even greater significance is the fact that in many countries the ICN preparatory activities have brought together various Ministries, sectors and interests to focus on nutritional problems and on what can be done to alleviate them.
Another key feature of the ICN process will be the convening of joint FAO and WHO regional and sub-regional meetings in early 1992. These regional and sub-regional ICN meetings will provide a mechanism for linking country-level preparatory activities and a global-level conference. They will also provide an opportunity to review the nutrition situation in each region, to evaluate relevant policies and programmes, and to discuss strategies for ensuring nutritional well-being. The results of these regional and sub-regional meetings will provide inputs into the global assessment paper and the global declaration of a plan of action which will be considered by the ICN in December 1992.
The first regional/sub-regional meeting is scheduled to be held in Bangkok for the Asia and Pacific Region from 27 to 31 January 1992. It will encompass all the countries in the Asia and Pacific Region. Additional regional and sub-regional meetings are scheduled during the months of February and March 1992 for Francophone Africa, for the Near East, for Anglophone Africa, for Latin America, for the Caribbean and for Eastern and Central Europe. In our view, these meetings are a vital step in the ICN preparatory process and based on the deliberations on the FAO governing bodies, we believe these meetings are also highly valued by Member Countries.
It is our hope that this approach could well catalyse ongoing national and regional level commitment and action directed at improving nutrition not only before and during the conference, but more important after it in follow-up actions.
Several countries have been able to mobilize their own resources in order to prepare for the ICN, but regrettably many others have not been able to raise the necessary resources. The FAO and WHO, the co-sponsoring agencies, are using their own limited resources to support country-level preparations and to organize the regional and sub-regional meetings. It is also encouraging that some donor governments and NGOs have also provided funds for country delegations' participation in the regional and sub-regional meetings. However, many countries still need assistance in order that they can participate in these regional and sub-regional meetings, especially as it is hoped that representatives from more than one sector can attend.
I sincerely hope that delegations attending the Council and the Conference will be in a position not only to confirm their commitment, but also to indicate their readiness to make more funds available for these and/or other of the regional or sub-regional meetings - for truly much more is needed. Once again we are appealing to donors to assist and thus give
further momentum to the genuine bottom-up preparations for the ICN that have already been initiated. The staff members of the ICN Joint Secretariat will be very happy to meet with interested donor countries to provide more detailed reports on country and regional level activities, and to discuss possibilities for supporting them.
Parallel to the country and regional-level preparations taking place, FAO and WHO are preparing a series of technical and background working documents for ICN. These consist of an oral assessment paper which examines nutritional problems and programmes throughout the world, papers by selected teams of case studies on particular countries and issues of interest. In addition, a framework of a draft declaration of a plan of action for consideration by the ICN is also being prepared. Various national, international and non-governmental organizations are assisting in the preparation of the ICN, including the preparation of some of the documents to which I have just referred. For example, UNICEF, the International Food Policy Research Institute (INFPRI) in Washington and the ACCSCN Secretariat are helping FAO/WHO in preparing major theme papers, as also is the Nutrition Institute of India and the Food and Drug Administration of the United States. Other sister UN bodies and NGOs are also providing specific contributions in their areas of competence, which we greatly appreciate.
We look forward to the comments of the Council, and at a later date the comments of Conference to guide our preparatory efforts.
LE PRESIDENT: Je remercie M. Dutia de cet exposé introductif intéressant et complet. Je le remercie également pour l'appel qu'il a lancé aux pays donateurs afin qu'ils fassent dès à présent un effort tout particulier pour la préparation de cette importante conférence. C'est maintenant que cet effort doit être fait et il est certain que les moyens financiers doivent être fournis afin de pouvoir préparer dans de bonnes conditions tous les documents ainsi que les réunions préparatoires de cette importante conférence internationale sur la nutrition.
L'exposé de M. Dutia a été exhaustif. En outre, les représentants de tous les pays auront l'occasion, durant la Conférence, de l'interroger à nouveau sur la procédure qui va être suivie en vue de cette conférence. Toutefois, si des membres du Conseil désirent poser des questions, je leur demanderai de le faire de la manière la plus brève possible car nous avons un ordre du jour très chargé. Je crois que l'exposé introductif complet de M. Dutia dispensera les membres du Conseil de poser beaucoup de questions et de faire de très longues interventions.
Y a-t-il des représentants qui souhaitent intervenir au titre du point 6 de l'ordre du jour, qui traite du rapport intérimaire sur les préparatifs de la Conférence internationale sur la nutrition (CIN)?
John Bruce SHARPE (Australia): Australia congratulates FAO and its joint initiative with WHO for the International Conference on Nutrition.
Australia is actively engaged in a process to develop a country paper which takes account of the inter-sectoral aspects of food and nutrition. The paper development includes input from a wide range of organizations and will be finalized in February 1992.
Additionally, Australia is undertaking a process toward the development of a national food and nutrition policy oversighted by a multi-sectoral committee from the agricultural, media, consumer and industry sectors. As part of the consultation phase of the policy development, a national conference is envisaged in March 1992. The aspects being dealt with in the policy process are consistent with the aims and objectives of the ICN, and the national conference will provide a forum for contributing to the ICN preparations.
Alberto DE CATERINA (Italy): The Italian delegation has read with great interest the document C 91/27 concerning the preparations for the International Conference on Nutrition (ICN) which will be held in Rome in December 1992. The progress report gives a very clear picture of the situation so far and we are grateful to the Secretariat. We also very much appreciate the extensive introduction of Dr Dutia, and we thank him very much.
The Italian delegation confirms, as on previous occasions, its strong support to FAO and WHO for the ICN. Italy certainly assures FAO of its help in the different sectors of the preparation process. Details confirming the extent of financial contributions that will be contributed by Italy for disposal by FAO and WHO are being finalized and will be known as soon as possible.
The Italian delegation would be very interested in knowing something of the favourable attitude of other donor countries. We have just heard Australia and we appreciate its efforts very much.
In the meantime we can confirm that Italy, as the very first country in the family of the Universal Postal Union has inaugurated the International Philatelic Campaign sought by the above-mentioned organization. As is well known, an ICN Italian commemorative stamp will be issued in 1992.
Finally, we are glad to confirm that Italy will provide three people to work specifically for the ICN at FAO Headquarters. One of the three is already working at the Headquarters of FAO as an associate professional officer.
Before concluding, Mr Chairman, I have a small question for Dr Dutia. He mentioned that the PrepCom I is in August 1992 while paragraph 28 of the Report mentioned early September 1992. I would appreciate confirmation that it is in August, and if the dates are already known.
Adel EL-SARKI (Egypt) (Original language Arabic): I will begin by thanking Dr Dutia for his very clear introduction to this document C 91/27 on the forthcoming International Conference on Nutrition.
I would like to say that in my country this is considered to be a very important Conference and we intend to participate fully. In fact, we have already established a national committee to prepare for this Conference. It includes a number of high-level scientists who will prepare a working paper, which will be an input from Egypt for the Conference.
Next month we are holding a national seminar on nutrition in Cairo, which will be attended by leaders of our country in this area, who will prepare further documentation for the International Conference.
We would like to congratulate FAO and WHO on this happy initiative.
S. NAJMUS-SAQIB (Pakistan): Pakistan is keenly looking forward to participating in the ICN. We are actively involved in the preparation of our country paper by top Pakistani scientists for the International Conference on Nutrition, with particular emphasis on the nature of nutrition and diet-related problems, description and analysis of factors determining nutritional status, population analysis of current policies, programmes, and interventions affecting nutritional status.
We would also like to say that FAO and WHO need to be congratulated for preparing such a valid and useful document.
Gonzalo BUIA HOYOS (Colombia): El informe del Dr. Dutia fue muy completo. Los representantes de Colombia nos complacemos de que la colaboración entre la FAO y la OMS vaya a asegurar la realización de una buena Conferencia Internacional sobre la Nutrición. Queremos insistir, señor Presidente, en que para que esa Conferencia produzca los resultados que todos deseamos deberá hacerse hincapié en la asistencia a los países en desarrollo para que éstos puedan presentar buenos informes nacionales, y también en la conveniencia de que se obtengan recursos para financiar la representación de los representantes de los países en desarollo que así lo soliciten. Cuando habíamos planteado este tema, señor Presidente, se nos dijo que los recursos que se propone aumentar en el programa ordinario para el próximo bienio en favor de la CIN se destinarían especialmente a actividades en la Sede y sobre todo al Comité Mixto FAO/OMS, lo cual encontramos razonable, pero ya que hay ahora ofrecimientos generosos de recursos extrapresupuestarios, como lo ha hecho recientemente Italia, esos fondos deben utilizarse para que los países puedan presentar informes nacionales y la Conferencia se realice sobre bases realistas, conociendo directamente la situación y las necesidades en materia de nutrición en los países en desarrollo. La reciente intervención del colega de Egipto sobre el seminario que va a celebrarse en El Cairo es un buen ejemplo de este propósito que los representantes de Colombia apoyamos.
David DRAKE (Canada): As we will have the opportunity to review this item in the Conference, I will be brief.
The Canadian delegation would like to thank the Secretariat for this document updating the status of preparations for the ICN. We also welcome the progress of ICN preparations and extend our sincere appreciation to the members of the joint FAO/WHO Secretariat who we know are working exceptionally hard to make the ICN a success.
Canada is presently in the final stages of preparing its national paper for the International Conference on Nutrition. A consultative process has been established in the Canadian Government for the production of the paper, which is expected to be ready next month.
Canada is pleased to note that it will be providing assistance for the preparation of country papers to four nations.
Canada has consistently stated that it would have preferred that the ICN take place at a later date. While postponement no longer is an option, we are concerned that the tight time schedule now proposed is an obstacle to effective production of papers and the essential associated process of consultation at the national, sub-regional and regional levels, especially in developing nations. Let us not forget that the primary purpose of the ICN is to focus on nutritional requirements of developing nations. In our view this Conference represents an important development opportunity that may not arise again in the foreseeable future.
Our delegation urges all Members of the Council to make best use of the process associated with this Conference, and the Conference itself, in order to advance the cause of nutrition in the developing world.
DONG QING-SONG (China) (Original language Chinese): First of all I would like to thank Dr Dutia for his comprehensive and clear introduction to this item. We are very happy to learn of the preparations for this important Conference.
In order to prepare for the International Conference on Nutrition FAO and WHO have cooperated and coordinated to great extent. We hope that this kind of cooperation will continue in order to achieve maximum results.
However, I would like to stress here that in order to make this Conference successful the aim and target of this Conference should be action-oriented. Secondly, we have to establish a kind of indicative figure; thirdly, we have to set out a monitoring system. Only by doing this can ICN bring about a practical and fruitful result. Also the Chinese Government in recent years has placed a great emphasis on nutrition and the food work, therefore our Government has set great store on participation in this important Conference. Presently all the preparatory work for this Conference, especially the country statement, the country report still being prepared by the Ministry of Agriculture and the Ministry of Public Health of the PRC. The Chinese Government will participate in this Conference and will make its active contribution to the successful holding of this Conference.
Luis MALDONADO VENEGAS (México): Seré breve también en mi intervención considerando que el tema será objeto de la mayor atención seguramente en la Conferencia.
Desearía en primer término transmitir nuestra más cálida felicitación al Sr. Dutia por la presentación del documento en el que se informa de los avances y preparativos de la Conferencia. En el mismo orden, hacer extensiva esta felicitación al Comité conjunto FAO/OMS por los avances ya obtenidos y la estrategia adoptada para la preparación de esta importante reunión.
Desearíamos hacer hincapié en un aspecto que ha sido ya materia de algunos criterios adoptados por este Consejo en su 99° período de sesiones. Especialmente atentos a las actividades que habrán de desarrollarse tanto a nivel nacional y regional con miras a la organización de la Conferencia, y especialmente a la reunión del Comité preparatorio que se ha previsto celebrar en septiembre de 1992 con el objeto de preparar y perfeccionar el plan de acción que habrá en su momento de debatir y aprobar la sesión plenaria de la Conferencia, resulta indispensable que no se pierda el enfoque interdisciplinario y multisectorial de los propósitos que se ha planteado la misma. Será preciso, desde luego, estar muy atentos en el desarrollo de todos estos trabajos para que este propósito y este mecanismo ya adoptado con miras a la celebración de la Conferencia pueda cumplirse a plenitud. Esto permitirá que en la adopción de la estrategia global atienda al conjunto de los factores causales de la malnutrición y se puedan también adoptar medidas y compromisos de más amplio horizonte.
Quisiéramos expresar que México se encuentra, desde luego, con el mayor interés y comprometido en los preparativos de esta Conferencia. Hemos celebrado ya un seminario nacional, y este mes habrán de celebrarse dos seminarios complementarios, a nivel técnico. Asimismo, estamos ya prestos a integrar el informe nacional, con objeto de poder presentarlo, en su oportunidad, a la FAO. Nos congratulamos igualmente con la ocasión que se nos brinda de acoger, en el mes de marzo de 1992, la reunión regional para Latinoamérica.
Kiyoshi SAWADA (Japan): My Government really appreciates the activities of FAO with WHO on the ICN. I would like to inform you on this occasion that my Government has designated a focal point for the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries coinciding with the Ministry of Health and Welfare and we have started to prepare the Japanese country paper jointly. We are pleased to participate in this meaningful Conference based on our experience to improve our nutritional intake after World War II to realize the system to supply enough nutrition to the multi-malnutritioned people in the world ICN should be a trigger for the countries to develop concrete strategy for that. We hope FAO will play a big role in ICN and constantly be active as well.
José Eduardo MENDES-FERRAO (Portugal): Nous suivons avec grand intérêt la Conférence internationale sur la nutrition. A cet égard, nous avons créé un groupe de travail élargi avec la collaboration directe des organisations locales de la FAO et de l'OMS et avec une contribution très importante en hommes et en intérêts particuliers.
En ce moment, notre objectif est la réunion de divers éléments et le rapport se trouve dans la phase de rédaction finale. Nous avons déjà manifesté à la FAO notre disponibilité pour collaborer avec les pays africains de langue portugaise et les aider à la préparation de rapports nationaux. On a organisé à Lisbonne une réunion préparatoire avec l'assistance d'un spécialiste portugais pouvant collaborer avec les diverses délégations des pays africains de langue portugaise au niveau local. Les frais sont assumés par le Gouvernement portugais.
Natigor SIAGIAN (Indonesia): We thank Dr Dutia for his very informative explanations on the preparation of the ICN. My Government fully supports the idea of confining this ICN and therefore will cooperate closely with WHO and FAO. We believe that the works on combating malnutrition will be much assisted by the United Nations Member Nations through active participation at the ICN.
The Government of Indonesia had requested the top scientist on nutrition to assist in the preparation of this document for ICN and a national preparatory committee has been set up and will work for the preparation of the ICN. We thank the WHO, UNICEF and the donor countries for their efforts in assisting us in the national preparations. The national seminar for the preparation for this ICN will be convened in Jakarta in December 1991 with the good participation of WHO, UNICEF and USAID. We hope that as a result of this national seminar we can submit a complete country paper, both for the regional and global ICN meetings.
On the other side of the coin, however, we may request FAO Secretariat to take any possible efforts in assisting the developing countries in their national preparations for this Conference. Likewise like the previous speaker we also wish to request FAO to secure funds for assisting the attendance of representatives of all developing nations especially the least developed countries at the coming ICN, as well as to attend their regional meetings.
Sra. Grafila SOTO CARRERO (Cuba): Seremos sumamente breves, ya que este tema se discutirá más ampliamente durante la celebración de la 26 Conferencia, la semana próxima. Quisiéramos agradecer la presentación que ha hecho el Sr. Dutia sobre los preparativos que se hacen sobre la Conferencia Internacional de Nutrición. Cuba ha constituido un grupo nacional para la preparación del informe que nuestro país presentará a esta Conferencia, integrado por catorce organismos nacionales que trabajan en estrecha colaboración con las representaciones de la FAO y la OMS. También se ha nombrado el punto focal responsabilizado con estas tareas, y se celebró un seminario nacional sobre el primer borrador del informe nacional, para tratar de completar el mismo, el cual esperamos esté listo para el mes próximo.
Agradecemos mucho el ofrecimiento hecho por los Gobiernos de Italia, Canadá, Portugal y otros para lograr que los países en desarrollo tengan posibilidades de participar en la Conferencia con buenos informes nacionales y con delegaciones altamente calificadas. Creemos que ha sido una excelente idea de la FAO y de la OMS en la coordinación de esfuerzos para celebrar esta Conferencia, que estamos seguros tendrá el éxito esperado y necesario.
B.P. DUTIA (Assistant Director-General, Economic and Social Department): I
would like to thank you again, through you and with your permission, the Members of the Council for the support that they have expressed to the ICN and also the appreciation that they have given to the efforts that FAO and WHO are making in organizing this Conference. In particular I would like to thank the representatives of the donor countries who have already announced their readiness to support the country level activities and also the financing of the travel of the delegations to the regional and sub-regional
meetings. We do hope that this is still the beginning and that we will get more support and more commitment to this from the donor countries because this is an exercise which for the first time has started from the bottom up. Let us not let it slip through our fingers. This is a very important occasion to rise to and I am optimistic that the donor countries will respond generously in assisting in these matters.
I would like to express my particular thanks to the representative of Italy, the host country for the great support that they have given to us right from the very beginning and we expect that with their full support we will be able to make this Conference an even greater success.
The member of Italy asked a question, whether the dates of the preparatory committee is in September or in August. Since the paper had been prepared we have given further consideration to this matter and now the preparatory committee is scheduled to be held in the last week of August in Geneva.
The member from Colombia appealed for the giving of more aid to the developing countries in the preparatory activities at the national level and also for assisting the delegations to attend the regional and sub-regional meetings as well as the ICN. As I said in my introduction, despite the budgetary constraints that both FAO and WHO are facing we have made special efforts to give assistance to the country level preparatory activities in a number of developing countries and we are also seeking funds from the donor countries to assist the developing countries in their travel to the regional and sub-regional meetings and eventually to the ICN itself.
The member of Canada referred to the time constraint that exists; yes, there is a time constraint but we in the Secretariat today are more optimistic in being able to succeed in producing a worthwhile basis for a worthwhile Conference.
LE PRESIDENT: Nous avons fait le point de la situation en ce qui concerne la préparation de la Conférence internationale de la nutrition, C 91/27. Ce point nous a été fourni pour information. Un examen plus complet de la situation sera fait lors de la Conférence. Je vous proposerai donc de clore ce point après cet intéressant débat qui fut d'ailleurs plus un échange de vues et d'informations qu'une confrontation sur un point quelconque, parce que je n'ai entendu aucune voix discordante en ce qui concerne l'organisation de cette Conférence internationale de la nutrition.
Nous passons au point 7 qui concerne les faits nouveaux concernant le Programme d'action pour les forêts tropicales, CL 100/2. Ce document, qui nous est fourni pour examen, est intéressant et synthétique. Je crois que nous devons être opérationnels et le plus bref possible.
Je demanderai à l'assistant spécial du Directeur général, M. Walton, de faire une présentation de ce point.
Declan WALTON (Special Assistant to the Director-General): The Council Session last June considered the revamping or renewal of the Tropical Forest Action Programme, the TFAP. The question which aroused by far the most controversy was the proposal to create a new international mechanism, a consultative forum on tropical forests, to provide overall strategic guidance to the TFAP. The Council suggested that the idea be further clarified through a contact group. A contact group duly met in Paris on 13-14 September, thanks to the generous cooperation of the French Government which made all the arrangements. The meeting was sponsored by the World Bank, UNDP and.FAO. It included representatives from all three of the main groups of partners in the TFAP - namely donors, tropical countries and non-governmental organizations (NGOs). The selection of developing countries, two from each main tropical forest region, was made after consultation with the regional groups in Rome.
The Report of the meeting is before the Council in document CL 100/2. The results are a classic situation on which you can place either an optimistic interpretation or a pessimistic interpretation. The optimist will say that the group worked out the most difficult of all problems for the new mechanism, namely its exact functions. The new text defining "functions" as developed in Paris is included in Appendix A of the document. I cannot say that this draft was fully satisfactory to all the parties present. Indeed, perhaps none of them was completely satisfied with it. Yet it did appear to be broadly acceptable to everyone. It was a compromise formulated in good faith and in a transparent manner, a success - however incomplete - towards which all parties contributed.
The pessimist, on the other hand, can say that the group left several key issues still untackled. The most important of these is probably the exact composition of the new body. Seen against the background of rising impatience in the outside world over the delays in completing the revamping of the TFAP, the pessimist can only be disturbed by the volume of unfinished business.
Incidentally, I received one comment on the Report of the Paris meeting from the representative of an industrialized country who felt that the text did not convey clearly enough the message of the meeting that time is of the essence for finding solutions.
The most important issue for the Council is to decide on the next steps that should be taken by FAO. I must perforce recall that the TFAP is not a piece of FAO property. It is jointly sponsored by FAO, the World Bank and the UNDP, and in a broader sense it is not even a programme of the co-sponsors, but a cooperative undertaking owned by the tropical countries, the donors and the organizations that participate in it. The Council can legislate regarding the action that should be taken by the FAO Secretariat, but the FAO cannot unilaterally decide on the future course of the TFAP as a whole; nor can any other single partner.
I hope that the Council will take into account the views of our co-sponsors, one of which - UNDP - is represented here today. Conversely, I hope that our co-sponsors, both the World Bank and the UNDP, will agree
to associate themselves in due course with whatever action may be decided upon by the FAO Council. In our document we have suggested three options. Option 1 is a further meeting of the Paris type to hammer out unresolved questions in the next few weeks. Option 2 is to proceed with an inaugural meeting of the new body on the basis of the agreements so far reached, leaving it to the mechanism itself to complete unfinished business regarding institutional arrangements. Our co-sponsors favour this option. Option 3 is to set up an ad hoc group that would discuss the unresolved issues until solutions were found.
Informal consultations in the last few weeks have not shown a consensus building up in favour of one option or another. They have, however, brought out three major considerations that the Council may wish to bear in mind even if they pull in opposite directions. First, if the TFAP is to become, in fact as well as in theory, a country-driven exercise, then the countries that are to drive it should have a major say in decisions on the shape of the new mechanism that is to provide strategic guidance, the new consultative forum. The driving countries, the tropical countries, appear to need more time and more consultation in order to reach a consensus on all important aspects of the new mechanism. This argument supports option 3.
The second consideration that has emerged, and I have already mentioned it, is a rising tide of impatience, and even exasperation, among donors and NGOs over the delays in finishing the TFAP revamping. There is a danger that a central role in the TFAP will slip away from FAO and funding for the TFAP at national and international level may decline in the absence of clear decisions and prompt action. This is an argument in favour of option 2.
Thirdly, it is still not clear to what extent the creation of the new consultative forum will lead to an increased flow of resources to tackle the forest problems of developing nations. This was raised in the Council the last time. I myself brought it up in my introductory statement in Paris. But the question remains without a clear and unambiguous response. Any light that the donors can shed in the course of this debate will certainly help the Council to arrive at a conclusion.
Mr Chairman, I would hate anyone to think that the TFAP had ground to a halt whilst meetings struggle with a definition of functions and secretariats worry about options. On substance, as distinct from institutions, the main features of the revamped TFAP have been clear since last March. Revamped operational guidelines have been approved by all groups of participants and are about to be issued. In recent months, if I may give one or two examples, the Presidents of the seven countries of Central America have decided to use the TFAP as the policy framework for environmental and forestry development with a linkage to agriculture. In Africa, the country with the largest tropical forests, Zaire, has as a result of its TFAP exercise developed a comprehensive forest policy for the first time, combined with arrangements for coordinated donor support to natural resource management. The largest forest country of Asia, Indonesia, has held a comprehensive consultation with NGOs on its National Forest Action Plan.
Mr Chairman, I will not say that the TFAP is in the best of health, but it is out of hospital and back at work. Let us contribute towards a final cure by making a clear decision on the next steps to solve the institutional issue.
LE PRESIDENT: Je remercie M. Walton pour cette présentation. Il est extrêmement important de se prononcer de manière claire sur nos préférences concernant les trois options dont il a été fait mention. J'ai, pour le moment, comme premier orateur inscrit, la représentante de la Malaisie. Ensuite, le Liban, la France, les Pays-Bas, la Suède, la Thaïlande, le Royaume-Uni, l'Allemagne, le Brésil, l'Indonésie, le Japon, le Cap-Vert, Madagascar, le Mexique, le Canada, le Congo, l'Australie, les Etats-Unis, Trinité-et-Tobago, le Pakistan, le PNUD. Je passe la parole à la Malaisie.
Miss Ting WEN LIAN (Malaysia): First of all, I would like to thank Mr Walton for his report, but as usual please allow me to be very straightforward and to get straight to the point. As you know, Mr Chairman, my delegation has expressed its strongest reservations on the proposed consultative group. From now on, I will refer to it as CG. Our position remains firm, and in fact firmer than before, after participating in the contact group meeting on the TFAP in Paris on 13-14 September 1991.
It is very clear to us that the proposed CG has no respect for national sovereignty and sovereign forest resources. In this regard, I wish to stress that my country cannot accept a situation where the fate of our sovereign forest resources is submitted to a group of self-appointed people who have no official credentials or mandate or any authoritative or legal status. We cannot accept that a motley group without officially recognized credentials, and which include non-sovereign government entities, will be in a position to scrutinize and assess proposed plans and programmes of our sovereign national forestry resources.
We may perhaps appreciate the need of the sponsors to please their NGOs, but we are certainly not prepared to provide our sovereign forests for the electoral convenience of other countries. Our NFAP is drawn up with our own NGO input, and any insistence on such inputs from sectors outside our national boundaries will be considered as interference in our internal affairs.
My delegation wishes to know from where this proposed self-appointed group would derive its mandate. Even if its task, as we see it, is solely to sit in judgement on our forests, we should ask ourselves from where this forum intends to draw its strength - from the stigma of public censure? - from economic and financial blackmail? - from more trade boycotts and bans? Perhaps the main actors feel that this is where FAO has failed in its task. It is our view that FAO has done a good job of coordination in the TFAP process, and we want to see this role of FAO strengthened.
You know better than I do how important it is to establish an appropriate and workable governance for the TFAP. This is extremely pertinent because we are dealing with sovereign forest resources which belong to sovereign countries. National dignity and sovereignty cannot be compromised. We are the owners of our forest resources and we should all - I repeat all – have
the right to express our views on the nature of the assistance that may be offered to us to sustainably manage, conserve and develop our forests.
I repeat: Our views - that is, the views of all tropical forest countries - have to be taken into account not only on revamped guidelines, but also on any structural changes that may be proposed. In fact, it is the view of my delegation that the time has come for the whole structure of the TFAP and its component parts to be reviewed by tropical forest countries in the TFAP. We would like this review to be done so that we have a clear idea as to who is doing what to our tropical forests.
Now that our NFAPs are country-driven, according to the so-called "revamped guidelines", it is all the more necessary for us in our new role as managers and organizers of our forest programmes to assess and review the structure of the TFAP, and my delegation would like to include this as an item for discussion in the ad hoc Group proposed in option (c) of document CL 100/2. We support option (c) not to continue discussion on the proposed CG, but to discuss the status of our NFAP and the future of the TFAP.
We see the CG as a conditionality imposed by the donors or sponsors. If it is the CG today, tomorrow it may be human rights, and the day after tomorrow it may be environment, or the wrong kind of democracy. We all know very well that the sponsors of the TFAP had ample time to disburse funds to finance the NFAPs in the five years' existence of the TFAP, that only a negligible amount out of the 2.3 billion pledged was provided; and now, when almost all the NFAPs are in place, including ours, there was this sudden desire to revamp the TFAP.
It is clear from this move that the revamping exercise was a delaying tactic, and there is a big question mark on whether in the first place there was a genuine intention to release any financial resources to launch the NFAPs. Of course, with the revamped guidelines, TFAP participants are obliged to re-do their NFAPs. This naturally provides another breathing space for the sponsors or revampers. Meanwhile, the proposed CG was also thrown in for good measure to appease their own domestic lobbies.
Some of us - including you, Mr Chairman - know very well why there is this reluctance to release financial resources for our NFAPs. I only wish to remind the sponsors - I repeat, I wish to remind the sponsors - that the commitment of some 85 tropical forest countries to the goals and objectives of the TFAP should not be taken lightly nor taken for granted - and I hope Mr Walton will also take note of this fact: The commitment of 85 tropical forest countries to the goals and objectives of the TFAP should not be taken lightly. If this commitment erodes as a result of proposals received in total disregard for national sovereignty, we will all live to regret it. Malaysia for one will be sorry to see the TFAP destroyed.
We support the TFAP, and we have, like our fellow developing countries, prepared our NFAP for implementation - but we have been truly shocked to see that our forests have been used to further self-interests, to settle scores, and to perpetuate feuds. You know what I am referring to, Mr Chairman, and so do the main actors in this farce. If you wish, I can be more explicit.
If the contention is that something has gone wrong somewhere with the TFAP then let us find out or determine where the shortcoming is, and take the
necessary remedial action. The solution should seek to consolidate and not to proliferate.
We must also question the wisdom of creating a new body which risks duplication and wastage of resources. At this stage, we must also admit to being utterly amazed at the alacrity with which some new money magically appeared to fund the proposed CG, whereas the developing countries have always been told not to expect new funds and not to expect new institutions.
In fact, as I see it, the CG will have the principal task of monitoring and filing judgement reports - a kind of super-international jury on tropical forests. May I remind those present here that the question of monitoring and stewardship of all forests is discussed in the UNCED process under the guiding principles, under management, conservation and development of all forests, and there has been no agreement as yet on this. The discussions here on such a CG are therefore premature, and pre-judge or pre-empt what would essentially require a political decision of governments.
I wish to reiterate that our participation in the TFAP is a clear indication of our willingness to adhere to the TFAP goals and objectives. This willingness however does not give a "carte blanche" to new proposals which impinge on our sovereignty. I really think that the way forward is to build on the commitment we have shown in getting our NFAPs in place, and to identify the ways and means to get those programmes off the ground in the way that we have been proceeding, otherwise we have no choice but to reconsider our participation in the TFAP.
After all, our NFAP has always been country-driven, and we are not in the least attracted by the idea of putting our forests in the dock for the gratification of an international forest jury with the kind of credentials which have no useful relevance to the pragmatic response that we see.
After having said all that, we wish to remain optimistic and positive. It was this same attitude of mind - and we said this clearly in Paris - that prompted us to participate in the discussions of the Contact Group to define the function of the proposed CG and we said at that time that our participation in the discussion did not indicate our approval of the CG.
In the original proposals there was no mention at all of a fund-identifying role, and my delegation, together with those developing countries present in Paris, added a funding element in the proposed functions. However, as you can see, even these amended functions duplicate the work normally undertaken by FAO.
In the same spirit, we are prepared to join in the search for a workable and approachable mechanism that can bring our NFAPs forward. Most of the sponsor countries are on record in international fora as expressing concern at the fate of our tropical forests. The TFAP structure is the only means that exists which provides them with the most ideal opportunity to genuinely demonstrate their commitment to assist in a pragmatic way, otherwise they only have themselves to blame for missing this historic opportunity.
Malaysia still stands ready to find a way out of what we consider as a man-made impasse on the TFAP. However, I wish to reiterate that if the proposed CG is bulldozed into the structure of the TFAP, Malaysia will have no choice but to take the necessary action to reconsider our participation in the TFAP. We said this in Paris, and we say this again today in Rome.
LE PRESIDENT: Je crois que le débat au Conseil démontre que le temps est un élément extrêmement important dans la recherche du consensus.
Je remercie Madame l'Ambassadeur de Malaisie de son intervention. Elle a clairement exprimé que ses voeux la portaient vers l'option c).
Amin ABDEL MALEK (Liban) (Langue originale arabe): Je tiens à féliciter M. Walton de son intéressante introduction au document CL 100/2 qui traite des faits nouveaux concernant le PAFT. J'ai lu ce document avec beaucoup d'attention. Il est très bref et très clair et il reflète tout à fait les efforts déployés par la FAO pour assurer le suivi nécessaire aux résolutions adoptées lors de la dernière réunion du Conseil.
Ce rapport indique que trois options s'offrent à nous - trois choix soumis à notre examen. La délégation libanaise choisit la troisième option, qui consiste à créer un groupe ad hoc pour débattre les questions en suspens dans le but d'aboutir à des solutions définitives.
La non-acceptation de la création d'un nouveau mécanisme vise à empêcher le double emploi dans le travail. Nous croyons, en effet, que le renforcement du mécanisme actuel est préférable à la création d'un nouveau mécanisme. Nous avons tout à fait confiance en la capacité de la FAO. C'est pour cela que nous insistons sur la nécessité pour la FAO de poursuivre ses efforts afin de coordonner les activités menées dans le cadre du PAFT. Il n'y a aucune excuse pour élever des barrières ou pour empêcher que la FAO assume ses responsabilités difficiles en créant un nouveau mécanisme.
Quoi qu'il en soit, nous sommes tout à fait ouverts et nous sommes disposés à étudier la question en profondeur dans le but de renforcer la FAO et de coopérer avec les Etats en développement pour appliquer leurs plans nationaux. Ce dont nous avons besoin maintenant, c'est d'une augmentation des ressources et de l'assistance technique dans le but d'aller de l'avant. Nous n'avons pas besoin d'une nouvelle entité pour nous apprendre quoi faire.
LE PRESIDENT: J'ai écouté attentivement l'intervention du représentant du Liban et je note sa prise de position concernant l'option c).
Jean Pierre POLY (France): Je voudrais tout d'abord remercier M. Walton pour son rapport, comme à l'habitude précis et concis.
Mon pays se félicite d'avoir accueilli à Paris, les 13 et 14 septembre derniers, en prélude au dixième Congrès forestier mondial, une consultation élargie ayant pour objet d'examiner les conditions générales de constitution d'un groupe consultatif international sur les forêts tropicales, sujet dont le Conseil a délibéré longuement lors de sa dernière session.
S'il est vrai que, faute de temps, les importantes questions concernant la composition et le fonctionnement du groupe n'ont pu être étudiées en profondeur, il n'en demeure pas moins que ces consultations ont permis de dégager un solide consensus sur le mandat du futur groupe consultatif en mettant l'accent, notamment, sur le principe du respect de la souveraineté nationale, sur le rôle purement consultatif de ce groupe, sur la promotion d'approches plus efficaces pour la foresterie tropicale, dans une perspective de développement durable, sur la transparence et la circulation de l'information, sur l'amélioration, enfin, des conditions de financement du PAFT.
Ces consultations doivent être naturellement prolongées et c'est donc fort opportunément que le Secrétariat propose au Conseil d'examiner de nouvelles mesures à prendre.
Pour sa part, ma délégation affiche sa préférence pour la seconde option proposée, c'est-à-dire pour la poursuite de la mise en place de cette nouvelle procédure, sur la base des fonctions du groupe définies à Paris et, pour d'autres questions, sur la base du rapport de la réunion de Genève d'ailleurs révisé lors de consultations ultérieures. Une telle solution, qui repose donc sur de solides fondements, aurait pour avantage de mieux lier à la FAO, dans une approche conjointe, la Banque mondiale et le PNUD pour dégager les perspectives de cet important Programme.
Ma délégation pourrait toutefois se rallier à la troisième option préconisée par certains, à savoir la création d'un groupe ad hoc, à condition de fixer une date limite pour la conclusion des travaux de cegroupe. Je pense qu'une échéance dans le courant du premier trimestre 1992 pourrait, par exemple, être retenue.
Je saisis cette occasion, enfin, pour rappeler l'importance que mon pays accorde également à la prochaine mission d'évaluation des activités de l'Unité de coordination du PAFT, mission d'évaluation dont les conditions générales de mise en oeuvre ont déjà été débattues avec le Secrétariat et mission d'évaluation, bien entendu, qui ne doit pas conduire à un nouvel examen d'ensemble du Programme.
LE PRESIDENT: Le représentant de la France a pris position pour l'option b), acceptant l'option c) dans la mesure où une date limite serait fixée pour les résultats des activités du groupe ad hoc.
Frederik Ch. PRILLEVITZ (Netherlands): I would like to thank Mr Walton for his introduction, which was a very good introduction to this agenda item.
The Netherlands participated in the Paris meeting which was a further consultation on the TFAP. Our delegation was quite satisfied with the outcome insofar as it concerned the function of the proposed new mechanism as reported in paragraph 4 of the Report of this meeting. So in this case we belong to the group of optimists, Mr Walton, but I must say my delegation regretted very much that the other agenda items like composition, and selection of members, establishment and organization, national-level arrangements and technical support of the consultative forum were not discussed.
My delegation does not understand why the right momentum, given the good atmosphere at that time in Paris, was not used to finalize the work. It puts us here in this Council meeting in a difficult position since we now know that, and I quote, "the other co-sponsors did not see a need for further consultations along the lines of the Paris meeting".
How do we go on from here? The Secretariat confronts us with three options for the next steps. It is the opinion of my delegation that option (a) is the only possibility for a very simple reason, namely, that we cannot afford to lose more time. When we follow the procedure that we have an open-ended ad hoc working group working during Conference, then we will know where we are within a couple of weeks. If we do not succeed during that period, then I can live with option (b) because then it is proven that we cannot find a solution here in the context of FAO.
It is of the utmost importance that a consultative mechanism for the TFAP is established as soon as possible, taking into account the working methods, as I pointed out in my statement on the subject in the ninety-ninth Council meeting of FAO. Today, I tried to attract your attention, Mr Chairman, after the intervention of my dear colleague from Malaysia. We have to stick to the rules of our Council meetings in that we do not repeat what we have said in an earlier meeting of the Council. I do not want to repeat myself here, and know why we have this opinion. I only want to say again that my Government intends to increase the amount of money available for forestry in the sphere of development cooperation up to US$250 million in three years.
Since Paris I have consulted several delegations of important tropical forest countries and many NGOs. It has encouraged me to propose that we must arrange a possibility during the next weeks in such a way that we can finalize the work on the various agenda items. Without these discussions first among the interested Member Countries, and hopefully in the presence of co-sponsors and NGOs with the aim of resolving the last problems, it is not possible to start the consultative forum. Too many things which are of special interest to FAO - for instance the relationship with the coordination unit of TFAP and FAO - have to be discussed and solved first before the new mechanism can begin to function.
LE PRESIDENT: Si j'ai bien compris le représentant des Pays-Bas, il choisit l'option a), étant entendu que l'on sait que ni la Banque mondiale ni le PNUD ne sont disposés à parrainer une réunion comme celle qui s'est tenue
antérieurement. Le choix des Pays-Bas est donc l'option a), avec les conséquences qui en découlent.
Sture THEOLIN (Sweden): I would like to join the thunder outside and say first of all that we were pleased to participate, together with other distinguished Members of this Council in the Paris consultations on the Tropical Forests Action Plan/Programme. There can be no doubt in this body that Sweden and the other Nordic countries attach considerable importance to the TFAP as a potentially central operational mechanism for development, use and conservation of the forests of tropical countries. We have supported TFAP from its inception.
Thus, our comments today, - and I regret that they may appear too long -aim at further vitalizing and developing TFAP as a cooperative enterprise, at restoring the confidence of the NGO and donor communities, and most importantly, finally to move beyond administrative and organizational matters and make TFAP a real instrument for the 84 or so developing countries who express need for support towards working out action-oriented plans for the sustainable development, conservation and use of their forest resources.
TFAP has been discussed in this Organization for some considerable time. In document CL 100/2, the Director-General indeed asks for the Council's guidance on this matter. The Council has a unique opportunity at this juncture to provide such guidance if FAO is to remain a viable partner in the cooperative effort which TFAP represents. Some delegations fear that TFAP's very survival now is at stake. Lacking clear responses from FAO, others rather seem to welcome the fact that the important tasks and functions are taken over by others.
Sweden firmly believes that the Council has a duty, also in this case, to give sufficiently clear directions to the Secretariat.
To this end, it is fundamental that the comparative advantages of each multilateral organization involved in the TFAP process be mobilized and exploited, frankly speaking, in a much more coherent manner than has been the case until now. Thus, the role which each sponsor of the TFAP, that is, UNDP, World Bank, and FAO as well as that of the role that these NGOs can play in support of TFAP must be better and more sharply defined. These matters need to be viewed from a practical and pragmatic angle.
TFAP represents for FAO a challenge as well as an opportunity to demonstrate its willingness, its ability and competence. In our view FAO should primarily be responsible for the scientific and technological guidance in supporting developing countries in developing national forest plans, in identifying and selecting projects, and in coordinating research and data collection.
The other sponsor, UNDP, has the system-wide role of coordinating on a country level a full range of multilateral activities in strengthening capacity building of the tropical forests countries. UNDP should coordinate and manage the financing and execution of pre-investment and technical
assistance activities. Together with the agencies, in this case FAO, the 112 UNDP field offices play a key role in identifying projects, communicating with recipient governments, and the coordination with donor countries at the country and regional level.
The natural responsibility of the World Bank should be the investment operations. The Bank should identify, appraise and supervise tropical forests investment projects related to the TFAP, with the participation of UNDP and FAO.
Many Members of the Council undoubtedly recognize that this is the method of work within the recently established Global Environment Facility in which UNDP, UNEP and the World Bank cooperate. In our statement on this issue to the Ninety-ninth Council this particular cooperative approach was emphasized.
Of course, recipient and donor countries now are well accustomed to this pragmatic division of work. The recipient of funds, whether a government, an NGO or a specialized agency has the primary responsibility to make the project work. The World Bank administers the funds and is responsible for pre-investment and administering technical assistance. The specialized agency, such as FAO, ensures that operations are in line with the scientific and technological standards and gives policy advice to all parties involved.
Obviously, many of these matters referred to are not under the purvue of FAO or of this Council. The Director-General seeks the Council's guidance on the next steps this Organization should take and suggests for consideration three options contained in the document.
It seems to us that none of the three options are likely to lead to a timely redivision among the TFAP sponsors of tasks, functions and decisionmaking. Alternatives (a) and (c) certainly bear the risk of leading to further expensive losses in time and tempo, prolonged uncertainty and, in fact, may ultimately undermine FAO's possibility and ability to effectively support multilateral efforts in this field.
Since the process of creating a new mechanism is underway with the Paris Consultations, a decision by the FAO Council on this process, as in option (b) does not seem necessary.
In this context, suffice it to say that it is important that such a mechanism is so designed that the comparative advantages of all the parties involved can be optimally exploited for the benefit of forest countries in the tropics.
Mr Chairman, a final point, which is very much in line with Mr Walton's introduction, for which I thank him, in which he underlined that time is the key issue, what step the FAO Secretariat should take, and the fact that this is not a piece of FAO property. Against this complex background we express the strong desire that the Report from this present Council give clear direction to the FAO Secretariat to go ahead and actively participate in the new mechanism.
LE PRESIDENT: Je vois que vous ne retenez aucune des trois possibilités offertes, dans votre exposé, en demandant de réfléchir à un système rapide et opérationnel qui permettrait de trouver une synthèse des différents points que vous avez soulevés.
John MACHIN (United Kingdom): Perhaps I could also start by thanking Mr Walton for his very lucid introduction to this document.
I also share the views of others on the encouraging progress made in Paris in identifying the major choices that have to be made for taking the TFAP forward.
Mr Chairman, very little time remains before UNCED 1992. Therefore, we need to see a faster pace of progress on the outstanding issue, the TFAP reform. In our view the TFAP needs to be clearly defined as the principal mechanism by which developing countries are assisted in implementing their national forestry action plans, in achieving the ITTOs Sustainability 2000 and in enacting the agreements to be reached under Agenda 21 of UNCED.
In our view it is vital also that the TFAP is fully compatible with both ITTO resolutions and the statement of principle on sound management of the world's forests to be agreed at UNCED.
The United Kingdom supports the Geneva draft statement of principles and very much hopes that this will form the basis for agreement at UNCED.
We also consider it vital that the renewed TFAP is accountable to governments and to agencies and, indeed, to the people that it represents. Therefore, we doubt whether a small consultative group - and I emphasize -however well chosen, can achieve this.
Of the options identified in paragraph 8 of CL 100/2, the United Kingdom favours option (c), that is to say, an expanded contact group, which we suggest could meet in January to consider issues of governance and the respective roles of the TFAP advisory groups, FAO and the TFAP coordinating units. The results of this expanded contact group could then be considered by the UNCED PrepCom IV when it discusses Agenda 21.
In conclusion we would like to emphasize the importance of bringing together the work of UNCED and the renegotiation of the International Tropical Timber Agreement in coordination with the renewal of TFAP. In our view it is essential that the role of FAO in this process is both clearly defined and monitorable.
Finally, we reaffirm our commitment to full participation in the TFAP. We sincerely urge FAO to address the challenge of reform with all the urgency that the problem of global deforestation merits.
LE PRESIDENT: Je vois que vous prenez clairement position pour l'option c) du document qui vous est soumis.
Ms Marasee SURAKUL (Thailand): Although Thailand was a non-participant in the Consultation in Paris on Tropical Forests Action Programme last September, we have followed this matter with keen interest.
On behalf of my Government I would like to express our appreciation to the Government of France for hosting this important Consultation. I am certain that this Consultation did not limit itself to only tropical forest countries or industrialized countries, but was also concerned with the world community, in particular the world environmental issues.
The participants of this consultative group should also receive our congratulations. We regret that the group did not complete all of the issues related to TFAP because of time constraints.
I shall limit my remarks to the Council's invitation given in paragraph 8 of document CL 100/2 to give guidance to the next steps to be taken.
My delegation is of the opinion that option (c) is our preference. However, we have a further suggestion that in setting up the ad hoc group, the membership of the tropical forest countries should be expanded to more than six countries, while that of industrialized countries and other parties remain constant. This is due to the likelihood that tropical forest countries have differing interests and policies on management, conservation and sustainable development of forests.
Harald HILDEBRAND (Germany): First of all I would like to thank Mr Walton for his clear and transparent introduction to this topic.
Germany's Government has actively supported the Tropical Forests Action Plan from the very beginning and has taken an active part in its implementation with the possibilities of our development cooperation. The potential for intensifying and improving international cooperation was identified by a number of encouraging TFAP country plans by elaborating comprehensive and transparent planning and coordination bases.
The experience gathered since 1985 has shown, as outlined in detail by the independent review of the TFAP, the Ullsten Report, that there is an urgent need to overcome bottlenecks and difficulties that exist, above all in the fields of TFAP management, quality protection and financing, as well as participative implementation which substantially restricts the sufficiency of the TFAP instruments.
We are, therefore, of the opinion that the reform step outlined by the mentioned report and other analyses to overcome these difficulties must be implemented energetically and without delay with a view to establishing the acceptance and the momentum of the TFAP as a central international cooperation mechanism in the tropical forest sector.
The establishment of the TFAP consultative group, which has been long proposed, in our view is a very important step within the framework of the TFAP process of reform. We welcome the fact that a consensus was reached on the function of such a body at the meeting of the contact group in Paris
last September. Even though a number of institutional questions have still to be settled, such as composition and selection of members, we feel that FAO in cooperation with the other co-sponsors, UNDP and the World Bank, should now take concrete steps to establish this consultative group in the near future. Therefore, my Government would favour option (b) of the document under review.
We thus hope that this Council Session will support with a vote in this sense, the urgent need to make convincing TFAP progress, in particular in light of the forthcoming UN Conference on Environment and Development. We also welcome the fact that FAO has taken the necessary steps, or intends to do so, through budgetary and personnel adjustments in the Forestry Department, enabling it to assume its functions more effectively in the fields of TFAP management and coordination. The TFAP will remain an important and fundamental instrument of coordination and cooperation for our bilateral development cooperation with the partner countries in the tropical forestry sector if these indispensable steps of reform are implemented in a convincing way without delay. Until the central reform is carried out we will continue to focus our support on the TFAP country programmes which are already underway or completed.
Paulo Estivallet DE MESQUITA (Brazil): From the outset Brazil has supported the efforts to renew and reinforce the Tropical Forestry Action Plan. This support stems on the one hand from the importance attached by the Brazilian Government to the underlying principles of the TFAP and on the other hand from the recognition that its accomplishments have fallen short of the expectations. In this connection we stated in the last Council Session that a positive outcome might encourage Brazil to move towards full participation in TFAP.
Unfortunately, however, the revamping process seems to have gone somewhat astray. In fact we believe that the current debate on institutional arrangements misses the point, deviating attention from the structural causes of deforestation and from the main flaws in international cooperation, such as trade distortions and the lack of adequate and timely funding. These misgivings notwithstanding, Brazil has participated, and intends to continue to participate, in the revamping process with an open mind. We recognize the keen interest that some developed countries attach to the creation of a consultative group. We are therefore prepared to continue discussions on the possibility of establishing such a mechanism. If such conditions are met we hope it may turn out to provide a useful forum. We also expect our flexibility to be matched by a similar disposition on the part of the developed countries to address what we consider to be the main external cause of deforestation.
With regard to document CL 100/2 the third alternative in para 8 is the only one which we could accept. If the discussions are to continue they should ensure the broadest possible participation as a means of ensuring the legitimacy of any decisions that may be reached. No conclusions should be taken for granted. We recognize the right of those who were not present at the Paris consultation to revisit the functions of the proposed mechanism as they were agreed in that meeting, just as we find it necessary
to discuss in depth each and every one of the other issues listed in para 3 of the appendix, as well as the proposed definition of the TFAP's goals and objectives. We must also ensure that there is no interference whatsoever with the inset process be it on substance or on timing. In any case we think that the proposed ad hoc group could not meet before next year, given the heavy schedule of meetings in the coming weeks.
As a final remark I would like to stress once more that we do not see the creation of a consultative group as the apex of the revamping process which should actually culminate in the achievement by the tropical countries of a higher degree of autonomy in the design of national forest plans that are to be supported by TFAP.
LE PRESIDENT: Je voudrais vous faire une proposition, qui serait d'entendre sur ce point l'Indonésie, l'Inde et le Japon. Nous arriverons ainsi à la moitié des interventions puisqu'il y a encore onze interventions.
Je proposerais, après le Japon, de suspendre l'examen de ce point, que je voudrais poursuivre de façon complète et approfondie ce soir et éventuellement demain en début de matinée, de façon à reprendre l'examen du point 17.1: Propositions d'amendements à l'Acte constitutif et au Règlement général de l'Organisation, et entendre, ensuite, le Président du Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques faire le point de la situation. Je demanderai à son Excellence l'Ambassadeur de Colombie de nous faire la synthèse de tous les travaux et des multiples réunions formelles et informelles qu'il a bien voulu présider avec beaucoup de compétence et nous examinerons ce qui peut être fait dans le cadre de ce point 17.
Paolo Estivallet DE MESQUITA (Brésil): Avez-vous l'intention de reprendre le point 17 pour le finir maintenant? Parce que dans ce cas j'aurais peut-être quelques problèmes car des textes viennent d'être distribués et on a du mal à avoir des consultations.
LE PRESIDENT: Je n'ai pas l'intention de finir d'examiner. Simplement, il s'agit "d'acter" l'existence de ce texte sur lequel la Conférence devra se prononcer. Il s'agit d'une question de procédure, pas d'une question de vote. Si vous permettez, nous suspendrons, après avoir entendu le Japon. Si vous avez des objections nous reporterons ce point, si aucun des membres du Conseil ne soulève la moindre objection, sur la procédure qui sera proposée par le Comité et par le Président du Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques. Nous pourrons suivre les suggestions qui seront faites. Sinon, il est évident que l'on reportera ce point à demain. Mais je demanderais de poursuivre encore en écoutant l'Indonésie et le Japon avant de suspendre pour un temps bref la discussion de ce point particulièrement important pour notre ordre du jour.
Miss Ting WEN LIAN (Malaysia): Just a point of clarification; are we to understand that after Japan you intend to suspend this afternoon's work?
LE PRESIDENT: Je n'ai pas l'intention de suspendre les travaux, mais de les poser quelque peu et de continuer; mais il est vraisemblable que nous ne pourrons pas achever ce point avant demain matin, parce que nous avons de nombreux orateurs inscrits et nous devons terminer à une heure raisonnable pour des raisons que connaissent les représentants du Royaume de Suède. Je voudrais simplement dire que l'on va arriver à la moitié de la liste des orateurs inscrits, et nous écouterons les autres orateurs après la reprise du point 17 qui, je le souhaite, ne prendra pas beaucoup de temps.
Miss Ting WEN LIAN (Malaysia): If, as I think, you are suggesting that we just listen to three more speakers on this item and then proceed to start Item 17, my delegation would like to suggest that for the purpose of continuity we should finish the debate on this item before we go on to Item 17.
LE PRESIDENT: Je vous remercie de votre question. Je crois que le Président du Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques voudrait pouvoir intervenir maintenant. Il ne sera pas libre demain. Je crois que par déférence pour notre collègue et ami le Président du Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques, il faudrait que nous puissions voir de façon très claire ce que vous souhaitez. Peut-être puis-je demander à l'Ambassadeur Poulidès ses convenances et ses disponibilités. M. Poulides, Président du Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques, fait remarquer que nous avons interrompu ce matin l'examen du point 17 de façon à arriver à un consensus. Je crois qu'en ce qui concerne le point qui nous est soumis, c'est-à-dire le point 7, il serait souhaitable que l'on arrive, pour la procédure, à un consensus, après avoir entendu tous les membres du Conseil qui désirent intervenir et si j'ai proposé de m'arrêter après le Japon, c'est pour la simple raison que nous arrivons à la moitié des orateurs inscrits. Nous avons 22 orateurs inscrits, et le Japon est le onz ième intervenant.
Miss Ting WEN LIAN (Malaysia): My delegation would like to insist that we proceed with this item instead of having it by installments because this is just as important as the other items on the agenda.
LE PRESIDENT: Je ne conteste pas son importance alors dans ce cas, je demanderais au Président du Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques d'être ici demain matin à 9 heures 30 et nous allons poursuivre nos travaux que nous avons interrompus et qui concernent le point 17. Je m'excuse de cette interruption. Je crois qu'elle a été profitable, et nous allons maintenant poursuivre l'examen du point 7 en souhaitant une excellente soirée à l'Ambassadeur Poulidès et nous nous réjouissons de le revoir demain matin.
Doddy S. SUKADRI (Indonesia): I would like to join the other delegations in expressing our thanks to the Secretariat and to Mr Walton for the comprehensive and clear explanation of this matter.
My delegation followed with attention the forestry and forestry development as it relates significantly to the national, socio-economic and environmental development of the country. Indonesia has participated actively in the preparation and implementation of the Tropical Forestry Action Plan which later on was known as Tropical Forestry Action Programme. In this connection I would like once again to inform the Council that Indonesia has currently carried out an in-depth review and analysis of forestry sector development. Moreover intensive consultation with the relevant government and independent sectors, including NGOs, have already taken place.
My delegation wishes to inform the Council that the final draft resolution of national forestry action document will be discussed in the consultative meeting on Indonesia Forestry Action Programme to be held in Jakarta on the 11th and 12th of November, next week.
This meeting will be followed up by the Indonesian Tropical Forestry Programme Round Table Type 3, which is scheduled for 24-26 February 1992.
Mr Chairman, my delegation takes note of the outcome of the meeting on revamping the TFAP held in Geneva in March 1991 which was followed by the Paris consultation on TFAP on 13-14 September 1991. We are happy to note that the meetings have come to the consensus that the TFAP should be based on a national policy orientated multi- sectoral, multi-disciplinary approach to forest management, conservation and sustainable development, and involving greater participation of all relevant factors. However, my delegation does not see the need to duplicate the existing mechanism as we feel that the technical competence of FAO should continue to play the coordinating role for the Tropical Forests Action Programme.
To this end, we are open to explore further the subject under consideration, but particularly from the point of view of strengthening FAO's capacity.
Regarding the development of the TFAP, I have read with great attention Report CL 100/2. It is brief but clear. It shows the strong efforts that FAO should put in to follow up on the decision of the last Session of the Council.
Finally, what we need now is how to continue and strengthen our efforts for conservation, development and management of our forests.
With regard to the three options which are considered in document CL 100/2, my delegation has no doubt that there is only one option before us, and that is option C.
Vishu BHAGWAN (India): In the last Session of the Council we discussed the developments regarding the revamping of the Tropical Forests Action Plan and welcomed a shift from donor-driven to country-led initiatives. It was also noted that as many as 84 countries had completed the Programme exercises in this regard. However, there has been little progress in the implementation of these plans.
In the last Council we also examined the question of the creation of a Consultative Group on TFAP as if this was the key to speeding up the implementation of this programme. However, at that time, we felt that the idea needed to be further reviewed by a contact group as it was not certain as to what would be the functions of the proposed CG or what would be its constitution and how it would benefit the TFAP. Now the Report of the contact group has become available. Unfortunately, it had a short time at its disposal and the Report is incomplete. The contact group has only been able to identify the functions of the proposed consultative group.
My delegation feels that the Programme as it stands needs to be financially supported for an effective take-off. FAO is in a position to provide the requisite technical support in preparing, helping and implementing the programme, and the proposed CG will only be some kind of an unnecessary duplication.
My delegation appreciates the work of the Forestry Division in producing the very precise and succinct Report indicating possible alternatives. We support alternative (c) in paragraph 8 proposing further discussion to reach a final conclusion on the unresolved questions, and once it is finalized to reach a final decision. In the meanwhile, my delegation hopes that the implementation of the TFAP will be speeded up by the efforts of national governments.
Kiyoshi SAWADA (Japan): The issue of environmental development is one of the biggest concerns of my Government now, including a fund contribution. With regard to forestry, we advocate that it is highly important to pursue sustainable development with consideration on a natural ecosystem. Along these lines, we expect TFAP to be reviewed so as to step up its activities to encourage tropical forest countries to tackle conservation and sustainable development of their forests.
Regarding the three options reported by the Secretariat in identifying the new body, my Government would like to select (a) after due consideration. In particular, we hope that the Committee on Forest Development in the Tropics will provide us with a chance to have further consultation to debate this matter.
Choosing (c), it seems difficult to set ad hoc group meetings in the time schedule of the series of meetings to be held next June.
LE PRESIDENT: Je vous remercie de votre intervention. Le Japon a clairement pris position pour l'option a), option qui ne reçoit ni l'agrément ni le sponsorship, le parrainage, de la Banque mondiale et du PNUD. Avant de poursuivre la liste des orateurs, je voudrais donner lecture des intervenants. Nous sommes à la moitié des interventions. Il me reste sur la liste, Madagascar, Cap-Vert, Mexique, Canada, Congo, Australie, Etats-Unis, Trinité-et-Tobago, Pakistan, Royaume du Maroc, Argentine, Cuba et j'ai également deux observateurs.
Avant de passer à Madagascar, je voudrais, à l'intention du Conseil, vous expliquer pourquoi j'ai fait la proposition de suspendre un moment la discussion de ce point. Je crois que la demande qui a été faite par l'honorable Ambassadeur de la Malaisie provient du fait qu'elle n'était pas là ce matin, et nous avons suspendu la session ce matin en indiquant qu'elle serait reprise dans le courant de l'après-midi après une série de réunions qui ont abouti à un document. De toute façon, le temps dont nous disposerons pour l'examen de ce document sera d'autant plus grand que ce point ne sera pas examiné aujourd'hui mais demain matin. J'émets le voeu que durant la nuit, le document qui fait l'objet du classement, CL 100/2 qui est le texte unique proposé par le Président du Comité d'Etats Membres chargés d'examiner les amendements au texte fondamental de l'Organisation, puisse occuper une part importante de la nuit qui nous sépare de la prochaine séance plénière qui se tiendra demain matin à 9 heures 30. Maintenant, je me permets, compte tenu du nombre d'orateurs, de vous demander avec insistance le plus de concision possible, concision bien sûr alliée à la clarté en ce qui concerne les prises de position et les options choisies. Je voudrais passer la parole à l'honorable représentant de Madagascar.
Raphaël RABE (Madagascar): Ma délégation voudrait remercier M. Walton pour la présentation de ce sujet et associer nos remerciements au Département des forêts pour la préparation des documents qui nous sont soumis. Avant de traiter les éléments du document CL 100/2, ma délégation voudrait dire quelques mots à propos du PAFT rénové. Il me semble important de rappeler les dispositions de ce nouveau PAFT. Ce nouveau PAFT devra adopter une orientation basée sur la multi-disciplinarité et regrouper l'ensemble des secteurs considérés par le développement rural. Il devra renforcer les capacités nationales de planification et de développement dans le secteur forestier, promouvoir la coopération régionale et appuyer des mesures favorisant la participation active et effective des communautés rurales à la protection et à l'aménagement des ressources forestières.
Voilà des objectifs qui nous conviennent parfaitement et nous souhaitons vivement que l'on aille franchement de l'avant dans la mise en oeuvre de ce nouveau Programme. Nous sommes heureux de relever que le Programme de travail et budget 1992-93 prévoit d'accorder des ressources supplémentaires au Sous-Programme 2.3.1.5 traitant du PAFT. Malheureusement, le montant est assez faible; aussi faudrait-il d'autres contributions. La question primordiale qui se pose est donc de savoir comment sensibiliser les donateurs, comment mobiliser les fonds nécessaires à la mise en oeuvre de ce Programme. Nous aussi, nous sommes convaincus que ce n'est certainement pas par le canal du groupe consultatif qu'on y arrivera car, semble-t-il, ce groupe s'interdit de discuter de questions financières. Dans sa forme actuelle, en tout cas, le mandat assez flou qui est le sien lui ferait faire double emploi avec les services compétents de la FAO.
Aussi choisissons-nous, nous aussi, l'option c) du paragraphe 8 du document CL 100/2.
Aguinaldo LISBOA RAMOS (Cap-Vert): Je remercie M. Walton et le Secrétariat de l'exposé et des documents soumis à notre appréciation.
Je serai très bref à ce stade de la discussion. La délégation du Cap-Vert estime que le groupe de contact mis en place par le Conseil à sa quatre-vingt-dix-neuvième session a fait un bon travail quoique, par manque de temps, il n'ait pas réussi à analyser toutes les questions qui lui étaient soumises.
Cependant, nous considérons prématurée la création d'un groupe consultatif étant donné que le travail qu'il devrait accomplir pourra très bien être réalisé par l'appareil de coordination de la FAO, qui a l'expérience et la compétence voulues. La création d'un tel groupe entraînerait de doubles emplois, un gaspillage de fonds et l'affectation d'une expertise qui pourrait être utilisée à d'autres fins telles que des activités relatives aux forêts, à l'environnement, à l'agriculture durable, à la pêche, etc.
A notre avis, un groupe ad hoc doit être mis en place le plus tôt possible pour approfondir la réflexion et rendre compte à la réunion du Comité du Programme, en mai 1992. Nous appuyons donc la proposition c) du paragraphe 8 du document CL 100/2.
Elias REYES BRAVO (México): Después de varios años de iniciativas en muchos de los paises tropicales no se ha logrado detener la deforestación a nivel mundial. En virtud de esta grave situación, mi delegación puntualiza que México ha estado en un proceso de reformulación de su propio Programa de Acción Forestal Tropical, buscando mecanismos más efectivos y una orientación precisa de las estrategias que permitan el alcance de los objetivos a nivel nacional. En ese sentido, el enfoque del PAFT México parte de premisas especificas como las siguientes: ver al plan más que como un programa como un proceso continuo. El aspecto de las selvas no se reduce al forestal; los problemas sociales y económicos deben ser contemplados. Depositar en la gente local el futuro del manejo forestal, hacer que el sector forestal contribuya a satisfacer las necesidades de la población sin que este desarrollo comprometa los recursos para generaciones futuras.
Mi delegación desea expresar el interés, la importancia que ha concedido al PAFT. Estimamos que la FAO es el foro que puede alentar el proceso operativo y formal en torno del PAFT, y que a través de esta Organización debiera y pueden canalizarse mayores recursos para la ejecución del Programa de Acción Forestal. Sin embargo, consideramos que optando por la propuesta c) que nos presenta el documento, y teniendo como factor positivo el alentar un proceso de toma de decisión que nos llevase un poco más de tiempo, optamos por el inciso c) pero no negando la posibilidad de que si se llega a considerar estrictamente necesario reforzar un órgano ejecutivo, estaríamos considerando en ese mediano o largo plazo la posibilidad de un comité consultivo.
EL PRESIDENTE: México ha tomado su opción para el punto c) sin excluir el punto b), diciendo que se trata de un organismo ejecutivo que realmente es únicamente consultivo. Hay una pequeña contradicción, pero su opción parece ser la del punto c).
David DRAKE (Canada): The Canadian delegation would like to thank Mr Walton for his helpful and clear introduction to this item.
At the last Council session, Canada joined many other nations in emphasizing the importance of renewing the TFAP, the need for transforming it into a country-led process and the requirement for an improved coordination, information and monitoring function. In the interests of brevity, we would like to simply re-affirm our statement to this effect made at the June Council, and concentrate primarily in this session on the issue on which the Council's guidance is being sought, that is the choice of how the FAO should proceed from this point onwards.
As the Secretariat has outlined, since the Council last met there have been important developments relating to the TFAP which issued from the meeting in Paris, this September. If we may characterize the process until now in broad terms, the Geneva meeting established a consensus for the necessity of a consultative mechanism. The meeting in Paris in turn helped define functions for such an entity. A significant proportion of the concerns expressed when this Council last met have therefore been addressed.
While questions of composition and access of such a forum still remain to be ironed out, we believe that these can be fully accommodated within the context of a consultative framework. Canada respects the views of those Member States which may retain concerns over the workings of a consultative mechanism. Our main concern is to see that the momentum of the Geneva and Paris meetings is not lost and that the positive dialogue on tropical forestry is continued, without risking further slippage in resolving critical ongoing problems with the TFAP.
The future of TFAP is currently in the balance. In the view of our delegation therefore, this Council must focus first and foremost on maintaining and building the level of development activities for country-led tropical forest management in the developing nations delivered through the TFAP framework.
Council Members recognize that donor confidence is key to revitalizing the TFAP and needs to be swiftly re-established.
We are confident that the prompt creation of a consultative forum would lead rapidly to increased donor confidence, as emphasized by various Member States at the last Council session.
The choices before us are clear. It is equally apparent to this Council that this Council will be an important turning-point for the TFAP. We submit therefore that it is essential that the TFAP process not falter at this stage. In our view, the most effective and timely way of continuing the dialogue is through a consultative forum.
The Canadian delegation is not overly comfortable with the wording of any of the three options contained in document CL 100/2. Nevertheless, our strong desire for the rapid establishment of a consultative forum generally conforms to option (b). Given the choice before us in this document, we strongly recommend that the Council endorse this option. As one of the foremost bilateral tropical forestry donors, Canada intends to participate fully and actively in a consultative forum. Canada strongly encourages the FAO to do likewise. The inability of the FAO to participate in a consultative forum would diminish the impact of the forum. Conversely, as such a mechanism may well be formed whether or not the FAO participates in it, the absence of the FAO would diminish the role and influence of the FAO in tropical forestry across-the-board. This is not a desirable outcome.
My delegation would like to take this occasion to reiterate our view that if the FAO is to maintain a leadership role in the TFAP, the organization must demonstrate institutional commitment to the TFAP. An important measure of such commitment would be a regularization of the TFAP planning framework as well as coordination and funding mechanisms within the regular FAO structure. The present status of the TFAP as primarily a trust fund-generated exercise needs to be revisited. In our view this means establishing a better balance between extrabudgetary and regular funding. We encourage the Secretariat to consider all ways and means of integrating TFAP more fully within the Organization.
In summary, Mr Chairman, the Canadian delegation would like to reaffirm its commitment to the TFAP process and the FAO's role as a co-sponsor of the TFAP. We strongly support moving promptly toward the formation of a consultative forum in which FAO should play an effective role. FAO's participation in a consultative forum should be seen as a critical step in strengthening both the TFAP process and the activities which take place within the TFAP framework for the conservation and sustainable development of tropical forest resources of developing nations.
CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much for your intervention. Your preference goes to option (b).
Joseph TCHICAYA (Congo): Je voudrais tout d'abord remercier M. Walton de son exposé introductif fort instructif.
Mon pays, qui est partie prenante du PAFT, suit avec la plus grande attention l'évolution de ce Programme sur lequel nous avons fondé beaucoup d'espoirs. Il faut cependant reconnaître que, jusqu'ici, nos espoirs n'ont pas été comblés. Les engagements de contribution pris n'ont, hélas, pas été tenus. La Consultation de Paris, en raison sans doute de sa brièveté, n'a pas permis aux participants d'examiner toutes les questions en suspens. Il est dommage, par ailleurs, que davantage d'Etats forestiers tropicaux n'aient pas pu prendre part aux travaux de cette Consultation. Aussi sommes-nous en faveur de l'option c), étant entendu que la participation des pays forestiers tropicaux devrait être plus large et que ce groupe devrait se pencher sur toutes les questions relatives au renforcement du PAFT en tenant compte des résultats positifs des réunions précédentes.
Le Congo serait disposé à participer à un tel groupe ad hoc et nous ferons tout pour que la FAO continue à jouer un rôle de tout premier plan dans la mise en oeuvre du PAFT.
LE PRESIDENT: Le Congo a pris position en faveur de l'option c), rejoignant la position prise par la Thaïlande, en demandant une représentation élargie.
Leslie ROSS BROWNHALL (Australia): With its comparatively small involvement in TFAP, Australia has not been a major participant in the reformulation process. We have, however, followed the debate with great interest as a potential supporter of the Programme and as a country with considerable interest and accumulated expertise in tropical forestry. We have consistently supported the need for an effective TFAP.
The recent review of TFAP has provided the key to re-establishing this programme as a dynamic force for development. The fate of the programme now is fundamentally in the hands of the three remaining sponsors, of whom FAO is an indispensable member, and the participating governments.
Within the last twelve months, the sponsors and governments meeting together with NGOs have proposed the formation of a Consultative Group or Forum, and as recently as September, agreed on the definition of functions for such a Forum.
It would be most unfortunate at this critical stage if the momentum is lost. We fully recognize that there are many important issues that remain to be resolved. However, in our view it is of vital importance to keep the three sponsors working together to provide leadership in the further development of this programme. In this connection, we urge the FAO to spare no efforts in working together with other sponsors towards this end.
Australia believes that on balance sufficient has been agreed between all parties to enable a start to be made with the creation of the new Forum or mechanism, with any unresolved questions to be resolved by consultation as and when they arise. This is clearly not an ideal way in which to proceed but in our view is better than the alternative options put forward in document CL 100/2.
In summary, the Australian delegation: supports the formulation of functions for the proposed "Consultative Forum" as drafted at the Paris Consultation, 13-14 September 1991; hopes that the momentum and focus of current activity can be maintained; and, in order to best achieve this, we support option (b) as outlined in paragraph 8 of Council document CL 100/2. This involves the creation of a new mechanism on the basis of the Paris Consultation and the results of the Geneva Meeting of 6-8 March 1991. This would also ensure the continued involvement of the World Bank and the UNDP. The other options, while possibly more transparent, are less attractive because they are open-ended and inconclusive.
Therefore, we recommend the Council gives its support to option (b) and encourage the Secretariat to participate actively with other sponsors in the creation of the new forum.
David JOSLYN (United States of America): To begin with I would like also to join other delegations in thanking Mr Walton for his presentation of this theme, and for the very positive efforts he has made towards bringing this issue to a satisfactory close. I might add that from my point of view, as with the last Council meeting, Mr Walton displays the clearest view in the House. The United States favours a forum using the definition of functions that emerged from the recent meetings in Paris and Geneva hosted by the co-founders of the TFAP. Repeatedly, the United States has urged the co-sponsors - the UNDP, World Bank and FAO - to establish this forum and we again express our conviction that the FAO should participate in such a forum as soon as it is formed. In addition, we would choose to trust those three co-founders to ensure all interests are represented sufficiently in this forum, and if the FAO Secretariat feels it needs further advice on this matter we are ready to participate in any mechanism to provide this advice. It is our opinion that procedural issues affecting the operating methods of the consultative forum should be addressed by the forum itself and should not occupy this Council or Conference.
As we see it, the mission of a broadly representative consultative forum is to increase the level of investment on the ground in countries managing their tropical forests for the benefit of citizens in this and succeeding generations. Increased investment on the ground can occur most rapidly when the TFAP efforts are credible and of high quality. We feel that the consultative forum should help developing countries to achieve this by providing support and acknowledgement of country-led TFAP exercises which are of high quality, innovative and participatory. FAO should be pleased with the overall success of the basic mission of TFAP to raise awareness of the economic and ecological importance of tropical forests. Having successfully completed that phase of the TFAP, FAO should concentrate on assisting countries to build institutional capacity for the better stewardship of forests, more capability in tropical silviculture, regeneration of degraded lands, better analytical skills and other aspects of tropical forest management.
In summary, the United States, therefore, is of the firm opinion that FAO should join with the UNDP and the World Bank in the establishment of the Tropical Forestry Consultative Forum as per option (b), consulting with members from the FAO Governing Bodies again if major issues arise.
We know the participation of tropical countries is essential to the proposed forum. It is our firm hope and belief that by that time the forum actually is convened, most, if not all, tropical countries will see the advantages of participating in this forum.
Winston RUDDER (Trinidad and Tobago): Given the lateness of the hour I hope my intervention will be as clear and concise as the document we have before us so that we do not all fall asleep.
The basic concerns we have with respect to the TFAP, whether it is Mark 1 or Mark 2, relate to the interminably long time period and the ever-receding time horizon between diagnosis, analysis, execution and implementation of identified projects. In that regard we regret, notwithstanding Mr Walton's remarks in his introductory statement, the fact that the momentum of the TFAP has been sometimes stymied by an institutional reform process which has itself taken the better part of a
year. Notwithstanding, in anticipation of the possibility and the potential that this new mechanism may provide greater access to increased and unimpeded flows of resources based on the confidence of the donor community and so enable the implementation of the programmes already developed and now lying on shelves in developing countries, we support the call for continuing dialogue. However, there must be consultation amongst the major co-sponsors with in-depth participation by the tropical countries themselves in how that forum should be developed and what are its operational arrangements. In that regard, therefore, we are inclined to support the comments and views shared by others in support of option (c).
In doing so, however, we want to endorse the comments and views which referred to the need for a strengthened and broader role by FAO in the provision of technical support, policy advice and general technical guidance to the activities of the TFAP. We also share the views of those who argue that the tropical countries themselves in any arrangement should have a greater role in respect of the overall governance of the TFAP process.
S. NAJMUS-SAQIB (Pakistan): Document CL 100/2 is a concise document and indicates what has been and what could not be achieved at the Paris Consultation on the TFAP. The conclusions are important and objective, but they did not cover all the aspects of the issue. We feel this has to be developed further. The areas that remain uncovered need to be examined. However, my delegation strongly supports option (c) in paragraph 8 of document CL 100/2.
Without going into detail, some points need to be made, however. First, the very composition of any fundamental Consultative Group needs to be approached with a degree of caution. It must always reflect the majority from the beneficiary countries or governments. We feel that this is important, and may tend to solve many of the problems outlined today.
Second, transparency of funds must also be necessary: the sources of fund should be visible and clearly indicated.
Third, duplication of effort between the consultative group and FAO should be avoided. The consultative group should be based in Rome. It should function only in a broad-based advisory capacity and should largely rely on the FAO. When it undertakes this role, FAO should be morally, materially and financially supported.
Notwithstanding the above observations, we concede that these possibilities can be explored within the overall exercise proposed to be carried out under option (c), paragraph 8 of the said document. We conclude by stating that all countries have a right to use their sovereign forest resources as they see fit. However, we also have a duty to our own future generations to manage these forests in a sustainable manner, and I am sure each country is working towards this end.
Abdesselera ARIFI (Maroc): Je me réjouis tout d'abord de la présentation qui a été faite de ce point par M. Walton, assez concise et complète.
Je me joins à mon collègue de Madagascar pour exprimer ma satisfaction quant à la place donnée par la FAO aux forêts dans le cadre de ses priorités, même si les montants alloués au titre du prochain biennum sont loin de permettre à l'Organisation de faire face aux besoins sans cesse croissants des pays en voie de développement en la matière.
S'agissant du PAFT, ma délégation estime que la meilleure façon de permettre à celui-ci de rénover, d'aller de l'avant, serait de permettre aux divers coparrains de ce Programme de participer pleinement aux différentes étapes de son processus. Pour cela, ma délégation retient l'option c) qui nous est présentée et espère que la FAO ne ménagera aucun effort pour ce faire.
Mustapha-Menouar SINACEUR (Maroc): Je ne pensais pas réellement intervenir et je voudrais juste ajouter un point à la déclaration de mon collègue.
Je voudrais dire que les pays en développement non tropicaux, notamment les pays méditerranéens, d'Afrique du Nord et du Proche-Orient, ont souvent déploré dans cette enceinte qu'un programme semblable au PAFT n'ait pas encore été conçu et mis en oeuvre pour cette région. Les représentants forestiers l'ont aussi fait savoir au sein de la commission forestière du Proche-Orient et de Sylvaméditerranéa, les deux organes statutaires de la FAO traitant spécifiquement des questions forestières de cette région.
Une référence à un programme forestier méditerranéen a été faite à l'occasion du dixième Congrès forestier mondial à Paris et figure exclusivement dans la Déclaration de Paris approuvée par le Congrès.
Nous savons que la FAO travaille actuellement à la formulation d'un tel programme et que le document correspondant sera présenté à la prochaine réunion de Sylvaméditerranéa en mars 1992 au Portugal. Les pays de la région ne peuvent que s'en réjouir. Ma délégation pense refléter les aspirations de ceux-ci en souhaitant que ce programme forestier méditerranéen soit finalisé au plus vite et puisse servir à renforcer les actions nationales de développement et de conservation des forêts et accroître l'appui de la communauté internationale à ceux-ci.
Ce programme d'action forestier méditerranéen pourrait bénéficier de l'expérience accumulée par les pays tropicaux dans la mise en oeuvre du PAFT et devenir ainsi rapidement opérationnel et efficace.
J'ai eu l'honneur de faire cette déclaration au nom de la délégation de l'Algérie, de la Tunisie ainsi que du Maroc bien entendu.
LE PRESIDENT: Je remercie M. Sinaceur pour la déclaration faite au nom du Maghreb.
Jesús SABRA (Argentina): Es intención de mi pais agradecerle, en primer lugar, al Sr. Walton por la introducción que ha hecho al tema y, al mismo tiempo, señalar el apoyo que le asigna nuestro pais al Programa de Acción para los Bosques Tropicales. En este orden de ideas, desde la última reunión del Consejo, en nuestro pais se ha creado la unidad de seguimiento del PAFT y la designación del coordinador nacional, asi como también la
reciente creación de la Dirección de Recursos Forestales. Esto demuestra el interés vivo de nuestro país en todo lo que se refiere a los recursos forestales.
En relación a la consulta, nuestra delegación apoya la opción c), ya que la misma permitirá asegurar la plena participación de los países con bosques tropicales, y a través de esta intervención se logrará un proceso decisorio basado en una mayor participación y en una mayor transparencia en la toma de decisiones.
Quiero ser breve para, atento a lo avanzado de la reunión, aclarar simplemente esta opción.
Srta. Ana María NAVARRO (Cuba): Agradecemos la presentación del documento CL 100/2 realizada por el Sr. Walton y que se refiere a las novedades en relación con el PAFT. No sé si recordará, señor Presidente, que mi delegación, en ocasión del 99° Consejo de la FAO, planteó sus preocupaciones ante la creación de este nuevo mecanismo o grupo consultivo, el cual, después de la consulta de París, se denominaría Foro Consultivo. La delegación de Cuba hizo diversas preguntas a la Secretaría sobre la composición, funciones y mandato de este Foro, cuestión que, por lo visto, no pudo ser resuelta en París.
No se trata de que en estos momentos seamos pesimistas u optimistas, como algunos lo han catalogado; se trata de encarar y definir la utilidad y necesaria creación de un nuevo mecanismo; se trata de que son los otros copatrocinadores los más interesados en crearlo. Por otro lado, algunos piensan que están de más las consultas actuales a los países miembros del Consejo de la FAO, pues hay que actuar rápidamente para que los fondos no se diluyan y los donantes no pierdan interés. En este sentido, la delegación de Canadá se refirió a que desde Ginebra se han atendido diversas expectativas.
Es por ello que opinamos que otras consultas formales o informales no está de más realizarlas, en aras de profundizar y estar convencidos de que sus funciones no podrían ser ejecutadas dentro de las estructuras de coordinación existentes en la FAO. Se nos ha insistido mucho en que el PAFT no es propiedad de la FAO, pero opinamos sinceramente que, sin embargo, la FAO ha representado un puntal importante en la aplicación del PAFT en nuestros países y ha garantizado el necesario equilibrio en las preferencias de los donantes y ante las necesidades y solicitudes que nuestros países han realizado a lo largo de estos años; muchas veces, sin esperanzas, por la falta de recursos.
Todos los bosques, en todos los países en desarrollo, necesitan la cooperación internacional para su manejo, conservación y desarrollo sostenible. Por ello, nos preocupa que el debate institucional desvíe la atención de los otros tipos de bosques de los países en desarrollo.
Mi país siempre ha mostrado especial interés en el PAFT y reiteramos nuestra simpatía por su reforzamiento. Si se plantea que este mecanismo se haga y que a la larga será útil a nuestros países, estamos en disposición de analizar las cosas profundizándolas. Por ello, hacemos un llamado a los otros copatrocinadores - a saber, el Banco Mundial y el PNUD - para que
atiendan estas preocupaciones, que estamos seguros de que no estamos haciéndolo en vano.
Por último, para que este mecanismo sea legítimo, debe tener una más amplia participación y debe respetar los objetivos actuales que rigen el PAFT. Mi delegación desea expresar la preocupación que ya ha sido planteada por otras delegaciones. Nos referimos a que los países en desarrollo tienen que asegurar que su soberanía no pueda verse amenazada por esta nueva propuesta, por lo que opinamos que los países en desarrollo deben participar activamente en los debates que afectan al futuro de su soberanía sobre sus recursos forestales.
José Eduardo MENDES FERRAO (Portugal): Je voudrais simplement faire une petite réflexion.
Le concept de forêts tropicales comprend un ensemble très vaste de situations diverses de forêts. Il y a non seulement la forêt équatoriale ou forêt des pluies, mais aussi d'autres types de forêt bien différents comme la forêt ouverte ou la forêt xérophytique ou même les régions de forêt où les arbres n'existent plus.
Les problèmes d'aménagement des forêts de différents types sont bien diversifiés.
Pour mieux s'adapter aux différentes situations, nous considérons indispensable de mettre en commun l'expérience et la compétence des techniciens de tous les pays. Les problèmes sont si nombreux, et même ceux d'ordre technique ne sont pas complètement éclaircis.
La coopération internationale est aujourd'hui indispensable, dans le respect total, bien entendu, de la souveraineté des Etats.
La réunion de Paris n'a pas donné la possibilité d'aborder tous les aspects liés aux forêts tropicales et la délégation portugaise exprime l'opinion que des consultations, avec la collaboration de tous les pays, devront continuer, et que la suggestion présentée à l'alinéa c) est une bonne solution.
Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Estamos de acuerdo, señor Presidente, con algunos aspectos positivos de las declaraciones del Reino Unido y Portugal. Apoyamos plenamente las posiciones de Brasil, Cabo Verde, Congo y Cuba. Opción c). Y, pleno apoyo a la labor excelente del Departamento de Montes.
Ralph SCHMIDT (UNDP): Mr Chairman, Mr Walton's very precise and brilliant introduction reminds me of something I heard a couple of weeks ago about optimists and pessimists. The optimist says this is the best of all possible worlds and the pessimist said yes, I am afraid you are right.
Perhaps we can bring the pessimist and the optimist together here, but I must confess that after listening to the debate I am not sure how useful my intervention can be at this point. It is clear that there are various priorities represented in this room. They include national sovereignty, quality of programmes, funding, sustainability. But it would seem to me that all delegates could support all of these priorities.
Perhaps we should look for some common ground. The co-sponsors have worked intensively for more than a year to develop clear recommendations on the future management of the TFAP. There have been wide and continuous consultations in March, April, June and September. Now the co-sponsors have been and are in basic agreement on their recommendations.
However, distinguished delegates, we have not been able to achieve a consensus here. After more than a year of discussing principle and process it is urgent that we move ahead to specific substantial matters. There is a critical need to review the framework within which funds can flow to deserving national forest programmes.
UNDP is on record, as are the other co-sponsors, as favouring the creation of the consultative forum. However, it does not seem to me that the UNDP can go ahead with any kind of formation of a consultative forum with the lack of support that we have heard today, which I believe is all of the tropical and developing countries who have spoken. The forum being envisaged was completely flexible and informal. It in no way pre-empts the UNCED process which could change or modify our working arrangements.
Obviously, UNDP is closely associated with and fully supports UNCED. Obviously, we all need to continue to work to facilitate funding and the effectiveness of forest programmes for the complex and comprehensive discussions of UNCED progress.
I would ask the delegates to consider very carefully where this will leave us if we cannot come to an agreement here this week. It is not the desire of UNDP that funding support for TFAP programmes diminish, but it is my personal view that that is what will happen. Also, I think it is unlikely that an ad hoc group created by the FAO Council will be able to integrate and fully assure the participation of all of the various UN bodies and agencies, not just the co-sponsors who have an interest in TFAP. These organizations, I would respectfully remind you, are waiting, and our view is that they are ready to join in a cooperative effort.
N'Dinga ASSITAU (Observateur de l'Alliance mondiale pour la nature): Nous vous remercions de nous avoir permis de nous exprimer ici et maintenant. Nos remerciements vont également à l'endroit de M. Walton pour son exposé introductif. L'Alliance mondiale pour la nature est impliquée dans le PAFT depuis que cette idée a été conçue. Elle considère le PAFT comme instrument international pertinent de coordination des actions en faveur de la gestion rationnelle des forêts tropicales. Cependant, comme nombre d'organisations non gouvernementales, nous avons critiqué le PAFT mais, en vue, essentiellement, d'améliorer ses performances. Et les nouvelles lignes directrices élaborées actuellement dans ce sens répondent à nos préoccupations. Tout en souhaitant la constitution d'un groupe ou d'une structure où toutes les parties pourraient discuter avec efficacité de la mise en oeuvre du PAFT, nous pensons aussi qu'il serait dommageable pour des pays qui participent actuellement au PAFT que les débats actuels achoppent sur la constitution du groupe consultatif. Nous voudrions rappeler à cet égard que le PAFT semble, ou parait à certains d'entre nous, comme un mirage. Pour nous permettre d'avancer, nous souhaiterions que les débats sur la constitution d'une structure où toutes les parties pourraient discuter de la mise en oeuvre du PAFT, se tiennent dans le cadre d'un Comité ad hoc qui pourrait être mis en place dans les meilleurs délais et
lequel pourrait, dans la mesure du possible, commencer à travailler d'ores et déjà à la définition et à l'attribution dudit groupe.
LE PRESIDENT: Merci de votre intervention. Je crois que nous arrivons au terme du débat général, tant des membres du Conseil que des observateurs, et je voudrais immédiatement passer la parole à M. Walton pour répondre aux questions posées et tenter de dégager une synthèse.
Declan WALTON (Special Assistant to the Director-General): If there were to be a vote now I am sure that Option (c) would carry the day. However, I am afraid that if we were to follow that course we would risk losing certain very important factors. The TFAP is a very strange piece of international machinery and in part it is held together with that mysterious element that I can only call confidence. We have heard expressions of lack of confidence in one aspect another today. I think this creates a difficult and dangerous situation for the future of the TFAP and for the role of FAO in it.
It seems to me that creating an ad hoc group to simply go on grinding out these endless discussions on institutional arrangements is going to be an essentially arid procedure whereas what the world is really concerned about is substance. The developing countries are concerned because the TFAP has so far not really delivered the goods. The TFAP has been enormously influenced by the forestry advisories group which consists essentially of the advisors of the donor programmes but even this has not resulted in a flow of resources to the tropical forest countries that could be considered satisfactory by anybody. This has been disclosed in all the reviews that have been made of the TFAP by any source. I seem to remember from much younger days that a London bank had a procedure for marking checks that were not properly drawn up, they wrote on the top "Words and figures do not agree" and I am afraid this has sometimes been the case in the TFAP. The NGOs for their part have many valid points to make about the TFAP starting with the fact the problems of the forest cannot be tackled just by foresters but do need to be looked at in a much broader economic and social context and this has been emphasized by many people on many occasions, including, for example, the remark by the representative for Brazil who drew attention to the much broader aspects that affect this.
Conclusion: can we not create at this session of the Council an ad hoc group on the TFAP with several responsibilities to thrash out the institutional issues that we have been debating and carry it forward but also with the license from the Council to take up and discuss certain matters of substance that could be proposed either by developing countries or by developed countries or perhaps by NGOs and that need to be debated if the TFAP is to be carried forward more effectively in the future than it has been in the past. The ad hoc group could also look at the implications for FAO and the TFAP of the conclusions of the evaluation that has just been started of the multi-donor trust fund on the TFAP. It could look at the possible implications for the TFAP of what is shaping up in the UNCED process. There are a lot of things going on right now that need to be taken into account and for which FAO does not have a piece of machinery and the international community does not have a piece of machinery that really can bring all this together and look at it in a sensible way.
The representative of Malaysia, if I understood her correctly, supported Option (c) provided that it was in the broader context of looking at what she called the governance of the TFAP. I hope I understood her correctly on that. Perhaps that could be understood, but the ad hoc group would be looking at this broader context also on the future of the TFAP.
If this course of action were acceptable to the Council it would be vitally important to try to attract the support and adhesion of the other co-sponsors of the other UN agencies interested in this and of the nongovernmental organizations, otherwise we shall continue endlessly turning in a vacuum. We shall be creating in the universe yet another black hole from which no light escapes. This then would be my suggestion, which I confess I have not had any chance to discuss with anybody, including of course my colleagues on the podium here but which does seem to me to be a valid way forward for FAO to pursue in the present situation. The Council would need to decide on the membership of the ad hoc group, which I think everybody would wish to be broad and not restricted in nature. There would need to be a decision-making process so that the agenda of the ad hoc group could be worked out, and not just imposed by either FAO or the other co-sponsors or anybody else and we would need to look at the logistic and physical arrangements for carrying such an exercise forward expeditiously and I must emphasize if we are not to lose more confidence than we have already lost this has to be done with a real feeling of urgency even if we know that the conclusions are not going to be reached immediately. This is going to be a process extending over several months but it should be started as soon as possible so that we could show the world that we mean business and that FAO is not dragging its feet on TFAP or the tropical forests.
LE PRESIDENT: Je crois également qu'il résulte du débat que la plupart des intervenants, et en tout cas une grande majorité de ceux-ci, se sont prononcés pour l'option c) Création d'un groupe ad hoc. Il n'y a pas de contradiction totale, que certains ont exprimé leur préférence pour le groupe c) tout en n'excluant pas totalement la solution b).
De toutes façons celle-ci est extrêmement vague: forum consultatif, groupe consultatif... Je crois que l'on peut créer des groupes consultatifs à l'infini. Ce qu'il faut, c'est un groupe. La formule présentée par la Thaïlande et rejointe par le Brésil d'élargir la participation à ce groupe permettrait non pas de se réfugier dans des éléments de procédure, ce qui me parait extrêmement dangereux pour un groupe, mais de définir le mandat de sa mission, c'est-à-dire ce que doit faire le Plan d'action forestier tropical. Ce groupe doit également, dès le départ, se fixer des délais. Lorsqu'on est tenu par certains délais, on arrive plus facilement à un accord, on finit par trouver un dénominateur commun.
Sans être un spécialiste en la matière, je propose donc, comme vient de le faire M. Walton, de retenir la création de ce groupe ad hoc en l'élargissant, en essayant de définir son mandat et en essayant de se mettre rapidement d'accord sur les délais à respecter pour les différentes étapes, de façon à se hâter - se hâter lentement, mais de manière raisonnable.
Ce groupe ad hoc ne doit pas être essentiellement un groupe de procédure. Il doit au contraire avoir comme seule ambition de renforcer le Plan d'action forestier tropical qui est en cours d'exécution et qui ne dispose certainement pas des moyens financiers nécessaires. Il faut étudier les différentes approches possibles pour le renforcer et ce groupe ad hoc pourrait, en suivant l'option c), effectuer ce renforcement.
Il est important de savoir ce que nous proposons à la Conférence. Nous avons examiné ce point avec une attention particulière et je remercie tous les membres du Conseil d'avoir bien voulu étudier ce document, qui est heureusement un document très court mais substantiel, et d'avoir eu le courage de choisir une option claire, ce qui permettra d'aller de l'avant en créant ce groupe ad hoc, lequel devra veiller à ne pas se cantonner dans des questions de procédure. En effet, lorsqu'on ne veut pas aborder un certain nombre de problèmes, on se réfugie dans la procédure et, une fois que l'on entame des réunions de procédure, on ne les termine jamais.
Ce qu'il faut, c'est définir le mandat de ce groupe, ses objectifs et, en fonction de ces objectifs, fixer un certain nombre de délais.
David JOSLYN (United States of America): My desire is to ask a couple of questions of Mr Walton. The description that you laid out for the ad hoc group which you are proposing frankly sounds very much like Option (c) to me. I see no differences unless, of course, there are some aspects of it that would make it different from Option (c).
I have a couple of questions in that regard. In your mind, would the ad hoc group include representatives of Non-Governmental Organizations? That is one question.
The second question is: in your proposal, are you proposing that this ad hoc group be a jointly co-sponsored ad hoc group of UNDP, the World Bank and FAO? Or was your proposal to invite the other co-chairmen to join and leave the participation up to them? Could you be more clear on that?
Then, Mr Chairman, maybe you could tell us how you want to proceed. I would hate to see this essentially closed off at this point. Maybe you would give us some time to think about it over the evening, just some suggestion as to how you think we should proceed, after Mr Walton has answered those questions.
Declan WALTON (Special Assistant to the Director-General): The principal difference, as I see it, from Option (c), is that in our wording in the document we have simply proposed a group to handle institutional issues. What I am suggesting is that this group extends its scope to look at substantive issues that are currently of concern within the TFAP. The group would be given a rather wide mandate, in my view, to look at such issues - not just institutional questions but questions of substance relating to the TFAP as a whole.
As an example, I would mention perhaps methodologies. It seems to me that while at one level there may be concern about a too intimate discussion of national plans, that nations will welcome a discussion through such a forum of the methodologies that they might be able to apply in certain areas of
designing their own national plans. I am not suggesting that as an item; I am just giving it as the sort of thing that could be discussed. So therefore beyond institutions.
As far as NGOs are concerned, the Council cannot legislate the participation of NGOs in a body. It can only invite them to come in. I believe that it would be extremely useful to have a number of NGOs participating in such a group, but it might have to be left to the group itself to issue the invitations.
Again, as far as the co-sponsorship by the UNDP and the World Bank is concerned, as the representative of the UNDP said, we have toiled together for just about a year now, and although outside parties have detected divisions amongst us, these divisions have been far more visible to the outside world than they were to me. I thought we got on extremely well and that we managed to solve all our problems and to work in complete harmony.
I would hope that this could be continued and that UNDP and the World Bank would, as an optimal scenario, co-sponsor such a group, if that is constitutionally feasible, or at the very least participate fully in the work of the group which I would see as central to the evolution of the TFAP.
LE PRESIDENT: Je répondrai, bien sûr, à l'ancien président du CPA, qui a posé une question extrêmement pertinente concernant le but de ce groupe ad hoc: définir un groupe ad hoc par rapport à un comité informel. Nous avons quand même une vaste expérience des comités informels. Il y en a certains qui, magnifiquement dirigés, aboutissent à des solutions qui rencontrent un très large agrément. Que l'on baptise ce groupe "groupe ad hoc" ou "comité informel", cela n'a pas d'importance. Ce qui me semble important, c'est que l'on ne confie pas uniquement à ce groupe ad hoc ou ce groupe informel des tâches de procédure mais un certain nombre de tâches de fond.
Il ne nous appartient pas de préjuger de la poursuite des travaux de ce groupe ad hoc. C'est lui-même qui devra établir son mandat, se fixer des délais et décider qui il devra inviter. C'est au sein du groupe ad hoc qu'il faudra trouver, dans une compréhension mutuelle, les formules les plus opérationnelles et les plus aptes à permettre de répondre aux questions qui se posent. Ces questions sont en partie d'ordre technique; elles sont également d'ordre financier. Comment, compte tenu de l'expérience acquise jusqu'à présent dans le cadre du Plan d'action forestier tropical, tracer la voie future?
J'ai dit que l'on en parlerait au cours de la Conférence, mais il est clair que, dans le cadre de la discussion sur le Programme de travail et budget, un certain nombre de délégués aborderont ce problème. Il appartient maintenant au Conseil de savoir quel mandat il doit donner à la FAO, qui doit jouer un rôle extrêmement important au sein de ce groupe ad hoc ou comité informel, en espérant que le PNUD et la Banque mondiale continueront de participer à ce groupe. Ils y participeront d'autant plus facilement, j'en suis convaincu, que l'on pourra se mettre d'accord au sein de ce groupe sur son mandat et ses objectifs - et si possible, sur des lignes qui ne soient pas contraignantes. Il faut faire preuve d'énormément de souplesse. La procédure selon laquelle le groupe pourrait faire rapport au Comité du programme en mai 1992 laisserait largement le temps au groupe
ad hoc de se structurer, de faire un certain nombre d'expériences, de lancer peut-être un certain nombre d'invitations et d'envisager le type de dialogue à entamer.
De nombreux pays ont exprimé leur souci de voir respecter leur souveraineté. Il est important que ce principe soit sauvegardé au sein de ce groupe mais il est fort possible que le dialogue qui se nouera soit un dialogue constructif, dans l'intérêt de tous.
Avant d'achever le débat, je voudrais donner la parole au représentant du Programme des Nations Unies pour le développement de façon à ce qu'il nous fasse connaître sa réaction.
Ralph SCHMIDT (UNDP): In September a year ago, Hollis Murray very ably headed up the Secretariat to the Committee on Forestry which made this exact same recommendation as far as I can hear. We had an ad hoc group to look at a number of institutional and substantive issues. That was the group that reported from Geneva in March and the Report and Recommendations of that group are being largely rejected here. If we are to maintain any credibility that we are moving forward to the outside world, we will need to differentiate very carefully now what we are doing now that is different from what we did fifteen months ago.
John MACHIN (United Kingdom): The questions posed by my American colleague were probably in the minds of everyone in the room, not least those of us who put forward their preference for option (c). I must admit that as you yourself, Mr Chairman, began to describe the kind of option you foresaw, I became more confused in trying to differentiate it from what Mr Walton had said, and wondered why perhaps the more substantive issues - which I thoroughly agree with him should be addressed - were perhaps not reflected in that option. Nevertheless, that is water under the bridge.
There are a number of important principles in the establishment of the ad hoc group. First, it must have a wider membership. Second, this Council set its agenda and especially timetable. It cannot be an open-ended process - we should set a number of signposts. The first is the meeting in December of the Committee on Forest Development in the Tropics; the second is the UNCED PrepCom IV in March; and the third is the Programme Committee meeting in May. It is also important in our view that the new group works closely with the UNCED process and possibly reports to UNCED. We must be clear, Mr Chairman, on to whom the group will be responsible and to whom it should report.
I very much agree with what the representative of the UNDP has just said. I would like to make the suggestion, which my delegation would certainly find very helpful in order to reflect on your helpful suggestions, and particularly the crucial points of the UNDP representative, that perhaps the Secretariat could put together a brief piece of paper that we could look at tomorrow, on the basis of which the Council could take a decision, because certainly we need, as my American colleague suggested, to reflect overnight.
Declan WALTON (Special Assistant to the Director-General): I do not think it is at all correct that the findings in March have been rejected here. On the contrary, the most significant findings in the most extensive part of the March Report have been accepted and adopted and passed into the general consensus on the future of the TFAP. It is only on certain aspects of institutional issue, which was only one paragraph in the Geneva March Report, that these problems and doubts have arisen.
Furthermore, I would point out that the March meeting was a group of individual experts, it was not a group of governments, whereas now we are at the stage where we have to have governments expressing their views, not individuals.
LE PRESIDENT: Il y a une chose importante, c'est que le groupe ad hoc sera composé de membres responsables de la FAO et définira lui-même les termes de sa mission. Je n'écarte pas la possibilité de tirer la synthèse demain en début de session à 9 heures 30, mais je crois qu'il ne faut pas s'enfermer dans un cadre ni dans un texte rigide qui serait fatalement quelque peu contraignant. Si nous tirons des conclusions rigides pour l'établissement de ce groupe ad hoc et pour la définition des termes de référence de sa mission avec une indication de délai de travail, nous sommes en contradiction avec nous-mêmes puisque l'option c) est une option par excellence souple et qui laisse à ce groupe ad hoc le soin de régler son autodiscipline et de fixer ses propres règles du jeu en invitant éventuellement, soit des organisations gouvernementales, soit d'autres organisations en fonction de ce qu'il est utile de faire. Donc, il appartiendra au groupe ou au comité ad hoc de fixer ses règles du jeu. Je ne crois pas qu'il soit bon qu'on établisse un texte de base. Ce texte serait insuffisant. Ce qui compte davantage, c'est une ouverture, un esprit et que les membres de ce groupe ad hoc, dont la composition devrait être élargie sur le plan de la représentation des pays bénéficiaires du programme d'action forestier tropical, assume ses responsabilités pour la définition de sa tâche.
David DRAKE (Canada): Please excuse me for intervening, but I would like to support the point of view just put forward by the delegate for the United Kingdom. I think it is a very constructive suggestion. I believe that we would not necessarily hold the Secretariat responsible for everything that is in there - it is just simply a paper which would help orient us and allow us to reflect overnight until we take the debate up again. Therefore, I would like to strongly support the suggestion made by the delegate from the United Kingdom.
Miss Ting WEN LIAN (Malaysia): I would like to take up the point that Mr Walton has just made - that it is now for governments to give their views. I made it very clear in our statement that tropical forest countries should give their views on the revamped TFAP, because we are talking about our sovereign forest resources. It is the views of governments that will now be needed, and the ad hoc group should be open to the participation of all tropical forest countries, because we are the owners of the sovereign forest resources.
LE PRESIDENT: Je remercie Mme. l'Ambassadeur de Malaisie. Je proposerai que le Secrétariat prépare un très court document qui serait un document informel, parce que je ne crois pas qu'il soit bon d'avoir un document qui constitue un cadre rigide. Ce document informel peut tenter de refléter la sensibilité et l'opinion du Conseil qui s'est clairement exprimé et permettra au groupe ou au comité ad hoc sur la base d'une documentation informelle, d'essayer de déterminer les termes de référence de ce qu'il entend faire sous sa responsabilité en définissant, non pas les procédures qu'il compte suivre, mais les objectifs qu'il estime devoir remplir.
Si vous êtes d'accord sur cette proposition, je proposerai de ne pas clôturer ce point de l'ordre du jour, de le reprendre demain à 9 heures 30 précises, en étant le plus bref possible. Il est relativement tard, je ne crois pas qu'il soit possible de poursuivre plus avant nos travaux.
Miss Ting WEN LIAN (Malaysia): I would just like to have your assurance now that whatever paper the Secretariat is going to put up, Council Members will have an opportunity to comment on it.
LE PRESIDENT: Il va de soi qu'à partir du moment où le document est absolument informel il peut faire l'objet de toutes les modifications voulues après la séance du Conseil, avant la réunion du groupe ad hoc et pendant la première réunion de ce groupe ad hoc.
Je vais vous proposer maintenant le programme de travail de la journée de demain qui sera très substantiel.
Nous avons interrompu nos travaux sur le point 17 et si vous le permettez, nous commencerons à 9 heures 30 par le point 17.1 en souhaitant qu'en moins d'une demi-heure nous arriverons à un large accord sur la procédure à suivre.
Nous reviendrons ensuite au point 7. Le document sera distribué en début de séance, de sorte que vous aurez l'occasion d'étudier ce document dès demain matin, parce qu'il est important que vous en preniez connaissance, étant entendu qu'il s'agira d'un document informel qui ne reflète pas une proposition tranchée, fixe, rigide et définitive.
Ensuite, nous passerons à l'examen des programmes de terrain 1990-91. Comme on a déjà longuement discuté de ces questions au Comité du Programme, on pourra l'examiner rapidement. Je vous demanderai un effort de concision et de brièveté sur le point 12.
Ensuite, on examinera le point 13 concernant la mise en oeuvre des conclusions de l'Examen de certains aspects des buts et opérations de la FAO. C'est un examen qui ne prendra pas beaucoup de temps. Nous avons également pour information un rapport sur la préparation de la Conférence de Rio. Nous avons un très bref rapport sur les sessions qui n'ont pas pu se tenir et quelques points mineurs qui pourront être parcourus rapidement.
Il reste une tâche importante pour le Comité de rédaction qui va se tenir sous la présidence de M. Sinaceur du Royaume du Maroc. Sa première séance aura lieu ce soir après le Conseil. Le Comité de rédaction se réunira à la salle du Mexique et poursuivra ses travaux demain dans l'après-midi
Notre séance de demain matin sera une séance au "finish". Nous continuerons de façon à épuiser l'ordre du jour qui nous est soumis, et nous fixerons avec votre accord bien sûr, la date précise et l'heure d'adoption du rapport de notre Conseil.
Je vous remercie de votre patience. Il est tard, nous avons fait du bon travail aujourd'hui grâce à vous tous.
Avant de lever la séance, je donne la parole à M. Sinaceur.
Mustapha-Menouar SINACEUR (Maroc): Je vois que les amateurs de sport se sont déjà levés, parce que nous avons une très bonne soirée de football en perspective, mais les membres du Comité de rédaction auront autre chose à faire.
Au niveau de l'adoption du calendrier, vous aviez dit, M. le Président, que les points 12 et 14 seraient abordés en même temps. Or, j'ai entendu: les points 12, 13 et 14.
LE PRESIDENT: Je crois que vous avez mal entendu, parce que je n'ai pas parlé du point 14. Le point 14 est fusionné dans le point 12.
The meeting rose at 20.00 hours.
La séance est levée à 20 heures.
Se levanta la sesión a las 20.00 horas.
