LEGAL COUNSEL: In the absence of the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the Committee on Constitutional and Legal Matters, I should just like to introduce the first part of this item which is the question of the procedures for the election of the chairmen and members of the Finance Committee and the Programme Committee. In this connection, you will recall that the Council has already considered this matter on two previous occasions. Basically, the problem was to find a solution which would be agreeable to all the members of the Council so that there could be a consensus.
There were two basic theses, one that the General Rules of the Organization should be amended in order to ensure that any region that so wished would be represented on those committees. The other thesis was that amendment of the General Rules was not necessary and that equitable regional distribution on the committees could be ensured through appropriate negotiations between regions and within the regions themselves.
At the last session of the Council, the matter was again referred to the CCLM in order to seek a solution which would lead to a consensus in the Council. The CCLM has recommended a compromise solution which you have before you in paragraphs 3 to 10 of document CL 92/5. It basically consists of an intermediate course of action which lies between amendment of the General Rules and merely leaving the outcome of the elections to prior negotiations among governments.
The solution which is proposed to you by the CCLM is that the Conference should adopt a resolution which lays down certain principles which should be taken into account by the Council when it proceeds to the election of the chairmen and members of the two committees.
The draft resolution which the Conference may wish to adopt, or which the Council may first wish to endorse, is on pages 3 and 4 of the English text of the document and you will see that in the operative paragraphs the Conference would endorse three principles. First, it would affirm the need for just and equitable representation of the various regions. Secondly, it would underline that an essential element of such representation is that all regions that wish to be represented are in fact represented. The third principle that should be borne in mind is the importance of securing equitable rotation among the countries constituting each region. Of course, the latter requires cooperation and negotiation within the regions.
The first two principles are directed at the question of which regions should be represented and if the Conference adopts this resolution it will affirm the need to ensure that each region that wishes to be represented on either of these committees, is so represented.
I think that is all I need to say on this. Later on I shall introduce the two parts of item 12.2 entitled "Other Matters Arising Out of the Report".
LE PRESIDENT: Je remercie M. le Conseiller juridique pour son introduction et ses explications et je demande si Messieurs les délégués ont des interventions à présenter.
Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): "El Señor Roche, en su competencia bien reconocida, ha representado muy bien al Comité de Asuntos Constitucionales y Jurídicos al presentarnos este tema.
La Delegación de Colombia piensa que el CACJ ha cumplido al máximo sus responsabilidades dentro del carácter limitado de este Comité que debe basarse sobre el fondo de las recomendaciones políticas del Consejo. No podía ir más allá el CACJ. Hemos estudiado con cuidado este proyecto de resolución que se propone a la aprobación de la Conferencia; realísticamente pensamos que apenas contiene buenas intenciones, sin embargo, creemos, Señor Presidente, que de acuerdo con el párrafo 3 del proyecto de resolución, la adopción de un texto como éste podría al menos inducir a los miembros del Consejo a meditar seriamente sobre los principios contenidos en el texto de. la Resolución.
Esencialmente, Señor Presidente, sería conveniente que haya negociaciones intensas de buena voluntad y con espíritu de compromiso entre los representantes de los Gobiernos de todas las Regiones para que se logre un acuerdo y se puedan cumplir así los principios objetivos y constructivos de este proyecto de resolución que apoyamos.
Elio PASCARELLI (Italie): Je voudrais tout d'abord excuser l'absence du Vice-Président qui provisoirement a présidé les réunions de ce Comité, le professeur Panebianco, il est aussi le Président de l'université et il est maintenant retenu par des travaux à Salerne.
D'autre part, je voudrais remercier M. Roche d'avoir si clairement introduit et synthétiquement donné l'essentiel de cette draft résolution à laquelle nous avons donné notre accord mais vous savez que nous sommes héraclitiens. Les situations peuvent changer, le projet de résolution a été approuvé par le représentant italien mais nous attendons la Conférence. La vague des réformes a commencé à courir et nous ne resterons pas à regarder la vague passer. Voilà une des réformes essentielles que nous allons proposer au cours de la Conférence. Je ne sais pas si cette résolution, acceptable au moment actuel, pourra survivre aux propositions de réformes de la commission des finances qui n'a rien à voir avec les autres critères qui dominent l'élection à la commission du Comité du programme.
Nous nous réservons très clairement de présenter une proposition de modification des critères d'élection et même du nombre des membres de la commission.
Pour l'instant nous n'avons rien à ajouter à ce draft, il est valable jusqu'à ce que la Conférence commence.
Sra. Margarita UZARRAGA SAUCEDO (México): Nuestra Delegación apoya totalmente la proposisición hecha por el CACJ y consideramos que el Reglamento no debe ser modificado porque esto daría lugar a ampliar el número de miembros del Comité y creemos que esto podría traer implicaciones negativas a posteriori. Consideramos que esta Resolución que se nos propone es una buena fórmula de espresar la buena voluntad de que podamos dirimir dentro de las propias regiones, y entre las regiones, la composición del Comité. Por tanto, le damos todo nuestro apoyo.
J. LYNCH (Canada): Although we had been in favour of a change in this particular area, we can accept the proposal being made, but just to underline that, it is an extremely important element that all regions be represented on the Finance and Programme Committees, and that it is necessary for the type of goodwill that has been shown recently to be manifested again at the time of the elections which are coming up.
John COOK (United States of America): The United Sates would like to express its concurrence with the statement of the delegate of Canada. The United States would like to support this resolution, and the United States would like to thank Mr Roche for his very clear explanation of this Resolution.
LE PRESIDENT: S'il n'y a pas d'autres interventions, nous pouvons considérer que le Conseil approuve à l'unanimité ce projet de résolution et le transmet avec avis favorable à notre Conférence.
LEGAL COUNSEL: Sub-item 12.2 is made up of two distinct questions. The first one relates to the draft resolutions concerning financial matters which are also dealt with under item 11. With respect to three of those resolutions you will recall that the Council asked that once the resolutions had been drafted by the Finance Committee, they should also be reviewed by the CCLM.
I think at this stage it would suffice if I merely said that the resolutions as drafted by the Finance Committee were found to be in order by the CCLM from a purely legal and constitutional point of view, and that the CCLM in paragraph 18 of its report concluded that if they were adopted in the form proposed by the Finance Committee, they would not involve any amendments to the Financial Regulations or any other provision of the Basic Texts.
This is merely a conclusion which you may wish to bear in mind when you come to discussing the resolutions on, the level of the Working Capital Fund, the amendment of the procedures for the application of a cash surplus, and the resolution relating to measures to deal with problems of delayed payment of assessed contributions. This is, shall we say, the legal and constitutional contribution of the CCLM to be taken into account when you discuss the relevant sub-items of item 11.
I shall now leave that particular aspect of the CCLM's report and go on to the other part of item 12.2.
This relates to a headquarters agreement to be concluded for the World Food Programme. This is dealt with in paragraphs 19 to 25 of document CL 92/5. To summarize briefly what this question is about, the first point to note is that the Italian Government has very generously undertaken to take the necessary measures to provide state-owned property for the permanent headquarters of the World Food Programme. Even after the buildings in this Terme di Caracalla complex have been restructured, there will still not be sufficient acconmodation to house the World Food Programme. The Italian Government indicated that it was essential under their legislation for a separate headquarters agreement to be concluded for the World Food Programme if such accommodation was to be provided. This agreement would be concluded by the Italian Government with the United Nations and with FAO as the two parent organizations of the World Food Programme. Because of the urgency of concluding this agreement, so as to enable the Italian Government to provide the accommodation, the Director-General and the Secretary-General agreed to enter into negotiations right away. These having been initiated, the Director-General wished to consult the CCLM on the appropriate procedures that should be followed within FAO, which would be one of the parties; and in particular to ascertain the views of the CCLM on what the proper role would be for the governing bodies of FAO.
After reviewing the Basic Texts, the CCLM concluded that there was no specific text which governed this particular kind of agreement. On the other hand, a body of practice had been built up over the years, and the normal procedure for headquarters agreements that had been followed, not only for the Organization itself in Rome, but for the establishment of the various regional offices, was to submit the text to the Council for approval. However, the CCLM realized that if in this particular case the same procedure were to be followed, we would inevitably put off the conclusion of the agreement, probably till the Council session that would be held in the last quarter of 1988. This would then delay accommodation being provided to the World Food Programme. This was obviously a situation which had to be avoided.
Taking that into account, and also the fact that the contents of this agreement would in principle be along the lines of the headquarters agreements already concluded with the Government of Italy by FAO and, more recently, by the International Fund for Agricultural Development, and further taking into account the fact that from information received from the United Nations it appeared that the Secretary-General would be able to sign the agreement without consulting any other intergovernmental body such as ECOSOC, the CCLM recommended that in this particular case the Director-General be authorized to conclude the agreement with the Italian Government on behalf of FAO without submitting the text to the Council for approval before signing it.
This is the only way in which we can avoid a long delay which would put off the suitable housing of the World Food Programme. This is the recommendation made to you by the CCLM. It is to be found in paragraph 23 of its report. In the meantime, the World Food Programme will continue to be covered by the FAO headquarters agreement as it always has been.
You will also notice in paragraph 24 of the CCLM's report that the CCLM placed on record its appreciation for the action proposed by the Italian Government and expressed the hope that the necessary arrangements could be undertaken as soon as possible. I have no doubt that the Council will also share those sentiments.
I think that is all I need to say at this stage.
Elio PASCARELLI: (Italie) Il est naturel que j'ajoute tout de suite mon appréciation et adresse mes remerciements à Monsieur Roche pour avoir aussi bien exposé ce sujet. Je crois qu'il est de mon devoir de demander avec l'énergie et la chaleur nécessaire au Conseil de donner ce que le CCLM a proposé, mais je crois qu'il faudrait quand même en expliquer les raisons car il y a des doutes. Les raisons sont les suivantes; nous avons, depuis ma prise de fonction, considéré la nécessité de payer le loyer du WFP, ce pauvre abandonné qui avait été traité comme un enfant d'Electre. Nous avons commencé à donner la moitié du loyer, j'ai réussi, l'année passée, à le donner entièrement.
Pour 1988 je le promets entièrement, cela a été déjà assuré au cours de la session de la Commission du Comité pour les Programmes et aide alimentaire, mais pour 1989 subsiste un doute en ce qui concerne la possibilité de payer la contribution volontaire. La FAO est logée ici, il n'y avait pas de place pour le WFP. Comme vous le savez, la famille s'est beaucoup agrandie; ils sont arrivés cinq cents, ils sont maintenant presque quatre-mille. Le WFP a quelques pièces ici, le reste est logé à la Via Cristoforo Colombo. Nous avons demandé à nos autorités compétentes de nous accorder des contributions volontaires pour cela, mais à un certain moment un obstacle s'est élevé: celui de la base juridique. Nous avons accompli notre devoir vis-à vis de cette Organisation que nous aimons en décidant d'allouer les fonds pour faire face aux besoins de la FAO. Les bâtiments des Thermes de Caracalla permettent à toute la famille de la FAO de se réunir sous un toit, mais il faut que nous trouvions quand-même quelque chose pour ce pauvre enfant abandonné. Or, pour 1988 la décision a déjà été prise de payer la totalité du loyer; pour 1989 il y avait des doutes. Je voudrais rassurer le Conseil - je l'ai fait devant la Commission d'aide alimentaire - que notre souci était le danger que notre parlement retarde l'approbation de la ratification de l'Accord de siège. J'espère qu'il n'y aura pas les mêmes raisons.
Il y a quelques mois nous avons eu de nouvelles élections, nous avons maintenant devant nous cinq ans - Dieu nous protège I - de législature continue. Si par hasard au début de 1989 ce processus n'était pas terminé, nous n'aurions pas la possibilité légale de payer, mais je puis aujourd'hui assurer le Conseil que le Gouvernement italien n'oubliera pas que la faute réside dans la lenteur du processus parlementaire. Il faut que les deux chambres examinent et approuvent cet Accord de siège. C'est la raison pour laquelle nous demandons que l'Accord de siège soit conclu aussi vite que possible, que le Directeur général n'ait pas à attendre jusqu'à la réunion du Conseil l'année prochaine. Nous recommandons vivement au Conseil de donner cette autorisation demandée.
Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): El Gobierno de Colombia ha venido reiterando constantemente su pleno apoyo al Programa Mundial de Alimentos; consideramos que es uno de los organismos que trabaja muy eficazmente, por ello nos complace que la posibilidad de que el PMA tenga su propia sede, podrá contribuir a que el personal de ese importante Programa trabaje en mejores condiciones que les permita ser aun más eficaces.
Estamos de acuerdo con el Embajador Pascarelli en la conveniencia de destacar en nuestro informe sobre este tema el hecho de que la autorización al Director General para que firme el acuerdo facilitará el pago del Gobierno italiano el arriendo que será del 100 por cien en 1988. Sobre 1989 el Embajador Pascarelli honestamente ha suscitado algunas dudas. Desafortunadamente, como ya es bien sabido, tal vez en ese año el Embajador Pascarelli no tendrá funciones oficiales directas, pero esperamos que de todas maneras él siga contribuyendo con sus luces, con sus orientaciones y su asistencia para que esa situación sea satisfactoria.
Apoyamos por ello el final del párrafo 23 sobre la conveniencia de autorizar al Director General a firmar ese acuerdo, que no contendrá diferencias importantes con los otros acuerdos. Suponemos que a posteriori se presentará un informe al Consejo al respecto y posiblemente se distribuirá el texto del acuerdo que va a firmar el Director General.
Finalmente, proponemos que el Consejo haga suyas, refrende, las consideraciones del CACJ en el párrafo 24 al dejar constancia de su reconocimiento por la actitud constructiva del Gobierno italiano.
Sra.Margarita LIZARRAGA SAUCEDO (México): Nestra delegación no tiene más que regocijarse de que una solución de esta naturaleza venga propuesta por nuestro Comité, y se une al Embajador de Colombia en el apoyo dado para que este acuerdo sea firmado a la brevedad posible a fin de que pueda resolverse este problema, y desde luego la gratitud que debemos este Consejo refrendar al Gobierno italiano por su actitud tan positiva.
James D. AITKEN (United Kingdom): The United Kingdom would like to add its thanks to those of other delegations to the delegation of Italy, the host nation, for the very generous and helpful way in which they have negotiated. We fully support the idea that there should be no delay in signing the Agreement, but because it will be some time before Member States see this Agreement as a Council document, we would like to suggest to the Council that the Draft Agreement when prepared, is circulated to Member States - simply for information, not as a Council Document awaiting decision, so that we are aware of what is going on.
Elio PASCARELLI (Italie): Je crois qu'il faut souligner encore une fois que cette attitude vis-à-vis du Programme alimentaire mondial est déterminée par le fait que nous voulons séparer nettement notre contribution volontaire au Programme ordinaire du reste. Nous avons eu le plaisir d'annoncer que nous allions doubler (c'est-à-dire augmenter de 100 pour cent) notre contribution régulière de façon à monter dans la liste des contribuables, à être dans les dix premiers. Alors nous voulons la séparer de ce que nous croyons de notre devoir d'hospitalité. Il s'agit donc d'une contribution volontaire, mais vous savez que parfois les contributions volontaires rencontrent plus de difficultés que les contributions obligatoires. Notre contribution obligatoire a surmonté tous les obstacles auprès du trésor jusqu'au moment où le bâtiment sera bâti, ou un bâtiment existant sera aménagé.
LE PRESIDENT: Je pense donc traduire la pensée du Conseil qu'il est unanime à recommander d'autoriser le Directeur général à signer cet Accord de siège pour le Programme alimentaire mondial avec le Gouvernement italien, d'en distribuer, après signature, un exemplaire aux membres du Conseil. Le Conseil se félicite et tient à exprimer sa reconnaissance au Gouvernement italien pour l'attitude constructive et généreuse dont il a fait preuve vis-à-vis des Organismes des Nations Unies qui siègent à Rome. Nous allons insister pour que cette reconnaissance figure au procès-verbal de notre Conseil.
C.H. BONTE-FRIEDHEIM (Assistant Director-General, Agriculture Department): It is my pleasure to introduce to Council, Council Document CL 92/7, with the proposal to establish a Commission on Livestock Development in Latin America and the Caribbean.
The importance of the livestock sub-sector in the Latin America and Caribbean region may be illustrated by the fact that it accounts for about one quarter of the world's cattle population and produces about 17 and a half percent of total world beef output. In 1985 the total value of meat and cattle exports was more than one and a half billion dollars. It is estimated that livestock production accounts for about five and a half percent of the regional GDP. However, the region's self-sufficiency ratios have declined, particularly in this decade: for meat, the principal export item, the self-sufficiency ratio fell from about 112 percent during the late 1960s and early 1970s to approximately 105 percent by the mid-1980s.
This situation has given rise to concern in recent years, although there has been an expansion in animal production. The reason is that the production increase stems largely from an increase in the number, rather than from higher productivity of the animals. FAO has closely followed the situation over the years and actively supported animal production and assisted development at national level, while at the same time participating in regional efforts to accelerate the transfer of technology. On FAO's initiative, the matter has also been considered in a number of the Organization's meetings.
Animal production and animal health issues were recently raised in the Regional Conference held in Nicaragua in 1982, as well as in meetings of the COAG and the Programme Committee. During all these meetings delegates reiterated their concern at the political situation in the livestock sub-sector and the need of concerted action. There appears to be general agreement that in order to improve the situation, coordinated action at the regional level, mainly of a TCDC nature, would be called for, which could generate action programmes at the country level.
With a view to promoting direct action, it was decided to include the issue again in the agenda of the Nineteenth FAO Regional Conference for Latin America and the Caribbean which was held in Barbados in August 1986. The Regional Conference stressed the need for action and urged FAO to promote comprehensive proposals and strategies for the development of the livestock sub-sector. As a conclusion of its discussions, the Regional Conference recommended the establishment of a Livestock Commission and requested the Secretariat to prepare the necessary follow-up action.
FAO therefore convened in Brazil in April of this year, a consultation of livestock experts from a number of countries in the region. The consultation discussed the substantive technical issues involved as well as the most appropriate follow-up action. It unanimously agreed that a Commission on Livestock Development should be established as a matter of urgency in order to promote active national and regional animal production and health development programmes.
The proposal was subsequently brought to the attention of the Programme Committee at its 53rd session in September of this year. The Committee fully supported the establishment of a Commission on Livestock Development in Latin America and the Caribbean under Article VI, paragraph 1, of the FAO Constitution, in view of the importance of the livestock sector in the economy of the region. The major tasks of the Commission would be to recommend animal production and health policies for the members of the Commission to plan and promote action for the improvement of animal production and for the survey and control of animal diseases, and to recommend common standards and practices for its performance. It is foreseen that while the Commission will deal mainly with policy and strategy matters, and animal livestock development, it will be supported in its work on substantive technical subjects by ad hoc expert consultations.
Document CL 92/7 sets out a rationale for the establishment of a Livestock Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean. It proposes a draft resolution to that effect in paragraph 19 for Council decision, including the terms of reference of the Commission as well as other provisions for its proper functioning. The proposed Programme of Work and Budget for 1988-89 contains provision in sub-paragraph 2.1.3.2. to finance the new Commission's work in the next biennium.
The Secretariat will be pleased to provide further information if required.
Igor KIPMAN (Brazil): I would like, on behalf of my delegation, to present our full support to the resolution establishing a Commission on Livestock Development in Latin America and the Caribbean, an initiative which had been recommended by the Regional Conference held in 1986 and by the Expert Consultation convened in the country this year. Taking into consideration the great economic difficulties faced by the region, bufdened by the service of a huge external debt, and also the specific problems of the livestock sector in Latin America and the Caribbean, which I referred to in the document, we are convinced that this initiative constitutes an appropriate support for our regional development .
Mond . Mazlan bin JUSOH (Malaysia): My delegation, after hearing of the stagnation in productivity of ruminants and the declining self-sufficiency ratio in the livestock sub-sector in Latin America, strongly supports the proposal to establish the Regional Commission on Livestock Development in Latin America and the Caribbean.
- 145.-
Drawing from the experiences from our own region where a similar commission, APHCA, has played an important role in the promotion of animal production and health development, it is indeed timely for such a commission to be established for the region of Latin America and the Caribbean.
Such commissions have played an invaluable role in fostering international cooperation, effecting the transfer of new technologies to optimise utilization of resources, implementation of better marketing arrangements and provision of training and extension services for the countries in the region.
We feel that efforts to promote more active participation in TCDC would be enhanced through this commission. Although this proposal comes in the midst of the financial crisis, we feel that the need and the useful role that this commission can play, overrides the financial consideration. We therefore strongly support this proposal and hope that the commission can play its useful role as soon as possible.
E.P. ALLEYNE (Trinidad and Tobago): Mr Bonte-Friedheim has already given us the relevant statistics which indicate the importance of livestock development to the economy of the region. In addition, of course, we have information paragraphs 4 to 9 of the document. As with the distinguished representative of Malaysia, our delegation also hopes that the present financial situation will not in any way interfere with the proposal to set up this commission, and so we only want to indicate our full support and appreciation for this initiative.
Sra. Monica. DEREGIBUS (Argentina): La delegación argentina quiere apoyar calurosamente la iniciativa de crear una Comisión de Desarrollo Ganadero para América Latina y el Caribe. El Sr. Bonte Friedheim ha sido muy claro al explicarnos los motivos y los beneficios que derivarán de la creación de tal Comisión. Creemos que serán muy grandes para la Región; específicamente, sí quisiéramos resaltar la importancia que en términos de cooperación económica y técnica en países en desarrollo esto constituye, y aplaudir el proyecto de Resolución que se nos presenta cuya Recomendación a la Asamblea apoyamos.
Ismael DIAZ YUBERO (España): Nosotros queremos también apoyar, y además apoyar fuertemente, la creación de esta Comisión de Desarrollo Ganadero para América Latina y el Caribe. Estimamos que en América Latina y el Caribe hay muchas zonas con auténtica vocación ganadera que pueden soportar un peso vivo muy superior al que tienen en estos momentos. Creemos que los incrementos de productividad pueden ser muy importantes en esta Región, y sobre todo estimamos que hay una base forrajera importantísima que en estos momentos no se está aprovechando suficientemente.
Por todos esos motivos y por la necesidad que en esta Región existe de proteínas de origen animal, lácteo o cárnico, y por que pensamos además el efecto que esta Comisión puede tener en el futuro de esta Región latinoamericana, es por lo que apoyamos muy fuertemente la posición oficial.
Marcos I. NIETO LARA (Cuba): Permítame, en primer lugar, felicitar al Sr. Bonte Friedheim por la clara y precisa exposición que nos ha hecho del tema: Mi delegación ve con mucha satisfacción el seguimiento que la FAO está dando a este aspecto tan importante para los países de nuestra Región, como lo es sin duda el desarrollo ganadero. Todavía están frescas en nuestras mentes las discusiones realizadas en la pasada Conferencia Regional de Barbados, y acogemos con satisfacción el seguimiento y el dinamismo que la FAO está dando a esta acción y a las proposiciones que allí se hicieron, evidenciando una vez más la capacidad de interpretar y actuar consecuentemente según lo demandan nuestros países.
América Latina y el Caribe se ha identificado históricamente y casi pudiera interpretarse erróneamente, desde luego, como una Región de alta y eficiente producción ganadera. Lo cierto es que la ganadería en la Región ha venido experimentando un considerable estancamiento en su producción y productividad, lo cual ha tenido importantes efectos en la economía de la mayoría de los países, según se expresa con claridad en los párrafos 5 y 6 del documento CL 92/7.
La recuperación de la producción ganadera sería posible mediante un notable esfuerzo, sobre todo en lo que hace al desarrollo de fuentes de alimentos estables para el ganado partiendo de los recursos autóctonos. Ya algunas instituciones en la Región, como el Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical radicado en la República de Colombia, está dando pasos en materia de investigación para el desarrollo de los pastos y de los forrajes.
También la FAO, en el maxco subregional, está realizando algunas actividades a través del Grepag. Esta es una red de cooperación técnica que está en funcionamiento y de la cual se esperan importantes resultados. Varios países también están realizando esfuerzos en este sentido, pero es cierto que por sí mismos no podrían poner solución a estos problemas en la cuantía y en la oportunidad que se requiere.
Otro aspecto de sumo interés es el referido a la diversificación de la producción ganadera. Tradi-cionalmente la Región ha sido productora y exportadora de tarne de vacuno, pero a la luz de las necesidades actuales para la seguridad alimentaria regional, se requiere con prontitud abordar el problema de la diversificación de la producción. Esto es, atender con mayor preferencia la producción de leche y sus derivados y aumentar la producción de otras especies ganaderas no vacunas.
Un problema importante que deberá ser abordado también por la Comisión es lo que hace a la sanidad pecuaria. Actualmente se están dando pasos en esta dirección, pero pensamos que la FAO puede tomar un papel determinante y un papel líder en estas acciones. La cooperación técnica entre países en desarrollo también sería un elemento importante que la Comisión pudiera tomar con mucha fuerza, y naturalmente propiciar excelentes resultados en toda esta estrategia.
La FAO está llamada a ser, a jugar un papel decisivo y un papel líder. De hecho, algunas medidas de carácter operativo ya han sido tomadas. Se han incluido en el presupuesto del Programa de Labores y Presupuesto para el próximo bienio. Han sido tomadas algunas previsiones presupuestarias a fin de poder organizar ciertas actividades.
Para concluir, mi delegación desea suscribir las conclusiones de la Consulta de expertos celebrada en abril pasado, y apoya firmemente las acciones de la FAO para poner en marcha la Comisión de Desarrollo Ganadero para América Latina y el Caribe, y en consecuencia, apoyamos la Resolución propuesta.
Sra. Rosa María VILLARELLO REZA (México): Agradecemos, en nombre de mi delegación, la presentación que hizo el Sr. Bonte Friedheim del proyectó de Comisión de Desarrollo Ganadero para América Latina y el Caribe. Quisiéramos señalar que mi delegación Ve con gran satisfacción que se haya llegado ya a la elaboración de este proyecto de creación de esta Comisión que estamos seguros que coadyuvará una mayor atención para los asuntos para la ganadería de la Región. Sin embargo, quisiéramos también recordar y manifestar nuestro interés nuevamente en asumir la Recomendación que la 19 Conferencia Regional de la FAO para América Latina y el Caribe celebrada en agosto de 1986 en Barbados, hizo en el sentido, y cito textualmente el proyecto de Recomendación: "... en que basándose en el Artículo VI-2 de la Constitución de la FAO, el establecimiento de un Comité de Ganadería como órgano asesor del Consejo de la FAO". Y pidió a la Secretaría que tomara las medidas necesarias para poner en práctica esta Recomendación.
Lo traigo a la memoria esta Recomendación que hizo la Conferencia en virtud de que estamos ciertos que si bien es muy importante, como lo expuso el delegado de Cuba, esta iniciativa de la creación de una Comisión para el fomento de la ganadería de la Región, también estamos ciertos que el problema debe verse de manera global, de manera integral, como uno de los aspectos más importantes que debe considerar la FAO. Y por consiguiente, sometemos nuevamente al Consejo la iniciativa de la creación en función a lo establecido dentro de los Estatutos de la FAO, de la creación de este Comité pecuario como órgano asesor de la FAO.
James D. AITKEN (United Kingdom): The United Kingdom has had a long and friendly relationship with this region and is proud to have played a significant role in the development of its agriculture. The British Aid Programme currently supports a number of livestock projects in Latin America and the Caribbean. These focus mainly on improving animal health and productivity. The United Kingdom fully supports the establishement of a commission which we believe will result in improved coordination of livestock policies and programmes for the region and lead to the development of integrated approaches to disease control.
We hope that as a result of the establishment of the commission more emphasis will be given to training staff and to technical aspects of animal health, nutrition and animal production. We certainly stand ready to cooperate through our Aid Programme with the commission.
We believe this proposal is a good example of the type of activity which we have in mind when we say that FAO should direct its resources to priority activities where it has a unique expertise. We therefore commend this proposal.
Sra. Virginia ESPINOSA DE CARRION (Nicaragua): Los países de América Latina y el Caribe reúnen características naturales y potenciales para el desarrollo ganadero. Es en la actualidad un recurso subexplotado y con grandes limitaciones tecnológicas, lo que restringe su participación más amplia en la alimentación humana y en la economía de nuestros países. Las enfermedades tropicales, la subutilización de pastos, la baja productividad genètica y el manejo tradicional del hato constituyen las principales limitaciones tecnológicas para el desarrollo ganadero en nuestros países.
Nuestra delegación apoya la propuesta de Resolución para el establecimiento de la Comisión de Desarrollo Ganadero para América Latina y el Caribe. Albergamos la esperanza de que dicha Comisión aportará logros para enfrentar los problemas con estrategias y herramientas de trabajo a disposición de nuestros países.
Ms Joan WALLACE DAWKINS (United States of America): The United States welcomes and believes necessary the establishment of a Commission on Livestock Development in Latin America and the Caribbean. Presently there is no worldwide organization which provides a forum for Latin American and Caribbean governments to discuss and resolve together the aspects of livestock development. The United States agrees that there is a need for the Commission to serve as an advisory body to the declining animal stock industry in that region. The United States proposes that the Commission invite all other regional livestock development organizations as observers to the Commission sessions. This would hopefully prevent the overlap and duplication of efforts by such groups as the Inter-American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture, OIRSA, PAHO, IDB and CIAGA, and the United States believes that, since Puerto Rico and the United States Virgin Islands play an important role in the livestock industry in the Caribbean, the United States should participate in the Commission as a member nation or as an associate member of the Commission.
The United States agrees with the proposal that the cost of attendance at the biennial sessions of the Commission be covered by the respective participating organizations or countries. Other expenses and services, including the technical secretariat for the Commission, should be provided for by FAO's Regular Programme activities, and no new posts should be created for the Commission.
The United States believes that the expert consultation, to be attended by up to twenty experts at the cost of US$ 85 000, is an expense that can be willingly absorbed by individual governments and regional organizations who are indeed committed to the development of the livestock industry.
We believe that without the individual commitment from Member Nations to share Commission travel expenses there will be no internal commitment from within each country to carry out future recommendations and resolutions of the Commission,
Masahiko YASUMURO (Japan): In order to avoid a rigidity in the whole programme, my delegation thinks it very important that in establishing a new committee the Organization should, in principle, dispense with an unnecessary one. In Japan we call this principle "scrap and build" system, in English, "made in Japan".
However, my delegation, in recognition of the serious constraints on livestock development in Latin America and the Caribbean, can support the establishment of a Regional Commission on Livestock Development in the region.
Sahadou BAWA (Niger): C'est avec un réel plaisir que ma délégation a écouté l'exposé très clair que M. Bonte-Friedheim vient de livrer avec sa rigueur habituelle.
C'est aussi avec joie que ma délégation voudrait apporter son plein appui à ce projet de commission régionale pour le développement de l'élevage en Amérique latine et dans les Caraïbes et voudrait formuler le voeu que cette commission joue pleinement son rôle et contribue au développement de cet élevage dans cette partie du tiers monde.
Sra. Maria Isabel CASELLAS (Venezuela): Mi Delegación quiere apoyar esta Resolución. Los países de América Latina y el Caribe tienen una gran potencialidad para el desarrollo ganadero; es un recurso que puede ser explotado con grandes posibilidades. Nuestra Delegación apoya la propuesta de Resolución para el establecimiento de una Comisión Regional de Fomento Pecuario para América Latina y el Caribe. Esperamos que dicha Comisión aportará logros para enfrentar problemas y poniendo a disposición herramientas de trabajo a nuestros países.
Joachim WINKEL (Germany, Federal Republic of): My delegation welcomes the presentation of the document and, of course, the preparation by the Secretariat, especially by Mr Bonte-Friedheim, dealing with the establishment of a Commission on Livestock Development for Latin America and the Caribbean. We share the view expressed in paragraph 3 of the document that the establishment of the Commission will fill a vacuum. We assume that one of the major items of the actions to be planned and promoted will be training and education, in order to ensure the implementation of the programme. We support the establishment of a Commission.
Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Nuestra Delegación desea sumarse particularmente a las declaraciones que han hecho nuestros colegas de América Latina y el Caribe y agradecer a los Representantes de otras Regiones el apoyo que han ofrecido al Proyecto de Resolución.
Sobre la participación en la Cornisón de países que tengan territorios incluidos en nuestras regiones, nos parece que ello está claro al final del párrafo 10.
En relación con algunos aspectos específicos de detalle que se han sugerido para el funcionamiento de la Comisión, seguramente algunos de ellos podrán ser constructivos, pero la Delegación de Colombia piensa que tal vez no conviene desde ahora entrar en esos pormenores, puesto que como dice este Documento, está previsto que la Comisión tenga su primera reunión en el bienio 88-89 y la propia Comisión, como se dice en el párrafo 8 va a adoptar su propio Reglamento. La Delegación de Colombia piensa que es mejor esperar a que la Comisión tenga su primera reunión, que empiecen a llevar a cabo esas actividades y más adelante se irán tomando disposiciones concretas aunque, repetimos, apreciamos el ánimo constructivo con que se han presentado esas cuestiones.
V. K. SIBAL (India): We. take the floor to support wholeheartedly the proposal under discussion which emanates from the Nineteenth FAO Conference for Latin America and the Caribbean and the subsequent consultation in Brazil. We should like to thank Mr Bonte-Friedheim for clearly presenting all the facts of this proposal, which we feel is fully justified and will open up very important areas in this field for the assistance of FAO in relation to technologies for the utilization of feeds and programmes for control of animal diseases and improved breeding programmes and in the area of biotechnology. The Budget implications are not very major and are very well justified. We fully support this resolution.
Elio PASCARELLI (Italie): Je ne peux pas me taire sur ce sujet parce que vous connaissez les relations étroites que nous avons avec l'Amérique latine. Je voudrais d'abord féliciter M.Bonte-Friedheim pour l'initiative de la FAO et lui souhaiter un grand succès.
Mais je voudrais ajouter que, comme d'habitude, s'agissant d'un problème essentiel pour la production de l'Amérique latine dans le domaine du bétail, nous sommes prêts à aller au-delà des paroles, des mots et, le cas échéant, nous demandons à M. Bonte-Friedheim de frapper à notre porte.
LE PRESIDENT: Est-ce qu'il y a d'autres interventions?
Nous pouvons résumer nos débats en disant que le Conseil est unanime à se féliciter de la création de cette commission pour le développement de l'élevage en Amérique latine et dans les Caraïbes, vu le poids considérable qu'a l'élevage dans l'économie agricole de l'Amérique latine et des Caraïbes.
La décision revient au Conseil, c'est le Conseil qui décide la création, donc c'est une décision du Conseil.
LE SECRETAIRE GENERAL: Le Secrétariat doit régulièrement rendre compte au Conseil des invitations qui ont été adressées à des Etats non membres de l'Organisation en vue de leur participation à des réunions de la FAO depuis la dernière session du Conseil.
Nous avions réservé à ce propos une cote de document pour présenter les renseignements voulus au Conseil, la cote CL 92/INF/8. En fait il n'y a pas eu, depuis la dernière session du Conseil, d'invitation adressée à des Etats non membres, de sorte que le document n'a pas été publié. J'ai simplement à rendre compte au Conseil que nous avons un état néant, aucune invitation à rapporter.
LE SECRETAIRE GENERAL: La FAO a organisé un grand nombre de réunions techniques auxquelles des organisations internationales, aussi bien intergouvernementales que non gouvernementales, sont invitées. Cela permet à la FAO d'obtenir des avis qualifiés et des informations sur des questions déterminées. Les organisations internationales non gouvernementales ayant un statut officiel auprès de la FAO sont invitées sur la base d'accords de coopération conformes aux textes fondamentaux de la FAO.
Quant aux organisations internationales ne jouissant d'aucun statut officiel auprès de la FAO, elles peuvent être invitées sur une base ad hoc si leur participation peut être considérée comme utile. Dans tous les cas où cela est possible, le Directeur général informe le Conseil du nom de ces organisations et, lorsqu'une telle notification préalable n'est pas possible, il est fait rapport a posteriori sur ces invitations.
La liste de ces organisations et des réunions auxquelles elles ont été invitées figure dans le document CL 92/INF/5.
Aucune action particulière n'est requise du Conseil a ce sujet.
LE PRESIDENT: Point 14.3 Modifications de la représentation de certains Etats Membres au Comité du Programme et au Comité financier: pour information (CL 92/INF/9).
LE SECRETAIRE GENERAL: Là encore, il s'agit d'informer le Conseil de ce qui s'est passé. Nous l'avons fait par le document CL 92/INF/9 qui non seulement indique les changements apportés mais également, comme le prévoit le règlement, donne des renseignements sur les personnalités qui ont été appelées à remplacer la représentation antérieure de certains Etats Membres du Comité du programme et du Comité financier.
En l'occurrence il s'agit de M.Weygandt qui a siégé au Comité du programme, de M. Sibal qui a siégé pour l'Inde au Comité du programme et de M.Coutts qui a siégé au Comité financier.
Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Solo deseamos, Señor Presidente, proponer que como en el pasado en el informe del Consejo sobre este tema consté el reconocimiento por sus servicios a los Miembros salientes de esos dos importantes Comités. Igualmente, dar la bienvenida a los nuevos Miembros.
LE PRESIDENT: Nous pouvons adopter Cette recommandation. Elle est adoptée.
LE PRESIDENT: Nous passons au point 11 de l'ordre du jour Rapports de la cinquante-troisième session du Comité du Programme, de la soixante et unième session du Comité financier et de leur session conjointe (Rome, 14-25 septembre 1987) notamment: 11.1 Coûts d'exécution des programmes: pour information et éventuellement examen.
Atif Y. BUKHARI, Finance Committee (original language Arabic): I think that the report which I submitted yesterday covers all these points.
Dean K. CROWTHER (Assistant Director-General, Administration and Finance Department): There is not a great deal that I can add to the Finance Committee report itself as the Chairman has covered the report in general terms and specifically the Programme of Work and Budget. The important thing for consideration, I think, in the Council today has to do with resolutions which must be considered. I would point to four resolutions which are for the consideration of the Council, three of which had previously been taken up by the Council in June, and one additional resolution which has been taken and proposed by the Finance Committee after careful review.
These resolutions have to do with several specific items. That includes replenishment of the Special Reserve Account for 1988-89, and this is included in the document which you have before you, CL 92/4, beginning at the end of paragraph 3.59 in the English text on page 39,
Secondly, there is a resolution for the increase in the level of the Working Capital Fund which is discussed in paragraphs 3.68 - 3.71. The resolution itself is on page 41 of the English text and there is a resolution for the amendment of procedures for application of the cash surplus which appears in paragraphs 3.72 - 3.75. This also is on page 41 of the English text.
Then there is a draft conference resolution concerning measures to deal with problems of delayed payment of assessed contributions. This is shown in paragraphs 3.76. The resolution itself is shown in paragraph 43.
In addition, the Council has received a document CL 92/LIM/1 which brings up-to-date the financial position of the Organization. It shows those contributions which have been received up until this date. The contributions in CL 92/LIM/1 were actually taken as of record dated 28 October and since that time we are pleased to say that we have received some additional contributions. If I may very carefully, I should like to read those additional contributions since they do not appear in the documents which are shown.
We have received contributions from the Bahamas in the amount of US$ 3476; we have received a contribution from Chad for US$ 364.48. We have received a contribution from Guatemala for US$ 354.58; from Israel for US$ 185 000 from Kenya for US$ 2031.88; from the Philippines for US$ 95268.29; from the Sudan for US$ 16324; from Tanzania for US$ 18434.49; and from Zimbabwe for US$ 32649. Similarly, we have received a cheque from Antigua and Barbuda as an instalment against their instalment plan proposed of US$ 6150.70.
This reduces the outstanding balances which have been shown at just over US$ 98 million at this time. We have been in contact with the other countries who are still in arrears or owe current contributions and have received indications from most of those countries as to when they are likely to pay. While this is encouraging, it is important to point out that we still have a very large number of countries who have either paid nothing at all or only a small portion of their contribution.
Although the arrears in total are reducing, the number is still alarmingly large at US$30 million and we have a great deal of concern over that. The Finance Committee in its report has indicated the need for continually urging all governments to pay their contributions as early as possible.
I think this completes the area of introduction on those specific items except that there may be one additional item which Mr Shah may want to make reference to. Other than that, the Chairman's introduction completes this.
V.J. SHAH (Director, Office of Programme, Budget and Evaluation): May I draw attention to another item considered by the Finance Committee? That is the subject of programme delivery costs. The report covers this in paragraphs 3.18 - 3.20. I do not need to recall at great length the discussion which took place in the Council at its last session in June, but as a result of that, as you will recall, the Finance Committee was requested to return to this matter at its last session in September. The Director-General offered to submit a document on the subject again to the Finance Committee which included not only the analysis of programme delivery costs which had been earlier considered by the Finance Committee, but also the letter from the representative of the United Kingdom to the Chairman of the Finance Committee dated 27 April 1987, commenting on the subject.
The document CL 92/8, which includes the earlier analysis and the letter from the Permanent Representative of the United Kingdom was considered by the Finance Committee accordingly.
The report of the Finance Committee is very clear. The Committee re-confirmed the views it had expressed at its last session as reflected in its report. It did not see any reason to conclude that further action on its part was warranted for the time being.
I shall be glad as always to answer any questions which the Council may have.
Thomas YANGA (Cameroun): Je voudrais tout d'abord m'informer si nous allons aborder les différents points 11.1 à 11.9 ensemble ou si nous allons les aborder séparément.
Je voudrais en second lieu faire une observation au Secrétariat sur le projet de résolution, notamment les deux projets de résolution qui concernent, dans le texte français, à la page 43 la modification des procédures d'allocation de trésorerie et à la page 45 les mesures pour faire face au problème des retards dans le règlement des contributions. A la lecture de ces résolutions, j'ai comme l'impresison que leurs titres ont été inversés. J'aimerais avoir des précisions du Secrétariat à ce sujet.
LE PRESIDENT: Nous avons neuf sous-points dans le point 11, la question est posée de savoir si nous faisons un débat global ou si nous analysons ces points l'un après l'autre. Peut-être pourrions-nous pour gagner du temps mener un débat global et permettre à Messieurs les délégués de soulever ces points un à un. C'est au Conseil de prendre position. Je ne vois aucune objection à ce que nous les voyions l'un après l'autre.
Je crois qu'il serait plus clair de prendre ces points un par un, car certains sont pour décision, d'autres pour information. Je crois que le débat serait plus clair. La seule suggestion que je formule est que nous puissions tenir compte de la contrainte de temps parce qu'il nous faut voir ensuite le rapport du Comité de rédaction. Donc nous commençons par le point 11.1 Coûts d'exécution des programmes. Y a-t-il des observations sur ce point?
Elio PASCARELLI (Italie): Je voudrais me déclarer d'accord avec votre suggestion de prendre les points l'un après l'autre, mais quand même vous recommandez d'éviter le verre très amer pour demain matin en fixant un temps maximum pour chacun de nous, sinon nous arriverons jusqu'à samedi soir.
Mourad BENCHEIKH: (Algérie): Je suis ouvert à toute procédure, mais il me paraît toutefois que, s'agissant d'une démarche globale, puisqu'il s'agit de traiter du problème important de l'élévation des contributions - il faut dire les choses comme elles sont - peut-être faudrait-il laisser la possibilité d'un débat global et l'opportunité pour chacun des délégués d'aborder le point sur lequel il souhaite se concentrer.
LE PRESIDENT: Compte tenu de la contrainte de temps, et de l'avis exprimé par les délégués de l'Italie et de l'Algérie, peut-être pourrions nous, sauf objection de votre part, adopter cette procédure, puisque tous les points sont liés. Nous ouvrons donc le débat sur l'ensemble.
Ms Anne-Lise PETERSEN (Denmark): I should like to support the proposal put forward by the delegate from Algeria.
J. LYNCH (Canada): With respect to the measures to deal with the problems of delayed payments of assessed contributions, Canada can support the resolution being proposed. We have supported this in other international organizations and consider it something that would be extremely useful. The particular proposal is sometimes, in terms of a weighted distribution, referred to as the ICAO S-curve because, as far as I am aware, the only organization which has also adopted a procedure such as this is the International Civil Aviation Organization. We think it is a very timely procedure and we hope it will result in earlier contributions by Member States because it will provide them with a financial incentive to do so.
With respect to the increase in the level of the Working Capital Fund, item 11.5, we have made the point before that we support the proposed increase in level of the Working Capital Fund. However, our support is limited to the first part of the proposed increase, that is the proposal in the draft resolution to increase the level of the Working Capital Fund to $20 million as of 1 January 1988. We consider that the second part of the proposed resolution, that is to increase the level of the Working Capital Fund to US$ 26 million as from 1 January 1990 is too large and also not necessary at this time because there will be an opportunity for this Organization to address that particular question at a later date. Therefore, we should like to propose that the resolution be amended by deletion of the reference to the increase to US$ 26 million as from 1 January 1990.
With respect to the replenishment of the Special Reserve Account, this causes us a particular problem because in other places we have advocated this type of approach, that is, the need to have a Special Reserve Account to make sure it is at a level appropriate for the needs of the Organization. However, as many of you are aware from interventions by other members of my delegation, in our country we shall be experiencing a particularly large increase in our assessed contribution to the FAO. Taken together with the increase in the terms of our contribution for the increase in the Working Capital Fund and an increase for the Special Reserve Account, these are a large number of additional' payments coming all at once. Therefore, we welcome the fact that the size of the increase is going to be limited to only half of what had been originally contemplated
and that there is consideration being given to retaining the remaining balance to the application of sums received from countries in arrears. However, we would note with respect the resolution that this particular part, that is the fact the remaíning half sum that is required will be sought from payment of arrears which will be received, does not appear very clearly. In fact, it appears that the exception to that Comes out more clearly than the question of the actual use of money coming from arrears.
We should like to recommend that the resolution be amended so that the actual text appearing in document CL 92/4, paragraph 3.59, comes out more clearly in the decision aspect of it rather than in one of the preambular paragraphs "Conscious of" or "Considering". I could discuss this later, Mr Chairman, if you want a particular proposal.
We should also like to note that, in keeping with the general thrust of proposals, that my country has made in this Organization and elsewhere, we consider that the use of the Special Reserve Account can be diminished by different types of proposals, such as going to a different currency for the denomination of the budget of specialized agencies.
Without in any way trying to complicate your life and making too many proposals, Mr Chairman, I would note that the use of the Special Reserve Account and the need to increase it could, in certain circumstances, be reduced if alternative currencies were used by this Organization, for example if the Organization were to go to Italian lire or a split lire type of approach. That particular idea is Very closely linked to the idea of the increase in the Special Reserve Account. However, it appears more as an afterthought in one of the items, and I think perhaps we could include it as a preambular item in a resolution on the replenishment to the Special Reserve Account. The items I am referring to in terms of this alternative currency are included in paragraphs 3.65, 3.66 and 3.67, particularly 3.67.
There are a number of other items which are dealt with in this particular agenda item. Without in any way attempting to prejudge the interventions Which will be made by other delegations, at this time I should like to offer general support for a further review of the question of programme delivery costs. I know this has been an item which has been debated back and forth, both in this Council and in the earlier session in the summer, as well as in the Finance Committee. We would note that the question seems to warrant more discussion and further examination than the Finance Committee has in fact indicated in the report to us. Therefore, we would encourage further examination of this, but again this is without prejudice to any interventions that might be made by other delegations here.
I hope I have not complicated your life, Mr Chairman, but if I could just recap: we have made two proposals for amendments to two of the resolutions that are being proposed here, one on the Working Capital Fund, that is to delete the part referring to the second part of the increase, and the second is with respect to the Special Reserve Account, to clarify the operational part of the resolution so that it includes material which is provided in the narrative and also, if possible, to make a general preambular type reference to the need to examine carefully the possible use of alternative currencies.
LE PRESIDENT: Je me permets de faire une remarque. Le procès-verbal du dernier Conseil de la FAO a mentionné que sur trois points il y a eu déjà un débat au dernier Conseil: pour le règlement du retard des versements de contributions (paragraphe 258 du dernier rapport du Conseil), des procédures d'allocation de l'excédent de trésorerie, ou sur le principe en tout cas, il y a eu un accord au paragraphe 273, puis sur le troisième point: fonds de roulement, un accord de principe également au paragraphes 281-282. Le point 4 n'a pas été examiné par le dernier Conseil.
Maintenant je crois que notre tâche est, comme l'a dit le délégué du Canada, de voir les résolutions dans le détail et d'y apporter des améliorations ou des modifications. Si je ne me trompe pas c'est à peu près ce qui a été fait au dernier Conseil, que j'ai voulu un peu essayer de reprendre.
James D. AITKEN (United Kingdom): Following the agreement that we should treat item 11 as one item I will speak first on the financial and personnel issues referred to in CL 92/3, and then turn with some trepidation to the question of programme delivery costs covered in document CL 92/8.
Looking first at the financial position of our Organization, we find it a little difficult to comment on some of the information before us in the absence of any up-to-date forecasts of the cash flow situation. That is not just a question of having information about income; it is also a question of projection of expenditure. Since document CL 92/3 was produced there have been a number of changes both in terms of additional contributions which we have been informed about in the update, but also all of us have been very conscious of the very dramatic currency fluctuations we have just seen in the last week or so. We believe it would help all of us in our considerations of these issues if, as a matter of urgency, the Secretariat could provide us with their current best estimates of cash flow for the remainder of this biennium, together with the latest forecasts of the cash flow for the 1988-89 biennium. It would be very helpful if, as well as having this in a numerical statement, we could also have it in a graphical presentation because many of us find this a much more immediate way of understanding the problems.
I should like to make it clear that our delegation continues to be opppsed to any question of borrowing by FAO. This is a possibility referred to again in paragraph 3.45 of CL 92/4. In our view, the expenditure of the Organization should not exceed the amount of resources available to it.
Turning now to other questions dealt with in CL 92/4, on the question of procedures for dealing with the cash surplus, we should like to make it clear that the United Kingdom opposes any change in the existing arrangements for the distribution of the cash surplus and any amendment to Financial Regulation 6.1(b). We oppose any delegation of responsibility from Conference to Council to decide when cash surpluses can be withheld.
Since there is not going to be a cash surplus in the 1986-87 biennium as far as we can tell, and since the proposed changes are intended to alleviate financial difficulties currently being faced by the Organization, is it really appropriate to make changes now which will have no effect whatsoever in the 1988-89 biennium? Surely Council should review the necessity for such changes in June 1989 in the light of the financial situation at that time with a view, if necessary, to considering action in 1990 to 1991.
Turning now to the proposals on the increase in level of the Working Capital Fund, the United Kingdom remains opposed to any increase in the level of the Working Capital Fund.
On the question of the Replenishment of the Special Reserve Account, we reserve our position on this question for the present, but we believe that the events of the past year or so illustrate the need for further considerations of proposals for a budget based on the two main currencies in which expenditure is incurred. We will return to this later during the Conference debates. For the moment, we see considerable merit in the sort of proposal which has just been put to Council by the delegate of Canada.
Turning to other Financial Matters, we are pleased to note that miscellaneous income for 1988-89 has been estimated on a conservative basis. We support a continuation of this practice. We remain opposed to work being undertaken by the Secretariat which may ultimately lead to a change in the present practice for the application of Miscellanepus Income.
Turning now to personnel matters, we can understand why the paper we have been given on personnel, documente 87/14, concentrates on remuneration and conditipns of service. These are certainly important, but we would also argue, and have argued before, that staff are the agency's most important asset and their management is extremely sensitive and very much an issue for Council.
We are rather disappointed therefore that the papers before us did not make any real reference to the very important work being carried out by Personnel Division, in introducing the systems of staff performance appraisal, staff training and staff career development planning. We consider that these issues are as important to maintaining morale and retaining good staff as the simple question of remuneration. We also fear that an opportunity has again been missed to bring to Council an indication of the very dedicated work which is being successfully carried out by the Personnel Division.
If I may, I would like to turn now to the questions of Programme Delivery Costs.
Here the United Kingdom obviously very much welcomes that this item is on our agenda. However we recognize that it has been discussed on a number of occasions and, to be frank, I thought this morning that I was finding myself in the position of a person whom I saw recently interviewed on television, who was about to be married to a very famous film star who had also been married many times before - I think, between them, they had something like twelve marriages already, and this would be number thirteen. He was asked by a rather insensitive interviewer if he had any thoughts about his wedding night; and I was reminded this morning when preparing this speech that the gentleman said: "I certainly know what is required of me - I guess my problem is to try to make it both original and interesting". I think I have the same problem here, after so much discussion.
We very much welcome this document and the manner in which it has been presented, because it enables the Council to see for the first time, not just the examination of this question, but both the Secretariat's presentation and the views of the United Kingdom delegation on that presentation. We believe that this is a very valuable exercise and we hope that ourselves and other delegations will be able to draw upon the information in here when we are considering other items - issues connected with the budget and expenditure - and discussing these matters in Council.
When we discussed the question of programme delivery costs at the June Council, I expressed the thanks of the United Kingdom to the Secretariat for their work in preparing this paper. We also thanked Mr Shah for the part he played and the time he was prepared to devote to this exercise, despite his very heavy schedule. It is appropriate for me to reiterate those thanks now.
Before I come to the main part of this intervention, it might be helpful as a prelude just to very briefly explain what we mean by "programme delivery costs".
The dictionary definition of overhead costs quite clearly takes in things like office expenses, management, interest on capital, and other general needs of business, and items like rent are also included. This is a very useful definition; but, when looking at a very specialist technical operation, we believe that we must also include some of the technical activities which contribute to the end product, as well as the straightforward administrative overheads. I think that in this we were following the line which has been established within the United Nations system by the Joint Inspection Unit, and which was considered by Council in 1978 when it considered document CL 74/15. There we see that things which could be included in support costs were such things as technical documentation and services, participation in intergovernmental inter-agency meetings, etc., so we are obviously dealing with a concept which is broader than simply the rent of the buildings. It may be helpful now as, as I said before, a prelude, to again state the reasons why the United Kingdom raised the question of programme delivery costs and why they consider this issue is important and justifies continuing consideration by Council and the Finance Committee. It is two years ago that we first asked the question - how much does it cost FAO to spend a dollar? We asked this question because, as we have said on many occasions, we consider that FAO's primary role is to assist developing countries. We believe that because of this it is important that our contribution to FAO should be targeted to make the maximum contribution and impact in the field. We firmly believe that FAO should be, if you like, a creature with many teeth and with a very small tail -a creature that is able to act effectively.
At this point I should emphasize that we are not trying to cut the Budget, or weaken the effectiveness of the Organization. On the contrary, we hope that by discussing programme delivery costs, Council will assist the Secretariat in its efforts to switch spending from support costs to substantive programmes. This sort of development can only strengthen our organization. We all want a lean, dynamic FAO, able to respond quickly and effectively to the challenges which it faces in global agriculture. We also believe that a discussion about progamme delivery costs enables Council to exercise a choice.
Every two years, we are asked to choose and purchase a programme, a Programme of Work and Budget. At the same time, in effect, we are also asked to buy the means of delivering that programme. In a way, we are rather like a farmer who is faced with the question of buying some transport to get his produce to market. He has taken a lot of advice from FAO, and he has saved up a considerable sum of money to buy a vehicle. He has a choice: he can go and buy a Rolls Royce or a Mercedes Benz limousine; or, remembering my colleagues on my right, just to show there are no trade implications here, he could also buy a Ford truck.
Now, if that farmer buys a Ford truck, we all know that he will be able to take much more produce to market than he would if he had bought a limousine. I would suggest that, when we are looking at FAO programmes, this is a question which we should be asking: do we need a truck, or do we need a limousine? I would submit that FAO is not in the business of providing limousines: they are very good for short trips to the airport, but not very good for taking loads of goods to market.
But this is not just a question of parables. We are all faced with the problem of maximizing the impact of our spending. Our contribution to FAO comes from our aid programme. If it costs FAO fifty cents to spend a dollar, then for every $1.50 we give FAO, only one dollar goes to the developing countries. On the other hand, if we contribute $1.50 to another agency where it costs only twenty cents to spend a dollar, then the developing countries will receive $1.30. And this is what it is all about. Many poor countries are members of FAO. In finding scarce foreign exchange to pay their subscriptions, they are asking their citizens, their people, to make sacrifices. We owe it to these people to ensure that we get the maximum value for money for the dollars they give to FAO.
These are the reasons why programme delivery costs are important, and why it is appropriate for us all to keep them under review.
Turning to the substance of CL 92/8, we find the information in the document very useful, especially when considered in relation to other papers before the Council. In particular, I refer to document CL 92/4, the Report of the Finance Committee, and on page 44 of the English version we have the Cost Measurement System, which comments on how much it costs to deliver the Trust Funds and UNDP.
I will not trouble Council with details of calculating the delivery costs for Trust Funds and UNDP -they are outlined in CL 74/15, which was circulated in September, 1978. I would just point out that many items which, in the calculation of Trust Funds and UNDP, are considered as delivery costs, are put into the category of indirect substantive expenditure in the paper on Programme Delivery Costs in the Regular Programme. We think that, for the sake of comparison, it would be more sensible if the same approach to categorization was used in both systems.
Certainly, we do find the information before us does give us a very good guide to how much it costs FAO to spend a dollar. We say that using the comparative methods for the Trust Fund and UNDP, and applying them to the paper we have before us, and the Regular Programme, we estimate that it costs FAO over fifty cents to deliver a dollar. The Secretariat may not agree with this estimate, and we appreciate that there has to be flexibility in interpretation of the data; however, I am sure that the Secretariat, the United Kingdom, and all Member States would agree that the Secretariat should continue with its search to find ways of reducing delivery costs, and switching savings into substantive programmes. We recognize that it is not realistic to expect dramatic changes overnight --- it is a continuing process. For this reason, we would like to propose that Council, through the Finance Committee, should receive a similar Report on Programme Delivery Costs each biennium. That is our first proposal. This does not have to be elaborate: the Tables in Annex 1, with a brief covering note, would be adequate. Again we would suggest here this point about compatibility with the methodology used when calculating the delivery costs for UNDP and Trust Funds.
Secondly, we would also like to propose, to help Council, Member States and the Secretariat in this difficult area, and to make sure that there is a degree of consistency with the operation within the UN system, that we seek the advice of the United Nations Joint Inspection Unit on the presentation of the Programme Delivery Costs and the measurement of Programme Delivery Costs. I want to be very clear about what we are asking for here. We are not asking that the JIU should look at Programme Delivery Costs in FAO. What we are asking is that we would like to see the Secretariat approach the JIU for advice on the presentation of Programme Delivery Costs and the calculation of their measurement, and we would also like to see the Secretariat share the information they gained from this with the rest of Council. The JIU has been very helpful to UNICEF on this, and I am sure would be able to extend this help to FAO if requested.
Before concluding this intervention, I must apologize for its length, but this is an issue which we consider important. It has been complicated, and I hope that to some extent this intervention has helped towards a better understanding of the United Kindgom's objectives in raising it.
Masahiko YASUMURO (Japan): I would like to Start on Item 11.3, the proposed "Measures to Deal with Problems of Delayed Payment of Assessed Contributions". My delegation thinks that the introduction of the proposed measures is not so effective for the promotion of early payments of the assessed contributions, because payment by each government is Carried out under the respective national financial system and under condition Of the respective government's financial condition. However, my delegation does not oppose the introduction of proper measures to provide a rational and equitable allocation of the interest income element of a cash surplus.
Now, looking into the proposed draft Conference Resolution, my delegation must express its disagreement on the draft resolution itself, for there are some unclear elements in the draft which may cause argument when it comes to implementation.
Firstly, is "the interest income element of a cash surplus" clearly identified? I understand that interest on Bank Accounts and Deposits is controlled under the Miscellaneous Income and is mixed with other incomes such as income from the Commissary, balance of publications, revolving funds, etc. For instance, how much is the interest income element of a cash surplus in the case of the 1984-85 biennium?
And is that amount described apparently in the Financial Report, document C 87/5?
Secondly, what formula is used to Calcúlate the allocation? I understand that there have been some different ways on a weighted basis. For example, OECD has introduced a linear formula for weighting, ICAO has introduced a cubic formula and Unesco is Studying a square formula. My delegation feels that the linear formula would be preferable.
My delegation believes that any financial regulations or procedures should be fair and lucid. For this reason, my delegation requests the Secretariat kindly to prepare another draft resolution which contains no unclear elements.
With reference to the next agenda item, 11.4 - Amendement of Procedures for Application of Cash Surplus - I would like to make a few brief comments.
My delegation is basically against any measures, even if temporary, which would mean that to make up for the outstanding amount caused by the delay in payments by some countries, other member countries must pay the due amount. Consequently, my delegation has difficulty in supporting this draft. The proposed delegation of authority to the Council means that the Council, which only consists of less than one third of all member countries, should be allowed to decide upon such measures which necessarily and directly affect all FAO member countiries. Therefore my delegation is also rather doubtful about the proposed delegation of authority.
I should now like to touch on the issue of the Working Capital Fund, item 11.5. My delegation thinks that the increase in the total Member Nations' contributions should be as modest as possible, as my delegation pointed out in agenda item 7. My delegation recognized that the present level of the Working Capital Fund iS 3 percent Of the budget leVel, but also understands that the unobligated TCP to be carried over to the next biennium, which will be US$ 31 million, is also functioning as a resource to protect the Organization against adverse effects caused by delays in the payment of assessed contributions. So, the present level of the Working Capital Fund and the unobligated TCP are US$ 44 million in total, which is nearly 8.5 percent of the next biennium's budget level.
In the light of these facts, my delegation doeS not agree to any increase in the level of the Working Capital Fund from 1 January 1988.
Concerning the replenishment of the Special Reserve Account for 1988/89, which is agenda item 11.6, my delegation can support the Director-General's proposal for this replenishment.
Lastly, I should like to come back to agenda item ll.2, the financial position of FAO: as is generally recognized, the financial difficulty of FAO iti the present biennium is caused by a large number of outstanding contributions, the decrease ih Miscellaneous Income and the depreciation of the US dollar. The financial difficulty should be resolved mainly by payment of the outstanding contributions by the countries concerned, and in principle my delegation cannot agree with such measures as the obliging of other member countries to cover the arrears.
On the other hand, my delegation appreciates the efforts made by the Secretariat to undertake programme adjustments amounting to a total of US$ 25 million, or 5.7 percent of the whole budget, although my delegation thinks that some adjustments can be made to the TCP.
Being very concerned about the recent development on FAO's financial situation, my Government, which has already paid its due contribution this June, has recently decided partially to defer receiving its share of Cash Surplus arising from the 1984/85 biennium, to next year. In a matter of days my Government will be paying approximately US$ 3.37 million, which we believe will contribute greatly to alleviating the severe financial situation of FAO during the rest of this year.
LE PRESIDENT: Je remercie le. délégué du Japon de l'information qu'il vient de nous donner concernant le versement de sa contribution.
Elio PASCARELLI (Italy): I wish immediately to congratulate Japan for following the example that we set I think a couple of years ago. I was only a little deceived because he mentioned when this Cash Surplus should be referred to Japan. I do not think they have any place in which to put it. Anyhow, I do hope that you and other countries will follow the example that 23 countries have already given as a testimony of their attachment to the problems of the Organisation. I am sure that the Organization will be much more relieved by being lectured on some aspects that should, I think, be dealt with by the competent organs. Being a member of the Finance Committee, I think we have already disposed, after a lengthy discussion which took about two meetings of our Committee, and in the report which we have before us CL 92/4, we said there was no reason to discuss and discuss and be lectured on the delivery costs, especially - especially - excuse me, by countries that have no Trust Fund here. We are most concerned with delivery cost monitoring and the Secretariat satisfies our request. I do not think that other countries should tell us how to deal with delivery costs on the programmes that we finance with FAO.
Coming to the measures that have been proposed, since X am a member of the Finance Committee, and some of these, if not originated by Italy, were strongly supported by Italy in the Finance Committee, of course, it would be a contradiction to object to any of them. X will not dwell in detail on the argument because I suggest that a time allotment be made to each of us because if every time we resume the discussion with 35 minutes for each delegate we will never get through. So I summarize the stand of my country. We support all these measures as they have been formulated, with one little amendment that I would agree to as proposed by Canada: that is the fact that since this increase of the Special Reserve Account is made in two tranches - sorry, the Working Capital Fund, and the Working Capital Fund was forced by the Finance Committee in two tranches, that was our common proposal - we could delete the second part of it and make it clear that we will postpone until the time comes.
Concerning Cash Surplus, I heard from one delegate the positive decision that there should be no Cash Surplus in this biennium. Who told him? Let the fluctuations of the dollar go on and we shall have another Cash Surplus. So why should we say as of now that we have to postpone the measure that we so wisely decided on because there is no Cash Surplus? It is absolutely wrong. There may be a Cash Surplus, suppose that the dollar is worth 1, 500 lire, we shall have plenty of money to give back to all the members.
I do support strongly these decisions taken by the Committee and proposed by the Committee on how to avoid the late payment of assessed contributions. We have thoroughly studied this problem. If the organs of the Council are needed for something, why should we resume all the time, all the time, in discussing them? Are we trusted or not trusted?
Finally, concerning the idea of not using one fluctuating currency today which has been so strong in the past and is now undergoing for some contingent reasons fluctuations every week, or every day, or every hour, I do subscribe also, as I did in the Committee, to the idea that we should further study the possibility of using two currencies. I do not know which is the third one. I heard about three currencies. I think there are US dollars and lire. So my Government is ready to help, the Treasury is ready to help, to examine the experiences of the other United Nations agencies and propose the budget in two currencies.
I am through. I have no paper. Again, I thank you for your patience, and again I ask you, Mr. Chairman, why do you not give a little thought to my humble suggestion that time is allotted to us? I spoke for five and a half minutes. Thank you.
LE PRESIDENT: C'est une question très importante, il faut laisser le soin aux délégués de s'exprimer complètement, quitte à ce que nous trouvions ensuite une façon de présenter le document à la Conférence mais c'est une question importante.
Ms Anne-Lise PETERSEN (Denmark): The Danish delegation realises that our Organization's financial situation is a very important issue which has impact on the Organization's possibility to carry out its functions. In that respect the report of the joint session of the Programme and Finance Committees is a very important document, but unfortunately it arrived very late and we have not yet finalized our examination of the report and the attached draft resolution. We shall have to come back to the issue in more detail at the Conference next week.
In general my delegation is of the opinion that financial problems arising from non-fulfillment of obligations by some member states should not be solved by imposing extra financial burdens on other members of the Organization.
My delegation, therefore, has some difficulty with a proposed model for the replenishment of the Special Reserve Account and reserves its position on that point until the Conference.
Concerning the proposed increase in the level of the Working Capital Fund, my delegation has already stated at the last Council meeting that we can support the proposal to increase a level of the Fund to US$ 20 million in 1988 and to US$ 26 million in 1990 in order to maintain consistency with other. organizations.
Turning now to the proposal concerning the procedures for application of the cash surplus, my delegation is opposed to changes in the present procedures and to any amendment of the financial regulations entailing a transfer of power from the Conference to the Council in order to decide on a possible deferment of the Cash Surplus. Furthermore, we are of the opinion that changes in the present procedure of application of the Cash Surplus does not solve the fundamental financial problems. Therefore my delegation would have preferred to discuss more radical changes dealing with the long-term financial problems of our Organization.
One of the long-term problems which, in our opinion, ought to be dealt with as soon as possible is the uncertainty of exchange rates, which has a great impact on the Budget as well as on the contributions in national currencies from Member States. My delegation has at a previous meeting expressed the view that one way of solving the currency problem could be to establish a basket of currencies when preparing the Budget. This approach is used in other international fora, like for instance, ECU in the European Community.
Concerning the programme delivery costs, my delegation can support the suggestion made by the UK delegation in regard to the biennial review of the cost and to putting the issue to the Joint Inspection Unit for advice. Furthermore we agree with the UK delegation that in order to create greater transparency, a detailed cash flow analysis would help members in grasping the current cash situation.
In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, my delegation is fully aware of the difficulties arising from the financial problems facing the Organization and we shall be prepared to discuss solutions to the problems in more detail at the Conference.
Mourad BENCHEIKH (Algerie): Je tâcherai de suivre le conseil de notre ami le délégué italien en faisant quand même une remarque préalable; ce conseil aurait dû être suivi hier, lorsque des points, qui étaient simplement pour examen, ont fait l'objet de longs développements qui vont être repris à partir probablement des mêmes arguments à la Conférence. Peut-être que là il faudrait sérieusement réfléchir à ce problème de façon que nous puissions limiter le temps de parole pour ces points qui, portés à l'ordre du jour simplement pour examen ou information, devraient être traités plus en détail à la Conférence.
Cette parenthèse rapidement fermée, j'aborde le problème du point 11 et je m'attacherai plus précisément aux points 11.3, 11.4, 11.5, 11.6, c'est-à-dire tout le mécanisme qui est proposé pour faire face aux difficultés financières que traverse la FAO.
Je dirai en exergue de mon intervention que l'Algérie, comme beaucoup de pays en développement, traverse une très grave crise économique, qu'elle a décidé de s'engager sur la voie d'une austérité très stricte qui la place d'ores et déjà dans l'impossibilité de faire face à des contributions supplémentaires du type de celles qui figurent aux différentes résolutions.
La seconde remarque que je présenterai en exergue toujours c'est qu'en définitive, à bien réfléchir et à bien considérer, je pense que la démarche qui nous est proposée est fondamentalement injuste en ce sens qu'elle demande aux bons payeurs de se sacrifier davantage pour les mauvais payeurs.
A la lumière de ce que je viens de dire je reprends les résolutions dans l'ordre dans lequel elles figurent au document CL 92/4.
Je commence par la reconstitution du compte de réserve spécial: nous comprenons très bien encore une fois les motivations du Secrétariat mais nous ne pouvons malheureusement pas y souscrire dans la mesure où nous considérons qu'il serait beaucoup plus légitime de demander, de puiser ou de réalimenter le compte de réserve spécial à partir des retards de recouvrement de contributions.
En ce qui concerne le fonds de roulement qui constitue en quelque sorte le poids spécifique de tout l'échafaudage la contribution algérienne à partir des barèmes de contributions conduit à l'impossibilité pour ma délégation d'accepter un accroissement du fonds de roulement. Nous pensons que là aussi nous devrions faire appel aux retards de contributions.
Quant à la modification des procédures d'allocation de l'excédent de trésorerie il y a là à la vérité deux questions qui gênent la délégation algérienne:
1. On demande aux Etats Membres de faire des avances de trésorerie en quelque sorte et d'aider au fonctionnement de la FAO à partir des sommes qui devraient retourner normalement aux Etats Membres. Certes, il y a eu le précédent de la vingt-deuxième session mais il serait très dangereux de s'engager sur la voie d'un blocage ou d'une mise à disposition systématique de ces excédents de trésorerie.
C'est vrai qu'il y a une novation juridique en ce sens qu'il y a une délégation quasi permanente au Conseil et là cette approche nous gêne considérablement parce que nous considérons que les questions financières, qui sont très importantes, doivent relever de la Conférence et par conséquent cette délégation au Conseil nous paraît un peu dangereuse.
Nous serions par contre assez favorables à la dernière résolution, les mesures destinées à faire face au problème des retards dans le règlement des contributions. Nous sommes a priori d'accord dans la mesure où il y a introduction d'une mesure d'équité qui nous paraît en tous les cas conforme aux intérêts de ceux qui payent dans les délais et qui par conséquent n'ont pas de recettes compensatoires à trouver.
Je ne voudrais pas vous donner l'impression que la délégation algérienne adopte une attitude négative; sa position est tout à fait justifiée par des considérations objectives. Ce disant, elle ne vise ni le Secrétariat ni personne d'autre, dans la mesure où elle est tout à fait consciente que le Secrétariat a fait son possible pour faire face à une situation extraordinaire. Nous restons ouverts à toute discussion. Là, je voudrais donner à mes paroles toute la solennité voulue: nous sommes ouverts à la discussion mais à la condition que celle-ci ne soit pas faussée dès le départ. L'une des conditions d'un dialogue fécond, à notre sens, est le versement par tous les Etats Membres,
sans exception, des arriérés de contributions et l'engagement ferme de tous qu'à l'avenir les contributions seront versées dans les délais. Ce n'est qu'alors que la question de l'augmentation éventuelle des contributions, si elle était encore indispensable, pourrait être abordée; ce n'est qu'alors que la question des réformes dont on parle tellement et qui feront l'objet d'une discussion probablement très serrée à la Conférence pourrait également être abordée. La délégation algérienne a entendu avec, je l'avoue, beaucoup d'inquiétude, certaines interventions visant à une modification, voire un bouleversement de la FAO. J'ai même noté qu'un délégué voulait transformer la FAO en espèce de FMI agricole. Alors, Monsieur le Président, je crois que nous sommes là en face de ce qui pourrait être un paquet global, de façon à ce que, les uns et les autres, nous qui sommes tous concernés par l'avenir de la FAO, nous puissions voir tous nos arguments ensemble et essayer de trouver les moyens pour que cette FAO continue à agir pour le bien de l'humanité.
John JURECKY (United States of America): Mr Chairman, I shall address myself to item 11.2, the financial position of the Organization. My colleague behind me, Mr Cook, would like to speak to a few other items.
With regard to 11.2, we share the concern expressed by other delegations regarding the financial situation of the FAO. We believe that the liquidity shortages experienced by the Organization highlight the importance many of us have attached to the establishment of clear programme priorities in the Budget proposal, that is to say the Programme of Work and Budget. This is most critical when a proposal like the one before us is unrealistic in terms of resource projections and the capacity of members to pay their assessments. As you all know, our country is involved in a strong effort to curtail the US Government's fiscal deficit. This has had, and will continue to have, important implications for US contributions to international organizations, as it does on US expenditures for domestic programmes. No programme, domestic or international, is spared. No programme is exempted from the responsibility to make the necessary adjustments.
Concerning the FAO, and being the largest contributor, we expected that the PWB would be realistic in terms of the constraints that the largest contributor faces. We were candid and clear in the June Council regarding the issue. The PWB as presented does not reflect that reality. That it does not contain a sharp sense of priorities suggests that when the Budget cuts become necessary the guidance needed will not be there to safeguard the truly critical programmes.
Unfortunately, we are not alone in respect to the contribution situation. We note with interest the Secretariat-prepared document 92/LIM/1 wherein contribution matters are presented. While not wishing to draw excessive attention to the list of countries having outstanding assessments, we find ourselves in the company of nearly 75 other fellow members, some of whom have singled my country out in a manner that brings to mind the saying that those who live in glasshouses should not throw stones. Furthermore, 34 countries in this group have amounts outstanding that exceed that of the US in terms of the percentage that they represent of the countries' assessment. While absolute magnitudes of arrears vary greatly from country to country, so also do the respective domestic economic problems.
The US Government is responding to these pressures, among others, when making decisions regarding the national budget which must have its impact on our contribution. I urge you all to be realistic as to the situation.
My colleague will now take up the other points on the agenda.
John COOK (United States of America): In regard to Agenda Item 11.1, Programme Delivery Costs, the United States would first of all like to compliment the delegation of the United Kingdom on the detailed research which it has conducted on the important subject of programme delivery costs. The United States finds it commendable that a member country has invested a considerable amount of effort in an attempt to clarify for all concerned the percentage of programme costs that go into delivery of the programmes, or in other words, the overhead costs for delivery of FAO programmes.
As Council document CL 92/8 points out, the two studies of this subject by the Secretariat and by the United Kingdom arrived at two widely separated percentages for programme delivery costs. From the large discrepancy we conclude that this is a subject requiring further study. Consequently, we agree with the delegation of the United Kingdom that the key subject of programme delivery costs should continue to be closely monitored in the Finance Committee and that reports on this subject should regularly be provided to the Council.
On Agenda Item 11.3, Measures to Deal with Problems of Delayed Payment of Assessed Contributions, the United States delegation would like to reserve our position on this matter until we have received a clear exposition of all the details of the formula which would be applied under this advance payment incentive plan.
On Agenda Item 11.4, Amending Present Procedures for Application of Cash Surplus, the United States delegation understands that the financial situation in the FAO is temporarily in extraordinary circumstances. However, we do not believe that these circumstances dictate changes in the financial regulations of the Organization. Therefore, the United States opposes this resolution.
On Agenda Item 11.5, Increase in the Level of the Working Capital Fund, the United States would like to reiterate the position it expressed at the 91st Council. That is the United States supports an increase in the Working Capital Fund to a level of US$ 20 million as of 1 January 1988. But the United States cannot support the proposed additional increase to US$ 26 million beginning 1 January 1990.
On Agenda Item 11.6, Replenishment of the Special Reserve Account for 1988-89, the United States supports a replenishment of the Special Reserve Account up to the level of US$ 12.04 million, provided however - and I repeat, provided however - that this replenishment is made through savings in the FAO budget and not through additional assessments for the 1988-89 biennium.
Thomas YANGA (Cameroon): First of all, as a matter of introduction I shall maintain my question to the Secretariat concerning the title and contents of the two resolutions on the Amendment of Present Procedures for the Application of Cash Surplus and the Measures to Deal with the Problems of Delayed Payment of Assessed Contributions.
The contents of the two resolutions in relation to their title are a little confusing for me personally and I shall come back to Item 11.1 which deals with the programme delivery costs. I would like to make a few observations.
My delegation, as full members, contributors and beneficiaries of FAO feel we should be concerned with what it costs to our Organization to deliver different services, and mainly for the beneficiary countries, we should be more concerned with the realization of clear and essential objectives targeted by FAO programmes.
The difference between the two points of view expressed in the document, which is the interpretation of delivery costs of programmes is recognized not only by both sides - and here I mean the Secretariat and the United Kingdom delegation - but also by GIU as having no single definition.
At the invitation of the United Kingdom delegation which understands the delivery costs of programmes as overhead costs before the product, I should like to ask what that delegation understands by "product" in the specific case of FAO activities.
Finally, we think that if FAO can implement UNDP-funded projects with 13% of the delivery costs, the Secretariat's figures which appear in document CL 92/8 - and I emphasize that - seemed to be 18.8%. I think that word "seemed" gives a little room of some uncertainty on the figure itself. So we think that in relation to the implementation of the UNDP project, FAO can make more effort to. bring the percentage down. That is all I have to say on Item 11.1.
Je voudrais aussi faire des observations sur les projets de résolutions qui nous sont soumis. Tout en déplorant la situation financière difficile dans laquelle se trouve l'Organisation, je voudrais dire, s'agissant de quatre projets de résolutions qui nous sont soumis, que nous trouvons équitable d'encourager les pays qui payent à temps toutes leurs contributions. Cependant, pour nous, les autres résolutions impliquent une augmentation des obligations financières des pays membres. Dans le cas précis de mon pays, qui l'année dernière a perdu plus du tiers de ses ressources budgétaires, estimées entre 200 et 300 milliards de francs CFA, a cause de la crise économique financière qui secoue le monde en général et les pays en développement exportateurs de matières premières en particulier, je voudrais signaler que d'autres pays sont dans une situation encore pire que celle-là. Je ne pense pas qu'une augmentation de sa contribution soit bienvenue surtout que les perspectives d'avenir, tel qu'il ressort de tous les documents. Qu'ils soient de la FAO, de la Banque mondiale ou d'autres sources, ils ne sont pas pour le moins optimistes. Donc, je crois que, pour la plupart des pays en développement et en l'occurrence le mien, l'une des causes profondes et réelles des retards ou des arrêts de contributions ne relève pas d'une mauvaise volonté à remplir leurs obligations vis-à-vis de l'Organisation dont ils sont les principaux bénéficiaires, mais résulte plutôt de problèmes économiques et financiers auxquels ils ont à faire face. Et, malgré ces problèmes, le pourcentage relativement élevé des arriérés dans le montant des contributions reçues en 1987 témoigne à la fois de la pertinence de nos propos et de leur bonne volonté à remplir leurs obligations vis-à-vis de la FAO. Enfin je voudrais exprimer clairement ici la ferme volonté de mon pays, en dépit de la situation difficile qu'il traverse sur le plan financier et économique et des mesures réalistes et douloureuses qu'il a été obligé de prendre pour y faire face, de remplir toutes ses obligations internationales, et en particulier ses contributions dans les Organisations multilatérales comme témoignage de son soutien et de son appui au multilatéralisme véritable.
N. MUKUTU (Zambia): My delegation does not support the resolution which is seeking to make a special assessment on Member Nations to provide for 50 percent of the replenishment of the Special Reserve Account. My delegation also does not support the resolution which seeks to raise the Working Capital Fund by reassessing Member Nations' payments. In general, my delegation is against any move to increase member countries' contributions to FAO. Developing countries have heavy financial burdens and many of them are already in arrears over the assessed contributions.
With regard to the Special Reserve Account, I agree with the Canadian and United Kingdom delegations that we should find a way of keeping our monies not necessarily in American dollars but it could be in lira or there could be some other arrangement.
Our main preoccupation should be to encourage Member Nations to pay their current assessed contributions. It is not possible for us to replace by any other means the delayed contributions made by Member States. My delegation also supports the United Kingdom's comments on programme delivery costs.
Mohd. Mazlan bin JUSOH (Malaysia): The Malaysian delegation wishes to congratulate Mr Crowther on his clear introduction to this item. We also wish to pay tribute to Ambassador Bukhari for the excellent work which his committee has produced.
After having studied the report of the Finance Committee, my delegation is of the opinion that the recommendations contained therein are worth the support of the Council.
Going on to specific points relating to the deliberations of the Finance Committee, we noted with satisfaction the conclusions arrived at regarding the subject of programme delivery costs. Bearing in mind the complexity of the projects being undertaken and implemented by FAO, my delegation considers that a figure of 18.8 percent in the programme delivery costs worked out according to the Secretariat's methodology is commendable.
We could not compare this figure with the figures of other agencies which have different types of programmes. Nevertheless, like the United Kingdom delegation we should also like FAO, where possible, even to trim this figure further and spare no efforts in increasing its efficiency in the delivery of projects. We commend FAO for having an open view in trying further to improve its delivery efficiency, and we note with great satisfaction that this effort is still being continued.
Referring to the financial position of the Organization under item 11.2, this matter has been in the forefront of discussions in previous Council meetings and will again feature prominently in the coming Conference. We. believe that there is no excuse for being delinquent on payments of contributions to this Organization, especially on the part of the richer countries. This has seriously undermined the ability of the Organization to perform its functions effectively. For this reason, we strongly support the measures which have been proposed in this document and by the Finance Committee relating to the problems of delayed payments of assessed contributions, the proposed amendment of present procedures for application of cash surplus, the proposal to increase the level of the Working Capital Fund, and the proposal for the replenishment of the Special Reserve Account for the 1988-89 biennium.
These proposals, together with the draft resolutions as presented in the document, receive our wholehearted support. We feel that without these measures this Organization will be crippled and will not be able to perform its normal task in implementing the programmes and projects effectively.
On the resolution entitled Measures to Deal with Problems of Delayed Payment of Assessed Contributions under item 11.3, we feel it is not a punitive measure against countries which pay their contributions late but rather it is an incentive for countries to pay their contributions early.
On the proposal to amend the present procedures for application of cash surplus, under item 11.4, the financial cash flow crisis has made this step necessary, although it will incur a higher contribution from most member countries. Nevertheless, we feel that it is in the interests of every member to help the Organization in a time of crisis.
The same applies to the draft resolution to increase the level of the Working Capital Fund and the replenishment of the Special Reserve Account. We know that most of these measures will call for sacrifices among members, especially those hard hit by economic recession, but we could not afford to see this Organization falling apart and unable to carry out its duties in these difficult times.
LE PRESIDENT: Nous arrivons donc à la fin de nos travaux de ce matin. Nous devons planifier notre temps. J'aimerais donc que les délégués qui désirent prendre la parole cet après-midi s'inscrivent dès à présent, après quoi nous pourrons clore définitivement la liste des orateurs. Je donne la liste des pays qui sont déjà inscrits: Mexique, Australie, Inde, Zaïre, Cuba, France, Suisse, Brésil, Chine et République fédérale d'Allemagne. Cela fait dix pays. Nous considérons que la liste des orateurs pour cet après-midi est définitivement close car notre programme de cet après-midi est le suivant: tout d'abord, nous demanderons aux délégués qui prendront la parole d'exprimer leurs vues sur les points précis sur lesquels porte le débat de ce matin afin d'écourter au maximum les interventions. D'autre part, nous demandons au Comité de rédaction, dans la mesure du possible, de nous donner dès cet après-midi une partie de son travail afin de ne pas avoir une séance tardive comme hier soir. Et il sera probablement nécessaire d'avoir une réunion demain matin, sous la présidence de l'un des vice-présidents, en l'occurrence l'Ambassadeur Pascarelli, pour terminer notre travail. C'est la dernière minute que nous avons. Il nous restera, bien entendu, le point essentiel de la désignation des présidents et des vice-présidents des trois commissions, j'espère que, cet après-midi, des propositions concrètes seront présentées au Conseil à cet égard.
The meeting rose at 12.30 hours
La séance est levée à 12 h 30
Se levanta la sesión a las 12.30 horas
