Previous Page Table of Contents Next Page

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

19. Implementation of the Review of Certain Aspects of FAO's Goals and Operations
19. Mise en oeuvre des conclusions de l'Examen de certains aspects des buts et opérations de la FAO
19. Aplicación del examen de algunos aspectos de los objetivos y las operaciones de la FAO

CHAIRMAN: First of all I want to thank the second Vice-Chairman for conducting meetings yesterday. That was a great relief for me.

We are a bit late but the reason is we have been talking about how to conduct business this afternoon. In fact the Commission is ahead of schedule, which I personally like very much, and I think we should, one way or another, try to rearrange things this afternoon. I would ask the Secretary to tell you about the state of the draft reports.

Ms C. FORTHOMME (Secretary, Commission II): This afternoon we should be able to adopt the report on Item 16, the Programme of Work and Budget, and also the reports on Item 14, the Review of the Regular Programme, and Item 15, the Medium-Term Plan, which makes together Report 1 and Report 2 for this afternoon.

CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much. That means, in practical terms, to carry it a bit further, that we will have the report on Item 16 before Plenary tomorrow morning with the votes on the Budget; plus we could have the draft reports on at least Items 14 and 15, maybe a bit more, in Plenary on Friday morning instead of next Wednesday. We will announce it later on in more detail but I think you should learn how it goes.

Now we are supposed to deal with Item 19, Implementation of the Review of Certain Aspects of FAO's Goals and Operations. There are two documents, one is the Report of the Director-General to the Conference, C 91/21, and in addition there is C 91/LIM/22, Extract from the Report of the Council.

Mr Shah, you have the floor for the introduction.

V.J. SHAH (Assistant Director-General, Office of Programme, Budget and Evaluation): As usual I intend to be brief. I am pleased to present this Report of the Director-General to the Conference in response to Conference Resolution 10/89 of the Twenty-fifth Session, the last Session of the Conference. As also directed by that Resolution, this report is submitted to you through the Programme and Finance Committee and the Council. The comments of these Bodies are before you. The Conference decided on a Review of Certain Aspects of FAO's Goals and Operations through Resolution 6/87, adopted at its Twenty-fourth Session in 1987. Based on the debate which then took place, the Report of the Conference underlined two important reasons for the review of FAO.

Firstly, the Conference expressed, and I quote, "unanimity on the need to strengthen FAO in every possible manner so that it can continue to play a leading role in world agriculture during the years ahead".

Secondly, there was a current of opinion that "an in-depth review of FAO's goals and operations would be timely so that the Organization could face the challenges of the 1990s and beyond, with increased strength and efficiency". The references are to the Report of the Twenty-fourth Session of the Conference, C 87/REP, paragraphs 138 and 139.

The review of FAO was therefore a valuable and a timely exercise, aimed specifically to strengthen the Organization in every possible way. The joint report of the Programme and Finance Committees on the Review of Certain Aspects of FAO's Goals and Operations was thoroughly examined by you, the Conference, at the Twenty-fifth Session. It bears recalling, and I cannot emphasize it enough; it bear,s recalling that a spirit of consensus marked the entire process of the Review: the work of the two groups of experts, the work of the Programme and Finance Committees; and their respective reports. The same spirit of consensus led the Conference to adopt by consensus Resolution 10/89.

The Resolution requested the Director-General to implement the measures proposed in this Resolution on a phased basis, to the extent that resources were available without impairing the execution of other priorities and activities in successive Programmes of Work and Budget adopted by the Conference. It also appealed to all Member Nations to pay their full assessed contributions to the Regular Programme promptly, and to financing agencies and institutions to consider the provision of extra-budgetary funds to cover the cost of selected activities.

The Conference had considered the requirements for resources to implement the recommendations emanating from the Review on the basis of the Director-General's estimated requirement of US$27 million, of which US$8 million might be drawn from extra-budgetary resources. However, you will well recall the Conference did not approve any supplementary appropriation and Member Nations and financing institutions have not come forward with the level of extra-budgetary resources required. It has been and continues to be the firm intention of the Director-General to implement the decisions of the Conference relating to the FAO review as promptly and as fully as possible. He regrets that the continuing financial crisis, which has proportions of unprecedented magnitude, of which you are well aware, has prevented him from doing more than what is presently reported. Contrary to what was expected as a result of the Review, the capacity of your Organization to serve the needs and aspirations of Member Nations has been severely eroded by the liquidity crisis. In this context, Mr Chairman, the Director-General has taken action to implement the Conference decisions in accordance with its directives, that is to say, on a phased basis and to the extent that resources permitted. While the largest and most important components of the Conference decisions have been implemented, the Director-General is committed to pursuing further action as resources become available in the hope of completing the task during the next biennium.

Mr Chairman, the entire process of the Review has been characterized by staff involvement and participation. This happened in the preparations for the groups of experts, in the briefing and discussions with them. It happened in the Secretariat response to the Programme and Finance Committees. The Director-General has followed the same principle of staff

involvement in implementing the decisions of the Conference on the Review. The report before you has clear sections on each area of action which has been implemented. In most cases the results of this action are before the Conference under other items of its Agenda. To give the most prominent examples, I cite the action on the Medium-Term Plan, which you have already considered; further strengthening FAO action on sustainable development and environment, which is considered by Commission I; country policy work, again in Commission I; the Review of Field Operations by the Governing Bodies, which you considered under the Review of Field Programmes; and support to agricultural trade negotiations, which is also covered in the work of Commission I. I will therefore not repeat the contents of the report.

Mr Chairman, the Director-General has spared no effort in implementing the Conference decisions. He regrets that the financial situation has not permitted further action. As you know, the execution of the Programme of Work and Budget approved by the Conference for the present biennium has been more difficult than ever because of the financial situation, and the Conference has given its directives on the manner in which the review recommendations were to be implemented without impairing the priorities and programmes of the Programme of Work and Budget. The Director-General wishes to emphasize that there are several important and useful recommendations emanating from the Review which would make FAO stronger in the future, provided they are put into effect immediately. The implementation of these recommendations calls for additional resources both under the Regular Budget and from extra-budgetary resources. If these resources fail to materialize, the Organization is bound to weaken the point where its mandate could be threatened and its comparative advantages eroded. Corrective action would then be much more difficult and costly. The Director-General sincerely hopes that an improvement in the financial stability of the Organization will permit him to satisfy you, the Conference, by completing action on the decision emanating from the FAO Review.

Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Como siempre, el Sr. Shah ha hecho una excelente presentación de este documento. La primera observación de carácter general que deseamos hacer los representantes de Colombia es la de que la realización del Examen y la aplicación de los resultados han tenido lugar dentro de un marco de incoherencias notorias y lamentables.

Los representantes de los Estados industrializados presionaron para que se llevara a cabo ese ejercicio con un costo superior a los tres millones de dólares, cifra calculable apenas hasta donde se pueden estimar los costos directos. Cifra que representó detrimento en favor de la asistencia a los países en desarrollo.

Luego, se negaron esos países a la adopción hasta de las más mínimas asignaciones presupuestarias adicionales para implementar las recomendaciones, y los tan anhelados y esperados recursos extrapresupuestarios brillaron por su ausencia; nunca aparecieron. Sin recursos, bajo el peso de la más grave crisis financiera que jamás haya padecido nuestra Organización, el Director General ha venido haciendo grandes esfuerzos para aplicar gradualmente las disposiciones y, hasta donde ha sido posible, ha evitado afectar las prioridades y actividades esenciales contenidas en el Programa aprobado por la Conferencia.

Ese examen de algunos aspectos de las metas y operaciones de la FAO confirmó la solidez de la estructura de nuestra Organización. El funcionamiento eficaz y adecuado de la FAO. Todo ese proceso se cumplió con el más amplio y decidido espíritu de consenso y el resultado unánime coincidió en la necesidad de reforzar a la FAO para que pudiera continuar desempeñando un papel destacado en la agricultura mundial durante los años venideros.

El párrafo 1 del documento básico concluye afirmando que "el examen constituía una actividad útil y oportuna para reforzar a la Organización en todas las formas posibles". Todos esperábamos que los gobiernos interesados en el examen, suministrarían los recursos indispensables para la aplicación de las recomendaciones. En Colombia hay un proverbio popular que dice: "El que quiere azul celeste, que le cueste".

Si esos Estados desarrollados propugnaron ese examen, debieron ser coherentes al haber suministrado los recursos para que se aplicaran las recomendaciones. Después, aquí viene otra de las incoherencias a las que hicimos referencia al principio de esta declaración. La última frase del párrafo 10 dice "contrariamente a lo que se preveía como consecuencia del examen, la crisis de liquidez ha erosionado gravemente la capacidad de la Organización para atender las necesidades y aspiraciones de los Estados Miembros".

No obstante, el Director General con actitud eficaz, ponderada e inteligente, ha logrado aplicar ya, como lo demuestra este documento, las recomendaciones más importantes y de mayor significación. Algo más, el Director General de mutuo propio, sin que lo hubiera solicitado la Conferencia, sin que lo hubiera pedido ningún representante de Gobierno, se anticipó, con buena voluntad, a presentar un informe preliminar al Consejo en noviembre de 1990 al final del primer año después de aprobada la Resolución 10/89.

Ya desde entonces, hace un año, el Consejo consideró que todo se adelantaba de manera clara, concisa, pragmática, como respuesta adecuada a las decisiones de la Conferencia y reconoció la dirección eficaz de esas medidas que estaban reforzando las actividades de la FAO.

Cuando intervenimos sobre algunos de los principales documentos de que se ha ocupado esta Comisión, bajo su digna y competente presidencia, tememos siempre incurrir en repeticiones porque hay una directa interrelación entre los principales documentos de esta Comisión II. Eso no obsta para que digamos que el Plan a plazo medio, que había ya existido hace 20 años, a fines de los sesenta y principios de los setenta, y luego se había incorporado al Programa de Labores, ahora ese Plan a plazo medio ha sido considerado en esta misma Comisión como un documento importante marco de políticas y programas para los próximos seis años.

Como lo comprobó el debate celebrado en esta misma Sala, ya en ese Plan a plazo medio se han incorporado esencialmente las principales recomendaciones dimanantes de ese examen. Pero aquí de nuevo encontramos otra incoherencia más. El párrafo 20 indica que - citamos - "el Consejo reiteró la vinculación orgánica entre el Plan a plazo medio y los sucesivos Programas de Labores y Presupuesto, inclusive la necesidad de recursos". Inclusive la necesidad de recursos, dijo el Consejo.

Y, ¿a qué estamos asistiendo? A un Plan a plazo medio magnifico, bien redactado, lujosamente empastado, luminosamente proyectado hasta el año 1997, pero todo ello en una estructura completamente vacia sin la menor indicación de cifras, ninguna referencia a recursos. Pero lo que es más grave y preocupante, el primero de los tres bienios que abarca el Plan a plazo medio 1992-93, comienza bajo el triste y lánguido peso del funesto crecimiento cero.

¿Cómo es posible, que si los Estados industrializados, que tienen los recursos, impulsaron ese examen y en ese Plan a plazo medio se han incorporado los principales objetivos localizados, que ahora se nieguen recursos para que todo lo que ellos han buscado se pueda en realidad implementar? La persistencia de esta nueva incoherencia, si en los otros dos bienios se insistirá también en el crecimiento cero o bajo cero; si el aumento de los costos se contendrá en forma tal que no permita garantizar la interejecución del Programa; si no podrá lograrse la recuperación de la totalmente devastada Cuota Especial de Reserva; si no podrá lograrse el natural y adecuado incremento del Fondo de Operaciones. Todo esto lo veremos más adelante en la Comisión III. Si nada de ello nos permitirá lograrlo, asistiremos a la desintegración progresiva de las actividades de la FAO, a través de los tres bienios del Plan a plazo medio.

Sobre el desarrollo sostenible y medio ambiente, la Resolución 3/89 de la pasada Conferencia pidió al Director General intensificar la integración de los aspectos del medio ambiente en todas las actividades pertinentes de la FAO y que al desarrollo sostenible se le concediera alta prioridad en los programas técnicos y económicos de la Organización.

Este era uno de los puntos esenciales sobre los cuales muchos Estados desarrollados y en desarrollo insistían como alta prioridad. Pues bien, de los párrafos 24 a 34 de este documento se desprende claramente como todo esto se ha llevado a cabo.

La Conferencia FAO/Países Bajos sobre Agricultura y Medio Ambiente, celebrada en Den Bosch en abril de 1991, ha creado un marco internacional muy constructivo para la elaboración y ejecución de programas para una agricultura y un desarrollo rural sostenible. La FAO ha venido participando activamente en las actividades preparatorias para la celebración de la Conferencia de Naciones Unidas sobre Medio Ambiente y Desarrollo (PNUMA). La Cumbre de la Tierra, que tendrá lugar en Brasil en junio del año próximo. El desarrollo sostenible es una de las pocas actividades de la FAO que, en medio de la crisis financiera, recibirá incremento de presupuesto en el bienio próximo.

Si no abusáramos de su tiempo y nos extendiéramos al infinito analizando cada uno de los apartados de este documento, podríamos fácilmente confirmar que el Director General ha cumplido con atención y eficacia todo lo que el resultado del Examen le pidió en la Resolución 10/89. Entonces, como lo dijo el Sr. Shah, corresponde ahora a los Estados Miembros ofrecer todo el apoyo necesario para completar las aplicaciones de las decisiones emanadas del Examen. Ya la propia Resolución 10/89, en el párrafo 13, reconoció la necesidad de recursos adecuados, incluida la aportación de fondos extrapresupuestarios. En sus conclusiones, el Director General dice que "no ha escatimado esfuerzos para aplicar esas decisiones". Varias recomendaciones, importantes y útiles, fortalecerán a la FAO en el futuro, si pudieran llevarse a cabo inmediatamente. Si no se consiguen los recursos indispensables, la FAO está destinada a debilitarse hasta el punto de que

su mandato podría verse comprometido. Creo que todos los representantes de Gobierno tenemos la obligación de ofrecer la mejor atención y el mayor respeto a estas admoniciones del Director General.

Para concluir señor Presidente y distinguidos colegas, los representantes de Colombia pensamos que con este documento el Director General ha atendido lo dispuesto en el párrafo 14 de la Resolución 10/89, que pidió se informara a la Conferencia en este 26° período de sesiones. Pero eso sí, esperamos que este sea el informe final.

Como lo dijo el Sr. Shah, el personal de la FAO sacrificó muy buena parte de su tiempo. En todo momento estuvo dispuesto a atender las solicitudes de los integrantes de los grupos de expertos. Algunas veces solicitudes excesivas. El personal de la FAO dedicó su tiempo para producir documentos a granel. Fue así como la FAO ofreció su más plena cooperación a la realización de este ejercicio. Eso sí, después de este informe final ahora, a trabajar.

Adoptaremos un Programa de Labores y Presupuesto para el bienio 1992-93, en el cual ya se han incorporado los resultados de este examen, cuyo nombre y cuyas ambiciones deben de quedar hacia atrás en el pasado y ahora, señor Presidente, hacia el futuro. Punto y basta.

Per Harald GRUE (Norway): Firstly, let me thank Assistant Director-General Shah, for his introduction this morning.

On this Agenda Item I have the pleasure to speak on behalf of the five Nordic countries - Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Sweden and my own country, Norway.

The Nordic countries have, for many years, taken a keen interest in strengthening and improving the United Nations system. As major contributors to the UN operational activities, the Nordic countries feel concerned about, and indeed that we have an obligation towards, ensuring the efficiency and the development impact of these activities.

It was against this background that the Nordic countries in the mid-eighties took an initiative to conduct a thorough and broad review of the goals and operations of FAO.

Since then considerable changes have taken place in the world and in international relations, creating a need for multilateral cooperation to adajpt to a new and different situation.

This has also created a new atmosphere of constructive cooperation which has given the very notion of reform a more positive connotation and enhanced the prospects for successful reforms of the United Nations system.

It is thus with great expectation that the Nordic countries welcome the Director-General's Report on the Implementation of the Review of Goals and Operations in FAO. In the document in front of us, C 91/21, the Director-General presents actions taken by the Secretariat to implement the Resolution adopted by consensus at the last Conference. Let me recall that the Nordic countries originally wanted a stronger Resolution, but at the end they joined in consensus.

Frankly, I have to say that the document does not fully meet our expectations. The reform process should be perceived as a positive challenge rather than a problem. This is, however, not the impression from reading the report. The report could have presented a clear picture of how far the Organization has reached in some areas which have been touched upon.

The Nordic countries have never accepted that reforms should be regarded as an additional cost factor to the Organization. A reform process is a useful basis for the necessary reduction of costs and for the streamlining of activities in any organization.

However, we realize that in a situation where the Organization is experiencing serious financial difficulties, the Secretariat's ability to implement the reform Resolution has been somewhat affected. The Secretariat has, nevertheless, been able to implement important parts of the Resolution. We are particularly pleased by the re-introduction of the Medium-Term Plan which is discussed in Agenda Item 15 at this Conference. The Plan forms a good basis for a fruitful discussion on priority setting. Through such discussions leading to consensus on the main priority areas, the Member Nations can improve governance of the Organization.

The continuous revision and updating of the Medium-Term Plan provides the membership with an opportunity to appraise FAO's comparative advantages. A thorough analysis of these advantages should form the basis for choosing areas of priority for the years ahead.

As a result of the Review Process, a new Budget procedure, including a Budget Outline, has been established. The new procedure has increased the transparency, and has thus improved the possibilities of reaching a consensus on the Budget at this Conference. The recent proposal from the Director-General for streamlining the whole Programme Budget Process, endorsed by the Programme and Finance Committees, will further increase the transparency and strengthen the influence of Member Nations in the Budget Process. There is, however, also need for further improvement in the transparency of the Programme of Work and Budget. In this connection we would like to refer to the Nordic statement on the PWB.

Conference Resolution 10/89 calls for strengthened efforts by FAO for sustainable development and environmental protection. The Nordic countries have for a long time advocated that higher priority must be given to these aspects of development. Agriculture, forestry and fishery are based on exploitation of natural resources, and are particularly vulnerable to environmental degradation. FAO, mandated to be the lead agency in these sectors, should therefore give environmental questions top priority. Let me emphasize, Mr Chairman, that the Nordic countries are pleased with the follow-up of this part of the reform Resolution. We note with pleasure that FAO is actively participating in the UNCED process. We trust that the Organization elaborates the follow-up measures of the Rio Conference in its next revision of the Medium-Term Plan and the PWB.

The Nordic countries support the Director-General's intentions to increase FAO's technical support to the ongoing agricultural trade negotiations in GATT. The work of the Codex Alimentarius Commission and the standardization of phytosanitary regulations are important contributions to the removal of trade barriers.

The report at hand does not include a section of Women in Development and we shall not elaborate on the issue in this connection either, since it will be discussed under Item 13.

Greater involvement of FAO in policy analysis and advice - tasks that have been gradually taken over the Bretton Woods institutions - has been of particular importance in the review process. The report devotes seven pages to country policy work and gives a good description of ongoing policy advice activities. In the proposed Programme of Work and Budget for the next biennium, policy activities are said to be given higher priority. We note, however, that the allocation of funds for these objectives seems rather modest. Further strengthening of this important role of FAO will therefore be needed.

Resolution 10/89 requested the Director-General to examine ways and means of strengthening the effectiveness of FAO's field representations. Such strengthening is important, and we believe this can be achieved by better coordination with the UN Resident Coordinator and if necessary through increasing the number of staff. At least for the smaller FAO representations considerable strengthening and savings could be achieved through closer cooperation. In this regard, the present number of country representatives should be reviewed.

Another part of the review process is improved coordination with other UN organizations and funding agencies. The report shows that there is ample room for improvement in this regard, and we would like to have more information from the Secretariat on the follow-up of the initiatives mentioned in paragraphs 56, 57, 58 and 113. The Tropical Forestry Action Plan could serve as an example of an area where an improved cooperation with other agencies is called for. The situation presently experienced for the TFAP and its reorganization, is not promoting confidence in the Organization.

FAO is entrusted to implement an extensive Field Programme that is important to many developing countries. The effectiveness and quality of the programme must be ensured and the Organization must take into account the changes in the UN system's technical cooperation modalities. Adhering to the modalities of national execution, as called for in UNGA Resolution 44/211, will require modifications in the implementation of the Field Programme. The new support cost arrangement, approved by the UNDP Governing Council, further advances these aspects of development. This challenge must be taken in a positive spirit by FAO, and the Organization must actively work to define its role within the new scheme.

We get the impression from the report that only a modest strengthening of technical backstopping has taken place. The new system for review of field operations by Member States has in our view not yet provided more information or resulted in thorough discussion of the different parts of the Field Programme. The lack of participation in the Technical Committees of experts from the capitals, especially from developing countries, and the committees' tight timetables, constitute the major obstacle to achieving the results expected from this new system. Therefore, there is a need to establish a better system to get the Member Nations more involved in the providing governance for the field operations.

The Director-General is, as stated in the report, committed to pursue further action. The Nordic countries, as strong supporters of FAO and the UN system in general, are prepared to participate actively in the further follow-up. The final report by the Nordic/UN project, which has been distributed to the Council members and the Secretariat, strongly recommends a strengthening of the quality and impact of the UN's operational activities for development and introduces a series of proposals in this regard. The most relevant proposals relating to the specialized agencies include: restoring their role as centres of excellence, strengthening of their normative roles, redressing the balance between Regular Budget and extra-budgetary resources and a redefinition of their role in the provision of technical cooperation. These are issues which the Nordic countries have already promoted during the FAO review exercise.

I want to conclude by saying that the Nordic countries are in general satisfied by the progress the Secretariat has made so far in implementing the reform Resolution. The principal task for this Conference is to decide on how best to carry the process further. Let me in this respect underline and support the conclusions from the Programme and Finance Committees when they discussed the review issue in September. I quote from paragraph 1.30 of the report of the joint meeting: "The Committees recalled the need for FAO, like every other institution, to adapt to changing circumstances and stressed the importance of continued dialogue among Member Nations with a view to achieving this aim and further enhancing the relevance and the impact of FAO action. They also recognized that new procedures, such as the Medium-Term Plan, would usefully permit periodic reassessment and study of the situation of the Organization."

In accordance with the conclusion of the Programme and Finance Committees, the Nordic countries would like to see a biennial follow-up included in the Medium-Term Plan, the first time taking place in 1993. This follow-up mechanism should be based on active involvement by all Member Nations of FAO. In this way, the Organization can adapt to meeting future expectations and demands from the World Community.

C.B. HOUTMAN (Netherlands): Two years ago we adopted Resolution 10/89 on FAO Review. The Resolution was a compromise, meaning that for some countries such as ours not all wishes regarding the Review were fulfilled. I quote further in this respect our wishes on the decision-making process in various Bodies of the Organization. Nevertheless, we were satisfied that the result of the Review efforts as formulated in the Resolution was there. Many delegations stated at the time that: this was the beginning of the second phase of the process of implementation.

It was also stated that because of the difficult financial situation it would not be an easy job to implement all the directives in the Resolution immediately. There was agreement that this should be done gradually.

Now we have before us a report in which all the activities resulting from that Resolution are described, and we are very happy to admit that the realization of the various directives is above the expectations we had two years ago. To mention a few again, we have already discussed the Medium-Term Plan, and the general feeling was positive. On policy advice the activity requires an integrated and multi-disciplinary approach. We pointed at this during the discussion of the Medium-Term Plan. The difficult

process of integration was set in motion, and various suggestions for improvement were given. So we consider that what has happened so far is the beginning of the process of further integration.

As a special feature of policy advice we see the efforts FAO put in its advisory role to governments that took and take place in the Uruguay Round negotiations. We also see a role for FAO to advise in policy matters that are related to adjustments after the successful completion of the GATT negotiations. We are ready to support FAO with this, as has been said already by my Minister in Plenary Session.

Related to this is also the good work that FAO does with regard to Codex and food quality and standard activities, as well as with regard to the International Plant Protection Convention, IPPC.

We still see scope for improvement in policy formulation in the execution of field work. FAO is still working on a number of concrete measures related to better information, evaluation and backstopping. Also, involvement of members during the discussions in the Technical Committees could result in more guidance for the Secretariat in this respect, as we mentioned during the debate on the Review of the Field Programme.

We have already expressed our satisfaction with the strengthening of the country offices and FAO's efforts in sustainable agriculture and environment.

To avoid too much repetition of subjects that have been dealt with in other Agenda Items, I shall stop there. There is just one remark which I should like to make. As we said at the beginning, the process of implementation has started promisingly. Therefore, we express the hope that further efforts are being made to continue with the process to bring the whole review exercise to a satisfactory end - an end that we will only call good when we see, as a result of this review process, a stronger Organization in the field of food and agriculture serving the interests of all people in the world and especially the under-privileged who still form such a great proportion of the population in our areas.

K.M. RABBANI (Bangladesh): We have gone through document C 91/21 containing the Report of the Director-General of FAO on the Implementation of the Review of Certain Aspects of FAO's Goals and Operations. We very much appreciate the fact that, in spite of the resource constraints, the Director-General undertook the review in the light of the earlier decision of the Conference. The review, which was admittedly a costly exercise, gave rise to a number of useful recommendations to strengthen FAO and its activities.

Again we commend the Director-General of FAO for the initiative he has taken to implement some of the recommendations in spite of the resource constraints.

The Conference in its Twenty-fourth Session expressed "unanimity... on the need to strengthen FAO in every possible manner, so that is could continue to play a leading role in world agriculture during the years ahead". With such an expression of unanimity, it is the moral duty of all Member States

to strengthen FAO by committing resources which will enable the Organization to implement the recommendations of the Review which was carried out at a considerable cost.

Resolution 10/89, adopted by consensus in the Twenty-fifth Session of the Conference, requested the Director-General to implement the measures on a phased basis, to the extent of resources available, and at the same time appeal to all Member Nations to pay their full assessed contributions to the Regular Programme promptly and to financing agencies and institutions to consider the provision of extra-budgetary funds to cover the cost of selected activities.

In view of the importance of agriculture to ensure food security to an increasing global population, we feel that all Member Nations of FAO should positively respond to this appeal.

We welcome the introduction of Medium-Term Plans for FAO which is one of the important decisions that emanated from the Review. We endorse FAO's Medium-Term Plan for 1992-97 as presented during this Conference, and congratulate all those in FAO who contributed to the preparation of this Medium-Term Plan. As considered in the 98th Session of the Council, we agree that the Medium-Term Plan should constitute a major policy document for giving direction to the existing programmes and new initiatives, provide the link between the Medium-Term Plan and the successive Programmes of Work and Budget and present eross-programme priorities to facilitate coordination with other UN organizations.

We are also happy to note that the various reports and proposals submitted by FAO before the current session of the Conference reflect earlier Conference Resolutions that sustainable development and environment protection concerns should pervade all the relevant FAO activities of the Regular and Field Programmes. The Government of Bangladesh is also putting emphasis on sustainable and environment protection while examining and approving the various development projects.

We have noted with satisfaction that the Director-General has taken a number of measures to increase decentralization at field level, among others, by doubling the ceiling of field purchase orders to US$20 000 and by authorizing the Country Offices to recruit national consultants. We strongly suggest that Country Offices, especially in those countries where FAO has a large Field Programme, should be further strengthened and measures should be taken for further decentralization of authority particularly for purchases and sub-contracts.

We hope that with the cooperation of Member Nations FAO will be able to overcome the financial constraints and take adequate measures to further strengthen its field operations and technical support in all the member countries in general and in the least developed countries in particular.

J.C. MACHIN (United Kingdom): I too would like to thank Mr Shah for his very helpful and positive introduction. Mr Chairman, perhaps I could begin by saying that my delegation welcomes this important Report by the Director-General on the steps which have been taken so far to implement the review of FAO's goals and operations. The review process is one which the

United Kingdom has followed with the greatest of interest believing, as we do, that on the success or failure of this process depends the ability of FAO to meet the challenges of the 1990s and beyond.

In order to meet these challenges, we believe it is necessary for FAO to strengthen its programme in those areas where it acts as a global centre of excellence and expertise and, at the same time, to ensure appropriate coordination mechanisms are in place. This coordination, both within the United Nations system and with other national and international bodies, is vital in order to ensure that activities of all different kinds, be they research, technical assistance, policy advice or others, are each carried out in the most efficient and effective manner by the body which is most appropriately placed. The implication of this is that FAO gradually relinquishes the execution of its field projects in favour of a greater concentration on technical backstopping and country policy advice, while national execution of projects is correspondingly strengthened; in other words, Mr Chairman, focusing its main activities on the Organization's normative functions.

As my Permanent Secretary said in his Plenary statement, these comments apply more widely than FAO alone. We strongly support the general approach to reform of the United Nations development system proposed by the Nordic countries, and to which my Norwegian colleague has just referred. For FAO, this means Secretariat action on a more open approach, greater accountability and a clear setting of priorities, but it also needs to be matched with action by we, the membership. We too have obligations as well as rights. We should therefore agree how best to fulfil them; how to improve our own working methods and decision-making process, and how best to balance the essentially multilateral nature of our Organization with the reality of differing national needs and contributions.

I would now like to turn to the report itself. My delegation welcomes the advances which have been made so far in implementing the recommendations of the Review. To mention just a few of the positive developments which are included in it we particularly welcome the continued emphasis on developing the Organization's role in country-focused policy work. An important aspect of this is the assistance that FAO provides with structural adjustment programmes, particularly the intention to monitor their effects on vulnerable groups including women.

In paragraph 61 the report refers to the strengthened coordination mechanism for country policy work, and the establishment of a Steering Committee, Central Task Force and Country Policy Information System. These are all positive steps which we welcome, as is the recognition in the report of the need to decentralize responsibility to Country Offices, a point reinforced by my colleague from Bangladesh. I shall return to this topic later on as we have some suggestions as to how FAO's country policy work might be further strengthened by ensuring an adequate geographical input from FAORs.

The Director-General in his Report has referred to the fact that the review has been a costly process, not only in terms of direct costs and staff support to the review itself, but more significantly in terms of its resource implications at a time when, as we all know, this Organization faces considerable financial difficulties. In this respect the Director-General's approach in our view has been a pragmatic one, and my delegation

supports the phased implementation, to which Mr Shah referred, of the Review recommendations as resources become available. This will inevitably be an on-going process.

We recognize, as this document states in paragraph 11, that the largest and most important components of the Conference decisions following from the review have already been implemented to a certain extent. However, we do have some concerns with the notion that there is an inevitable linkage between the further implementation of the review recommendations and the call for extra-budgetary resources. If the review process is taken hand in hand with effective prioritization of FAO's programme of work, some cost savings should also result. In other words, we do not accept that the implementation of the review should be seen exclusively as a financial burden on the Organization which will have to be met by extra-budgetary resources. Indeed, certain of the review recommendations do not have financial implications for the Organization, while others, as I have said, should result in cost savings if they are accompanied by effective prioritization and by a programme of work which truly concentrates on FAO's areas of comparative advantage.

In this respect, we feel that the report could have gone somewhat further in setting out for discussion by Conference actually what FAO sees as the Organization's priorities and those things it does best. Simply appealing to members to pay their full assessed contributions does not, unfortunately, solve the problem. FAO has to make some difficult decisions and choices and we would like to see it entering into a dialogue on these matters with the membership.

We agree with this report when it states that one of the most far-reaching decisions from the Review was the introduction of a rolling six-year Medium-Term Plan. The membership of FAO had of course ample opportunity to comment on the Organization's contribution to the International Development Strategy, which in turn provided the longer-term perspective. The United Kingdom welcomes the reintroduction of the medium-term planning process to FAO, and we have made detailed comments on the Plan itself under the relevant Agenda Item.

In the Technical Committees of FAO, the United Kingdom has commented on the medium-term perspectives, stressing the need to be realistic in what can be achieved in the five-year time span as well as the need to take full account of the technical, environmental and social issues involved. We very much agree with the Secretariat in emphasizing the importance of the Long-Term Strategy and the Medium-Term Plan in providing an opportunity for the Organization to prioritize its future work programme.

As I have already said, FAO should concentrate on its areas of excellence and emphasize cross-programme priorities which facilitate coordination with other UN organizations, other multilateral donors, bilateral donors, the private sector and NGOs, as mentioned in paragraphs 15-23 of the document. The recent success of the Screwworm Eradication Programme in Libya, which we were glad to see has been given appropriate publicity and on which my delegation warmly congratulates FAO, is an excellent example of this type of coordination.

In commenting on the FAO Long-Term Strategy for the Food and Agriculture Sector and on the Medium-Term Plan at past FAO meetings, my delegation has stressed the importance it attaches to environmental protection and the

attainment of sustainable development. We consider this to be a priority objective without which the other objectives of the strategy (namely economic growth with equity, poverty alleviation and food security, and development of human resources and institutions) cannot and will not be achieved. We therefore endorse the priority which has been attached by FAO to sustainable development and environment in the implementation of the Review recommendations. We also welcome the Organization's positive steps toward strengthening efforts for sustainable development, protection of the environment and the appropriate management of renewable natural resources.

It is equally important, however, that FAO ensures that these issues are fully integrated into all its programme and activities.

Paragraphs 35-64 of the report address another key area of FAO's activities, namely country policy work. This activity, as the document rightly states, calls for an integrated and multi-disciplinary approach covering a wide range of issues. That said, we somewhat question whether FAO actually has the capacity to carry out all the activities referred to in paragraph 37, such as in-depth analysis on all the areas of policy mentioned here, including macro-economic and socio-economic analysis. For some of these areas institutions such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund have the expertise. As we see it, the emphasis should therefore be placed on inter-agency cooperation rather than on FAO attempting to match this expertise. This is not to say that FAO does not need to have some understanding of macro-economic issues. Indeed, the Organization has an important role to play in ensuring that natural resource issues are adequately analyzed in the context of economic reform.

And it is encouraging to note that informal collaboration between FAO and the IMF on a country-by-country basis already takes place. We would like to see more of this.

Another fundamental aspect of country policy work which I would like to address is that, in addition to the multi-disciplinary approach which the document rightly stresses, a stronger geographical focus is also needed. Country policy advice will obviously not be effective and appropriate unless it is informed by adequate knowledge of local and national conditions. The Medium-Term Plan places the onus on Regional and Country Offices to feed back to Headquarters the relevant information. Nevertheless, we are conscious that the Country Offices may lack the capacity to do this effectively, and that they will not be able to play their full part in the country policy advice process as currently envisaged. We welcome the establishment of a country policy information system which is mentioned in paragraph 61 of the report, but feel that more will need to be done in strengthening Field Offices and in delegating responsibility to them if they are to be able to contribute all they should to the important country policy advice work of FAO.

Paragraphs 99 to 102 of the report refer to progress in decentralization and in strengthening FAO Country Offices. As I have already said, the United Kingdom welcomes the recognition by FAO of this need to decentralize, and we are happy to note that considerable steps have already been taken in this direction, including the increased delegation regarding field purchases. It is disappointing, however, that the proposals in this area have had to be scaled down due to the financial difficulties of the Organization. My delegation would like to reiterate its view that as meaningful responsibilities are delegated to Country Offices, such

decentralization should involve cost savings at Headquarters. I would urge the Secretariat to look at whether certain posts could be saved at Headquarters in order to continue the process of strengthening FAORs.

Finally, on the subject of country policy advice, we have some other points of detail to put to the Secretariat, but rather than take up more valuable time now, we will put these in writing to Mr Shah and be most grateful if they could be included in the Verbatim.

Perhaps I could now turn to paragraphs 83 to 91 of the report which address the review of field operations by the Governing Bodies. We have detailed comments to make on the Review of Field Programmes document itself under the relevant Agenda Item. However, at this stage I should like to raise one general issue concerned with the adequacy of the current arrangements for the review of field operations. Though a system was agreed at the last Conference which is designed to ensure that each of the Technical Committees of the Council review relevant aspects of the Field Programme, the arrangement in our view has a number of shortcomings. In part this is due to the fact that the level of technical attendance at these Technical Committee meetings is not as high as could be desired. Now, I appreciate that the Secretariat are already looking into this question. In part, too, it relates to questions of procedure and to agendas which are sometimes rather heavily loaded and do not always permit the proper examination of the field review. Consequently my delegation urges the Secretariat to continue to consider ways in which the review of the Field Programme can be improved. This perhaps could be done by establishing a separate Field Programme Committee or by considering ways in which Technical Committee procedures could be streamlined to allow more in-depth discussion of the field review.

The FAO Yearbook, mentioned in paragraph 92 of the document, is a most useful source of information on FAO field projects. My delegation would like to put forward a modest practical suggestion which could improve the usefulness of this document. At present its format is geographical, showing breakdowns of projects by country and source of finance. Other documentation, such as the Programme of Work and Budget, has a sectoral format. It would be most helpful if in the Yearbook a breakdown or index by sector could also be given in order to permit users of this document to identify assistance by sector as well as by region and its source of finance. That would bring it into line with other FAO documentation and facilitate cross-reference and analysis.

Similarly, we regard the development of a Field Programme Manual, mentioned in paragraph 94 of the report, as potentially a very valuable instrument in unifying the procedures and guidelines relating to field operations.

Paragraphs 95 of the report gives a brief reference to the computerized Field Programme Management System. In view of the importance of management information to the process of project monitoring and decision making, my delegation would be grateful for an update from the Secretariat on progress in implementing this system and its linkage to the FINSYS system. Given the discussion which took place at the June Council this year about the future financing of the Field Programme Management System, we would be very grateful to hear about the Secretariat's longer-term plans for securing the financing of this system.

My delegation also welcomes the acceptance in the report of the need to strengthen the technical backstopping of FAO; again, a key area already alluded to by several speakers. This is indeed crucial to the future development of the Organization as is envisaged in the Review. We were somewhat disappointed, however, at the account of progress in technical backstopping and evaluation of field operations provided in paragraph 103. Given the changing nature of FAO's involvement in field projects - that is to say, with a shift towards more complex projects in which technical backstopping is of the utmost importance - we would once more urge the Secretariat to look again at ways in which Field Programme evaluation and technical backstopping can be reorganized so as to approximate more closely to the review recommendations. The United Kingdom considers that greater emphasis should be given to monitoring and evaluating field activities, in particular the TCP. We would therefore like to see a strengthening of the mechanisms whereby the findings and lessons learned can be fed back into the system to improve the management of field activities.

I have ranged widely and, 1 am conscious, at some length in this intervention. I will conclude by summarizing the following key points. It would be most helpful if we could have the Secretariat's comments on them.

Firstly, have any areas been identified where the prioritization of FAO's activities, and concentration on what I described earlier as "what it does best" will permit cost savings, which in turn could be offset against the costs of implementing the review recommendations?

Secondly, what measures are in hand to further strengthen FAO Country Offices and to delegate responsibility to them, given that the onus is to be placed upon them to provide a stronger geographical focus for FAO's country policy advice activities?

Thirdly, have any cost savings at Headquarters been identified as a result of the delegation of responsibilities to Country Offices? In other words, is there a true transfer of posts from Headquarters to the FAORs?

Does the Secretariat have any plans to strengthen the review of field operations by the Technical Committees and Governing Bodies of this institution? As a related point, what further consideration has been given to the ways in which attendance by national technical experts at FAO technical meetings could be enhanced?

What is the current state of play regarding the implementation and future financing of the Field Programme Management System?

And, finally, what steps are envisaged in order to continue the process or reorganization of Field Programme evaluation and technical backstopping in the light of the review recommendations?

My delegation also has a number of more detailed comments to make on the subject of country policy advice. In paragraph 43 of the document, the table headed FAO's Assistance to Member Nations in Policy Work raises a number of questions which we would like to ask the Secretariat. We note a total of five ongoing projects in the field of assessment of structural adjustment programmes, plus two in the pipeline. This total seems perhaps rather low, especially given the importance which is attached to this topic in other parts of this report. My delegation would like to ask the Secretariat whether it sees its role in this area as an expanding one.

We also note that in the area of Policy and Performance Review, though there are fewer pipeline projects the costs are considerably higher than for ongoing projects. We are led to conclude that FAO is planning to become involved in much larger scale projects than those currently being implemented, and would like to ask for an explanation of this change in scale. A similar phenomena would seem to be occurring in the case of training projects, where the allocation of resources for projects in the pipeline is around ten times greater per project than that for ongoing ones.

Likewise, could the Secretariat explain why institution building projects, which we might expect to expand in line with the objectives of the Long-Term Strategy, seem rather to be subject to a decline. Country policy work is unlikely to be effective where local institutions are weak, and indeed it is of great importance that FAO should evaluate the impact of its assistance to those countries where institutions are very weak.

If the figures given here indicate a concentration of effort by FAO on fewer, larger and more carefully selected projects, the United Kingdom would of course welcome this. However it would lead us to emphasize, too, that in this case the evaluation of project implementation and impact becomes even more crucial.

Ms Melinda KIMBLE (United States of America): The United States is pleased to have this opportunity to discuss the implementation of Resolution 10/89. Mr Shah's introductory comments were extremely useful in focusing our attention on some key issues examined in this document. The Director-General's Report itself provides useful information about many initiatives undertaken in response to this Resolution.

The United States has been especially pleased with the improvements in priority setting, both within the Budget and the Medium-Term Plans. The discussions within the Technical Committees and the Council on priorities clarified relative benefits and necessary trade-offs. These discussions allow the Organization to proceed into the next biennium with the membership united behind its stated priorities.

The United States commends the Organization for its increased involvement in agriculture trade issues, especially GATT, Codex, and the International Plant Protection Convention. These activities, which serve developed and developing countries alike, depend on FAO's continued technical expertise.

The United States fully supports the efforts which the FAO has made, and which are detailed in this report, to increase its linkage with other UN agencies. In particular, we note the Memorandum of Agreement with the Inter-American Development Bank. These relationships are invaluable, for they permit each organization to benefit from the human and financial resources of the other. The FAO should also seize the opportunities presented by the new arrangements on UNDP support costs, which offer the FAO an opportunity (1) to focus its resources and efforts on areas of comparative advantage, particularly its technical competence; and (2) increase its support to building the capacity of developing countries to manage and implement their own development projects and programmes.

The United States particularly welcomes the process that FAO is now making in strengthening and expanding its agricultural data bases. These data bases will underpin and reinforce the technical and analytical work of FAO and serve as an invaluable resource for all Member States.

Despite these achievements, the report notes on several occasions that FAO's ability to implement Resolution 10/89 was limited by resources constraints. The United States continues to believe that the initiatives called for under the Resolution should be integrated into FAO's normal operational activities, rather than regarded as distinct or additional programmes, and should not require significant additional resources. FAO must see "Review" as an on-going dynamic process, a process that must continually reset priorities and eliminate functions that no longer serve desired objectives. Without such an approach, FAO cannot sustain its effectiveness in areas of its technical competence, and it must sustain its effectiveness to retain its relevancy in this decade. Strengthening and streamlining operations is a positive challenge that every organization must undertake. In this regard we note that the possible efficiencies and savings resulting from the implementation of Review initiatives were not covered in this report.

The United States is disappointed that the report did not provide more information on the impact of Review-related initiatives on FAO's programmes. For example, the report provides a detailed list of the country policy work in which FAO has been involved: however, the report does not provide comparative information to enable members to evaluate the impact of the Review. Has FAO's involvement in country policy work expanded in this biennium? What measures are being taken to assess the quality of policy analysis and advice? Has the quality of the analysis improved? What changes have taken place to strengthen FAO's policy analysis capacity?

The United States has specific comments on the following sections of the report:

Field Operations: FAO should reexamine its staffing requirements for Field Offices and management support in the context of the new UNDP support cost arrangements, the anticipated shift from agency - to national-execution, and the reorientation from a project to a programme approach. Specifically, it should consider gradually replacing its traditional programme officers and operations officers, who are primarily concerned with monitoring the delivery of project inputs, with agricultural development officers, who would have a background in both broad sectoral development as well as policy.

Strengthening FAORs: While the report addresses increased decentralization only with respect to purchasing, the United States supports increased delegation of authority to Field Offices for project development and approval. In addition, as described above, the United States supports a shift in the qualifications for field staff.

Role of Regional Offices: As the Review showed, many questions remain about the role of the Regional Offices, particularly given the varying needs of each Region. The United States encourages FAO to follow up on the issues raised by the Review, examine the role of each regional office, and report to the next Council and Conference on its findings and recommendations.

Technical Backstopping: The report identified only one instance where resource shortfalls were an obstacle to full implementation of the Review, i.e., insufficient resources to hire additional staff for technical backstopping. In this particular instance, however, the improvements called for in the Review dealt with internal organizational structure and coordination with other UN agency personnel, not simply staff size. It is not clear from the report whether FAO has actually refocused its staff resources so as to increase its technical involvement and reduce the number of staff with administrative project support functions.

Field Inspection: The report describes the various internal mechanisms in place to address management issues affecting field operations. The United States notes that these mechanisms do not incorporate the recommendations of the FAO Conference, the Programme and Finance Committees, or the Groups of Experts. The United States continues to believe that the importance of the FAO's Field Programme justifies an institutionalized field inspection unit which reports to the FAO membership.

Support Costs: In paragraph 105, the report refers to FAO's decreased "earnings" from UNDP support costs. Under the successor arrangements, FAO's so-called "earnings" will increasingly depend on FAO's ability to demonstrate a relative advantage in technical and analytical expertise at the sectoral and/or subsectoral level over other multilateral, bilateral and non-governmental organizations.

As FAO points out in paragraph 24 of C 91/4-Sup.l, the expected decline in earnings from administrative and operational services (AOS) could be offset by increased earnings from technical and analytical support to programmes and projects (TSS-I and TSS-II). Furthermore, since AOS are heavily subsidized by the Regular Budget, a gradual reduction in AOS, matched by a corresponding reduction in administrative and operational staff, should result in significant Regular Budget savings. These savings could be used to strengthen FAO's technical and analytical capacity.

We realize, of course, that a precipitous shift from agency to national (or UNDP/OPS) execution/implementation over the next few years would require either: (1) increased "transitional" financial support from UNDP; or (2) an increase in the Regular Budget subsidy to AOS, if FAO reductions in its AOS capacity cannot keep pace with the decline in demand.

We do not believe such a precipitous shift is likely: (1) changes would affect only new projects (or a maximum of 20 percent of projects per year); (2) the UNDP Governing Council has insisted that UNDP make the shift gradually; and (3) governments themselves will decide how, and how much, of a given activity should be implemented by agencies or by the government itself.

As my comments on the report demonstrates, the United States believes in the potential for a restructuring within the FAO that will improve its technical and policy analysis capabilities. We are encouraged by the measures, particularly in the area of priority-setting, which the FAO has already undertaken. The progress thus far gives us confidence that the FAO will continue to work toward the full implementation of Resolution 10/89.

The Review focuses largely on measures within the FAO to achieve greater efficiency and effectiveness. Now, however, the United States delegation would like to turn the Conference's attention to our responsibilities, as

Member Nations, for achieving greater efficiency and effectiveness in the procedures and processes by which we govern the Organization and its Committees.

The United States believes that streamlined meetings and improved decision-making processes in the Technical Committees and the Council would: (1) enable the membership to provide more effective guidance to the organization as it responds to issues arising in the world agricultural sector and the UN system: and (2) assist all member states, particularly those with small delegations, to fulfil their responsibilities as members of FAO's Governing Bodies and Technical Committees.

The United States would look favourably on proposals for streamlining Committee, Council and Conference procedures, which could be implemented on an experimental basis during the coming biennium. These changes might be then proposed for Conference consideration in 1993. The United States welcomes the views of other Member Nations on this issue.

Amin ABDEL-MALEK (Liban) (Langue originale arabe): Je voudrais remercier M. Shah pour l'excellent exposé clair et concis, qualité à laquelle il nous a toujours habitué dans ses travaux. Nous sommes heureux que les comités financier et du programme soient satisfaits des progrès réalisés dans la mise en oeuvre de la Résolution 10/89 de la Conférence.

Nous voudrions aussi remercier le Directeur général et le Secrétariat pour leurs efforts et pour ce que le Directeur général compte mettre en oeuvre, aujourd'hui comme à l'avenir, pour une parfaite application des recommandations découlant de l'examen du budget et des opérations de la FAO. Le Plan à moyen terme élaboré par le Directeur général confirme les nouvelles mesures qui visent à entreprendre une évaluation et une étude périodique des travaux de l'Organisation. Les activités entreprises par l'Organisation dans le cadre de cet examen, malgré les moyens réduits mis à sa disposition, sont vraiment dignes d'éloges. Et je pense qu'il n'y a plus lieu désormais de parler d'un nouvel examen des opérations de la FAO, après les coûts énormes supportés par l'Organisation, et les efforts intenses déployés par un grand nombre de responsables qui se sont joints au travail des experts.

Lorsqu'on parle de la transparence, après tous les éclaircissements et les informations prodigués par l'Organisation comme suite à l'initiative du Secrétariat ou à la demande de certains pays membres, tout débat devient inutile; la transparence étant totale.

NAN-SHAN (China) (Original language Chinese): May I begin by thanking the Secretariat for preparing document C 91/21, which is a very clear document, and thank you, Mr Shah, for your very clear introduction. We have noted that, notwithstanding the major financial difficulties facing FAO, progress has been achieved in implementing the Conference recommendation in a number of important fields. In this connection, I would like to express my satisfaction: At the same time we hope that all Member Nations will honour their financial commitments so that there can be effective follow-up to the Review. Document C 91/21 has a wealth of information in it and I do not intend to comment on it in detail. What I would like to do here is to

emphasize the importance of strengthening FAO's country policy work. We hope that FAO will continue to strengthen its work in this particular field.

Document C 91/21 states at paragraph 75 that it is planned for the 1992-93 biennium to hold two regional meetings which will examine the consequences for developing countries in Latin America, the Caribbean and Africa of the changes in agricultural policy of international significance stemming from the Uruguay Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations and other policy developments, such as the European Single Market and changes in national policies under way in eastern Europe and the USSR. We believe that, with the present international situation changing rapidly, this work is of particular importance. At the same time we hope that FAO will also organize a study on the consequences of these changes on developing countries in Asia and the Pacific area.

Haruo ISHII (Japan): First of all, we should like to thank the Secretariat for their efforts in preparing document C 91/21 which shows us that respective activity of high priority areas continuously contributes to FAO's goals. We are, however, disappointed about some aspects of the explanation in the document, because it has not referred to the problem in the implemented activities and the level of achievement of the goal. We believe that all Member Nations expect FAO, through FAO's Review, to contribute further to the development of food and agriculture and the rural development of the whole world and Member Nations, as well as meeting the need for technical assistance by developing countries.

We also regret to see that FAO has stressed the shortage of resources as a conclusion. We believe that FAO's Review is aimed at discussing FAO's role in the food and agriculture sector, identifying priority areas and examining the objectives and strategy of FAO in order to strengthen FAO's capacity. In line with this discussion, we did not premise that Member Nations would bear an additional burden for the implementation of FAO's Review.

Therefore, FAO should at first carry out its strict internal restructure, aiming at the restoration of financial stability.

José Elias LEAL (México): La delegación de México ve con particular atención este documento que es producto indirecto de la Resolución 6/87 del 24° periodo de sesiones de la Conferencia en 1987.

Apreciamos su contenido y consideramos que responde a los requerimientos de la Resolución 10/89 del 25° periodo de sesiones de la Conferencia en 1989.

Resulta gratificante percibir con este documento que el tiempo transcurrido desde su gestión no ha sido en vano, si bien advertimos que ejercicios como este, por su naturaleza, deberán ser validados por el trabajo continuo de los Estados Miembros y por su concurrencia a los compromisos suscritos con esta nuestra Organización.

En el marco de este documento encontramos una Estrategia a largo plazo y un Plan a plazo medio que sitúan a esta Organización en una posición adecuada para responder a necesidades presentes y futuras, con el natural respaldo en la experiencia acumulada.

- 357 -

Recordamos la importancia del apartado referente al desarollo sostenible y medio ambiente, destacando que México participó en la Conferencia FAO/Paises Bajos sobre Agricultura y Medio Ambiente, experiencia que, en lo nacional, nos alienta en la incorporación del componente medio ambiente en los procesos productivos del sector agropecuario y forestal, y en lo internacional seguramente contribuirá a enriquecer la contribución de la FAO a la Conferencia de Naciones Unidas sobre Medio Ambiente y Desarrollo.

La parte relativa a la elaboración de políticas nacionales es de interés indudable por ser un ámbito de acción determinante para el desarrollo de la agricultura y de la alimentación que a su vez determina la ubicación de los países, en particular en el concierto internacional.

Consideramos importante la cooperación que la FAO ha emprendido con otras instituciones en lo que a diseño de política se refiere destacándose el documento de la ONUDI, del PNUD, del Banco Mundial, del FMI y del BID. La mayor coordinación que la FAO ha emprendido en este ámbito es de carácter trascendente.

El examen de las actividades complementarias de la Conferencia Mundial sobre Reforma Agraria y Desarrollo Rural y la atención de los programas de campo, son también tópicos importantes del documento.

Se consideran muy importantes los puntos relativos a las relaciones con los organismos de financiación y el apoyo a las negociaciones comerciales sobre agricultura, ya que la viabilidad financiera y comercial del entorno internacional son determinantes para la agricultura y el desarrollo rural de un país en particular.

Como se ha indicado anteriormente, del Examen surgieron diversas recomendaciones importantes y útiles que gradualmente fortalecen a la FAO, no obstante que para completar la aplicación de las mismas se necesitarán recursos adicionales que permitan la ejecución plena del Examen de la FAO.

S. RAJASEKAR (New Zealand): We thank Dr Shah for his very lucid introduction of this topic. I do not propose to speak at length on the subject, as many of the topics coming under the umbrella of the Review have been discussed, as has already been stated in separate items, both in this Commission as well as in Commission I.

The re-introduction of the Medium-Term Plan is a welcome step in the process of planning and prioritization in FAO's programmes and activities. New Zealand supports the broad priorities set out in the document. FAO has an important role to play in the area of environment and sustainable development. Protection of the global environment is, without doubt, the greatest challenge facing us today. We are pleased that FAO is participating actively in the UNCED process.

While environment and sustainable development have now gained the prominence they deserve, we still need to ensure that the considerations permeate at all levels of decision-making and analysis. This is the challenge facing organizations such as FAO as well as national governments.

New Zealand supports the importance accorded to policy advice and the support that FAO can provide to the multilateral negotiations on trade liberalization. We cannot emphasize sufficiently the importance of policy

advice as a means to promote better resource allocation, improved efficiency and long-term economic growth. The comments made by earlier speakers about the need to monitor and evaluate the quality of policy advice are shared by New Zealand. To avoid repetition, I share the views expressed by the United Kingdom delegate about the advantages of closer liaison and cooperation with the World Bank and other agencies to ensure better resource utilization and cooperation.

We shall be monitoring FAO programmes and activities with close interest in this area.

In our earlier statement we expressed general satisfaction at the contributions FAO has been making to the GATT negotiations, particularly in the area of international harmonization and reduction of technical barriers to trade. The proposed GATT agreement on sanitary and phytosanitary measures provides a closer relationship between trade organizations and the specialized agencies such as FAO. We hope that FAO, in recognition of this situation, will move expeditiously to strengthen FAO's Secretariat, particularly in the plant protection area to ensure progress on harmonization.

To conclude, we should like to re-state our general satisfaction at the outcome of the Review and our commitment and cooperation in the years to come.

John Bruce SHARPE (Australia): Australia is generally pleased with the early efforts being made to implement the Review of Certain Aspects of FAO's Goals and Operations and would wish to see the full implementation of the Review's recommendations occur as quickly as possible. The Review has obviously had a very positive result and there would be benefit in keeping this Review process going in the future.

We note the progress which has been made in a number of the priority areas, including sustainable development and environment, policy advice, support to agricultural trade negotiations, Codex and the planned role of the International Plant Protection Convention Secretariat.

The progress made in each of these areas was also welcomed in the report of the September joint meeting of the Finance and Programme Committees when they considered this document.

As a member of the Finance Committee, Australia had an input to the Report on the Review. Therefore, we would not wish to take up the time of this Conference by going into further details.

However, there are a couple of areas which we should like to mention specifically: Australia was among all those countries which congratulated the Secretariat on the preparation of the Medium-Term Plan, which, of course, we considered to be one of the major outcomes of the Review. We reiterate that congratulation; we think it was a fine document.

We made a fairly detailed intervention when the Medium-Term Plan was discussed earlier and our views are contained therein.

- 359 -

Australia would also wish to be associated with the Nordic countries and the United Kingdom concerning the views they expressed on the reform of the UN Development System and Member Nations involvement therein.

We would also wish to be associated with the views of the United States concerning the streamlining of FAO Council Committee and Conference procedures. We fully endorse the views of my predecessor in the list of speakers, New Zealand, our very close neighbour, concerning FAO's involvement in the GATT negotiations and the reduction of technical barriers to trade.

On the question of the use of additional resources to meet emerging needs and to carry out other recommendations of the Review, Australia would be pleased to see this eventuate if they are available from the finance agencies and institutions referred to in Resolution 10/89 or if there were countries who had surplus resources and were prepared to make them available on a voluntary basis for these purposes.

However, consistent with the approach we have adopted on increased country contributions in other Agenda Items, we would not wish to see the provision of additional resources become a mandatory obligation on Member Nations. If funds from the sources mentioned are not forthcoming, we consider it important for FAO to place an even greater emphasis on priorities, to evaluate its existing activities and, where possible, discard those that may no longer be relevant in order to release resources.

Harald HILDEBRAND (Germany) (Original language German): Our Agenda provides for discussion of documents which are of fundamental importance to the activities of the Organization. The carefully-weighed statements, my delegation believes, clearly reveal the seriousness and the initial success of the efforts of the FAO Secretariat to adapt the Organization as well as possible to the challenges of the 1990s and to strengthen its role and its effectiveness.

Document C 91/21 lists the measures for the implementation of the FAO Review which are intended to serve that end. In summary, the objectives are: greater transparency in the preparation and carrying out of programmes; a closer link between Headquarters and field level; the integration of cross-programme activities and priorities into the work of FAO, in particular in the context of the Regular Programme and Field Programme; optimum coordination with other UN Organizations, NGOs and, in particular, recipient countries; and increasing transfer of responsibility to states and their national organizations in programme implementation.

In the view of my delegation, in all these points the implementation of the FAO Review follows on from past decisions, including Resolution 10/89.

Accordingly, one is totally entitled to say that the process of reviewing FAO activities is in full swing. In the conclusions to document C 91/21 I believe that all this is convincingly depicted. However, there is also mention there of the critical problem facing the Organization in regard to further prosecution of the reform and the financing thereof. The contradiction is a manifest one. On the one hand the reform costs money. Yet it must not be carried out in a way which is detrimental to programme priorities. If funds are not available to implement the recommendations, this could impair programme effectiveness in the longer term.

It is the view of my delegation - and in saying this I find myself at one with some delegations which have already spoken - that measures such as improving cooperation with other organizations and institutions and coordination with FAO, decentralization in regard to particular activities, proper setting of priorities, and the use of FAO's comparative advantages -all of those should entail certain savings. For that reason, I should like to ask what results, in terms of the implementation of reforms, have been achieved with the financial means used to date? What compromise is the Secretariat prepared to entertain to eliminate the contradiction to which I have referred? As my delegation sees it, those are questions which cannot fully be answered on the basis of this document.

I should like to support the suggestion from a number of delegations - and here we find ourselves totally in agreement with the Secretariat - that the review of FAO's activities should be pursued consistently in the longer term. I should like to say a word of thanks to Mr Shah and his team for the very good document and also for the introductory presentation thereof. Like some delegations in their statements today, I believe that if the recommendations are pursued consistently this Organization will be able to achieve results which will let us move forward. I should like to reaffirm what Mr Shah has reiterated on a number of occasions, that is, that this is a matter above all for Member Nations.

Mohd. Zaki GHAZALLI (Malaysia): The Malaysian delegation would like to register its general satisfaction with the progress made so far in FAO's implementation of the Conference recommendations in Resolution 10/89 linked to the FAO Review despite the financial constraints faced by FAO.

My delegation welcomes the Director-General's proposal in the Programme of Work and Budget for 1992-93 to allocate funds for support to the very critical multilateral trade negotiations, as mentioned inparagraphs 116-123 of document C 91/21. Malaysia hopes that the financial situation of FAO will soon improve in order that FAO can pursue its efforts to implement the Review of FAO's goals and operations.

François ROUX (Belgique): A notre tour, nous désirons remercier le Secrétariat pour son rapport sur les suites données à l'Examen de certains aspects des buts et opérations de la FAO.

Comme nous l'avons déjà dit lors des discussions au point 15 de l'ordre du jour, la réalisation la plus tangible de la Résolution 10/89 a été la mise en place du Plan à moyen terme. Ce résultat est important mais ce n'est pas le seul. Ainsi que le souligne le présent rapport des pages 8 à 17, un gros effort est en train d'être fait par cette organisation pour ce qui concerne les avis en matière de politique nationale.

Quarante ans d'expérience en matière de développement agricole ont révélé que les cause principales des échecs des projets et des programmes de développement étaient dues à des politiques nationales et internationales inappropriées. Outre les fonctions dont elle a trop souvent fait l'objet au profit d'une industrialisation pas toujours réussie, l'agriculture a aussi souvent souffert de politiques de prix et de politiques de revenus inadaptées.

- 361 -

La délégation du Royaume de Belgique continue de penser qu'à la demande de ses Etats Membres, la FAO doit pouvoir jouer le rôle de société de conseil en matière de politique économique et sociale liée à l'agriculture, et ceci en collaboration avec d'autres institutions internationales. A priori, je rejoindrai ici ce qu'a dit le délégué du Royaume-Uni.

Concilier intérêts nationaux et interdépendance internationale n'est pas une tâche facile. Ce que l'on a appelé la réforme et qui est en fait la revue montre cependant que l'Organisation a déjà trouvé trois éléments de réponse à ce dilemme:

- l'approche multidisciplinaire des problèmes liés au développement agricole

- la régionalisation des programmes pour faire face aux fléaux transnationaux et contribuer au développement des solidarités régionales;

- et enfin l'adoption de codes de conduite et de normes internationales dans les domaines liés à l'agriculture et à l'alimentation.

Ces réponses vont dans la bonne direction. Le document C 91/21 contient beaucoup d'autres réflexions intéressantes dans domaines pour lesquels la FAO devra sans doute jouer un rôle accru et pour lesquels cette organisation devra sans doute adapter sa structure. Nous ne répéterons pas ce qu'ont déjà dit beaucoup d'autres délégations, parce que, hélas, si ma délégation est satisfaite des premiers résultats de la revue, elle est aussi très inquiète sur ce qui concerne son financement.

Au paragraphe 9 du document, on nous rappelle que le coût initial de cette étude était de 27 millions de dollars. Il se trouve que ce montant est équivalent, à peu de chose près, à celui dont le Budget 1992-93 a été diminué vendredi dernier.

A ce stade, j'aurai donc une double question à poser:

- où le Secrétariat compte-t-il trouver les ressources pour mettre en oeuvre les recommandations de la réforme pour la période 1992-93?

- et quelles sont les priorités moins prioritaires qui devront être sacrifiées au cas où les ressources extrabudgétaires se révéleraient insuffisantes, étant entendu que l'équilibre entre le rôle normatif et le rôle opérationnel de cette Organisation doit être préservé.

Jean-Pierre POLY (France): Ma délégation s'est exprimée à différentes reprises à ce sujet, pour se déclarer toujours, dans l'ensemble, satisfaite à la fois des résultats de l'Examen de certains aspects des buts et opérations de la FAO et de la bonne volonté manifestée par le Secrétariat pour mettre en application les conclusions et recommandations de cet examen. C'est pourquoi cette intervention sera particulièrement brève.

Ma délégation souhaite toutefois souligner tout d'abord l'importance qu'elle accorde au Plan à moyen terme qui permet d'inscrire les activités de notre Organisation dans une perspective à long et moyen termes, d'autre part l'intérêt qu'elle porte à la nouvelle procédure budgétaire, celle du Schéma sommaire projet de budget qui doit faciliter le cadrage budgétaire dans la perspective d'une adoption du Programme de travail et budget par

consensus, même si les tractations actuelles en marge de notre débat budgétaire concernant le prochain exercice ne confirment pas pleinement cette appréciation.

Je rappelle, à cette occasion, que la délégation française considère que l'adoption du Plan à moyen terme devrait permettre de revenir d'ici quelque temps à une procédure budgétaire allégée, expression de ce Plan glissant sur la période biennale concernée.

Ma délégation souligne le rôle accru que doivent pouvoir jouer les représentants de la FAO dans les pays, dans la perspective notamment d'une évolution des activités de notre Organisation, du rôle d'appui technique vers un rôle de conseil en politiques agricoles et alimentaires, comme l'exige le contexte désormais bien établi de l'exécution nationale des projets.

Enfin ma délégation, comme d'habitude, encourage le Secrétariat à poursuivre l'effort entrepris, avec jusqu'à présent la participation de la France, pour la mise en place d'un système de gestion informatisé des activités opérationnelles de la FAO, auquel le Programme ordinaire doit désormais consacrer une priorité sans équivoque.

Mohammad Saleem KHAN (Pakistan): My delegation also is grateful to the Director-General for his comprehensive Report on the Implementation of the Review of Certain Aspects of FAO's Goals and Operations, and to Mr Shah for his presentation on this item.

Pakistan made a detailed intervention on the interim report submitted to the Ninety-eighth Session of the Council. We have also had the opportunity of commenting on the various aspects of the report in conjunction with other related issues in our interventions in other Commissions under various Agenda Items. Therefore, like other delegates, we wish to be brief and will confine ourselves here to a few major points.

We wish to start by joining numerous other delegations in commending FAO and the Director-General on being able to report such good progress despite the severe limitation of resources which the Organization faces during the ongoing biennium.

The Pakistan delegation has been closely involved in the negotiations leading to the consensus between Member Nations at the Twenty-fifth Conference Session over the findings and recommendations of the experts who carried out the review. This consensus was significant, not the least in being the trendsetter in encouraging better understanding and respect for each other's viewpoints between Member Nations. My delegation therefore has great pleasure today in noting such trends being happily carried further to issues as important as the Programme of Work and the Budget level, the admission of Regional Economic Integration Organizations to membership of the FAO and, prior to the Conference, on issues such as the revised governance structures of the World Food Programme.

In general, the Pakistan delegation welcomes the progress on all aspects of the Review Report, and in particular wishes to welcome the assistance in country policy work and in developing nationally based expertise.

The FAO Country Offices would certainly have an important role to play in this regard and therefore implementation of the recommendations of the Review in relation to the Country Offices is endorsed by us. We do, however, express our concern that contrary to the viewpoint of the experts and a predominant number of Member Countries the FAO Regional Offices have been de-emphasized to accommodate the requirements of the Country Offices. This is a matter of great concern to us and we hope in the following biennium this trend will be reversed.

Mr Chairman, my delegation further notes with satisfaction the increased involvement of FAO in structural adjustment and economic reform policies and exercises and would wish this role of FAO to be further enhanced, particularly in attending to the negative impact of such economic adjustment measures on agricultural production and food security in developing countries.

The delegation of Pakistan also welcomes the listed focus on technical cooperation amongst developing countries and ECDC. The Newsletter noted at paragraph 70 in this regard has been found to be most useful by a number of developing countries and we look forward to an increase in the number of issues and more expanded versions of such newsletters.

We would wish to know from FAO what is being done to promote greater use of services of technical experts from developing countries in missions being sent abroad by FAO. We would like FAO to explore the possibilities of enroling and using the services of more experts from developing countries. The delegation of Pakistan supports the emphasis given to integrating environmental and sustainability concerns in all areas of activities of FAO but would wish to record, what a large majority of countries had underlined during the Twenty-fifth Conference deliberations that for this purpose more extra-budgetary resources should be sought.

It is disappointing to note that while we have gone forward with large-scale cuts on the approved Budget for 1991-92 and are going ahead with a negative growth budget for the forthcoming biennium, no significant extra-budgetary resources for such programmes were provided and cuts had to be imposed on other programme elements which were equally important.

We welcome the involvement of the Technical Committees in the Field Programme Review and would recommend also extending this to the Regional Conferences to the greatest extent possible. We, however, do not feel the need for further comprehensive reviews by the Council and Conference following detailed reviews already carried out by the Technical Committees. We would recommend that the reviews in the Council and Conference be confined to reviewing the reports of the Technical Committees and the Council respectively, both in the interest of saving time and economy in costs. However, Mr Chairman, my delegation totally agrees with the delegation of the United Kingdom in underlining the recommendations of the COAG on the financing of technical participation from developing countries in Technical Committee meetings and would request that serious consideration and examination of this recommendation be made.

On the same note, while my delegation welcomes measures taken to strengthen cooperation between FAO/Codex and GATT, here we also feel that to enable developing countries to be appropriately represented and properly

participate in Codex Alimentarius Committee sessions, efforts should be made to support the participation of representatives from developing countries in Codex Alimentarius Committee sessions.

We wish to recall that the experts had felt that the comparative advantages of FAO lay in the diversity of its activities and the complementary of the roles it plays which should be maintained and equally strengthened. This viewpoint was endorsed by a vast majority of Member States during the various stages of examination of the experts report including the Twenty-fifth Conference. We feel strongly that this diversity and complementarity of roles is essential for FAO and should not be disturbed due to the interests of prioritization. In our view it would be incorrect to presume that FAO can undertake the large menu given to it following the Review by adjustments within the existing resources available to it. We must be realistic and hope that those Member Nations who are in a position to pay should try to strengthen the hands of FAO to implement the Review recommendations by the provision of additional resources outside the Regular Budget.

Finally, we wish to note that the experts had generally endorsed the importance and usefulness of the Technical Cooperation Programme in responding to the needs of developing countries as well as the important contribution to the other activities of FAO, i.e., policy advice, data collection and so on. It was for this reason that the Member Nations, following the consensus on the findings in the Review Report in the Twenty-fifth Session of the Conference, adopted Resolution 9/89 for restoring the previous high levels of the TCP allocations and working towards enhancing this to a figure of 17 percent of the total budget allocation. A large number of countries, in expressing their view over the Programme of Work and Budget proposals for the coming biennium and during the Review of the Field Programme earlier on in this Commission, had expressed their disappointment over the continuing low level of TCP and in fact a further drop in the TCP level. We hope that this position will be rectified in the next biennium with strict adherence to the Conference Resolution.

R.C.A. JAIN (India): I intend to be very brief, as many of the issues covered by the Review are coming up before this and other Commissions as separate and individual items, and my delegation has been, and will be, commenting in detail during the discussions on those issues. Mr Chairman, I have sought the floor primarily to express my delegation's satisfaction with the progress made in implementing the recommendations linked to the US$3 million exercise, namely the Review of Certain Aspects of FAO's Goals and Operations.

On a scale of 1 to 10 the Director-General of FAO would find a place somewhere near the upper end of the scale with regard to the policy initiated on various points arising out of Conference Resolution 10/89. If there has been a shortfall it is not on account of any lack of intentions on the part of FAO to implement the recommendations of the Conference but is attributable to the limits of resources available to FAO.

During the biennium not only the much promised additional extra-budgetary resources but the failure even to pay the assessed contribution by a number of Member States created severe liquidity problems for the Organization. The outlook in terms of the Programme of Work and Budget for the years 1992-93 also does not look very different inasmuch as this Commission has

recommended a Budget level for the next biennium which is lower than the current biennium in programme terms. I am, however, sure that with the promised payment of the assessed contributions the financial position of the Organization would improve and the momentum which has been created with regard to the phased implementation of the various recommendations of the Conference, linked to the Review, would be carried through also in the next biennium.

We also hope that the financing agencies and institutions will be willing to provide additional extra-budgetary resources to enable FAO to undertake Special Action Programmes and other selected appropriate activities. The Conference has already seen some concrete evidence of the improvements brought about following the Review; the introduction of the Medium-Term Plan, the greater involvement of FAO in GATT negotiations, greater orientation of programmes on environment and sustainable development concerns and increased policy advice activities and so on, are pointers to the fact that the Organization has risen to the occasion and is gearing itself to meet the challenges of the 90s.

It is also gratifying to note that there has been effective follow-up on the report submitted by the management consultants leading to improved efficiency, accountability and cost-effectiveness in the Organization.

Earl W. WEYBRECHT (Canada): In the same way that Canada attached high importance to the conclusion of the Resolution on the Review of FAO at the last Conference, my delegation considers the implementation of this Resolution to be of equal importance. We are pleased therefore that we have before us the Report of the Director-General on the Implementation of the Review of Certain Aspects of FAO's Goals and Operations.

We would note that this report was reviewed by the Programme and Finance Committees at their joint session in September. Canada had an opportunity to comment briefly on the report at that time. My delegation concurs with the assessment of the two Committees that expresses general satisfaction with the progress made in the implementation of the recommendations of the last Conference linked to the Review. We are also reassured by the remarks made in paragraph 10 of the report that it continues to be the firm intention of the Director-General to implement the decisions arising out of the Review exercise as promptly as possible. Many of the points in the report will be discussed as separate Agenda Items in the Conference and so my comments will be rather brief.

Canada considers the introduction of the Medium-Term Plan to be an important outcome of the Review process. We are pleased therefore that this Conference had an opportunity under another Agenda Item to examine the Plan for the period 1992-97. The introduction of this Plan, combined with the decision to establish, on a permanent basis, the submission of an Outline of the Programme of Work and Budget to the Finance and Programme Committees, will provide for a thorough budgetary process, assist in priority setting, and we believe facilitate a consensus on budgets.

Canada feels that substantial progress has been made in focusing the work of FAO on the priority areas identified within the framework of the FAO Review. In particular we welcome the steps taken at an early stage to give higher level attention within the Organization to FAO's role in relation to sustainable development including the appointment of a Coordinator on

Environment and Sustainable Development with cross-sector responsibilities. The report highlights the important contribution that FAO is making to the UNCED process and the work of the Organization will be influenced by the outcome of this important Conference. Similarly, we consider, that substantial efforts have been made to focus attention on the role of women in development and these efforts will need to continue and be enhanced. The proposals in the Programme of Work and Budget also contain provisions to strengthen further some of the other priority areas identified, including the strengthening of FAO's role as a world agricultural information centre, as well as efforts to strengthen the Country Offices. Importance will continue to be attached to FAO's work in support of the GATT, including in particular the work in relation to Codex Alimentarius and the International Plant Protection Convention.

The decision to have FAO's Technical Committees examine in detail the field operations of FAO was another important outcome of the Review exercise. The experience in COAG, COFO, COFI and the CFS has perhaps been somewhat mixed and it may be too early to draw any further conclusions. However, we hope that these Committees will place emphasis on this area and devote the time necessary to examine the field activity in detail. The linkage between the Regular Programme, along with the need to monitor developments in the implementation of new arrangements with the UNDP, will need to be taken into account.

Resolution 10/89 was directed at two of the three main elements of the Review exercise. Brief reference to the third element, that is the Management Review, is made in document C 91/LIM/22. However, we find these very brief comments provide little perspective on what steps have been taken to implement the outcome of the Management Review, and we would hope that at some point a more detailed report could be produced by the Finance Committee. We have noted the comments made on Field Inspection. The Review teams have looked at this area and recommended a more independent form of inspection, whereas the Conference had urged the Director-General to strengthen the process of Field Programme evaluation through the work of the evaluation service. We would still see merit in strengthening the Evaluation Unit as urged by the Conference.

On the question of resources, my delegation can associate itself with the comments made by the Nordic countries that reform should not be regarded as an additional cost factor. We are encouraged, therefore, that substantial progress has been made since the last Conference, despite the particularly difficult financial situation. As well, we can support the comments of the United Kingdom and the United States that we, as Member States, need to look at how best we can improve our own working methods in various Bodies in FAO; including the point raised by Norway on the need to encourage greater participation of technical experts in the various Technical Committees.

In conclusion, my delegation considers that much has been done to implement Resolution 10/89, and that there is the recognition that more still remains to be done. The Report of the last Conference stressed the need for an ongoing dialogue in order to better support the objectives, of the Organization. In the face of rapid changes and new challenges, my delegation supports such an ongoing dialogue to ensure that every effort is made to continue to strengthen the Organization.

Joseph TCHICAYA (Congo): Je serai bref étant donné que sur nombre de questions abordées ici, nous avons déjà exprimé notre point de vue dans d'autres circonstances.

Cependant, j'ai tenu à prendre la parole pour manifester ma satisfaction quant à la manière dont sont mises en oeuvre les conclusions de l'Examen de certains aspects et opérations de la FAO.

Cette satisfaction est d'autant plus grande que nous avons, à la vingt-cinquième session, planché souvent des nuits pour aboutir aux conclusions que nous connaissons.

Je dois simplement regretter que cette mise en oeuvre se soit heurtée à unanque évident de financement. Ceci est d'autant plus regrettable que le Budget 1992-93 n'incite guère à l'optimisme avec les amputations dont il a fait l'objet au cours de cette session

Nous espérons que ces amputations ne se répéteront plus, sinon elles risquent de mettre en péril le long processus budgétaire actuellement mis en oeuvre, dont on nous a souvent dit qu'il facilite le consensus.

Nous pensons que le Plan à moyen terme devrait désormais simplifier ce processus budgétaire en le rendant moins coûteux.

Etant donné ces aléas, nous nous interrogeons également, comme bien d'autres ici, sur le fait de savoir comment le Secrétariat entend faire des progrès encore plus substantiels dans la voie de mise en oeuvre des conclusions de cet examen.

Nous serons heureux d'entendre M. Shah, bien entendu, sur ce sujet. Nous espérons en tout cas que les difficultés nées du financement de ces conclusions ne seront pas de mise au cours des prochaines sessions.

Mohammed Saleem KHAN (Pakistan): I apologize for taking the floor again. Looking at my written statement, I missed one line; I would not like to repeat - may be if you would like me to repeat it?

What I wish to state is while sitting here 1 heard some delegates speaking about further continuation of this Review and reform exercise, and my delegation very strongly feels that now is not the time to reopen this Review exercise, and that now is the time we must consolidate what we have done and find the resources to consolidate on it.

This is what I really missed from my first statement, and I would request that this be put at the end of my statement. If it is wished I could put the same in writing.

While I have the floor, Mr Chairman, in my capacity as Chairman of the Asia Group, I would like to tell our colleagues from the Asia Group that there will be a meeting of the Asia Group, on Friday 22, at 12.45 hours in the Ethiopia Room in Building C.

The meeting rose at 12.30.
La séance est levée à 12 h 30.
Se levanta la sesión a las 12.30 horas.

Previous Page Top of Page Next Page