II - ACTIVITIES AND PROGRAMMES OF THE ORGANIZATION (continued)
II - ACTIVITES ET PROGRAMMES DE L'ORGANISATION (suite)
II - ACTIVIDADES Y PROGRAMAS DE LA ORGANIZACION (continuación)

drawn up a few months back. One would be especially interested to see in view of the recent developments whether there is any improvement in UNDP financing and what the share of FAO is in this financing. This would help us to update and see where we stand as far as UNDP financing is concerned and this is important since a sizeable portion of FAO budgeting comes under UNDP. The table on page 23 shows a substantial rise in trust funds from 1974 to 1976. This is encouraging and we are made to understand in paragraph 3. 22 that this trend will continue. One would have really liked also to have the assurance that there are real pledges to confirm that the trend will be kept.

A. BIN YUNUS (Malaysia): Mr. Chairman, since this is the first time that the Malaysian delegation takes the floor, on behalf of our delegation I would like to congratulate you on your election as Chairman of this Commission. We assure you of our full support in the discharge of your functions.

Mr. Chairman, at this stage we would like to make a few general observations. Firstly, we offer our congratulations to the Director-General and the Secretariat for presenting a very comprehensive and manageable Programme of Work and Budget for the next biennium 1978–79. We concur with the other distinguished delegates that this Programme of Work and Budget is certainly an improvement over those of the past. We welcome the Director-General's proposed reduction in the Budget with respect to publication and documentation and a number of meetings.

Mr. Chairman, Malaysia notes with interest the emphasis given by the Director-General on decentralization from the Headquarters to the country level. We support the reduction of posts at the Headquarters and the subsequent strengthening of the regional offices. We believe that the regional offices have an important role to play in coordinating programmes at the regional and country levels.

With regard to the appointment of the FAO country representatives, we would like to stress that the functions of the country representatives should be clearly defined so as to avoid duplication of functions with those of other UN agencies such as UNDP.

Mr. Chairman, we are happy to note that in the Director General's Programme of Work and Budget for 1978–79 high priority is given to training activities. In this respect FAO's contribution and assistance can be challenged for one, training of personnel as well as training of trainers. This can be achieved through fellowships or training programmes. Two, short-term investments in terms of providing experts or specialists for a period of time while the personnel is being trained to do the job. The short-term specialists are especially needed for planning, project identification and preparation, management and project monitoring and evaluation.

In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, we support the budget level as proposed to the Conference.

CHIN FENG-CHU (China) (interpretation from Chinese): The Chinese delegation endorse the budget level of 211 350 000 dollars. We would like to take this opportunity to make a few comments on the Programme of Work and Budget of the Organization.

First as a developing socialist country, China cares very much for the Third World countries, the benefits from the Organization's budget and its various programmes of work. As we all know in the 1976–1977 biennium allied with the decision of the 18th Conference and the concrete proposals made by the new Director-General, the proposed number of new posts was cut down from 519 to 189, meetings and publications by about a third, and some items of work were appropriately adjusted, thus saving a considerable amount of funds for the establishment of the Technical Cooperation Programme. The efficiency of the Organization was not diminished; on the contrary such measures won the support of Member Nations. This example shows that the efficiency of work is not just determined by the amount of funds allocated, but depends to a considerable extent on the policy and the conduct of the work. It is our consistent view that institutions and the staff should be changed and expenditures economized as much as possible. Efforts should be made for a continuous improvement in the Programme of Work and in increased efficiency to protect the Organization's limited funds to assist Third World countries solve selective and urgent problems involved in the development of food and agricultural production.

Secondly in our effort to achieve the first objective, we are of the opinion that FAO's financial resources should be used in a yet more selective way, and now with the changes in the situation and in the Programme of Work, education for various programmes should be increased or cut down in the light of active circumstances. The amount of funds thus saved from some programme or item of FAO's unit may

be transferred to other or more cogent needs. In this way the budget level which has been rising by fairly big margins over the recent years would no longer go up on a large scale from one biennium to another.

Thirdly, what we care most about is how effective are the services the Organization renders to the Member Nations, especially the Third World countries.

The final accounts of this biennium and the year of work of FAO give a general picture of FAO's activities. Of late it has been made the rule to evaluate the level of programme. We hope that an earnest evaluation will provide a more concrete understanding of the actual results produced and the problems existing under the various programmes, so that its result can be summed up in concerted efforts and that use can be made of the human and financial resources of the Organization with a view to making greater contributions to the development of food and agricultural production in the Third World countries.

F. D'ALMEIDA (Bénin): Monsieur le Président, ma délégation est heureuse de vous adresser ses félicitations pour votre nomination au poste de Président. Nous adressons également nos compliments au Directeur général et au Secrétariat pour la présentation du document qui, à notre avis, est réellement plus concis que par le passé.

Dans notre intervention, nous voudrions parler du problème de la réduction du personnel, et il nous est très agréable d'adresser nos compliments au Directeur général pour cette réduction de personnel. Certaines délégations pensent que cette réduction au niveau de la base est une bonne chose, mais il semble qu'au niveau du sommet, il y ait un regroupement. Nous voulons voir en cela une espèce d'investissement intellectuel au niveau de la FAO qui permettrait au Directeur de recruter un personnel plus qualifié et plus adéquat pour que l'Organisation puisse aller de l'avant.

Nous apprécions aussi les nominations qui ont été faites, en ce sens qu'il nous paraît s'agir de personnel jeune, et peut-être cette jeunesse donnera-t-elle également une jeunesse à l'Organisation, ce qui la rendrait plus dynamique et efficace.

Nous avons constaté également qu'il a été fait une place importante, dans l'Organisation, au département de la campagne mondiale contre la faim, mais nous n'avons pas vu, dans le programme proposé, les activités destinées à cette division. Nous nous souvenons que la campagne mondiale contre la faim a, pendant un certain temps, au niveau de la FAO, entre les années 1960/70, été l'un des organes les plus actifs, puisqu'elle a permis dans nos pays de mieux faire connaître les activités de la FAO et de sensibiliser un certain nombre de personnes aux problèmes réels de la famine et de la malnutrition. Nous aimerions que l'on nous dise à quoi sert maintenant cette division, et quelles sont les activités qu'on envisage de lui confier.

Dans la mesure où nous estimons qu'il faille mettre l'accent sur les cultures vivrières et la production vivrière, nous pensons que la division de l'alimentation et de la nutrition doit jouer un rôle très important.

Il nous semble que dans le domaine de la formation une action particulière doit être entreprise au niveau des pays en développement, en particulier de l'Afrique et surtout de l'Afrique francophone où cette formation est vraiment désuète. Nous souhaiterions que la FAO se penche sur cette formation au niveau moyen, parce que ce sont les cadres moyens qui nous manquent dans ce domaine. Puisque la FAO envisage d'être beaucoup plus proche des populations rurales, nous pensons que cette formation serait la bienvenue.

En ce qui concerne l'action en direction des femmes rurales, nous applaudissons à cette activité, car nous pensons que la formation de la femme rurale contribue à l'évolution du milieu rural, et il nous serait agréable qu'un certain nombre d'actions soient faites dans la direction des femmes rurales pour la formation en économie familiale et en économie domestique. Nous souhaitons qu'il ne s'agisse pas simplement d'un voeu, mais que réellement des séminaires, des rencontres, des voyages d'études soient organisés à l'intention des femmes rurales, afin qu'elles se rendent compte des activités qu'elles pourraient mener dans ce domaine.

Nous appuyons aussi la Conférence sur la réforme agraire, mais il ne faudrait pas que cette conférence reste lettre morte, parce que la réforme agraire est l'expression d'une politique donnée. Il ne s'agit pas de réunir des personnes à grands frais pour qu'une réalisation ne se fasse dans ce domaine.

En ce qui concerne le niveau du budget, nous ne pouvons qu'appuyer les propositions du Directeur général, mais nous pensons qu'il faudrait un large consensus de la Conférence pour arriver à se mettre d'accord et trouver les moyens pour réaliser ce budget.

En ce qui concerne les pertes de récoltes, nous nous réservons d'intervenir plus tard, mais nous pensons que lorsqu'on parle de pertes après récoltes il ne s'agit pas simplement d'un problème d'emmagasinage et de silos, on doit aussi penser aux problèmes de la conservation et de la transformation rurale et domestique. Nous voulons donc que l'on songe à cela et que l'on mette un accent particulier sur ce problème.

Nous appuyons le niveau du budget proposé pour cela et la création d'un fonds spécial. Nous pensons que c'est également par consensus que nous arriverons à obtenir ce résultat.

O. DIALLO (Mali): Tout d'abord, comme les autres orateurs qui m'ont précédé, je vous adresse mes vives félicitations pour votre élection qui vous amène à diriger les débats de cette commission. Soyez persuadé, Monsieur le Président, que ma délégation apportera sa modeste contribution au succès de votre commission.

L'occasion est bonne pour féliciter également le Directeur général et son Secrétariat des louables efforts qu'ils ont déployés pour la préparation des importants documents mis à notre disposition. Sans entrer dans les détails, ma délégation n'éprouve aucune difficulté pour accepter le niveau du budget tel qu'il nous est présenté.

Pour ce qui concerne la décentralisation proposée et déjà amorcée, ma délégation approuve cette formule qui permettra, j'en suis convaincu, si on accorde les moyens nécessaires, une coopération plus étroite entre les activités du PNUD, de la FAO, et des autres institutions spécialisées. A cet effet, mon pays souhaiterait qu'un représentant lui soit affecté, si possible dans les meilleurs délais.

Ma délégation appuie la création d'un fonds spécial pour les pertes après récoltes, mais elle estime qu'il faudrait tout autant se pencher sur les aspects également importants de la production de ces récoltes. C'est dire que chez nous, au Sahel, les récoltes du paysan ne peuvent être sécurisées que par la réalisation d'aménagements souvent coûteux, susceptibles de pallier les insuffisances pluviométriques.

Les économies réalisées sur de nombreux postes tels que réunions, documentation, etc. ont été très appréciées par ma délégation.

M. A. M. ABOUTALEB (Kuwait) (interpretation from Arabic): In the name of Allah, the Merciful and Compassionate, may I thank you Mr. Chairman and congratulate you on your election to the chairmanship of this Commission. I am certain that under your leadership our efforts will bear fruit.

First I should like to express our support for the Programme of Work and Budget which has been worked out so excellently. Secondly, we also share the point of view expressed by other delegates who stressed the need for the decentralization of the regional offices and the balance or equilibrium which should exist between Headquarters and the regional offices.

Thirdly, as regards the post-harvest losses, we agree as far as the principle is concerned which emphasizes the need to limit these losses and to set up a fund, but there are other funds concerned with this question also, such as the Fund for Agricultural Development. So we do not think that a separate fund needs to be set up, because it would mean simply dissipating the very scant resources that we could use, and perhaps using them for other purposes. We should like to reserve our right to come back on other items on the agenda as they arise in the discussion.

J. BERTELING (Netherlands): The Netherlands Government has agreed in general with the review of the policies set out in paragraph 2 of the Director-General's Introduction to the Programme of Work and Budget for 1978–79. I would have preferred that Mr. West could have heard these comments but we take it that the central role of the UNDP in the financing and coordination of technical assistance as agreed upon in 1970, in the so-called consensus will be kept in mind.

Secondly, as the Programme Committee stated in paragraph 2. 11 of its last report, many activities of FAO are of importance for all Member Nations.

Thirdly, some so-called theoretical long-term studies will continue since they are of importance as a basis for the daily activities of the Organization, and of the many Member Nations, and for the support that FAO needs from the general public.

Therefore, my delegation agrees with the Director-General's remark that the New International Economic Order is not an empty slogan. My Government has committed itself to it many times.

It is therefore hoped that the FAO will give sufficient priority, also in the sense of the necessary qualified personnel, for the project “Agriculture: Towards 2000 “.

I am sure I do not have to remind you, Mr. Chairman, that my Government like yours, has made available a substantial financial contribution to the preparation for a new United Nations development strategy. The Director-General refers to the importance of investment and the increases in commitments of external assistance for agriculture. The Netherlands Government is in complete agreement with this and has acted accordingly by tripling its voluntary commitments for agricultural development in the last three years, including very substantial contributions to such important FAO programmes as the Food Security Assistance Scheme - about $8 millions - the Fertilizer Programme, the Programme for Dairy Development and now $2 million for the Post-Harvest Food Losses Programme.

We share, however, the feelings expressed by the Swedish delegate yesterday that a real burden-sharing, for all necessary activities is a must.

Therefore, my delegation welcomes the fact that more of these programmes are financed from the regular budget, as long as they are well-coordinated with the activities of the United Nations system.

Because of the many field activities of FAO, my delegation sees merit in a fair, FAO representation in developing countries. We agree, however, with the United Kingdom delegation that the proposed increase in the budget might be too high and that the establishment of FAO representatives should be fully coordinated with the United Nations Development Programme Resident Representatives.

We also share the views of the Danish delegation in support of the Technical Cooperation Programme and agree that the projects should be small, urgent and less miscellaneous. We do welcome the suggested evaluation of the Technical Cooperation Programme in the hope that it will be an effective evaluation. My delegation, not so surprisingly, endorses wholeheartedly the remarks made by the Norwegian delegation.

My delegation will go into more details during the following stages of the debate. I would like to finish my statement with a small suggestion and some general remarks on the structure and format of the budget and on its level.

The small suggestion concerns the joint financing of the CGFPI by FAO, UNDP and the World Bank. These sponsoring agencies will make an evaluation on the CGFPI by the end of the year but have now to continue its financing. Can the Secretariat give me some more information on this? My delegation welcomes the format of the present document and especially the fact that some indications of extra-budgetary resources are given. We have requested this for many years. We would, however, also agree with the remarks made in the Programme Committee that information should be given on progress made in a particular programme or sub-programme when these are significant causes for revision in the execution of major items referred to in the previous Programme of Work and Budget. Only then can the Conference really assess the proposed programmes.

Finally, as to the budget level, my delegation has stated from the beginning that the proposed real budget growth is in our opinion too high. This position has not changed. The arguments for this growth are not convincing. The extra raise as a consequence of the important preparations for the World Conference on Agrarian Reform and Rural Development and adjusting the appropriations rate at 879 lire to a dollar are acceptable, since these are logical consequences of decisions that have been taken earlier by my Government. The World Conference on Agrarian Reform and Rural Development can be very important if it is concrete and action-oriented, and if it is well prepared. We therefore welcome the priority that the Director-General has given to these preparations.

G. DE MICHELIS (Italy): Mr. Chairman, I would like to refer to the problem of the level of the budget and values of rate of inflation, but as it is the first time the Italian delegation is taking the floor, let me first congratulate you on your election and at the same time express my appreciation to Mr. West and his staff for the work they have accomplished in the difficult task that has been given to them.

As far as the values of rate of inflation are concerned, I am afraid that we will have something to say in the sense that these values are a little high, and especially if we consider that the position of the Italian Government has to be in accordance with the commitment that we have undertaken with the International Monetary Fund.

We have here our advisor from the Treasury, and with your permission I would ask you to allow him to speak and express the views of the Treasury on this particular aspect of the problem.

G. GUERRIERO (Italie): Nous avons lu très attentivement le document qui nous a été soumis. Et nous avons vu dans l'introduction du Directeur général, que “le cadre financier 1978–79 se trouve en grande partie prédéterminé par les majorations des coûts qui se sont produites à différentes époques durant l'exercice 1976–77, et qui doivent maintenant être projetées sur la totalité des vingt-quatre mois du prochain exercice. ”

Après avoir considéré un certain nombre d'éléments tout à fait objectifs et les liens pour chiffrer en dollars les éléments qui ont été produits, nous devons dire que tout en reconnaissant que les augmentations de coût pour les mêmes années ne pouvaient être calculées uniquement d'après le taux d'inflation prévu dans cette période pour le pays hôte, nous savons que 65 pour cent des dépenses doivent être prévus en lires et qu'environ 35 pour cent des mêmes dépenses se feront dans des monnaies autres qu'italienne.

A la page 28 de l'introduction, nous voyons que le Directeur général estime “que le taux général d'inflation a dépassé 20 pour cent dans le pays hôte en 1976, et les prévisons officielles les plus récentes pour 1977 sont du même ordre. Pour l'ensemble de la période biennale, le total pourrait se situer autour de 45 pour cent”.

A cet égard, je dois déclarer que dans la lettre d'entente que mon Gouvernement a adressée au Fonds monétaire international, l'Italie a prévu pour 1978 un taux d'inflation de 14 pour cent. Si nous relions l'inflation au taux de croissance prévu de 2 pour cent, nous avons un taux d'inflation réel de 12 pour cent seulement.

C'est dans cette optique que mon Gouvernement et en particulier mon Département voudraient que soit lu le budget.

A cet égard, nous devons considérer qu'en général le programme d'activité des agences spécialisées des Nations Unies selon la tendance manifestée de la part de certains pays, devrait prévoir dans un délai assez rapproché d'atteindre une consolidation du budget concerné. Cette attitude devrait être réalisée pour la FAO à partir du biennium 1984–85, elle pourrait être supportée et même aidée dès maintenant tout en lisant le programme et budget pour le biennium 1978–79 suivant cette même direction. Et à cet égard, je pense que la valeur indiquée pour le taux d'inflation, de même que les autres indications, pourraient avoir des répercussions sur certains arguments tout à fait individuels et spécifiques.

C'est pour cela que la délégation italienne aimerait que le projet de programme et budget soit lu tout en tenant compte, soit de la sélectivité des programmes, soit des possibilités des compressions de personnel, soit - et cela vient en troisième position, mais en premier lieu - par l'harmonisation et la coordination, pas seulement au niveau des fonctionnaires de la famille des Nations Unies, mais aussi du comité du programme et de la coordination.

En conclusion, nous aimerions que dans la poursuite des débats, soit au niveau du programme et budget, soit au niveau de chaque programme, le comité du budget et en deuxième instance les organes de la FAO qui doivent décider, aient à l'esprit cette considération de la délégation italienne quant au niveau du taux d'inflation prévu pour l'année prochaine et même pour le prochain biennium.

L. KABUYI (Zaïre): Comme les collègues qui m'ont précédé, je voudrais vous féliciter, Monsieur le Président, pour votre élection à la tête de cette importante commission.

Ma délégation désire faire quelques commentaires sur ce point de notre ordre du jour dans le débat général à savoir le programme de travail et budget. Je reviendrai sur certains points au cours des discussions particulières consacrées à l'examen de ce point de notre ordre du jour.

Du point de vue de ma délégation, le programme de travail et budget que nous a présenté le Directeur général représente le minimum de ce qui peut être fait au cours de la prochaine période bienniale.

Nous pensons que ce programme doit être accepte parce qu'il rentre dans les objectifs assignés à l'Organisation et des déclarations faites en séance plenière, il est apparu que tous les pays souhaitaient voir la FAO rendre plus de services aux pays qui en ont besoin.

En ce qui touche le programme de coopération technique, nous savons qu'il s'agit d'une très bonne initiative. Il permet d'entreprendre de petites opérations dans un laps de temps plus rapide. Cela ne peut être considéré comme un gaspillage ni comme faisant double emploi, parce que dans les pays dits en voie de développement, il y a énormément à faire. Pratiquement tout est à faire, et les ressources ne sont pas suffisantes pour qu'on puisse parler de gaspillage. Nous estimons qu'il s'agit d'une très bonne initiative prise par le Directeur général et approuvée par les différentes sessions du Conseil consacrées à ce problème,

La possibilité de décentralisation a notre entier appui, parce que nous estimons que l'Organisation doit être le plus près possible des Etats Membres. Nous appuyons surtout le principe qui tend à recourir aux institutions nationales, ce qui a pour effet de réduire considérablement les coûts que représentent les rémunérations des experts étrangers qui s'élèvent généralement à 80 pour cent du coût des projets de terrain.

On peut alors se demander si les pays censés bénéficier de l'assistance en bénéficient effectivement, parce qu'actuellement les pays ont plus besoin d'équipements et de fournitures auxquels les ressources devraient en grande partie être consacrées.

Au sujet du Fonds spécial pour la prévention des pertes après les récoltes, ma délégation appuie la proposition du Directeur général et souhaite que les pays qui ont exprimé des avis contraires, tant à sa procédure qu'à sa constitution, acceptent de considérer les indications avancées par le Directeur général pour que ce Fonds puisse être constitué rapidement.

Concernant le niveau du budget, ma délégation estime qu'il devrait pouvoir être accepté; en effet comme l'a dit M. le Directeur général, le taux d'accroissement réel n'étant que de sept pour cent, ce projet de budget devrait pouvoir recevoir notre accord. Or, certaines délégations estiment que ce taux d'accroissement est trop élevé. Dans ces conditions, la délégation zaïroise souhaiterait que le Secrétariat put faire une présentation comparative des niveaux des budgets des différentes organisations de la famille des Nations Unies, ce qui permettrait de nous faire une idée plus précise.

En ce qui nous concerne, nous proposons à la Commission d'approuver ce projet de budget et de le recommander à la Conférence générale.

P. LAOWHAPHAN (Thailand): Mr. Chairman, could we first of all add my voice to the previous speakers in congratulating you on your election to the post of Chairmanship of this very important Commission.

Mr. Chairman, mv delegation also want to compliment the Secretariat for the great endeavour in the preparation of a very informative and analytical documente 77/3 for our deliberation.

My delegation have studied and looked into the documents with great attention, even so we have not had time to study them thoroughly. In this connexion we just want to make a very brief general comment emphasising the points that would be of most interest to my delegation, without going into detail, as we intend to intervene at a later stage on particular points of interest.

The establishment of the Technical Cooperative Programme has proved itself meaningful and highlights the interest of all Member Nations since its inception in 1976. The government of the Kingdom of Thailand wants to put on record our sincere appreciation to FAO, in particular the Director-General, in response to the urgent need and prompt action to the request from my Government. This programme is self-explanatory; how it is of benefit to the developing world, particularly to the most seriously affected countries. It will doubtless need more strengthening.

We also support the statement of the Director-General delivered to the Seventy-First Session of the FAO Council in appointing the senior consultants to carry out the valuation of this programme for future appropriate recommendation.

The second point I would like to touch upon is the Conference on Agrarian Reform and Rural Development. We firmly believe that the information and recommendations to the structure and step of development concerning the land reform and rural development, would be of the utmost importance to developing countries. So that, Mr. Chairman, my delegation is looking forward to participating in this meeting.

Mr. Chairman, we also learned with great satisfaction of the decentralization which FAO had performed so far, the gradual appointment of FAO country Representatives now in progress. The government of the Kingdom of Thailand has shown keen interest in establishing the office of Country Representatives and now it has almost come to the final stage of preparation for appointments.

My delegation would like to associate ourselves in proposing the level of budget for 1978/79 as a whole, but we reserve our right to intervene in some detail, with your Commission, when it comes to the particular attention of my delegation.

F. SHEFRIN (Canada): Mr. Chairman, we would like to congratulate you on your being elected as the Chairman of Commission II. I trust that you will be able to maintain a good humour right to the very end of this Commission.

The leader of the Canadian delegation in his statement to the Plenary yesterday afternoon expressed satisfaction with the positive role played by the Director-General in developing a new approach to the FAO that is highlighting action programmes. He underlined this concept several times in his statement. We agree with the reduction in the number of documents and meetings and other similar, types of activities connected with delegations and secretariat meetings. We feel that the Director-General's two years have been very effective. He has shown tremendous drive and determination.

We find ourselves agreeing with the delegation of China which says the real measure of FAO contribution is the work it does in the third world countries. I think this is the real test of the work of FAO, not the number of publications we issue, or the number of meetings that we hold.

I will touch on a few points of the Programme of Work and Budget. Most of our points will be raised in the form of questions for further information. I don't ask to be answered immediately, but perhaps during the discussion chapter by chapter an answer could be provided to us. It is the view of the Canadian delegation, and I have this advice from our people that have been involved very actively in the work of pesticides in the FAO and they attended the meetings recently, that the support given to these pesticide activities by the administration of FAO is not adequate. They feel that there is room for more manpower and a higher priority should be given to this activity.

The second point that I would like to raise is we feel that the nutrition programme should have a higher priority.

The third question that arises, and we have read the Programme Committee report and also the comments of the Director-General, refers to the industry cooperative programme. We are not quite sure what is happening to this programme, whether it is one that will be phased into the FAO; phased out of FAO; phased into some other UN agency, and here again we are reluctant to express comments. Having seen a. reference made to this several times, perhaps we could have some clarification on the thinking of the Director-General to help us understand what is happening. One of our very large industries in Canada is an active member of this programme and they have expressed a strong interest in the future of this activity.

Another concern is in respect to cooperatives we had a feeling when we read the report and compared it with earlier ones, there has been a bit of lessening of the activities in the areas of encouraging and creating cooperatives. Again I may be wrong about this. Maybe we are not aware of some of the work that is being done in the field, but the impression we got making comparison was there had been a lessening activities in the field of cooperatives. I do not want to go into a long lecture why we consider cooperatives very important, that is obvious and, therefore, we would be very grateful for further information.

As regards to the Technical Cooperation Programme, we appreciate very much the report given by the Director-General providing us with further information, and we are looking forward to the evaluation report. I believe it is due at the end of 1978. We want to express our appreciation.

With respect to the Programme of Work and Budget we find the Director's Programme of Work and Budget is very well prepared. It reads well. We can find the information we are looking for, but one could be critical and say no matter how much information you give there is always a desire for more information, or perhaps there may be an awful lot of information for some people but too little for others. Having said that we must say that we found it a very useful document and not only that but the way it is written, it kind of encouraged us to seek for further information.

On the budget itself, Mr. Chairman, we would like to make a few comments. As you know this is the place where Member Governments get their chance once in a while, once every two years and in the Plenary, to indicate their views on the subject. I think this is the right of all Member Governments to do so, and it is also the place where after we have had considerable discussion between Members themselves, and take into consideration the views expressed by the head of our Organization, we try to arrive at some generally agreed position. As is well known budgets are never fully acceptable to anybody at any time. They are the cause of some of the hardest debates in international agencies; and in Parliaments of various governments. So the kind of discussion we have here, reflecting different opinions, is a good thing. Even if we don't agree with the contributions, they are good contributions, and should be looked upon as contributions, as points of view.

The first point is the change submitted to the last Council, the change in the value of the lira and the increase in the budget level. We do not see the rationale for this situation. You know this question of who gets the better of a change in the currency rate, is difficult to answer. More analysis is needed in respect to determining the value of the lire in relation to the US dollar.

Mr. Chairman, in looking at the budget we would like to raise a few questions and to try to understand what is happening. We feel, for example, so far in the budget what has not been identified are the deductions, the items that have been deducted, because they will not be continued from this budgetary period to the next budgetary period. In other words certain work is finished and has stopped, and that is the end of it. What has happened to the resources connected with this? Do we have a reduction in the budget or not? We had a feeling this has not come through. Maybe it has but if it has we have missed it, and we would be very glad to get the information from the Director-General or his representative. I think it is important we look at it in terms of measuring the rate of growth, Mr. Chairman. In respect to the inflationary costs, and the suggestion that these costs may increase: first of all I have the impression - and I may be wrong - that the Director - General was using the full budgeting system, in other words not a semi - full but a full budgeting system, which means an attempt to anticipate every increase which we already know which may be due to changes in wage relationships; changes in price structure; changes in rates, etcetera, and also taking into consideration the possible rate of inflation growth.

We have already had a view as to what the rate should be from the Italian experts, so perhaps we need a little further understanding as to whether the present budget has taken inflation rates fully into consideration, or whether there is a justification for asking for more money because ve believe that inflation could be lower than anticipated. With the help of the Italian experts, we may $et some better information which may lead to some change in the total of the budget.

Another point which we would like to raise is that on the basis of the information provided in the Programme of Work and Budget, it would appear that no account has been taken of achieved improvements in efficiency. We assume there must have been some improvements in efficiency over the past two years in the productivity which took place in the present biennium, and perhaps there is anticipation for 1978 - 79 could be higher. Perhaps that is not possible, but we would like a little informâtion on this. We are not saying “Why havent't you done it? - Why did you do it this way? - You are wrong” - ve just want some more information on this.

Also, we are unable to find whether, in trying to establish the new budget for 1978–79, any consideration has been given to programme changes: for example, in the area of projects which have been anticipated to finish at end of this year but finish before the end of the current budgetary period, or whether there are programmes which have had to be stretched out, and therefore the amount of expenditure will be lover than anticipated in the budgetary period.

We raise these points, because when we questioned the level of budget the other day, we were asked to give more details. We are not saying that we are right in all these points - we are saying that we would like some answers to help us in our thinking and to make a final decision.

Listening to the discussions today, there is obviously a variety of views. Many delegates have supported the Director-General's proposed budget of $ 211 million; others have been more cautious, saying there is room for consideration; and a few have problems with the level of the budget. Our view is that, in the light of the present discussions, we should be thinking in terms of the original budget figure of $ 206. 8 million proposed by the Director-General, rather than the $ 211 million.

Our view on the suspense account in the case of currency fluctuation – “the new term is the Special Reserve Account” - is that we can support this. We feel that that $ 5 million is being set up to anticipate a changed relationship between US dollar and the Lire, and therefore we have some difficulty in seeing why that $ 3 million adjustment is required now. It should not be used for inflationary costs.

Furthermore, although we recognize the importance of the Conference on Agrarian Reform, the figure of $ 1. 2 million is a very substantial one, and we have not been informed exactly how much of this is additional to what the Organization will in any event be doing in regard to this Conference. The feeling among our officials in Ottawa has been that this $ 1. 2 million can be absorbed, with an existing budget of $ 206. 8 million.

I would like to express our appreciation for being given the opportunity to raise these points. We are only seeking for further information which will help us to become part of the overall concensus at this Conference.

E. B. MONGA (Zambia): On behalf of my Delegation I would like to congratulate you, Sir, on your election to the Chair of this very important Commission, and would like to express its total support and agreement with the proposed Decentralization Programme which, as the head of my Delegation pointed out in his statement, would help to bring FAO activities closer to the people.

I would also like to echo the views expressed by the Delegation from Kenya on the Technical Cooperation Programme. My Delagation's view is that this programme should aim at direct production projects, rather than mere theoretical studies.

We do not wish to repeat the views that many delegates here have already expressed, which in many respects are the same as ours. We shall, however, wish to make further interventions where necessary when individual Chapters come up for discussion.

H. HUBAYSHI (Yemen, People's Dem. Rep. of) (interpretation from Arabic): May I first of all, along with others who have expressed similar sentiments, congratulate you on your election to the Chairmanship of our Commission. We should like to extend these congratulations also to the Director-General and his staff on the effort they have made in preparing this Programme of Work and Budget. My Delegation would like to give its support to this Programme of Work and Budget, and in this connection we would like to reiterate our support for the policy which the Director -General has commenced and which is already under way, with a view to allowing the developing countries to benefit further.

We also agree with the Programme of Technical Cooperation and Progress, and with the transfer of unallotted funds to a Transfer Budget.

We are also in favour of the principle of decentralization and the creation of Country Officers and Country Representatives, and of the extension of the Terms of References of the Country Officers and Regional Officers. But we must be quite sure that there is no overlapping or duplication between the work done by the Regional Country Officers and the Headquarters so that our programme will not suffer from this.

We must also leave to one side purely theoretical studies, and rather lay a stress on field activities.

We are also prepared to agree to a need for reducing the number of meetings and publications.

We would also like to support the idea of the creation of IFAD, and we hope that this Fund may make it possible for those countries unable to import foodstuffs to do so under better conditions. We hope that the Fund will not encounter the same difficulties as those which have formed an obstacle for other funds.

We also approve the idea of the World Conference on Agrarian Reform and Rural Development, and my country has already commenced preparatory work for this Conference.

We would also like to approve the Director-General's suggestion for the creation of a fund for post-harvest losses.

G. CHACON (Ecuador): Mi país en término general apoya el Programa y Presupuesto presentado por el Director General, cuya labor dinámica ha merecido el respaldo y la simpatía de la gran mayoría de miembros de esta Organización, prueba de lo cual es que esta Conferencia la han presidido más de 90 Ministros encargados de agricultura, de alimentación, de desarrollo rural.

El Presupuesto bienal de la FAO en general es modesto en comparación a lo que se utiliza en otros rubros, que no son precisamente los de esta necesidad primaria de toda la especie humana: la alimentación. Lamentablemente las decisiones en los organismos mundiales y a nivel de países, muchas veces están en los sectores que piensan unicamente en el mejoramiento del sector urbano y menosprecian lo que se haga en el sector rural y lo que se haga por producir los alimentos. De tal modo, que consideramos que con ligeros cambios, con alguna modificación de cifras, de rubros, este Presupuesto merece la aprobación de las delegaciones que asisten a esta Comisión.

Consideramos nosotros de gran importancia el Programa de Cooperación Técnica por su afinidad, y en cierta forma, por la cantidad reducida de dinero que emplea. Creemos que en los rubros considerados para los Programas de Cooperación Técnica, deberían circunscribirse en algunos casos a las provisiones de equipo e insumos que necesitan nuestros países, pero en aquellos otros sí será necesaria la cooperación de consultores que impartieran para la preparación de proyectos de inversión, de factibilidad de organismos más internacionales. Creemos que para la Conferencia de Desarrollo Rural, podría efectuarse un reajuste siempre y cuando todos colaboren los países a nivel regional en las Conferencias que se realizarán en 1978, ya analizaremos cuidadosamente estas materias tan importantes.

En el caso de América Latina, tenemos la próxima Conferencia a finales de 1978 y ya podremos llegar a un consenso de nuestra region. Apoyamos la descentralización que realmente dinamice la comunicación entre nuestros países y la FAO. Desearíamos que en todos los proyectos existiera, a más de la agilidad, una evaluación de los propios países de las oficinas o representaciones nacionales de la FAO y las regionales, de tal manera que podríamos evitar los problemas y los estancamientos que puedan existir en la ejecuciön de proyectos de campo.

Por ultimo, nos reservamos el derecho a emitir nuestro criterio cuando se traten ya asuntos específicos del tema que nos ocupa.

Y. LIKE (Ethiopia): I would follow the other speakers in congratulating you on your election to chair the Commission. I would also like to congratulate the Director-General, the staff and the whole Secretariat for the well-consolidated Programme of Work and Budget.

While 1975–76 saw some improvement in the overall agricultural production, food production in developing countries fell below the Second UN Development target of 2. 8 percent. Their terms of trade deteriorated as a result primarily of poor prices in their exports. Secondly, systems including the development assistance on concessionary terms reached a low ebb during the last biennium, thus contributing to widen the already wide gap in the standard of living between the developed and developing countries. The Eighteenth Session emphasized the need to transfer to developing countries at least 8. 3 billion dollars at 1975 prices of resources if agricultural production in developing countries is to grow at a minimum level of 4 percent.

The preliminary estimate of resource transfer is put at 32 percent lower in 1975, and 43 percent lower in 1976. Not only is the size low, but the trend does not appear encouraging. It is allied with its past achievements and failures that we have to judge the Programme of Work and Budget of the Director-General.

We support fully the Director-General's objective as laid down in his introductory statement on the Programme of Work and Budget document. Special note should be taken of his decentralization effect of FAO's activities. We believe that the expulsion of countries' representation will give FAO and hence Member Nations actual agricultural conditions in the respective countries, thus contributing to realistic objectives, programmes and superior results of action implementation.

We are therefore concerned about comments made by certain delegations here about their concern at the increase in countries' representation in the next biennium. We hope they will have a second look at this.

We also support the 211. 3 million dollars budget proposed by the Director-General. The need for this size of budget cannot be over-emphasized if FAO's role to stimulate agricultural production to the desired level is to be effectively undertaken. We do not therefore share the view that the budget is high, which is held by some delegations. We also support the Director-General's request of 5 million

for Special Reserve Account. We believe without this fund, enforcing fluctuation in FAO's income may negatively affect timely implementation of its activities.

We cannot over-emphasize the need for a minimum level of 20 million on the post-harvest losses if these losses are to be cut by about 50 percent. Mr, Chairman and distinguished delegates, if we cannot approve this small financial need to save what is produced, how can we argue for increased production in yet another big investment towards this achievement.

Last but not least, my delegation is fully behind the Director-General's emphasis on rural development and the measures such as training and CCP proposed for its attainment. This is the key factor in increasing food production to feed not only the expanding world population but if the level of nutrition over 500 million people is to improve. In this regard we look forward to the impressionable stage of IFAD and to FAO's sponsorship of the forthcoming World Conference on Agrarian Reform and Rural Development scheduled for July 1979.

We reserve our right to come back for comments on specific issues at the appropriate time.

L. CEYSSENS (Belgique): A ce stade de notre débat, mon commentaire sur le Programme de travail et budget qui nous est proposé pourra être à la fois général et bref.

En premier lieu, dans sa présentation, le document qui nous est soumis est nettement meilleur que ses prédécesseurs. Il est concis, clair, complet, intelligible, ce qui n'était pas toujours le cas dans le passé.

En second lieu, l'orientation des activités proposées pour le prochain biennium est généralement conforme à nos voeux. Nous en rendons hommage au Directeur général, Monsieur Saouma, dont la gestion lucide et dynamique a été jusqu'à présent digne d'éloges.

Enfin, l'enveloppe budgétaire globale qui nous est proposée est importante. Sa progression d'un biennium à l'autre est plus rapide que dans les autres institutions du système des Nations Unies. Je ne souhaite pas prendre aujourd'hui position sur le niveau du budget, mais exprimer uniquement à ce stade la préoccupation de ma délégation.

R. W. M. JOHNSON (New Zealand): I just want to speak briefly on our position with regard to the level of the budget. I can be brief as I do not wish to go into detail regarding the Programme as a whole at this stage; many speakers have covered the topic in detail. It seems to be the general consensus that FAO is moving in the right direction by concentrating on practical assistance at the field level and investment activities rather than on less practical work, and we can endorse this consensus.

However, we do wish to make a few general remarks on the level of the proposed budget for the next biennium. My delegation wishes to join with other delegations who during the Council Session, the Plenary and this Session, have expressed concern about the proposed budget level of 211 million dollars. This level is nearly 27 percent higher than the budget, for the previous biennium in cash terms, and around 7 percent higher in real terms. We understand this rate of increase is the highest in all the UN's major specialized agencies.

Mr. Chairman, our wish to register concern about the substantial increase in FAO's budget is not motivated by disapproval of FAO's Programme of Work. On the contrary, as our member said, during the Plenary, we believe FAO is doing effective and valuable work under the leadership of the Director-General.

Our concern is over the fact that the projects of all UN bodies continually escalate, not only as a result of inflation and exchange rate changes but also in real terms. With such increases in real terms we would certainly expect extra results as a reward for this new allocation. We are hopeful therefore that for future budgets it will be possible for FAO and other UN agencies to restrain the rate of increase in the budget by making more strenuous efforts to make savings by eliminating low priorities and ineffectual activities, and by streamlining operations.

Hopefully, we will be commenting further on the individual items at a subsequent stage.

Ms. M. DEHARENG (Observer for International Confederation of Free Trade Unions): My Organization, the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions, represents over 55 million workers organized in 119 affiliated organizations. Our members come from 88 countries of vastly differing levels of development, political systems and culture.

We are glad that the Director-General in document C 77/23 has reaffirmed that the basic needs of the rural poor are now rightly receiving attention, and that therefore there is no danger that the FAO will ignore the fact that the provision of money, seeds, fertilizers and machines will not of itself improve the lot of the poor.

However, he expressed concern that the basic needs strategy should not become an instrument of pressure, partial and paternalistic in its support of the needs and desires of the Third World.

Our concept of the basic needs strategy could not be further removed from paternalism. Indeed, paternalism is alien to the trade union philosophy.

As an international trade union organization, the realization of full employment in conditions of economic and social justice is at the centre of our concern. The right of employment is an integral part of the basic needs strategy. That is the right to a job in a private or public enterprise, but also the right for the small farmers and the self-employed workers to earn a decent income from their work, and to benefit from services enabling them to satisfy their basic needs. In this context, the basic needs concept is relevant to the FAO activities and we are glad to note that in the Technical Cooperation Programme emphasis has been placed on projects enabling the participation of the majority of the rural population concerned.

Rural workers' organizations in the broad definition of ILO Convention number 141 have proved effective instruments to determine the needs of the rural working population and to bring about their satisfaction. This organization must, however, be allowed to exist.

Workers' and peasants' organizations in our opinion and in our experience are the motive force of rural development. They lead to a more equitable distribution of income, stimulate productivity, and develop internal markets. Measures restricting the activities of such organizations do not solve problems; on the contrary, they create more poverty and intolerable tension.

We think, therefore, that the FAO should closely cooperate with the ILO in implementing Convention Number 141, and that more emphasis should be placed, in various budget items, on cooperation at all levels with representative organizations of peasants and workers.

We should like, for instance, to see them being able to take an active part in the World Conference on Agrarian Reform and Rural Development, and we regret the silence on this subject of the government on the review of arrangements for the World Conference on Agrarian Reform and Rural Development.

With regard to the Investment Centre, we do not doubt that it is very useful. However, we have some doubts about the value of the participation of private capital in the FAO Bankers' Programme. It would be interesting to see to what extent the projects they finance really contribute to the development of the countries in which they invest, and what benefit the majority of the population derives from these projects.

The last point on which I would like to comment is the question of the agro industries. Too often their impact in developing countries has been linked to the introduction of techniques which have led to the reduction of jobs, the expulsion of tenants, the over-production of export goods at the expense of products for local consumption, and because of profit repatriation which leads to the slowing down of asset formation. That is why we find that the privileges granted to the multi-national companies in FAO, through the Cooperative Programme, intolerable and far in excess of the consultation framework admitted by the UN system.

We hope there will finally be an inquiry into the activities of the programme, as demanded by the Eighteenth Conference and that it will be replaced by an appropriate consultative structure in which both sides of the agro industries - that is capital and workers - will be able to advise and assist FAO and its Member Nations in order to ensure a better balance between the economic and social objectives of development in a new international economic order.

Ε. M. WEST (Assistant Director-General, Office of Programme and Budget): I am grateful for the opportunity, at the end of this general debate, to offer some information and comments on points raised which I hope will facilitate the remainder of the debates.

I am sure the Director-General will be gratified - as indeed his staff are - at the kind remarks made about the format. It is a great relief to find that at last at this stage we have a great measure of common agreement with the format and satisfaction with the information provided. I can assure delegates that this will not be used as a basis for complacency; we shall go on trying to improve the information given, the clarity with which it is given, while at the same time keeping down the volume of documents.

I shall not, therefore, reply to any of the specific points raised on that, but shall certainly take them into account in formulating the next Programme of Work and Budget.

The first matter I should like to take up, since it comes at the beginning of the document, is the interesting question of our forecasts for extra-budgetary funds, in particular the UNDP, which was raised by the delegate of the Sudan. He is, of course, quite right to question the accuracy of these forecasts; for many years we were anxious to avoid having to provide such figures, precisely because we knew that they could not be accurate. They could only be projections based on trends and indications, and that is specifically stated.

I can, however, give some further indications, particularly about the UNDP.

We think that as regards trust funds and the various arrangements we have, we are justified in some optimism, particularly if we get voluntary contributions to the proposed Special Fund for the Prevention of Food Losses.

On the other hand, on the UNDP, I am afraid that the latest information is not encouraging, even less encouraging than indicated in the document. Although there has been an improvement in the resources available to the UNDP, the recent pledges indicate that the increase in the level of resources provided to the UNDP will barely cover the rate of inflation expected. So that the real programme resources available to the UNDP will hardly increase.

Furthermore, for a variety of reasons, some of which are complicated, the amount of funds being allocated to FAO for new projects indicate that there will be an inevitable shortfall in our delivery as compared with the past, in the coming year.

The allocation of funds for new projects is very important to determine the trend of expenditures. If the approvals of new projects are slow, then there is quite a time lag in getting projects into operation, to replace those which are coming to an end.

There is another discouraging factor, although it may only be temporary and not have significance: at least I hope it does not have significance. Out of the total allocations being made in 1977, we are seeing a much smaller share than we have had in the past coming to FAO. In the past we have averaged around 30 percent, sometimes more, sometimes a little less. So far, up to July, we were getting only 24 percent as compared with 30 percent in the past.

We have not got the figures for the whole year yet, and of course there may be some improvement, but it is a worrying factor. So, far from being able to reassure anybody on these estimates, I have to confess that I have more doubts than when these figures were provided. However, it is a matter which the Director-General has taken up with the Administrator of the UNDP, and I hope that as a result we shall see some improvement.

The delegate of Argentina made some references to the Director-General's proposed plan for programme adjustments and savings in the next biennium, to cover some of the things that he has to deal with. He mentioned in the Council a decision that he has in mind to implement, to cut back allocations, including those for travel, which will help to reassure another delegate who raised the question of the increase for travel. Otherwise, we have to rely very much on vacancies to pick up savings, and it is not to predict all the vacancies which will occur. So I am afraid it is not possible to answer the question in detail.

The Director-General will take measures, from the beginning of the biennium, to ensure that savings are made, and in areas where they least hurt the programme which he needs to carry out and which you ask him to carry out.

Another important issue which was mentioned was the World Conference on Agrarian Reform and Rural Development. Some people supported this strongly some were doubtful; I do not think there was any particular regional or other balance in the comments made; opinions varied from region to region. This is a separate subject on your agenda, but I hope you will concentrate on the actual arrangements rather than on the budget. In that direction, I would like to give you some details about the additional budget for the World Conference now.

The Director-General referred to this in the Council and in his statement to the Plenary. It is necessary to take account of the establishment of a Conference Secretariat, the appointment of an advisory group on experts which was requested by the Council last June, a preparatory meeting and an increase in the duration of the Conference from six to eight days, as well as the provision of documentation in Arabic and Chinese, as well as English, French and Spanish.

The costs of the Secretariat, including personnel costs, general operating expenses, at cetera, will be around $690 000.

The Advisory Committee on Experts will cost in the region of $100 000, assuming they meet in 1978 and 1979. They have already had one meeting, so it will be three meetings in all.

The Preparatory Committee will cost - depending on decisions to be taken by this Conference - in the region of $70 000. The documentation and interpretation will cost an additional $650 000, and the remaining $240 000 is made up of substantive support for the Conference, mostly through contracts with national institutions and with consultants for the preparation of case studies and other documentation.

It has been suggested that this sum might be absorbed, but as the Director-General indicated in the Council, he is already having to absorb a large amount in the budget, and he does not consider that this item either could be absorbed or even should be absorbed.

At this point I should like to pick up also a comment made by the last speaker who seemed to imply some disappointment about relationships with the International Labour Organization in general, but in particular in relation to the World Conference. I have a letter here from the Deputy Director-General of the ILO, on behalf of the Director-General, to Mr. Saouma, in which he says:

“We are particularly pleased to note the FAO's determination, as is well expressed in your introduction and in the various references throughout the programme texts - ”

He is referring to the Programme of Work and Budget and the Medium-Term Objectives - “to the satisfaction of basic needs, to join forces with the ILO and other UN agencies to combat rural Poverty. …We are therefore encouraged by your intention to pursue a common poverty-oriented rural development approach. The forthcoming FAO World Conference on Agrarian Reform and Rural Development, in the preparation of which the ILO intends to participate fully, the follow-up work to implement the recommendations of the ILO's World Employment Conference aimed at satisfying the basic needs of the rural poor, and the ACC Task Force on Rural Development should provide opportunities to develop such an approach together, and to test the effectiveness of our actions. “

So I am obliged to reject any suggestion of criticism of FAO on that score.

Next, I should like to refer to various programme issues, before coming finally to the financial framework of the Programme of Work and Budget. References were made to the question of food losses. Some of them, I felt on behalf of the Director-General, surprisingly negative, in view of the unanimous support in the Committee on Agriculture and of the Council in 1977, and again of the Council in its recent session just a few days ago. Also, from the Plenary statements so far made it would seem that there is almost general support, unanimous support for the aims and objectives of this Programme.

Now, as for including it in the Regular Programme, I was surprised also to find that some delegations who have spoken here or in the past about the desirability of not including funds for technical cooperation projects in the Regular Programme, saying that provision should be made in the Regular Programme instead of having a Special Fund for a programme of projects on prevention of food losses. Perhaps privately they will reassure me that there is no contradiction in their attitudes. I should like to be able to explain it to the Director-General rather than leave him with the impression that here is a contradiction, especially on the part of those delegations.

Having said that, I would point out that the Programme of Work and Budget does in fact provide around a million dollars for support of food loss prevention programmes and projects in Member Countries. This is the technical back-stopping logistic support for project action. It would have been open to the Director-General to include this $10 million in his Regular Programme. In fact, there were voices which suggested this would be a good thing. It would even increase the base for future Programmes of Work and Budget. However, I do not think it would have been appropriate to include it in the provision that I just mentioned of a million dollars for support of the scheme. It could well have been added to the Technical Cooperation Programme, but for reasons which I think many delegations are aware of and much concerned about at this very moment in the corridors, we are discussing the establishment of a Special Fund for this purpose, in which perhaps the voluntary principle may be fully enshrined to the satisfaction of those who insist on the voluntary principle. It is my expectation, quite frankly, that we shall in fact reach a widely supported consensus on this issue, provided, of course, there is a consensus on the whole issue of the Programme of Work and Budget and provision therefor.

Having mentioned the Technical Cooperation Programme, I will just refer briefly to one point raised by the United Kingdom and others about the provision for miscellaneous projects in the TCP. I think perhaps this is more due to the name “Miscellaneous” than to the projects that figure there under. When my wife accuses me of various crimes and I ask her to specify them, her answer is generally “Miscellaneous”. I prefer that to having them particularised, because there I think hercriticisms might be more effective. This is one area in which I expect that the evaluation report when it is received next year will provide very valuable information to delegations, and I would therefore hope that judgment can be suspended on that particular issue until you see what the evaluation has to say about this particular class of TCP projects. If necessary, I am sure the Director-General will think of further sub-divisions which could dispose of any mis-conceptions that might occur on this account.

Turning now to another very important area of the Programme of Work and Budget and FAO's new directions, I would refer to the question of FAO Representatives and Regional Offices. One point I did not understand too well was references to the need for clear definition of the responsibilities of the FAO Representatives in relation particularly to the UNDP Resident Representatives. The Council was informed, last summer in fact, that the Director-General and the Administrator of the UNDP had been in full consultation on the terms of reference of the Country Representatives and that there was agreement between them on this. In fact, in his address to the last Governing Council of the UNDP, the Administrator, Mr. Morse, expressed satisfaction with the agreements which had been reached on this precise point, so perhaps some delegates are not as fully in touch with the UNDP. I can assure you that it is not a controversial issue. Furthermore, I can assure you that we are very happy with the relationships which have been established at the country level with the UNDP, and we feel that everything is working very well at the country level.

As regards the question of the Regional Offices, this I feel is more clearly open to some feeling that there is a lack of definition and a lack of clear vision about the future, shall we say. Well, there is a separate sub-item on your Agenda about this so I will not go into it now, except to stress again the point made in the Programme of Work and Budget that the provision for the Regional Offices is very much for the support of the work of the FAO Representatives and is in effect decentralizing support that might otherwise have been included in Headquarters. Rather than putting it in Headquarters, we have located it in the regions.

On the FAO Representatives, the other main point raised by a number of delegations: United Kingdom, France, Japan, Australia, was that perhaps we could slow down the appointments of the FAO Representatives in consultation with the UNDP, partly to save money and partly perhaps for some other reasons. I hope in fact that we will not be able to save money on this not only because we are under pressure from a very large number of governments to appoint FAO Representatives, but also because the UNDP is getting rid of the SAAR's faster than we can replace them. It is the UNDP which from the beginning has made the pace about disposing of the present arrangements, and by the end of this year there will be virtually none of the old-style UNDP Senior Agricultural Adviser /Country Representatives left. The UNDP does not want to pay for them any more; they want to work with FAO Representatives wherever they are appointed. So I hope that in fact we can speed up our appointment of FAO Representatives rather than slow them down.

One delegation, the Netherlands, asked about the Consultative Group on Food Production and Investment. Their future is under consideration. I think that the World Bank and FAO are very much of the same mind at the present moment. Nevertheless, the provision is included under Programme 3. 2 and if required it will be available. If not, it will be a saving and will be deleted from the budget as one of those deletions which Canada referred to as being necessary. Where we have made such deletions of a major character, we have mentioned them, for example, for the World Food Council. I will come back to this point in a moment, if I may, Mr. Chairman.

I think it was Canada who raised various points or questions - he courteously put them as questions rather than points - on certain priority programmes in the Programme of Work and Budget. On Pesticides he said did it not need higher priority? There are some controversial aspects to that question, but I think this is best taken up when we discuss Chapter II.

On Nutrition, I would like to say that many of us share his concern. We have taken a number of steps to give this the priority it deserves. We have high hopes of new institutional arrangements with the United Nations and the other Agencies, including the World Food Council. We still have some problems, but we hope to deal with those in the near future.

Cooperatives: is there a lesser emphasis? I think he is right in discerning in the texts less emphasis than has been given in the past. There are not, however, less resources or concern for cooperatives. I think rather that the specific aspect of cooperatives has become subsumed in this more general emphasis on rural development and rural credit. There has been in fact rather a tendency in the last year or so to put more emphasis on credit, but I take his point and perhaps we can deal with that at a little more length when we come to that item.

On the Industry Cooperative Programme, I would not like to deal with it at length at any stage because I would like the Director-General to have the opportunityto come forward in response to the request of the Programme Committee, which in fact has been endorsed by the Council, with his proposals next year. I only want to say that certainly his new proposals will in accordance with his already declared views change the particular status which the ICP has hitherto enjoyed in FAO. If I refer to two points only, in particular, one is symbolic, but nevertheless important, and that is the inclusion of a programme for the ICP in the Programme of Work and Budget, notwithstanding the fact there are no Regular Programme funds involved. I see no need to do that in future. The other important issue will be the status of staff, which again is very anomalous and must be changed.

The third point I would make is that there must certainly continue to be cooperation with agro-industry, perhaps intensified, but probably on a more sub-sectoral basis, as exists in certain sectors already, then in the form that we have now, which many find unacceptable.

If I do not refer to all of the particular technical issues involved, I apologise, but I am aware we must leave something to be said in the debates on the other Chapters, although I would hope not too much. I just want to conclude with some remarks on the general financial framework. Canada referred to efficiency, reductions, slippage; this technique is employed as part of our zero-base budgeting approach and will be intensified in the next biennium, and whilst we cannot give details on all the detailed changes within sub-programmes and work programmes, we take the point that it will help delegates to know more about this as we go along. We will try to do that to the extent we can.

On travel, I just mention in reply to Germany that we did put into operation practically all of the recommendations of the Inspector of the JIU who visited us some years ago to the extent that he now quotes us as a model to other Agencies, and notwithstanding that we are still having a large increase in the budget, but we do not see how we can carry out increased investment activities in particular since they involve large missions, without an increase in the budget.

On cost increases, there is nothing I would say or would want to have interpreted as as in contradiction of what Italy, our host country, said. It would be very imprudent of us, and we are very conscious of this, to say anything in our documents which would appear to be at odds with the undertakings and the public statements of the Italian Government, particularly in relation to the IMF.

I would, however, make the following points very briefly, although they are very technical. Since a large part of the budget has now been set aside for the Technical Cooperation Programme and for FAO Country Representatives whose establishments are abroad and not here, the proportion of expense in lira to the total budget has gone down from 65 to around 60%. It may be a little less, depending on each particular programme of work and budget. Forty percent in dollars and marks, or swiss francs and other currencies is quite a considerable amount. Things like pension fund contributions are in dollars. These go up, so we must not assume that the FAO budget is directly and proportionately related to the rate of inflation in the host country, not by any means. What we are giving are figures for our total cost increases and not figures for cost inflation in Italy. Furthermore, what we have said about carry forward from 1976–77 is incontrovertible. We are carrying forward what has occurred and we cannot avoid it. Even if the rate of inflation in Italy is brought down very substantially in 1978, those costs are still there. They have to be carried forward for the full twenty-four months of the next biennium.

Thirdly, the figure was given of a fourteen percent cost increase for 1978. That was the figure provided by the Italian delegation. If you take the rate of conversion of currency applied even at nine hundred in this budget you will find our annual cost increase for 1978 is about 8 percent. So I do not think we can be open to any misunderstanding by the Italian Government that we are producing figures which are an embarrassment to them, except in the reverse sense to which they intended. I think we are suggesting their cost increase should be lower than the one they are officially estimating to the IMF. Of course, it brings in the whole question of the currency rate. I can only say that speculation about the currency rate is a recipe for bankruptcy. We have always adopted the one prevailing. In fact we are now calculating at 879 although yesterday, and I believe this morning, the rate is 878. 25 in Milan. If you wish I can give you each day at round about four o'clock the fixing in Milan, but I think you would not wish me to do so in case it goes down to 877, which it may well do. It will fluctuate during the biennium but no one can say with any degree of certainty that it is going to fluctuate on average by a certain amount. The Director-General considers it is absolutely indispensable to have some protection against adverse fluctuations. The exact terms by which this might be provided are a matter of active consideration in the corridors, and I would not want to say more than that about it right now. Finally, Mr. Chairman, on the level, which some delegates have indicated is tied in their minds to satisfactory solutions on other issues, some delegates have suggested quite straight forwardly that it is too high. I conclude with an answer, if I may give it to the distinguished delegate of Germany who raised the question, is it really necessary? Well, this will be indicated by a vote of the Conference. Before then it will be indicated by the views expressed in the Commission. I think we have already heard a majority of delegates saying it is not too high. It is perhaps in some cases said to be too low, so I do not need to reply to the distinguished delegate of Germany on that point. It is for you, Sir, and your distinguished delegates to provide that answer.

G. GUERRIERO (Italie): J'aimerais dire quelques mots en réponse aux commentaires de l'assistant du Directeur général sur le Programme de travail et budget.

La délégation italienne était intervenue sur la question du taux d'inflation non seulement pour tenir compte du fait qu'en Italie l'augmentation prévue est de 14 pour cent l'année prochaine, mais surtout en considérant que le Programme de travail et budget pour le biennium prochain doit tenir compte de ce que les prévisions de budget doivent se relier à la prévision la plus réaliste possible des augmentations de coûts.

En Italie, nous avons le headquarters de la FAO où travaillent plus de 3 600 personnes. Nous avons beaucoup de dépenses au titre des dépenses générales pour le personnel. Je pense que le système des salaires des Nations Unies qui s'applique à la FAO doit tenir compte du fait que le coût pour le personnel comme post-adjustment, c'est-à-dire non seulement comme taux de change mais aussi coût de la vie, est influencé par les diminutions relatives en baisse du taux d'inflation en Italie. Pour cette raison, nous pensons que les prévisions de budget doivent enregistrer ces faits, c'est-à-dire qu'il y aura une réduction en Italie, où travaillent plus de 3 600 personnes, et pour la première fois le système de diminution de post-adjustment, qui jusqu'à maintenant n'a pas été appliqué comme cela a été souligné à la cinquième commission des Nations Unies, pourra être appliqué pour la FAO.

C'est dans cette optique qu'il faut tenir compte du fait qu'en Italie, pour l'année prochaine, et peut-être le biennium, le taux d'augmentation de la vie, c'est-à-dire le taux d'inflation, sera beaucoup plus faible que celui indiqué par le Secrétariat soit pour l'année prochaine, soit - avec une certaine réserve - pour le biennium complet.

The meeting close at 12. 55 hours
La séance est levée à 12 h 55
Se levanta la sesión a las 12. 55 horas