TRIBUTE TO THE MEMORY OF Dr Y.S. RAO. SENIOR PROGRAMME ADVISER FORESTRY RESEARCH SUPPORT PROGRAMME FOR ASIA AND THE PACIFIC
HOMMAGE A LA MEMOIREDE M. Y.S. RAO. CONSEILLER PRINCIPAL. PROGRAMMEDE SOUTIEN A LA RECHERCHE FORESTIERE POUR L'ASIE ET LE PACIFIQUE
HOMENAJE EN MEMORIA DEL Dr. Y. S. RAO. ASESOR SUPERIOR.PROGRAMA DE APOYO A LA INVESTIGACION FORESTAL PARA ASIA Y EL PACIFICO

III. ACTIVITIES OF FAO AND WFP (continued)
III. ACTIVITES DE LA FAO ET DU PAM (suite)
III. ACTIVIDADES DE LA FAO Y DEL PMA (continuación)

9. Report of the 11th Session of the Committee on Forestry Rome, 8-12 March 1993)
9. Rapport de la onzième session du Comité des forêts (Rome, 8-12 mars 1993)
9. Informe del 11 período de sesiones del Comité de Montes (Roma, 8-12 de marzo de 1993)

9.1 Recommendations on the Establishment of a Consultative Group on the Tropical Forest Action Programme
9.1 Recommandations relatives à la création d'un Groupe consultatif sur le Programme d'action forestier tropical
9.1 Recomendaciones para el establecimiento de un Grupo Consultivo sobre el Programa de Acción Forestal Tropical

C.H. MURRAY (Assistant Director-General, Forestry Department): When it met for its Eleventh Session in March 1993, the Committee on Forestry was the first Technical Committee of the Council to convene after UNCED and the International Conference on Nutrition. It was therefore no surprise that the outcome of these two hallmark events permeated the deliberations of COFO. At UNCED forests were amongst the most sensitive and difficult issues discussed. At the ICN, attention was called to the value of forests and trees in nutrition and food security.

As is customary, COFO considered two policy items, namely "Forestry and Sustainable Development - UNCED Outcome and Implications for FAO's Forestry Programme" and "Forestry and Nutrition". It also reviewed medium-term perspectives and programme priorities; ongoing FAO programmes in forestry; and the proposed Summary Programme of Work and Budget for the next biennium 1994-95.

In the interest of time and with your concurrence, Mr Chairman, I shall present only the matters which require the attention of the Council.

Forestry and Sustainable Development: The Committee recalled the Rio Declaration and the prominence given by UNCED to forest conservation and sustainable development as reflected in the non-legally binding "forest principles" as well as in Chapter 11 of Agenda 21. The Committee stressed the role and responsibilities of FAO in the follow-up to UNCED in forestry and underlined the need to maintain the momentum gained in this respect. It recognized the importance of the main priority areas proposed by FAO in this regard, but stressing in particular support to TFAP, forest resources assessment, sustainable forest resources management and capacity-building.

Forestry and Nutrition: The Committee welcomed the timely inclusion of this item on the agenda of COFO as an immediate follow-up to the ICN and as a topic complementary to UNCED. It noted the principal areas in which forestry

contributed to nutrition and food security mainly through enriching diets, supplying seasonal foods, providing fuel for cooking as well as enhancing income and purchasing power. The Committee felt that linkages between forestry and nutrition and the interaction between forestry and agriculture for nutritional well-being were of interest well beyond the confines of the forestry sector; it therefore requested FAO to bring these linkages to the attention of the Committee on Agriculture (COAG) and the Committee on World Food Security.

Forest Resources Assessment: Directly related to the UNCED follow-up and sustainable forest management in general is the status of global forest resources.

The Committee on Forestry welcomed the report on the final results of forest resources assessment with baseline 1990. This report dealt with forests in industrial and tropical countries. The Committee looked forward to the early completion of the entire assessment with the inclusion of data for nontropical developing countries. The Committee emphasized the importance of assessing regularly the status of forest resources so as to monitor the effectiveness of plans and strategies for forest conservation and development, nationally and internationally. It considered that forest resource assessment at global level continued to be a fundamental task of FAO and stressed the need for the Organization to give it higher priority in its Regular Programme. Recognizing the weakness of forest resources assessment systems in many countries, from where much basic data must eventually come, the Committee emphasized the importance of capacity-building and requested FAO to assess the needs and means required, and develop its Field Programme. to this end.

With regard to the medium-term perspective and the Summary Programme of Work and Budget, both these items will be dealt with in detail under Items 17 and 18. Suffice it to say that the Committee endorsed, in general, the priorities in the medium-term perspective and in the Programme proposals for forestry for the 1994-95 Programme. It recognized the importance to national forestry action plans and requested that resources devoted to TFAP implementation be maintained. It also noted the importance given to greening the world and the fact that the UNCED forest principles applied to all types of forest, both natural or planted, and man-made, and in all regions whether boreal, temperate or tropical.

With respect to the Summary Programme of Work and Budget, the Committee was concerned that the budget proposals did not reflect the equal importance given by governments at UNCED to forestry and agriculture. The members of the Committee on Forestry were called upon to communicate this concern regarding the proposed budget to the Council or to the Conference. COFO was informed, of course, of the financial constraints facing the Organization, but the Committee felt nevertheless that a special case should be made for forestry and recommended unanimously - and here I quote - that in reviewing the overall priorities of the Organization, the Council reaffirms its earlier calls for allocations of increased resources to forestry.

The final topic to which I should like to refer is to do with progress in the implementation of TFAP and the establishment of a Consultative Group.

There was strong general support for the TFAP. The Committee noted that there were 90 countries involved in planning or implementing national forestry action plans either under the TFAP or through other approaches applying TFAP principles. However, the Committee noted the slow pace of TFAP implementation in some countries and urged donor countries and lead agencies to adopt a more flexible and accommodating approach, in order to accelerate the attainment of sustainable forestry in participating countries. The Committee requested that FAO pursue vigorously with donor and international organizations adequate funding for implementing TFAP.

Following the recommendations made at its Tenth Session, the Committee on Forestry noted progress in introducing the changes in approach which distinguished the revamped TFAP. However, in addition to increased resource availability (that is to say, more funds), an important outstanding aspect of the revamping concerns the establishment of a consultative group on the TFAP. Distinguished members will recall that the Council at its last session empowered you, Mr Chairman, to prepare a proposal, which was to be reviewed by COFO, to enable the Council to decide on this matter at this Session.

This is the subject of Item 9.1 and will be introduced by the Independent Chairman himself.

In closing, in the post-UNCED period FAO faces challenges and responsibilities in forestry greater than ever before. FAO must, therefore, measure up to the challenges posed if it is effectively to discharge its mandated role in this area. The issues raised by COFO are now referred to the Council for guidance and decision.

The Secretariat is at the full disposal of distinguished delegates and you, Mr Chairman, to provide any information or clarification which may be needed, not only on this item, but on the subsequent 9.1 which you, Sir, will handle.

LE PRESIDENT: Je voudrais rappeler que la déclaration de compétences de la CEE dans son document 19 a signalé que les points 9 et 9.1 étaient de compétence mixte, le vote étant réservé aux Etats Membres. Je remercie tout spécialement l'Assistant Directeur général, M. Murray de son introduction très complexe. Il m'incombe non pas de faire une présentation exhaustive mais de rappeler les conclusions du Comité des forêts en ce qui concerne la création d'un groupe consultatif.

Je voudrais rappeler une des remarques qui a été faite en page 9 du document CL 103/19. En effet, nous avons deux documents à examiner, le document CL 103/8 qui est le rapport du Comité des forêts et le document CL 103/19 qui est une note loin d'être exhaustive sur la création d'un groupe consultatif sur le Programme d'action forestier tropical. Je signalais en page 9 au point 49 que le mandat du groupe devrait être centré sur le Plan d'action forestier et tropical au départ mais que progressivement le mandat devrait être élargi à l'ensemble des problèmes forestiers y compris ceux se posant dans les zones tempérées et boréales. Le problème forestier doit être progressivement envisagé de manière globale.

Dans le rapport de la onzième session du Comité des forêts vous verrez qu'un certain nombre de questions retiennent l'attention du Conseil. Ce rapport synthétique facilite bien sûr nos travaux et en ce qui concerne la création d'un groupe consultatif vous verrez qu'en début du rapport il est mentionné que le Comité des forêts estime que la plupart des membres ont accepté la proposition qui fut soumise par le Président indépendant du Conseil et moi-même concernant la création d'un groupe consultatif. le Comité des forêts a rappelé que la décision de créer le groupe relevait de la compétence du Conseil mais que les avis et suggestions devaient être avancés pour faciliter les travaux sur ce point particulier à sa cent troisième session. A cet égard, quelques délégations ont proposé, étant donné qu'un véritable consensus n'avait pas été atteint sur la création de ce groupe, de ne pas recommander de prendre une décision à la prochaine session du Conseil mais d'entamer une période de réflexion au cours de laquelle les parrainages pourraient se structurer et se réorganiser. J'avais noté cette proposition concernant une période de réflexion mais j'ai suggéré que cette période n'aille pas au-delà de la prochaine session du Conseil car cela risquerait de retarder encore une décision sur une question inscrite à l'ordre du jour depuis quatre sessions. Nous aurons l'occasion d'en débattre et je demanderai à tous les membres du Conseil qui vont intervenir sur le rapport de la onzième session du Comité des forêts et sur le Groupe consultatif relatif au Programme d'action forestière et tropicale de diviser leurs interventions en ce qui concerne le document CL 103/8 et le document CL 103/19, de façon à nous faire connaître de manière très claire leurs avis et considérations sur les différentes facettes des problèmes qu'ils nous ont soumis et sur lesquels on devrait pouvoir prendre position.

Les orateurs inscrits sur ma liste sont le Canada, et le Mexique. Je demanderai à tous ceux qui souhaitent intervenir de lever leur pancarte. Si des observateurs désirent intervenir il serait souhaitable qu'ils s'inscrivent dès maintenant.

Ricardo VELAZQUEZ HUERTA (México): Querría en primer lugar, señor Presidente, solicitar una aclaración para entender bien un asunto que solicito a la Secretaría que me aclare.

Se refiere a la competencia de la Comunidad Económica Europea, ya que entendemos claramente que es un Miembro de pleno derecho; sin embargo, solamente y para clarificar bien mi pensamiento, quisiera saber si la competencia mixta se refiere a que tanto los Estados Miembros de la Comunidad como la Comunidad como tal tienen derecho a hacer uso de la palabra. Esa sería una aclaración que en su tiempo rogaría a la Secretaría que hiciera.

En segundo lugar, nos referimos al documento CL 103/8, sobre las labores del COFO, para manifestar que nuestra delegación participó en los trabajos de este Comité, aprobó el informe y, por tanto, no tenemos ninguna objeción para recomendar a este Consejo que lo apruebe en los términos en que se aprobó en el seno del Comité.

Entrando ahora en el tema del documento CL 103/9, queremos expresar la siguiente opinión.

La delegación mexicana está, y ha estado siempre, de acuerdo en la formación de este Grupo Consultivo. Nos parece que es una necesidad que existe y que en mucho ayudará a resolver los problemas en el área de los montes y de los bosques, en el sentido global de los bosques; esto es, no sólo para unos, sino para todos los bosques, que es lo que nosotros quisiéramos señalar.

Hay cuestiones en las que nuestra delegación está enteramente de acuerdo, porque están incluidas en el documento; no obstante, quisiéramos hacer hincapié en ello. El Grupo Consultivo debe establecerse con base en el articulo VI. 5 de la Constitución de la FAO para que su constitución esté perfectamente legalizada; que el mandato sea de la Conferencia, y permanezca siendo de la Conferencia el mandato de establecer grupos de trabajo o consultas de Estados Miembros y, además, fijándoles sus atribuciones de una manera clara y luego la Conferencia es quien debe sancionar su constitución.

Nos parece muy bien, como propone el Presidente, que se constituya por 36 miembros, como lo señala el párrafo 23 del documento, a efectos de que se logre un equilibrio regional adecuado. Aquí, señor Presidente, salta nuestra primera preocupación que queremos manifestar al respecto de una manera muy clara y respetuosa. En el sistema de las Naciones Unidas siempre se ha hablado de una distribución regional y parece que en la FAO se habla de otra distribución regional. Obviamente nosotros sabemos que en el seno de la FAO se manejan como entidades formales, unas veces sí y otras no, el grupo del Cercano Oriente y otros grupos; pero nos parece que para mantener la estructura de las Naciones Unidas y mantener una cuestión dentro de los parámetros formales, sería conveniente hablar de las regiones que existen, nada más: Africa, América Latina y Asia.

Nos parece muy bien, señor Presidente, que el Grupo se reúna una vez al año y nos parece también muy bien e indispensable que el mandato del Grupo Consultivo tenga entre sus objetivos perfectamente definidos y claros el respeto estricto a la soberanía nacional y al desarrollo sostenible.

Nos parece también bien que las recomendaciones del Grupo no tengan fuerza jurídica obligatoria y que los principios de respeto a la ordenación, la conservación y el desarrollo sostenible de los bosques sean para todo tipo de bosques, como decíamos al principio, a efecto de dar pleno cumplimiento a las recomendaciones de la CNUMAD donde se propuso con claridad que la ordenación, conservación y desarrollo sostenible debían ser para los bosques de todo tipo.

También el documento coincide con nuestro punto de vista en que la elección de países sea de la responsabilidad del Consejo de la FAO, aplicando un sistema de rotación similar al que adopte el Consejo y tal y como lo señala su propuesta, señor Presidente.

Surge ahora nuestra segunda procupación, que queremos dejar manifiesta y que es la relativa al financiamiento del Grupo Consultivo. Para la delegación de México sería de crucial importancia que la vía de financiamiento del Grupo quedara perfectamente definida y clara antes de proceder a su constitución y a su creación. Proponemos también, señor Presidente, que los informes que elabore ese Grupo Consultivo en su oportunidad se consideren como documentos oficiales del Consejo y que se les dé amplísima distribución entre todos los países y organizaciones interesadas.

Volviendo al tema de nuestra segunda preocupación, decimos que nos preocupa también - y dentro de ello nos preocupan los recursos que se le asignen al Grupo Consultivo - el que nuestra Organización continuamente haga reducciones en temas y asuntos de suma importancia y de vital importancia para la FAO. Hemos hecho recortes en Pesca, hemos hecho recortes en Montes, hemos hecho recortes en Agricultura, y esto es un asunto que nos preocupa y queremos reiterar que es indispensable que la Organización cuente con recursos suficientes para ejercer su programa de una manera eficaz y eficiente en beneficio de nuestros propios países. El tema de los recursos adicionales cuenta con nuestro total apoyo.

David DRAKE (Canada): First of all, my delegation would like to thank Mr Murray for his excellent introduction to this item.

Canada took an active part in the COFO meetings in March and therefore associates itself with the consensus reached in the report. In Canada's view, as Mr Murray indicated, COFO was especially significant in bringing to the fore the fundamental discontent of the forestry community with regard to the low proportion of the budget historically allocated to forestry by the Governing Bodies, approximately 4.2 percent, and which persists to this day. COFO's concern was based on several important points which can be found in the report, but to which I will draw your attention briefly.

1. Forestry is an especially important part of the post-UNCED Agenda. Agenda 21 has indicated that the needs for forestry are equal or in fact slightly higher for forestry than for agriculture;

2. FAO has an essential role to play in following up the results of UNCED in the areas of its competence, as stressed by the Director-General in his statement to this Council;

3. COFO noted with concern that the budgetary levels for the present and upcoming biennia were inadequate in meeting the challenges for forestry set out by UNCED;

4. There is a great imbalance in the proportion of regular to extra-budgetary funds for forestry, where the ratio is roughly 1:6, whereas it is only 1:1.3 throughout the Organization as a whole;

5. COFO specifically recommended that its members communicate to the Council at Conference level their concern regarding the proposed budget; and

6. COFO unanimously recommended that in reviewing the overall priorities of the Organization, the Council reaffirm its earlier calls for allocation of increased resources to forestry.

I would also note that the Programme Committee subsequently recommended that FAO maintain and strengthen its lead in forestry, and endorsed the view of the Committee on Forestry.

It is essential at this point in time that the Governing Bodies of FAO begin to react inearnest to global forests challenges, as reflected in the

realities of each sovereign nation. It is of the utmost importance that this Council Session begins this process by sending a clear signal to the Conference and the world forestry community at large, based on the consensus achieved at COFO - first, by relaying the message that the Governing Bodies of FAO recognize the importance of the challenges of forestry worldwide; second, by re-emphasizing that FAO has a pivotal role to play in addressing these challenges; and third (and most important of all), that they, the Governing Bodies, are prepared to take the steps necessary to adapt to these new realities by reallocating scarce funds.

Accordingly, the Canadian delegation calls on this Council to:

1. Reiterate to Conference COFO's concern that the historically low levels of funding allocated to forestry are inadequate for forestry in response to the challenges set out by UNCED;

2. Reiterate to Conference COFO's deep regret over the proposal to cut the forestry allocation for the 1994-95 biennium, in the context of no programme growth for the Organization, and its concern that this be reconsidered;

3. Recommend to Conference that within the context of no programme growth for the Organization, the FAO maintain and strengthen its lead in forestry;

4. Recommend to Conference that within the context of no programme growth for the Organization, it endorse the view of COFO and the Programme Committee that a special case should be made for forestry and that highest priority be accorded to forestry in any eventual revised pattern of budgetary allocations for the 1994-95 biennium; and

5. Recommend to Conference that Member States give consideration to increasing the forestry budget in subsequent biennia. This can be done, for example, through reallocation and re-prioritization of resources pursuant to the normal planning processes.

The question of proportionate funding levels for forestry is one of the utmost importance for my delegation and, judging from the unanimous concern expressed by COFO, to the majority of other Member States of the FAO as well. What is at stake is FAO's effectiveness and its status as a lead agent in promoting the conservation, management and sustainable development of forests worldwide.

Finally, I would note that in paragraph 73 of the report of COFO, the Committee regretted that it had been felt necessary to reduce the allocation to forestry in the current biennium. An early measure of the FAO's intentions respecting forestry would be the reinstatement of the reduction described by the Director General in his progress report to the November Council concerning implementation of the approved PWB for forestry for 1992-93.

My delegation will be addressing the issue of funding for forestry again in the context of Items 16, on the Medium-Term Plan, and 17 on the Programme of Work and Budget.

Finally my delegation reserves the right to intervene again if necessary on the issue of the Consultative Group in Tropical Forestry Action Plan.

LE PRESIDENT: Je remercie le Représentant du Canada de son intervention très constructive. Je souhaite que l'on examine l'ensemble du point 9, y compris le point 9.1 simultanément. De toute façon les travaux de la Conférence doivent être préparés par le Conseil dans le cadre de la discussion du Programme de travail et budget qui nous sera soumis la semaine prochaine et les observations qui ont été émises devraient pouvoir être prises en compte. Au cours de la discussion de ce budget il serait souhaitable d'envisager une augmentation globale de ce budget. En effet, lorsque l'on parle de réallocation il faut savoir ce que l'on peut diminuer et ce que l'on peut augmenter. C'est dans le cadre de cette discussion qu'il faudra se situer de manière claire.

Je note avec beaucoup de satisfaction que le Canada a souligné le rôle de chef de file de la FAO en matière forestière. Je passe maintenant la parole à M. Mombouli, Représentant du Congo.

Michel MOMBOULI (Congo): Nous allons suivre votre conseil en divisant notre intervention en deux parties.

Concernant la première partie qui porte sur le PAFT et le document CL 103/8, nous serons brefs dans la mesure où le Congo a participé à la onzième session du COFO, et où, dans sa logique, il lui est tout à fait facile d'appuyer l'entièreté du rapport qui en est résulté. Nous appuyons en particulier les priorités proposées pour le Département: des forêts dans les perspectives à moyen terme - 1994-99 - et dans le Programme de travail et budget pour 1994-95.

Comme la délégation canadienne, nous nous associons au voeu que les ressources du Département des forêts, dans la mesure du possible, puissent être accrues.

Voilà pour la première partie.

En ce qui concerne la seconde partie nous serons un peu plus longs. Nous voulons d'abord rappeler qu'au moment où nous siégeons dans les pays en développement plusieurs programmes d'action forestiers nationaux sont prêts depuis bon nombre d'années et sont bloqués faute de financement.

Ce faisant, nous marquons notre appui total à la mise sur pied d'un groupe consultatif sur le Programme d'Action forestier tropical qui aura pour tâche prioritaire, ainsi que cela ressort du paragraphe 49(b) deuxième alinéa du document CL 103/9. Cette priorité sera la recherche de solutions à l'épineux problème de financement.

En vue de la constitution dudit groupe consultatif, nous voudrions vous remercier et vous féliciter Monsieur le Président pour les efforts que vous n'avez cessé de déployer en votre qualité de Président indépendant du Conseil pour parvenir, au moyen de consultations tous azimuts, à la formulation des

meilleures propositions possibles pour la mise en place de celui qui devra régir ledit groupe consultatif.

Aussi, est-ce dans le but de contribuer tant soit peu à cet exercice préalable en cours, que nous nous permettons de faire quelques observations et remarques sur le document CL 103/9 à l'examen.

Pour gagner du temps, nous concentrerons l'examen sur vos propositions à la section 3 du rapport qui nous est soumis.

Nous n'avons pas d'objection en ce qui concerne le mandat qui est proposé pour ce groupe consultatif s'il est amendé comme cela ressort dans le document à l’examen.

En ce qui concerne les dimensions du groupe, nous sommes d'accord pour un nombre restreint de participants et le chiffre de 36 pourrait être retenu. Cependant, la proposition de classement par catégories pourrait être remaniée dans son ordre et dans sa répartition. Nous nous proposons en ce qui concerne les catégories que l'on place en premier lieu les Etats Membres avant les représentations et avant les représentants des organisations.

Concernant la répartition, nous estimons que l'on a peut-être accordé une place trop grande aux ONG. Il est en effet proposé qu'ils aient 7 représentants. On pourrait peut-être faire un effort et ramener ce chiffre de 7 à 5 et les deux postes ainsi libérés pourraient être renvoyés à la catégorie 4 où le forum forestier des pays en voie de développement pourrait voir son nombre de représentants passer de 1 à 3 afin que toutes les régions en développement puissent être représentées.

En ce qui concerne la sélection des ONG, il serait souhaitable que les intéressés se prononcent sur les propositions qui leur sont faites. Toutefois, concernant ce processus de sélection nous pensons que le rapport final pourrait se limiter à l'énoncé du principe selon lequel c'est aux ONG elles-mêmes de choisir leurs représentants sans que nous soyons obligés d'entrer dans le détail, même s'il y a déjà un exposé qui pourrait leur être bénéfique.

Nous sommes d'accord avec la fréquence des réunions proposées ainsi qu'avec la structure et le principe de rotation, mais nous pensons que le mandat pourrait être de trois ans au lieu de deux.

Nous n'avons pas de commentaires particuliers concernant les sections F et J, ce qui nous amène tout de suite à la section H du document CL 103/19 portant sur le droit de vote. Nous voulons émettre le voeu allant dans le même sens que le paragraphe 48, à savoir: voir le Conseil marquer son accord au cours de la présente session pour la création du groupe consultatif sur le Programme d'Action forestier tropical, afin que celui-ci puisse démarrer dès le début del'annéeprochaine, mêmes'ilfaut pourcelacréer un petitgroupede travail pour essayer de concilier d'éventuelles divergences qui pourraient apparaître. Nous pensons en tout cas que c'est une question urgente à laquelle il faut trouver une solution.

Pour en finir, nous voudrions faire quelques commentaires pour compléter en quelque sorte le paragraphe 46. Nous pensons en effet qu'en ce qui concerne

le droit de vote il ne sera peut-être pas utile d'avoir recours à ce processus, dans la mesure où il s'agit ici d'un groupe consultatif et d'un comité, mais nous voudrions compléter pour dire que le groupe consultatif n'a pas, effectivement, la capacité de décider; il est une source de propositions et d'avis et, à certains moments, il nous sera peut-être nécessaire, compte tenu de ce statut, de nous mettre d'accord sur les propositions à faire. C'est alors que nous verrons comment répondre à cette question.

Dans ce même cadre je me réjouis de voir que le Conseil juridique est présent car j'avais quelques inquiétudes tout à l'heure ayant constaté qu'il n'était pas là. Je voudrais donc profiter de sa présence pour lui demander, en nous référant au passé, puisque nous avons déjà créé des groupes consultatifs, si lors de ces créations on faisait la distinction entre participants membres et participants observateurs. En effet, dans le projet que nous avons sous les yeux, tout le monde est participant et donc, à priori, membre. J'aimerais être éclairé sur ce point. En fonction de la réponse je pense que nous pourrons savoir comment traiter la question.

LE PRESIDENT: Merci beaucoup pour votre intervention Monsieur le Représentant du Congo. Avant de passer la parole à l'honorable Représentant du Brésil je vais passer la parole à notre Conseiller juridique pour répondre aux questions posées à la fois par le Mexique et par le Congo.

Je ferai remarquer cependant que nous avons pour le moment un comité technique - que M. Moore notre Conseiller juridique, va rejoindre - qui est réuni depuis 9 h 30. Ce comité technique est composé de membres du Conseil et d'observateurs qui participent à part entière aux activités de ce comité. Un groupe consultatif et un comité technique, cela représente tout de même beaucoup d'interrelations. Il n'y a pas tellement de différence entre un comité technique et un groupe consultatif.

Je passe la parole à M. Moore, Conseiller juridique, pour répondre à la question souvent évoquée des compétences mixtes de la CEE et de ses Etats Membres. Je crois d'ailleurs que la CEE compte intervenir par le biais de sa présidence ou de sa future présidence et que les Etats Membres dans le domaine de leurs compétences comptent également intervenir.

LEGAL COUNSEL: I understand a general question has been raised regarding the division of competence between the EEC and its Member States and the way in which each may participate in the meeting. Perhaps I should start off by saying that the Basic Rule is set out in Article II, 8 of the Constitution which indicates that a Member Organization shall exercise membership rights on an alternative basis with its Member States that are members of the Organization in the areas of their respective competence and in accordance with rules set down by the Conference. This means that the EEC and its Member States should operate within the areas of their own respective competence, and they should speak only on matters that are within their competence. The division of competence and the way in which the information is brought to the Council is set out in Rule XLI of the General Rules of the Organization. The EEC and its Member States are required to report before each session of the

Council, and in fact, before each meeting of the Organization; they are required to give us a statement indicating which, as between the Member Organization and its Member State has competence in respect of any questions to be considered by the meeting, (this is in respect really of each agenda item) and which, as between the Member Organization and its Member States shall exercise the right to vote in respect of each particular agenda item. Now, where the competence is with the EEC and the right to vote is with the EEC, then we only hear the EEC on any particular matter. Where the competence is with the Member States and the vote with the Member States, then we hear only the Member States on that particular agenda item. Where the competence is mixed, and I think this is the case here before you, in fact in the document submitted by the EEC and its Member States this agenda item is listed as mixed competence - vote Member States, what does this mean?

It means that both the EEC and its Member States may speak on this item from their own respective competence. They may both speak and participate in the discussions, but the Council, at arriving at its decision, will take into account only the views of the party that has the voting rights - in this particular case, the Member States. In other words, both the EEC and the Member States may speak on this issue from the standpoint of their own particular competence but the Council, in dealing with this matter and arriving at a decision, is required to take into account only the views of the Member States.I hope that answers the question that was put.

Now the second question was raised by the distinguished delegate of Congo, and that is regarding the status of observers in the proposed consultative group. I should answer first of all, yes, a distinction is always made in meetings of the Organization between members and observers. That is the first point. Members of a consultative group, of any meeting in FAO, have the right to vote. Observers do not have the right to vote. That is the fundamental difference. Given that, there is a great deal of flexibility that can be allowed, particularly under Article VI.5, as to the mode of participation of observers. You will note, for example, in the technical committee that is now set up and which I am servicing in the German Room, as the Chairman has pointed out, in that technical committee the Council itself has urged, has allowed as it were, that not only members of the Council should participate freely in the groups, but also observers should also be allowed to participate freely in the committee. Therefore, there is a great deal of flexibility as to how observers may participate. However, should it come to a vote, as I am sure it will not, in this particular technical committee established by the Council, of course only the members of the committee itself would be allowed to vote, and not the observers. I hope that that answers the question of the distinguished Representative of the Congo.

Alcir CARVALHO REBELLO (Brazil): First of all, let me thank and congratulate Mr Murray for his clear and very complete introduction of this Item 9.

As you know, Brazil is a member of the Committee on Forestry and participated actively in the works of its 11th Session, which produced a balanced report with which my delegation associates itself.

Brazil believes that FAO is the main forum for the coordination of international cooperation within the United Nations system, as well as for the implementation of actions and programmes in forestry, as set out in Chapter XI of Agenda 21, in the Convention on Biological Diversity and also in the Convention on Climate Change. We also believe that FAO has a leading role to play, among inter-governmental organizations, in promoting the observance of the non-legally-binding authoritative statement of principles for a global consensus on the management, conservation and sustainable development of all types of forests.

Also, it is our hope that the aims and goals of the Rio Declaration will be the aims and the goals of FAO and of all countries toward sustainable development.

UNCED has given us the instruments for a new era of international cooperation, that of achieving development in a sustainable way. Forests represent an asset that demands coordinated efforts on the part of States and the international community to be sustainably developed. The plan of action is before us. Rules concerning biodiversity, development and conservation, as well as the role of forests toward addressing climate change are set and ought to be implemented. Guiding principles of sustainable development of all types of forests were conceived after thorough discussions and constitute an impressive achievement.

Brazil deems essential that we move to action at once. Resources must be allocated to the sustainable development of the world's forests. Of course, responsibility to this end relies primarily on our governments, but FAO, alongside the Commission on Sustainable Development, shall set the pace of measures for the realization of the goals to which Heads of States and the international community have committed themselves in Rio, one year ago.

Time must not be wasted. Efforts must not be spared. Difficulties already overcome must not be brought up again.

Let us not go on rehearsing the same old debate on new international organizations responsible for forests or dwelling on the question whether we need or not a new organization, nor a new convention, but to take immediate action for the sustainable development of forest resources within the existing international institutional framework.

We trust FAO will be determinant in triggering prompt action from the UN System. The Government of Brazil is ready to collaborate with FAO and any other partner willing to help promote sustainable development of forests.

With the help of G-7 countries and other partners, we, in Brazil, have already taken the first steps to trail the new path opened before us since June 1992. Actually, since 1990, the Brazilian Government had started drafting a Pilot Programme for the protection of our tropical forests. Together with the World Bank and the Commission of the European Community we finalized, in December 1992, the first set of five programmes concentrating on national forests, extractive reserves, Indian lands, research institutions as centres of excellence, and non-governmental and local communities organizations, all of which are to start being implemented, should enough resources be available

both from the Rain Forest Trust Fund established by the World Bank and from bilateral cooperation.

One particularly important outcome of UNCED is the understanding that developing countries must be provided sufficient new and additional financial resources to be able to reach sustainable development. Access to adequate technology, to be transferred on preferential terms, is a sine qua non condition to our sustainable development. In this regard, it is essential that industrialized countries make available, through FAO, UNDP and other intergovernmental institutions, or through bilateral cooperation, enough resources to make possible sustainable development of our forests.

Regarding TFAP, Brazil believes that a revamped programme should represent a very positive FAO contribution to the implementation of Agenda 21 in tropical forests. The establishment of the proposed Consultative Group, in accordance with Article VI.5 of the FAO Constitution, is a significant step in making TFAP more effective. Financial support, though, remains as an outstanding issue. It is hoped that the revamped TFAP will attract donors to increasing substantially their contributions so as to solve this lagging shortcoming that imparts lack of full credibility to FAO efforts in the field of tropical forestry.

Brazil has actively participated in the elaboration of the proposals related to the terms of reference, composition and procedures of the Consultative Group. We lend our full support to the proposals put forward by our Independent Chairman, Ambassador Antoine Saintraint, who has accomplished to bring together a balanced and sound proposal. We would like to acknowledge his invaluable work to help bring this initiative to reality, and thank him for his excellent job.

Brazil does not take part in the TFAP as of now, but we accompany with great interest the revamping process of the programme. May it be possible that in the near future we can profit from TFAP experience to help us in our endeavours.

Finally, I would like to express the strong support of my delegation to the terms of paragraph 94 of the COFO's report, which expressed the Committee's concern with the low commitment of resources to forestry activities in the proposed budget of FAO. We do hope that his situation will be re-examined.

LE PRESIDENT: Le Comité technique déposera un rapport, mais la décision incombe aux organes responsables, en l'occurrence le Conseil et la Conférence.

Je remercie tirés vivement le Représentant du Brésil de son intervention extrêmement positive et constructive. Il a posé un certain nombre de questions et a apporté beaucoup de réponses positives. Je le remercie tout particulièrement de l'esprit dans lequel il a situé ses interventions.

Je donne maintenant la parole - et cela précisera la question du Mexique -à la Communauté économique européenne, qui a compétence en la matière et qui est représentée par sa future présidence.

Mlle Colette TAQUET (Belgique): Monsieur le Président, comme vous le disiez à l'instant, la Belgique prend la parole au nom de la Communauté économique européenne et de ses Etats Membres.

Monsieur le Président, à l'occasion de la onzième session du Comité des forêts de la FAO, tenue en mars 1993, la Communauté européenne et ses Etats Membres avaient souligné l'important travail réalisé par le Président indépendant du Conseil de la FAO en vue de la création d'un "Groupe consultatif sur le Programme d'action forestier tropical".

Nous avions alors fait part de notre agrément sur le principe du groupe consultatif tel que proposé, ainsi que de notre souci d'une participation effective des organisations internationales et des organisations non-gouvernementales impliquées dans l'élaboration et la mise en oeuvre du PAFT et des Programmes d'action forestiers nationaux.

Nous considérons tout aussi important l'établissement d'un système de comptes rendus par lequel toutes les opinions seraient entendues.

La proposition présentée par le Président indépendant du Conseil de l'OAA à cette cent troisième session du Conseil de l'OAA nous semble prendre en compte les remarques exprimées par différents Etats Membres de l'OAA lors du dernier Comité des forêts, tout en conservant une taille opérationnelle et un équilibre relatif entre les différents intérêts.

Nous voudrions attirer l'attention sur le paragraphe (c) des termes de référence, et insister sur le fait que la réussite du PAFT dépendra de la mise en oeuvre, effective et rapide, des Programmes d'action forestiers nationaux, au sein des pays tropicaux concernés. Cet objectif devra recevoir la plus grande priorité de la part de la FAO et des autres structures impliquées dans le développement du PAFT.

Ichiro NOMURA (Japan) : We have never seen so much concern extended to forests and forestry as now. The role of FAO in this field has become bigger than ever in this context. The result of the Report on Forest Resources Assessment 1990 is very much appreciated and quite important for us to understand the serious current situation of world forests from a scientific view.

My Government feels that FAO's task in forestry is expected to be encouraged a lot more, but it is regrettable to see that the budget for the coming biennium will be slightly decreased.

My Government has supported TFAP through a trust fund contribution totalling US$1.3 million, positive participation in donors' round tables and the NFAP formation missions, as well as despatching an expert to coordinate units of TFAP, with the consideration that TFAP has been providing basic policy to sustainable forest development.

On the Consultative Group of TFAP, my delegation would like to express our support of the proposals made by the Independent Chairman of the FAO Council.

Julio LUCINI CASALES (España): En principio, queremos agradecer al Sr. Murray la presentación que ha hecho del documento 103/8, Informe del II periodo de sesiones del Comité de Montes. En una intervención que haré muy breve para permitir la participación de los numerosos oradores que se han inscrito, quiero hacer referencia exclusivamente a dos aspectos del máximo interés para la delegación española en relación solamente con el documento CL 103/8.

En primer lugar y dado que el concepto de sostenibilidad también afecta, como es lógico, a los aspectos silvícolas, es momento oportuno para que se reflexione con la mayor profundidad posible en que el equilibrio y la sostenibilidad requieren resolver tanto la restauración de la cubierta forestal como preservar al máximo las zonas forestales existentes en peligro. Es aquí donde animamos al máximo desarrollo compatible con las posibilidades presupuestarias de programas regionales de acción forestal que se realicen mediante la acción coordinada de países de una misma región. Este es el caso del Programa de Acción Forestal del Mediterráneo, formulado por Silva Mediterránea en el que España tiene un elevado interés.

El segundo aspecto y en línea con la declaración de mi delegación en el II período de sesiones del Comité de Montes del pasado mes de marzo, queremos insistir en la importancia que se debe dar a la realización de plantaciones con especies de crecimiento rápido para obtener productos industriales, el empleo de tierras marginales de bajos rendimientos agrícolas, pero abundantes en muchos países, haría menor la presión sobre los bosques de especies autóctonas y podría ofrecer a la sociedad mejor su potencialidad.

El establecimiento de programas en zonas piloto representativas daría un respaldo real al tema y sería una fuente de enseñanza para todos.

Por último, y con objeto de avanzar de forma rápida en este tema, se estima del máximo interés la mejora genética de estas especies de crecimiento rápido. Este tipo de plantaciones puede llegar a constituir la mayor parte de la producción forestal de algunos países pudiendo equilibrar en muchos casos el desequilibrio en el balance de productos forestales de los mismos.

Vishnu BHAGWAN (India): I must begin by thanking Mr Murray for a lucid presentation of the report of the 11th Session of the Committee on Forestry held earlier in March. My delegation fully endorses this report for acceptance by the Council.

I should like to restrict myself only to a few comments regarding the level of budget and your proposals for the constitution of the Consultative Group.

While considering the Medium-Term Plan and the programme priorities for forestry as well as the Programme of Work and Budget for 1994-95, the importance accorded to national forestry action plans has been recognized by the Committee, which requested larger resources for supporting TFAP implementation. It also noted the importance given to greening of the world and the fact that the UNCED forest principles had called for attention to be paid to all regions whether tropical, temperate or boreal. It also recalled that in the 1992-93 biennium even the approved forestry programme could not be carried out in its entirety. The proposal to cut the forestry allocation

by US$640 000 in the 1994-95 biennium was therefore deeply regretted. We entirely agree with the Committee's opinion.

My delegation feels that it is unfortunate that this is being done at a time when FAO has a greater role to play in matters concerning forestry, biodiversity, desertification and sustainable development in the post Rio scenario.

My country has always been strongly of the view that FAO is the lead agency in the UN system in the field of forestry through which studies should be initiated and action plans drawn up, which would help in capacity building and also assist the members in implementation of forestry plans.

We are also pleased to inform you that the World Bank recognized the role and technical excellence of FAO and will be contracting the organization for forestry project preparation services in my country. I assume the Bank would be similarly proceeding in respect of other countries as well.

My delegation strongly recommends that allocation of resources for forestry programmes should be augmented, or at least not reduced, to undertake the mandate and fulfil the challenge laid down by UNCED and the United Nations.

My delegation very much appreciates your efforts, Mr Chairman, in making your recommendations for the constitution of the Consultative Group on TFAP, and we will fully support your proposals.

Sri Murnining TYAS (Indonesia) : My delegation would like to welcome the report of the 11th Session of COFO presented on the document CL 103/8. My delegation would like also to congratulate the Independent Chairman for his excellent work in formulating the proposal for the establishment of the Consultative Group on the TFAP. However, we regret that the 11th Session of COFO could not come out with a solid consensus on the proposed establishment of the Consultative Group.

As you are aware, Indonesia has actively participated in TFAP since its initiation. The TFAP has contributed importantly to the national development. In addition, recommendations made by Forestry Sector Review and Indonesian Forestry Action Programme have been considered as the main input for the policy reform and institutional strengthening. We note that during the implementation of Indonesian Forestry Action Programme, donors' support is considered satisfactory.

Moreover, with regard to the forestry developmental issues, our Government pays a great concern on the outcome of some international meetings.

First, the broad consensus reached in UNCED that Principles of Forests govern all types of forests.

Second, with a view to contributing to the implementation of the outcome of UNCED, the Global Forest Conference was held in Bandung, Indonesia last February with the theme "Response to Agenda 21". The important outcome of theconference was the "BandungInitiative"which urgesus toundertake

immediate actions to develop, enhance and strengthen global partnership by, among others, "promoting and expanding efforts to increase the area of forests, to enhance the protection, and sustainable conservation of all types of forests, and enlarge the carbon sink of the world".

Third, the meeting to harmonize the TFAP approaches and exchange of knowledge among countries in the Asia Pacific region organized by TFAP Coordinating Unit of FAO, convened in Indonesia in 1992, declared that "In an effort to address the global environmental issues, within the framework of sustainable development, TFAP transcends the boundaries of the tropical zone and is a partnership programme between the developing and developed countries. Therefore, the Action Programme should be expanded to cover forestry outside the tropics".

My delegation took note of the introductory phrase of the term of reference which specifically made reference to "full respect to national sovereignty and sustainable development objectives, as well as the provisions of the non-legally binding Forest Principles agreed at UNCED". Therefore, in line with the spirit of the UNCED outcome, our cooperative undertakings should be referred to all types of forests. In this connection, my delegation wishes to reiterate the statement as expressed in paragraph 29, document CL 103/8. I repeat, Action Programme should be referred to all types of forests.

We appreciate the view of the Chairman of the Council, as stated in paragraph 49 Β of document CL 103/19. However, we are of the view that we should not delay the implementation of the UNCED spirit, and that our cooperative efforts should cover all types of forests. The post-UNCED activities should not be carried out with a partial approach, but should focus the consultative group's attention first in tropical forests. The issue of boreal and temperate zone forest problems could be dealt with at a later stage - we do not know when.

We support the Committee's view that FAO has important responsibilities to follow-up to UNCED in forestry. We therefore express the hope that an appropriate budget be considered under the forthcoming Programme of Work and Budget. My delegation will come back to discuss this matter at a later stage during the Council's debate on the Programme of Work and Budget agenda.

We follow with great attention the proposal as submitted by the Independent Chairman of the Council, as presented in document CL 103/19. We can go along with him that Article VI.5 of the Constitution could be used as a basis for establishing a body within FAO, including a consultative group. However, in line with the aforesaid consideration, we should also consider the matter of membership of the proposed consultative group in the same spirit as the intention of Member Countries to have Article VI in the Basic Texts.

In conclusion, we wish once again to express our appreciation for the efforts of the Chairman of the Council and express our respect for his proposals. My delegation wishes to request your kind permission, Mr Chairman, to allow us to take the floor again at a later stage on the issue of the establishment of a consultative group on TFAP, if and when deemed necessary.

Jürgen OESTREICH (Germany): I want to follow your advice, Mr Chairman, and separate my statements clearly with some remarks on the report of COFO and then on Agenda Item 9.1.

Firstly, Germany has taken an active part in COFO's deliberations last March. My delegation approves the results as reflected in document CL 103/8.

Let me just mention one point: The UNCED follow-up, particularly the pertinent chapters of Agenda 21, must be the yardstick for FAO, the specialized agency for food and agriculture and, I wish to stress, forestry.

With this in mind, my country shares the concern expressed by the Committee in paragraphs 54, 70 and 72, regarding the volume of money to be allocated to forestry during the next biennium. We consider the allocation to the Forestry Department Regular Programme Budget totally inappropriate in the light of the signals given by UNCED, the international community and the answers given by UNCED to urgent problems which have to be solved soon.

Therefore, we support the constructive proposals made by Canada and others such as India, my neighbour, and we have nothing to add to that.

Turning to Agenda Item 9.1, I should firstly like to thank you, Mr Chairman, for the efforts which have been made to prepare the proposal before us. My Government has always supported the TFAP as an important tool with which to coordinate the activities aimed at conserving tropical forests and to increase efficiency in the assistance to tropical countries. As Germany is a major donor and the major bilateral donor in this field, we appreciate all efforts to come to a better understanding about the needs and intentions of developing and developed countries.

To achieve this purpose, we have emphasized that the Consultative Group should be a forum where the participants can discuss the relevant tools which are at our disposal to strengthen partnership between the different participants of TFAP and to harmonize their specific interests.

During the long, perhaps too long, discussion process which has been under way now for several years, and not very fruitfully, the international debate has widened to find a consensus about what can be done and what should be done for the conservation of all forests, tropical and non-tropical. New initiatives have evolved to create an independent World Commission on Forests and Sustainable Development, although at the moment there is no clear picture about the future scope and mandate of that Commission.

As resources are limited, it is necessary in this situation to reflect further what is needed to meet best the requirements that came out of the UNCED process. To avoid possible double work (inter alia, with regard to the independent Commission on Forests and Sustainable Development) my delegation, therefore, is of the opinion that it would not be convenient to take a decision on the establishment of the Consultative Group today.

I should once again like to emphasize the commitment of my Government to assist tropical countries in implementing their national TFAPs.The

bottlenecks which hindered a more effective use of TFAP and a more rapid implementation, have been discussed at length. It is our experience over the last years that financial resources become available if good project proposals based on a clear strategy for the conservation of forests are prepared in a participative process of TFAP formulation. For my Government, the assistance to developing countries for the conservation of their forests remains a high priority, including the necessary institutional back-up.

LE PRESIDENT: Il est clair que quand un vaste problème se pose on crée une commission mais le tout est de savoir si en commissionnant un problème on parvient à la régler. Plusieurs pays importants, comme le Brésil et l'Inde, ont souligné le rôle de chef de file de la FAO dans le domaine forestier. J'ai relu ce matin l'Acte fondamental et je crois que le secteur forestier est un secteur qui relève de la compétence de la FAO et que jusqu'à présent la FAO est le seul organisme opérationnel qui puisse quelque peu être utile. Tout dépend des moyens dont nous disposerons à l'avenir car les forestiers savent mieux que moi que ce problème requiert une vision à très long terme pour nos enfants, pour les enfants de nos enfants et pour les petits enfants de nos petits enfants et qu'il n'y a pas que les essences à croissance rapide mais également des essences à croissance lente et que pour mener une grande politique forestière qui ne soit pas uniquement une politique de conservation mais une véritable politique de développement cette vision à long terme est nécessaire. Je ne crois pas que la création de commissions puisse apporter des solutions. Les agences opérationnelles sont chargées d'assumer leurs responsabilités et il leur incombe de faire face aux grands défis en fonction des moyens dont ces organisations devraient de manière impérative pouvoir disposer.

Kurshid HAMID (Bangladesh): I should like to highlight the national concern for the forestry sector of Bangladesh and its importance to conserve, enhance and sustainably manage the forest heritage, and to improve its contribution to development.

Of the total forest areas, natural forest areas make up almost 31 percent and forest plantation 13 percent. Shifting agriculture plus illegal occupation include 5 percent of forest lands, while water is 9 percent, unproductive areas 0.06 percent and other areas 35 percent account for almost 45 percent. Pgresently protected areas represent just over 5 percent of forest land.

Natural forest plus bamboo areas and plantations cover 835 000 hectares. Areas included in the present protected area network is 116 700 hectares, equalling 5.2 percent of state forest land and less than 1 percent of Bangladesh's total area.

In terms of forest land the Chittagong Hill Tracts Division on the eastern border contributes 47 percent, followed by Sunderbans, the land of the famous Bengal tiger, and the Patuakhali Coastal Division 27 percent. Inventories show an overall depletion in forest stocks in all the major forests. About half of the land area controlled by the Forest Department lacks tree cover.

Good tree-covered areas under the current situation are declining at the rate of 2.5 percent, which will continue to decline at a varying rate. The natural forest area is declining by 3 percent and this will also continue for some time.

Stress will be put on environment and conservation. Particular attention will be given to the monitoring of environmental impact assessment and biodiversity conservation, which will in turn act as a gene bank.

The future of development on forestry is devoted to high per-unit production which needs technological adoption. In such a case, research and development needs to be strengthened, and for genetic improvement and sustainability issues, stress will be put on the production of quality seeds. Bangladesh has already initiated the establishment of seed orchards of important forestry species. The programme has been strengthened to cater to the needs of government agencies and non-governmental organizations.

We fully agree with the establishment of a Consultative Group on the Tropical Forest Action Programme. We are in agreement with the main priority areas for sustainable forestry development. It could be mentioned here that a forestry master plan for 20 years is being developed by Bangladesh National Forest Management with the assistance of ADB and FAO. To implement this forestry Master Plan, the continued support of FAO is essential. Therefore, we feel that for national as well as global interests, an FAO programme to work with a sufficient budget for the coming period be made.

We are also in agreement with the establishment of a linkage between forestry and nutrition, and inter-action between forestry and agriculture.

Jacques LAUREAU (France): Je voudrais d'abord remercier M. Murray de son remarquable rapport introductif et lui dire que nous adhérons pleinement, bien entendu, au rapport de la onzième session du COFO qui souligne le rôle irremplaçable, et le rôle de chef de file irremplaçable également de l'OAA dans la mise en oeuvre de la coopération internationale forestière. C'est vrai tout particulièrement pour la mise en oeuvre de l'Agenda 21 concernant les questions forestières et c'est vrai aussi quant au rôle que joue l'aménagement intégré pour la nutrition à long terme. A cet égard, comme le Canada, l'Allemagne, l'Inde, nous trouvons que les moyens mis en oeuvre sur le plan financier, pour la réalisation des plans forestiers, ne devraient pas connaître de diminution mais au contraire une augmentation. Nous suggérons • que la révision à la hausse du budget ordinaire du Département forestier se fasse au bénéfice de l'unité de coordination du PAFT ainsi que du programme d'évaluation des ressources forestières mondiales dont le degré de priorité a été souligné à maintes reprises par le COFO et qui reposent depuis leur origine, sur des contributions exclusivement extra-budgétaires.

Je voudrais aborder maintenant la question du point 9.1 concernant la création du groupe consultatif sur le PAFT.

En 1990, l'équipe indépendante de revue du PAFT, dirigée par l'Ambassadeur Ola Ullsten avait recommandé la création d'un Groupe consultatif indépendant qui contribuerait à la définition des orientations stratégiques et au renforcement

des appuis politiques et financiers pour la préparation et la mise en oeuvre des plans nationaux d'action forestiers (PAFN).

La France avait appuyé cette initiative, et depuis nous avons participé très activement à cet exercice en espérant le voir aboutir rapidement. Je voudrais ici saluer l'engagement et les efforts continus déployés par notre collègue malgache, M. Raphaël Rabe, à la présidence des travaux du groupe de travail constitué pour approfondir notre réflexion.

Pour nous, ce groupe consultatif sur le PAFT devait être établi avec le soutien actif de la Banque mondiale et du PNUD, coparrains du PAFT. Il devait bénéficier d'une participation des ONG équilibrant les intérêts industriels, commerciaux et ceux de la protection de l'environnement. Bref, l'objectif au départ était d'élargir le partenariat du PAFT au-delà des membres fondateurs, afin de renforcer son audience et de mobiliser davantage de ressources financières.

Après trois ans de discussions, il n'y a manifestement pas unanimité sur le projet de Groupe consultatif présenté selon la formule de compromis tentée avec courage, par le Président indépendant du Conseil, au point que le dernier COFO n'a pas été en mesure de proposer une recommandation au Conseil sur ce point.

D'autre part, la Banque mondiale et le PNUD, coparrains fondateurs du PAFT, ont clairement exprimé leurs réserves sur ce projet de Groupe consultatif. Ils assisteront aux séances, mais ils n'ont pas dit s'ils y participeraient activement (y compris financièrement) et s'ils prendront en compte ses travaux.

Les ONG ont dit qu'elles ne participeraient pas au Groupe consultatif si elles n'en font pas partie à part entière, c'est-à-dire avec droit de vote.

Monsieur le Président, ce Groupe consultatif, tel que présenté, ne sera-t-il pas une nouvelle instance s'occupant de forêts tropicales, aux côtés du COFO et du CDFT? Quelle valeur ajoutée pourra-t-il apporter? Comment financera-t-on ses travaux, puisque je rappelle que l'Organisation n'a pas prévu d'inscrire cette opération sur son budget ordinaire? Et quels sont les bailleurs de fonds qui seraient aujourd'hui prêts à financer une institution redondante à certains égards.

Enfin, la CNUED de Rio a attiré l'attention sur le problème de toutes les forêts, et pas seulement des forêts tropicales, et l'on connaît les tensions créées par la focalisation des environnementalistes sur les forêts tropicales.

L'Ambassadeur Ola Ullsten, le même qui avait dirigé l'équipe de revue indépendante du PAFT, a proposé la création d'une Commission mondiale des forêts et du développement durable, initiative fortement appuyée par la récente Conférence de Bandung sur les Forêts globales. Cette Conférence semble promouvoir les bases d'un processus consultatif indépendant sur les questions forestières mondiales. Sa proposition antérieure est donc en quelque sorte gommée par le nouveau processus. Il y a une sorte de redoublement à moins qu'il y ait complémentarité? C'est une question.

C'est avec regret, compte tenu de notre engagement constant depuis 1991 pour la concrétisation de l'idée initiale, que nous nous interrogeons sur la pertinence de la proposition qui nous est faite de création du Groupe consultatif sur le PAFT. Mais bien entendu nous ne nous opposerions pas à l'émergence d'un consensus.

LE PRESIDENT: Je remercie particulièrement l'Ambassadeur de France. Lorsqu'il sera répondu aux différentes interventions, je crois que des mises au point devront être faites, notamment en ce qui concerne la position du PNUD et de la Banque mondiale qui est une position claire quant à leur acceptation complète pour une participation active au sein du groupe consultatif.

Vous avez évoqué les travaux menés par un Ambassadeur. Je crois que dans le cadre de la restructuration de la famille des Nations Unies, il est profondément malsain d'envisager, notamment dans un monde d'interdépendance, la création de nouveaux organismes indépendants sans aucune possibilité de faire autre chose que du papier et sans aucune possibilité de prolongation opérationnelle. Or, il a été souligné de manière très claire que l'acte fondamental de la FAO lui donnait des responsabilités complètes dans le domaine forestier et d'ailleurs plusieurs pays ont souligné le rôle de chef de file de la FAO dans le domaine des forêts. Par conséquent, je pense que la constitution de commissions mondiales, d'organismes indépendants n'est pas de nature à apporter une solution concrète aux besoins d'un certain nombre de pays.

Mon sentiment, je l'ai dit très clairement, est que le problème forestier est un problème global et que dans le cadre du PAFT se posent des problèmes immédiats pour un certain nombre de pays qui n'ont pas les moyens d'assumer des responsabilités, faute de ressources. Il faut donc procéder par étape et ne jamais perdre de vue que les objectifs à atteindre sont globaux, sont des objectifs d'interdépendance globale des situations forestières dans l'ensemble de la planète.

Paul ROSS (Australia): Australia participated actively in the Eleventh Session of the Committee on Forestry and is happy to endorse the Report of the meeting contained in document CL 103/8 as an accurate record of the discussions. Therefore, we will confine our remarks to the matters drawn to the attention of this Council Session.

Australia shares the concerns of COFO and of those other members who have spoken here about the proposed reduction in the allocation for forestry in the Programme of Work and Budget for the next biennium. This concern was also expressed by Australia and the other members of the Programme Committee at its meeting last month.

The proposal to reduce the allocation for forestry runs counter to the weight of international opinion expressed at UNCED and elsewhere that forests are an issue of the highest priority. As reflected in the COFO report, FAO has important responsibilities in the follow-up to UNCED on forestry in concert with other bodies sharing global leadership in this area. Australia hopes, if

it is at all possible, that increased resources will be allocated for the forestry programme in the 1994-95 Programme of Work.

Australia also endorses the request made by COFO that the linkages between forestry and nutrition be brought to the attention of COAG and the Committee on World Food Security with the suggestion that there will be greater flexibility between agriculture and forestry budgets.

We would also like to draw attention to the region-specific aspects of many nutrition issues. We particularly endorse the recommendation of COFO in paragraph 63 of the Report that the Regional Forestry Commissions further examine this issue in the context of their respective regions.

Finally, Australia has consistently supported the need for an effective Tropical Forest Action Programme. It is our hope that a consensus on the issue of the Consultative Group on the TFAP can be reached soon.

Juan NUIRY SANCHEZ (Cuba): La delegación de Cuba desea intervenir brevemente para apoyar el informe del undécimo período de sesiones del Comité de Montes, Comité que constituye uno de los objetivos centrales y fundamentales de la FAO en su función de líder sobre la materia, razón por la cual nuestra delegación sólo se concentrará en los asuntos que requieren la atención del Consejo, propósito que nos facilita la presentación del Sr. Murray, breve y precisa, así como también la introducción de usted sobre el tema, Presidente Saintraint, gestor principal y autorizado de este proyecto que se analiza, cuyo trabajo y esfuerzo entendemos justo reconocer.

Apoyamos el establecimiento del Grupo Consultivo, haciendo énfasis en que se tengan en cuenta las enmiendas referentes a la soberanía nacional, los objetivos de desarrollo sostenible y la declaración autorizada de principios para una consenso mundial respecto a la ordenación, la conservación y el desarrollo sostenible de los bosques, así como la función de seguimiento del flujo de fondos destinados a la ejecución de los planes de acciones forestales nacionales y la recomendación de mecanismos financieros viables para la disponbilidad de fondos y recursos.

Cuba destaca las importantes responsabilidades, tanto de la FAO como de los países, en las actividades complementarias de la Conferencia de las Naciones Unidas para el Medio Ambiente y Desarrollo en el sector forestal, apoyando las áreas prioritarias propuestas por la FAO contenidas en el epígrafe 53 del informe del COFO.

No podemos dejar de plantear nuestra preocupación por la dilación de las discusiones sobre la creación del grupo Consultivo sobre el PAFT, que ya datan de casi tres años, y la poca disponibilidad de recursos internacionales puestos a disposición para la implementación de los planes nacionales del PAFT. En este sentido, señor Presidente, permítame hacer un comentario al margen, y es el alarmante recorte monetario que se está produciendo en el seno de algunos mecanismos multilaterales que tienen que ver, muy directamente también, con las cuestiones del medio ambiente. Leíamos con preocupación hace algunos días un artículo que planteaba la intervención central de la Presidenta del PNUMA, quien se lamentaba del recorte financiero de su

organismo que le impide cumplir con los compromisos a que se llegó el año pasado en la Cumbre de Rio de Janeiro sobre el Medio Ambiente y Desarrollo. Señaló que se estaba recibiendo una cuarta parte de los recursos que se comprometieron poner para el Fondo del medio ambiente. Esta noticia nos hace pensar que debemos conjuntamente reelaborar nuestras prioridades, y que la palabra dada por 120 Gobernantes en Rio de Janeiro tiene que significar algo más que un compromiso de palabra; debe ser una actuación decisiva en favor de la Agenda 21 y en general de la salvación del planeta que condividimos, cuyos recursos están a punto de extinguirse y, lo que es más grave, está también en peligro la supervivencia de la especie humana, precisamente lo que debe constituir nuestro primer reto que es prevenir el deterioro ambiental.

Finalmente, esta preocupación la reiteramos con relación al presupuesto asignado al Departamento de Montes, y por ende a la actividad forestal, opinando que es insuficiente a pesar de las peticiones y exhortaciones hechas para aumentar dichas asignaciones; todo esto, señor Presidente, si además se tiene en cuenta que los programas del presupuesto no reflejan el nivel similar de importancia que los gobiernos y la Conferencia de las Naciones Unidas sobre el Medio Ambiente y Desarrollo le han asignado a la silvicultura en particular. Apoyamos lo planteado en el marco del undécimo Comité de Montes respecto a que volvamos a examinar las prioridades generales de la Organización para que se le dé una mayor asignación al sector forestal.

Morad Ali ARDESHIRI (Iran, Islamic Republic of): First I wish to express my appreciation to Mr Murray for his clear and concise introduction to the subject of our present discussion. Secondly, our delegation actively took part in the Eleventh Session of the Committee on Forestry so we fully support its report which is before us and the document CL 103/8 to our Council. Nevertheless, in brief I wish to emphasize and make some remarks on some issues.

As my delegation expressed its concern on the cut of the forestry allocation for 1994-95 biennium I wish to reiterate my concern with the proposal to cut the forestry allocation by US$649 000 for the 1994-95 biennium and that should be reconsidered, as raised by the delegate of Canada and others.

Concerning the forestry and sustainable development outcome and the implication for FAO forestry programme, as my delegation has pointed out on several occasions, the leading role of FAO as a technical international agency within the United Nations system must be emphasized in the implementation of those programmes of Agenda 21 and any follow-up action of UNCED which are related to the forestry and natural resources issue. In this context at the first substantive session of the Inter-governmental Negotiating Committee for the Elaboration of an International Convention to Combat Desertification in those countries experiencing serious drought and/or desertification, particularly in Africa, which was held in Nairobi last May, I support it and emphasize the role of FAO in implementation of the related programme, Agenda 21 and particularly in elaborating follow-up action of the aforementioned Convention. So if FAO wants to move along with the caravan of the UNCED, which we strongly believe that it must do, it must be more active and play a greater role in any follow-up action of Agenda 21 of the UNCED which is related to the mandate of the FAO.

In doing so, from the technical point of view, we strongly believe that some programmes of FAO, such as combating desertification, watershed management, natural resources management and the other multi-disciplinary subjects must be dealt with through the inter-departmental programme and this is strongly important to be taken into consideration in our programme of FAO, including forestry activities.

The second point, in order to achieve this objective the forestry programme budget must be increased instead of being decreased as opposed in the related medium-term programme.

This is my intervention at this stage and in respect to your recommendations, may I ask to take the floor regarding the establishment of the Consultative Group on Tropical Forestry Action Plan as our discussion is proceeding.

LE PRESIDENT: Je souhaiterais que les deux points soient joints dans la discussion, mais il va de soi que tous les Membres du Conseil peuvent reprendre la parole comme ils l'entendent et je prends acte du souhait exprimé par l'honorable Représentant de, la République islamique d'Iran.

Avant de donner la parole à Madagascar, je voudrais rendre un hommage tout particulier à M. Rabe car on a fait état du document qu'il vous soumet; ce n'est pas un document personnel mais le reflet des conversations que nous avons eues, mais je voudrais souligner le rôle extrêmement important que le Dr Rabe a joué pendant de très nombreux mois pour essayer d'aboutir à un large accord. Je crois qu'un consensus sans réserves, global est chose impossible; nous devons tenter de dégager de larges accords assortis d'un certain nombre de réserves, car qui n'a pas de réserves sur une proposition? Mais je vais donner la parole au Représentant de Madagascar en remerciant une fois encore Monsieur Rabe pour tout ce qu'il a fait.

Raphaël RABE (Madagascar): Monsieur le Président, je tiens à vous remercier pour les paroles aimables que vous avez prononcées à mon endroit. La délégation de Madagascar est reconnaissante à M. Murray pour la présentation très claire qu'il a faite du point 9 de l'ordre du jour. Ayant participé à la onzième session du Comité des forêts, nous appuyons bien entendu les principales conclusions et propositions qui sont contenues dans le rapport. Nous regrettons immédiatement le bas niveau de ressources proposé pour le secteur forestier dans le budget ordinaire de l'Organisation mais, à notre sens, cette question devrait être examinée dans le Programme de travail et budget 1994-95 en tenant compte de l'ensemble des priorités insuffisamment dotées.

Cela dit, Monsieur le Président, la délégation malgache apprécie grandement l'effort que vous avez fourni pour obtenir des Etats Membres concernés et/ou intéressés par le Programme d'action forestier tropical une vue commune ou tout au moins partagée par le plus grand nombre des principes directeurs qui doivent régir le groupe consultatif sur le PAFT. Nos félicitations vous sont également adressées car, déjà au COFO, vos propositions pour le moins pertinentes ont été accueillies favorablement, ce qui permet de saisir maintenant le Conseil pour une décision nous espérons finale.

Des points litigieux comme la participation active et intense des organisations non gouvernementales, la dimension du Groupe consultatif et la représentation des groupes régionaux d'une façon équitable, et même la prise en considération à terme de tous les types de forêts ont trouvé des solutions consensuelles. Il suffit de se reporter à l'alinéa Β du paragraphe 49 du document CL 103/19 pour constater que votre proposition ne se limite pas aux seules forêts tropicales mais, à terme, intéressera toutes les forêts. Cependant, comme vous l'avez si bien dit, il y a des priorités et la priorité actuelle est de venir au secours de tous les pays en voie de développement qui possèdent des forêts gravement menacées et qu'ils veulent exploiter d'une manière rationnelle et durable.

Cependant, Monsieur le Président, on ne peut pas vous reprocher d'avoir rejeté tout simplement mais fermement l'idée d'un groupe indépendant car, comme vous l'avez signalé à juste titre, la FAO et, à travers elle, ses organes directeurs ne peuvent pas et de doivent pas créer un organe ou une organisation qui échapperait à ses règles, organe qui lui serait indépendant, c'est illogique et cela dépasserait tout entendement.

En vérité, comme vous le souligniez, n'importe quel Etat, pour ne pas dire n'importe qui, peut créer tel organe quand il le désire et comme il le désire et il n'est point besoin pour ce faire de s'adresser à la FAO et d'impliquer cette dernière.

Nous avons enregistré avec plaisir, Monsieur le Président, que beaucoup de délégations ce matin, entre autres le Bangladesh, le Canada, le Congo et le Brésil, ont confirmé une fois encore le rôle de leader de la FAO dans le secteur forestier et c'est la FAO qui pourra donner les meilleurs conseils au groupe, alors pourquoi n'en profitérait-il pas?

Monsieur le Président, si Madagascar ne s'était pas joint aux pays qui ont rejeté a priori et sans appel le projet de créer un groupe consultatif sur le PAFT, c'est parce qu'il était et qu'il est encore aujourd'hui, soit dit en passant, convaincu qu'un tel Forum pourrait contribuer à la résolution rapide et satisfaisante des problèmes financiers ardus qu'ont connus et que connaissent encore les pays qui avaient déjà des projets fin prêts pour la mise en oeuvre; beaucoup de ces pays étaient parvenus à la table ronde devant déboucher sur la mobilisation de financements appropriés, mais ils ont été déçus et nous espérons que la création d'un tel groupe pourra les aider à débloquer la situation. Le forum en question devrait s'employer à faire sauter les goulots d'étranglement et à favoriser donc les investissements dans le secteur forestier. Nous étions aussi convaincus que tout en étant créé au sein de la FAO et utilisant les textes appropriés, le Forum devrait permettre aux ONG de s'exprimer largement et librement et ainsi de participer intensivement à l'instar des Etats Membres aux travaux; pour nous, la raison d'être du Groupe consultatif et le rôle positif qu'il pourrait jouer pour dynamiser le PAFT est et demeure valable et nous serions partie prenante à toute résolution qui procéderait à sa création. Cependant, Monsieur le Président, nous souhaiterions vivement que les problèmes de financement du fonctionnement de l'organe trouvent une solution urgente et nous serions vivement reconnaissants aux pays qui pourraient donner des indications à ce sujet.

LE PRESIDENT: Je remercie vivement le Dr Rabe de son intervention qui concerne le financement. Je crois qu'il a parfaitement raison. Merci de son intervention extrêmement claire et positive.

Ms Julia MORRIS (United States of America): The United States participated in the llth Session and endorses its report. We would like to speak to several items forwarded to the Council for discussion and decision. The establishment of the Consultative Group of the Tropical Forestry Action Programme is addressed separately under Agenda Item 9.1, and we will reserve our remarks on that item to present at the conclusion of our intervention. On the matter of forestry and sustainable development, the United States feels that the Forestry Department has developed overly ambitious goals for itself in the follow-up to UNCED. The objectives to support all the priority areas emerging from UNCED must be tempered by the budgetary constraints of the FAO, as well as the responsibility resting with individual countries and other international structures. The United States requests that the Forestry Department further prioritize the allocation of its limited resources among those programme areas for which it has clearest responsibility and comparative advantage.

These include the areas of forest resources assessment, sustainable forest management, and national capacity building in support of the UN Agenda 21 programme. The United States on the matter of programme priority for forestry and the Programme of Work and Budget for 1994-95, the United States reiterates COFO's call for greater prioritization of programmes to achieve more effective programme impact. The US also reiterates the request noted in paragraph 95 of the report of the COFO; namely, to provide additional information to members on reductions in the budget, greater overall transparency, and improved accountability to allow FAO to maximize efficiency and identify areas of its greatest comparative advantage. The United States is concerned that the FAO, in light of the importance attributed to forest resource management during the UNCED and the equal importance given by governments to agriculture and forestry during the UNCED, can justify a disproportionate reduction in the Forestry Department budget. The United States strongly urges the Council, as many of our colleagues have before us, to recommend that the Programme of Work and Budget for the Forestry Department be re-examined and augmented to reflect the importance which Member Nations attribute to the forest sector. On the establishment of a Consultative Group on the Tropical Forestry Action Programme, the United States position on the Consultative Group over the past two-and-a-half years has been clear. While we appreciate the time and effort invested by the Chairman and by Mr Rabe of Madagascar, we do not believe that the proposed Consultative Group mechanism represents a significant advance towards a revamped and revitalized tropical action programme, especially in the post-UNCED era. While we will not repeat here all the comments that we shared with the Committee on Forestry, a summary of our principal concerns may be useful to the Council. We are concerned that the proposed Consultative Group will be unable to meet its objectives for the following reasons: first, we sense that it will be unable to attract needed financial resources from principal multilateral and bilateral donors, and we do not believe that nongovernmental organizations will feel sufficiently welcomed by the proposed Consultative Group to participate in it fully. In addition, the United States feels that this is an inopportune time to create a new bureaucratic structure

within the FAO to address forestry issues, in light of the imminent election of a new Director-General, the current negotiations of the International Tropical Timber Agreement, the possible establishment by the Secretary General of the United Nations of the proposed independent World Commission on Forests and Sustainable Development, and the decision of the UN Commission on Sustainable Development, to address forestry issues in its 1994 agenda. Most of the work of the proposed Consultative Group can be handled by the existing Committee on Forestry and Committee on Forest Development in the Tropics. The United States, therefore, does not believe that the proposed Consultative Group should be established.

Nevertheless, we also feel strongly that this 103rd Session of the Council must come to closure and reach a final decision on the establishment of the Consultative Group. The subject has already taken up too much time and energy on the agendas of the Committee on Forest Development in the Tropics, the Committee on Forestry, the Council, and numerous ad hoc sessions. Continuing debate will only be counter-productive and will further divide already polarized views. If the Tropical Forestry Consultative Group is established, it is unlikely that the United States would be able to contribute financially to its operation, although we will continue to work to support country-driven tropical forestry activities. With respect to the observations made by the Independent Chairman in paragraph 49 in document CL 103/19, the United States has the following comments or concerns : if the Consultative Group is established, the United States will insist that it confine its work to implementation of that programme it is intended to ameliorate, the Tropical Forestry Action Programme. As noted by our distinguished colleague from Madagascar, this Consultative Group has always been to address the implementation of TFAP. A technical consultative body to address all forestry issues already exists in the form of the Committee on Forestry. The United States cannot and will not agree to the establishment of the Consultative Group for Tropical Forestry Action Programme if it is to be granted additional responsibilities for issues regarding temperate and boreal forests. These topics are more appropriately addressed in other international fora. The United States does not support diverting the already limited Regular Programme funds towards the work of the Consultative Group but rather agrees with the Chairman's proposal that if established the Consultative Group should be funded by an extra-budgetary resources. The United States also agrees with the Chairman's proposal that the performance of the Consultative Group be evaluated at the conclusion of three years before authorizing its further existence. We also believe that it is essential that the Consultative Group report to and be evaluated by the technical body best qualified to do so, that is, the Committee on Forestry or the Committee on Forest Development in the Tropics. In conclusion, as I stated earlier, the United States does not believe that the proposed Consultative Group should be established. However, in the event that all members of the Council agree to go forward with the establishment of the Consultative Group, the United States will not oppose consensus agreement in the Council on the Consultative Group, providing our aforementioned concerns are met.

LE PRESIDENT: Nous tenons à dire que les Etats-Unis ont toujours été les défenseurs de la coordination entre les organisations internationales et partisans d'une participation consultative d'un certain nombre d'organisations

non gouvernementales. Le Groupe consultatif qui n'a pas plus de prétention que l'actuel Comité technique travaille actuellement sur un problème spécifique et permet aux organisations internationales intéressées de travailler ensemble la Banque mondiale, le PNUD, le PNUE ont marqué leur accord à une participation. La composition n'est peut-être pas parfaite mais elle peut toujours être corrigée. Sur le principe d'une coordination je crois que les Etats-Unis d'Amérique ne peuvent que la souhaiter comme nous la souhaitons tous parce que le fait de créer des commissions indépendantes sans coordination avec les organismes opérationnels responsables me paraît quelque peu être un non-sens.

Abdul BAIST HAQQANI (Pakistan): The delegation of Pakistan had actively participated in the 11th Session of the Committee on Forestry held in March 1993. We are in general agreement with the report of this Session and would restrict our intervention to only a few points.

UNCED has laid before us an Agenda in which forest conservation and sustainable development occupy an important place. Since we recognize FAO as the leading international agency in this field, we expect it will play a key role in the follow-up of the Rio Declaration. In doing so, a measure of reorientation may be required so that appropriate strategies and plans are developed to further the objectives of sustainable development and management of all kinds of forests. In this regard, we would like to emphasize that the delegation of Pakistan attaches great importance to capacity building and afforestation/reforestation programmes. Development of national forestry action plans must continue to receive due attention so that countries can embark upon a sound course for the sustainable management of their forest resources.

This brings us to the question of allocation of resources for the forestry sector. It is ironic that increased attention to forests has led not to a corresponding increase, but to a decrease in resources. The proposed reduction in resources will obviously affect the ability of the Organization to discharge the mandate in this sector. In particular, the priority areas of national capacity building and afforestation would severely suffer if adequate funding is not provided. Although this subject will be discussed in greater detail under Item 18, we would like to place on record our regret at seeing a reduction in the proposed allocation for the forestry sector for the 1994-95 biennium. We strongly urge that this matter be reconsidered so that appropriate adjustments can be made within the Programme of Work and Budget to identify additional resources for channelling into the forestry sector.

As regards the question of establishment of a Consultative Group on Tropical Forests Action Programme, we would like to express our appreciation for the efforts you have made, Mr Chairman, in furthering the process of consultation.

We hope it will be possible for you to see the fruits of your efforts before you end your term of office.

We are. in general agreement with the broad framework for the proposed Consultative Group and its terms of reference as amended. However, on certain aspects, some of which are of vital concern, full consensus is still proving

elusive. These aspects range from the legal framework, its composition, to funding.

We agree that if the proposed Consultative Group is to be established under the aegis of FAO, it should be done within the constitutional framework of FAO under the provisions that have been indicated, that is Article VI.5 of the FAO Constitution. However, this does not adequately clarify the nature and extent of the participation of the co-sponsors of TFAP, that is, World Bank and UNDP, in the proposed Consultative Group.

Under the proposed format of the Consultative Group it is also not clear whether it will be able to accomplish its task without duplicating the work which could possibly be undertaken by already existing bodies.

The questions raised in respect of regional representation are still unresolved, and an acceptable formula has not yet been devised to ensure balanced representation. The question of participation of NGOs on an equal footing with sovereign states is one on which we have reservations. Such an arrangement would not only create an awkward precedent, have wide-ranging implications, but would be contrary to reality since it would create entities that are completely different in nature in the scope of the activities and the responsibilities that they bear.

As regards funding for the proposed Consultative Group, obviously no provisions are envisaged in the Programme of Work and Budget for the next biennium, and no extrabudgetary sources have been indicated which could be tapped to meet the essential costs.

As I have said, there are these several grey areas, but my delegation would like to continue to make its contribution to the achievement of a consensus.

CHAIRMAN: In reply to the distinguished representative of Pakistan, I would like to say that the proper role is only in the framework of Article VI.5.

MA GENG-OU (China) (Original language Chinese): I would like to thank the Assistant Director-General, Mr Murray, and also the Secretariat for preparing the very extensive and comprehensive document.

I would like to touch upon forestry and sustainable development and on TFAP.

Concerning forestry and sustainable development, we believe that forestry plays a very important role in environmental protection and sustainable agricultural development. Therefore, all governments should place forestry in a very important position. The reason for my not mentioning its position as of the highest priority is because forestry is not proceeding at a unified pace and physical conditions of countries differ from one another. Therefore, in formulating forestry development plans, all countries should establish their own priorities in light of specific conditions. Similarly, in providing assistance, FAO should put emphasis on the specific situation of each Member Country.For example, some countries may need advisory services, some need

help to enhance the capacity of their forestry departments, some need help to make resource assessment and others need technical training and so on.

With regard to resources of the Forestry Department, I heard a lot of delegates express regret at the reduction of resources in the forestry sector. I recall that in other sessions of COFI or COAG this reduction of resources issues has been responded to many times. Since FAO has limited resources, how can we get resources for all sectors? We would therefore urge FAO, in accordance with the opinions of Member Countries, to readjust their resource allocation and priority allocations.

With regard to TFAP, we think the objective of TFAP is positive and conducive to the protection and development of tropical forests, and we appreciate the large amount of work done by FAO and countries and institutions concerned in implementing TFAP.

I would now like to give special thanks to the Independent Chairman, Mr Saintraint. We highly appreciate your efforts.

The Chinese delegation, in principle, supports the establishment of the TFAPConsultative Group. Nevertheless, we have to establish clearly the task, competence and scope of the work, as these have not yet been made clear. Thisis a very great international cooperation programme, and since it is acooperation programme we have to consider the opinions and interests of allparties concerned. To this end, it is very important that we be very flexibleand compromising. I believe that if we do not have compromise we cannotachieve cooperation. Therefore, we hope that all parties concerned will actin a spirit of cooperation and with a sense of responsibility for improvingenvironment and bringing benefits for future generations in their attempts tosuccessfully implement TFAP.

LE PRESIDENT: Je remercie le très honorable Représentant de la Chine de son intervention très positive. Je me permets très respectueusement de lui faire remarquer que le mandat du Groupe consultatif figure en dernière page de l'annexe du document CL 103/19.

Inge GERREMO (Sweden): I have the honour of making this statement on behalf of the three Nordic countries, Finland, Norway and Sweden. Let me first thank Mr Murray for his clear introduction to the COFI report.

On the agenda of the 11th Session of COFO three months ago, especially two items were widely discussed. These were the UNCED outcome and its implications for FAO's forestry programme, and the TFAP, including the proposed establishment of a Consultative Group.

In accordance with the resolution unanimously adopted by the UN General Assembly on the institutional arrangements for the follow-up of the UNCED, the overall responsibility of the follow-up is given to the Commission on Sustainable Development. The organization of the work of CSD is under way, and future decisions of that forum will be guiding and therefore be important for the work of a number of UN specialized agencies, including FAO. It is

quite evident, however, that in forestry matters a major contribution of the lead agency for forestry is urgently needed and expected.

When reading the present proposal for FAO's Programme of Work and Budget for 1994-95, it is hard to see how this Organization will be able to take a lead expert role in the implementation of UNCED decisions and the development of the forest principles. The relative weight of the forestry sector in FAO's activities has diminished over a long period of time, and a further reduction in the allocations for forestry is being proposed. This concern was shared by COFO delegations, as is mentioned in the introductory part of document CL 103/8. However, the concern is not reflected in the Programme of Work and Budget proposal distributed to the present Session of the Council. We shall return to this matter during the discussion on the Programme of Work and Budget.

As almost two-thirds of the programme areas of Agenda 21 are relevant for FAO's activities, a determined priority setting, along the lines of UNCED decisions, is necessary between the departments as well as within each sector. Taking into account the high priority to forestry matters that was considered necessary during the UNCED process, we would not like to see a further marginalization of forestry in FAO.

The priority areas within the forestry sector were discussed and generally agreed by COFO. In out view, the opinion of the Committee should be reflected more thoroughly in the reshaping of the Programme of Work and Budget including that adequate resources be guaranteed to these priority areas. We find, for example, that FAO should, instead of postponing meetings of regional forestry commissions, consider means to revitalize them to serve as fora for fruitful discussions on regional problems including those on the implementation of UNCED decisions.

In the longer run, and from the substantive point of view, our concern is not only the share of the forestry sector in the Programme of Work and Budget. It is important to consider the interaction between agriculture and forestry. FAO should utilize its multidisciplinary strength to analyse how agricultural and forestry activities could best interact.

As for the Tropical Forestry Action Programme, we have expressed our strong support to the concept of TFAP during several occasions. We have also expressed our concern for the increased criticism towards the TFAP and given our support to a revamping process. One of the elements of this process has been the discussion on the need of a Consultative Group. In our view, the aim of such a group was to ensure equality between the co-sponsors so that each one would contribute fully to TFAP on the basis of its particular competence and comparative advantage, as was also elaborated on by my distinguished colleague the Ambassador of France.

In the COFO meeting we made some critical observations on the compromise solution proposed by the Independent Chairman of the Council. We had, and still have, serious doubts whether a consultative group established within FAO would really be able to ensure the equality, transparency and confidence needed for a successful future of TFAP.

Against the background of the remaining uncertainties in relation to the establishment and the efficiency of the Consultative Group we support the point made in document CL 103/19 that the group - if established - be established only for an initial period of three years, with an obligatory performance assessment at the end of this period.

In addition there are two more specific remarks we would like to make concerning the proposal presented in the document.

In our view, the participation of NGOs is fruitful and necessary in order to enhance the transparency and for the exchange of information. Election of the representatives of the NGOs may, however, prove to be problematic and costly, especially if the rotation causes a continuous need for the arrangement of workshops. We would not welcome this kind of administrative cost to reduce the resources otherwise available for the implementation of TFAP. At least a number of other benefits should be achieved through these workshops.

Among the additional observations of document CL 103/19 it is mentioned that the Group's terms of reference would focus on TFAP but should gradually extend to forest problems in general. As the terms of reference, as well as the composition of the Group proposed, focus merely on tropical forests in the TFAP context, we would not find such a gradual extension reasonable.

Global forest issues, including forest problems in temperate and boreal zones, do need to be discussed, but we are not convinced that the Consultative Group on TFAP be the right forum for that purpose. The forthcoming decisions and arrangements by the CSD and other fora related to forestry should be known before more permanent and sustainable institutional arrangements on a global forestry dialogue can be defined.

Let me sum up by saying that we would favour a decision not to establish the Consultative Group on TFAP proposed in document CL 103/19.

LE PRESIDENT: Si j'ai bien compris vous êtes pour le Groupe consultatif mais en même temps contre le groupe consultatif tel que proposé. Je demanderai donc, en fin de réunion, quels sont les pays qui sont pour et quels sont les pays qui sont contre. J'avoue qu'entre être d'accord avec un groupe consultatif et ne pas être d'accord, je ne saisis pas bien la nuance. C'est une position qui me paraît assez étrange. Je crois que s'il n'y a pas de co-parrain à ce groupe consultatif, s'il y a une participation de la Banque mondiale, du PNUD, du PNUE et de l’ITO, il vaut beaucoup mieux être membre direct de la famille que d'être un lointain parrain. D'ailleurs cette notion de parrain est une notion religieuse qui n'a aucune portée d'ordre juridique et je dirais que le "sponsorship" n'équivaut certainement pas à une participation réelle, franche, loyale et active.

Les pays devront prendre leur responsabilité et dire nettement s'ils veulent ou ne veulent pas ce type de forum qui est un forum extrêmement modeste, créé dans le cadre de l'article VI, paragraphe 5 de la FAO.

Iván MARULANDA GOMEZ (Colombia): Estamos, señor Presidente, en un punto muy delicado del orden del dia de este Consejo, y me siento un poco confundido con lo que acaba de pasar.

El señor Representante de los países nórdicos hizo una intervención, luego usted, en sus comentarios, ha hecho su propia interpretación que confunde un poco al auditorio. Si usted me lo permite, y en aras de la seriedad y de la tranquilidad de este debate, yo quisiera que nos diera la oportunidad a los miembros de este Consejo de que el miembro de los países nórdicos, el señor Representante de Suecia respondiera a su pregunta o clarificara su interpretación para poder hacer un seguimiento del debate en forma apropiada, sin distorsiones que pueden dañar la serenidad y la altura del debate.

LE PRESIDENT: L'Indonésie et l'Iran ont demandé à faire une nouvelle intervention après la clôture du débat général sur le point précis de ce que l'on appelle le groupe consultatif, donc sur le document CL 103/19. Il sera bien sûr loisible au Représentant du Royaume de Suède de reprendre la parole ainsi qu'aux Représentants du Canada, de l'Indonésie et de l'Iran pour préciser leur position.

En tant que Président, je vous ai fait part de mon avis quant à la manière de conduire les débats et vous me permettrez, à ce propos, Monsieur l'Ambassadeur de Colombie, de dire que sur certains points il faut pouvoir se prononcer de manière précise de façon à ce que l'ensemble du Conseil connaisse exactement la position de chacun. Or, le Représentant du Royaume de Suède nous a dit qu'il était d'accord sur le principe d'un Groupe consultatif mais qu'il n'était pas d'accord sur le Groupe consultatif tel que proposé. Ultérieurement nous aurons certainement l'occasion de préciser ce point de vue.

Aguinaldo LISBOA RAMOS (Cap-Vert) : Je remercie le Dr Murray pour sa présentation claire et précise de ce point de l'ordre du jour. Même si nous l'avions déjà approuvé en tant que membre, la délégation du Cap-Vert aimerait vous faire part de quelques commentaires concernant le rapport.

En ce qui concerne la foresterie et le développement durable et dans le cadre du suivi de la CNUED, il faut renforcer la capacité de la FAO en tant que chef de file et lui permettre ainsi de maintenir son élan. Nous reconnaissons l'importance des domaines prioritaires proposés par la FAO et réaffirmons notre regret de voir diminuer le budget pour 1994-95. D'ailleurs la position du COFO à ce sujet est très claire (paragraphes 54 et 93).

Tout en tenant compte de l'importance des forêts dans le secteur de la sécurité alimentaire, grâce à la conservation de la diversité biologique et génétique, et de la préservation de l'environnement en vue d'une agriculture durable, nous demandons à la FAO de continuer à promouvoir le développement de ce secteur, en particulier dans le domaine agro-forestier.

Dans le cadre du processus de remaniement du PAFT, il fallait décider de la création d'un mécanisme consultatif international. Après de longues et nombreuses discussions, la question a finalement abouti sur un groupe

consultatif centré sur le PAFT et dont le mandat devrait être élargi progressivement aux forêts des zones tempérées et boréales.

Votre note, Monsieur le Président, répondant à la demande du Conseil, tient compte des points de vue exprimés précédemment, en d'autres instances, au cours du dernier Comité des Forêts et lors de vos contacts informels avec des représentants des groupes régionaux.

Dans l'ensemble, nous partageons vos propositions énoncées dans le Chapitre III:

- premièrement, le groupe consultatif doit être établi en vertu de l'article VI.5 de l'Acte constitutif de la FAO;

- deuxièmement, pour qu'il puisse respecter la souveraineté nationale et stimuler des flux de ressources financiers, son mandat doit être amendé tel que proposé à l'annexe B.

- troisièmement, la désignation des membres des catégories 2, 3 et 5 doit relever de la compétence du Conseil, le principe de rotation étant essentiel;

- quatrièmement, s'agissant d'un Groupe restreint il n'est pas souhaitable d'envisager un Comité directeur.

Nous nous réjouissons de la décision de la Banque mondiale, du PNUD, de l'OIBT et du PNUE de participer activement aux travaux du groupe, en plus de leur soutien actif au Programme d'Action forestier tropical qui offre un cadre national au développement du secteur forestier.

A la lumière de ce qui précède, notre délégation est favorable à la création immédiate du groupe consultatif sur le PAFT, convaincue qu'il constituera un forum idéal pour toute sorte de consultations visant à résoudre les problèmes qui se posent au développement forestier.

Toutefois, nous soulignons la nécessité de mobiliser des fonds extrabudgétaires pour permettre le fonctionnement normal du groupe. En effet, son financement revêt un caractère absolument prioritaire.

Duck Soo AHN (Korea, Republic of): On behalf of the Korean delegation, I would like to extend my compliments to the FAO Forestry Department for its excellent work on the conservation and sustainable development of tropical forests through the Tropical Forests Action Programme. Compliments are extended particularly to Mr Saintraint, Independent Chairman of the FAO Council, for his dedication to the establishment of a Consultative Group on the TFAP.

My delegation recognizes the importance of the TFAP and is mostly in agreement with the idea of establishing a Consultative Group on the TFAP, as recommended by the Committee on Forestry at its 11th Session. My delegation believes that, in the future, one of the important tasks of the Consultative Group will be to determine how to achieve optimum cost-efficiency.

The Korean delegation would like to raise one concern on the TFAP. We note with anxiety the reality that 15.4 million hectares of tropical forests will disappear annually in tropical regions. However, we also believe that both boreal and temperate forests face the danger of extinction, because conservation of forests usually is not given high priority in many regions undergoing economic development.

Now, the Forest Principles agreed to at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development cover all types of forests, including tropical forests, and require conservation and sustainable development of all types of forests.

The Korean delegation would like to call upon FAO to redouble its efforts to work toward attaining sustainable development of global forest resources, because FAO is a unique international organization working in the field of forestry. We propose that the Tropical Forests Action Programme be enlarged to Global Forests Action Programme, since we believe that we must recognize and better understand the countless benefits deriving from the economic, ecological, social and cultural functions of the forests in all regions, including the tropical regions.

In this connection, the Korean delegation fully supports the recommendation made by the distinguished delegate from Canada, and many other countries, to increase the FAO forestry budget.

The Korean Government expresses its willingness to be an active participant in the "greening the world" programme, and to share Korea's own experience in this area with other Member Countries interested in greening their mountains.

The greening works accomplished in the Republic of Korea is often cited as one of the best stories in the world on forest rehabilitation.

A successful implementation of this national programme has changed Korean mountains from the brown and devastated ones to green and densely forested ones. Today in Korea, bare mountains are hardly to be seen throughout the country.

Benson C. MBOGOH (Kenya): whilst we express agreement on most of the issues in the report before us, we should like to make some comments on a few specific issues of continued concern. I will start immediately with the issue under Item 9.1, the TFAP.

First of all, let me commend you, Mr Chairman, and the Chairman of the ad hoc Committee on TFAP, Mr Rabe, for the splendid job you have done in narrowing down the scale of divergence and mitigating many of the concerns which existed at the start of the TFAP re-vamping process. Arriving at the agreement to establish the consultative group was in itself a large measure of consensus and a major step in achieving final agreement on the new consultative mechanism we need to re-vamp TFAP.

We do not think that the consultative group is the perfect example of choice, meeting in full all the separate partisan interests and concerns of each interested party, but we think it is a reasonable consensus point which has attempted to meet, as far as possible, all the concerns together in a no-winners and no-losers situation. The basic elements it attempts to achieve would seem to us to be: (a) it recognizes the concerns for, and attempts to accord a greater measure of equity of, participation for all major co-sponsors; (b) it recognizes the sovereignty of Member States in deciding on matters of forest resources; (c) it acknowledges and maintains the lead role of FAO in matters of forestry; (d) it acknowledges the important role of NGOs and attempts to accord them a greater participatory role within the accepted international rules of international bodies; (e) it has delineated a distinctive functional scope; (f) it features a measure of transparency and accountability to both donors and recipients of resources. Finally, it is representational and can be further improved.

We have come a long way so far. Our conclusion would be - let us give it a try now, recognizing it is an evolving system. Its membership can improve it further if the system fails to deliver upon a technical revolution of its performance at some later date.

On the issue of forestry and sustainable development my delegation endorses the priorities set out for forestry and sustainable development in response to UNCED, and would stress that FAO should continue to maintain its supportive role in all the facets of forestry resource development. We express support for the priority areas stated in paragraph 53 of CL 103/8, and particularly lay stress on the priority needs of Africa mentioned in paragraph 78.

Finally, we endorse the elements of the FAO Programme of Work and Budget for the biennium 1994-95. In this context we share the concerns of many others on the limited budget levels accorded to forestry particularly in relation to the size of the programme tasks to be undertaken. We request reconsideration of the budgetary provisions, and where possible, the making available of more resources.

Winston RUDDER (Trinidad and Tobago) : Speaking in the name of the 13 Member States of CARICOM my delegation intervenes in support of the contents of the Report of the Eleventh Meeting of COFO as outlined in CL 103/8. In particular, we support the priority areas for action indicated therein. We comment, too, on the adoption and incorporation into the Organization's further work on the forest resource assessment the recommendations in paragraph 11, which call for more detailed information on the wider aspects of forest resources utilization and causes and processes of deforestation and forest degradation.

We stress also the importance of assessing needs and means to enhance forest resource assessment systems, and in particular, the need to target for consideration the requirements for in-country capacity building in this regard.

We support the conclusion of the Committee at paragraph 94 in respect of the proposed 1994-95 Programme of Work and Budget with reference to the intended allocations to the forestry programme. Here we fully endorse the view of the

delegations of Canada, Brazil, India and others. We advise Council that the imperatives in this regard are more compelling for small island states where ecological zones are not sharply defined but are zones of transition where the links between forestry, agriculture and fisheries are finely and intricately interwoven and where, accordingly, the call on FAO for technical and related support for forestry development, already demanding, can only be further intensified in the light of the conclusions of UNCED and ICN.

At stake here is the credibility of FAO, indeed our own credibility, in regard to our interpretation of the mandate and responsibility of FAO in terms of forestry, people, sustainability, environment and development. Therefore, Council must send a strong message about our concern. For what we do or do not do in regard to our forestry resources conditions opportunities for agriculture, fisheries and, indeed, socio-economic development. And now to TFAP and the CG.

The views of my delegation on this are quite simple. Forest nurseries planted some three years ago when we began the debate on the CG would have developed (if well-nurtured, indeed supported by the technical assistance of FAO and funded by the donor community) into quite sturdy saplings by this time, yielding forage for livestock and/or serving to protect soil, prevent landslides, mitigate floods and even save lives.

In our search for solutions I urge that we do not fall into a Utopian means/needs trap. That is why in the name of humanity, particularly the suffering masses whose condition and welfare we are empowered to improve by the decisions and actions we take in this Organization, my delegation exhorts Council that insofar as the absence of a consultative mechanism is a deterrent to accelerated progress in the development, preparation and implementation of national forest action programmes, particularly in terms of flows of funds, we spend no more time and energy on analysis or on further refinement of considerations. Let us press on with the proposal of the Independent Chairman, with whatever imperfections, and thereby signal loud and clear that TFAP is back on track.

Whatever we do, let us decide now. Let us not give the impression of obfuscation on TFAP or worse yet, that we are now in pursuit of some new nirvana. Let us show the millions outside these walls that we are responsible.

V. CONSTITUTIONAL AND LEGAL MATTERS (continued)
V. QUESTIONS CONSTITUTIONNELLES ET JURIDIQUES(suite)
V. ASUNTOS CONSTITUCIONALES Y JURIDICOS (continuación)

26. Other Constitutional and Legal Matters, including: (continued)
26. Autres questions constitutionnelles et juridiques, notamment: (suite)
26. Otros asuntos constitucionales y jurídicos, en particular: (continuación)

26.1 Invitations to Non-Member Nations to attend FAO Sessions (continued)
26.1 Invitations à participer à des réunions de la FAO adressées à des Etats non membres (suite)
26.1 Invitaciones a Estados no miembros para que asistan a reuniones de la FAO (continuación)

LE PRESIDENT: Si vous le permettez, avant de clôturer la séance de ce matin, je voudrais saisir le Conseil de la demande qui a été adressée à Monsieur le Directeur général, demande datée du 14 juin 1993 par l'Ukraine pour assister à la présente session du Conseil en qualité d'observateur.

Je rappelle que, selon les paragraphes B.l et B.2 des Principes régissant l'octroi du statut d'observateur aux nations des Textes fondamentaux de la FAO, les Etats qui ne sont pas membres ou membres associés de l'Organisation mais qui sont membres de l'Organisation des Nations Unies, d'une des institutions spécialisées des Nations Unies ou de l'Agence internationale de l'énergie atomique peuvent, sur demande, être invités par la Conférence ou par le Conseil à se faire représenter par un observateur à une session de ces organes.

Le Directeur général demande dès lors l'approbation du Conseil à la participation de l'Ukraine en qualité d'observateur à la présente session du Conseil.

S'il n'y a pas de remarques, nous considérons que le Conseil est d'accord pour que l'Ukraine soit invitée à assister en qualité d'observateur aux travaux de cette session.

It was so decided
Il én est ainsi décidé
Así se acuerda

The meeting rose at 12.45 hours.
La séance est levée à 12 h 45.
Se levanta la sesión a las 12.45 horas.