-Aprobación del tercer informe del Comité de Credenciales
CHAIRMAN: The Third Report of the Credentials Committee you have before you. Are there any observations or comments? If there are no comments I shall consider that this Report is adopted. I have received two requests of inserted statements on the subject of Credentials, from the dele-gations of Cuba and Grenada respectively. Their statements will therefore be inserted in the records.
Leopoldo Ariza HIDALGO (Cuba): La Delegación de Cuba quiere dejar constancia do su rechazo a la presencia en esta Conferencia do la Delegación do Granada por considerar que no representa los verdaderos intereses del pueblo granadino.
En nombre do mi Gobierno solicito que esta Nota aparezca en el informe final del 24° Período do Sesiones de la Conferencia. 1/
Denis NOEL (Grenada): The Delegation of Grenada would like to place on record that Cuba's objection to Grenada's presence at this Conference Is without basis since it is a non-subject and should not be entertained.
It should be noted that this so-called reservation was entered after the Plenary had earlier approved without any dissenting voice, the very credentials of the said Grenada Delegation in the presence of the full membership of Ministers and Heads of Delegations including Cuba.
This belated ploy is nothing but an attempt by Cuba to seek to discredit the Grenada Delegation and is thereby interpreted as an insult to the Government and People of Grenada. It further constitutes undue and unacceptable interference in the internal affairs of Grenada. in this regard, Grenada Delegation wishes to draw attention to the fact that this Delegation represents a Government elected by the democratic process such that is provided for through national elections conducted under the duly established Constitution of the Sovereign State of Grenada, and allows for the participation of all the people of Grenada irrespective of political affiliations. Record shows that over 80% of the electorate actually participated during the last election held in December 1984.
Furthermore, Cuba's action of writing to the Credentials Committee is nothing but blatant "petty politiking" and negates the very spirit of functional cooperation that we strive to achieve through this Organization. 2/
DRAFT REPORT OF PLENARY - PART 2
PROJET DE RAPPORT DE LA PLENIERE - DEUXIEME PARTIE
PROYECTO DE INFORME DE LA PLENARIA - PARTE 2
CHAIRMAN: The second document before you is C 87/REP/2, Draft Report of Plenary Part 2. Any observations or comments?
Paragraphs 1 to 2 approved
Les paragraphes 1 à 2 sont approuvés
Los párrafos 1 a 2 son aprobados
Paragraph 3 approved
Le paragraphe 3 est approuvé
El párrafo 3 es aprobado
Paragraph 4 approved
Le paragraphe 4 est approuvé
El párrafo 4 es aprobado
____________________
1/ Texto incluido on las actas a petición expresa.
2/ Statement inserted in the Verbatim records on request.
PARAGRAPHS 5 TO 8
PARAGRAPHES 5 A 8
PARRAFOS 5 A 8
LE SECRETAIRE GENERAL: Il y a lieu do signaler, au paragraphe 8 de ce document C 87/REP/2, sous "Vice-Présidents de la Commission Il" après "B. El Mabrouk Said (Libye) et H, Sucre (Panama)": "Temei Iskit (Turquie)".
Paragraphs 5 to 8, as amended, approved
Les paragraphes 5 à 8, ainsi amendés, sont approuvés
Los párrafos 5 a 8, asi enmendados, son aprobados
Paragraphs 9 to Il approved
Les paragraphes 9 à Il sont approuvés
Los párrafos 9 a 11 son aprobados
Paragraph 12 approved
Le paragraphe 12 est approuvé
El párrafo 12 es aprobado
Paragraph 13 approved
Le paragraphe 13 est approuvé
El párrafo 13 es aprobado
Paragraphs 14 to 16 approved
Les paragraphes 14 à 16 sont approuvés
Los párrafos 14 a 16 son aprobados
Paragraph 17 approved
Le paragraphe 17 est approuvé
El párrafo 17 es aprobado
Paragraph 18 approved
Le paragraphe 18 est approuvé
El párrafo 18 es aprobado
Paragraph 19 approved
Le paragraphe. 19 est approuvé
El párrafo 19 es aprobado
Paragraph 20 approved
Le paragraphe 20 est approuvé
El párrafo 20 es aprobado
Paragraphs 21 to 22 approved
Les paragrahes 21 à 22 sont approuvés
Los párrafos 21 a 22 son aprobados
Paragraph 23 approved
Le paragraphe 23 est approuvé
El párrafo 23 es aprobado
Paragraphs 24 to 28 approved
Les paragraphes 24 à 28 sont approuvés
Los párrafos 24 a 28 son aprobados
Paragraphs 29 to 31 approved
Les paragraphes 29 à 31 sont approuvés
Los párrafos 29 a 31 son aprobados
Paragraph 32 approved
Le paragraphe 32 est approuvé
El párrafo 32 es aprobado
Draft Report of Plenary, Part 2, was adopted
Projet de rapport de la plénière, partie 2, est adopté
El proyecto de informe do la Plenaria, Parte 2, es aprobado
DRAFT REPORT OF PLENARY - PART 3
PROJET DE RAPPORT DE LA PLENIERE - TROISIEME PARTIE
PROYECTO DE INFORME DE LA PLENARIA - PARTE 3
DRAFT REPORT OF PLENARY - PART 3 SUPPLEMENT
PROJET DE RAPPORT DE LA PLENIERE - TROISIEME PARTIE SUPPLEMENT
PROYECTO DE INFORME DE LA PLENARIA - PARTE 3 SUPLEMENTO
CHAIRMAN: The next documents are C 87/REP/3 and C 87/REP/3-Sup.1, the Draft Report of Plenary, Part 3 Are there any observations? Since there are none, the Report is adopted.
Draft Report of Plenary, Part 3, was adopted
Projet de rapport de la plénière, partie 3, est adopté
El proyecto de informe de la Plenaria, Parte 3, es aprobado
DRAFT REPORT OF PLENARY - PART 4 (from Commission I) (C 87/REP/4)
PROJET DE RAPPORT DE LA PLENIERE - QUATRIEME PARTIE (émanant de la Commission I) (C 87/REP/4)
PROYECTO DE INFORME DE LA PLENARIA - PARTE 4 (de la Comisión I) (C 87/REP/4)
CHAIRMAN: We now move to document C 87/REP/4, Draft Report of Plenary, Part 4 (from Commission I). The Chairman of Commission I and the Chairman of the Drafting Committee have been invited by us to ask for any questions or queries to be raised. If there are no comments on this part of the report or on the whole report and the resolution, we shall consider that the report and the resolution are adopted.
Draft Report of Plenary, Part 4, was adopted
Projet de rapport de la plénière, partie 4, est adopté
El proyecto de informe de la Plenaria, parte 4, es aprobado
CHAIRMAN (original language Arabic): Now we move to the next Item, C 87/REP/5 which is Part 5 from Commission II. The Report is before you. Commission II has approved it. If there are no objections we will consider the Report as adopted.
Draft Report of Plenary, Part 5, (from Commission II) was adopted
Le projet de rapport de la plénière, partie 5 (de la Commission II), est adopté
El proyecto de informe de la Plenaria, parte 5 (de la Comisión II), es aprobado
Paragraphs 1 to 8 approved
Les paragraphes 1 à 8 sont approuvés
Los párrafos 1 a 8 son aprobados
Paragraphs 9 to ,13 approved
Les paragraphes 9 ã 13 sont approuvés
Los párrafos 9 a 13 son aprobados
PARAGRAPHS 14 TO 29 INCLUDING DRAFT RESOLUTION
PARAGRAPHES 14 A 29 Y COMPRIS LE PROJET DE RESOLUTION
PARRAFOS 14 A 29 INCLUIDO EL PROYECTO DE RESOLUCION
J. Augusto DE MEDICIS (Brazil): In page 9 of document C 87/REP/9 my delegation believes that no adequate opportunity-has been given to member countries in Commission II to present their views in relation to this Resolution, which was adopted almost unnoticed by many delegations.
In our view, the Resolution does not reflect the comprehensive conclusions of the Brundtland Report, as it indicates "environment protection and prudent management of renewable resources" as the only factors to improve food security, disregarding many others such as the establishment of a more equitable world trade system, for instance.
Finally, the Brundtland Report recognizes that environmental policies and priorities are sovereign decisions of Member Governments to which recommendations could be addressed. This fact also has not been considered by this Resolution.
My delegation would therefore have preferred to offer some amendments to the Resolution. We are sure that had our proposals been considered and eventually approved we would have had a stronger and more balanced text. However, in a spirit of true multilateral cooperation we decided not to present any reservations to the present text, and offer our support to the Resolution.
CHAIRMAN (original language Arabic): If there are no other comments, we will consider the Draft Resolution as having been adopted.
Paragraphs 14 - 29, including Resolution, are adopted
Les paragraphes 14 - 29, y compris la résolution, sont adoptés
Los párrafos 14 - 29, incluida la ResoΔΊución, son aprobados
CHAIRMAN (original language Arabic): I should like to apologize to you, because I should have asked the Chairman of the Drafting Committee and the Chairman of Commission II to join us here. I should like to ask them to do so now, please.
PARAGRAPHS 30 TO 35 INCLUDING DRAFT RESOLUTION
PARAGRAPHES 30 A 35 Y COMPRIS LE PROJET DE RESOLUTION
PARRAFOS 30 A 35 INCLUIDO EL PROYECTO DE RESOLUCION
Srta. Margarita LIZZARRAGA (México): No sé Señor Presidente si ha quedado este error en el párrafo 34. Anoche, cuando salíamos del Comité de Redacción yo hice la corrección, pero no sé si quedó en las otras lenguas. Es en el útlimo párrafo, al inicio dice: la Conferencia aseñaló que la cooperación con esta Organización... No es la Conferencia, Señor Presidente, es la Secretaría. Cuando se le preguntó a la Secretaría fue la que contestó que esto no entrañaba.
CHAIRMAN: Can we ask the Chairman of the Drafting Committee to clarify this, please.
Joseph TCHICAYA (Président du Comité de rédaction Commission II): La remarque du Mexique est justo.
Roger P. LEWIS (United States of America): I am asking for an intervention with respect to document C 87/REP/9, paragraph 35, the Resolution for FAO to provide Support to the Action Committee on Latin American Cooperation and Consultation on Plant Genetic Resources (CARFIT).
We note that in the Resolution as provided it refers to a number of countries which reserved with respect to this Resolution, of which my country was one. The United States would like to reiterate the reservation my country made to this Resolution, and I would like to ask that our reservation appears as a footnote to the Resolution itself.
I will read the text of the reservation again: "In the absence of a clear statement within the Resolution requiring the proposed plant genetic resource activities to be carried out within existing budget resources, and lacking adequate information concerning the scope of work envisioned by the Resolution, and an inadequate amount of time to study the implications of the proposed activity, the United States would like to ask that the record reflect that it reserves with respect to this Resolution".
CHAIRMAN (original language Arabic): May I ask the representative of the United States to be good enough to hand in the written text of what he has just read out.
Michael Joseph RYAN (Australia): Australia agrees with the United States on this matter. We would also like to be associated with that footnote.
Shigeki YAMAMOTO (Japan): Concerning the Draft Resolution on Support to the Action Committee on Latin American Cooperation and Consultation on Plant Genetic Resources, the Japanese delegation associates itself with the United States.
G. MUSGROVE (Canada): That applies to our delegation as well, Mr Chairman.
Wolfgang F. GRABISCH (Germany, Federal Republic of) (original language German): For the same reasons as those stated by the United States delegation, we wish to record our reservation and we ask that our name also be included in the footnote.
James AITKEN (United Kingdom): For similar reasons, we should also like to be associated with the reservation made by the United States.
Paragraphs 30 - 35, including Resolution, as amended, are adopted
Les paragraphes 30 - 35, y compris la résolution, ainsi amendés, sont adoptés
Los párrafos 30 - 35, incluida la Resolución, así enmendados, son aprobados
Draft report of Plenary - Part 9 (from Commission II) as amended, was adopted
Le projet de rapport de la plénière - Partie 9 (de la Commission II) ainsi amendé, est adopté
El proyecto de informe de la Plenaria - Parte 9 (de la Comisión II) así enmendado, es aprobado
DRAFT REPORT OF PLENARY - PART 10 (from Commission II) (C 87/REP/10) (continued)
PROJET DE RAPPORT DE LA PLENIERE - DIXIEME PARTIE (émanant de la Commission II) (C 87/REP/10) (suite)
PROYECTO DE INFORME DE LA PLENARIA - PARTE 10 (de la Comisión II) (C 87/REP/10) (continuación)
CHAIRMAN (original language Arabie): Gentlemen, document C 87/REP/10, which you were waiting for, is now being distributed. That is the Draft Report of Plenary - Part 10. You will note that there is a footnote in this document. If you have any comments to make in relation to it, please ask for the floor in order that it can be discussed. If there are no comments on the document we are now debating, I shall consider it to have been adopted.
PARAGRAPHS 1 TO 17
PARAGRAPHES 1 A 17
PARRAFOS 1 A 17
Ms Joan DUDIK-GAYOSO (-United States of America): I have a couple of suggestions to make on this draft, because we were not able to complete it in the Commission.
In paragraph 12 of the original text, which is still paragraph 12 in this document, I would like to propose that the sentence which starts "In relation to coordination..." be put first in that paragraph, because that is what the paragraph speaks about.
I would also like to insert the words "at the sector level" after "such work" - "the Conference called for the strengthening of such work at the sector level in future ", in what now will be the third sentence of that paragraph.
At the end of that paragraph I would like to add "Some delegations expressed the view that field level coordination of United Nations system activities needed substantial improvements".
I have another addition on paragraph 13, the paragraph on training and human resources development -it would be a last sentence, reading as follows: "But the Conference noted that training still accounts for only 11 percent of field programme resources, while experts account for 55 percent".
Ms Susan ULBAEK (Denmark): A minor point in the last line of paragraph 16 which reads "and role of women in larger FAO development projects". That word "larger" is in error - it should be "all FAO development projects".
POINT OF ORDER
POINT D'ORDRE
PUNTO DE ORDEN
Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Como cuestión de orden, Señor Presidente, tal vez conviene que en primer lugar nos concretemos ál párrafo 12. Sobre el párrafo 12 la Delegación de Estados Unidos hizo dos propuestas, la primera no la entendimos, no sabemos exactamente lo que propuso ni cómo quedaría el párrafo al alterar el orden de la frase.
La segunda propuesta, aunque está a nombre de algunas Delegaciones, nos causa cierta preocupación. Seguimos el debate en la Comisión y no nos pareció que se planteó este asunto. Como esto no pasó por el Comité de Redacción, o el Comité no tuvo tiempo de tratarlo, quisiera que la Secretaría confirme cuántas Delegaciones trataron el asunto a que se refiere la adición propuesta para el párrafo 12.
Luego veríamos la adición al párrafo 13 a fin de ordenar un poco el debate.
A. SAINTRAINT (Belgique): Sur l'ajout qui vient d'être fait par la représentante des Etats-Unis, je voudrais compléter en disant "il est bien entendu que les experts ont une activité de formation importante". Parce que vouloir simplement donner des chiffres en ce qui concerne les rapports et les experts voudrait dire que les experts n'ont aucune tâche de formation; il me paraît très important de souligner le rôle important des experts en matière de formation.
Joseph TCHICAYA (Président du Comité de rédaction Commission II): Monsieur le Président, je ne sais pas ce que je pourrais vous dire. Cette question n'a pas été évoquée au niveau du Comité de rédaction. C'est une idée nouvelle qui est exposée ici. Il appartient à l'Assemblée plénière d'en discuter.
Nils Ragnar KAMSVAG (Norway): I apologize for referring to an earlier point, but we are sitting in a far corner from the Chairman. We have been trying to get your attention on the first Belgian amendment. We did not get where it was and what it was. We would appreciate it if the Belgian Ambassador would repeat his suggestion.
Sra. Mercedes FERMIN-GOMEZ (Venezuela): También nosotros estamos confundidos porque el Embajador de Colombia ha hecho referencia al párrafo 12 y ahora vemos que se está haciendo referencia a la enmienda belga que no sabemos a qué párrafo se refiere. No sé si sería mucho pedir que pudiéramos escuchar la lectura del párrafo 12, como pidió Colombia para ver donde encaja la enmienda de Estados Unidos, ya que estamos ausentes de este panorama.
CHAIRMAN: May I ask the Secretariat to read paragraph 12 as amended by the United States and added to by Belgium?
Ms Joan DUDIK-GAYOSO (United States of America): If I may clarify, I have proposed amendements in paragraphs 12 and 13. The proposal that I made for paragraph 12 was a very simple one: it was to take a sentence in the middle of the paragraph that starts, in the fifth line down, "In relation to coordination, the Conference noted the increasing integration of technical with capital assistance and the need to support governments in the overall coordination..." and to put that at the beginning of the paragraph, because everything that is in that paragraph has to do with coordination and that makes a better opening for the paragraph.
My second proposal was that after the words "work in future" which is the fifth line down - the sense reads, "the Conference called for the strengthening of such work in future" - to insert the words "at the sector level". Therefore, the paragraph would start out. with a reference to the Conference noting the increasing integration of capital and technical assistance, and so on, first. Then it would talk about the Round Tables and Consultative Groups. It would then call for the strengthening of such work at the sector level.
With relation to the delegate who remarked that this did not come up in the debate, it did come up in the debate, we included it in our statement, and frankly the mention of the integration of technical with capital assistance was I think made by Mr Lignon; it was in the Secretariat's response.
I can deal with training, but that is in the next paragraph.
CHAIRMAN: What is the sentence you have added at the end of paragraph 12?
Ms Joan DUDIK-GAYOSO (United States of America): The sentence that comes at the end says, "Some delegations expressed the view that field coordination of UN system activities needed substantial improvement".
CHAIRMAN: I would ask the Secretariat, if they have everything, to read paragraph 12 as amended by the delegate of the United States, so that everybody is clear about it.
SECRETARY-GENERAL: Paragraph 12: "In relation to coordination, the Conference noted the increasing integration of technical with capital assistance and the need to support governments in the overall coordination of aid. The Conference stressed the importance of FAO's assistance in planning, designing and implementing agricultural policies including its partnership in UNDP-sponsored Round Tables and World Bank-sponsored Consultative Groups. In commending the contribution which FAO had already made to such mechanisms, the Conference called for the strengthening of such work in future at the sector level. In this connection the role of the UN system at country level was noted, including the function of UN Resident Coordinator. It underscored the importance of close collaboration between FAO, UNDP, other UN and bilateral agencies, including for practical coordination support to governments at sectoral and sub-sectoral levels. Some delegations expressed the view that field level coordination of UN system activities needed substantial improvement."
Leopoldo ARIZA HIDALGO (Cuba): Señor Presidente, después de oír la proposición de la Delegación de Estados Unidos y oír la lectura que ha dado la Secretaría tenemos algún problema con esta proposición. Queremos llamar la atención de que este párrafo, bastante grande como estructura, podría tener algún ánálisis como estructura, pero nos parece que hay dos ideas diferentes que no pueden mezclarse, a no ser que se le quiera restar importancia a la primera idea. Si el objetivo es querer restarle importancia a la primera idea, estaríamos totalmente en contra de la proposición, porque la primera idea es que la Conferencia recalca la importancia de la asistencia de la FAO en materia de planificación, formulación y ejecución de políticas, incluida su participación, en el punto este reforzaría esa labor, hasta ahí una idea fundamental. Creo que no se puede entremezclar en las otras ideas porque es quitarle importancia.
Después dice con respecto a la coordinación, eso es otra cosa. La coordinación, la Conferencia observó In creciente integración de la ayuda técnica con la ayuda en forma de capital y la necesidad de apoyar a los gobiernos en la coordinación general de la ayuda.
Creo que son dos cuestiones que no pueden mezclarse, a no ser que la intención sen quitarle fuerza. En esto, Señor Presidente! estaría en contra.
Referente a lo de algunas Delegaciones, esta es otra cuestión. Algunas Delegaciones expresaron que se recoja lo que ellos dijeron.
Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): La propuesta de los Estados Unidos de que el párrafo 12 empiece con la actual frase "con respecto a la coordinación...", me parece aceptable y pensamos que mejora el texto. En cambio, con la agregada "a nivel sectorial y la declaración de algunas delegaciones", queremos llamar la atención de que en la frase final del párrafo 12 ya se habla de nivel sectorial, y también porque, justamente, la última frase del párrafo 12 subraya la importancia de una colaboración más estrecha entre la FAO y el PNUD para establecer una coordinación páctica. Pensamos que esa última frase del párrafo 12 ya contiene las dos ideas propuestas por los Estados Unidos.
Pienso muy respetuosamente que quizás debido a las prisas con que esta parte del proyecto de informe se hizo, no se haya podido considerar en el Comité de Redacción, o tal vez haya pasado inadvertido, este hecho que estamos señalando, y de manera muy cordial quisiéramos que, con la aceptación de la primera parte de la propuesta de Estados Unidos, adoptáramos el párrafo 12, y cuando lleguemos al 13, le ruego me conceda la palabra.
Ms Joan DUDIK-GAYOSO (United States of America): I am not sure I understand exactly what the delegate of Colombia was saying, but I think he has a good point about "at the sector level". It is true that we had very little time in which to look at this. I note that the draft says "the strengthening of such work", so I would be willing to withdraw the words "at the sector level", but I would hold to the idea of keeping this sentence at the beginning of the paragraph if the House could go along with it, and of keeping the last sentence that I proposed.
In this context, in respect to what the delegate of Cuba said, I might say that when I first looked at the text I was going to propose that a new paragraph started there, and that 12 be broken into two separate paragraphs, but that seemed an even more complicated proposal than the one that I made. For my Government the whole process of preparing for Round Tables and Consultative Group is part of the coordination process. However, I do take Cuba's point that the first sentence talks first about planning, and second about Round Tables and Consultative Groups. So I could live with either the proposal I made, or break it into two separate paragraphs. I would like to thank the delegation of Colombia for their support.
Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Lamentamos insistir mucho, pero es que tal vez el aire fresco y de serenidad que se respira en esta sala nos impulsa a hacer frecuentes declaraciones. Queremos de nuevo señalar que la frase final del párrafo 12 se atribuye a toda la Conferencia. De manera que es supérfluo ahora atribuir a algunas delegaciones el mismo deseo que ya está expresado en la última frase del párrafo 12. Pero naturalmente, yo no puedo resistir demasiado a una insistencia cordialmente femenina y a ese respecto repetiría mi pregunta. Si como esto no se trató en el Comité de Redacción, rogaría a la Secretaría me confirmara cuántas delegaciones se refirieron a esto en el debate que tuvo lugar en la Comisión II. Si fueron una o dos, poner en este último caso unas pocas delegaciones, y si fue una, poner una delegación, porque queremos dar satisfacción a la distinguida colega y amiga Gayoso, de los Estados Unidos.
Leopoldo ARIZA HIDALGO (Cuba): Creemos que se podría aceptar la proposición que ha adelantado la delegada de Estados Unidos en cuanto a que podríamos tener dos párrafos totalmente diferentes. Nosotros damos también importancia a la coordinación, pero creo que - como ha dicho Colombia - si esto no pasó por el Comité de Redacción, no creo que habría ningún problema para la Secretaría porque dejara la primera parte como el párrafo 12 y un párrafo 12 a) o uno consecutivo, que lo arreglaría la Secretaría después refiriéndose específicamente a la coordinación y a la proposición que hace la delegada de Estados Unidos.
Referente al añadido de "algunas delegaciones", creo que si algunas delegaciones lo expresaron, no habría ningún problema en aceptar esa parte también.
DIRECTOR-GENERAL: I think we have spent enough time on paragraph 12. We have many reports to approve today and tomorrow. I do not see any problem here. The question was raised as to whether there was more than one delegate who expressed views about field coordination, etcetera. Yes, Mr Lignon has confirmed to me that there was more than one delgate. It was not expressed in the same way but it was around the subject, so I think the words "some delegates" can be justified. Otherwise, since the words "at sectoral level" have been deleted, I think the paragraph can stand, as amended by the United States, starting with "In relation to coordination", or making it into two paragraphs, 12(a) and 12(b). There is no problem at all. The substance is the same. I suggest that we accept the amendments proposed by the United States and pass on to tho next paragraph. I have no problem with that.
Ms Susan ULBAEK (Denmark): I am perfectly happy with the Director-General's proposal. I just wanted to be sure that the amendment by the United States was going to stay in, because this was certainly one of the central points in my statement.
Ms Anna-Li isa KORHONEN (Finland): The Finnish delegation is also happy with the proposal by the Director-General and would like to see the United States amendment retained in the text as it was proposed.
CHAIRMAN: Is there any objection to that?
Leopoldo ARIZA HIDALGO (Cuba): No es para oponerme, es para saber cómo va a quedar la redacción porque el Director General dijo que podía haber dos párrafos. Queríamos saber cómo va a quedar.
CHAIRMAN: If the United States has no problem with separating the.paragraph into two paragraphs, or dividing it, and with the consent of the distinguished delegate of Cuba, we will have them astwo separate paragraphs, with the amendment of the United States. If this is approved, that is so decided.
We move to paragraph 13, which now has to be renumbered.
Michel MOMBOULI (Congo): Je voudrais intervenir sur le paragraphe 13, précisément en ce qui concerne la proposition américaine dont lecture nous a été faite.
Nous constatons pour notre part que la délégation américaine fait un constat à la fin d'un paragraphe. Nous pensons que ce n'est pas la place qu'il faut donner à cette adjonction. Nous sommes d'avis que cette phrase devrait être au debuti du paragraphe 13 et pourrait, si la délégation américaine est d'accord avec nous, se lire comme ceci: "Ayant constaté que la formation ne représente que 11 pour cent des ressources allouées au Programme de terrain contre 55 pour cent pour les experts, la Conférence..." et le reste pourrait s'enchaîner.
A moins que la délégation américaine ait oublié de donner un complément nous ne voyons pas comment on pourrait mettre un constat à la fin d'un paragraphe alors qu'il y a bien des choses qui précèdent. Dans le fond, nous n'avons pas d'objection mais cette adjonction devrait être liée au reste du paragraphe 13, ce devrait être le chapeau de ce paragraphe 13.
CHAIRMAN: I thought that the distinguished delegate of Norway had some clarification on the addition that the distinguished delegate of Belgium had made on the proposal of the United States for an amendment. Can we repeat that before we continue discussion on that?
A. SAINTRAINT (Belgique): J'ai dit ce que j'avais à dire, ça suffit, (continues in English) The main task is to train people.
CHAIRMAN: is that satisfactory to Norway?
A. Nils Ragnar KAMSVAG (Norway) : The point of clarification I wanted was only to have the sentence repeated. If I can have that, I am perfectly satisfied.
CHAIRMAN: What sentence? There was no sentence put forward by Belgium. I think he just wanted to clarify it further. He did not add anything to the sentence that was proposed by the United States.
Ibrahima KABA (Guinée): C'est sur une autre question que je voudrais intervenir toujours au paragraphe 13. J'aimerais intervenir sur la forme de la première phrase qui se lit ainsi: "La Conférence a declaré soutenir fermement les efforts déployés par la FAO pour renforcer les capacités des bénéficiaires dans le domaine des ressources...". A mon avis, malgré l'existence de l'adverbe "fermement" dans cette phrase, la tournure donne plutôt le sens d'un soutien fort hésitant.
Je souhaite proposer simplement: "La Conférence a exprimé son soutien aux efforts déployés par la FAO..."
Ms Joan DUDIK-CAYOSO (United States of America): I want to thank the. delegation of Congo for a very excellent suggestion. I think it makes much more sense to put this at the beginning of the paragraph, and I would be very happy to see it there.
Bashir El Mabrouk SAID (Libya) (original language Arabic): I have a comment on the proposal made by the United States. We should not mention here that the Conference expressed its point of view about the percentage of 11 percent. We could keep the text as it is, and we would add, "a limited number of members" or "a small number of members" or "some delegates" "indicated..." and so on. We should not speak on behalf of the Conference because it was a limited number of delegates who held this viewpoint.
AKBAR MIRZA (India): I hate to intervene, but I should like to point out here that some of the amendments, in my opinion, appear rather unnecessary. If we go on in this way for each paragraph, adding a line or two, it will be very difficult. While we respect everybody's right to do it, it would make it very difficult to improve on the rather slow pace we have kept in the last two days. For example, when a Conference meets, I do not think that, after first mentioning that it was noted that 500 000 men and women are trained in the last decade, we should refer to the fact that only 11 percent are in training and so many are 'experts. That in itself is a contradiction. We should not eliminate adjective here or an adjective there after it has gone through drafting and other things. I think there should be a quicker procedure and that we should all exercise constraint except on substantive matters.
CHAIRMAN: I think the United States has made the proposal and it was accepted. I think there was no strong objection to that. Again, it has been brought to the beginning of the paragraph. If there is no strong objection to that, please consider paragraph 13 adopted, as amended by the United States.
Paragraphs 1 to 17, as amended, approved
Les paragraphes 1 à 17, ainsi amendés, sont approuvés
Los párrafos 1 a 17, así enmendados, son aprobados
PARAGRAPHS 18 TO 28 INCLUDING DRAFT RESOLUTION
PARAGRAPHES 18 A 28 Y COMPRIS LE PROJET DE RESOLUTION
PÁRRAFOS 18 A 28 INCLUIDO EL PROYECTO DE RESOLUCION
A. SAINTRAINT (Belgique): Au paragraphe 25, il est noté "la Conférence s'est félicitée des progrès de la coopération entre la FAO et le PAM et a encouragé les deux organisations à maintenir cette association féconde", je crois que si on se félicite des progrès. Monsieur le Président, on n'arrête pas le progrès, alors je suggérerais de compléter cette phrase par les mots "à maintenir et renforcer cette association féconde". Je voudrais que non seulement on maintienne, mais que l'on renforce l’association.
CHAIRMAN: Are there any comments on what the Belgium representative has said?
Paragraphs 18 to 27 , as amended, approved
Les paragraphes 18 à 27, ainsi amendés, sont approuvés
Los párrafos 18 a 27, así enmendados, son aprobados
Paragraph 28, including draft resolution, approved
Le paragraphe 28, y compris le projet de résolution, est approuvé
El párrafo 28, incluido el proyecto de resoluciõn, es aprobado
Draft report of Plenary - Part 10, (from Commission II) as amended, was adopted
Le projet de rapport de la plénière - Partie 10 (de la Commission LI), ainsi amendé, est adopté
El proyecto de informe - Parte 10 (de la Commisión II), así enmendado, es aprobado
DRAFT REPORT OF PLENARY - PART 6 (from Commission III)
PROJET DE RAPPORT DE LA PLENIERE - SIXIEME PARTIE (émanant de la Commission III)
PROYECTO DE INFORME DE LA PLENARIA - PARTE 6 (de la Comisión III)
CHAIRMAN: We now move to document C 87/REP/6. May I invite the Chairman of Commission III and the Chairman of the Drafting Committee to speak? Are there any comments on this report? Since there are none, the report and the resolution are adopted. I have received a request for insertion of a statement from the delegation of Venezuela, indicating their reservation on the resolution on Scale of Contributions. The Statement will be inserted.
Sra. Mercedes FERMIN-GOMEZ (Venezuela): Nuestra delegación quiere dejar constancia que la propuesta de Escala de cuotas basada en la escala de las Naciones Unidas, aprobada en diciembre de 1985, no refleja la situación económica actual, en la que el peso de la deuda externa representa una carga extraordinaria, a la cual no está en capacidad de responder positivamente. Por tai razón, mi delegación se opone a dicha escala de cuotas para el bienio 1988-89. 1/
Paragraphs 1 to 19 approved
Les paragraphes 1 à 19 sont approuvés
Los párrafos 1 a 19 son aprobados
PARAGRAPHS 20 to 27, INCLUDING DRAFT RESOLUTIONS
PARAGRAPHES 20 à 27, Y COMPRIS LES PROJETS DE RESOLUTION
PARRAFOS 20 a 27, INCLUIDO LOS PROYECTOS DE RESOLUCION
Ronald DEARE (United Kingdom): My delegation certainly objects to the adoption of the resolutions on the Working Capital Fund and the Special Reserve Account. We shall request rollcall votes on both resolutions.
CHAIRMAN: (original language Arabic): There is a proposal which has been moved, asking for voting or putting these two resolutions to the vote. Are there any objections? If there are no objections, we shall procede to the vote.
Leopoldo ARIZA HIDALGO (Cuba): Gracias, Sr. Presidente. Nosotros no nos oponemos a que se saque a votación si el país lo pide; pero queremos saber si en el Comité de Redacción, o en la Comisión, hubo alguna declaración en este sentido! por si es oportuno ahora pedir la votación: si se discutió en la Comisión o en el Comité de Redacción y se aceptó; cómo vino de la Comisión y cómo vino del Comité de Redacción. Porque me parece que podemos caer un poco en retrasos pidiendo votaciones, si en la Comisión no hubo objeción y si en el Comité de Redacción tampoco la hubo. Muchas gracias.
CHAIRMAN (original language Arabic): I would like to thank Cuba for putting this question. We shall ask the Chairman of Commission III to be so kind as to reply to the representative of Cuba's question. Where there any objections when the question was debated within this Commission? I should also like to emphasize that there is a proposal for a vote on these two resolutions, but before we proceed to the vote, may I repeat that I shall ask the Chairman of Commission III to be so kind as to reply to the question from the representative of Cuba?
Mold Mazlan JUSOH (Vice Chairman of Commission III): The matters in these two resolutions were debated quite thoroughly and the vote was taken on both resolutions in the Commission. Both these resolutions were approved by the Commission on a majority vote. I do not recall exactly right now whether there was any statement made by any delegation in the Commission that they would raise the question again in the Plenary. But I stand to be corrected on that.
CHAIRMAN: (original language Arabic): Are there any further observations? Does the representative of Cuba have any other comments?
______________1/ Texto incluido en las actas a petición expresa.
Ronald DEARE (United Kingdom): Just to supplement the response of the Chairman of Commission III, we had a discussion in Commission III, when it was explained to us that the practice is that even though there is a vote in the Commission, this is not reflected in the report of the Conference unless there is a vote in the Plenary. My delegation for one made it clear that we were going to ask for votes on both these resolutions in the Plenary.
Thomas YANGA (Cameroun): Je voudrais une petite clarification au sujet de la résolution concernant le compte de réserve spécial. Il est dit au paragraphe 1 de cette Résolution qu'il sera demandé aux Etats Membres une contribution extraordinaire pour assurer à 50 pour cent le Compte de réserve spécial de 12 309 000 dollars. Le mode par lequel la contribution sera faite n'est pas précisé. J'aimerais avoir des précisions sur ce point, si possible avant que l'on ne passe à la mise aux voix.
Dean K. CROWTHER: (Assistant Director General, Administration and Finance Department): The assessment for the replenishment of the Special Reserve Account will be in accordance with the scale of the contributions and as is shown in the resolution, it will be one-half the authorized amount or the dollar figure which is shown here. Rather than the full 5% it will be 2½% of the approved Programme of Work and Budget, assessed basis of the percentages for each nation, the scale of contributions.
CHAIRMAN: (original language Arabic): if there are no further-comments, can we proceed to a vote on the two Draft Resolutions together? Do you have any objections? Since I hear no objections, perhaps we might start the vote.
Ronald DEARE (United Kingdom): May we have separate votes please, Mr Chairman.
CHAIRMAN: (original language Arabic): Then we will have two votes. We will vote on the first Resolution first.
POINT OF ORDER
POINT D'ORDRE
PUNTO DE ORDEN
Mrs Astrid BERQUIST (Sweden): Could the voting procedures kindly be explained to us?
CHAIRMAN: (original language Arabic): We are voting at the moment on the Resolution entitled "Increase in the Level of the Working Capital Fund".
VOTE
VOTE
VOTACION
CHAIRMAN: The resolution is therefore adopted.
Paragraphs 20 to 22, including draft resolution, adopted
Les paragraphes 20 à 22, y compris le projet de resolution, sont adoptés
Los párrafos 20 a 22, incluido el proyecto de resolución, son aprobados
CHAIRMAN (original language Arabic): The Chairman of the Drafting Committee has some amendments to introduce to one of the pages of the document, so I would like to ask him to draw the Conference's attention to these corrections.
Elio PASCARELLI (Chairman, Drafting Committee Commission III): in C 87/REP/6 page 11, in the Spanish edition, four lines from the bottom: (continued in Spanish) Al objeto do alcanzar un consonso. En lugar do la palabra "consenso", "apoyo más amplio". (continued in English) So please cross out "consenso" and write "apoyo más amplio".
CHAIRMAN (original language Arabic): We will now proceed to the voting on the second Draft Resolution which begins "Noting that the Special Reserve Account has ...".
VOTE
VOTE
VOTACION
Paragraphs 23 to 27, including draft resolution, adopted
Los paragraphes 23 à 27, y compris lo projet de resolution, sont adoptés
Los párrafos 23 a 27, incluido el proyecto de resolución, son aprobados
A. SAÍNTRAINT (Belgique): Rapidement, pour ne. pas retarder nos travaux, je voudrais justifier le vote d'abstention que nous avons émis. Nous L'avons explicité très longuement lors des travaux à la Commission et je voudrais dire que sur le point 1, en ce qui concerne le Compte de réserve spécial, nous émettons le souhait, compte tenu de la proportion des sommes dépensées en lires italiennes, qu'un certain nombre des pays de la Communauté économique européenne puissent s'acquitter de leur contribution en lires italiennes ou en ECU. Je demanderai au Comité financier de se pencher rapidement sur le problème. Cela permettra d'éviter les fluctuations dans la monnaie de référence actuelle et cela permettra en même temps de faire face d'une manière régulière aux obligations que la FAO doit assumer ici, à Rome.
En ce qui concerne la première résolution d'augmentation du Fonds de roulement, nous nous sommes abstenus parce que nous estimons que nous n'avons pas à nous substituer aux débiteurs défaillants et que l'entièreté des pays doit assumer ses obligations à temps. Nous souhaitons qu'un système soit très rapidement mis en place pour inciter les pays à remplir leurs obligations dans les premiers mois de chaque exercice.
Alfred AMISI (Kenya): I should like to take this opportunity to explain the reason why my delegation has felt it necessary to abstain from taking any specific vote on these two resolutions, the resolutions contained in document C 87/REP/6, concerning the increase in the level of the Working Capital Fund and in the replenishment of the Special Reserve Account for 1988-89.
We are a small country. We face serious economic difficulties. We face serious budgetary problems. As such, we arc not going to be able to fulfil our obligations to this important Organization if increases in our contribution are going to be approved in this forum. Of course, we have always been meeting our obligations, our payment is up to date, but any increase, however small it may be, will put a burden on our already-strained financial situation. This is the reason why we have abstained.
However, based on the level of the current contributions, we undertake to pay our contributions, even right now, for the year 1988-89.
Elio PASCARELLI (Chairman, Drafting Committee Commission III): I should like to assure the delegate from Belgium that his concern is widely shared by Europeans, but I may not speak as such, only as Chairman of the Drafting Committee. I should like to call the attention of ail the delegates to this concern and to the need for discussing in the Finance Committee the adoption of a dual currency or a basket of currencies, which has been taken care of on page 13, paragraph 26, of our report.
Antonio C. DE ALMEIDA RIBEIRO (Portugal): I should also like to give a short explanation of our vote. We abstained, not because we do not understand the reasons presented by the Secretariat, or because we oppose the substance of the two resolutions; on the contrary, we abstained on a simple question of principle. In fact, we do think that such extra contributions are a penalty for countries like mine which have always accomplished in time their obligations vis-à-vis this Organization.
Ismael DIAZ YUBERO (España): Muy breve; solamente para decirle que estamos total y absolutamente identificados con lo expuesto por Portugal y esa ha sido la razón que nos ha llevado a votar como lo hemos hecho.
Draft Report of Plenary - Part 6, (from Commission III) as amended, was adopted
Le projet de rapport de la piéniere - Partie 6 (de la Commission III), ainsi amendé, est adopté
El proyecto de informe - Parte 6 (de la Comisión III) así enmendado, es aprobado
DRAFT REPORT OF PLENARY - PART 7 (from Commission I)
PROJET DE RAPPORT DE LA CONFERENCE - SEPTIEME PARTIE (émanant de la Commission I)
PROYECTO DE INFORME DE LA PLENARIA - PARTE 7 (de la Comisión I)
CHAIRMAN: We now come to document C 87/REP/7 and C 87/REP/7-Sup.1, the Draft Report of Plenary - Part 7 (from Commission I) and the Supplement, Progress Report on the Implementation of the International Code of Conduct on the Distribution and Use of Pesticides. May I call on the Chairman of Commission I and the Chairman of the Drafting Committee of Commission I to join us.
Paragraphs 19 to 31 approved
Les paragraphes 19 à 31 sont approuvés
Los párrafos 19 a 31 son aprobados
PARAGRAPHS 32 to 43 INCLUDING DRAFT RESOLUTIONS
PARAGRAPHES 32 A 43 Y COMPRIS LES PROJETS DE RESOLUTIONS
PARRAFOS 32 A 43 INCLUIDO LOS PROYECTOS DE RESOLUCION
CHAIRMAN: Before we go into discussion of the draft resolutions in paragraph 43 I would ask the Chairman of the Drafting Committee I to explain to us the difference between the two resolutions which are there.
I. Ismael DIAZ YUBERO (Vicepresidente de la Comisión 1): Este tema ha sido el último punto de la Comisión I y tengo que decir que ha sido un punto que más complicaciones nos ha creado; se estuvo discutiendo en Sesión Plenaria de la Comisión I aproximadamente durante cinco horas; posteriormente se formó un grupo de trabajo especial junto con el Comité de Redacción que duró otras ocho horas más; ayer tuvimos alguna hora más y esta mañana media hora para intentar llegar a un acuerdo. A pesar de todo ha sido imposible llegar a un acuerdo por lo que la decisión que hemos tomado esta mañana ha sido de presentar la resolución que en principio proponía el documento y pedir a los países que quisiesen hacer alguna reserva o modificación que lo expusiesen esta mañana de palabra y que las presentasen por escrito a la Secretaría. Como consecuencia de eso tenemos el documento que tenemos en estos momentos entre las manos en el que hay una primera resolución que era la que se estuvo discutiendo y a la que se agregaron unas reservas por parte de siete países que están expuestos en el pie de página 3 en el texto español.
Como consecuencia de esto, las delegaciones de Colombia, Filipinas, Venezuela y Zambia que habían hecho un proyecto de resolución transnacional volvieron otra vez ai proyecto primitivo y, por otra parte, los países nórdicos, que también habían presentado un proyecto de resolución, volvieron a hacer suyo el proyecto puesto que no había sido posible llegar a un consenso.
Como podrán ver, dentro de cada una de las resoluciones hay una serie de notas de pie de página que señalan la posición de diversos países en relación con cada una de los tres modelos de resolución.
G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Nuestro colega y amigo Ismael Díaz Yubero, activo Vicepresidente de la Comisión I, ha explicado muy bien la situación.
A estas horas no pretendemos reabrir el debate; ya el Vicepresidente de la Comisión ha explicado muy bien la situación; quisiéramos, simplemente reiterar la propuesta que aparece ya en la última página de este documento y en la penúltima nota al pie de página que se refiere a la delegación de Colombia.
La propuesta original de cuatro países más Colombia contó con el apoyo de la gran mayoría de la Comisión; sin embargo, al constatar que para nuestro proyecto original no podíamos contar con el apoyo de los países nórdicos, países que han demostrado ser muy positivos en estas actividades, hemos decidido como compromiso y cediendo mucho de nuestra parte, acceder a apoyar el proyecto de resolución presentado por los países nórdicos que aparece en el Apérrdice B de este documento.
En cuanto a la reserva de siete países que aparece en la página 3 de este documento debemos dar testimonio de que las delegaciones de esos países demostraron ánimo constructivo al haberse asociado todas para presentar una reserva en forma relativamente discreta que nos causa menos problemas. Sin embargo, es conveniente aclarar que la redacción de esa reserva se hizo con base en el proyecto de resolución que había surgido del Comité de Redacción, de manera que proponemos de forma muy formal y con el ánimo de no prolongar el debate, que se adopte el proyecto de resolución de los nórdicos y que aquellos siete países que expresaron reservas queden en libertad de hacer lo que consideren conveniente.
Queremos agradecer al Sr. Søndergaard, de la delegación de Dinamarca, Presidente del Comité de Redacción, los esfuerzos que hizo junto con todos los miembros de ese Comité, así como al Sr. Díaz Yubero, el interés que tomaron en lograr un consenso.
Sra. María Eulalia JIMENEZ (El Salvador): Desea mi delegación ratificar el contenido de la nota de pie de página número 2 de la página 7 del documento que estamos analizando.
Mi delegación desearía que se lograra la aprobación del proyecto de resolución enmendado por los países nórdicos, y aunque le hubiese gustado que este proyecto de resolución no contase con ninguna reserva. en aras a lograr un consenso podríamos aceptar que este proyecto de resolución contuviese la reserva que fue expresada en nombre de los siete países mencionados en la primera resolución y que fue expuesta en los trabajos de nuestra Comisión por el distinguido delegado de Alemania.
Srta. Marina BRICEÑO ZEHL (Venezuela): Trataré de ser muy breve, pero considero de todas formas útil para la sala aclarar que la primera resolución, la primera de las tres que estamos considerando, es una resolución de compromiso que salió del trabajo del Comité de Redacción que se convirtió en un Comité negociador durante el día del lunes.
Esta resolución tenía razón de existir y era apoyada por nosotros sólo si se lograba su adopción por consenso. Este no fue el caso. Cuando la resolución volvió a la Plenaria de la Comisión I, siete países pusieron una reserva. Nosotros habíamos planteado la resolución original que consta en el Apéndice A. Se pedía que se enmendara el Código de Conducta sobre Distribución y Utilización de Plaguicidas inmediatamente, pero en vista de que consideramos precioso el apoyo de los países nórdicos vamos a apoyar la resolución presentada por los países nórdicos del Apéndice B del documento que tienen ante ustesdes.
Leo HERTOG (Netherlands): I would like to support the proposal made by the delegate of Colombia. I think that it is a very good idea and my support for this proposal is based on the firm hope that this Draft Resolution may meet with a very large consensus.
Namukolo MUKUTU (Zambia): My delegation is willing to accept the Nordic version of the original resolution. In our view the Nordic version sufficiently takes into account the reservations of some . developed countries and gives ample time within which modalities for the implementation can be worked out. My delegation therefore supports the views of Colombia, El Salvador, Venezuela and the Netherlands.
Leopoldo ARIZA HIDALGO (Cuba): Nosotros queremos dar todo nuestro apoyo a lo expresado por la distinguida delegada de Venezuela en cuanto a la forma en que se discutió, en cuanto a la situación presentada en la Comisión a la hora do discutir la proposición. Teniendo en cuenta lo que la distinguida delegada de Venezuela ha puesto de manifiesto nosotros podemos apoyar en todas sus partes el proyecto de resolución enmendado por los países nórdicos, y estando de acuerdo con lo propuesto por Colombia y otros.
A. SAINTRAINT (Belgique): Bien que je sois d'accord sur le fond de la proposition, je m'abstiendrai à son vote pour la raison suivante: à l'heure actuelle, la Communauté économique européenne, consciente de son rôle important en la matière, examine l'ensemble de la question du commerce des produits chimiques dangereux au niveau du Conseil de ministres; une décision doit intervenir dans un proche avenir. Je crois que ce domaine est particulièrement important et que nous devons arriver à un consensus, et compte tenu du fait que la décision n'est pas intervenue, j'estime devoir m'abstenir
Washington ZUÑICA TRELLES (Perú) : Unicamente con el deseo de apoyar el proyecto de resolución enmendado por los países nórdicos, ya que en el proyecto de resolución original presentado por las delegaciones de Colombia, Filipinas, Venezuela y Zambia, se había puesto una nota del apoyo de mi país; por eso retiro el primer apoyo para apoyar el proyecto de resolución de los países nórdicos.
Yiadom K. ATTA-KONADU (Ghana):Since the introduction of the original resolution, my delegation has taken the position that some more homework has to be done to make the original resolution more meaningful and workable. I an happy to know that the Nordic Resolution has taken care of the consensus which we expressed. I am also happy to know that the reservations by the seven countries are well taken care of by the Nordic Resolution so I have no hesitation in recommending to my colleagues that they accept the position taken by the Nordic delegation.
CHAIRMAN (original language Arabic): Thank you all very much. I see that the Draft Resolution as amended by the Nordic countries gains your approval. If my assessment is right, I take it that there is approval and acceptance of the Draft Resolution. Is that so? It is so decided.
Wolfgang A.F. GRABISCH (Germany, Federal Republic of) (original language German): With the footnote which we proposed as regards the first decision which was dealt with thoroughly in the Commission, our legal position is not fully covered, so that as regards the resolution which you have just adopted we find ourselves in the position of having a reservation.
This is a text which is different from the one to which wo agreed before, so with your permission, Mr Chairman, I should like to read this text.
"The Federal Republic of Germany reserves its position on the first operative paragraph because this text prejudges any decision to be taken by the Twenty-fifth Session of the Conference on the basis of the outcome of the actions and deliberations envisaged in the following operative paragraph. It recalls that the present Code of "Conduct on the Distribution and Use of Pesticides does not preclude importing countries which wish to do so from adopting measures like "prior informed consent". Having already incorporated this Code into its legislation, the Federal Republic of Germany continued to be open for further improvements of the Code.
I am prepared to send you that note, Mr Chairman, so that it could be incorporated at the end of the Resolution.
John COOK (United States of America): I would like to have asked the Federal Republic óf Germany to re-read their reservation, but I believe that I understood quite clearly the first two sentences which were a reservation in general. The United States would like to associate itself with the first two sentences of that reservation.
Masahito YAMAMOTO (Japan): For the same reason as that given by the delegate from the Federal Republic of Germany, Japan wishes to reserve on this paragraph.
Peter A. WIESMANN (Switzerland): Switzerland would also like to associate itself with the reservation expressed by Germany, but only for the two first sentences, because the last sentence refers to Germany's legislation and this does not apply to Switzerland.
Philippe PIOTET (France): Bien que mon pays soit très attaché au consensus sur le code des pesticides qui a prévalu jusqu'à présent, nous estimons qu'il convient, dans ce domaine, de réaliser encore un certain nombre d'études. C'est le cas des études qui ont été faites dans le cadre de la Communauté Economique comme l'a cité le délégué de la Belgique, et c'est aussi le cas des études entreprises dans le cadre du PNUD: Pour ces raisons, nous estimons que les décisions soumises aujourd'hui à la Conférence anticipent sur les études. Pour ces raisons, ma délégation s'associe aux réserves qui ont été mentionnées par la République Fédérale d'Allemagne.
James T. AITKEN (United Kingdom): My delegation was pleased to support this Resolution on a consensus basis. However, we would like to be associated with the first two sentences of the reservation made by the delegate of the Federal Republic of Germany.
Srta Marina BRICEÑO ZEHL (Venezuela): La delegación de Venezuela desea expresar una reserva de las reservas formuladas que acabamos de oír, con relación a la resolución que acabamos de adoptar.
Procedo a leer el texto: "La delegación de Venezuela quiere dejar constancia de que el deseo original de la gran mayoría de los países presentes era que el Código de Conducta para la Distribución y Utilización de Plaguicidas se enmendara inmediatamente para incluir en él el principio de consentimiento previo. Sin embargo, teniendo en cuenta que un número muy limitado de países expresaron objeciones, y convenidos de que era deseable llegar a un acuerdo por consenso, se trató por todos los medios de lograr una solución de compromiso que reflejara los puntos de vista de ambas partes. A tal efecto fue presentada una resolución muy parecida a aquella adoptada por consenso en el PNUMA sobre el mismo tema, la cual aun así no encontró el apoyo aquí de estos pocos países.
A nuestro entender las reservas formuladas por ellos a la presente resolución, la cual toma en cuenta algunos de sus planteamientos, van en contra del espíritu del Código, así como de los esfuerzos desplegados por la mayoría de los países por preservar la salud, la vida humana y el medio ambiente."
Leopoldo ARIZA HIDALGO (Cuba): Queremos unirnos a la reserva de las reservas que se están haciendo en esta Conferencia. Queremos unirnos totalmente a lo expresado por la distinguida delegada de Venezuela. Lamentablemente, la discusión no dio los frutos que se esperaban a pesar de la buena intención que existió y los que reservan en esta forma este texto del compromiso realmente inconscientemente no se están dando cuenta que están contribuyendo a que podamos pasarlo mientras estudian pacicntomente la situación. Por lo tanto quiero unirme a la distinguida delegada de Venezuela en su reserva.
Raúl LOPEZ LIRA (México): Mi delegación desea sumarse a los que me han precedido en el uso de la palabra.
Namukolo MUKUTU (Zambia): My delegation fully supports the footnote proposed by Venezuela.
Mme Anna Teresa FRITELLI ANNIBALDI (Italie): Jusqu'ici l'Italie n'avait pas trop pris la parole sur cette question puisqu'on avait pensé qu'une solution de compromis avait été trouvée, et on avait apprécié tout à fait cette façon d'arriver à une solution de bonne volonté, ce que l'on avait retrouvé dans la solution de compromis. En effet, nous considérons qu'il faudrait arriver à réglementer de la façon la plus appropriée cette matière très délicate. Nous sommes convaincus qu'il faut vraiment étudier tous les aspects qui y sont liés. L'Ambassadeur de la Belgique a rappelé que sur cette matière il y a, dans plusieurs enceintes, des études et des négociations qui sont en cours; je crois que nous pouvons arriver à des résultats meilleurs avec de la bonne volonté.
C'est ainsi que l'Italie se voit, étant donné que l'effort de compromis qui avait été fait au sein de la Commission est ici tombé, obligée d'exprimer une petite considération sur ce qui vient d'être appuyé. On se trouve, si vous permettez l'expression, obligé de faire une "réserve de prudence", pas sur le fond de la question, mais parce que l'on pense que c'est une matière qui doit être étudiée jusqu'au fond.
Mme Malika SACI (Algérie): Nous appuyons entièrement la déclaration que vient de faire le Venezuela et nous voudrions nous associer à cette réserve.
Horacio MALTEZ (Panama): Señor Presidente, también la Delegación de Panama se suma a las reservas presentadas por la representante de Venezuela.
P.N. KHADI (Lesotho): My delegation would like to support the reservation expressed by Venezuela and to be associated with it.
Mrs Hannelore H. BENJAMIN (Dominica) : The delegation of Dominica gives full support to the reservation made by Venezuela.
Joseph TCHICAYA (Congo): Nous n'aimons pas beaucoup les notes de bas de page et encore moins les réserves sur les Résolutions. Nous pensons que le projet de résolution amendé par les pays nordiques-, constitue un compromis sur lequel on a pu obtenir un consensus. Malheureusement, il n'en est pas ainsi. Nous sommes dans l'obligation, dans ces conditions, de ne pouvoir qu'associer le nom de notre pays aux réserves, disons aux contre-réserves, qui ont été proposées par le délégué du Venezuela.
Sra. María Eulalia JIMENEZ (El Salvador): Como expresamos anteriormente no nos gusta, Señor Presidente, que tengamos una Resolución con reservas y mucho menos con reservas a las reservas, pero lamentablemente nos vemos obligados a ello. Apoyamos el contenido de lo planteado por la delegada de Venezuela y solicitarnos se incluya nuestro nombre a la reserva aquí planteada.
Reza ASKARIYEH (Iran, Islamic Republic of): We wish to have our name included in the toot note, and support what has been said by the delegation of Venezuela.
Washington ZUNICA TRELLLES (Peru): Unicamente para decir que mi país apoya la decisión de Venezuela. Nada más, Señor Presidente.
Humberto CARRION MCDONOUGH (Nicaragua): Señor Presidente, nos asociamos a las reservas expresadas por Venezuela y queremos que nuestro país aparezca incluido en ella.
Amilcar SPENCER LOPES (Cap-Vert): Nous aussi nous nous associons à la contre-réserve émise par le Venezuela.
CHAIRMAN: I suggest that if we wish names to be associated with one of the reservations we send the names to the Secretariat and have them listed there. Would you be satisfied with that, so that we can let you go and have a rest, and then meet tomorrow?
POINT OF ORDER
POINT D'ORDRE
PUNTO DE ORDEN
M. M. SIDDIQULLAH (Bangladesh): I am a little confused about the procedure, if we have to adopt a resolution with so many reservations. I do not know what the rules are. Does this not call for throwing the whole thing open and 'starting right from the beginning? Besides, on the merits of Appendix B which I think we have been trying to adopt with reservations, this gives the impression that it will really delay the implementation of our intentions with regard to the use of fertilizers in developing countries. We are not often well informed on, these things, and their literature encourages us to use certain pesticides which are not used in their own countries.
I would like to have a legal opinion at this point on how many reservations can throw an adopted Resolution open for further discussion - or may it not be better to have some form of vote?
CHAIRMAN: The Resolution has been adopted - there are only some reservations. So, once again,if there are no more interventions of substance, if you wish to associate your country's name toany of the reservations you may care to inform the Secretariat and your country's name will be added to the lists of those associated.
Pedro SEBASTIAO (Angola): Il y a une quinzaine de minutes que j'ai demandé la parole et on ne me l'a pas accordée. Tout simplement je voudrais associer mon pays à la réserve qui a été faite par le Venezuela et je voudrais que notre nom figure dans la liste de pays qui ont émis des réserves.
CHAIRMAN: If you would send your names to the Secretariat, it will save us all the time and effort of speaking.
Paragraphs 32 to 42, as amended, approved
Les paragraphes 32 à 42, ainsi amendés, sont approuvés
Los párrafos 32 a 42, así enmendados, son aprobados
Paragraph 43, including draft resolutionn, adopted
Le paragraphe 43, y compris le projet de résolution, est adopté
El párrafo 43, incluido el proyecto de resolución es aprobado
Draft report of Plenary - Part 7 (from Commission I) as amended, was adopted
Le projet de rapport de la plénière - Partie 7 (émanant de la Commission I)ainsi amendé, est adopté
El proyecto de informe - Parto 7 (de la Comisión I) así enmendado, es aprobado
DRAFT REPORT OF PLENARY,- PART 8 (from Commission III)
PROJET DE RAPPORT DE LA PLENIERE - HUITIEME PARTIE .(émanant de la Commission III)
PROYECTO DE INFORME DE LA PLENARIA - PARTE 8 (de la Comisión III)
PARAGRAPHS 1 TO 11 INCLUDING DRAFT RESOLUTION
PARAGRAPHES 1 A 11 Y COMPRIS LE PROJET DE RESOLUTION
PARRAFOS 1 A 11 INCLUIDO EL PROYECTO DE RESOLUCION
CHAIRMAN: Are there any corrections to the drafting?
Elio PASCARELLI (Chairman, Drafting Committee Commission III): Because of reasons that were explained to us at the end of the last session of Commission III, there was absolutely no time for the Drafting Committee to meet and to judge, comment or amend the Report on this subject. So it has been kindly given to me, and I am one member of the Committee; so I cannot speak on behalf of the whole Committee. Whether this reflects exactly what was said, in principle, I do not want to move objections from here, but I want to dissociate my responsibility from whatever is wrong. There is something at the end, but I hope that members of the Committee will participate in the discussion if they so think.
Jean-Luc GRAEVE (France): Ma délégation voudrait aborder brièvement le point relatif à la Résolution qui figure au paragraphe 16 de notre document dans la version française et qui est relatif à l'exécution du Programme approuvé pour 1988-89. Ma délégation ne souhaite pas s'opposer au consensus très large qui s'est dégagé en Commission III sur l'adoption de cette Résolution. Elle souhaite cependant rappeler les réserves de nature juridique qu'elle a exprimées lors des débats et qui figurent sur la page 5 du procès verbal de la 9ème Séance de la Commission III: Ma délégation souhaite que ces réserves soient mises à leur place appropriée par le Secrétariat, dans le projet de rapport qui nous est soumis, et que le texte, avec notre réserve mise à la place appropriée, lui soit communiqué.
CHAIRMAN (origínal language Arabic): Since we are waiting for the supplement to document C 87/REP/8, would Mr Crowther please clarify what the procedure is for the discussion of this document?
Dean K. CROWTHER (Assistant Director-Ceneral, Administration and Finance Department): The Conference has before it in REP/8 two specific items, both of which have resolutions. The second resolution, that has just been mentioned by the Chairman of the Drafting Committee, was approved by consensus. The first resolution could not be totally agreed upon, but, because we did not have a quorum and we could not go to a vote and it is required for adoption in Plenary, it is for the Plenary to decide whether or not a vote would be required on it.
CHAIRMAN (Original language Arabic): Would the distinguished delegates prefer to adopt this first Resolution, Procedure for the Election of the Chairman and Members of the Programme Committee and Finance Committee?
Elio PASCARELLI (Chairman, Drafting Committee Commission III): I do not think that we reached a consensus in the Commission. This draft has never been examined by the Drafting Committee but was prepared by the Secretariat, and I only received it this afternoon. I could not call the Commission together so I do not think that we can use this. That is why I asked your permission to leave this post. May I repeat the reason why Italy would not vote in favour of this Resolution if a vote were taken? I shall ask for a vote on the Resolution, because it is absolutely useless. The CCLM spent hours and hours and hours to come to us with an unnecessary Resolution. The risk that we want to prevent is that one region wishing to serve on the Finance Committee would not be elected. This actually happened two years ago. The risk is there again this year. This Resolution is very theoretical and a mass of parole, parole, parole. I am sorry that the work we have done in the Council - and we recommended alternative 3 to the CCLM - was not taken seriously, and I use the word "seriously" responsibly. It has taken three meetings of the CCLM to come up with a useless Resolution, whereas we had thought of a proposal that did not become a resolution but is a paper that is known and is available to all members to judge. You have it. It disappeared. Why? It is not in the report. I ask the Secretariat to explain to me why.
LEGAL COUNSEL: Members who attended the Commission III meeting will recall that there was an alternative proposed to that which was submitted by the CCLM, endorsed by the Council and submitted to the Conference for decision. This alternative proposal is reflected in paragraphs 8 to 10 of the draft report. I distinctly remember, towards the concluding part of the Commission's discussion, asking the Commission whether the alternative proposal, which was in the shape of a resolution, should be passed on as such or whether the contents - its substance - should merely be reflected in the report without submitting the whole draft resolution. I may be wrong, but I gained the impression that the Commission intended to forward the resolution which had previously been endorsed by the Council and also to reflect the main lines of the alternative proposal because the Commission recognized that there were certain elements of that proposal which merited further study. The Secretariat has done its best to reflect these conclusions in the report. It is also perfectly true that, it is the Secretariat which takes the full responsibility for this because, as the Chairman of the Drafting Committee pointed out, there was no time to submit this part of the Report to the Drafting Committee. However, I believe that it reflects what the Commission intended to do. Naturally in this Plenary the Conference may, if it so wishes, change the contents and discuss the matter further.
Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): El Embajador Pascaroili tiene razón cuando dice que este Proyecto de Informe se presenta bajo responsabilidad de la Secretaría, porque el Sr. Roche ha explicado muy bien la situación, y desde luego es adecuado que el delegado de Italia intervenga en este momento.
Sin embargo, convendrá recordar! y ojalá lo confirme así el Presidente de la Comisión III, que ayer, cuando se debatió este punto, el debate se dividió en dos aspectos. El primero sobre el Proyecto de Resolución que había enviado el Consejo, relacionado con el procedimiento de elección de los Presidentes y Miembros de los Comités del Programa de Finanzas, y yo no recuerdo que haya existido ninguna oposición en la Sala, ni siquiera del Embajador Pascarelli. Varias delegaciones, listados Unidos y Colombia, reconocimos que tai vez esa no era la solución más adecuada al problema, pero que representaba un esfuerzo notable que hacía el Consejo, después de haberse ocupado el Consejo dos veces de este asunto, después de haber oído en dos ocasiones también el asesoramiento del CACJ. Ese es un punto; sobre esa Resolución no creo que haya discusión y fue aprobada en la Comisión III.
Paralelamente, el segundo punto fue una propuesta del Embajador Pascarelli y ya el Consejero Roche explica que sobre esa propuesta, aparecen los párrafos 8, 9 y 10. En la primera frase del párrafo 9 se reconocen los méritos de la propuesta del Embajador Pascarelli, y yo le reitero mi reconocimiento. Pero, la Conferencia decidió que no había llegado el momento de examinarla a fondo. Fue por eso por lo que la Secretaría, muy adecuadamente, no incluyóen el Proyectode Informe el texto presentado por Italia sino el resumen de las deliberaciones sobre ese punto en la Comisión III. Yo espero que esto aclare la situación y que podamos así aceptar este documento que es correcto.
Elio PASCARELLI (Chairman, Drafting Committee Commission III): I think that Ambassador Bula Hoyos, a dear friend and the distinguished representative of Colombia, is a little too kind to the Secretariat. I want to put on record that we are very displeased with the action and procedure of the Secretariat. It is absolutely incorrect. First, there is no Ambassador "Pascarelli's Resolution", there is just a paper, because I refused to push forward this Resolution; Alas, it had not the sponsorship of countries benefiting from the activities of FAO - Africa, Asia, Latin America, the Near East, etcetera.
Secondly, the resume that is produced here is not satisfactory at all because, if any of the delegates tonight would like to resume this discussion before, the sovereign body of the Conference which must replace the Commission whenever the Commission does not have time, as in fact has happened, we have no document in front of us, and this document has been in the hands of the Secretariat for fifteen days. It was produced before the Resolutions Committee and was approved by the Resolutions Committee. On that subject there was ample time to reach an agreement because it was only to correct an imbalance that I recognized tonight that a negotiating point was put in. I think that by correcting the number from 11 to 12 we could have reached agreement the same night but it was prevented, not because of lack of goodwill on the part of the Chairman, but because we were practically physically thrown out of that hall. This is the sovereign body. If Great Britain has the right to make us lose one hour to vote on two resolutions that had already been voted on and re-voted on and were very clearly defeated there, I think any delegate would have the right to call attention to this quite useless resolution, and I have said so since the beginning of Commission III's work. This resolution has already been disattended. What better proof do you need? (microphone switched off).
POINT OF ORDER
POINT D'ORDRE
PUNTO DE ORDEN
Ronald DEARE (United Kingdom): I must register an objection to the implied criticism in the statement just made by the Ambassador of Italy. It is perfectly within the right of any delegation to call a vote on any resolution, particularly when we were advised in Commission III, when Ambassador Pascarelli was present, that there would be no record in the report of the Plenary of a
voto unless that vote took place in the Plenary, and so a vote in the Commission does not exist, as I understand it, for the purposes of the report of the Plenary.
For Ambassador Pascarelli's information, the name of my delegation is "the United Kingdom delegailon”.
Atif Y. BUKJIARI (Saudi Arabia, Kingdom of) (original language Arabic): This Resolution referred to by His Excellency Pascarelli was considered first in the Third Commission, and many delegations in Commission III considered the subject of this resolution and its contents. There has not been any agreement on the contents of this resolution. However, some delegations, including the delegation of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, referred to the fact that it is possible that this resolution be considered and be put to the vote if it is amended and the members of the Finance Committee were eight from developing countries and four representing developed countries. Regrettably, however, at that time I left the hall in order to join Commission II and did not know what happened afterward as regards the deliberations of Commission III. Would the Chairman of Commission III be able to keep us informed of the destiny of this resolution and how discussions were closed as regards this resolution?
Mohammed Mazlan JUSOH (Vice-Chairman, Commission III): This matter on procedure for election of chairman and members of the Finance Committee and Programme Committee was debated quite extensively by the Commission. At that time it was chaired by the Chairman himself, the Ambassador of Poland. There seems to be no objections to the original resolution as tabled before us, except that Ambassador Pascarelli said in a discussion that he had another resolution which he wished to put to the Commission for consideration. But then because of the problem of getting sponsors for the resolution the matter was left in suspension for quite a number of days. But then the matter was brought up again, I think during the last session yesterday afternoon and the whole problem was that I was not chairing that session myself and I also had to go into Commission II.
At this point perhaps the Secretary, Mr Crowther, or someone from the Secretariat would be able to enlighten the Plenary.
A. Daniel WEYGANDT (United States of America): I really do not wish to pre-empt a response from the podium if such is indicated. If that is your wish, Mr Chairman, I would be happy to speak perhaps after the response from the Secretariat member, in compliance-with the request of the Chairman of Commission III.
LEGAL COUNSEL: I thought I had summed up how the discussion ended because in view of the fact that the Secretariat was going to take responsibility for drafting this part of the report, I specifically sought the guidance of the Commission in order to be sure that the text which you would have before you now reflected what the Commission wanted to do.
Of course, I stand to be corrected by Ambassador Pascarelli, but my understanding was that there was general support for the CCLM's and the Council's draft resolution, and that different views were expressed on the other proposal which the delegate of Italy stated that he did not wish to be associated with in view of the fact that he had not got any co-sponsors. Therefore, we ended up by referring to it as either "the anonymous resolution" or "the non-Italian resolution". But the substance was discussed at some length. Various views were expressed on how, if at all, the composition of the Finance Committee should be changed; whether it should be increased. A number of different views were expressed, but I distinctly recall having asked whether the resolution in that form should be sent on to this Plenary Session or whether, on the other hand, it would be sufficient for its contents to be forwarded. I suggested to the Commission that only the substance be forwarded. I heard nobody dissenting. This is precisely what we did.
A. Daniel WEYGANDT (United States of America): Mr Chairman, I thank you for giving me the floor at this time because I would like to take the opportunity to confirm quite clearly the understanding that Mr Roche has conveyed to the Plenary. This was a discussion which was carried out at some length and certainly it is my recollection of what transpired. It do not believe that the verbatims are yet available from our discussions, but I am quite confident that if they were they would confirm indeed what Mr Roche has said.
In fact, I was tempted when I received this document to make the comment that I thought it was a relatively balanced job of drafting, given the fact that there was no opportunity to send it to the Drafting Committee. If anything, I would perhaps criticise in this draft that there is perhaps excessive mention of a discussion about a resolution which was never agreed to by the Commission.
Therefore, I think it is important for us to bear in mind that this resolution was not agreed to by the Commission and it is also important to bear in mind that there was no consensus on this resolution. If there is an effort to press this, there will not be a consensus in this Plenary tonight.
Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Sr. Presidente, después de la declaración que acaba de hacer nuestro amigo y colega el Sr. Weygandt, de los Estados Unidos, casi no tengo nada que agregar. Una vez más, el Sr. Roche ha estado perfectamente adecuado en los detalles que da sobre el debate. Seguramente los colegas que estuvieron ayer en la Comisón III recuerdan que yo hice una segunda intervención, en la que me excusé ante el Presidente si me anticipaba a su resumen y propuse lo que luego el Sr. Roche repitió ante la Comisión de manera muy clara, y estaba presente el distinguido, eminente y queridísimo amigo, el Embajador Pascarelli. También confirmo lo que ha dicho el Sr. Roche: la resolución de Italia quedó huérfana, y él mismo lo reconoció. El Embajador Pascarelli se lamentó de que nadie le había apoyado.
De manera que yo concuerdo con Estados Unidos en que estos tres párrafos hasta son excesivos, en relación con el debate que tuvo lugar, pero los acepto como homenaje a mi amistad y al respeto que debo al Embajador Pascarelli. Creo que esta parte del informe de la Comisión III debe ser aprobada tal como se ha presentado.
CHAIRMAN (original language Arabic): The representative of Italy has asked for the floor, but before giving him the floor I deemed it appropriate to put this issue before you in order to take a decision on whether you wish to agree on this or to accept it in its form as a draft resolution or to enter some amendments on the draft resolution and thereafter take the appropriate decision. I see that the discussions taking place now through the various statements might be lengthy and this might not lead us to any tangible outcome. Therefore, once again I put this matter before you. Would the representative of Italy, Ambassador Pascarelli, agree not to take the floor now? Then after taking a decision on this resolution he can explain his position.
Elio PASCARELLI (Chairman, Drafting Committee Commission III): Which resolution are you referring to?
CHAIRMAN (original language Arabic): This is on procedures for the Election of the Chairman and Members of the Programme and Finance Committee, page 6 of document C 87 REP/8 .
Elio PASCARELLI (Chairman, Drafting Committee Commission III): I stated at the very beginning of the item under discussion that this was a useless resolution. That was fifteen days ago, the document disappeared. I want the document to appear as it came from the Resolutions Committee. I request an answer to my query as to why it was kept for fifteen days and not circulated. These answers must be given.
I think we have to vote on this because I want a vote on the resolution which is useless in my view. I do not want to make comments on the three speakers who have agreed on one point, that is a useless polemic. The fact is that many countries in that room were not permitted, because of lack of time, to state their position. The Ambassador of Colombia said that I ignored mathematics, that four and eight would be perfectly suitable to him.
CHAIRMAN (original language Arabic): Without reference to any further speakers, let us decide on this resolution by a show of hands. If you approve of the resolution in front of you, if you agree with what is in front of you as a draft resolution, please raise your hands? Those against kindly raise your hands? Abstentions, please? Thank you.
The resolution was adopted by 65 votes to 1 with 14 abstentions
La résolution est adoptée par 65 voix contre 1 et 14 abstentions
Por 65 votos contra 1 y 14 abstenciones queda aprobada la resolución
Paragraphs 1 to 11, including draft resolution, adopted
Les paragraphes 1 à 11, y compris le projet de résolution, sont adoptés
Los párrafos 1 a 11, incluido el proyecto de resolución, son aprobados
PARAGRAPHS 12 TO 16 INCLUDING DRAFT RESOLUTION
PARAGRAPHES 12 A 16 Y COMPRIS LE PROJET DE RESOLUTION
PARRAFOS 12 A 16 INCLUIDO EL PROYECTO DE RESOLUCION
CHAIRMAN (original language Arabie): We still have another resolution which has already been adopted by the Commission.
Ms Janet Lesley TOMI (Australia): I have taken the floor because I require clarification concerning some of the business that was conducted in Commission III. My understanding is that there were a couple of resolutions which were going to be voted on and we ran out of time in Commission III. I am wondering if it is now the intention in Plenary for a vote on C 87/LIM/9 and then again there was C. 87/LIM/14 which had two supplements. Australia certainly would wish to call for a vote on C 87/LIM/9.
Dean K. CROWTHER (Assistant Director-General, Administration and Finance Department): The delegate from Australia is correct. These resolutions that were discussed but not voted on in Commission III because there was not a quorum, or are at this moment being finalized in the supplement, will come forward as soon as they are completed; there is every intention of bringing them forward to the Plenary for the decision that will be taken according to the members.
A. Daniel WEYGANDT (United States of America): I have a procedural question to follow-up what Mr Crowther has told us. How is it proposed to deal with the reflection of our debate on these two items? My understanding is that normally before a vote goes to Plenary it should be seen at least by a Drafting Committee or a Commission. In this case it seems as though we will not have a chance to see any report until - I do not Know - until a report is issued. I should like some clarification on what it is that the Secretary would propose as a means of conveying the Report to the Members.
Dean K. Crowther (Assistant Director-General, Administration and Finance Department): As a result of finalizing the discussion late yesterday in Commission III on this subject, there was no follow-on time for the Drafting Committee to meet. Therefore, a Draft Report has been prepared and is to be included in the supplement that is coming forward. It will therefore be considered the same as REP/8 which is being reviewed at this moment. Certainly if there had been time and a quorum, full discussions would have taken place, but it will come before the Plenary for its review.
Elio PASCARELLI (Chairman, Drafting Committee Commission III): I have two points. I would again call the attention of the Spanish-speaking members of FAO because there is a mistake or an omission in C 87/REP/8, the last page of the Spanish text. Accepting a British amendment, we added the words - this is point 4 of the Resolution that you have in front of you, the line before the last - "cash spending". It does not appear in Spanish. It should be set between the,words "fondos y la situacion de los atrasos"; would you kindly add "gastos en efective"? It is the last page of REP/8, page 9, point 4 of the resolution. I hope that is clear.
Secondly, since, from this moment, I think that the Chairman of the Drating Committee is no longer needed on this podium because there is nothing more produced for lack of time, may I humbly ask to be allowed to take my seat again and to fight for an issue that is going to be raised? I thank the Australian delegate for raising it. With your permission, I have nothing to add.
A. SAÍNTRAINT (Belgique): Le principe proposé tout à l'heure par la délégation française me paraît, sur le plan juridique, extrêmement contestable et je me permettrai de poser la question de savoir si la procédure suggérée par la France est la bonne en ce qui concerne les objections que mon pays comme la République française ont. J'aimerais obtenir sur ce point l'avis du Conseiller juridique.
LE CONSEILLER JURIDIQUE: Avec votre permission, j'aimerais obtenir quelques éclaircissements concernant la question posée par la France. Si mes souvenirs sont exacts, ce que le délégué de la France cherchait à savoir était comment ses réserves seraient exprimées dans le rapport.
Il ne s'agit pas nécessairement d'une question d'ordre juridique parce qu'il a déjà exprimé les vues qu'il a à cet égard. Il s'agit uniquement d'une question de forme, la question étant de savoir comment les réserves seraient reflétées dans le rapport tel qu'il sera publié à la fin de la Conférence. D'ailleurs, je me dois d'ajouter que c'est une question qui n'est pas tout à fait de mon ressort. Mais le Secrétariat de la Conférence trouvera sans doute moyen d'ajouter dans le texte, sous une forme ou une autre, les réserves qui ont été faites par ces deux délégations.
CHAIRMAN (original language Arabie): Is this response sufficient?
Elio PASCARELLI (Chairman, Drafting Committee Commission III): In this Resolution the sponsor does not appear. It was Italy. I am glad at least the Resolution was carried, because tonight I was very kind to a certain party of this meeting to let them win at least once!
On this Resolution, we decided to change one word, but I am told it is not good English. In the operative part "1. Delegates exceptionally to the Council" should read "Delegates to the Council on an exceptional basis". It appears that is better English than my formulation. Yet it was thoroughly examined by the Secretariat.
Mr Chairman, I am still waiting for the answer to the query that I formerly put to the Conference. Where is my document?
Akbar Mirza KHALEELI (India): Mr Chairman, once you find the document, I wonder what you can do with it now. (laughter)
CHAIRMAN: We will not go into that. Excuse me for saying that, Mr Pascarelli,' but whenever they find the documents they will give them to you I am sure. (laughter)
Leopoldo ARIZA HIDALGO (Cuba): Tengo un pequeño problema en el párrafo 15 de la página 7, antes de entrar a considerar la resolución. El párrafo 15 comienza diciendo: "Varios Estados Miembros expresaron sus dudas sobre que la Conferencia hubiera actuado sabiamente al delegar en el Consejo su importante prerrogativa de tomar decisiones respecto dé cuestiones presupuestarias, puesto que en opinión de todos los Estados Miembros ...".
Por lo tanto, en español, nos parece que no es correcte que varios delegados opinen por todos ios Miembros. Creo que ahí lo que debe decir es: "puesto que opinaban". Estos sí puede opinar, opinaban que todos los Estados ...,pero no pueden opinar en nombre de todos los Estados. Ahí debe decir en español, "Puesto que opinaban que todos los Estados Miembros tienen derecho", y en español dice lo contrario. "Que en opinión de todos los Miembros". Se lo dejo a la Secretaria para que lo pueda arreglar.
CHAIRMAN (original language Arabic): I think that will be taken care of in the Spanish version by the Secretariat. Now we shall go back to the second Resolution.
I would like to remind you that this Resolution has already been adopted by Commission III. If there are no observations or objections, this Resolution is adopted.
Paragraphs 12 to 16, including draft resolution, adopted
Les paragraphes 12 à 16, y compris le projet de résolution, sont adoptés
Los párrafos 12 a 16, incluido el proyecto de resolución, son aprobados
CHAIRMAN (original language Arabic): There is a supplement to this document which will be coming soon, I hope (C 87/REP/8-Sup.l).
Draft Report of Plenary - Part 8 (from Commission III) not concluded
Projet de rapport de la Plénière - Huitième partie (émanant de la Commision III) est en suspens
Proyecto de informe de la Plenaria - Parte 8 (de la Comisión III) queda pendiente
DEPUTY DIRECTOR-GENERAL: I would like to summarize what lies ahead of us. There are pieces of unfinished business, one from Commission II and the other from Commission III. In both cases the REPs are now being processed and will be ready tomorrow morning.
From Commission II, there is item 12 which deals of course with the review question. This REP contains both the text of the Resolution which was adopted by Commission 11 this evening right at the end of its discussions, and two draft resolutions which the Commission did not have time to consider.
From Commission III there is a section of draft report covering items which were considered so late that in fact the draft report could not even go through the Drafting Committee. There was a question from the United States about this earlier on and an explanation was given by Mr Crowther. That section of the draft REP will also be up tomorrow morning.
Antonio GAYOSO (United States of America): I have a request for clarification. On item 12 of Commission II, no report was prepared or sent to the Drafting Committee, I would like to inquire how this will be handled, in terms of tomorrow's programme.
DEPUTY DIRECTOR-GENERAL: At the meeting of the General Committee this morning I suggested - and there was no disagreement - that, in order to avoid any problems with the adoption of a draft report without going through the Drafting Committee on such a delicate item, we would give the Plenary a one line entry saying something like this: "After extended discussions the Conference adopted the following Resolution", and then give the text of the Resolution. That is what will be in front of Plenary tomorrow morning. We have not attempted in any way to produce a textual description of what happened, as we believe this would create far more problems than it would solve.
I would just repeat the recommendation of the General Committee, that the Conference itself wind up its business by 13.00 hours - one p.m. - tomorrow so that the Council can then meet in the afternoon. So - lunch time tomorrow is the deadline for the completion of the Conference.
Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Del resumen de lo que nos queda pendiente se deduce que ya no falta nada de la Comisión I. Porello, la delegación de Colombia quiere pedir al Embajador de India que transmita al Gobierno de ese fraterno- país del Tercer Mundo nuestro reconocimiento por la manera dinámica, inteligente y ponderada como el Señor Sastry, de la India presidió esa Comisión I en forma ejemplar.
Antonio GAYOSO (United States of America): I don't want to disturb your sleep, Mr Chairman, nor mine, tonight, and I shall have to sleep on it. I do not intend to call for a report or anything like that, but many important thoughts "on both sides of the hall", as we say in the States, were put forward during the Commission II discussions. It would be a great pity if those thoughts were lost from our record. Perhaps, with the wisdom which is so characteristic of the manner in which you have performed your task, you might come up with some thoughts tomorrow that would permit us, in a very broad sense, to have those thoughts expressed. I agree with you that we do not want to reopen the debate - that would not be conducive to anything. However, it was a very sensitive issue, and some very deep thoughts were expressed. Perhaps we could find a way, without reopening the debate or embarking on polemics or diatribes, to reflect how these matters were at least put on the table.
James AITKEN (United Kingdom): We fully appreciate the sentiments expressed by the Deputy Director-General, and also the comments made by our distinguished colleague from the United States. We think that possibly the way to tackle this is to have perhaps a little longer, but not much longer, statement than the one proposed by the Deputy Director-General - one in which there was some reference to the verbatim report, without necessarily quoting them, but some signpost to the verbatim report so that there would be an indication of where the arguments and counter arguments could be found, without necessarily reopening them.
Akbar Minza KHALEELI (India): First of all, I would be failing in my duty if I did not thank my distinguished colleague from Colombia who has graced so many Conferences, for conveying his best wishes to Mr Shastry. I shall certainly do what is necessary in this regard.
Regarding the point raised by the distinguished representative of the United States and also by the United Kingdom, I agree with them because the exact nature of the vote in Commission II will perhaps only be known to us tomorrow. (laughter) No - I am not trifling about this. The verbatim report will tell us exactly what was discussed whereas individual impressions may well be mistaken. We were under pressure, and the Chairman was doing a remarkable job with great energy and control over the situation. For example, on paragraph 1, whether the Nordic, or Norwegian, or French preamble is adopted - I am sure that if we held a rollcall people may have a completely different idea of what they were voting on. In any case, the verbatim report will not be very long, because there were a lot of adjournments - (laughter) I am not making light of this. It would be impossible to summarize, because there is quite a lot of discussion on certain items. Either you accept Mr Walton's suggestion, or, if it is possible for the Secretariat - we do not wish to place a heavy burden on them - perhaps we need only the verbatim report of the last part of our meeting in Commission 11. We can then perhaps be clear as to what exactly we voted for. It is important from the point of view of the record that we. know exactly what happened.
Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Apoyamos plenamente lo que ha dicho el distinguido Embajador de India, aunque pensamos que tal vez una radiografía del proceso cumplido en la Sala Roja podría ser lamentable. Por ello, más bien preferimos apoyar lo que el señor Walton ha dicho que ha recomendado el Comité General, con la esperanza de terminar mañana, al final de la mañana, y no pasar en esta Sala Plenaria el fin de semana próximo.
J. Augusto DE MEDICIS (Brazil): It is so rare for my delegation to be in agreement with the United Kingdom delegation that I can not resist this opportunity! I think that the proposal made by the United Kingdom delegation was a very fruitful one. We do not want, as the United States delegate pointed out, to lose the discussion and the differing viewpoints from both sides of the hall: a reference to where certain matters could be found in the verbatim record would assist, at least, and would not I think cause further discussion.
Mónica DEREGIBUS (Argentina): La delegación argentina pidió la palabra para expresar que, en su opinión, el reflejo más objetivo y más exacto de lo que ocurrió esta mañana y esta tarde en la Sala Roja, estará sin duda en los verbatim, y no creemos nosotros que debamos cargar a la Secretaría con el trabajo adicional de hacer resúmenes de nuestras deliberaciones cuando no hemos podido tener tiempo de hacerlo nosotros mismos. En ese sentido, apoyamos lo expresado por la delegación de la India.
A.J.M. OOMEN (Netherlands): My delegation associates itself with the suggestion made by the delegates of the United States and United Kingdom of having a report on today's discussion on the reform item. My delegation also thinks it may be of interest for the Expert Group, and also those within FAO, both the Secretariat and Member Nations, to have a reflection of the views voiced today. It is therefore the opinion of the Netherlands that the thoughts and arguments put forward today during the discussions need to be in a compact form and discussed tomorrow if possible.
DIRECTOR-GENERAL: I think we must be realistic about this. We are supposed to start at.9.30 tomorrow morning but it may be more like 9.45. There is unfinished work for Commission I: there is a Resolution to be discussed, perhaps voted on, and there may be reservations, and yet further reservations. You then have the unfinished work of Commission II: there are two very important resolutions by the United States, and India and Costa Rica which have not been discussed. They must be introduced; the Legal Counsel has been asked to give his point of view: you have to vote on them, and to explain the vote; you have to make footnotes, etc.
Then you have to deal with the resolution which has been voted on in Commission II, and with the Review. If you start first by discussing the two pages, reporting how things were done, there will be no agreements on those two pages. We will then lose time and you will not pass the resolutions. Then there will be no review. I think you have to be realistic. If the Chairman of Commission II or the Chairman of the Contact Group, or friends of the Chairman, would like to write the report, they are most welcome, but you will never finish. If you do not finish by one o'clock tomorrow, if you continue for the whole day, then the Council has to meet on Saturday. I know that many members of the Council would like to leave. We will have some difficulty with the interpreters. Many of the interpreters have contracts finishing tonight at midnight, they have commitments elsewhere for Saturday and Sunday. So we have to be reasonable. If you want to finish tomorrow by midday, and let the Council meet in the afternoon, we cannot go through this Report. We are ready to comply with the wishes of the Conference, but is is ten o'clock now and we have no Drafting Committee. We will be doing something of our own responsibility. There was no agreement for many days, and I take this opportunity to say that I very much regret this. I even went so far as to make some proposals unoffically to try to reach a consensus, if not at this Conference, in some weeks' or in a few months' time, on those two important issues which are .dividing the member countries. In my acceptance speech I said I would do everything to prevent a division. I want to have a united FAO.
To come back to the Report, it is an impossible task to do it. If it is done, it will delay and delay and complicate matters. We want to save the Conference, we want to save FAO, save the Organization. We are dealing with the very important problem of hunger in Africa. We and the World Food Programme are fully committed to helping the African countries at this time. We have the problem of desert locusts in Africa, and many other things, so please bear with us.
Joseph TCHICAYA (Congo): Je voulais intervenir avant le Directeur général parce que je voulais aborder exactement le point qu'il vient d'aborder. Je crois sincèrement que nous avons suffisamment travaillé, nous ne pouvons plus demander au Groupe de contact de rédiger un rapport et encore moins au Comité de rédaction de "plancher" sur un projet de rapport.
Ce qui s'est dit au niveau de la Commission II est très bien reflété dans le verbatim, nous pensons que le mécanisme qui aura à travailler sur les réformes aura tous ces documents devant lui et pourra les consulter. Par conséquent, nous ne comprenons pas les craintes qui ont été exprimées ici et nous pensons que toutes les dispositions seront prises pour assurer la diffusion des verbatim afin de tranquilliser tout le monde.
Aussi, Monsieur le Président, je voudrais associer le nom de ma délégation à ce qu'a dit notre ami de l'Inde. Cela est sage et nous devrions pouvoir nous en tenir là. Nous ne voudrions pas éterniser le débat au sein de cette Conférence, nous savons déjà les difficultés que connaît l'Organisation et nous ne voulons pas lui en créer d'autres. Voilà ce que nous tenions à dire.
Leopoldo ARIZA HIDALGO (Cuba): Creo que debemos asociarnos, en todas sus partes, a lo expresado por el Director General en busca de realismo y razón. Realmente, como han dicho otros colegas, los verbatim los tienen a su disposición para que todos los que quieran saber lo que pasó dentro de la Comisión puedan leer esa novela trágica. Esa lectura va a ser muy interesante para muchos, pero muy amarga para otros. Realmente, señor Presidente, la propuesta del señor Walton es la más realista para poder terminar mañana en paz los trabajos de esta Conferencia porque, lamentablemente,jarnos a tener que expresar que no fue feliz la forma en que se dirigieron los debates de la Comisión II.
Elio PASCARELLI (Chairman, Drafting Committee Commission III): I am going to be very brief because it is so late. I would also express in the name of my Government our best thanks and feelings of appreciation to the distinguished Ambassador of Poland who chaired the Commission III for his wisdom and patience. We had very smooth sailing. I also extend the same appreciation for the Vice President, the distinguished colleague from Malaysia. I speak in the name of my Government, and I think I also express the feelings of other Members of the Drafting Committee.
A.SAINTRAINT (Belgique): Il serait non seulement totalement déraisonnable mais sur le plan pratique absolument impossible d'obtenir un document dégageant la synthèse des discussions relatives au point 12.
Je crois que notre collègue, l'Ambassadeur du Brésil, a raison de demander que peut-être dans l'avenir on puisse dégager certaines conclusions d'un débat. Le verbatim est un document largement suffisant pour nous permettre de nous prononcer en connaissance de cause. Nous sommes parfaitement capables, parce que nous connaissons les enjeux et nous connaissons les options qui ont été prises, de nous prononcer dans une totale clarté demain. Mais rien n'empêcherait que dans quinze jours, trois semaines, un mois, un document de synthèse puisse être établi de façon à permettre une certaine réflexion d'un certain nombre de délégations, réflexion qui leur permettra de comprendre la position d'un et chacun, et probablement, d'ici un certain temps, quand ils verront ce qui a été réalisé dans la formule de compromis, d'en arriver à se rallier à cette formule.
Igor MARINCEK (Switzerland): I have a point of clarification or a question. I can imagine that it would be rather difficult to reflect today's discussions in the Report. I think the suggestion made by the delegate of the United Kingdom was wise, but two weeks ago we bad a discussion and most delegations had the opportunity to speak there. I can well imagine that the Secretariat was able in these two weeks to put forward something which would reflect our discussion; maybe not the last, heated part of the discussion, but at least the first part. I would consider it rather unusual not to have a chapter in the Report of this Conference on an item which has certainly marked this Conference, even if it were only for historians.
Antonio GAYOSO (United States of America): I am the first to recognize - because I talk with ail levels of FAO staff and support staff - how hard people work in this building, and how continuously hard they work; how they put themselves forward at all times to serve us and to serve the Organization. I do not want to add to their burden. However, what we have discussed in item 12 is, in the view of my delegation, of such critical importance to FAO that, as my Swiss colleague just said, having a one-liner in a report is like having Tolstoy's War and Peace described by the last line. It does not even come close to giving any depth of feeling of what has happened. It was not my suggestion to have a typical report from a commission. Since we are on the last day, there is no drafting committee, and so on and so forth. I express myself very clearly, it was not my intention nor my desire to initiate debate tomorrow on what the Report did or did not say. I will say though that I may have more faith in the quality of the staff than others because in looking, for example, at C 87/30, which was the document on which our discussions were based, the Secretariat did what I felt was an excellent, objective job in preparing a summary of the positions at the beginning of that document. The usual practice, as I know it, is that, as a Commission goes over a theme, summaries are being prepared so that at the end the chairman is helped with a summary of what has happened. Perhaps one could search the files and find if such a draft summary exists. What I was thinking of was not something which said that some delegations said this and some delegations said that. It was more substantive and shorter: the following ideas were expressed. You see, during the discussions, however bitter they may have been for some delegates, one major conclusion came out, and that was that all Members of this Assembly fully support FAO, fully desire FAO to be a better agency, to be more effective, to deliver more goods for the money. I think that it is crucial to express that conclusion, even of itself. Concurrently, it is very important to say that some of the major ideas that were expressed are not reflected, I am afraid, in the Resolution that was finally adopted.
Therefore, if all that, people see in the Conference Report is a one-liner, and the Conference Resolution on this matter, they will never know whether it was the butler or the maid who did the deed, whichever it was. I think the UK suggestion that the Secretariat search the files for that draft summary, that most have been reading as the first segment of the discussion which took place, in which all of the major ideas were put on the table. it would be a good parting gift for us when we left tomorrow. I am not suggesting it would be open for debate.
James AITKEN (United Kingdom): We should like to try to be constructive here. First of all, I should like to thank India for their support of our proposals. This emphasizes the usefulness of the verbatim records. Another example has just sprung to mind: when I listened to the intervention of the delegate of Brazil, searched my emotions to identify the feelings I had at that moment when he
associated himself so sensibly with the United Kingdom delegation's position. Indeed it was in a verbatim record that I was able to find what I was looking for: it was at page 37 of C 87/III/PV/7, which reports the workings of Commission III. I found the word which summed up my emotions; essentially it is a word which I will always associate with the Ambassador of Italy. It was he who used it very properly and correctly. He said - and I read from the verbatim record. Elio Pascarelli, Italy, "bouleversé". I think this expresses how we feel in relation to Brazil.
More seriously, as is often the case, we find ourselves here in consensus with the Director-General. We very much thought that the suggestions he was making about how we treat this item were in line with the ideas which would help to keep FAO together and to reach sensible conclusions in the work ahead.
I also was very seized by the suggest ion from our American friends that we should have some sort of fairly short, simple, precise summary. I think that here, probably, the answer is to have this, perhaps not as long as our US colleagues might like, but perhaps slightly longer than a single sentence from the Deputy Director-General, something along the lines that full discussions are set out in the verbatim records of Commission II and quoting some reference to them. Perhaps for clarity one might wish to have the verbatims of Commission II, exceptionally, circulated as some sort of annex to the report, but I only put this forward very tentatively. However, thinking about this, this would possibly meet the points raised by Brazil, Switzerland, India, the USA and others.
Harald HOSTMARK (Norway): I was very heartened by the words of the Director-General. This is the spirit in which I want to lend my voice to this idea that there must indeed be something more that a one-liner on this report. It has been said before, so I shall not be too long about it. We are not intending to have a very long report here, a report of the type on which Plenary will sit as a drafting group and discuss."some", "few", "many", " a couple", "a majority" or anything of that nature but will include events on this which was to many the most important issue, the one really central issue in this whole Conference. A one-liner is too small for it, it deserves a short description of the events that took place, because the events were somewhat surprising and do not in any way describe what took place. I am afraid that if we do not get that we shall waste the time of the resting hours of the Conference. I think it would save time. I am sure the Secretariat would be able to draft a few short, objective paragraphs. I know I am asking for an additional burden to be put on the Secretariat, but I think it would be a saving of time and avoid what I fear could be a long debate tomorrow which would upset the workings of this Conference and prevent it ending in the dignified way that wo all want it to end.
Goran ANKARBERG (Sweden): The Swedish delegation would like to associate itself with the statements made by the delegations of Norway and Switzerland.
R. MACINTOSH (Canada): I should simply like to associate my delegation with the remarks of the distinguished delegate of Norway.
Philippe PIOTET (France): Je pense effectivement qu'il faut éviter de demander qu'il y ait un débat prolongé sur un rapport. Je comprends aussi qu'il est peut-être nécessaire de laisser une trace des discussions qui ont eu lieu dans la Commission II. Je suggérerais donc qu'on examine la possibilité d'un rapport très bref d'une page ou deux, qui, de manière très synthétique, présenterait les principales conclusions de la discussion de cette Commission.
Hannu HALINEN (Finland): I should like to associate my delegation with the remarks made by the previous speaker. I think it would do a service to the group of experts when they start work and could provide a starting point which could be a little more than the resolution itself.
A.E. MACDONALD (Australia): We have one small practical problem with one of the proposals and, if I may also speak on behalf of eight of the other countries of the south-west Pacific region, in that we have not had the historical enrichment of the Spanish and French cultures in our part of the world, we would have some difficulty if we had to rely exclusively on the verbatim reports for the historical record of this. We all know that the Secretariat has quite extraordinary skills in drafting. Could I propose that we have something quite succinct, perhaps a page, or certainly less than two pages, that would encapsulate the essence of the debate? We would appreciate that very much.
DIRECTOR-GENERAL: The Secretariat is in a position to be objective, and the document mentioned by the representative of the USA prepared by the Secretariat for item 12 on the review was estimated to be of good quality and objective. It took us two months to prepare it. He also said, because he was the prime mover of this proposal, that it would not be discussed. I want to make a deal with you tonight. We will prepare one and a half or two pages, as was kindly suggested, under the responsibility of the Secretariat in the most objective way. We will describe what has happened, and it will not be discussed because it is not prepared either by the Drafting Committee or by the delegates. We will, I promise you, be most objective in preparing this document, in telling the story or in summarizing. We could not summarize what was discussed over many days. The report is, in fact, a synthesis of the verbatim. If you want to discuss it and amend it, etcetera, it is up to you. Of course, you are free to do so. I am saying that, in order to move quickly, we could put something in under our own authority in the most objective way, giving a description, the film of the whole history.
There is another proposal, made by the representative of Belgium, that after tomorrow, in the ensuing weeks, we could write something more substantive which could be checked with some permanent representatives here who are interested. We could clear it with those. We know who are the most interested. We can circulate it under our own responsibility.
We can even do both, because any committee that has to work will need this document. We will have a short one now and later on something a little more substantive, which will also be done in a very objective way. You can have both.
I am worried about the report on the question of the budgeting process. For this you will not have the possibility of having a report because there are two straightforward resolutions, and on this item, which might be of interest, it would be difficult to have a report unless the report also should be done later on.
CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Director-General, for your very constructive and very spirited proposal. I have speakers on the list here who have asked to speak. To come with a report and ask the Conference not to discuss it is, I think, rather impossible. I cannot sleep with this idea tonight unless you promise me and promise yourselves not even to look at it. Can you do that? You will have it with the resolution, but reflect on it after we decide on the resolution. As the Director-General has said, we shall have ample time later on for representatives who reside here in Rome to discuss it among themselves and add to it, inflate it, whatever they like, referring to the verbatim report. If this is the case, OK. If not, I would leave the floor open for you to speak in the morning, because I do not want the Secretariat to commit itself to something on which you will be accusing them later on that they have not taken care of a word that you said, a sentence that you said, a proposal you made or a suggestion you produced. I do not know whether the Secretariat will be able to put in one page or two pages the gist of the discussions that have taken place in considering this issue, which, as so many of you have acknowledged, is a very important issue, the backbone,
the essence of this meeting of our Conference. I do not know. I want your reaction on that. If you approve the proposal that the brief summary of the discussions will not be discussed tomorrow and that we shall concentrate on the resolution, we can leave that today and finish our work. If you approve that, let us have a show of support for this proposal by clapping our hands.
Applause
Applaudissoments
Aplausos
With that, I will not have any more speakers. I think you are all tired. You want to relax and de ready for tomorrow.
Antonio GAYOSO (United States of America): It would be discourteous of me to leave the room without answering the kind proposal of the Director-General. If you will allow me, I will just spend two or three sentence on it (microphone not on)
Ian BUIST (United Kingdom): I want to be clear. I think you said - and I agree with that, for my part and that of my delegation - that we should discuss the resolution first and deal with it and then with any draft report that is produced. I am quite content with that proposal. However, it does not seem possible to my delegation in principle - and I think the Director-General recognized this -to say now that we shall have no comments on a draft which we have not seen. But, for the order of the procedure, I am entirely content with what I think everybody else has agreed is the right way to proceed.
Harald HØSTMARk (Norway): I asked to be on the speakers' list when I heard the Director-General's proposal. I want to thank him for it and receive it in the spirit in which he offers it, even if I cannot, on behalf of my Government, promise anything outright. We are. doing serious business here, after all. What I can promise, on behalf of my delegation, through you Mr Chairman, is that we shall certainly put on our most objective looking glasses to find this report objective.
CHAIRMAN: If you want to continue with the discussion, I am ready. I have a list of speakers who want to speak. Otherwise we shall proceed as I said: the report prepared by the Secretariat will be brief and we shall deal with it after the resolution has been dealt with. I see no objection to that. With that, we shall finish our business for tonight and meet tomorrow at 9.30 hours.
The meeting rose at 22.45 hours
La séance est levée à 22 h 45
Se levanta la sesión a las 22.45 horas
