  |
 |
| C
2003/II/PV |
Thirty-second Session |
Rome, 29 November – 9 December 2003 |
SECOND MEETING OF COMMISSION II |
1 December 2003 |
The Second Meeting was opened at 15.15 hours
Mr Mohammad Saeid Noori-Naeini
Chairperson of Commission II, presiding
La deuxième séance est ouverte à 15 h 15
sous la présidence de M. Mohammad Saeid Noori-Naeini,
Président de la Commission II
Se abre la segunda sesión a las 15.15 horas
bajo la presidencia del Sr. Mohammad Saeid Noori-Naeini,
Presidente de la Comisión II
CHAIRPERSON
Ladies and Gentlemen, good afternoon. We do now have the quorum to start, but unfortunately again we have had to wait for 45 minutes to reach this. We are continuing our discussions and debates on planning the PWB for 2004-2005 and we are talking about a different scenario which was presented this morning to all of us. The floor is now open for your interventions.
Robert SABIITI (Uganda)
Mr Chairman, Uganda joins the other delegations in congratulating you upon your election to the Chair of this important Commission. During the 124th Council Meeting held in June 2003, when the PWB was first introduced to us, my delegation then gave a statement regarding the three scenarios. Since then, wide consultations have been held at different levels trying to better understand the three scenarios and their implications for the operations of FAO and indeed the impact on the masses of the people living in the developing countries whose livelihoods are indeed at stake. My delegation reaffirms its commitment to FAO's continued existence and in that regard supports the views expressed this morning by the distinguished delegates of North Korea, Afghanistan and Nigeria.
Ngoni MASOKA (Zimbabwe)
I would like to congratulate you on being appointed to the Chair of this Commission and I am glad that you are doing it so well. My intervention will be brief, and I would like to add my voice to the views already expressed by the delegations of North Korea, Afghanistan, Nigeria and Uganda who spoke before me, to press and persuade this Commission for the Real Growth Scenario. The Director-General, as clearly indicated in the document, has appealed very passionately for a Real Growth scenario. In here, we are talking about the 842 million people out there who are hungry. I talk about this to say that, when we are talking hunger, we are talking peace. It is important for us as we deliberate on the level of the budget to take cognisance of the fact that we are really interested in peace.
We know for certain, but we do not have to continue hammering the issue, that our own leaders here, gathered for the WFS: five years later, on the UN Millennium Development Goals, and again on the World Summit for Sustainable Development which took place in South Africa, still place emphasis on the goals that we have set for ourselves. Having seen the document 2003/3, the introductory statement by the Director-General, it is very clear. The explanations given this morning by Mr Wade were also very clear. We often ask our Secretariat to explain things but to both of them we have been asking a very simple question: if we are a Member of the UN institution, and we are really comparing with other UN institutions, then what is happening to FAO? ILO, WHO, UNESCO and all the others are really registering and getting more resources.
It is definitely clear and I think we all appreciate the argument being put forward by others concerning the physical difficulties that people face but we should not just place this emphasis more on FAO than on other institutions. I believe we really need to recognize all of this and the analysis given in the documentation is very clear. Therefore, without repeating the points which have already been made, my delegation adds its voice to the call for the Real Growth Scenario and appeals to our colleagues that they think again about the Zero Growth budget.
CHAIRPERSON
Before I go on to the next speaker, we have received a message from our sister Commission I: they are having difficulty in reaching a quorum and therefore in beginning their business. So, the people who are not in the speakers' list and have some time, might join Commission I across the hall for a few minutes in order for them to reach a quorum and then come back to our discussions. I appreciate your cooperation.
Ms Gillian MAGGS-KÖLLING (Namibia)
Mr Chairman, distinguished delegates, ladies and gentlemen. I have been listening to the Director-General and to Mr Wade since the start of the Council last week. During all the statements and presentations, these two loyal, dedicated and committed disciples have tirelessly explained the bare reality facing this Organization when it comes to the PWB 2004-2005. Again, and again, they have humbly, tolerantly and faithfully answered the Member States’ calls for further clarification, be it on the budget level scenarios or on the split assessment contributions.
However, it is disheartening to hear once again some Member States saying that they still need additional information to be convinced that what we have heard thus far is indeed the truth and nothing but the truth. To quote Mr Wade's words “what more must be said to convince us that the need for a Real Growth budget is real if FAO is to effectively respond to the Memberships’ increasing demands”.
During the consultation in June 2003, this delegation humbly advised against the wholesale comparison of FAO's efficiency measures with those of other UN system bodies. Our view then was that it would be interesting to hear what would have been said of the sister organizations had their budget been subjected to having stagnated, if not declining, budget levels for a period spanning an entire decade. I am glad to hear Mr Wade confirming what this delegation suspected then, that these institutions have not been and are not being subjected to the same budget reductions to which FAO has subjected.
Mr Chairman, FAO has to respond to a daunting challenge: that of assisting the global communities to reduce the number of the hungry by half before the year 2015. This morning, we saw from Mr de Haen's presentation that we are already off track in our quest to attain this noble goal. Neither the ZNG nor the ZRG budget has the capacity to invigorate the FAO to steer us back on track in pursuit of our collective noble goal. As stated by my honourable Minister in his speech in the Plenary, this morning, Namibia strongly believes that only the Real Growth Budget scenario can help us back on track.
We fully understand the concerns of those advocating ZNG and ZRG budget levels. However, the tragedy facing us all requires soul searching on our part as members of FAO. It requires collective sacrifices for a collective cause. We, therefore, wish to humbly and passionately appeal to those still thinking of ZNG and ZRG budget levels to reconsider the catastrophic consequences of these scenarios and to therefore join us in supporting Real Growth Budget level for FAO for 2004-2005 biennium.
Patrick K. LUKHELE (Swaziland)
I wish to congratulate you, Mr Chairman, and the other members of your bureau for having been unanimously elected to guide the deliberations of this Committee. My delegation considers the topic under discussion, that is the 2004-2005 PWB, the most important item in this 32rd Session of the FAO Conference. I also wish to thank Mr Wade and his colleagues in the Secretariat for the good and informative documentation provided to us here and the excellent allocation given to this Commission. Mr Chairman, I wish to remind us all that FAO is about improving the lives of ordinary people through the improvement of agriculture and food situations.
I wish to recall the excellent speech delivered by the former Prime Minister of Malaysia, Dr. Mahatha bin Mohammad, on Saturday, where he reminded us about the human tragedy brought about by hunger and poverty. We have repeatedly had proponents of the no budget increase to FAO statutory that Parliaments have had difficulties in appropriating more resources to international organizations such as FAO. However, it would appear that FAO is being treated differently as it is being denied the necessary resources to carry out its mandate. This was clearly demonstrated by the indices that we were given earlier by the Secretariat. One therefore wonders as to whether many of us are not aware of the effects that are compelling other governments to deny FAO the reconciled budgetary support will have.
I believe we are all aware of the extensive restructuring that has been carried out by FAO which has included (amongst others) retrenchments, redeployment and large scale decentralization. This has been coupled with significant improvement in the level of efficiency which has been acknowledged by a significant membership of the FAO. My delegation therefore calls for understanding this crucial debate. As for my country's position on the budget level, Mr Chairman, Swaziland strongly supports the Real Growth scenario. Lastly, my delegation would strongly advise against the reduction of the critical activities under the Major Programme 2.5 in the document, C 2003/3 before us. We believe these programmes are critical to the reduction of hunger and poverty.
Dato'Annas KHATIB JAAFAR (Malaysia)
First of all let me join my fellow delegates that spoke before me to congratulate you for being elected as Chairman of this meeting and also to congratulate the Secretariat for presenting a very comprehensive and transparent format of PWB budget for 2004-2005. After reading and listening to all the explanations as well as the views expressed by fellow delegates, as well as the implication of the three scenarios, the Malaysian delegation is in favour of the Real Growth scenario as put forward by the Director-General. I do not wish to repeat the implications of the ZNG and ZRG. I would also like to re-emphasize that the reason why we disagree with the Zero Real Growth is because we want to avoid the implications of the ZNG and ZRG especially where the shift of resources from Major Programme 2.5 and under Major Programme 2.1 are concerned. The Malaysian delegation strongly believes that this is the most suitable budget level for us to make sure that there are adequate resources available in the field and to implement the responsibilities that they are supposed to implement. Therefore, we support and endorse the Real Growth budget.
Philip MOUMIE (Cameroun)
La délégation du Cameroun se joint aux délégations qui l'ont précédée pour vous féliciter de votre élection à la présidence de notre Commission. Notre délégation a suivi très attentivement les analyses présentées par le Secrétariat pour attirer notre attention sur les conséquences néfastes de l'adoption d'un budget dont le niveau ne serait pas celui de croissance réelle. La logique qui soutend cette analyse se rapporte par ailleurs aux engagements précédemment pris par les dirigeants de ce monde, et à la nécessité de faire des progrès dans la réduction de la faim et de la malnutrition. Comment pourrons-nous être satisfaits en fragilisant nous-mêmes une organisation dont la mission est si noble, car la mission de la FAO est très noble.
J'en appelle à toutes les délégations d'appuyer l'adoption d'un budget de croissance réelle. Ce serait pour nous déjà une façon d'être sensibles à l'appel des millions de personnes qui souffrent vraiment de la faim. Donnons les moyens à la FAO pour réaliser le programme qui s'inscrit dans le Plan stratégique que nous avons adopté il y a quelque temps. J'invite tous les délégués à faire un petit effort de mémoire de quelques secondes seulement afin d'imaginer ce que c'est que la faim. Parce que j'ai l'impression que de temps en temps on oublie qu'il y a des gens qui ne mangent pas, qui ont besoin de soutien de la FAO pour améliorer leur production. Evidemment peut-être ces personnes ne sont pas dans cette salle. C'est pour cela que je les invite, je vous invite, Mesdames et Messieurs à faire un effort de mémoire pour imaginer le moment où vous avez eu, par hazard, faim un jour. Imaginez toutes ces personnes qui ont besoin de notre soutien. C'est pour cela que j'en appelle à tous pour que nous adoptions un budget de croissance réelle.
Govindar NAIR (India)
First of all let me join others in saying how happy we are to see you in the Chair. If there is anyone who can take us out of this impasse I think you are best placed to do so. I thank Mr Wade for his excellent explanation this morning and for so lucidly setting out the disaster scenarios that we face if we adopt the ZNG thesis. It is really startling what will happen to an organization that is forced to downsize by almost 20 percent by abolishing 740 posts. We can be quite certain that FAO will not be what it has been over the last several years. The Organization will drastically change, its mandate will change, the nature of its activities will change and we can be quite sure that we will not be able to expect very much of the organization in the future.
That said, Mr Wade brought out the strange irony that, while at various forums we talk about our commitment to agricultural development, feeding the hungry and reaching the millennium development goals, we are starving funds from perhaps, the key organization in this battle, FAO. It makes you wonder what FAO, unlike other agencies, has done to deserve this sort of treatment. It also makes you wonder at the statements which are made in various world fora expressing sympathy and empathy with the poor on the one hand, while on the other hand we behave like accountants in key fora like this one, and quibble about decimal points, fractions and percentages.
We have been over these issues several times in the last few months and what we have been hearing today and in the last few days has really just been a repetition of stated positions. I do feel that the sooner we break into your Friends of Chair Group, and actually start negotiations, the better.
I have noticed that today we have not heard a single statement which has not been in favour of growth, in fact all of the statements to my knowledge, since I've been in this room, have been in favour of a Zero Growth Budget, if not a Real Growth Budget. We can go on endlessly expressing our positions, but I really feel we should get down to negotiations and talk about budgetary levels. We also need to reaffirm our faith in the Organization, the fact that FAO has a key role to play in agricultural development and that we want to see the Organization not just survive, but prosper.
India once again reiterates her firm resolve that we should go in for the Real Growth Scenario.
Dario Alberto BONILLA GIRALDO (Colombia)
Quiero expresar algunas dudas sobre los 115 millones de dólares del crecimiento nominal 0 y del ajuste al tipo de cambio y estoy tratando de resolver estas dudas con toda la ayuda prestada por la funcionaria experta de cifras matemáticas y economía, todavía no he podido encontrar una explicación. En mi opinión, si tomara en cuenta el porcentaje que se quiere aplicar en euros y el porcentaje que se quiere aplicar en dólares me resulta una cifra mucho menor de 115 millones de dólares, sumando el presupuesto base de 651.8 millones con los 115.5 millones por el ajuste al tipo de cambio, más 33 millones como aumento de costos o de inflación, que encuentro palabra más indicada, me resulta una cifra de 656.7, menos 651.8, obteniendo así una cifra que sin tener en cuenta la reducción, por los programas de 800.3 millones se llega a un incremento altísimo de cerca 20 por ciento en cifras nominales de presupuesto. Si el presupuesto neto nominal actual es de 652 en cifras redondas y el próximo será de 800, haciendo la diferencia matemática expresada en porcentaje, me resulta de un 20 por ciento, pero este es el resultado matemático, sencillo que cualquier persona que no sea experta en finanzas puede manejar. Es esta la dificultad grande que he encontrado en tratar de entender el resultado de estas cifras y así podérselas explicar a mi país. Por lo tanto pienso que deberíamos seguir insistiendo en obtener más claridad y por esto propongo que organicemos un grupo de trabajo, en el que yo estaría dispuesto a trabajar, y analizar así más detalladamente este tema, vista la necesidad de aclararlo todo y poder aprobar los cuadros. Además tendría que hacer otras consultas con mi Cancillería para fijar una posición final porque de un lado entendiendo la dificultad de la Organización, y del otro lado entendiendo también las dificultades de mi país, por lo tanto se tendría que llegar a una posición conciliatoria respecto a las condiciones de la Organización y también a las condiciones de nuestros países que hoy se ven muy afectados por una gran crisis fiscal. Por lo tanto insisto que debería crearse este grupo de trabajo para hacer claridad total con respecto al resultado de estas cifras.
CHAIRPERSON
Thank you very much, distinguished representative of Colombia, for your conciliatory spirit, but I think perhaps you were not here this morning when Mr Wade explained all the figures and we tried to answer all the questions related to this calculation. Following your intervention, it would seem you understand this. Even the percentages that you mentioned are all right. But I think Mr Wade would be best placed to talk to you on all of these calculations if needed.
Roberto SEMINARIO (Perú)
La delegación del Perú se suma a las felicitaciones expresadas por otras delegaciones por presidir usted la presente Comisión, somos plenamente concientes que con el paso de los años los países le han venido dando mayores responsabilidades a la FAO para combatir el hambre y la desnutrición, mandato que fue recogido por la Cumbre Mundial de la Alimentación. Igualmente, estamos convencidos que la Organización viene cumpliendo un rol preponderante para fomentar la agricultura y la alimentación en nuestros países y que a todo esto se les han encomendado nuevas tareas como las labores del Codex Alimentarius y la Comisión interina de medidas fitosanitarias que tienen estrecha relación con factores del comercio internacional. A lo señalado, vemos que las demandas de los países en desarrollo se incrementan cada vez más, se requiere apoyo de la FAO para enfrentar desastres naturales y situaciones de emergencias para crear capacidades técnicas en nuestros países entre otros. El escenario descrito pone en evidencia que la Organización requiere mayores recursos financieros. En este sentido, la Delegación del Perú apoya la hipótesis de crecimiento real.
ANDRADJATI (Indonesia)
First of all let me also join the previous speakers before me in congratulating you on your election as Chairperson of this Commission and also my delegation expressed its thanks to the Secretariat for the briefing and explanation that has been given in the deliberation of this Commission. I would like to reiterate, to the Council, the statement of my delegation, with reference to the major programmes of FAO. However, taking a look at the extenuating situations between the Euro, the US Dollar and inflation rate, this delegation once more states its support for the Real Growth Scenario as proposed by the Director-General and as contained in document C 2003/3.
Namba MITSUNORI (Japan)
Like previous speakers, my delegation would like to congratulate you on your appointment as the Chair of this Committee. My delegation would also like to thank the FAO Secretariat for introducing us to a new chart and explaining the PWB. I have already noticed that there are many members who expressed their willingness to support this Real Growth Scenario, however, I would like to draw the members' attention to assessed contributions. Generally, when we consider the budget we have to take into account revenue side and expenditure side. I regret that, this morning, FAO Secretariat kindly explained that the new budget proposal just focused on the aspect of expenditure. This is just a one-sided explanation; we also have to take into account contributions. There are members who just supported the Real Growth Scenario. According to the calculation of the Secretariat the Real Growth Scenario figure is 850 million US dollars, this is a 30 percent increase compared with the current budget, current assessed contribution. Even in Zero Real Growth, if we compare the amount of the assessed contribution with current contribution, there is a 23.5 percent increase. This means that the members have to pay by 23 or 30 percent more contributions. This is unrealistic to me, to my delegation and, perhaps, to all members.
We have to take into account the recent economic performance of the world. No single organization can accept an increase of more than 20 percent and this, based on the current budget size, should cause us to reconsider. My delegation prefers Zero Nominal Growth Scenario for two reasons: one is taking into account the less fortunate of the Member Countries and the second regards sound financial management of the organization. And after the expenditure. This morning FAO Secretariat stated that if we take the 1 or 2 deduction scenario, its impacts might be catastrophic. However, this needs to be further looked at, as we may have different views. In our evaluation of the last week, my delegation proposed to seek the areas of high-expenditure to achieve/realize cost reduction. Firstly, reviewing staff recruitment, secondly, seeking efficiency and increasing savings, thirdly, putting priority on the projects and, lastly, deciding the size of the budget.
In conclusion, Mr Chairman, this afternoon the Secretariat introduced the trend of other international organizations and we checked this, of course, in other UN organizations. Not a single entity that adopted an increased budget was verified. In the past ILO, UNESCO both had Zero Nominal Growth budgets and ILO will continue this trend in the coming year.
CHAIRPERSON
I certainly will ask Mr Wade to check the figures of other organizations, which will not be difficult, and we will come back again with our evaluation, thank you.
Mario Arvelo CAAMAÑO (República Dominicana)
Hace poco más de una hora corría por los pasillos hacia este salón, pensaba que iba a encontrarlo lleno, sin embargo, tuvimos que esperar cuarenta y cinco minutos para encontrar quórum y luego tuvimos también que prestar algunos de nuestros colegas incluidos un colega dominicano para lograr quórum en otras salas. Todo esto resulta desmoralizante, pensaba que este tema iba a atraer a todos los representantes de los países miembro visto la importancia y del cual depende el futuro de esta Organización. Hay tres escenarios que todos conocemos, el primero en el cual la Organización va a tener menos recursos, el segundo en el cual va a tener los mismos recursos y el tercero con el cual va a tener más recursos. Para comprender los alcances de estos tres escenarios hicimos un pequeño esfuerzo imaginativo creando en nuestra mente dos nuevos escenarios, radicalizando los que están presentes, uno en la cual la FAO no tiene suficientes recursos y se ve obligada a cerrar sus actividades dejando los empleados y los representantes en condiciones de dedicarse a otras cosas y otro escenario en el cual la FAO obtiene todos los recursos. En este feliz escenario que por el momento pertenece solo al campo de la imaginación y los problemas que tiene que enfrentar la FAO por la cual fue creada, quedarían resueltos. En el Consejo, mi Delegación, desde la tribuna de los Observadores, escuchó a la Delegación de Australia y otras, abogando para que se protejan los aspectos normativos de la FAO muy importantes como el Codex Alimentarius y los Códigos de Conducta para pesca responsable, el consentimiento fundamental previo, los químicos peligrosos, los recursos fitogenéticos y otros. En este marco también estamos plenamente de acuerdo con lo que Brasil y otros países dijeron que no se podían modificar los programas en ejecución en los países en vías de desarrollo, como el programa especial para la seguridad alimentaria. Estamos también de acuerdo con las dos posturas propuestas. Por lo tanto, la única forma de complacerlas, es con un crecimiento real. La FAO que somos todos nosotros, los países que la componen, tenemos como empleados nuestros a los funcionarios de ella, una FAO estancada con crecimiento real cero estrangulada con crecimiento nominal cero, significa el estancamiento y el estrangulamiento de nosotros los países miembros. El crecimiento de la FAO, por el contrario, es el crecimiento de sus miembros. Conocemos los esfuerzos de la FAO en reducción del personal, tenemos entendido que se han cortado 1.611 puestos de trabajo del año 1994 al 2002, esta es una tercera parte, los esfuerzos de eficiencia, descentralización, racionalización y es cierto hay lugar a más eficiencia, a dar prioridades, a hacer más eficientes los procesos, a racionalizar, a descentralizar, y mientras tanto, mientras trabajamos en esto, hay 842 millones de personas que esta noche, hoy 1º de diciembre, van a irse a la cama, a entregarse a la pesadilla del hambre. Para terminar, voy a decir que además de la voluntad política de nuestros gobiernos, solo una FAO vigorosa puede hacer frente a esta tragedia.
Richard W. BEHREND (United States of America)
Mr Chairman, I wish you much success as you assume your new duties. Like other delegates, we agree that FAO has a worthy, indeed essential, mission to relieve world hunger. The United States contributes to the relief of world hunger through a variety of bilateral aid programmes and contributions to multilateral organizations, FAO among them. But to say that an institution has a worthy mission does not imply any particular level of financial support. There are institutions that serve public purposes funded at a million dollars, there are institutions that serve funded by a billion dollars and so forth and so on. The United States supports a Zero Nominal Growth Scenario for the coming biennium, with two small adjustments: we could agree to support the additional 14 million dollars requested to amortize after-service medical coverage and we could agree to support the Director-General's request for an additional four million dollars to cover security expenses. That would imply a level of assessed contributions of 661 million dollars. The United States believes that budget increases are inappropriate at a time when many Member States are experiencing financial difficulties and accumulating arrears to the Organization. Indeed, if we are to undertake commitments that exceed our ability to pay, we are simply setting the stage for future financial difficulties.
With respect to exchange rates, just as the Organization has benefited recently from favourable exchange rate movements, we believe it is incumbent upon the Organization to adjust when exchange rates move in an unfavourable direction and, like the delegate of Japan, we believe that to absorb these exchange rate movements, one has to look for efficiencies, economies and prioritization. We would be willing to join other Member States in a consensus to adopt the system of split-assessments, that would protect the Organization against future adverse movements in exchange rates, once a Programme of Work and Budget is approved. Finally, as we launch this debate, I think its important to bear in mind that the overall level of assessed contributions represents only about one-half of the total financial resources available to FAO. When one adds expected contributions from Trust Funds and voluntary organizations, total resources available are more on the order of 1.3 billion rather than 650 million dollars and, even though not all of those resources are fully fundable, it is a better measure, or a better indication of financial strength of the wherewithal of the Organization.
CHAIRPERSON
Thank you, distinguished representative of the United States. At least there was very good news for the Independent Chairperson of the Council, who has just joined us, namely that you are joining the agreement on the split-assessment because he is chairing that Working Group. That was a good point.
Ariel FERNÁNDEZ (Argentina)
No sé si reiterarle mis buenos deseos para esta reunión, ya que no quiero pecar de repetitivo, después de las diversas Comisiones que ha precedido durante estos años. Estamos seguros que con su liderazgo, como lo ha demostrado en otras oportunidades llegaremos a un consenso. Esta es la palabra clave que tenemos que buscar con ahínco. Las posiciones rígidas generalmente llevan a consecuencias negativas, y es por eso que tenemos que llegar a un consenso.
La Argentina también ha sufrido una catástrofe y una devastación en estos últimos años, en particular nuestros problemas financieros con la Organización, comenzaron en el año 1998. No por casualidad, ya en esos años una serie de factores concatenados hicieron que Argentina comenzara a tener dificultades financieras en su constante apoyo a la Organización. Tampoco fue casualidad que algunos factores un tanto irrealísticos en la ponderación de su contribución de cuotas, hicieran que nuestro país fuera el decimoquinto contribuyente mundial a las Organizaciones Internacionales. Sin duda alguna, esto constituía una irrealidad, que está profundizada en estos días, como consecuencia de la devastación que sufrió mi país. Hoy tiene más de un 60 por ciento de su población, con claros índices de pobreza y sobre esto se están haciendo profundos esfuerzos. Pero el mensaje que desearíamos transmitir a esta honorable Asamblea, es el siguiente: nuestra Organización es un conjunto de individualidades y una colectividad que tiene que seguir el consenso, no se puede ver el todo sin ver el particular en sus partes, y es aquí que arrastramos a nuestro juicio una serie de problemas históricos de la Organización. Todos sabemos que las cuotas se fijan en base a factores ponderados, que surgen de las Naciones Unidas. También sabemos que esos factores ponderados están desacoplados en términos temporales, es decir, hoy nadie podría afirmar que los factores ponderados de hace 6 u 8 años en otras organizaciones de las Naciones Unidas, son extrapolables a lo que sucede en el 2003 o aún más, a lo que ya comenzaba a suceder en 2002 y 2001.
Estamos viendo mundos diferentes, sobre todo el nuestro, que analizarlo con factores estáticos en principio, es una falsedad teórica. También tenemos presente que esta Organización, ha hecho profundos cambios, ha entregado profundas modificaciones, de modo tal de buscar ahorros por eficiencia. Estos los ha logrado y por definición representa un factor dinámico. Me uno a las palabras que mi colega de la República Dominicana manifestó que si hoy midiéramos ahorros por eficiencias de los Estados Miembro, está claro que, la falta de quórum por más de 45 minutos en esta Comisión, o en la otra Comisión, implican que algo está fallando desde el punto de vista de los Estados Miembro. Esto no se ha hecho y nos parece claro, se necesita una profundización del diálogo. Tenemos que ser más modernos, el presupuesto como todos lo sabemos en nuestros países, lleva una discusión de meses y no se decide en dos o tres días. Nosotros instamos a que las cuestiones presupuestarias que definen la vida de la Organización por el término de dos años, y con consecuencias también posteriores, sean producto de un diálogo mucho más activo entre los grupos regionales y la Secretaría. A nuestro juicio no es posible que solo en órganos de composición restringida, se llegue a una especie de consejo, sugerencia o recomendación, cuyo análisis va a tener que ser realizado en menos de dos meses. Los órganos de composición restringida cumplen un rol vital en esta Organización, pero debe existir mayor tipo de diálogo, no es posible que decidamos en tres días, cuestiones fundamentales del presupuesto de la vida de la Organización y de las cuotas de ésta. Yo quiero recordar a nivel de mi país, y solicito las disculpas del caso por la extensión, que no es por falta de voluntad política, que Argentina está sufriendo un potencial incremento de su cuota que podría impactar seriamente en la responsabilidad fiscal. La voluntad política y la responsabilidad fiscal, son dos caras de una misma moneda. Por consiguiente, nosotros estamos abiertos al diálogo con todos los miembros de la Organización, pero también solicitamos comprensión como lo han adoptados otras Organizaciones del sistema y menciono por ejemplo: la OIT, la OIM, ONUDI, UNESCU, la Organización Mundial de la Salud, el Tribunal Internacional de Derecho del Mar, etc., que han comprendido esta situación en la que está viviendo actualmente nuestro país. No queremos profundizar la simetría en la responsabilidad fiscal individual y colectiva de todos los Miembros de la Organización, pero si debiéramos discutir que no hay mecanismos automáticos, que no se pueden utilizar factores ponderados de 6 u 8 años de antigüedad a situaciones precedentes y algún día lo tendrá que reconocer la Organización. Sus órganos intermedios tendrán que analizar con profundidad el tema, porque de otro modo viendolo en perspectiva histórica no solo a mi país le ha crecido su cuota en un 167 por ciento al término de seis años. Esta es una simetría clara, que no necesariamente ha sido compartida por otros miembros, obviamente, nuestro país quisiera que esta organización tenga un crecimiento real. Es una decisión que adoptaremos verificando la voluntad política de estos días de modo tal de llegar a una decisión concreta y responsable, porque como dijimos antes, la voluntad política y la responsabilidad fiscal para nosotros es parte de la misma moneda.
CHAIRPERSON
Thank you very much for this information. The scale of Contribution is Agenda item 17 and will be discussed in Plenary on Monday, 8 December.
Ibrahim Bocar DAGA (Mali)
Ce serait peut-être une repétition que de vous féliciter de votre nomination à la tête de notre Commission, nous qui avons le plaisir et le bonheur de vous avoir avec nous en permanence à Rome, savoir combien vous êtes effectivement l'homme de consensus, qu'il faut, quand il y a des problèmes délicats. Vous savez parfaitement arrondir les angles et accepter à la limite ce qui est acceptable. Nous sommes rassurés par votre présidence de cette Commission, d'où sortiront des résolutions, si ce n'est une résolution consensuelle qui soient aussi à l'avantage de notre Organisation.
Monsieur le Président, le problème de budget de cette Organisation est un problème très délicat. Il est vrai que de nos jours tous les pays peuvent avoir des problèmes par rapport à leur contribution dans quelque organisation que ce soit. Depuis quelques années, nous sommes confrontés à une prolifération d'organisations, on crée des organisations pour tout et pour rien parfois et toutes ces organisations naturellement requièrent des contributions des États Membres pour fonctionner. Mais nous pensons qu'il y a différents types d'organisations et tous les états ont un ordre de priorité par rapport à ces dernières. Nous avons pensé et nous le pensons encore, que la FAO fait partie de ces organisations majeures à qui le Sommet du Millénaire a confié une tâche excessivement importante, si ce n'est la plus importante: réduire d'ici 2015 au moins de moitié la faim dans le monde, c'est une gageure. Comment ceci peut-il se faire ! si effectivement et en même temps on ne donne pas à la FAO les moyens requis pour cela. Nous savons que de trois scénarios qui vous ont été proposés, pratiquement aucun n'est à la hauteur de cette ambition, mais pendant quelques années le Secrétariat de la FAO et, bien sûr, nous-mêmes ici avons fait des efforts louables pour contenir les besoins et nous voyons ce que cela donne, malgré les performances de la FAO, nous voyons que la faim ne recule pas ou alors recule trop peu à nos yeux.
Donc, Monsieur le Président, il conviendrait peut-être d'interpeler les consciences car il ne suffit pas de faire des déclarations, il faut passer aux actes. Seul dans des circonstances actuelles un scénario de croissance réelle peut aider la FAO, nous le pensons, à atteindre les objectifs qui lui ont été assignés, non seulement en 1996 par les chefs d'État mais réitérés encore plus récemment en 2002. Comment comprendre, par ailleurs, que l'on puisse demander à la FAO de lutter contre la faim et quand il y a un choix à opérer, qu'on restreigne les moyens dus aux aspects de production de cultures vivrières par rapport aux aspects normatifs. Nous disons, ici, au niveau de cette enceinte, que tout le monde s'entende pour accorder l'importance aux aspects normatifs et un signe de bonne volonté, de ceux qui n'ont pas suffisamment à manger parce que, comme je l'ai déjà dit, avant de penser au qualitatif on pense d'abord au quantitatif dans une situation de pénurie. Ce qui a poussé tout le monde à accepter qu'il faudrait effectivement accorder une certaine importance aux normes ou aux aspects normatifs, doit surtout les inciter à accroître les moyens qu'il faut pour produire davantage; c'est pourquoi parfois, nous ne comprenons pas certaines positions.
Aujourd'hui, nous sommes heureux de constater ce que tout le monde a compris, c'est-à-dire que le "split assessment" n'augmente en rien la contribution des pays au niveau de la FAO. Cette cause étant entendue, voyons plutôt les objectifs que nous attendons de notre Organisation. Nombreux sont les pays qui, ici, ont déclaré aujourd'hui, nous en sommes fort heureux, qu'il faudrait effectivement s'engager résolument vers une croissance réelle. Nous comprenons parfaitement les pays qui ont quelques réserves mais il y a une contradiction qu'il faudrait relever. On ne peut pas en même temps vouloir une chose et son contraire; soit ici au niveau de cette enceinte nous nous approprions les mots d'ordre, les consignes que les chefs d'État nous ont ici même laissés, soit, nous sommes en porte-à-faux. Nous le disons encore, il y a deux manières d'atteindre les objectifs du Millénaire, soit on se donne les moyens de produire davantage pour nourrir la population, soit alors on laisse la FAO stagner, nous ne faisons rien de plus et naturellement à terme nous aurons la moitié des personnes aujourd'hui affamées qui risquent de mourir et on dira toujours qu'on a atteint les objectifs du Millénaire d'ici 2015. Dieu nous en garde, nous pensons que les uns et les autres n'ont pas cela comme ambition, les uns et les autres veulent au contraire que nous puissions tous les jours nourrir davantage de personnes.
C'est pourquoi, Monsieur le Président, nous conjurons les uns et les autres de faire appel à leur conscience et comprendre que ce qui leur est demandé n'est pas extraordinaire, ce n'est que donner des moyens à une organisation, à qui on a donné des termes de référence bien précis, de pouvoir les accomplir. Nous comptons en tout cas sur la volonté des uns et des autres, nous devons espérer que les nombreuses délégations qui se sont prononcées ici pour une croissance réelle, pour une fois, seront entendues, tout en respectant naturellement ceux qui émettent des réserves pour des raisons objectives.
CHAIRPERSON
Thank you, Mr Ambassador, for your kind words. In this special situation I certainly do need all your prayers and the goodwill of everyone.
Ahmad AL-KHALAF (Kuwait) (Original language Arabic)
In the name of God the Most Merciful, the Compassionate.
At the outset I should like to associate myself with the preceding speakers who have expressed their congratulations to the Chairman and to thank the Secretariat for their finely prepared documents and clear information it has provided regarding the budget, and I should likewise like to thank Mr Wade for his ample explanations given this morning.
It is certain that the State of Kuwait fully understands the obstacles and difficulties faced by FAO with regard to their responsibilities and commitments, particularly with regard to the problems of hunger and poverty in some of the poorest countries. There is no doubt that there is a challenge with regard to providing sufficient means and allocations to the Organization in order to carry out the projects serving the interests of some of the poorest countries.
Today, also, we discuss the budget of 2004/05, which constitutes one of the most important topics under consideration in this current session. There is no doubt that FAO, in foresight, needs to reconsider and review its strategy, particularly in the light of the decreasing investment and allocations for investment, and the desire to reduce costs, as mentioned by the distinguished representative of Japan.
Undoubtedly, with the adoption of the Real Growth scenario, we in future will be faced with an increased budget which, in turn, entails additional responsibility to the major contributors. We certainly support the views expressed by many countries who, in turn, supported the Real Growth scenario and all the justifications emphasizing the importance of supporting and consolidating FAO and its programmes, yet this in itself does not absolve FAO from the task of reconsidering and revisiting its own strategy and its format of expenditure for the forthcoming years. That is why the adoption of the proposed budget with an increase of 30 percent over the current budget would constitute a greater burden on the Member States, especially those who are prompt and contractual in paying their dues.
We are fully convinced of the importance of seeking growth on the basis of ZNG, which does not run counter to the interests of poor countries. Kuwait has a rich history of decades of supporting poorer countries, and it has paid millions of dollars through the Kuwaiti Development Fund and other banking institutions where Kuwait is a major contributor, whether in Africa or Asia. This, of course, does not run counter to our policy, but we in Kuwait believe that we have to maintain and safeguard the budgets and the budgetary allocation approved, because this would entail considerable additional burdens to the Member States.
That is why we support the Zero Nominal Growth as far as the budget is concerned.
José A. QUINTERO (Cuba)
La Delegación Cubana quisiera reiterarle sus felicitaciones por haber sido designado para dirigir los importantes debates de esta Comisión. Hemos discutido bastante en estos días sobre el tema en cuestión, primero en las sesiones del Consejo, y ahora en las labores de este período de sesiones de la Conferencia. Como ha sido recordado por una gran parte de las delegaciones, la FAO tiene el mandato otorgado en la Cumbre del 96 y ratificado en el 2002, de poner en práctica todos sus esfuerzos para mejorar la situación alimentaria en el mundo.
La disminución constante de los recursos que hoy en el mundo son destinados a la ayuda y al desarrollo, es una de las causas de que actualmente tengamos que aceptar el hecho que en vez de avanzar las estadísticas muestren un retroceso preocupante en la situación del hambre y la desnutrición en el mundo. En este momento en el que nos encontramos reunidos, tenemos sin duda la oportunidad de mostrar claramente nuestro compromiso con los objetivos de la Cumbre Mundial de la Alimentación y adicionalmente podemos contribuir a que la tendencia hacia la disminución de estos recursos sea totalmente detenida.
En nombre de nuestra delegación, deseo dar las gracias a la Secretaría por la información tan clara que en estos días nos ha proporcionado y por los esfuerzos que ha desarrollado para que tengamos una idea más clara sobre el significado de cada una de las hipótesis presentadas. Por último, deseo expresar que nuestra delegación apoya la hipótesis de crecimiento real, porque creemos firmemente que es esta la opción que nos ayudará a continuar luchando con éxito contra el hambre y la desnutrición en el mundo.
TANG SHENGYAO (China) (Original language Chinese)
When we talk about the Programme of Work and Budget, there are certain figures that we have to keep firmly in mind. We have to work on a basis of figures and that is the only way of understanding the very complex workings of the Programme of Work and Budget.
The Secretariat has presented a scenario today on a basis of an exchange rate of 1.19 but, in fact, the scenario was drawn up on a basis of 1.15 and it is difficult for me to change, to take into account these two different figures, when assessing the situation. I think it is obviously an exchange rate which has changed and it is very difficult for me to compute the figures on that basis. According to the Real Growth Scenario for 2004/05, the FAO budget is 1113 in euros, that is an increase of 29.4 percent and the Member States' level of contribution will reach 830 million dollars, a 29.3 percent increase, in other words. That is the Real Growth Scenario situation.
If we consider the Zero Real Growth scenario, Member States' contributions will increase about 22.5 percent, so there is significant growth in the budget level. The euro has increased and now stands at 1.19. I do not know what the exchange rate will be when we actually adopt the budget level. Perhaps, if the exchange rate stands at 1.2 at that time, we will have to recalculate all these figures.
FAO is a specialized organization for food and agriculture and, as such, its responsibility is reducing poverty. It is quite normal for the Member Nations to ask more from the Organization and it is extremely important for all the programmes to continue for Forestry, Fisheries, CODEX Commissions, and it is important that FAO has sufficient resources to be able to continue its mission.
On the other hand, we think that the real situation within Member Countries has to be borne in mind. At the moment, our country's budget has seen zero growth in all programmes and it is a situation which has been unchanged for many years. We have seen for very many years, zero growth in all of our programmes. We believe that if we see an increase of 29 or 30 percent, well, it is a very difficult situation that we find ourselves in, as we have said before.
Perhaps the Zero Real Growth scenario is the one we ought to be considering. We may be able to have something which is close to zero real growth and obviously the definitive budget level is something that all the Member States will decide together.
Ms Bongiwe Nomandi NJOBE (South Africa)
Members of FAO probably know more than any other development sector, the difficulty we have as agricultural sectors, to increase levels of investment and support into our critical and pivotal sector for a range of reasons within our own countries. One of these is the long-term lag effect that is seen on the returns to investment in agriculture. And yet we also know, when faced with a crisis that is related to hunger or food insecurity, it is often this knowledge and capacity that has been accumulated over time through our collective effort, that is drawn upon to solve or redress the problem.
It is thus ironic that we now have to put the Secretariat under such pressure to present a case for an increased scenario, after what we believe is a respectable period of belt tightening and reform in the Organization. Unfortunately now, during the Council Meeting and today again, the focus of this discussion here is on the difficulty some Member Countries have in accepting the principle of increase in budget levels in the face of identified needs, rather than using our valuable time together to discuss the agricultural challenges faced and the actual work of implementation of the Programme of Work, which is the agenda item we are now discussing.
In the meantime, as you grapple with these financial issues, the complexities that are facing the agricultural sector in both the developed and developing countries are growing. The boundaries between the roles and impact of the range of activities in the agricultural sector, from production to productivity, are becoming blurred with market access issues, competitiveness, income generation, poverty eradication, sustainable management and use of natural resources, and responding to the advancement in science and technology. And yet the imperative we have is to look at the total value of the food production from field to plate. This growing complexity is reflected in the scope of work currently undertaken by FAO and would be compromised if we had no growth in the budget. So, with due respect to the possible fears that may be faced by various countries in implementing the real growth scenario, or the increased scenario, we believe that there is a fundamental principle we need to uphold and that is the imperative for us to support a real growth option as demonstration of our commitment to the core mandate of FAO and the strategies we, as Members, have agreed to with the adoption of the Strategic Framework for 2000–2015. Once we do that, we might then use our time together to deepen our collective understanding of the complexities in facing global food insecurity.
South Africa supports the Real Growth scenario.
Ms Barbara EKWALL (Switzerland)
Thank you Mr Chairman for the opportunity to make a statement which we will focus on the Programme of Work. There is wide consensus that considerable work must be done to meet the goal the international community set itself to halve by 2015 the number of the world's chronically hungry and undernourished people. Seventy percent of these people live in rural areas and depend on agriculture for their survival. In order to reach the above goal, it is indispensable that rural development and sustainable agriculture be vested with top priority. Switzerland recognizes the crucial role of FAO in this context and in making the World Food Summit Plan of Action become a reality. It is against this background that we have analyzed the Programme of Work and Budget for FAO.
Switzerland thanks the Secretariat for the excellent document. Its present format and structure allow for a rapid, focused and clear overview of FAO's priorities in the next biennium, it also provides relevant information on activities to be undertaken. We appreciate the focus on the twelve strategic objectives and the six complementary, cross-cutting strategies. We also recognize the attention given to the Priority Areas for Inter-disciplinary Actions identified in the mid-term plans.
With respect to the substance of the programme of work, Switzerland appreciates that it reflects the main priorities set out in the Medium-Term plan and that adjustments were made to respond to the priorities of the Members regarding, among others, CODEX Alimentarius, Plant Genetic Resources, Forestry and IPPC.
Our major preoccupation concerns Program 2.5, Contributions to Sustainable Development and Special Programme Trusts. This program makes a sizeable contribution to achieve FAO's strategic objective "Sustainable Rural Livelihoods and more equitable access to resources. It covers areas as gender, HIV/AIDS, access to land, Sustainable Agriculture and Rural Development (SARD), as well as the Special Programme for Food Security. We want to emphasize the crucial impact this program has in promoting rural development, poverty alleviation and sustainable development.
We noted, with appreciation, that program 2.5.2, Gender and Population, did not suffer from cuts made throughout the other parts of the Major Program 2.5. On the other hand, it is struggling with the shortfall of contribution from other sources. This program deals with the critical issue of HIV/AIDS and should continue to receive highest attention and adequate funding.
With special reference to the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg, we are of the opinion that program 2.5 should be protected from further budgetary cuts, taking into consideration the direct impact these activities have on the livelihoods and on the food security situation of the poorest populations in developing countries.
For a decade now, FAO has successfully undertaken important restructuring, taken advantage of synergies and achieved unprecedented efficiency savings, while at the same time improving the quality of its services to members and responding to diverse demands for additional, mainly normative, activities. Switzerland commends the reforms undertaken and thanks FAO personnel for this achievement and its commitment.
The search for efficiency, increased impact, and better results must continue to be a permanent feature of FAO's work. Monitoring and independent evaluation are crucial in this context and a priority for the organization. Based on these considerations, Switzerland emphasizes the importance of providing FAO with adequate budgetary means to consolidate the reforms and to build on the improvements achieved in the past years.
The Conference is meeting in Rome to give orientations for the work of FAO in the next biennium and provide the means to concretize these orientations. But I feel we all came to Rome, carrying with us the worries of the present situation back home. The decisions we will take here, however, have to be seen with a longer-term perspective in mind. They have to be seen from the perspective of the efficient functioning of an organization of which we are Members and shareholders but, more importantly, from the perspective of our commitment to reduce hunger and poverty, as reflected in the Millennium Declaration and the World Food Summit Plan of Action.
As was expressed by many other Delegations, Switzerland sincerely hopes that it will be possible to reach consensus on this important issue.
Ms Anna BLEFARI MELAZZI (Italy)
I am speaking on behalf of the European Community and its fifteen Member States. The ten acceding countries to the EU associate themselves with this statement.
We appreciated the debate which took place at the 125th Council in a constructive atmosphere. On that occasion, most Members of the Organization, including the European Union, recognized the need to provide FAO with sufficient financial resources to carry out its Programme of Work and to meet the challenges of an increasing demand for its important activities.
Considering the different possible budget scenarios presented by the Secretariat, and in light of the various points of view illustrated by the Membership, the EU believes that the following items of the budget level should be taken into account:
Preservation of the purchasing power of the Organization resources, in the light of the exchange rate fluctuations between the functional currency and the Euro, in which approximately one half of FAO's payments are made. Failure to take this factor into adequate account will negatively affect the capacity of the Organization to fulfil its mandate.
Provision for the amortization of After Service Medical Costs, with particular reference to the first tranche to be set aside in the next biennium.
We are ready to discuss the amount of cost increases that FAO is expected to face.
In reaffirming our confidence in the role that FAO has to play for the reduction of hunger and poverty as well as for the support of agriculture and rural development in the world, we are ready to participate in the ongoing negotiations with a very constructive attitude in order to determine the budget level in line with the needs of the Organization for the next biennium, and we wish you every success.
At the same time, we would like to stress the need for FAO to continue streamlining its procedures and achieving more efficiency gains with a view to a more efficient and effective management of its resources.
Arnaldo DELGADO (Cap-Vert)
La délégation du Cap-Vert voudrait elle aussi vous féliciter pour votre élection à la présidence de cette Commission. Les données avancées et les explications fournies par M. Wade, ainsi que les interventions faites par les honorables délégués de l´Afrique, qui m´ont précédés ainsi que les interventions de l´Indonésie et l´Afghanistan ont été pour nous suffisamment éloquentes. Par conséquent, nous nous abstenons de nous répéter. Nous dirons tout simplement que la délégation du Cap-Vert voudrait aussi défendre un budget à croissance réelle.
Carlos Alberto AMARAL (Angola)
J´aimerais m´associer à toutes les délégations qui m´ont précédé et vous féliciter pour votre élection comme Président de cette Commission. J´aimerais féliciter également la FAO pour la forme claire et détaillée présentée pour le budget 2003 et 2004. L´aspect fondamental qui a déjá mérité un déballage dans les travaux du Conseil concerne les choix de l´option pour servir au mieux le budget de l´Organisation et les États Membres.
Durant cette année le Comité des Pêches, des Forêts, de l´Agriculture, de la Sécurité alimentaire, la Commission de la génétique, le Codex Alimentarius se sont réunis de façon consciente et ont proposé de nouvelles actions pour mieux concrétiser les objectifs de la FAO. Cela implique inévitablement des coûts supplémentaires, et les interventions du Conseil des Comités techniques et du Secrétariat ont reconnu que le secteur de l´agriculture a été sous estimé, ces derniéres années par les gouvernements des pays en développement en faveur de l´aide publique au développement qui a diminué la qualité de 0,21 pour cent du PNB au lieu de 0,7 pour cent promis aussi bien par la Banque mondiale que par d´autres banques de développement.
Ceci a réduit les financements du secteur agricole et la FAO ne constitue pas une exception, comme confirmé le budget approuvé des derniéres années qui confirme la réduction et considère qu´il a des orientations précises du Sommet mondial et du Millenium pour réduire la moitié du nombre de personnes souffrant de la faim avant 2015 et que la FAO joue un rôle important de coordonateur dans ce processus international de réduction de la faim et de la pauvreté, ma délégation est de l´opinion que seulement avec un budget de croissance réelle il est possible atteindre ces objectifs définis qui aident les pays en développement à résoudre les problèmes agricoles. Nous sommes conscients que ces budgets de croissance réelle impliquent de plus hautes contributions mais nous pensons que l´effort solidaire concerne la communauté internationale dans son entier. Il conviendrait également que les pays en retard de paiements de contributions puissent faire un effort pour régulariser la dette afin que l´Organisation puisse travailler avec normalité.
Ms Martha MOTSELABANE (Lesotho)
My delegation would like to reiterate what other delegates, who have taken the floor before me, have said in support of the Real Growth Scenario. It is a fact that many of the countries are behind schedule in meeting the World Food Summit goals and are in need of FAO support in Policy, Technical Assistance and Capacity Building. We would like to thank the Secretariat for explaining the various scenarios and their implications on the next Biennium Work Plan and Budget. We are aware that without additional or adequate resources, FAO would not be able to assist as required. We appreciate initiatives already being initiated by FAO in cost-reduction measures. We strongly feel that we should not impose additional demands on the Secretariat for the next Biennium Work Plan and Budget. We therefore strongly support the Real Growth scenario.
Sra. María Eulalia JIMÉNEZ DE MOCHI ONORI (El Salvador)
El Salvador se encuentra al día con el pago de sus contribuciones a la FAO, por esto deseo señalar que mi Gobierno ha hecho muchos esfuerzos como demostración del respaldo y el apoyo que queremos brindar a esta importante Organización. Usted nos solicitó al inicio de nuestros debates que dejáramos a un lado por decir así, la cuestión de la asignación de cuotas en dos monedas, así lo haremos, pero claramente lo que se decidirá en este debate influirá decididamente en el monto de nuestras contribuciones y tengo que señalarle, que mi Gobierno no quisiera ver incrementada su cuota, que ya con tantos esfuerzos paga. De acuerdo con su solicitud, esperaremos los resultados de los debates en el Grupo de Trabajo que Usted preside. No obstante lo anterior, la delegación de El Salvador también está conciente de la importancia de darle a esta Organización los recursos necesarios para atender las necesidades que nuestros mismos países le plantean. En ese sentido, nosotros estamos firmemente convencidos de la necesidad que, tanto la Organización como los países miembros hagamos esfuerzos para cumplir con nuestras obligaciones. Hay que buscar mecanismos válidos y eficientes que logren mejorar realmente la situación del pago de las contribuciones. Si todos cumpliéramos a tiempo con nuestras cuotas, no estaríamos en la situación en la que actualmente se encuentra esta Organización. La FAO por su cuenta, y de esto estamos seguros, buscará los mecanismos para lograr una mayor eficiencia, en buscar alternativas viables que hagan frente a las necesidades que les plantean nuestros países y por esto la instamos a que continúen explorando otras alternativas que puedan ayudar en este sentido.También es importante que nosotros, los países, establezcamos prioridades en lo que solicitamos a la Organización y por esto la delegación de El Salvador considera que en el Programa de Labores y Presupuestos que estamos analizando es fundamental para la revitalización del Programa de Campo. Es ahí, donde la labor de la FAO es fundamental. No tanto en la sede, como en el campo, es con esto que la asistencia de la FAO ayuda realmente a mejorar las condiciones de nuestros campesinos, y de nuestras poblaciones. Por esto también respaldamos el Programa de Cooperación Técnico, mecanismo eficiente en este objetivo. Queremos reiterar la necesidad de que se le asigne a la región de América Latina un mayor porcentaje del presupuesto de la FAO. También compartimos lo que expresó el distinguido delegado de Afganistán, esta mañana, particularmente la importancia de la asistencia que se le dé a los fondos destinados a los Programas de Producción Agrícola y Pesquero y a los servicios de apoyo que la FAO realiza. Otra cuestión que para nuestra delegación reviste vital importancia, es el respaldo que debemos darle a la aplicación del Tratado Internacional de Recursos Fitogenéticos para la Alimentación y la Agricultura. En junio de este año El Salvador fue el 25º país que ratificó este Tratado que considera de vital importancia para las generaciones futuras. Por el momento estas son las consideraciones que nuestra delegación quería hacer, en el entendido que continuaremos debatiendo este importante tema, confiamos que bajo su acertada dirección, llegaremos a un consenso en determinar el nivel de presupuesto más adecuado para nuestra Organización.
KYEONG-KYU KIM (Korea, Republic of)
I am happy to see you again in the Chair, and I am also very happy to see Mr Wade still present. This morning my colleague from the North Korean peninsula strongly insisted on a Real Growth budget scenario. Unfortunately the delegation from the South peninsula has an adverse view on this matter. I know you are in great difficulty to accommodate all of these views. I will be very brief, Mr Chair. The basic position which Korea holds on the budget level is for ZNG which has over US$ 650.8 million. I don't think I have to repeat why. Japanese and US colleagues said what I wanted to say. I have never seen 23 percent or 30 percent increases in our budget even during the high level of economic growth in past decades. Considering the certain level of depreciation of the Korean Won against the US dollar and the Euro during the past two years, the budget in our currency shall increase sharply again. However, Mr Chair, in order to compromise and negotiate successfully we will try to show our flexibility when we deal with numbers tomorrow. As far as the split assessment, basically we acknowledge the benefits it has, even though it may increase our burden and exchange risk.
Ms Nihal HEGAZY (Egypt) (Original language Arabic)
I should like to start by expressing our pleasure at seeing you in the Chair, Mr Chairman, particularly as you have led our delegation in many other fora at various times, where difficult issues were dealt with. That is why we are very optimistic and we are certain that your leadership will lead us to success and consensus. I am not here to deliver an official statement since we did so on behalf of the Egyptian delegation and the Near East Group in the course of the 125th Council Session, but we should like to provide you with certain views of ours which may shed light on our path to solve this issue. The delegation of Egypt and most members of the Near East group support the Real Growth scenario of the budget. Yet, we are realistic and we know full well that if we arrive at a consensus this will not be on the basis of a Real Growth of the budget but will be for a consensus solution to be reached among us where we arrive at Zero Real Growth of the budget. But I cannot understand how we can insist, in the light of all international responsibilities which we have shouldered and expressed at this fora, on accepting a Zero Nominal Growth for the budget. Let me remind my colleagues,
The colleagues here, present only one year ago; we met here in this very room and we issued a statement within the framework of the World Food Summit: five years later, along the following lines: “...in an international alliance against hunger we promise the following...” and this was followed by the text of the statement. How could we have done this a year ago and then, in the light of the international events and increased levels of inflation, how could we come here to say that we support and call for a Zero Nominal Growth of the budget? We are here not only comprising contributing countries and beneficiary countries, we are all here fighting hunger and poverty. If we succeed in this aim and objective we will all be on the beneficiary side. We are all, at the same time, contributing countries to varying degrees of our own abilities, but the possession of our own projects and schemes and our feeling that all this will yield results which are beneficial to us make us realize that in the final analysis we are all beneficiaries. May I say this in full realization that my country is thus classified. For example, Egypt is the largest African contributor in the Agricultural Development Fund for Africa, we contribute to FAO, we pay regularly and at the same time we speak on behalf of a region which suffers from natural and man-made catastrophes which need increasing contributions year after year. Therefore we cannot but support the scenario of Zero Real Growth and if we can achieve consensus, a consensus solution will be fully supported, provided it reflects our previous commitments and our ambitious interests.
Ms Wafaá DIKAH (Lebanon) (Original language Arabic)
Firstly I should like to congratulate you on your Chairmanship of this Committee. The delegation of Lebanon would like to express its appreciation of the budget document and its format particularly with regard to the presentation of the various options. Above all, we realize that most of the programmes which are adversely affected are of major interest to developing countries. These countries need the support and active contribution of FAO. I would not like to go into a detailed list of these programmes but I refer simply to programmes for rural development and gender equality. For these reasons my delegation finds it essential to emphasis the importance of the Real Growth Scenario in the UN. We believe that it is fundamental in order to help the organisation achieve some of its aspirations, primarily on the basis of its adopted medium-term plan in addition to development and cooperation programmes and some programmes which help to achieve commitments and obligations by member states to international programmes. Here I should like to express appreciation for the improvements in administrative programmes and activities for the regions. I believe that, the stage, as it has been already mentioned by the delegation of Egypt, is rich in changing developments at the international and global levels and the openness of markets, but all this circles around the consolidation of various strategies and policies for realization of the interests of us all.
Ms Maria-Theresa LAZARO (Brazil)
The delegation of Brazil, at the last session of the Council, fully supported the role of FAO in the fight against malnutrition and hunger in the world. It is a governmental priority in Brazil under President Lula Da Silva to associate our national actions to combat hunger and malnutrition with international action, under the aegis of FAO's works. Brazil is extremely conscious of the significant role played by FAO in the support of Member Countries’ efforts to promote rural development, aiming at raising people's levels of nutrition. FAO acts as a catalyst for international efforts to promote rural development through its technical cooperation programmes. Following our national experience, we feel it important to associate new effort with this scene. Civil society, either through NGOs or through enterprise, should be present here. In this sense I should like to bring to the attention of this distinguished assembly, the nominative proposal presented this morning to FAO by the head of the Brazilian delegate to the Conference, Mr Graziano da Silva. Mr Da Silva proposed that bringing the civil society to the debate on food security, carried out at these organizations, represents a definite step forward in the constructive action that we all, as Member States of FAO, pursue in the direction of raising the standards of living in the world.
The Committee on Food Security should be reformed in order to incorporate representatives of the civil society to its work, and reinforce, in order to make its presence in decisions on investment of new money collected to constitute the international funds to combat hunger, recently proposed by President Lula da Silva. As for the budget level for 2004 and 2005, I will quote the Permanent Representative of Brazil at the last Council by stating that we have before us not an easy choice. Present budgetary restrictions in many developing countries, resulting from strict fiscal policies, make it very difficult to consider increased contributions to international organizations in general. This is in spite of FAO's case being a very sensitive one for developing countries. However, we will try to be flexible in considering this matter, but we cannot engage ourselves in ambitious magic which ignores our present economic restrictions.
Neil FRASER (New Zealand)
We have been asked here to reach agreement on a budget for 2004 and 2005 on a consensus basis, and from what I have heard in this room today, that may be difficult. We appear to have proponents for Real Growth and for ZRG, and ZNG at 651.8 million US dollars and ZNG at 767 million US dollars, and one or two other variations. It would appear that we have a choice of basically only four levels of budget, but we don't agree that this is the only choice we have. Just the choice of an acronym. Perhaps we should move outside the acronyms. Perhaps it would be easier and allow more flexibility to countries in coming to a consensus decision if, instead, we were to be negotiating and discussing with a view to coming to agreement on a figure, not just an acronym.
A Working Group probably provides a much better atmosphere for such a discussion. Another consideration, a major impact is the exchange rate movements which Mr Wade described as a blip. I wonder, should we make our decision on the basis of a blip? Mr Wade went on to say, I think, that he thought this blip would go through some level of correction over the next few months or the next year. In other words, that FAO stood to make a budget windfall gain if the blip does correct and the dollars that the Organisation holds or would collect would purchase more goods and services due to the exchange rate movement. This factor would certainly need to be factored into the considerations of members in coming to a decision, and perhaps the Friends of the Chair Group would be a more amenable forum for such a discussion than the Plenary of this Commission here.
David INGHAM (Australia)
Australia would like to join other delegations in congratulating you on your appointment and expressing our confidence in your ability to direct us towards a consensus outcome on the very important issues before us today. Australia thinks it is important to clarify precisely which scenarios are being discussed and we therefore thank the Secretariat for producing the tables of four scenarios provided this morning. Australia is committed to Zero Nominal Growth as a setting for all UN agencies and therefore Australia supports an FAO budget which excludes any exchange rate supplementation and does not exceed 651.8 million US dollars. The scenario called Reduction Scenario II by the Secretariat in their table – we would argue that this is the appropriate ZNG scenario. Australia believes that maintaining the FAO budget at this level will continue to impose financial discipline which is an essential element in making the organisation a more efficient, effective and more productive one. We recognise that, in terms of the real level of resourcing, this will require significant adjusting by FAO with FAO needing to make major structural and pragmatic changes. National governments are continually facing increasing financial pressures within their own national budgets. We think it is important that FAO recognises this. Many countries are under severe financial stress and Australia believes that the level of the FAO budget needs to take account of these realities.
Moving from the budget level to the FAO Programme of Work, Australia would draw the Conference's attention to those FAO programmes which the Governing Bodies have recently and consistently stressed should be radically funded. This would include IPPC and Codex Alimentarius, Fisheries and Forestry areas. Australia strongly supports the allocation of adequate resources to these areas to enable them to meet the expectations of Member Governments in carrying out their critically important work. In view of the clear guidance which has been provided by the Technical Committees, the Programme Committee and Council, these activities need to be fully funded to levels previously identified by the governing bodies, irrespective of whatever budgetary level is funded at the deliberations during the next couple of days.
Mme Catherine OUEDRAOGO (Burkina Faso)
Ma délégation se joint à tous ceux qui vous ont félicité pour votre élection. Nous vous savons sage et toujours à l'écoute des préoccupations des uns et des autres et nous savons que vous allez arriver à ce que nous attendons tous avec espoir. Nous avons choisi de faire confiance aux experts de la FAO qui, depuis que nous abordons ce sujet, n'ont pas cessé jusque là de nous parler de la catastrophe que serait le scénario nominal zéro. Personne ne souhaiterait donc aller dans ce sens et ce ne sont pas nous les pauvres qui sachant où nous mène un tel scénario allons le soutenir aveuglément. Nous voudrions ici exprimer notre étonnement lorsque tout le monde s'accorde à dire : « il faut que la FAO… il faut que la FAO… ». Nous voudrions poser la question de savoir : « c'est qui la FAO? » mais je pense que c'est nous tous qui formons cette organisation merveilleuse aux nobles objectifs vers qui les regards des plus pauvres sont tournés avec espoir.
Je voudrais dire ici aux pays nantis combien nos paysans et surtout nos femmes s'échinent et s'épuisent encore au travail et, face aux réductions annoncées, que deviendraient tous ces gens qui représentent dans mon pays près de 80 pour cent de la population. Que deviendrait un tel pays dont 80 pour cent de son énergie productive se retrouverait réduite par des scénarios que nous concevons effectivement ici comme une véritable catastrophe. C'est là que nous aussi, à l'instar de l'honorable délégué du Mali, nous parlons d'appel à la conscience; que coûterait le fait d'aller dans le sens d'un scénario à croissance réelle avec la volonté politique requise et l'ambition d'en expérimenter tous ces impacts réels et objectifs et d'en tirer tous les bénéfices pour ceux au nom desquels la FAO œuvre inlassablement.
On ne peut pas réduire les moyens de production et vouloir résoudre les questions liées à la faim. Mon pays est classé parmi les pays les plus pauvres du monde où plus de la moitié de la population vit en dessous du seuil de pauvreté. Malgré cela, nous avons dans nos cahiers une liste d'activités que nos femmes et nos braves paysans s'échinent à accomplir du matin au soir, sous un soleil accablant, et pourtant nous contribuons fidèlement, dans la mesure de ce que nous devons payer, à la bonne marche de l'Organisation. Ceci pour montrer notre volonté à ceux qui contribuent à nous aider, et leur assurer que les efforts que consent leur population pour nous aider sont des efforts bénéfiques, positifs qui aident des gens à survivre. C'est pourquoi nous souscrivons et nous insistons que l’on aboutisse à un consensus sur les scénarios de croissance réelle.
CHAIRPERSON
Any other requests for the floor? I just have one NGO who wishes to make a statement.
Nils FARNERT (Observer for the International Federation of Agricultural Producers)
I am speaking on behalf of the International Federation of Agricultural Producers, IFAP. Our federation has a membership of 500 million farming families. We regret the proposed shift of resources away from Major Programme 2005, including funds for sustainable development. For capacity-building we feel that the formation of Farmers' Cooperatives and Rural Farmers' Associations is of great importance in increasing food production in the developing countries, especially in the poor ones which are so important in fighting hunger, the most important agenda item at this Conference.
The removal of funds in the budgets for the formation of farmers' cooperatives and rural farmers' associations is a severe blow to our farmers in the poorer countries.
We were pleased to hear in the Council, and also here at the Conference, concerns expressed by several countries about the reductions of plans for these purposes. The Director-General this morning, in his speech, underlined strongly the importance of farming in the poor countries for safeguarding the livelihood of their people. The proposed budget cuts which I have mentioned will not really help the poor farmers in this respect.
To finish, I would like to say that the money involved is not large, but it is critically important to follow through with the FAO commitment to people's participation in development.
CHAIRPERSON
This was the last speaker today. Let us now have a few minutes of consultation with the Secretariat to see if we can finish. Can we answer the questions or respond to the statements, or we might leave it for tomorrow morning. Mr Wade will now respond to your queries.
Tony WADE (Director, Programme, Budget and Evaluation)
On TCP: a question raised by Afghanistan concerning the increase of major programme 4.2, which deals with the TCP Coordination unit. That resulted from the review we did of TCP to try and understand why it was under-delivering its programme during these previous two biennia. Part of the problem was the approval process was too slow and so we added two posts, first of all on a temporary basis and, now, in the budget on a permanent basis to accommodate that particular problem and we believe that it is working well now.
The distinguished delegate of Colombia raised a question concerning the calculation. We will provide an explanation in Spanish to the delegate and then, if necessary, sit down and discuss it and find a solution. I do not believe it is a fundamental problem. He pointed out the difference between the fact that there was a 20 percent increase in ZRG, and this of course is true; in fact, it is slightly more than that. But, if you look at the change in the exchange rate, it has gone from .88 to 1.19, which is a 35 percent increase. So, what we are seeing is the effect of the 35 percent increase flowing on partially into ZRG.
Japan argued that no single organization can expect 20 percent and then, further went on to question the information I had provided this morning on ILO. I am delighted that Japan considers the ILO case to be ZNG. If we can have similar flexibility in dealing with FAO, we would be more than happy. The statistics that I provided this morning came from the resolutions of the ILO Conference. If I can just give you the precise figures. The fact is that, if we look at what happened to ILO, as I said to you, the Swiss franc figure went down and the American dollar figure went up and, according to the resolution, ILO's budget was approved at US$ 529.6 million against a previous budget of US$ 434 million, that is plus 22.2 percent. Of course I did mention that that was not the situation in Swiss francs; in Swiss francs it went the other way, in Swiss francs it went down from 768 to 709. So, I agree with you that that can be interpreted to be a ZNG budget and we have a similar situation in FAO. The same is probably true for WHO because, although I understand from the Controller of WHO that the cost increases were rejected by the World Health Assembly, and therefore ZNG was approved, they received an additional US$ 25 million for other reasons, so that they found some way to be flexible in addressing ZNG and, as I say, I hope we can do the same in this forum.
Japan questioned whether it would be catastrophic to go for the 651.8. I do not know how we can convince people that is the case, but there would be about 740 post abolitions. There are about 340 vacancies in this Organization today, that means that about 400 people that are sitting on jobs today would have to go. I consider that fairly catastrophic.
Turning to the distinguished delegate from the United States of America, who expressed concerns about the accumulation of arrears: we too share that concern but, on the whole, it is not a major problem in FAO. I did give this information to the Council, but not everyone was represented there, so if I can very briefly indicate that, what happens from one biennium to the next, is that yes, several Member states, quite a large number, do not pay their current annual assessments, but they do pay the ones from the biennium before. People are running about two years behind on average, in this particular group. So they do not get any further behind. There is another group who are Member States who face a particular problem in a particular moment in time because of a financial crisis or because of unstable conditions in the country. These are another type which also is a problem but usually in the end pay up when the situation stabilizes. The statistic I point you to is a four-year moving average of the percentage shortfall in the receipt of contributions, current and arrears combined together: 1 percent, 1.1, 1 percent, 1.9 percent, 0.5 percent, 0.7 percent and 0.5 percent. In other words you are seeing a very small rate of underpayment which is, in fact, attributable to the growing value of outstanding contributions, which in turn is attributable to inflation. It is not a growth in the underlying indebtedness to the Organization. So, I do not think that is necessarily a reason for deciding the level of the budget. I think it is probably inflexible to the level of the budget.
The USA suggested that exchange rate management should be incumbent on the organizations themselves: first of all I would say that that is not consistent with the decision of the Council to protect the programme of work to the maximum extent possible from exchange rate fluctuations. Second, if I may say so, I have some difficulty with the logic. Except for perhaps a very few countries, all the rest of the Members take a risk in relationship of the assessed contribution in US dollars. That risk will be reduced—I repeat, it will be reduced—by taking a split assessment approach because it means that the risk will be diversified over two currencies which have a tendency to move in opposite directions. That, therefore, means that the fluctuations in your local currency payments will decline. However, if you leave it with the Organization, it is all concentrated in the one place and you see the sort of damage it is going to do today.
It is noted that 50 percent of resources are extra-budgetary: this is correct. The only comment we have to make here, is that we have to be a little bit careful about suggesting that extra-budgetary resources replace regular programme resources. Much of the regular programme work is normative and relies on the comparative advantage of FAO as being independent and credible. If that normative work starts to be undertaken with funding from individual donors, we risk losing our comparative advantage and we risk losing the credibility in the output that we produce. In other words, do you want Codex Alimentarius standards to be paid for by one Member State? I think the answer is fairly obvious on that.
Now, the effect of exchange rate fluctuations on local currencies is important. One of the phenomena that is occurring this time is that some nation states would suffer seriously from this effect and others would not. If you look at the European Union, for example, the euro has appreciated by something like 25 percent against the dollar in the period that we were looking at, actually a bit more than that now. I looked at this a couple of days ago. That means that, if there is a 20 percent increase in the budget, European Union members will actually pay two or three percent less than they paid last biennium. This is on average of course from biennium to biennium.
Australia has a currency which has strengthened by 28.8 percent, so their interpretation of ZNG and insistence on 651.8 implies that they will reduce their contributions in local currency by close to 30 percent. I find that difficult to understand, given the circumstances that we face today.
Japan I think mentioned the fact that they could see some flexibility in the fact that the yen has, of course, appreciated between 9 and 10 percent over the last two years.
There was reference from two or three Member States to the need for budgetary discipline: FAO certainly agrees with that but there is a question of degree in all of this process. The budgetary discipline that we are referring to in FAO has meant a decline in both nominal and absolute terms over the last ten years. In the same ten-year period, Australia increased spending in terms of Australian dollars by 39 percent to 1999; Japan increased it by 35 percent to the year 2000 and the United States increased it by 33 percent. Those are all figures from your national accounts. So I really think that the imposition of budgetary discipline to the extent that it is being applied to FAO is a little bit beyond what you seem to consider to be the norm.
Finally, we are struck with the suggestion that various priorities should be protected. We heard about Fisheries, Forestry, CODEX, IPPC, Major Programme 2.5; just those alone add up to US$ 120 million of the budget that has to be protected absolutely at any level of approval. I am sorry, we are just not facing reality in this. If you cut the budget by US$ 150 million, everything will be hurt. It is impossible to do it any other way.
CHAIRPERSON
Thank you, Mr Wade, for the answers provided. Certainly there will be more arguments and counter arguments and we are not in a position to reach a consensus today.
I hope that all the regional groups will give the name of their representatives to the Secretariat so, that tomorrow afternoon at 14:30, we can meet in the Malaysia Room, the Friends of the Chair, to continue our discussion.
Tomorrow morning we start at 09:30 here to discuss the PER and PIR so we will be here both tomorrow morning and tomorrow afternoon. If we are able to finish with the discussion that we will start tomorrow morning, the Friends of the Chair will work alone, otherwise we will have two parallel sessions, one session working in PIR and PER and the Friends of the Chair in parallel with that to discuss their plan on the Programme of Work and Budget. I hope that we will sooner or later come to a consensus which so many delegates desire.
SECRETARY
Just briefly, while we are on this subject, I would like to read out the names of the delegations who have contacted me vis-à-vis the Friends of the Chair. If I read any name in error, I would ask you to please correct me at the end of this meeting.
The African Regional Group will be represented by Nigeria, Zimbabwe and Mali.
The Asia Regional Group will be represented by China, India and Japan.
The North American Region will be represented by the United States of America and Canada.
The South-West Pacific Region will be represented by Australia and New Zealand.
The Near East Region will be represented by Qatar, Lebanon and Egypt.
The European Regional Group will be represented by Italy, the United Kingdom and Switzerland.
I am still awaiting names of representatives from GRULAC but I expect to receive them shortly.
On a different subject, I would remind Members that Round Table Number One has just started in the King Faisal Room. Delegations of FAO Members which have not registered in Round Table Number One are able to follow the debate in the Austria Room.
I would also announce that the next General Committee meeting will not be held tomorrow morning, however, it is expected to be held on Wednesday morning at 08:30 in the Mexico Room.
Finally I have been asked to announce, by the Chairman of the Conference, that in reference to the Working Group on Split Assessments, established by the Conference on Saturday 29 November, delegates are kindly reminded of the need to submit two delegations from each region to the Conference as soon as possible.
The meeting rose at 17.45 hours
La séance est levée à 17 h 45
Se levanta la sesión a las 17.45 horas
|
|
|