CHAIRMAN: I thank the delegates of Libya, Mexico and Pakistan for allowing us to start. Although we have had some little problems with 'auspices' this is certainly an auspicious occasion because all through Friday and this morning we were meeting in the Red Room, which means we had a red light and could not proceed. Now we are in the Green Room and we have the green light. I am sure that I would not be fooling myself, neither would I be fooling the Contact Group, if I told you that we have some good news. The Contact Group has finally reached agreement on the clauses that were giving us problems earlier this afternoon. I should therefore like to ask the Secretary to read the final versions of what has been agreed on paragraph 7.2 and Article 9, after which she will then read what has been agreed on the draft Resolution.
K. KILLINGSWORTH (Secretary, Commission II): The first amendment agreed by the group this afternoon comes at the end of paragraph 7.2 in Article 7 of the Draft Undertaking and it involves the addition of the following sentence: "The centre concerned will, whenever requested by FAO, make material in the base collection available to participants in the Undertaking".
The second amendment is in Article 9, paragraph 9.2. In the first sentence the words contained between brackets would go out and the sentence would therefore read: "FAO will, in particular, monitor the operation of the arrangements referred to in Article 7". We would then put a comma and add the following words: "will establish any necessary mechanisms, and ...", and then we would go on with what is in the original text, the next sentence. So it would read: "will establish any necessary mechanisms and will take or recommend measures that are necessary or desirable", and the rest of the paragraph would reamin unchanged. Just to make sure in the other languages, I would like to say that the words added in Spanish would be "establecerá cualesquiera mecanismos necesarios” and in French would be "mettra en place tout mécanisme nécessaire".
Passing on to the Resolution, several amendments were made. In the second preambular section, which begins "Recognizing that", the order of the three sub-paragraphs would be. changed as follows: sub-paragraph (b) in the original text would become sub-paragraph (a), sub-paragraph (c) in the original text would become sub-paragraph (b), and the original (a) would become sub-paragraph (c).
In originally (c), now sub-paragraph (b), two changes are introduced. The sentence begins "full advantage can be derived from plant genetic resources only through an effective programme of plant breeding". In this sentence we would delete the word "only". Finally, at the end of the sub-paragraphs the words suggested this morning by the delegate of India, "plant survey and identification" would be inserted, so that the final clause would read: "training and facilities for plant survey and identification and plant breeding are insufficient or even not available in many of those countries."
In the third preambular section, which begins "Considering that", in the first sub-paragraph (a) we would insert the word "documentation", so that the sentence would read: "the international community should adopt a concrete set of principles designed to promote the exploration, preservation documentation”,availability and full use… “ we would change the word “exploitation, “to “use”-“… of relevant plant genetic resources”, and here we would delete the words “for plant breeding”. So it would read: “of relvant plant genetic resources essential to agricultural development”.
In sub-paragraph (b) the word "documentation" would again be inserted after the words "maintenance, evaluation" in the early part of the paragraph: "maintenance, evaluation, documentation and exchange of plant genetic resources ...".
Sub-paragraph (c) again at the end of the paragraph the word "documentation" would be inserted after "maintenance, evaluation" and before "exchange of plant genetic resources".
Operative paragraph 1 remains unchanged.
In operative paragraph 2, which begins "Requests the Director-General" the final clause would be deleted, so that the paragraph would end with the words "contained in the Undertaking", and we would delete "especially Articles 3 to 5 thereof".
Operative paragraph 3, the final clause would also be deleted and three words inserted earlier, so that the sentence would read: "Urges governments and the aforesaid institutions to give effect to the principles of the Undertaking and to support ..." - and here we would insert "and participate in the international arrangements outlined therein". At this point we would finish that paragraph and put a semi colon and add operation paragraph 4.
Operative paragraph 4 would read as follows: "Endorses the Director-General's proposal for the establishment as soon as possible, within the framework of FAO, of an intergovernmental committee or other body on plant genetic resources open to all interested states".
CHAIRMAN: Before we get comments, if there are any, I should explain that there is under preparation a separate Resolution that will address the specific mechanism for the setting up of the Inter-governmental body referred to in the final operative paragraph. If the amendments, as just read out by the Secretary, are acceptable to the Commission, we would be ready to hear about that Resolution which is under preparation. First, let us hear if there are any comments on the amendments as agreed by the Contact Group.
R. SALLERY (Canada): I assume we are going to deal only with the amendments in the Undertaking itself, and not with the amendments of the Resolution. I think we should do it in two parts. Am I correct in that assumption?
CHAIRMAN: Let us finish first with the amendments in the Undertaking itself, which means 7(b) of Article 7, and Article 9. Then when we have finished with that we will go on to the Resolution. On the Undertaking now.
H. MALTEZ (Panamá): Queremos referirnos a las observaciones sobre el punto 9. La delegación de Panamá conceptúa que, si bien se han realizado algunas mejoras al documento en general, el mismo, a nuestro juicio, resulta en algunos casos excesivamente flexible. Por esta razón y en aras de su concretividad, tiene dificultades en aceptar que se elimine la frase "establecerá un grupo intergubernamental", y que en su lugar se introduzca una frase de tan amplias interpretaciones como la que se propone.
Nuestra delegación conceptúa que el grupo intergubernamental es e] único foro que poseen los países para exponer sus necesidades de recursos fitosanitarios y por este motivo debemos ser concretos y plantear de manera clara lo que en realidad deseamos. Por tal motivo queremos proponer la siguiente redacción: "La FAO en particular vigilará la aplicación de los acuerdos mencionados en el artículo y establecerá un grupo intergubernamental que tomará o recomendará las medidas ...", y el resto continúa tal como está.
CHAIRMAN: Before I give the floor to other delegations, I would like once more to explain that the Contact Group spent all afternoon mainly on that aspect, and the compromise that was just read out by the Secretary was the only one acceptable, which we thought would meet the requirements as just stated by the distinguished delegate of Panama. However, this is for submission by the Contact Group to the Commission, and it is for the Commission to decide.
M. AHMAD (Pakistan): I endorse the views of my distinguished colleague from Panama. I was wondering why this roundabout way of saying the same thing has now been adopted with the Contact Group. It says so in our printed paragraph 4 of the Resolution that FAO endorses the Director-General's proposal for the establishment as soon as possible of an inter-governmental committee. But then it is being left out from this Undertaking. I was wondering what really the Contact Group had in mind in eliminating it from one place, and reviving it in another place. I think that paragraph 9.2 of the Undertaking was the appropriate place to say that FAO will in particular establish an inter-governmental group. We have so many inter-governmental groups for dealing with other commodities, and this is a very important area, for which I think we should retain this particular phrase within the parenthesis.
CHAIRMAN: I should explain here that the question of the inter-governmental group is mentioned in the Resolution specifically, because if it is included there it would be first time more effective to achieve that purpose, because, according to the proposal of the Director-General, which is referred to in the Report, such a body would only be established when a sufficient number of countries would have acceded to the Undertaking. But if this is reflected in the Resolution then the Conference would empower the Director-General to proceed immediately to establish this inter-governmental body. So for that reason the Contact Group agreed it would be more effective to have it in the Resolution, other than in the Undertaking, because of the complications of the timing for setting it up.
M. R. SY (Sénégal): Mon intention n'est pas de prolonger la discussion mais il y a un point qui ne me paraît pas très clair. Généralement, on_ prend une résolution pour proposer une solution à une situation nouvelle par rapport à ce qui existe déjà. Or, nous sommes en train d'élaborer un engagement international sur un problème bien déterminé. Nous ne voulons pas que dans cet engagement figure un organe exécutif de la FAO pour suivre le problème dont nous débattons, et dans la résolution qui est prise simultanément, on accepte d'inclure cette idée. Il y a là une situation qu'il faut éclaircir.
La FAO est composée d'organes exécutifs; elle comprend le Conseil, des comités et la Conférence. Or, si la FAO a une mission, il faut qu'on nous dise comment elle va exécuter complètement cette mission. L'amendement proposé par le Panama est très sage, tout en reconnaissant que le groupe de contact a eu à résoudre beaucoup de problèmes, nous l'en félicitons, mais je pense qu'il y a un problème important qu'il ne faut pas esquiver.
A.R. PIRES (Capt-Vert): Je partage tout à fait l'opinion du délégué du Sénégal et je l'appuie totalement.
W.A.F. GRABISCH (Germany, Federal-Republic of) (original language German): After we have heard that after paragraph 9.2 there is an addition in the second line as the secretary read it out, after "Article 7" we are to add "will establish any necessary mechanism and". That was the addition as I heard it from the Secretary. We think that the matters you have mentioned are arguments which convince us. It is better to leave it out in paragraph 9.2 and insofar as such a paragraph is necessary then better to include it there.
CHAIRMAN: Could you repeat your suggestion?
W.A.F. GRABISCH (Germany, Federal Republic of) (original language German): We do not have a concrete proposal but what we heard was that in 9.2 there was to be added a sentence "will establish any necessary mechanism and", and you yourself, Mr. Chairman, said that the question of the time factor must be taken into account and that was the main reason why the words "establish an inter-governmental group" in paragraph 9.2 were knocked out, and instead you said we would have a new paragraph, paragraph 4. For that reason we think that is a proposal we also could agree to, although we did say before that the Contact Group should deal with this question.
J. GAZZO FERNANDEZ-DAVILA (Perú): Señor Presidente, aunque yo estoy acá desde las 8 de la mañana y estoy por retirarme, lamento no haber sido parte del grupo de contacto por la carga de experiencia que tengo en estos trabajos fitogenéticos, pero no fui escogido; tuve esa mala suerte; sin embargo, me parece que si en el punto 4 ya se habla del grupo del Comité Intergubernamental y ya se menciona claramente, no veo por qué cuando se trate de vigilancia de las actividades y medidas afines de la FAO se quiere eludir el grupo intergubernamental. Lo que queremos es que justamente vigile. Entonces se le pone en el lado estricto en el punto 4, donde está medio perdido y creemos que una de las funciones más importantes del grupo intergubernamental está en el articulo 9.2, que es donde debería estar; en cambio, se le saca en una forma incomprensible. Yo, desgraciadamente, en este momento me tengo que retirar, pero me reservo para el plenario. Gracias, señor Presidente.
Sra. Doña H. LOPEZ DE MORAL (Colombia): Señor Presidente, simplemente para abundar en las expresiones que acaba de comunicar a esta Asamblea el delegado del Perú. Específicamente quisiéramos también apoyar a los delegados de Panamá, Pakistán, Senegal y Cabo Verde, que se pronunciaron en favor de mantener esta expresión del grupo intergubernamental en el párrafo 9.2. Si, efectivamente, se mencionaba en la resolución, no vemos ningún daño que se repita la mención de este grupo intergubernamental aquí, en el párrafo 9.2.
D.R. GREGORY (Australia): Perhaps I should just indicate as far as the Contact Group is concerned - and this to reiterate I think what you yourself was saying - that this was a carefully wide and balanced sentence. People will realize the sentence is quite long and I think I could say it was a unanimous view that this was probably the best way to handle what was a very difficult situation, and perhaps difficult in the sense that the question of timing and the question of the legal provisions are the ones that are at essence here. What is the best mechanism for setting it up, and it comes back to the advice we had from, the Legal Counsel and so forth. It did represent a balance of interests, of course, but I think there was a reasonable amount of unanimity and quite a unanimous opinion of how this was handled and also how we handled the proposal in the reservation, so I feel it is somewhat of a pity that while I can sympathize with the views that have been expressed here and I think I can understand them, I think we might lose if we go back to the original form - at least from our own point of view - and perhaps other delegates might like to take this matter up.
CHAIRMAN: I still believe it is perfectly within the rights of distinguished delegates to take the floor and say as much as is necessary on the subject but I hope we are aware that we have at thus stage simply enlarged the Contact Group.
R. GUADARRAMA SISTOS (México): Yo había ofrecido guardar silencio en esta Comisión como miembro del Grupo de Contacto, pero debido a que la delegación de Australia hizo uso de la palabra me permito también intervenir.
Le aclaro a esta Comisión que no hubo, y repito "no hubo" unanimidad en la eliminación del "Grupo Intergubernamental". La delegación de México se quedó sola defendiendo el punto, y en consecuencia la mayoría aceptó la nueva redacción. Mi compromiso fue guardar silencio en la Comisión, pero es mi obligación también en este caso aclarar que no hubo unanimidad en el punto y nuestro argumento fue que el Grupo Intergubernamental es el único, el único medio para que los representantes de gobiernos tomen y compartan decisiones en materia de recursos fitogenéticos.
En consecuencia, es una parte vital, repito vital, del sistema global que estamos desarrollando. Esta es la preocupación de ciertos países, que sea una parte vital, pero lo es también para los países en desarrollo.
En consecuencia, pido a los colegas que reflexionen en términos de la importancia que tiene el Grupo Intergubernamental, el peso que tiene y que tendrá en el futuro y la importancia de incorporarlo ple-namente en el cuerpo del Compromiso, es decir en el artículo 9, inciso 2.
CHAIRMAN: I do not see any indication of desire to take the floor. Nonetheless, I would say that notwithstanding the explanations of the Mexican delegation, it is valid and still true to say that what the Secretary read out at the beginning is what the Contact Group agreed should be presented to the Commission, and of course it is clear that that was a compromise reached after a very lengthy discussion; there is a question about that, but this is what the Group agreed should be presented here. Are there any more observations?
M. NIETO Y LARA (Cuba): Para adelantar en el proceso de la discusión pienso que la parte que se refiere a la Resolución es lo que recoge el espíritu, la intención de los países. Y la segunda parte, el anexo del proyecto del Compromiso constituye más bien la parte instrumental de este espíritu resolutivo que acordará la Conferencia. Quisiera, si fuera posible, que el Consejero legal en este sentido nos auxiliara un poco en el Orden técnico del problema, pero si algo está previamente establecido en el sentido, en el basamento del documento y luego se agrega un documento instrumental, es decir reglamentario, me parece que no habría ningún problema en que se expresara exactamente en los dos lugares; que pudiera estar incluido el Grupo Intergubernamental en la Resolución y también en la parte instrumental: es decir en el proyecto de Compromiso, toda vez que este Compromiso es enteramente voluntario; por eso pienso y me solidarizo con la opinión de algunos delegados que expresaron su deseo, su interés de que apareciera en el punto 9.2, como estaba originalmente previsto.
CHAIRMAN: In accordance with your request I will give the floor to the Legal Counsel.
LEGAL COUNSEL: I am rather reluctant to intervene at this stage, but to take up what I said earlier on this evening, I had some difficulty in seeing a reference to an inter-governmental body alone in the Undertaking and not anywhere else. The Conference has got to be absolutely clear on what it wants to do, and what it wants to do has got to be done. For that reason I think the fact is that it has been mentioned in operative paragraph 4 of the Resolution that contains a specific instruction; it is a specific action taken by the Conference. If you adopt the Resolution and the reference to the inter-governmental body is in that and in only very general terms, the actual follow-up action that is going to be taken either by the Director-General or by the governing bodies of FAO remains uncertain. It is also the uncertainty that would be created in the light of how much support there eventually might be for the Undertaking itself. For that reason, if it is mentioned in both places in a manner which is obviously consistent in both cases, that I think would be a perfectly appropriate solution, and I am not so sure in any case that the solution is not going to come later when the concrete proposal - I understand a resolution is being prepared which would contain a concrete proposal - will show exactly what the intergovernmental body would actually be.
But to get back to the precise question raised by the delegate of Cuba, there would certainly be no objection to having it in the body of the Undertaking in more or less general terms, and also in the operative paragraph 4 which the Contact Group has just adopted.
M. S. ZEHNI (Libya) (original language Arabic): I wish first of all to apologize to my Arabic-speaking friends because for technical reasons and because the discussion in the Contact Group went on in English and all that was agreed upon was taken down in English, therefore I wish to ask permission to use English unlike the practice I have been used to on similar occasions.
(Continues in English) The assumption that the Resolution under discussion here will be finally approved by the Conference, we feel that as it stands now this refers to a possible mechanism or to an inter-governmental committee or other body without specifying or clearly indicating the type of body we are talking about. So the Libyan delegation, in coordination and with the help of other delegations, took it upon us to attempt to offer a draft resolution as a solution to this problem because we feel that one of the most important aspects here is not to lose the momentum we gain by this Resolution under discussion here. So we would like to see some progress on the lines of this Resolution to be taken, steps to be taken, so as to proceed as soon as possible with the establishment of that mechanism or body we are talking about now. We attempted to do so with the understanding and realization from our side that whatever we are going to propose would not be strongest or the best possible form we would like it to be in because of practical, legal and other implications. So without going into too much detail, Mr. Chairman, I will let you in at this stage of our general thinking on this line.
The proposal, or the resolution we are proposing, will, of course, start and build up on the Resolution we are discussing now, if adopted. So in the preamble part there will be mention of the particular parts of the Resolution and the Undertaking we are discussing; and after that, we will be requesting the Director-General to establish a body, a type of body in addition that will refer to the membership of this body which, I think, is the desire of all here, to have it an open body for membership of all the UN governments. After that, we suggest to proceed with the terms of reference of that body.
In doing all this, we are inspired to a great extent by the Report of the Director-General and the line of thought he had in his proposals. At the moment you will appreciate, Mr. Chairman, that I am only giving notice to this Commission that we are intending to present a resolution, hopefully one that will be sponsored by others, so this is to give you the required time for giving notice to this body and to alert you that we are working on this. There are some uncertain parts of this resolution which are under consideration by some of my colleagues here, so if what I said at the moment is sufficient, I will appreciate it if you do not ask me for further details because these can be worked out.
A final thing I wish to say: we do this in the spirit of proceeding, putting the plant genetic resources question into perspective and to keep up the momentum, but you will understand that if we find the going difficult tonight and that what we are proposing does not find strong support from those we are intending to consult with from our group, then perhaps we will not proceed with this suggestion; but in case we do, you have been warned and alerted.
CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much. I have no doubt that delegates realise that this has not been an easy matter for this Commission and certainly not for anyone. The manner in which we have proceeded up to this point, I think holds promise. It is important to note that the paramount consideration in the
Contact Group was that the proposed Undertaking should receive the widest possible acceptance by member countries of the United Nations that would participate in the Undertaking if it is to be of any effect at all; and, as you realize, all this has been done in a spirit of compromise and cooperation because it has been for the benefit of all of us. But apparently we can only achieve that by continuing to walk on thin ice. I would therefore still say to member countries or delegates that were not in the Contact Group that the work done in there was, I am convinced, in the best interests of reaching common ground and a meeting of minds for the benefit of all.
I therefore want to repeat: the words that were presented to you are the words that were arrived at in that spirit and I think you would do a great honour to the Contact Group, and perhaps a service to the Commission and the Conference, if we could agree to adopt those. However, the decision is yours to take.
A.R. PIRES (Cap-Vert): Je suis tout à fait d'accord avec vous. Je crois que le groupe de contact a eu une tâche difficile pour produire la proposition que nous avons sous les yeux, il faudrait maintenant que nous fassions un effort pour avancer et trouver une solution sur laquelle tout le monde soit d'accord, parce que si nous continuons comme cela je crois que nous ne verrons pas notre lit ce soir, que nous ne finirons jamais.
CHAIRMAN: Are they any further observations, perhaps on what Cape Verde has said?
S. ABOUJAOUDE (Lebanon): I was really moved by the statement you made here, Mr. Chairman, and I really sympathize with both my friends from Mexico and Libya because after all, we have given them our confidence: they have worked so hard and, unfortunately, it is not always when we come up with compromises that we are fully satisfied. It is true that many of us would have preferred the text to remain as it was presented to us; but, as you said it very clearly, Sir, and as our friends from Mexico and Libya also explained, that was the best thing we could get. So I think what my friend from Cape Verde said would probably end this discussion and we can accept it as such.
CHAIRMAN: Are there any further observations? We have registered positively from Cape Verde and Lebanon.
M. B. SY (Senegal): Je crois que la situation est assez difficile. Ne pourrait-on pas appréhender les raisons précises pour lesquelles cela dérange que l'on mette à la fois dans la Résolution et dans l'Engagement le terme "groupe intergouvernemental"? On parle de calendrier, mais est-ce que, dans la Résolution, si nous exhortons le Directeur général à former un groupe, il n'y aura pas un problème de calendrier? Je pense que cela n'est pas très clair. Ce que les pays en développement veulent c'est que l'on puisse quand même, modestement, très modestement, participer à une action tendant à la sauvegarde, à la lutte contre l'érosion des ressources phytogénétiques.
Il faudrait qu'on précise vraiment une structure dynamique dans laquelle les pays pourront participer utilement à cette oeuvre qui est d'une importance capitale pour tout le monde. Mais je voudrais que l'on précise les difficultés qu'il y aurait à insérer le terme dans la résolution et dans l'acte d'engagement.
M. TRKULJA (Yugoslavia): I am really very much afraid that if we go into something that, in our minds at least, does not convey very much substance, we might be here - as I am very well prepared to be - the whole night. I think the only definition of a compromise is: something that makes everyone equally unhappy. I am quite prepared to go along and to agree - in fact, I am very much tempted to agree - with what was said by Cape Verde and Lebanon which is, I feel, fully in line with your own thinking, Sir.
So I would just urge everybody in order that we agree on what, in fact, came out after the long deliberations in the Contact Group.
R. GUADARRAMA SISTOS (México): Tal vez por un problema de traducción el distinguido delegado del Líbano interpreto que había sido un acuerdo logrado en el Grupo de Contacto y que, en consecuencia, era la mejor solución. Problema probablemente de traducción, me permito ser muy claro en esto: no se llegó a un acuerdo unánime; no fue unánime el acuerdo. En consecuencia, son válidos los comentarios que hicimos en su oportunidad en el Grupo de Contacto y los que hemos hecho en esta Comisión. Este es el unico organismo o Grupo Intergubernamental que permitiría que los representantes de gobiernos pudieran opinar en relación a aspectos de recursos fitogenéticos en este momento, y el documento del Director General es muy claro, el párrafo 173 señala la existencia de una laguna, una "laguna", un espacio negro, una falta importante de un mecanismo o grupo intergubernamental que les permita a los Estados ser portavoces de las políticas que en esta materia deberán llevarse en el ámbito internacional. El informe del Director General es muy claro en diagnosticar esta ausencia, y de ahí,"de ahí la insistencia de que el Compromiso recoja las recomendaciones hechas en el párrafo 195, párrafo 195, en el que se destaca la. necesidad de formar un grupo u órgano auxiliar para llenar esa laguna. Esta es la razón de nuestra insistencia, señor Presidente.
Quiero aclarar que por la hora observo que muchos delegados de países en desarrollo no se encuentran presentes y es por ello que nos permitimos hacer uso repetido del micrófono. Es un punto importante para los países en desarrollo, es el único organismo que tendríamos para discutir estas materias.
CHAIRMAN: I thank Mexico. I agree one hundred percent that the delegate of Mexico is repeating the arguments that he advanced within the Contact Group and I do not think anyone expects him to go back on them. But it is also true, as I indicated, that when the Contact Group was about to rise, it was because no one in the Contact Group was any longer willing to stand in the way of a consensus. The delegate of Mexico did indicate that he thought there would possibly be problems from other delegations in the Commission but nonetheless - and here, if we could have the verbatim record of the Contact Group it would indicate this - no one at that point was any longer willing to stand in the way of consensus; and therefore there was consensus.
Y. ABT (Israel) : The exchange and availability of plant genetic resources is hardly going to be guaranteed only by the written word. We believe that the exchange and availability first and foremost will depend on the good will starting with the plant breeder and ending with the government. My delegation is of the opinion that to advance the improvement of exchange and preservation of plant genetic resources, this has been enhanced since this morning, bearing in mind Clause 4 in a Resolution which in our opinion certainly strengthens the ideas that were expressed in our previous meetings. We also feel that 9 in the International Undertaking, Article 9.2 affording FAO the task of monitoring arrangements relating to Article 7 should give enough teeth to motivate all of us, all our countries, to play ball and increase the exchange and training possibilities in the subject.
W. E. ADERO (Kenya): Kenya was in the Contact Group and I just wanted to underscore what you had said, what has been read by the Secretariat which is being discussed now, we agree that that is what should be presented to the Commission II and I want to say that as at the time we agreed to bring that text to the Commission, all of us who were in the Contact Group agreed that we could present it for discussion.
L. MOHAPELOA (Lesotho) : My delegation had not quite intended to take the floor on this issue, particularly at this point. We only take it because we feel compelled, looking at the circumstances and the environment we are in, where there is seemingly very little progress, looking at the whole issue and reflecting it in our minds we seem to think that we have here in front of us certain articles and certain proposals for an Undertaking which previously we had not had. Granted in a few respects there are items that some of us, particularly us developing countries, do not see reflected in the manner and in the time that we would have wished to, or at least hoped to see. We at the same time realize, of course, that there are possibilities in the future of implementing and realizing greater progress.
By saying this I am agreeing with those delegations that have spoken that have expressed the sentiment that it is perhaps worthwhile to appreciate that this was done in the spirit of compromise. Perhaps the other way of looking at it is that we need to look at the point of similarity, hopefully emphasize those and believe that in due course we will identify further areas of similarity and therefore cooperation. One can only add that when this compromise is made and accepted by the developing countries perhaps the developing countries will recall when we later review progress on the matter that we have ourselves at one point made a compromise. Particularly I have in mind when we discuss the Resolution that I am informed will be coming up.
H. LOPEZ DE MORAL (Colombia): A tal altura del debate me parece que convendría hacer un punto en alto y ver un poco en dónde estamos.
Ha habido varias intervenciones que merecen tenerse en cuenta. Kenya nos subraya que el compromiso o transacción a la cual se llegó en el Grupo de Trabajo ha sido sometido a esta Comisión para ser debatido, para ser estudiado.
No se nos ha dicho en ningún momento que teníamos que aceptar, sin ninguna posibilidad de discusión, lo adoptado por el Grupo de Trabajo, máxime cuando la Delegación de México que estaba representando la posición de los países en desarrollo nos ha dicho que se encontró solo en ese debate y que tuvo que aceptar esto como única opción.
Tenemos además el documento del Director General en donde se nos subraya que hay un vacío en esta posibilidad de que los países en desarrollo puedan discutir este tema quitando importancia para ello.
Tenemos además una propuesta de Panamá que debiera discutirse como tal puesto que ha sido apoyada por varias Delegaciones entre ellas por la Delegación del Peru que se ha reservado además su posición para abrir este debate en Plenaria.
No creo que estemos haciendo ningún servicio a la Conferencia dejando este tema que quede en suspenso para la Plenaria.
Tenemos también una propuesta de la Delegación de Cuba que pide al Asesor Jurídico que presente su posición como Asesor Jurídico respecto de la repetición en dos partes de ese documento de la mención que aparecería en el párrafo 4 de la Resolución. El Asesor Jurídico nos dice que no hay ningún inconveniente en que lo que se decidirá respecto del párrafo 4 sea repetido en el cuerpo del Compromiso, es decir, en el párrafo 9.2 como solicita la Delegación de Panamá.
No ve mi Delegación ningún inconveniente en que se le dé al Director General instrucciones más precisas puesto que en el fondo lo solicita en el párrafo 9.2 y que no dejemos abierto el que se establezca cualesquiera mecanismos, sino decirle al Director General cuál es exactamente el mecanismo que deseamos que establezca.
CHAIRMAN: I am sure the delegate of Colombia is right in almost everything she has said but I think we have to be fair to everyone, the delegation of Mexico was not the only delegation from developing countries and we have already had reflections that express other views on the same matter.
I do agree that the Commission has no obligation to take what the Contact Group has presented but nonetheless I think we need to reflect all views at all times. Any other observations? We have to come out of this one way or another. Let us get ourselves out. Perhaps at this stage, if we could suggest a way towards progress, if we could request the other members of the Contact Group to take the floor and make indications so that the Commission could be put into a much clearer position.
M. S. ZEHNI (Libya): I am taking the floor to indicate here that in the Contact Group no single country from the developing countries was not strongly in favour of the intergovernmental group. My delegation being one of them, we firmly know and believe that the ultimate aim of this Commission or this Conference will be the formation of an intergovernmental group. So there is no question here in our minds that we all, in the developing countries in the Contact Group, we were thinking that whatever happens or whatever we say in the Undertaking the ultimate result will be a formation of an intergovernmental group. The basic difference was that should it be mentioned in the Undertaking, in what form it should be mentioned and then should it be mentioned in the Resolution and what form it will be mentioned in the Resolution. This has to be very clear because this reflects on the whole of the conduct of the Contact Group which we join in understanding that it has a responsibility. We thought we shared it with the others in approaching this.. Now I can only mention here that I can only judge by what I heard in the English interpretation. My Spanish was not that good, what I got through the interpretation, that before we came to this meeting there was a total agreement in the text that we presented to you word by word. Saying this, we all had difficulty with this and in particular the Mexican delegation, they had great difficulty in accepting the intergovernmental group to be removed or to be mentioned in other languages and they indicated that other developing countries, particularly from their group will find difficulties with this. This is true but the way I understood it, that when we came out of the group there was an agreement in the text as presented to this Committee now and I repeat here, I judge only from what I heard from the English interpretation. We were not easy on parts of this compromise. We spent hours on it - the mechanism, the measures, should it be one sentence, two sentences or three sentences. Finally we accepted something which we thought would be acceptable to all if this wording in the Undertaking and the Resolution is backed by another resolution which will specify this intergovernmental body which spells out its terms of reference and the mode of its working. This is what I said we were working on, and we hope we can get some agreement on that. So the intergovernmental body, in the thinking of all of us, and certainly in my thinking, will be in; how to do it and where to do it, that was the only difference. There was no difference in the principle; it was how to do it.
CHAIRMAN: I thank Libya. May I complete the circle and ask other members of the Contact Group to take the floor, at least those who have not done so so far.
K.M. EJAZUL HUQ (Bangladesh): I agree with my colleague from Libya. It was my impression and conviction also that the formation of an intergovernmental group was inevitable, it was only the means as to where this should appear that was at issue. The amendment to paragraph 9.2 was agreed because it was understood that the question of an intergovernmental body would appear in the Resolution which would be followed up by another resolution endeavouring to establish it.
J.M. BOLIVAR SALCEDO (España): Gracias, Señor Presidente: Coincido con lo que acaba de exponer la delegación de Bangladesh. Efectivamente, nuestra delegación fue la que propuso la fórmula intermedia, intentando que se pudiese llegar a un consenso dentro del Grupo de Contacto. La fórmula que nosotros propusimos, similar a la que ahora se ofrece a esta Comisión, fue objeto también de un amplísimo debate y en ella la delegación de México y otras delegaciones introdujeron ciertas modificaciones a nuestra propuesta original.
Creo que en el ánimo de todos los países componentes del Grupo de Contacto estaba la necesidad de la formación de este Grupo o Comité Intergubernamental, pero las posturas que allí se manifestaron claramente demostraban una casi imposibilidad de llegar a una transacción en un punto tan importante, y únicamente a través de esta fórmula, no tan explícita como la contenida entre corchetes y a través de la inclusión de la referencia al Grupo Intergubernamental en el Proyecto de Resolución, en su preámbulo, fue posible que el Grupo de Contacto llegase a un acuerdo para presentar un texto a esta Comisión, aunque creo que estaba bien entendido por parte de todos que, en definitiva, era esta Comisión la que tenía que decidir. Nada más.
J.M. ALLFREY (United Kingdom): I should like to stress that in the Contact Group not only the developing countries but the developed countries there accepted the fact that there will be an intergovernmental group. However, it was felt that a looser wording in the Undertaking combined with a very firm recommendation in the Resolution would help those few Member Nations who are still having some difficulty with the Undertaking to accept the Undertaking while still accepting the inevitability of an intergovernmental group.
I should like to remind those here that we are also anticipating tomorrow a further resolution from the Libyan delegation to set out in more detail the establishment and terms of reference of the intergovernmental group and bearing that in mind would ask them to recognise this compromise that was arrived at after long negotiations.
J.P. NEME (France): Je voudrais simplement rappeler, moi aussi, que ce texte du paragraphe 9.2 avait été accepté par tous les membres du groupe de contact après une longue négociation.
G. ANDRE (Sweden) : I have no more to say when the last delegates of the Contact Group have witnesses in this matter. I wholly support what they have said.
C.R. BENJAMIN (United States of America): All I need do is echo the words of the delegate of Sweden. There is nothing much more to be said that would be constructive in this issue.
CHAIRMAN: We did this not to set the members of the Contact Group one against the other, but we thought it was necessary that you should know the whole truth of what transpired on your behalf. I think we have what has been presented to you as indicated, and of course I should underline the strong positions that the individual delegations had before we came to the compromise. We are presenting to you the compromise and you have understood how it was arrived at. I think we are back in your hands. The decision is yours to take.
A.R. PIRES (Cap-Vert): Après avoir entendu les membres du groupe de contact nous dire il faut adopter ce texte, je ne comprends plus car la majorité se prononce pour la création d'un groupe intergouvernemental. C'est donc ce qu'il convient d'adopter.
M. MAHI (Cameroun): Après ce que nous ont dit les représentants du groupe de contact, chacun a compris que la création de ce groupe intergouvernemental est inévitable. Si tout le monde est d'accord, pourquoi ne pas apporter ces précisions dans le texte, nous sommes dans un match où on ne cherche pas à savoir quel est le gagnant ou le perdant, mais si l'on a perdu, il faut le reconnaître, et c'est être sportif que de reconnaître que le groupe Intergouvernemental est inévitable et qu'il doit figurer dans le texte.
CHAIRMAN: Perhaps at this stage we need to check with the delegations that have insisted on the inclusion of the words in the Undertaking whether, with all the mechanisms that have been suggested and the resolution that will be coming tomorrow and the operative paragraph 4 of the present Resolution and the fact that this has been mentioned in clear terms that give the FAO a mandate to proceed with mechanisms and whatever else is necessary, they are not yet willing at this hour to agree that there is no way that the intergovernmental group will not be formed and that maybe, as the delegate of Israel said, it is not necessarily in the words but in the spirit that we will achieve what we are trying to arrive at.
M. AHMAD (Pakistan): I would suggest in order to help you find a solution to the problem a small change: "FAO will, in particular, establish any necessary mechanism to monitor the operation of arrangements referred to in Article 7 and take or recommend measures that are necessary or desirable" etc. So we will delete the reference to intergovernmental group, and instead put in "any necessary mechanisms", if that will help.
CHAIRMAN: Thank you for your help, Pakistan. You have put what we have in the first part of the sentence in the second part of the sentence. Thank you very much for your contribution anyway. Are there any more positive contributions?
M. B. SY (Sénégal): La délégation sénégalaise était parmi ceux qui insistaient pour l'inclusion des mots "groupe intergouvernemental", mais si une majorité se dégage pour une autre rédaction, par discipline démocratique notre délégation ne verrait pas d'inconvénient. Il n'est pas très agréable d'être convaincu sans avoir reçu d'explications. On nous dit: Tout le monde entendait par "mécanisme nécessaire", "groupe intergouvernemental". Pourquoi éviter d'employer ce mot; on ne nous a jamais expliqué pourquoi on esquive ce mot. Peut-être que la raison en est que cela doit rester entre les membres du groupe de contact à qui nous continuons de faire confiance.
Ma délégation, en s'excusant de ne pouvoir participer à la fin de la discussion, se ralliera à la majorité.
CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Senegal. I would like to answer you before you go away. You have been fair to the Commission and Contact Group. I think I need to be fair to you. The only reason is that with these words "in the undertaking" we might not get the support we need to be able to make the Undertaking as effective as it should be. This is all.
S. ABOUJAOUDE (Lebanon): I think I will probably have to come with a slight word for a compromise. I am sure what I said earlier probably was misinterpreted, but now I have added one word to the last phrase here. It would read "FAO will in particular monitor the operation of the arrangements referred to in Article 7. Will establish any necessary mechanism or body that will take", and I am sure that everybody here will support "the body" and I do not think there will be any problem with that, and it will clarify the word "mechanism" more. It is a clarification of the word "mechanism". It is an addition, and I think everybody will accept it.
CHAIRMAN: With what has been said by Lebanon, and the distinguished delegate of Senegal before he left, that after the explanation he was willing to go along with the majority, I should like to indicate here we have the delegations of Mexico, Panama, Colombia and Cameroon, which are on the other view of not accepting what was presented to the Commission, and I think it is appropriate that we should say that we have taken note of their very strong positions, but perhaps request that they do not stand in the way of consensus.
M. MAHI (Cameroun): Si les mots "tout mécanisme nécessaire" sont pratiquement synonymes de "groupe intergouvememental", il n'y a pas de problème. D'après ce que vient de dire le précédent orateur, on peut mettre "tout mécanisme nécessaire" ou "groupe intergouvernemental". C'est un compromis et on peut s'y rallier.
Y. HAMDI (Egypt): I will speak in English. I do not know, do we really have a problem? I myself am not so clear, because I have heard so many people in accord with what we have after the introduction of the Secretariat's additions. However, if the problem is in the idea of establishment of an intergovernmental group, or other body, which came in the main Resolution No. 4, which is added, and if this part is accepted, I think automatically this should be included in 9.2. So the problem here is we accept 9.2 as it stands here, or we accept No, 4 as it stands here, and if we accept No. 4, No. 2 would be similar. If we accept No. 9, and we do not accept No. 4, then we have to correct No. 4 so as to be in line with No. 9.2. I am sorry, I hope I have not confused you more.
CHAIRMAN: Before I give the floor to Mexico I think we need to give you the whole truth about this thing, which I tried to do in answering Senegal. You realize that this Resolution, of course, will be. adopted by the Conference, and the Director-General will have the instructions, but the Undertaking has to be acceded to and signed by individual governments which will undertake to offer their genetic resources to the network, and so on and so forth. Some Governments will not be willing to do this with the text reflecting the intergovernmental group in the Undertaking. This is the reason. This is why we needed to arrive at a compromise. All those explanations were made. The concept of an intergovernmental group is acceptable, and will definitely be formed, but there are instructions, and so and so forth, and positions. To get out of that the Contact Group thought, as represented to you, that if we gradually build towards it, all the way from mechanism through specifically saying it in the Resolution, and then another resolution that: strengthens it and spells it out in detail, would achieve the purpose, which is to try and get as many members to accede to the Undertaking as possible.
R. GUADARRAMA SISTOS (Mexico): Me preocupa la observación que hizo, señor Presidente, en el sentido de que unas pocas delegaciones se oponían a la aceptación del consenso respecto a excluir el Grupo Intergubernamental.
Por lo avanzado de la hora evidentemente estamos hablando en un foro con el 40 por ciento del quÓrum; de los delegados presentes un grupo importante se ha manifestado a favor de mantener el Grupo Intergubernamental en el artículo 9.2. Me atrevería a decir la mayoría de las intervenciones fueron en ese sentido, aparte del Grupo de Contacto; únicamente la delegación de Alemania tuvo objecciones, el resto de las intervenciones fueron de apoyo y/o de aclaración. Intervenimos después los miembros del Grupo de Contacto en donde, efectivamente, están divididas las opiniones; no veo entonces esa minoría del lado de los países que están apoyando incorporar el Grupo Intergubernamental.
Un segundo punto es, y es muy pertinente, lo resalto el distinguido delegado de Egipto en este momento, es la oposición, la oposición concreta de incluir en el 9.2 el órgano específico que queremos establecer. La respuesta que no se nos ha dado es que este órgano puede seguir siendo el IBPGR; este órgano, quiero que me traduzcan, este órgano puede seguir siendo el IBPGR y esto es lo que tratamos de evitar. Hemos insistido en que el IBPGR determina las políticas y FAO acata las instrucciones técnicas que el IBPGR establece. Esto salió a relucir en la discusión del artículo 7.1 inciso g) y esto lo resalto para indicar que no estamos hablando de FAO en un trato igual o con un trato justo con el IBPGR.
Nos preocupa, y hemos insistido a lo largo de nuestras intervenciones durante el año, nos preocupa que el IBPGR establezca las políticas que FAO acepta en esta materia de recursos fitogenéticos.
El Grupo Intergubernamental y por eso hay que destacar cuál es el organismo o mecanismo que queremos establecer, el Grupo Intergubernamental sería la única instancia nuestra para poder balancear esta relación; por eso la insistencia. Por eso no podemos permitir que quede la vaguedad de "cualquier organismo" o "cualquier mecanismo''. Esto quiero que quede perfectamente claro, señor Presidente.
Como procedimiento, y dado que nos estamos quedando vacíos, hay que acelerar la discusión o mandarla a la Plenaria, pero insisto, no veo que los países que hayamos tomado el micrófono seamos minoría en relación a mantener el Grupo Intergubernamental en el artículo 9.2, no veo la minoría.
C.R. BENJAMIN (United States of America): I would hate to see the Contact Group re-open the debate that we had for 20 hours over these seven pages. It seems to me, if we are going to have a Contact Group, that is going to be effective that unless there is something the de legates really want to change, it should be accepted, otherwise there is no point in having a Contact Group.
W.A.F. GRABISCH (Germany, Federal Republic of) (original language German): My country's delegation on this point in the Agenda - plant genetic resources - cooperated constructively on this point, and contrary to what has just been said, it did not make any opposition here, that is not true. My country did not have the honour, and pleasure, of being in the Contact Group, but the delegation of the Federal Republic of Germany was represented in the Contact Group by the United Kingdom and France who represented the European Community and have put forward also our point of view. I want just to say this to make that matter clear. Mr Chairman, you yourself gave us the reason why here, in paragraph 9.2, we did not want to have this sentence in brackets. Instead of that we added "establish any necessary mechanism". In paragraph 4, on the other hand, we have "that as soon as possible an intergovernmental committee will be set up". But possibly it could take some time to set up this Group. We do not know how long it will take. We have to make the necessary preparations in advance. The proposal to be added to paragraph 9.2, has, in our view, the advantage that the Director-General, in the context of his competences, can act. We think that should be considered, if some delegations insist that this sentence, which is in brackets, is to be retained. Not only the question that a compromise was reached in the Contact Group, but the other points I have just mentioned, should also be recalled.
CHAIRMAN: I hate from the Chair to be pushed to make a ruling, basically because I believe that it is almost a tradition in this Organization that on matters like this we arrive at a solution by consensus and it would be a happy ending if we could continue to do so. Because we have before us now the words that we agreed in the Contact Group to consider and agree upon and on the basis of that wording it is clear that the majority is willing, after the explanation of the individual members of the Contact Group, to accept and go along with them. Therefore, that would be a basis to rule that the majority agrees with the compromise (and I underscore compromise) should be accepted so that we can proceed. But, before I am pushed to that, only so that there is the assurance that the inter-governmental group will be formed as soon as possible in line with the new operative paragraph 4 of the Resolution, I should like as a final desparate attempt to request the distinguished delegate of Libya just to highlight this point of the proposed resolution to give the assurances.
M.S. ZEHNI (Libya): As I said before, some parts of the draft resolution we have in mind can still be worked out in agreement with others. But, however, I will attempt to give you the highlights of what I had in mind. But, you will allow me to repeat what I said earlier, that the form I am suggesting perhaps is not the strongest form possible, but I base my suggestion here about the agreement during the discussion of this whole Committee, on the general agreement at least, on the proposals of the Director-General, particularly when he referred to the "possible mechanism" in relation to this matter. You have the paragraphs of the Director-General's proposals for which I thought there was some great measure of support.
So the resolution tentatively will be as follows: there will be two preambular parts. The first one will be referring to this Resolution we are talking about, the International Undertaking on Plant Genetic Resources, and it will be referred to as "The Undertaking". Here, I thought that we should refer again to Article 9.2 under discussion, which states that "FAO will establish", and here I am quoting the exact words as they stand now, but this will be changed - it depends upon the results of the debate "to establish any necessary mechanism", to monitor the operation and arrangements referred to in Article 7 of the Undertaking, and take or recommend measures that are necessary or desirable to ensure comprehensiveness of the global system and efficiency of its operation in line with the Undertaking. This is the preambular part.'
The Conference then will request the Council and COAG to take the necessary measures to establish the subsidiary body of COAG on plant genetic resources which would meet at the time of the Committee's regular sessions, and the membership and terms of reference would be as follows. So the membership first of all would be for all Member Nations of the Organization, regard less if they are members of COAG or not, and in addition I cannot recall now that particular rule in the General Rules of the Organization which I know of under which you can admit membership of that to anybody interested, of non-member nations of FAO that are members of the United Nations, of a specialized agency or of the International Atomic Agency. This is a standard clause if.you want to open its membership. So the operative part one will deal with the membership and it is open for all members of the United Nations and the specialized agencies and the IAEA.
The terms of reference use, almost to the word, certain parts of the proposals of the Director-General. So the terms of reference (a) to monitor the operations of the arrangements referred to Article 7
of the Undertaking: (b) to take or recommend measures that are necessary or desirable in order to ensure the comprehensiveness of the global system and the efficiency of its operations in line with the Undertaking, and in particular to review all matters related to the policy, programmes and activities of FAO in the field of plant genetic resources, and to advise the Committee on Agriculture. to give advice to the Committee on Agriculture or to the Committee on Forestry, because you know those are related. We have the genetic resources of forestry and perhaps the Committee on Forestry might deal with it as appropriate.
So these are the highlights in a very crude form, and at this stage while I have the floor, Mr Chairman, I would really like to have your indication and that of my colleagues here if they think this is the type of resolution which can guarantee their support so that I can proceed with it, otherwise it will be unfruitful on my part to proceed in this without the Commission's approval at least in principle.
CHAIRMAN: With these explanations and what has been prepared by the distinguished delegate of Libya and all the others we have had, can I ask, before we make rulings and move to the closure of the meeting, whether the distinguished delegate of Cameroon is still willing to not stand in the way of consensus.
M. MAHI (Cameroun): Au contraire, je suis l'homme du consensus. Nous sommes là pour ça! Je vous ai dit aujourd'hui qu'en matière de consensus il faut savoir perdre ou gagner, n'est-ce pas. Je constate que, peut-être l'heure avançant, les gens commencent à vouloir aller très vite, je ne l'aurais d'ailleurs pas souhaite parce que nous sommes ici pour travailler, même s'il faut dormir dans cette salle, pourvu que nous sortions avec quelque chose de sérieux pour l'emmener dans nos gouvernements. Néanmoins, si la majorité est dans ce sens, nous aussi sommes du côté de la majorité.
H. LOPEZ DE MORAL (Colombia): En realidad, no creo que sea Camerún el único que se oponga al consenso. México hace un momento nos dijo que había una enorme mayoría que estaba en favor de que se incluyera la mención de "Grupo íntergubernamental" en el párrafo 9.2. Yo también, por mi parte, he oído a muchas delegaciones, inclusive a miembros del Grupo de Trabajo, que se mencionaron, el hecho de que en el seno del Grupo de Trabajo había habido una mayoría en favor de la creación de un Grupo Intergubernamental; en realidad, también he escuchado con muchísima atención lo propuesto por Libia sobre la nueva redacción para una resolución adicional.
En realidad, se trata de una cosa bastante profunda, bastante delicada y creo que convendría más a nuestras delegaciones, tanto las que estamos presentes como las que ya han abandonado la sala que realmente tengan la posibilidad de ver por escrito y con mayor detalle la propuesta de Libia.
En mi intervención anterior mencioné el hecho de que hay una delegación que se ha reservado la posición para intervenir sobre esto en la Plenaria; he escuchado a otras delegaciones que también se reservan su posición al respecto. Colombia, tanto como Camerún, es un país que está siempre en favor del consenso y de llegar a una decisión que convenga a la mayoría, de llegar a una transacción con la cual la mayoría, o si no todos, pudiéramos estar de acuerdo. Es un poco tarde y creo que tal vez convendría que levantáramos la sesión ahora, que estudiáramos el texto que propondrá Libia con mayor atención y lleguemos posiblemente a un consenso mañana.
CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much for your cooperation, Colombia.
M. NIETO Y LARA (Cuba): Considero muy apropiada la propuesta de la Delegación de Colombia; rae sumo a esta propuesta en cuanto a que sería conveniente poder reflexionar durante estas horas hasta mañana y tal vez tener una mayor concurrencia en la sala para permitir un acuerdo más unánime y mayori-tario y que esto, por supuest' , evitaría por supuesto dificultades posibles en el Plenario como se discute finalmente este info ;me y este acuerdo.
R. GUADARRAMA SISTOS (México): No había pedido la palabra pero ya que me la concede yo también creo que es más conveniente posponer la decisión mañana temprano, levantar la sesión hoy, reflexionar cuidadosamente con la almohada y mañana llegar conuna decisión que seguramente seráefectivamentela de la mayoría.
CHAIRMAN: To clarify the consensus I was talking about it was that the great majority of the members in the Commission were willing to accept the wording recommended by the Contact Group. Now I see the sense in what is being said by those delegations that are so far indicating reservations, but I also have to indicate some practical problems that will now face us in the Secretariat. It is that we need to emerge tomorrow with a report, a text, and we have to agree what we include in the text. The only problem that we have now in the whole of the documentation before us is concerning 9.2 because we have no problems on the Resolution.
We have no more problems on all the other articles of the proposed Undertaking now. Do we give the Secretariat the green light to go ahead and prepare the documentation as recommended by the Contact Group, on the understanding that we are hoping to finally pronounce ourselves on a consensus tomorrow morning?
C.R. BENJAMIN (United States of America): You have said we have no problems with the Resolution, Mr Chairman. I would have to disagree with that to some degree. I do not think we want to take it up yet, though, do we? Do you not want to finish the Undertaking first?
CHAIRMAN: Where we stand now is that all other articles of the Undertaking except 9.2 have been cleared, that is the Undertaking, and this is the one on which some delegations are requesting that we should look at tomorrow morning. Now we should put that aside and let the Secretariat go ahead and print all the other articles that have been agreed on and, hopefully, those other delegations will come and we can agree on something for 9.2, because we would have to agree on something after we sleep on it.
But now the Resolution has not been discussed. I think we need to give the Secretariat very clear instructions on what comes out of this Commission on the Resolution itself, so that we know the status regarding the Undertaking. Now let us find out with regard to the Resolution.
C.R. BENJAMIN (United States of America): Our delegation has no desire whatever to block a consensus on either the Resolution or the Undertaking. However, in respect to the Resolution I would like to say a few words. The United States position on the plant genetic resources issue is to support the present system coordinated by the IBPGR and to improve it as needed. As we said last Friday, any undertaking which would supercede - however gradually - overlap or fail to build on the existing system, will not command our support. Our delegation would note the proposed Undertaking as revised by the Contact Group is substantially improved insofar as the possibility of the United States accepting it. We feel, however, that the Undertaking should be sent to capitals together with a statement outlining any financial implications. Until these can be studied by our Government, we must reserve on operative paragraph 1 of the Resolution and would like that reservation indicated as a footnote on the Resolution.
CHAIRMAN: I thank the delegate of the United States for not blocking consensus and therefore the Resolution, insofar as that is concerned, can be adopted with a note of the reservation of the United States.
R. SALLERY (Canada): We also would not wish to block consensus. We have been very grateful to the Contact Group which has met over the weekend and again today, this afternoon, in an attempt to overcome apparent disagreements and to come up with a framework for today's discussion, one which might be acceptable to all of us. I would also like to commend your efforts, Mr Chairman. We have not yet finished our task but none of us underestimate the difficulties involved. The Contact Group and you yourself, sir, have, it seems, been quite successful and while the Canadian delegation has made its position quite clear in previous interventions, there is much in this report and in this discussion which will be food for thought and consideration by our professional colleagues in Ottawa.
Operative paragraphs 1 and 2 in the Resolution which, of course, once agreed to will establish the legal basis for the entire Undertaking, are essential elements which all governments must consider most carefully. And I can assure you, Mr Chairman, that my Government will study this document and our own position with great care. The Government of Canada would want to reiterate its continued commitment to the free access, exchange and conservation of plant genetic resources but believes - or at least has believed - that the improvements being sought can best or could best be achieved within the IBPGR's procedural system.
Our understanding of this Resolution is that the Director-General will now forward it to governments and to specific institutions for their consideration; and incidentally, we are somewhat surprised that there is no trigger mechanism or agreed to number of signatories which, once attained, would signal to the Director-General that the Undertaking might become operative or effective, and that he could then strike an IGG or whatever else is agreed to.
I assume also that, inevitably or not, someone in this august assembly - perhaps those who are preparing the new resolution, or the Secretariat - is giving some thought to the cost of such an IGG and how these measures are to be paid for. In any case we want to avoid any confusion which might lead to a misunderstanding at a later date. We see no need for this Commission or the Conference formally to adopt or endorse the Draft Undertaking which we have been considering over the past few days, as is suggested in Point 1 of this Resolution. If, however, it is the wish of this Commission to formally adopt the Undertaking, then we would request that following paragraph 1, a footnote be inserted indicating that the Government of Canada reserves its position on this Resolution and the Undertaking. This will avoid confusion at some later date when officials might wish to point to this report as being unanimously adopted by this Commission or Conference and imply thereby that the Canadian delegation to this Conference had endorsed its contents at that time which, of course, Mr Chairman, as you know, we have not. And if you wish, I have a wording which we could insert as a footnote.
CHAIRMAN: I thank the delegate of Canada once more for his cooperation in not standing in the way of consensus, which means we may proceed with the adoption of the Resolution with a footnote that Canada has reservations.
A. NAGA (Japan): My delegation would like to thank the members of the Contact Group for their excellent work in providing the Undertaking. We find many points in the Undertaking which reflect the efforts of the Contact Group. We will certainly send the results to Tokyo for the consideration of my Government. Therefore, until the study of my Government is finished by my delegation, I would like to reserve its position on the Resolution including the Undertaking. As mentioned by other delegates I also request you, Mr Chairman, that our reservation be specified in a footnote to this Resolution.
CHAIRMAN: I thank the delegate of Japan for his cooperation in not wishing to stand in the way of consensus and that the Resolution may be adopted with the footnote of reservation.
R.J. STONYER (New Zealand): I too have no wish to stand in the way of any consensus of this Commission and I certainly am very appreciative of the work and efforts that have been put in the last two days by the Contact Group. The New Zealand delegation has no problems with the basic Undertaking which has been set up before us. Unfortunately it does not seem to be possible to provide in that Undertaking some means of rewarding the commercial interests which have been so important to the development of agriculture in my own country. As the United Kingdom delegate said in the previous session, they pointed out that we cannot expect plant breeders to be denied incentives to develop new varieties or not to be compensated for the years of work and efforts they put into developing new plant strains. New Zealand herb and seed exports make up a very high proportion of world trade and are an important export for my country.
This Undertaking, as it is worded, is going to be subject to a number of limitations because I think this point has not been able to be taken into account in the form of the International Undertaking. I think it is most unfortunate because most of us are wholeheartedly behind the principles of international distribution of genetic material.
Again, I would say that the members of the Contact Group are to be congratulated on their very difficult task and we certainly commend them for their efforts.
CHAIRMAN: I thank the delegate of New Zealand also for not wishing to stand in the way of consensus but that the Resolution may be adopted with a footnote to that effect. Anyone else who wants to take the floor on the Resolution? I take it that with those footnotes the Commission agrees to the draft Resolution which will now be forwarded to Conference, after the adoption of the Report, of course.
It was so decided
Il est ainsi decide
Asi se acuerda
Now that we are done with the Report we should indicate what we do with the Resolution, i.e. what will happen tomorrow. We are scheduled to consider Reports 2 and 3 which will be dealing with the Reviews of the Regular and the Field Programme, with the World Food Programme Resolution and with item 16, 16.1 and 16.2 which was dealing with the Relations within the United Nations System. That is what we are scheduled to deal with tomorrow morning and we should dispose of those. In the afternoon we will have to look at the Report of the Commission on this matter, which of course, will include what we have just agreed on the Resolution and what we have agreed upon in the Undertaking and at that point then we can take up the matter that is outstanding on the Undertaking and if we do not finish tomorrow afternoon we will have to go on to a night session because we are scheduled to present our Reports to Conference the next day. So this is how tomorrow's programme will stand and hopefully by then the delegations that have requested time to sleep over this will come with more positive resolutions.
W.A.F. GRABISCH (Germany, Federal Republic of) (original language German): If I understand you correctly, tomorrow afternoon together with the Reports we will also have the text of the Resolution and if possible at that time will be able to give again our views, if we feel the need to do so.
CHAIRMAN: Excuse me, you are talking about views on which Resolution?
W.A.F. GRABISCH (Germany, Federal Republic of) (original language German): If I understand you correctly, together with the Reports of the Commission we will get the text of the Resolution again and it will be put before us here in our Session. Is that correct, together, both these texts?
CHAIRMAN: The text of the Resolution will be available but it will not be for discussion because we have just concluded the discussion on the Resolution. The text of the resolution we have just agreed on with the attendant footnotes and what has been accepted in the Undertaking will be the draft report. What has been prepared by Libya will be submitted for consideration by the Resolutions Committee tomorrow at 12.30.
The meeting rose at 21.00 hours
La seance est levée à 21 heures
Se levanta la.sesión a las 21.00 horas
