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

CHAIRMAN: We are now on the last item for consideration by this Commission, and I should like immediately to ask Dr Bommer to introduce the subject.

D.F.R. BOMMER (Assistant Director-General, Agriculture Department): The Director-General's report on Plant Genetic Resources, contained in document C 83/25, has been prepared as requested in Resolution 6/81 adopted by the Twenty-first FAO Conference. The Eighty-fourth session of the Council has considered this report. The Council has noted that it incorporates many suggestions of the Working Party of 13 Member Nations which the Director-General had convened during 1983 as requested by the Seventh session of the Committee on Agriculture (COAG).

The Council expressed general satisfaction at the scope and content of the report and supported its general principles with regard to the importance and free availability of plant genetic resources for scientific and development purposes as a heritage of mankind . The Council recognised that the proposals contained in the Director-General's report had been formulated with a view to achieving a consensus and the widest possible participation of Member Nations and recommended its submission to this Twenty-second session of the Conference.

In the debate of the Council, a number of Member Nations indicated that certain articles in the report and the proposed Undertaking caused difficulties. I therefore wish to provide some explanations in order to assist Commission II in its deliberations.

The report contains six chapters and six annexes. Chapter II outlines the principles and objectives relevant to plant genetic resources generally, including the worldwide scientific collaboration of the many disciplines required and the forms of plant genetic resources conservation needed, in situ, in their natural habitat, and ex situ, in genebanks. It recommends concentrating international action within FAO primarily on base collections, which are those collections where the treasure of genetic variability of many crop plants should be maintained for the future ex situ, conservation is not possible. Otherwise the issue of in situ conservation is not treated in great detail in the report. But because of its utmost importance, it is recommended to pursue the establishment of nature reserves for genetic resources in collaboration with UNEP and IUCN (para 39).

Chapter III outlines the purpose, form and content of a possible International Agreement on Plant Genetic Resources. Various options for such an Agreement are considered. The form of an International Undertaking is then proposed taking into account the need for wide acceptability by all nations, of minimizing bureaucratic procedures and of rapid entry into effect of its principles.

Chapter IV reviews the historical development of international cooperation in the field of plant genetic resources and the arrangements presently existing.

In this context full account is given of the important scientific and technical role of the International Board for Plant Genetic Resources (IBPGR) under the auspices of the Consultative Group for International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) co-sponsored by FAO. The detailed analysis on the legal status of the IBPGR and the CGIAR is only presented for clarification and should not in any way be interpreted as criticism of either of them.

Chapter V outlines measures that could be adopted in the light of the basic principles, objectives and requirements.

The concluding chapter summarizes the results of the review and outlines the Director-General's proposals.

His proposal for an International Undertaking on Plant Genetic Resources is presented in Appendix A in the form of a Conference resolution. In order to avoid confusion it should be noted that the other Appendices bear no reference to the International Undertaking and only provide explanations on the text of the report.

At the heart of the International Undertaking is the concept of the International Genebank, proposed in the form of an internationally coordinated network of national, regional and international centres which have assumed or will assume in the future responsibility for holding base collections of plant genetic resources. Governments and institutions responsible for such base collections, and which agree to participate in the network, would notify the Director-General of their wish to form part of the International Genebank under the auspices of FAO.

Such a network of base collections was in fact initiated by IBPGR which will continue to play a pivotal role in the scientific aspects of its further development and as an instrument of research and promotion within the fraework of activities foreseen in the report. Both the report and the Undertaking, therefore, call for a strengthening of the activities of the IBPGR.

As stressed by the Director-General in his statement to the Eighty-fourth session of the Council, the Undertaking does not weaken IBPGR and no changes in its independent scientific character under the auspices of the CGIAR and working in close collaboration with FAO are proposed.

The Undertaking proposes further on establishing as a policy body an Intergovernmental Committee which would be a subsidiary body of the FAO Committee on Agriculture. This Intergovernmental committee would keep under regular review the International Genebank and plant genetic resources in general. The review would cover reports issued by various bodies, including the IBPGR, the FAO Panel on Forest Genetic Resources, IUCN and others. The measures .proposed in the undertaking would keep expenditures from the Regular Programme of FAO at a minimum, and could be met within the approved 1984-85 budget.

In summary, the Undertaking and the other proposals formulated by the Director-General are framed in such a way as to try to ensure on the one hand the continuation and strengthening of ongoing efforts in the field of plant genetic resources and, on the other, to provide for commitments and involvement of governments in safeguarding and reviewing the basic material of plant genetic resources as a common treasure of mankind and their free availability for scientific and plant breeding purposes.

The Director-General being aware not only of the great importance but also of the complexity of the subject, has formulated his proposals with a view to achieving a consensus and the widest possible participation of Member Nations. He trusts that the Conference will support and adopt his report.

CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much Dr Bommer. Before we open up our discussion I should indicate that we have for this last item of the Commission, three Sessions, - this morning, this afternoon and Monday morning. The final product of these three sessions should be the adoption of the Resolution as reflected on page 32 of document C 83/25 or otherwise amended. But I should also indicate that before we come to that stage we will need to have paid detailed attention to the undertaking which is on page 33 of document C 83/25. Therefore these two aspects of the document will need our very detailed and particular attention before we come to the conclusion of the three sessions.

I would now like to invite distinguished delegations to make their comments but with the understanding that finally we will have to pay particular attention to these two aspects. The floor is now open for discussion.

K.M. EJAZUL HUQ (Bangladesh): I thank Dr Bommer for the excellent presentation of the subject as contained in document C 83/25.

At the last Council session the Bangladesh delegation expressed its support to the proposed International Undertaking on Plant and Genetic Resources. Presently we only wish to make a couple of points. We all know that plant genetic resources are a heritage of mankind. To apply these resources to the collective benefit of mankind it is essential to promote the exploration, preservation, availability and full exploitation to the plant genetic resources and to freely exchange these on a mutual basis. To this end we all cannot but agree to an institutional and legal " framework for operational purposes on a global scale.

The Bangladesh delegation supports the establishment of an International Bank for Plant and Genetic Resources and suggests that this would work using the existing network "of base collection facilities at the national, regional and international level. Bangladesh also offers that it be designated a base collection centre for jute, banana and aloe and also to serve as a duplicate centre for rice.

Mr Chairman, with these words my delegation reiterates its supports to the proposed international Undertaking on Plant Genetic Resources.

A. EL SARKY (Egypt) (original language Arabic): Mr Chairman, my delegation would like to thank Dr Bommer for his very interesting statement which we have heard. We would also like to thank the Secretariat for the considerable efforts it has made in the preparation of this document.

The circumstances prevailing in the world today make it especially necessary to protect and stock plant genetic resources and conserve them over long periods of time. Thus my country’s delegation supports this approach and in the discussion at the 7th Session of COAG and at the 83rd Executive Council of FAO we took account of these facts, and in Egypt we set considerable store to plant genetic resources because this is the best way of increasing food production and agricultural output. Information and data on plant genetic resources is extremely important for the conservation of these resources, and apart from that the collection of information and the preparation of it is vital, and since we cannot act individually and singly, we welcome international and regional cooperation in this area according to specific guidelines. We think that we should consolidate national capabilities, in plant breeding, seed production, exploration and assessment efforts and we agree entirely with the Director-General with regard to his proposals about an International Genebank in the way presented in the document. We agree in principle on the draft agreement and we will ratify it once-its legal aspects are completely studied.

G. ANDRE (Sweden): We would like to thank Dr Bommer for his excellent presentation of this subject. On this occasion I have the pleasure of speaking on behalf of Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden.

Firstly, the Nordic countries would like to underline that we fully support the principle that plant genetic resources are a heritage of mankind and that they should be freely exchanged between countries and their respective institutions for the scientific purposes and use in plant breeding programmes.

We would also like to reiterate our satisfaction with the Director-General's report on the subject before us. We have participated in discussions on this report at COAG as well as the Council Sessions. Moreover Sweden was a member of the Director-General's Working Party on Plant Genetic Resources, which met in June and July.

As known, the five Nordic countries jointly operate a Nordic genebank located in South Sweden serving the whole region since 1979. The Nordic genebank also actively cooperates with the international system of IBPGR and has international responsibility for some major plant germ plasm collections. We would like to express our strong support for the International Board for Plant Genetic Resources as an autonomous independent forum for organizing an international network of plant genetic resource centres under the auspices of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research. The Board is under the co-sponsorship of FAO, the World Bank and UNDP, and is working in close cooperation with FAO. IBPGR is successfully organizing a worldwide and expanding network of genebanks. The work is carried out with scientific professionalism. The decentralization has resulted in the mobilization of substantial financial support.

We appreciate very much the accomplishments of IBPGR and do not see the need for any changes in the structure and affiliation of this Board. We recognize, however, that IBPGR is not an intergovernmental body, and as such does not have the necessary legal framework to deal with some issues which can confront an international exchange of plant genetic material.

We can therefore see a reason for the desire to establish an intergovernmental Undertaking under the auspices of FAO, which would consist of a network of base collections of plant genetic resources and a global information system. Such an Undertaking would settle matters relating to international exchange of germ plasm resources and help gain access both to genetic resources in situ as well as to those already held in various genebanks and germ plasm collections throughout the world. We feel that if properly executed such an undertaking would strengthen international efforts in this field by mobilizing Member Nations of the United Nations system and as such give support to the activities of the IBPGR and therefore make it more effective. We therefore underline what is requested in the draft resolution, paragraph 2 on page 32.

Our delegations do not, however, agree that all categories of plant germ plasm resources should come within the framework of the proposed Undertaking. Because of domestic legislation we are not able to agree that a plant breeder or a plant breeding establishment should be obliged to make available its current breeding material, breeders' stocks or early generation lines unless they have been submitted by the breeder or the breeding establishment in question to the base collections as defined in the proposed draft resolution and the enclosed undertaking.

We would like to propose an amendment to the Annex on page 33, paragraph 2.1 (a) (v) by adding the wording: "if present in base collections".

When defining plant genetic resources the same addition should apply in the Director-General's report.

We understand that matters concerning forest genetic resources will be continuously reviewed by COFO.

We note from the clarification given just now by Dr Bommer that the description of the legal status of IBPGR and CGIAR contained in the report in no way constitutes a criticism of the function and effectiveness of the system.

Successful plant-breeding will increasingly depend on access to the full range of genetic variability in plants. It is therefore important for developing countries to be in a position to make full use of available plant genetic resources in their agricultural development.

The Nordic countries consider it vital that national capabilities in plarit breeding in the developing countries are expanded in order to obtain full benefit from resources available within their own territories or elsewhere. FAO in collaboration with the institutions supported by CGIAR has a great role to play in this context, specially concerning increased emphasis on the use of gene plasm resources for plant improvement in the developing countries.

The Nordic countries are of the opinion that our proposed amendments are important in order to ensure that the objectives set up in the draft resolution concerning an International Undertaking on Plant Genetic Resources can be achieved to the benefit of all.

Furthermore they will enable the participation of governments, relevant institutions and financing agencies in a significant number later on when monitoring of activities and related actions are carried out, in order to build up a global network of genebanks.

Finally, the Nordic delegations are in principle in agreement with the Director-General's proposals contained in document C 83/25 and we would like to assure the Conference and the Director-General of our full cooperation in the further deliberations on this important item.

M. TRKULJA (Yugoslavia): In my first intervention I will be very brief indeed - unusually brief - but I may ask again for the floor in the light of our debate.

First, we are grateful to Dr Bommer as usual.

Second, I just want to echo the position that we have already stated in Plenary, that plant genetic resources represent the most important item at this Conference. Indeed, my Government attaches very great importance to the issue, which is intended, as is well known, first of all to preserve something that is indeed a heritage of mankind; and then, no less important, to provide free access to such material.

Third, we fully support what the Director-General has proposed, without any reservations. We conceive the proposal of the Director-General as a modest first step towards a very essential intervention objective and we would certainly regret, we would indeed deeply deplore it if this Conference were not able to mobilize adequately overriding support to the proposal of the Director-General.

A. SALGADO SANTOS (Brazil): First, I would like to thank Dr Bommer for his excellent introduction of the Director-General's report on plant genetic resources. I would like to express the agreement of the Brazilian delegation with the principles stated in document C 83/25 which provides that plant genetic resources are a heritage of mankind and should be freely exchanged between countries and their respective institutions for scientific purposes and use in crop breeding programmes. We believe that the success of plant breeding will increasingly depend on access to the full range of viability in plant genetic resources existing in all countries of the world. The full availability and exchange of plant genetic resources should therefore be ensured and increased. Emphasis should be given to exploring and evaluating them, to safeguarding them against indiscriminate losses and to placing all nations, particularly developing countries, in a position to make full use of them through plant breeding for their agricultural development.

Taking this point into consideration, the Brazilian Government supports the idea, particularly as seen in the light of the discussion of the Committee on Agriculture, that plant genetic resources should be freely available. In our view such an availability should be the object of a firm commitment by the international community and by individual governments.

In this connection I would like to inform the Council that Brazil has made considerable investment in the conservation of animal and plant resources. For this purpose a National Centre of Genetic Resources was created; it coordinates 64 genebanks in the whole country.

As far as the creation of an international bank for plant genetic resources is concerned, my delegation agrees with the suggestion of the Committee on Agriculture that the bank should be considered as an international concept and not as a single physical entity; and that it should be formed of a network of storage facilities.

We also agree with the Committee on Agriculture's special emphasis on the predominant need to strengthen national capabilities of developing countries in plant genetic resources, plant breeding and seed multiplication. Considering the establishment of an international network of base collections, we believe it should function as central component of a global system for the collection, preservation and exchange of plant genetic resources. Such an international system, based on the principle of the full availability of plant genetic resources, will certainly require the interacting cooperation of the scientific community and the community of nations. In addition, the stress on international cooperation should ensure that all nations are in a position to exploit the benefits of plant genetic resources. Intergovernmental cooperation and support from intergovernmental and financial agencies should ensure increased assistance to developing countries in strengthening or establishing their plant breeding and seed production capabilities, in their expertise and exploration and evaluation work with the related training and establishment of genebanks for their plant breeding programmes in the first instance, and for their participation in the network of base collections.

The Brazilian Government also favours the adoption of an instrument on the lines of an international undertaking. Such an instrument would have a strong formal commitment without having the legally binding character of a convention which could be an obstacle to its acceptance and could certainly entail delay in its entry into effect for a'significant number of governments.

Finally, the Braizilian delegation would like to commend the document before us and also to give its support to the draft resolution annexed which adopts the international undertaking on plant genetic resources.

M. NIETO Y LARA (Cuba): En primer lugar deseamos felicitar y agradecer al señor Bommer la clara y amplia presentación del tema. Igualmente agradecemos al Director General por el documento tan completo que nos ha presentado, el cual merece nuestro apoyo.

Nuestra delegación, al examinar detalladamente el documento C 83/25, desea, antes de referirnos a su contenido y aspecto sustantivo, reconocer el esfuerzo que realiza la FAO en el sentido de preservar los recursos fitogenéticos como patrimonio de la humanidad para la generación actual y las futuras Entendemos que estos esfuerzos deben recibir adecuadamente el apoyo de todos los países en su concepción general, al margen de los detalles prácticos para su implementación, lo que será analizado con toda objetividad en esta Conferencia.

El documento C 83/25 es amplio y objetivo en su exposición al abordar las dificultades actuales y las alternativas de solución. Sin embargo, quisiéramos llamar la atención sobre algún aspecto de suma importancia, especialmente para los países en vías de desarrollo.

La creación de un sistema internacional que asegure la protección, recolección, conservación, mantenimiento, evaluación de los recursos fitogenéticos e intercambio, y sobre todo que estén libremente disponibles para la utilización de todos aquellos que lo necesiten, requerirá el apoyo de todos por igual, tanto de los países pobres como de los países ricos.

Hay que destacar además que el uso de los recursos fitogenéticos para el mejoramiento de las plantas cultivadas deberá estar encaminado prioritariamente a la solución de los problemas del hambre que hoy aqueja a la mayoría de los países del Tercer Mundo. Algunos problemas deberán ser resueltos para que se realice el libre intercambio de estos recursos, y en tal sentido debemos prestar atención a la capacitación de los científicos y técnicos dedicados a la fitogenética, en particular de los países subdesarrollados.

La creación de condiciones en los países para que pueda asegurarse el adecuado funcionamiento del sistema requerirá un soporte financiero, que todos los contribuyentes deben considerar como de primera importancia.

Será necesario, además, mejorar las informaciones existentes y garantizar un sistema viable y eficiente para la rápida transferencia de las informaciones necesarias en la utilización de los recursos fitogenéticos, con lo que se evitaría pérdidas de tiempo y duplicación de trabajos y esfuerzos.

Saludamos con beneplácito la propuesta de España para poner al servicio internacional su banco genético como caja de seguridad para colecciones básicas, bases de recursos fitogenéticos.

Nuestra delegación considera una necesidad impostergable la formulación y puesta on práctica de un compromiso internacional sobre recursos fitogenéticos, en el cual participen además de los goblernos, instituciones internacionales de prestigio como el CIRF, apoyado en el marco jurídico que otorga la FAO.

En tal sentido, para poner en práctica este compromiso, nuestra delegación entiende conveniente la creación de un organo auxiliar de carácter intergubernamental bajo los auspicios del Consejo de la FAO.

Nuestro país comparte y apoya la alternativa de la creación de un banco internacional de recursos fitogenéticos siempre que esto se lleve a cabo dentro de un estricto concepto internacional y para el bien de la generación presente y de las futuras.

E. EMMANOUILIDIS (Grèce) : Sur ce problème des ressources phytogénétiques, la Communauté économique européenne et ses dix Etats membres ont arrêté une position communautaire. C'est pourquoi, et puisque la Grèce exerce actuellement la présidence de la Communauté, je vous demande de bien vouloir donner la parole au représentant de la Commission qui exprimera le point de vue de la Communauté économique européenne.

D. OBST (EEC) : The European Economie Community and its Member States wish to congratulate the Director-General of the FAO on the excellent report in document C 83/25. They note that the Undertaking proposed in Appendix A for this report represents a substantial improvement on earlier proposals. They consider that it is essential to collect and to conserve plant genetic resources in order to guard against losses of such material and to safeguard genetic diversity. They support measures designed to develop and, should any shortcomings become apparent, improve the ready exchange of knowledge and material under the control of adherent governments and institutions between plant breeders and scientists so that all parts of the world may enjoy the benefits of expert maintenance of available varieties and the breeding of new ones. To this end they also recognize the need to promote training for proper conservation and use of plant genetic resources.

They welcome the proposals set out in Appendix A as a suitable basis for discussion and they approve the objectives and the form thereof. However, due account should be taken of existing structures in the Community in respect of plant breeding and plant protection and of the conditions necessary to maintain the proper function of established institutions active in the field of plant genetic resources, in particular of IBPGR and of existing international cooperation arrangements. Nevertheless they are convinced that in the spirit of mutual understanding of the problems of the various countries solutions will be found. The Community and its Member States are resolved to cooperate to the best of their ability.

C.R. BENJAMIN (United States of America): We would commend Dr Bommer for his introduction. We also would commend the Director General and his staff for the effort put forth in preparing document C 83/25. The presentation of basic considerations is especially well done and is, we believe, quite objective. We are puzzled and concerned though by the apparent attitude that the current CGIAR sponsored network is insufficiently institutionalized to support a successful international germplasm system. The IBPGR and CGIAR both have respected positions as international institutions with long and proud records of programs and activities which command respect and cooperation from the world scientific community, whether governmental or private and, recently,... The International Board on Plant Genetics Resources (IBPGR) has in fact obtained the opinion of the respected international law firm, Surry and Morse, which reached the firm conclusion that both the IBPGR and CGIAR are unquestionable legal entities. To allow this body to get sidetracked from the germplasm concerns because of a debate about the legal status of these institutions we feel would be an unfortunate disservice that would delay any possible, improvements or expansions to the International Plant Genetic Resources System.

My Government has had a long-standing and continuing commitment to our National Plant Germplasm System, to the International Plant Genetic Resources System, and to FAO. Our direct and indirect monetary contributions in support of both systems and of FAO are very sizeable. More importantly, though, we have consistently encouraged, supported and contributed to the free exchange of germplasm. It would be strange indeed if such were not the case - - for as much if not more than any other country in the world, the agricultural sector of the United States economy has benefitted from ready access to the free exchange of germplasm. That sector of our economy has now evolved to the point where the United States is often the source of germplasm which is of interest to others. In fact, at the present time the United States distributes more than 50 germplasm samples for every single sample we receive from other Nations. We recognize the intense interest which other Nations have in improving access to and utilization of germplasm. While we are proud of our part in what has been and is being done to meet that intense interest, we are equally anxious to do whatever we can to improve the existing system - - within limitations on resources so that there will be even better access to and utilization of germplasm in the future.

The current system works. In fact, it is widely acclaimed for its records of success. It is very important to recognize that the current system works because it is trusted by the scientific community. In fact, major decisions have been made in consultation with or under the leadership of the scientific community. Thus, operation of the system, improvements and participation are based upon desire and not unnecessary legal requirements.

The system is being improved dramatically in terms of numbers of new accessions, cataloguing, storage, preservation and distribution. We in the United States are just now completing a germplasm resources information program, which we call GRIP, which is a computerized system of tracking and accounting for all germplasm in the USDA system. All information on germplasm held in storage by USDA and cooperators that is the states primarily should be in this system and easily accessible within two years, possibly sooner.

We recognize the concern of some Member Nations regarding the effects of breeders' rights legislation on germplasm exchange. We are convinced, however, that such legislation causes little or no hindrance to free germplasm exchange among plant scientists around the world. We also recognize the right of sovereign nations to impose legislation relating to breeders'rights.

Our attitude toward and evaluation of any proposal for a new undertaking stems basically from the great respect in which we hold the present system - - a system which is working well and offers the means for some improvement. Any undertaking which would supersede, however gradually, overlap or fail to build on the existing system will not command our support - - indeed it will encounter our resistence and opposition. Allow me now to explain the reasons:

- First and foremost, we believe that any such action would place the highly successful international germplasm system in serious jeopardy. As an example, those components of the international system which reside in the United States are, in some cases, administered by Federal agencies; in other cases administered by State agencies; and in many cases include property from private sources. There is simply no way that control of those collections will be granted to any outside organization- including FAO. Collections controlled by private sources can sometimes be obtained by exchange. Most of those available from US stores are freely exchanged depending on specific agreements with cooperating countries.

- - Second, adoption of any undertaking that would commit FAO to large increases in expenditures would be unacceptable. There would have to be an indication as to which of its other worthwhile activities would have to be proportionately curtailed in light of the limited FAO budget. This would not seem to be a constraint during the present upcoming biennium, according to Dr Bommer^!s introduction.

- - Third, we are still concerned that adoption of any new undertaking might conflict with some provisions of our plant variety protection and patent laws.

- - Finally, we are firmly convinced that improved effectiveness of the total system can be made within the existing mechanism if we seek improved processes from a scientific rather than a legalistic stance. It is the fervent hope of the United States that this body of nations will recognize the value and success of our current system and will seek means of improvement within that system rather than attempt to invoke any additional management or legalistic control which will very likely damage rather than improve the system.

In our view, FAO could be very helpful in improving the present system. For example, it is printed out in paragraph 160 of the Director-General's report (C 83/25) that the international action should first concentrate on the strengthening of national plant breeding capabilities. Such strengthening of national capabilities could be an important contribution which FAO could make through TCP-funded research training projects, for example. Likewise, FAO could assist the IBPGR in improving its global information system by utilizing information available from information systems of many countries as for example the GRIP in the United States. But let us build on and seek to improve the system that is working - - not speculate on or plan for new systems or .new institutions which will not command the confidence and support of the very parties whose cooperation and participation are essential to a functioning world system of germplasm exchange.

The issue we are discussing has occupied a vast amount of time and stirred many emotions in this and related FAO discussions. Although Member Nations have expressed some divergent views, the level of interest is indicative of our common concern for and appreciation of those precious resources. I hope we will not lose sight of our common objective of preserving and utilizing plant germplasm for the benefit of all humankind, now and in the future.

B.H. DJIBRIL (Bénin): Ma délégation félicite le Directeur général pour la clarté du document : C 83/25 relatif aux ressources phytogénétiques. Elle félicite aussi M. Boramer pour son introduction à la fois concise et exhaustive.

Tout d'abord, ma délégation tient à rappeler que c'est depuis 1946 que la FAO s'occupe de problèmes de conservation de ressources phytogénétiques, et qu'elle a créé plus tard, en 1950, son unité d'écologie des plantes et des ressources phytogénétiques. Elle collaborait alors avec le Programme international de biologie. Aujourd'hui encore, la FAO est la principale agence ayant des responsabilités sur les ressources génétiques forestières.

Au début des années 60, il y a donc 20 ans, la FAO a attiré l'attention du système des Nations Unies sur les dangers croissants de l'érosion génétique. L'unité d'écologie des plantes et des ressources phytogénétiques constituait en fait le premier organisme du système des Nations Unies engagé dans le problème de la conservation des ressources phytogénétiques. A travers ses rapports techniques, ses congrès scientifiques et une revue longuement diffusée, elle a su mettre en évidence l'importance des ressources génétiques pour la sécurité alimentaire mondiale.

Parallèlement, la FAO était le premier organisme des Nations Unies à lancer un programme de conservation des ressources génétiques forestières. Elle continue ses efforts dans ce sens, et ses compétences en la matière sont universellement reconnues et appréciées.

Au cours des années 70, une large prise de conscience des problèmes liés à l'environnement, suscitée en partie par la Conférence de Stockholm, conduisait à renforcer le camp des partisans de la conservation des ressources génétiques.

Parallèlement, le Conseil international des ressources phytogénétiques (CIRPG) se substituait à l'unité d'écologie des plantes et des ressources génétiques de la FAO. Cette usurpation a créé depuis lors ce qu'on peut appeler une anomalie organisationnelle. De fait, le CIRPG est devenu une structure indépendante n'ayant de comptes â rendre à personne bien qu'elle soit domiciliée dans les bâtiments de la FAO. Cette confusion des attributions a entraîné la séparation de la conservation des ressources génétiques forestières de celle des espèces utilisées dans la production agricole. Cette séparation artificielle nous semble contraire aux exigences d'efficacité pour une bonne conservation des ressources phytogénétiques.

Récemment, les débats de la vingt et unième Conférence, ainsi que les réunions du Conseil et du Comité de l'agriculture de la FAO ont montré clairement que l'enjeu n'est pas seulement technique et financier, mais surtout une arme politique et commerciale néfaste aux intérêts des pays en développement qui, ne l'oublions pas, ont été à l'origine de la plupart des plantes à haut rendement actuellement cultivées.

La délégation du Bénin estime qu'il est indispensable que la FAO retrouve son mandat originel et qu'elle mobilise ses moyens humains, techniques et financiers dans un effort harmonieux de conservation des ressources génétiques au sens large du terme.

Pour ce faire, ma délégation voudrait suggérer que la Conférence invite le Directeur général à étudier les mesures adéquates afin que la collaboration avec le CIRPG soit plus conséquente au profit de tous les pays, y compris ceux en développement.

Par ailleurs, la délégation de mon pays propose que le Directeur général soit invité à créer un nouveau comité intergouvernemental pour la sécurité phytogénétique, avec pour mission de donner des orientations â l'ensemble des efforts de conservation génétique engagés par notre Organisation.

Ma délégation souhaiterait également être unanimement soutenue par les Etats Membres pour cette seconde demande. A notre avis, cette nouvelle orientation doit être considérée comme une évolution logique des efforts engagés depuis 40 ans environ par la FAO sur ce sujet de discorde artificiellement créé.

Pour terminer, ma délégation appuie sans réserve les propositions du Directeur général pour la création d'une banque de gènes.

E. MARTENS (Belgique): La délégation belge tient d'abord à féliciter le Secrétariat pour l'excellent rapport concernant les ressources phytogénétiques.

Conscient de l'importance de la protection et conservation des ressources phytogénétiques pour l'amélioration des plantes cultivées, le Gouvernement belge apporte sa contribution au Conseil international des ressources phytogénétiques depuis sa création en 1974. Nous appuyons pleinement et sans réserve les activités de ce conseil international qui travaille comme une entité autonome dans le cadre du Groupe consultatif sur la recherche agricole internationale. La force du groupe consultatif est étroitement liée à son informalité d'association. De même pour le CIRPG. Lors de la réunion du groupe consultatif, au début de novembre de cette année, à Washington, le groupe

a exprimé sa satisfaction sur le travail exécuté par le CIRPG dans le cadre des ressources phyto-génétiques. Le groupe a même renforcé le mandat du CIRPG et s'est prononcé sur le fait que le Conseil international devrait continuer comme institution internationale autonome et indépendante sous l'autorité du GCRAI en travaillant étroitement avec la FAO. La représentation belge à cette réunion tout comme les représentations des autres pays présents, souscrit à cette appréciation. Nous ne voyons pas la nécessité de changements ni dans la structure, ni dans le fonctionnement du CIRPG.

La proposition qui figure à l'appendice de l'annexe A du document C 83/25 représente une amélioration substantielle comparée aux propositions antérieures. Le document même donne une analyse exemplaire de la situation en matière de ressources phytogénétiques, et les objectifs y formulés reçoivent toute notre attention et notre appui.

Le système actuel du réseau organisé et coordonné par le CIRPG aura probablement des faiblesses, mais nous sommes de l'opinion que des améliorations pourraient être apportées plus efficacement par le renforcement du CIRPG lui-même et cela à un moindre coût.

Nous sommes disposés à appuyer tout effort qui pourrait améliorer davantage le libre-échange et l'accès aux ressources phytogénétiques et le renforcement du sujet. Nous sommes convaincus que des solutions valables pourront être trouvées dans le cadre du système international existant.

P.M. AMUKOA (Kenya): My delegation welcomes the opportunity to discuss the report of the Director-General on this important subject. We wish to thank him, his staff, COAG, the Council and members of the working party who contributed to this work. It is our hope that the Conference will make further positive contributions to the suggestions made and approve them.

It is indeed gratifying to see that the subject of plant genetic resources, conservation, utilization, ownership, and so on, which very often is normally discussed by individual scientists or groups of scientists, is now receiving high level consideration by member countries of FAO. This is a positive development in that it in part helps create or increase awareness within government machinery of the importance, or maybe even the existence, of this important subject, particularly in some countries where the subject has not developed or is in rudimentary stages of development. Such countries may not be few. So at this stage of my intervention we could say that an international undertaking in this area must also seek to bring to the attention of governments of countries that may fall in this category the importance of genetic resource conservation.

We have also been told, and in fact we know, that plant genetic resources are a common heritage of mankind. No one doubts this. Genetic resources can be non-renewable in that once lost they cannot be synthesized. This non-renewability may not be visible to those of us who are unfamiliar with the fine detail of natural variability but it is important that they do because the replacement of these resources needs to be urgently checked to avoid serious consequences.

Paragraph 21 of the document we are discussing goes into detail on this point and I need not repeat what is said there. It stands to reason, therefore, that the international community must collaborate to the maximum extent possible in measures to prevent genetic erosion.

Specific principles and projects must be worked out covering the commitments and role of governments and relevant institutions in efforts to preserve genetic material and in the necessary utilization, especially in breeding programmes, and even ownership.

It is in this context that my delegation generally supports the proposals that the Director-General has made on an international undertaking which we think has put together views that have been expressed in the past two years and which we consider to be balanced and practical.

We shall now make specific comments in a few areas.

Paragraph 34 considers international genebank that is not a single physical entity. Of course it would hardly work or it would probably never work if it was a single physical entity. It considers an international genebank that is a network of storage facilities all over the world. It considers the strengthening of national capabilities of developing countries in plant genetic resources, plant breeding, seed multiplication, and so on. My delegation considers this approach most reasonable, and without labouring our need so much we support the Director-General's suggestions in this regard.

Paragraphs 164 to 168 on the proposed legal framework of FAO, under which activities of the IBPGR would be conducted, is also in line with our thinking since this does not seem to us to deny IBPGR from going on with its present activities, which are very important to us.

Governments' participation, as contained in paragraphs 172 and 173, are also very important. It is also very important that constraints developing countries are faced with, in developing their national capabilities, are contained in paragraph 108. As usual, Africa carries the largest burden as far as these constraints are concerned. In this part of the world I do not know how many countries have an organized genetic resource conservation programme. Probably none. In many cases there are pockets of storage-holding activities scattered in the major and a few research stations in these countries. I do not know how many such stations have even live germaplasm stored in situ. Our priority, therefore, is to develop at the national level an organized genetic resource conservation programme, and clear objectives in our breeding programmes. We must establish a manageable national genebank so that we can benefit more from international collaboration.

In order to succeed in this the question of personnel must receive urgent consideration, and other facilities, otherwise the benefits of genetic integrity will be at stake, and documentation can be such that any attempts of information retrieval can be difficult, or uncertain.

The need for a regional or sub-regional genebank must also be emphasized. Such an arrangement is good in that our breeders would be expected to have access to more genetic resources if we operated at the national level. I am happy the Director-General is considering these issues. We shall not go further than this since we have had in the past meetings of COAG and Council that have discussed this subject in greater depth, and as we can see the Director-General has come up with compromise proposals which, as I have said, have received our general support.

A. CAUDERON (France): La délégation française remercie le Directeur général de la FAO ainsi que M. Bommer de la qualité du rapport qui a été fourni ainsi que de la présentation qui en a été faite. Ce rapport marque un progrès important.

Le représentant de la Communauté européenne a déjà indiqué l'essentiel des observations de principe auxquelles nous nous rallions absolument. Il est effectivement essentiel de traiter les ressources génétiques comme un patrimoine commun, et il est capital qu'il y ait un engagement de chaque pays à ne pas faire obstacle à l'échange des ressources génétiques; cela afin de faciliter les travaux de génétique et les travaux de sélection végétale. Cet engagement est important, mais il ne suffit pas. Il faut également encourager l'étude des ressources génétiques et les travaux de sélection végétale en particulier dans les pays en voie de développement; encourager et appuyer la formation des chercheurs, l'organisation de laboratoires, la prospection de ressources génétiques locales et également la fourniture de matériel végétal extérieur à des fins de sélection. Je ne pense pas qu'on puisse arriver à faire tout cela sans avoir des moyens nouveaux ou sans redéployer les moyens actuels.

Dans cet esprit, il nous semble qu'on devrait approfondir l'idée de création d'un fonds des ressources génétiques administré par la FAO. Cette idée est exposée dans l'article 177 du rapport du Directeur général.

On devrait également approfondir l'idée d'un organe du comité de l'agriculture qui suivrait les travaux sur les ressources génétiques, idée qui est exposée à l'article 195 du rapport du Directeur général.

Tout cela permettrait de mieux associer le comité de l'agriculture aux travaux poursuivis sur les ressources génétiques. Et ici, il faut dire qu'il importe de ne pas perturber les organisations déjà engagées dans ce travail. Ces organisations, et en particulier le CIRPG, ont prouvé leur efficacité. Rappelons qu'elles ont travaillé en liaison très étroite avec la FAO. On peut bien entendu développer l'action du CIRPG ou d'autres organisations internationales de ressources génétiques, on peut modifier leur façon de faire, mais il serait dangereux de les perturber et la procédure prévue présente, me semble-t-il, des dangers, dangers de désaccord, désaccord qui aboutirait à diminuer l'efficacité du système actuel qui est contraire.à ce que nous souhaitons tous.

Le CIRPG aurait certainement l'imagination nécessaire pour se doter des instruments juridiques qui pourraient lui manquer pour conclure des accords et des contrats avec des gouvernements, avec le fonds des ressources génétiques de la FAO déjà cité, tout cela pour remplir un certain nombre de tâches précises.

On devrait enfin, nous semble-t-il, réfléchir à la possibilité de développer la fourniture aux pays en voie de développement, de matériel de sélection, je veux dire de matériel intermédiaire de sélection qui pourrait être préparé par des organismes, comme les centres internationaux de recherche agricole. L'ensemble de ces mesures nous paraît de nature à diminuer la principale difficulté que nous rencontrons dans le domaine des ressources génétiques, à savoir la méfiance.

I. GARCIA CUERVA (Argentina): Señor Presidente: Como ya hemos manifestado en la reciente reunion del Consejo, mi delegación quiere expresar su satisfacción por la velocidad, por la objetividad y la eficacia con que el Director General, con el apoyo de un grupo de expertos, nos ofrece propuestas concretas. Sin duda, las mismas constituyen un avance muy significativo en la búsqueda de puntos de encuentro en un tema de la importancia del que estamos tratando, pero al que asimismo debemos reconocer complejo y con grandes implicaciones.

La delegación Argentina desea ratificar y apoyar los principios fundamentales que han dado lugar a la Resolución 6/81 de la Conferencia; o sea, que los recursos fitogenéticos son un patrimonio de la humanidad y que debe haber en todo momento y lugar disponibilidad de fitogermoplasma para fines de investigación.

Es por ello que mi delegación apoya las principales conclusiones y propuestas del Director General, que están adecuadamente expresadas en forma resumida en los párrafos 193 y 194. No obstante, quisiéra-mos extender nuestros comentarios a algunos aspectos de la experiencia de nuestro país en el campo de la fitogenética, así como explayarnos en algunos párrafos del documento presentado, por considerarlo de particular interés.

Como ya hemos reiterado en las sesiones del Comité de Agricultura, somos conscientes de que la genética es el instrumento tecnológico más contundente, más formidable y de más alto retorno económico de que el hombre hoy dispone para el logro de crecimientos en la producción agrícola.

Nuestro país ha logrado aumentar los rendimientos agrícolas en un 57 por ciento en la última década, y, sin lugar a dudas, ha sido la genética, a través de nuevos materiales híbridos, quien ha tenido un papel preponderante en este resultado. En ese sentido, la legislación existente en la Argentina en el campo de las semillas y creaciones fitogenéticas cuenta ya con varios años de aplicación y vigencia, y ha s ido. un medio eficaz para promover una eficiente actividad de producción y comercialización de semillas, asegurando a los usuarios, o sea a los productores agropecuarios, la identidad y calidad de las semillas que adquieren, protegiendo al mismo tiempo la propiedad de la creación fitoge-netica.

El Ministerio de Agricultura, con el asesoramiento de una Comisión Nacional, Cuerpo Colegiado en el que intervienen el sector oficial y el privado en partes iguales, vigila el cumplimiento de la Ley, así como el establecimiento de los requisitos, las normas y tolerancias para cada una de las categorías de simiente.

En lo que hace a recursos fitogenéticos básicos, mi país cuenta con varios puntos de conservación de germoplasmas que incluyen materiales de gran valor como son el trigo, el maíz, los cultivos forrajeros, oleaginosos, caña de azúcar, forestales y otros.

De todos modos existe en mi país gran preocupación por la grave erosión genética existente en la región durante los últimos años originada en la sustitución de variedades naturales, expansión de las fronteras agropecuarias y sobrepastoreo de los forrajes nativos. Esta situación es especialmente seria en especies silvestres y cultivares primitivos y dado que los mismos son irrecuperables consideramos que deben implementarse acciones urgentes para su preservación.

Este tema fue uno de los más debatidos en la reciente reunión sobre recursos fitogenéticos de interés agrícola en el Cono Sur que se realizó en Brasilia, organizada por el Instituto Internacional Americano de Comercio Agrícola, el Centro Nacional de Recursos Genéticos del Brasil y el CIRF. En la misma participaron representaciones de Brasil, Chile, Bolivia, Uruguay, Paraguay y la República Argentina, así como delegados de organizaciones regionales. Se consideró como muy importante la necesidad de explorar el establecimiento de un acuerdo regional sobre recursos fitogenéticos que facilite y garantice el intercambio de germoplasma, compatibilice normas, promueva la cooperación técnica y las actividades cooperativas en la recolección, conservación y manejo ante los Centros especializados de los Estados Miembros, considerando que organizaciones regionales como el Comité de Acción sobre Seguridad Alimentaria Regional, CASAR, con el apoyo del Programa CIRF/FAO., pueden promover estas acciones.

Un tema de gran prioridad es el del mantenimiento y conservación de germoplasma, pues los métodos de enfriamiento convencionales son muy costosos. En ese sentido nuestro país está trabajando en el uso de energía no convencional en zonas del Altiplano Andino, cuyos costos son prácticamente nulos. Consideramos que la falta de infraestructuras adecuadas en los países en desarrollo es uno de los obstáculos importantes. Esto está explicado con todo detalle en el párrafo 192 del documento, pero deseamos remarcar que estos factores no pueden ser utilizados para marginar a los países en vías de desarrollo en lo que hace al manejo y utilización de estos recursos. Por el contrario, lo fundamental es trabajar para mejorar esta situación.

En ese sentido, consideramos que la capacitación profesional debe ser una de las acciones fundamentales. Vemos con satisfacción las acciones que despliega el CIRF en la formación de fitogenetistas, pero consideramos que éstas deben y pueden incrementarse y alcanzar también a personas de nivel intermedio, pues en nuestra región es casi nula la existencia del personal de este nivel.

Para terminar, señor Presidente, mi delegación espera que la Conferencia apruebe las propuestas y proyectos de Resolución elaborados por la Dirección General, que significan un paso adelante en la búsqueda de la efectivizacion del principio de la universalidad de los recursos fitogenéticos.

J. M. ALLFREY (United Kingdom): The United Kingdom would like to take this opportunity to express its support for the principles behind this initiative and to thank the Director-General for his work in preparing this clear and detailed report. We are in full agreement with the sentiments expressed in the preamble to the draft resolution at Appendix A of this paper. Plant genetic resources are indeed a heritage of mankind and their preservation and use, particularly in developing countries, is essential for our future.

We welcome several of the conclusions drawn by the Director-General in his report. There is clearly a lack of trained breeders and other personnel in developing countries with the result that such countries are not receiving the full benefit of their own genetic resources. The United Kingdom is ready to lend its full support to activities in this particularly important field and to assist nations to utilize all available genetic resources for the benefit of their people. We must work to remedy these and other deficiencies as IBPGR is indeed already doing. However, problems such as these cannot be solved overnight. We also welcome the Director-General's conclusion that the conservation of plant genetic resources should take place in a network of gene banks based on the present expanding IBPGR network.

There are, however, some areas where we disagree with the conclusions in the report. Our main difficulty is that we do not see the need for the present network of gene banks to operate within an FAO legal framework. The Director-General's report itself demonstrates that the IBPGR system is working well, making good and steady progress in its objective of conserving plant genetic resources. FAO should monitor work in this field through their existing links with IBPGR but we see no reason to change the existing system unless and until real difficulties arise. Indeed we see the lack of a legal framework as an asset; it gives IBPGR the flexibility to act rapidly once a need is identified. A legal framework as suggested would simply increase bureaucracy and costs.

A further area of difficulty is the inclusion of "special genetic stocks' in the undertaking. This is defined to include current breeders' lines. It is simply unrealistic to assume that this material could be made freely available in the same way as cultivated varieties and primitive cultivars. This material is constantly changing and commercially sensitive. Vast numbers of lines are produced and simply cannot be subject to long-term storage. There is no magic in these lines: the genes they contain will appear in final varieties and already appear in the parent material. The intermediate lines are not of value to agriculture in themselves or they would be marketed as new varieties. Their free availability in the short term might benefit a breeders' rivals in his own or geographically similar countries but would be of dubious benefit to breeders in countries with a different climate, terrain or soil. In the long-term, assuming free availability could be practically organized which seems unlikely, if not impossible, breeders would lose the incentive to develop new varieties.

I should like to turn now to certain areas where there are deficiencies in the report. We may have set the Director-General an impossible task by asking him to produce a comprehensive report in such a limited time, and the United Kingdom believes more information is needed to complete the report. One area that has not been studied is the financial implications, surely a central point. Dr Bommer has commented briefly on this point in his introduction, However, we need to know in full both what the measures proposed will cost and where the money will be found. Firstly the global information system. The details of what is intended are far from clear - indeed this in itself is a deficiency of the report. We need a full explanation of the intentions behind Article 7.1 (e) of the draft undertaking, an estimate of its costs and details of where the resources are to come from.

Secondly, we need to cost the proposed legal FAO framework for the existing IBPGR network. FAO does not have the same expertise as IBPGR and will therefore need to increase its staff and costs to take on this extra and quite unnecessary task. The costs of this FAO framework have not been made clear, nor has the exact role of IBPGR within this framework. Paragraph 158 of the report states that these proposals can only be achieved if the present financing of the various base collections continues or is increased. We need to know how existing-financing systems will relate to the FAO .legal framework. Will contributions still continue through CGIAR as before and will national governments fund their own institutions as before? Any changes in existing arrangements could be very difficult for many states to accept.

In conclusion I should like to summarize the United Kindgom's view and discuss what action Conference should now take. While fully supporting the principles of the conservation and full and free availability of plant genetic resources the United Kingdom, in common with many other countries, is opposed to the introduction of a formal FAO legal framework to direct activities in this field and to the inclusion of breeders' lines in the arrangements for exchange of material. The legal framework would impose an extra layer of bureaucracy and as yet unquantified costs, and would restrict IBPGR's present ability to act rapidly and flexibly in cases of need. IBPGR is functioning well at the moment, and should be supported and encouraged in its present form. The FAO and its members can monitor IBPGR's progress, and only if and when problems become apparent should we consider expanding FAO's role. For this reason we suggest that the undertaking is adopted without Section II on international cooperation. Irrespective of our views on the desirability of a legal framework we do not see how Member Nations can accept proposals without a clear analysis of the financial implications. However-, if we await this there will be a considerable delay before any undertaking can be adopted.

The United Kingdom also takes the view that the reference to special genetic stocks in Article 2, sub-paragraph (v), of the undertaking should be deleted: the inclusion of such material as breeder's lines is completely impracticable and is, we believe, based on a misconception as to the nature of the material. The United Kingdom feels confident that Conference will be able to take into account the views of all member nations to adopt an agreement that all, both within and outside FAO, can accede to. In this way the future of the world's genetic resources can be placed on a firmer basis.

B. PALESTINI (Italy): The Italian delegation has taken good note of document C 83/25 and would like to congratulate the Director-General for preparing such and extensive and comprehensive report.

We think that such a document can provide a good starting point.

The essential, in my opinion, is to make clear to ourselves, first of all, what we really have in mind to achieve. Genetic banks are widely spread throughout the world; but generally they are under national supervision and have to comply with rules and regulations thereof. Many plant breeders have experienced the difficulties related to obtaining certain lines or varieties which are essential for their work. The private sector also tends to hold back part of its phytogenetic material, especially where plant variety protection is missing. So progress in research can be slower, not having the full availability of some of its essential tools. Under this point of view, we can look with favour to the establishing of an International Undertaking on Plant Genetic resources, as appears in Appendix A to this report. Another aspect - second quoted but not for that less important - is the preservation of plant genetic resources for the benefit of all mankind. We have noticed that some of the ancestors of today's common varieties are not anymore available in the areas which once were their natural habitat, but still can be found in other countries where probably plant breeding has not yet attained the highly specialized level of industrial countries. Furthermore, it is essential that plant breeding research centres are established in developing countries, so that varieties of plants which are suitable for the climatic and soil conditions of those countries can be successfully bread and made available to the rural population. Financial aspects related to this problem will require detailed consideration, as stated in paragraph 176 and following of the present document; but we think that even this difficulty can be overcome, if the good will of the countries involved is higher than particular interests and there is a true belief in the righteness of the proposal. Naturally attention must be given that the proposed agreement does not come to conflict with existing structures, such as those belonging to the European Community or related to International conventicrsin the field of plant breeding and plant protection. But the fact that the responsible Organization for monitoring international cooperation relating to plant genetic resources represented by FAO, is in itself a security and we can rely confidently on its full commitment and on that of its governing bodies.

M. LADOR (Israel): Permit me at the outset to express my delegation's appreciation for the excellent report contained in document C 83/25. We are happy to subscribe to the principles and objectives relevant to plant genetic resources. The description of activities undertaken by the International Board of Plant Genetic Resources throughout this report is indeed impressive and agricultural development history will surely relate to the efforts of IBPGR to promote and to support at the global level the collection, conservation, documentations, evaluation, the utilization and exchange of plant genetic resources.

Our experience in cooperating with the IBPGR in the field of exchange of plant genetic resources know-how and technical training has been, to the best of our judgement, rather effective. While fully subscribing to the desire to further strengthen intergovernmental cooperation within a stream-lined legal framework, we would nevertheless suggest judicious caution in order to avoid impediments of an institutional nature to the excellent work presently undertaken by the existing de facto IBPGR/FAO arrangement under practice.

A genebank has been established in Israel in response to meet a need to collect and maintain its rich germ plasm heritage in some ten specific areas where a unique contribution to germ plasm conservation and use can be applied. The activities of the genebank are conducted by the ten cooperatives, each composed of prominent breeders, researchers and agronomists. Within this context we offer our full cooperation with FAO and IBPGR in the collection and preservation of plant genetic resources.

My delegation is particularly guided by paragraphs 108 and 160 of the Director-General's report and suggests that this forum decide on a gradual approach to improve the system and expand the network of base collections as a priority.

D.F. SMITH (Australia): We too appreciate the review and we arc moved by the same spirit of need to conserve plant genetic resources. Australia therefore has a commitment to the free movement of genetic resources through the interchange of germ plasm. We recognize that we ourselves have moved in the last century from being an underdeveloped country to a developed country, largely because of plant breeding; and we have used the genetic resources of other countries almost exclusively. We have also, of course, bred animals and adapted animals to use this plant material. It has been said that in the first century of our existence we discovered gold and in the second we discovered genes.

Australia therefore gives a strong support to the notion of undertakings by all nations to maximize the unfettered movement of genetic material and believes that FAO is the appropriate body to register these undertakings and watch over the process. Australia, though, like most developed countries, has a substantial seed industry covering food crops, forage plants, vegetables, etc., and it has in place a number of mechanisms to regulate commerce in seeds such as seed certification to ensure truth in labelling. Some countries also have systems of plant breeders' rights to encourage investment in plant breeding. We would see such mechanisms as clearly relating to trade in seeds and, in the long run, having little bearing on the matter of free interchange of germ plasm to be incorporated in breeding programmes. Thus we would expect to see a continuance of such commercial mechanisms and accept that the developing countries themselves will gradually generate these forms of regulation.

We believe the undertaking on genetic resources exchange which we are discussing here would clearly recognize the distinction between seed trading and plant breeding, and gradually ensure that mechanisms to regulate seed training do not in any way impede the latter. Australia would also affirm the responsibility of national governments to husband the genetic resources of their country. Indeed, we see this as part of being a government. This should not preclude a government making arrangements with others to include its genetic resource storage or repository in a collective source as the Nordic countries have done, but we do not see this national responsibility as one that can be passed on to any of the international agencies such as FAO. It is a national government responsibility to conserve its resources but this does not preclude international agencies assisting - one hopes temporarily - with finance and other resources to help establish and operate these repositories and train staff.

We ourselves collaborate with IPBGR and believe it has made good progress in encouraging the establishment of genetic resource storages by nations, groups of nations and collaborating agencies. We believe this progress should continue with the resources and responsibility remaining the property of the nations.

Within this context we see the establisment and endorsement of a conventional undertaking as very real progress. We see value in FAO sponsoring the undertaking but we oppose any move which would give FAO any responsibility whatsoever for physical facilities or the exchange of materials.

We therefore strongly support the principles enshrined in the proposal of the Director-General on page 29 but we would amend it to alter its operational clauses (b), (c) and (d). With regard to the draft resolution on page 32, we would wish to add to the background to include recognition that mechanisms exist to regulate commerce in seeds. I will not go into the details of our proposed amendments; I would rather submit them to the Drafting Committee. But we do intend proposing amendments of Articles 2, 5, 7 and 8 to accommodate our position, and we propose the deletion of Article 9.

In essence we are very close to the United Kingdom position, we have the same reservations about material being used by breeders, but I do not believe it would be appropriate to cover our amendments in detail here. Instead, we shall give notice of them to the Drafting Committee and I am confident that a position can be developed which will make for real progress toward ensuring the free interchange of genetic material among all nations.

J.R. LOPEZ-PORTILLO ROMANO (México): Agradecemos la concisa y clara exposición del Doctor Bommer. Agradecemos también y felicitamos con entusiasmo al Director General por su excelente informe que sobre recursos fitogenéticos presenta a esta Conferencia. Lo consideramos un documento completo y que no requiere mayor información para que nosotros podamos tomar nuestras primeras decisiones en torno a las propuestas que contiene. Consideramos también que es un documento que contiene un adecuado diagnóstico de la situación actual y una visión estratégica de corto y largo plazo de las alternativas para establecer un sistema que a todos convenga y beneficie, lo repito, que a todos convenga y beneficie. Es indudablemente el informe del Director General el que recoge una serie de preocupaciones y propuestas alternativas de solución que nos acercan a un manejo más adecuado y más justo de los recursos fitogenéticos y al espíritu mismo de la Resolución 6/81.

Los países en desarrollo vemos con gusto que ha sido recogida la preocupación de fortalecer nuestra propia capacidad de fitomejoramiento con el objetivo de responder a nuestras apremiantes necesidades de alimentación. Por otro lado, los países desarrollados pueden encontrar igualmente en el documento alternativas que les permitan asegurarse de insumos estratégicos para su importante industria semillera.

Por sus trascendentales implicaciones, el informe del Director General nos invita a analizar detalladamente y a precisar al máximo posible nuestras posiciones y propuestas en la materia.

Señor Presidente, nuestra Delegación apoya plenamente el documento, haciendo sólo los siguientes comentarios:

Los recursos fitogenéticos deben efectivamente considerarse a todos los efectos como un patrimonio de la humanidad y en consecuencia, deberá haber en todo momento y lugar libre disponibilidad de fitogermoplasma.

El trabajo secular de generaciones de campesinos de todo el mundo, así como las bondades de la naturaleza nos han permitido disponer a lo largo de la historia de una riqueza tan indispensable para nuestra supervivencia como el aire que respiramos. Por su enorme importancia para la vida, tanto vegetal como animal, este patrimonio debe ser cuidado y usado con sentido de justicia y utilidad, es decir, en función de los intereses y necesidades de toda la humanidad.

Es por esto que los recursos fitogenéticos deben ser considerados en toda su amplitud y con toda su potencialidad. Destaca ante todo su gran importancia en la fitomejora para producir más y mejores alimentos, pero también en otros sectores clave de la actividad económica, como la industria farmacéutica para producir más y mejores medicamentos, la industria química, la de construcción, la textil, la nuclear, etc.

Su disponibilidad y pleno aprovechamiento debe, por tanto, respetarse y materializarse en beneficio de todos.

Reconocemos pues la trascedencia de esos dos principios que inspiran y se concretizan en el informe presentado.

El informe del Director General contiene una gran virtud, rescata la visión integral de la conservación de los recursos fitogenéticos, es decir, tanto en el terreno, "in situ", como en bancos o cajas de almacenamiento fuera de sus ámbitos naturales, "ex situ". Esta formulación integral de la conservación permite reforzar y complementar lo que la FAO, otros Organismos Internacionales y diversos Gobiernos han hecho en la materia.

México, por su parte, está poniendo en práctica este doble propósito de conservación a través de su sistema nacional de reservas naturales protegidas.

La necesidad de apoyar el fortalecimiento de las capacidades nacionales de mejoramiento fitogené-tico de los países en desarrollo es uno más de los aspectos relevantes del informe del Director General.

Subrayamos que la investigación y el desarrollo en materia de recursos fitogenéticos tienen un valor estratégico debido a que determinan, en gran medida, las características y modalidades presentes y futuras de los sistemas de producción agrícola. Por ejemplo, la investigación y el desarrollo en fitogenética que dieron lugar a la revolución verde en condiciones de abundancia de agua, fertilizantes y pesticidas, tienen su contraparte en la investigación y desarrollo para la revolución verde en el temporal, en condiciones de escasez de agua, pobreza de suelos, falta de fertilizantes y pesticidas,y de capital.

La investigación y el desarrollo bajo estas ultimas condiciones deberán enfrentarse con imaginación y audacia, este es el desafío que involucra a grandes masas campesinas empobrecidas del mundo. Su productividad puede y debe incrementarse de manera importante en el futuro.

El informe destaca la necesidad de apoyar estos esfuerzos, aunque en esta importante materia es necesario avanzar con la proposición de medidas concretas que permitan a los países en desarrollo diseñar y generar variedades de alto rendimiento, que esta vez sí, se adecúen a sus condiciones ecológicas, económicas y culturales.

Reiteramos en esta ocasión que la razón de ser de un convenio internacional sobre recursos fitogenéticos es la de reglamentar el usufructo de las diferentes categorías de estos recursos, aprovechando la gran cantidad de conocimientos científicos y técnicos acumulados en beneficio del desarrollo de la agricultura de todos los países y de la alimentación de todos los pueblos. En consecuencia, nuestra Delegación reitera la necesidad de un compromiso internacional que nos permita avanzar hacia un marco jurídico que señale eventualmente los derechos y las responsabilidades de lus firmantes, las correspondientes instancias jurídicas reconocidas para apelar en eventuales, no deseables, casos de desaveniencia, así como el papel que deb desempeñar la FAO, etc.

No obstante, debemos tender hacia sistemas que nos permitan pues, apelar contra prácticas restrictivas en materia de libre disponibilidad de recursos fitogenéticos para fines de investigación.

No obstante, creemos que un compromiso internacional no se agota en sí mismo, este es ante todo un importante catalizador de normas, actitudes e instrumentos que favorecerían, sobre todo en los países en desarrollo, la formación de personal, la ampliación de diversos tipos de infraestructura técnica y física, la canalización de recursos financieros y otras ventajas más que redundarían en beneficio de todos.

Si bien es necesario, el compromiso internacional no es suficiente para garantizar la plena y libre disponibilidad del fitogermoplasma y de la información científica como acertadamente lo reconoce el documento; justificándose así, bajo el reconocimiento unánime de estos principios, el establecimiento de una red internacional de colecciones, base de recursos fitogenéticos bajo la jurisdicción y la administración de la FAO.

La propuesta de red internacional del informe del Director General, página 137, 138 y 139, lo enfatizamos, no viene a sustituir, duplicar, aniquilar, lastimar o poner en la picota, de manera alguna, el sistema vigente. Nadie lo ha dicho o planteado, ni tampoco sería viable hacerlo, somos conscientes de ello. Por el contrario, el sistema propuesto lo complementa, lo fortalece, colma vacíos por todos reconocidos. No debemos permitir que se les satanice o condene por principios o malos entendidos.

El Banco como red internacional sería el primer mecanismo establecido para la coordinación mundial de las actividades en materia de recursos fitogenéticos. Sería la base de la cooperación internacionalpara fortalecer la capacidad de conservación y mejora fitogenética de todos los países.

En este sentido, apoyamos lo dicho por Argentina al destacar la necesidad de acuerdos regionales para la conservación de recursos fitogenéticos.

El Grupo Consultivo de Investigaciones Agrícolas Internacionales va a seguir operando, nosotros no podemos cambiarlo, ni eso se pretende, los Estados Miembros aquí representados no tenemos más datos sobre dicho Grupo, sólo podemos nosotros responsabilizarnos por lo que nos concierne, si el Grupo Consultivo se adapta o no a otras circunstancias deseables es su problema, pero no forma parte del Sistema de Naciones Unidas, se trata de una Organización heterodoxa en el sentido de que está integrada por compañías privadas, Estados Miembros y algunas Organizaciones Internacionales. Se basa en ciertas legislaciones nacionales para desarrollar sus trabajos y responde a intereses particulares. Lo que se propone, pues, no lo acepta, no puede aceptarlo, ojalá se asemeje a ese sistema, pero ello no está en nuestras manos, lo quiero reiterar, lo que aquí se discute es la salvaguarda y promoción de todos los recursos fitogenéticos para beneficio de todos los países y pueblos del mundo, principalmente de los países en desarrollo.

Con respecto al establecimiento del Banco Internacional (y disculpe, señor Presidente, que nos estemos tomando tanto tiempo, pero usted sabe que nuestra delegación ha mantenido un interés especial en este tema y que lo consideramos como un aspecto fundamental de los trabajos de esta Conferencia); como decía, con respecto al establecimiento del Banco Internacional, reconocemos de nuevo la ejemplar actitud del Gobierno de España, que ha dicho que podría poner su Banco Nacional a la disposición de la Comunidad Internacional, dando con su adhesión el primer paso para la institucionalización de una eventual red internacional de Bancos.

México, por su parte, desea aprovechar la ocasión para poner a la plena disposición de la FAO sus muestras de materiales colectados o introducidos que tiene en sus Bancos de germoplasma.

El documento es visionario en la consideración y en el tratamiento de las diferentes categorías de recursos fitogenéticos que existen_. Presenta, sin embargo, algunas imprecisiones que pueden dejar lugar a dudas, por lo que sugerimos que sean precisadas las categorías de las variedades cultiveras y las reservas genéticas especiales del párrafo 19. Lo más importante, en resumen, es destacar que el compromiso internacional deberá contemplar todas las variedades, todas las diversas categorías, perdón, de recursos fitogenéticos, reconociendo y respetando su tratamiento específico y diferente para cada una de esas categorías, aunque buscando, ante todo, asegurar su uso con sentido de equidad y utilidad para todos los seres humanos.

El sistema de información propuesto resulta un complemento indispensable del sistema global planteado por el Director General y nos permitirá, sin duda, establecer prioridades y dar los primeros pasos en estrategia que debamos seguir. Hay que destacar que, al igual que el compromiso, la información científico-técnica deberá incluir todas las categorías de recursos fitogenéticos de interés agrícola, pues unicamente así la totalidad de los participantes del sistema se beneficiarían por igual. La superación y libre manejo del sistema de información por parte de la FAO, además de garantizar su consistencia técnica,permitiría garantizar la libre disponibilidad de la misma. Por lo antes dicho, esta propuesta merece también todo nuestro apoyo.

Hemos dejado para última parte de nuestra intervención lo que consideramos una gran novedad del informe del Director General. Me refiero a la formación de un grupo intergubernamental sobre recursos fitogenéticos, como organo rector en la materia, y también del Consejo. La propuesta del Director de incorporar plena y efectivamente a los países, incluyendo aquellos que no forman parte de la FAO, en el tema de decisiones, en el establecimiento de prioridades, y en el diseño de políticas en materia de conservación, mejoramiento e información sobre recursos fitogenéticos, debe ser apoyada incondicionalmente por todos, ya que actualmente la FAO no cuenta con el mandato jurídico que le permita participar u orientar sus actividades y programas del CIRF, impidiendo a todos los países una participación activa en la materia. Creemos que es esta la única forma de garantizar que los criterios técnico-científicos correspondan a los legítimos intereses de nuestros pueblos. Es evidente que este es un tema que debe tener todo el apoyo científico-técnico para que los responsables de la conducción de las políticas en materia agrícola y alimentaria puedan tomar las decisiones que más convengan a sus pueblos. Este es un aspecto fundamental para el logro de la soberanía alimentaria en nuestros Estados y que requiere, por lo tanto, toda nuestra atención y todo nuestro apoyo.

Respecto a la Resolución propuesta por el señor Presidente, que apoyamos, México se reserva el derecho de intervenir nuevamente para comentar con todo detalle y precisión su contenido.

Finalmente, señor Presidente, deseamos que esta Conferencia recoja la intervención que a nombre del Grupo Latinoamericano y el Caribe hicimos en el último Consejo de la FAO y que consta en los verbatim correspondientes. Se lo retornaremos a la Secretaría para que tenga a bien incluirla. Lo que dice dicha intervención es básicamente que el grupo Latinoamericano y el Caribe da un apoyo de tipo general al informe del Director General. Muchas gracias señor Presidente.

CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mexico. We have taken note of your suggestion to include your statement to the Eighty-fourth Council session. If the Commission agrees this can be included in the verbatim record of this Commission.

(Extract from Document CL 84/PV/4)
(Extrait du document CL 84/PV/4)
(Extracto del documento CL 84/PV/4)

J. R. LOPEZ-PORTILLO ROMANO (México): A nombre del Grupo Latinoamericano y del Caribe y de la propia delegación de Mexico agradecemos al Sr. Bommer su presentación y felicitamos al Sr. Director General por el Informe sobre Recursos Fitogenéticos que presenta a este Consejo. Indudablemente es un informe que nos acerca a una situación más justa y equilibrada en esta materia, por lo que lo apoyamos en lo general y sin duda será considerado con mayor detenimiento en la Conferencia.

Es necesario, Sr. Presidente, ratificar en este Consejo nuestro apego a los principios fundamentales que dieron origen a la Resolución 6/81; a saber: que los recursos fitogenéticos son un patrimonio de la humanidad y que en consecuencia deberá haber en todo momento y lugar libre disponibilidad del fitogermoplasma para fines de investigación. El reconocimiento de estos principios lleva al Director General en su Informe al establecimiento de un sistema internacional que permita asegurar la operación de estos principios. Es éste hoy un importante aspecto que debe recibir el apoyo de todo nuestro Consejo.

Coincidimos con el Informe cuando señala claramente la indudable ventaja que reportaría al sistema en su conjunto la adopción de las medidas propuestas. Destacamos: primero, la aceptación de un compromiso internacional que establezca la actividad y tratamiento de las diversas categorías de recursos fitogenéticos existentes para asegurar su uso con sentido de justicia y utilidad para toda la humanidad. Segundo, el establecimiento de una red de colección base de recursos fitogenéticos bajo la administración de la FAO complementado por un sistema de información. Tercero, el fortalecimiento de la capacidad nacional del mejoramiento fitogenético de los países en desarrollo. Cuarto, la propuesta de incorporar plena y efectivamente a los países en la total decisión y establecimiento de prioridades enmateria de recursos fitogenéticos y podría pensarse seriamente en incluir a países que no siendo miembros de la FAO podrían hacer importantes aportaciones.

El Grupo Latinoamericano y del Caribe considera que el Director General debe recibir apoyo a estas propuestas.

ABDUL WAHID JALIL (Malaysia): My delegation has listened with great interest to the discussion on this subject. We would like to make some very general comments.

The Director-General and his staff must be commended for the preparation of this excellent report. It has no doubt been a difficult task trying to bring together the varied international activities relating to the various aspects of plant genetic resources, their present network and their major weaknesses. Issued relating to the activities of international, national, private organizations and national governments, how these activities are coordinated and the extent of their commitments are no doubt issues of great significance if a suitable and practical system for the collection, preservation and exchange of plant genetic materials is to be achieved.

While we note the analysis of the present situation and the proposals for its improvement with satisfaction, we do realize that the report is not a complete reflection of the state of affairs of the plant genetic resources. Being the first attempt, and a very concrete attempt indeed, the analysis can but be very broad and general. However, I do not think every one of us, including the Director-General, would want to consider this report as the final attempt on the subject which has attracted a great deal of attention now and that everything contained therein should be the ultimate. Notwithstanding the deficiencies and omissions, this report nevertheless contains many valuable observations, suggestions and proposals. Some of these merit our immediate consideration, others may need further modifications and strengthening, while many others may not be thought of now but may prove to be useful and necessary in the future.

For example, as mentioned in paragraph 147, the suggestion that an international genebank should be considered as an international concept, rather than a physical entity and that account should be taken of relevant ongoing activities, should merit our utmost consideration. This, to me, should be the basic premise of our deliberation and should get the consideration of all.

Similarly, there is the need to consider the formation of an inter-governmental forum in which governments could collectively exercise their responsibilities in respect of issues relating to plant genetic resources as enumerated in paragraphs 71 and 173. Measures for the establishment of and strengthening of a global information system and funding arrangements are also important issues which must be considered.

In spite of the already existing institutions and arrangements for the various activities of plant genetic materials, the analysis of the report confirms that the present system still lacks institutionalization in its arrangements and commitments. This report discussed the merits and demerits of a number of arrangements and considered a universal undertaking to be the most appropriate solution for improvement under the present situation.

It is the feeling of my delegation that whatever form of international convention or undertaking is considered we must always strive to develop an arrangement that is realistic, effective and productive and one in which there will be a guarantee that the contracting parties are able to assume their responsibilities willingly.

Any arrangement made should not further impose financial burden on the developing member countries and every effort should be made to improve the capacity and capability of developing countries to enable them actively to participate in the work of plant genetic resources.

Finally, based on these considerations my delegation lends its support to the conclusions and proposals of the Director-General, with the understanding that these matters would be further discussed and reviewed to ensure improved effectiveness of the total system within the existing mechanism.

P. GOSSELIN (Canada): The issue that we have before us is a difficult one. There are honest differences of view as to whether a problem really exists and if there·is a problem what should be done about it. However, all delegations recognize the importance of plant genetic resources and the potential dangers of erosion and loss, and all support the principle of unrestricted exchange and access.

The Canadian Government has studied carefully the report of the Director-General which, as he notes, is submitted on his own responsibility. The Director-General has made a valiant attempt to come to grips with the situation, recognizing the differences of view which have characterized previous discussions on this issue.

I regret to say that the Canadian Government does not draw the same conclusions as the Director-General. The international community has long recognized the importance of plant genetic resources. In fact the FAO's interest in the field dates back at least twenty years. As has been noted, the FAO played a major role in establishing the International Board for Plant Genetic Resources, the IBPGR, under the aegis of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research.

Since the establishment of the IBPGR in 1974 the FAO has worked closely with the board serving as an ex officio member of the Executive Committee and providing secretariat support. In fact, the close collaboration between the FAO and the IBPGR has been a model of institutional cooperation. The Canadian Government is thus satisfied that the international community is seized of the importance of protecting and preserving plant genetic resources, and appropriate mechanisms are in place to ensure continued international cooperation in this important field.

We do not find compelling the arguments that the IBPGR is not 'institutionalized', alledgedly lacks a legal basis, is not permanent and does not have a secure funding. These alleged shortcomings have never hindered the board from carrying out its functions over the past decade. Moreover, arguments of this kind if carried to their logical conclusion would suggest that the entire CGIAR system should be institutionalized because it also would be at risk.

Canada, together with many other countries, developed and developing, is extremely satisfied with the CGIAR system of autonomous independent international institutes. The system's many accomplishments and its professional integrity need no elaboration. Indeed I would venture to suggest that a major reason for the success of the IBPGR and its sister institutes is the fact that they do not operate under intergovernmental control. They are thus essentially scientific and free of the politicization that sometimes unfortunately characterizes many intergovernmental institutions.

It is unfortunate that the question of the adequacy of the existing international system for plant genetic resources has become such a contentious issue. To date there has been no evidence to support the fear that the exchange of genetic resources is threatened by governmental restrictions. Rather it would appear that concerns regarding plant breeder rights legislation have become internationalized into a concern regarding genetic resources. While any private individual or sovereign government are obviously entitled to their own views as to whether plant breeders' rights is on balance good or bad, this debate is completely different from the question of whether the existing international plant genetic resource system is adequate. Unfortunately these two separate and distinct issues have become increasingly intertwined and are regarded by some people as one and the same. They are not. The decision as to whether or not to introduce plant breeders' rights legislation is the prerogative of sovereign governments. If individuals or groups desagree with the position of their national administration on this issue, they should work within the domestic political process to change this. The only issue which should be considered by this Conference is whether governments are satisfied with the existing international plant genetic resource system.

The Canadian position is clear. It is suggested in the following statement adopted by the CGIAR at its meeting on Friday, 4 November 1983, and I quote: "The group expressed its satisfaction with the accomplishments of the IBPGR in the field of plant genetic resources. The group reinforced the terms of reference of the IBPGR. It stated that the Board should continue as an autonomous independent international institution under the authority of the CGIAR working in close collaboration with the FAO". That is not to say we believe that the IBPGR is perfect, and could not be further improved. However, our belief is that these improvements should be incremental, and should be designed to strengthen the present system, and not to replace or duplicate it with another organism. To summarize, Canada does not believe that there is a need for this Conference to adopt an international undertaking on plant genetic resources., The case for such an undertaking, we believe, has not been made. However, we recognize that this is an important issue, and we are certainly prepared to keep the situation under review. One way in which this might be done would be to ask the IBPGR to report periodically to the Committee on Agriculture, so that governments would have an opportunity to determine whether any additional international action is required. However, at this juncture proposals for international undertakings, conventions, or international gene banks, would appear to be solutions in search of a problem.

In conclusion, my delegation would like to reiterate that we fully recognize the importance of the issue, and are committed to the free access and exchange and conservation of plant genetic resources. However, we firmly believe the solutions to the perceived problems, and any improvements that could be made, should be sought within the existing IBPGR system, and not by striking out in new and uncertain directions that might not attract the required support.

J.M. BOLIVAR SALCEDO (España): Nuestra delegación agradece al doctor Bommer su excelente presentación. Nuestro país considera fundamental que en esta Conferencia se alcance un consenso en la línea de las propuestas que nos presenta el Director General en su informe; propuestas que son flexibles y permiten la negociación.

Dentro de la flexibilidad que muestra el documento C 83/25 creemos que es plenamente posible llegar a un acuerdo que, respetando los intereses individuales de los distintos países, establezca el marco jurídico legal para la salvaguardia de los muchos intereses comunes que contiene el término "recursos fitogenéticos".

Como ha dicho bien el distinguido delegado de México, este acuerdo a todos conviene y beneficia. Las ventajas de llegar a este acuerdo internacional son obvias. Un patrimonio de toda la humanidad cuyo manejo y utilización tiene una inevitable proyección economica y política no debe estar bajo el único control de un grupo internacional que engloba un número muy limitado de países.

Mi país es donante del CIRF y estamos convencidos de que está desarrollando una excelente labor técnica. Creemos también que, en líneas generales, el sistema bona fide en el que se basa ha funcionado satisfactoriamente, pero creemos que no es suficiente el sistema actual ya que existen deficiencias, al menos políticas, de las que dan buena prueba estos debates y los que les han precedido.

Los miembros del CIRF son elegidos por su capacidad personal y profesional y actúan a este título, lo cual como cuerpo técnico y científico es plenamente válido; pero unas actividades que son básicas para el futuro de la seguridad alimentaria de todos los pueblos es imprescindible que se desarrollen en el seno de un organismo representativo de la Comunidad Internacional.

Hemos hablado del Acuerdo Internacional que es un elemento en que debe asentarse un sistema que englobe los recursos fitogenéticos, y también nos hemos referido al CIRF, cuya permanencia y continuidad defendemos y al que no se ataca ni se disminuye en la propuesta contenida en el documento C 83/25; y precisamente, a nuestro entender es otro elemento fundamental para este sistema global de recursos fitogenéticos, pero hacen falta otros elementos; es una red de duplicados de colecciones básicas bajo jurisdicción de la FAO, como expresó el Director General, y también un sistema internacional de información pues cualquier tipo de acuerdo o compromiso está sometido a los vaivenes legislativos nacionales derivados de los cambios políticos y administrativos de los países firmantes.

Es necesario, pues, para asegurar el libre acceso a este bien precioso que son los recursos fitogenéticos que exista una garantía de que efectivamente van a estar siempre disponibles, independientemente de los cambios políticos de los países, y esta garantía solo puede ofrecerla la red citada internacional de colecciones básicas, red bajo jurisdicción internacional que no supone una duplicación de las actividades actuales, sino un complemento de las mismas.

Este es precisamente el sentido y la voluntad política de la oferta hecha por nuestro Gobierno: poner las colecciones básicas de nuestro Banco de Genes bajo la jurisdicción y control del Sistema de las Naciones Unidas; en otras palabras, nuestro país está dispuesto a renunciar expresamente a ejercer la propiedad y a legislar sobre estas colecciones básicas a fin de que puedan estar siempre a disposición de la Comunidad Internacional. Y además se compromete a financiar la conservación de estas colecciones básicas y a administrarlas bajo el control y la jurisdicción del Sistema de las Naciones Unidas, a fin de que la existencia de estas colecciones no genere nuevos gastos a este Organismo Internacional. Esto quiere decir que estamos dispuestos a admitir con hecho, no con palabras, que efectivamente los recursos fitogenéticos son un patrimonio de la humanidad y pensamos que este es el tipo de garantía que hay que reconocer a los donantes en especie del CIRF, que el material que procede de sus países está conservado y a su disposición bajo la égida de la FAO, sin tener que depender en un momento dado de la buena voluntad de un gobierno o de un parlamento determinados.

La oferta española sólo trata de abrir camino a esta red básica de duplicados bajo jurisdicción internacional. Naturalmente, esta red es totalmente compatible con la existente de Bancos Nacionales y con el Sistema actual. La red internacional sólo debería cumplir una función de caja de seguridad en la que estén depositados los duplicados de las colecciones existentes en Bancos Nacionales, si es que efectivamente el sistema actual funciona y da satisfacción.

Comprendemos perfectamente que no se puede pretender que todos los Bancos hoy integrados en la red del CIRF secunden el ejemplo español, pero seguiremos insistiendo cuantas veces sea preciso hasta que los recursos fitogenéticos esenciales se encuentren salvaguardados con esta garantía, que no puede ofrecer la actual red de Bancos bajo soberanías nacionales.

Finalmente, el cuarto elemento de este sistema global de recursos fitogenéticos debe estar constituido por un sistema internacional de información. Estamos totalmente de acuerdo en ello.

Mi delegación apoya plenamente la Resolución propuesta por el Director General como un primer paso para llegar a un convenio internacional en sentido estricto. Creemos positiva la propuesta de crear un órgano rector intergubernamental para seguridad genética en el seno del Consejo que pueda incorporar incluso a países que no pertenecen a la FAO.

Para terminar, quisiéramos reservarnos la posibilidad de volver a hacer uso de la palabra.

J. SONNEVELD (Netherlands): We would like to congratulate FAO on the excellent base document C 83/25. We appreciate the need to focus world attention on the most important subject of genetic conservation, and to recognize the fact that FAO already for many years has stressed this issue. It was FAO who very much stimulated the establishment of IBPGR and ever since has given support and cooperation to that organization.

We can be brief, Mr Chairman. We fully endorse the view expressed by the Nordic countries. Genetic resources are indeed a heritage of mankind and we will support what action is necessary to promote free exchange.

We accept the undertaking in principle where it deals with this .issue. We support the amendment proposed by the Nordic countries at paragraph 2.1(a)v to cover material in base collections. We have difficulties where new organizational structures are suggested under the umbrella of FAO. We are of the opinion that with the CGIAR and the IBPGR we have a uniquely effective organization which satisfies all requirements coming out of the proposed undertaking, including a close link with FAO. It is establishing an international network; it has high standing with the agricultural community; it is successful in attracting international support: and funds. We would not want to duplicate such an organization, let alone reduce its scope. We would like to have a clear picture of how the relations will be between IBPGR and FAO.

We take it that what is stated in paragraph 7.2 of the draft resolution, the last sentence, is of a purely legal nature and does not suggest FAO's operational aspirations in bringing about the free exchange of gene material.

However, having said this, we do see merit in an international undertaking stimulating governments to accept responsibilities in genetic conservation and safeguarding these as a resource of mankind. We do feel that an international agreement on the free exchange of genetic resources is important for the future. The Netherlands has recently concentrated its own genetic base collections in a new established gene bank. We stand ready to continue cooperation along the lines proposed in the draft undertaking.

A. NAGA (Japan): First of all, on behalf of my delegation, I would like to congratulate Dr Bommer on his excellent introduction of this important agenda item. We also would like to commend the secretariat for the preparation of this comprehensive and analytical document C 83/25 which is before us.

My country, fully recognizing the importance of plant genetic resources and the necessity of further strengthening such activities as collection, conservation and exchange of plant genetic resources, has been actively cooperating with IBPGR in many ways including that of financing, of provision of conservation facilities, of holding of training courses etc.

The idea of the proposal of the Director-General, as far as I understand, is to strengthen cooperation between each country in the hope of preventing erosion and loss of genetic resources and ensuring the free exchange of these resources.

We can support the idea itself and share in the hope with him that international cooperation in this field will be further strengthened. However, at the same time, we are not totally convinced of whether the approach of the formulation of the undertaking is actually an improvement over the current system. Therefore we feel compelled to express our concern about the possible adverse effects of adopting the proposed undertaking as already expressed by some delegates.

The draft undertaking, based on the understanding that the current system does not fully ensure a long term commitment of the participating countries and organizations and does not allow for active participation of each country, presents a proposal of establishing a legal framework over the current IBPGR network.

However, we are of the viewpoint that what is needed for expanding international activities in this field of plant genetic resources, is the will of all countries and organizations to participate in the present network.

Establishing a legal framework over the current network might discourage the will of these countries and organizations to participate in the network.

In conclusion, Mr Chairman, our opinion is that first we are not convinced of the necessity of establishing a new legal framework. Secondly, we are concerned about the possible adverse effects of the proposed undertaking. Thirdly, we feel that in order to promote international cooperation for the conservation of plant genetic resources, it is much more realistic to seek a way that steadily improves and expands the current IBPGR activities.

M. B. SY (Sénégal): A l'occasion des récentes réunions de notre Commission, j'ai souligné que notre monde, en tout cas dans sa situation actuelle, connaît des problèmes qui sont une résultante évidente de certains paradoxes. Aujourd'hui dans le document qui nous a été présenté avec beaucoup de brio par M. Bommer, que je tiens à féliciter au nom de la délégation sénégalaise, nous avons un rapport particulièrement important, clair, et très suggestif notamment pour les pays en développement. Je lui reprocherai simplement d'être intervenu un peu tard parce qu'il pose un problème qui, à l'origine, intéressait davantage un certain nombre de pays qui (après avoir résolu leurs difficultés en utilisant certains croisements de plantes sauvages provenant de pays en développement) aujourd'hui hésitent à améliorer le système parce qu'ils le trouvent excellent. Il est excellent du reste, je le reconnais. Mais il est étonnant que l'on trouve dans notre monde un système parfait. Il est parfait par certains côtés, cela est vrai, mais il faut que l'on réfléchisse sur certaines difficultés. A cet égard, le Rapport du Directeur général mérite beaucoup d'éloges parce qu'il est loin d'être paradoxal comme peut l'être la situation mondiale. Il est très logique et s'inscrit dans le processus général tendant à réaliser un bien-être pour l'ensemble de la communauté et notamment les pays en développement. Comment peut-on reconnaître que les ressources phytogénétiques constituent un bien de la communauté internationale et s'inquiéter que ces ressources soient gérées de manière transparente, selon des normes, qui contrairement à ce que l'on dit, n'auraient aucun caractère politique. Qui peut dire d'ailleurs que dans le système actuel il n'y a pas de caractère politique ? Je ne m'aventurerai pas dans ce sens. Mais je pense qu'un cadre juridique est un apect important pour permettre un renforcement des moyens (dans le système actuel, il s'agit de bonnes volontés, qui sont très importantes, que nous apprécions très fort) mais nous souhaitons, dans le renforcement des projets qui sont de plus en plus importants, relativement aux besoins rencontrés par les pays en développement, qu'il y ait un cadre juridique, qui en fait ne serait juridique que de nom, parce que tout le monde sait que le droit international n'a pas un caractère impératif, mais donne simplement des lignes directrices qui décrivent une bonne volonté et l'engagement d'une volonté internationale de collaborer sur des bases de solidarité humaine et d'entraide.

Dans la résolution, le dernier point parle de la mise à disposition de la communauté de certaines ressources et je serai d'accord pour qu'on enlève les perfectionnements qui ont été obtenus sur la base de recherche d'un coût important pour ces pays. Mais pour les autres points, il est souhaitable qu'il y ait un appui général et total de la résolution présentée par la FAO, parce qu'elle s'inscrit dans un cadre logique de coopération et de solidarité.

Je soulignerai enfin qu'il y a une bonne dizaine d'années, la situation était la même pour les ressources halieutiques. On avait des difficultés à obtenir un consensus. Mais des efforts persistants ont fait qu'aujourd'hui, après plusieurs années de négociations, les pays sont parvenus à se mettre d'accord sur la nécessité de créer une véritable base.

Nous, pays en développement, qui attachons une importance particulière aux ressources phytogénétiques, nous comprenons l'attitude des autres pays et nous la respectons. Mais ce n'est pas pour autant que nous devons nous décourager et nous continuerons à oeuvrer dans le sens de l'internationalisation de ce problème, pour qu'il obtienne un cadre juridique qui permette de trouver les fonds nécessaires pour engendrer la survie des ressources phytogénétiques et éviter leur érosion.

CHAIRMAN: Distinguished delegates, I have ten more speakers on the list for this subject. We have gone a long way toward establishing the general trend of opinion. However, in preparation for the final consideration of the proposed or the draft resolution, it is necessary that we move rapidly towards a detailed examination of the undertaking. We will be endeavouring over the lunch hour to conside the mechanics that we will use for the rapid examination of the proposed undertaking. Therefore it is necessary that we come back and try as hard as we can to establish a quorum by 14.30 hours.

The meeting rose at 13.00 hours
La séance set levée à 13 h 00
Se levanta la sesión a las 13.00 horas