SECRETAIRE GENERAL: L'organisation de la vingt et unième session de la Conférence est contenue dans le document 79/11 qui ne diffère pas fondamentalement des autres formules d'organisation qui ont été utilisées pour les précédentes conférences. Ma présentation sera donc très courte. Je voudrais surtout faire une observation à propos du paragraphe 18 sur lequel j'ai reçu beaucoup d'appels téléphoniques me demandant des informations à ce sujet.
Contrairement à la coutume suivie depuis 1957, aucun thème n'a été suggéré cette fois-ci pour le débat général. Beaucoup de représentations permanentes m'en ont demandé la raison. Cette raison, je ne l'ai pas, mais je pense que cela découle simplement d'une part de la réduction à 15 minutes du temps d'intervention des ministres ou, d'autre part, du fait que le Conseil, en novembre dernier, n'a pas insisté sur la nécessité d'indiquer des thèmes. Enfin, l'expérience passée a montré que les ministres ne s'en tenaient presque jamais aux thèmes qui étaient suggérés pour leur déclaration générale. La soixante-dix-huitième session du Conseil avait simplement demandé qu'on suggère aux orateurs de se concentrer sur un petit nombre de sujets déterminés.
Le paragraphe 18 du document CL 79/11 spécifie en outre que les chefs de délégation devraient avoir la latitude d'aborder tout sujet considéré comme concernant l'ordre du jour et présentant un intérêt spécial pour les travaux de la Conférence.
Je crois que je m'en tiendrai à cette observation parce qu'il n'y a rien de particulièrement nouveau à dire à cet égard.
CHAIRMAN: As you can see, in document CL 79/11 there are not many changes, there are no changes, in fact, in the format as we used to know it, and therefore it should be easy for you to decide; either you recommend this or you make some comments, because as I said, the thing is quite standard.
The subject is now open for discussion.
G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): A fines de 1979 se inicio un intento de renovación de producir algunos cambios en la forma como se celebra actualmente la Conferencia. Si no está mal mi recuerdo, ello se origino en la declaración que usted, señor Presidente, hizo en la Plenaria de la Conferencia, declaración en la cual, creo, no estoy seguro, que usted, señor Presidente, usó los términos de que en su forma actual la Conferencia era muy aburridora. Posteriormente el Consejo en su período de sesiones celebró un debate intenso sobre este tema basado particularmente en los Informes de los Comités del Programa y de Finanzas. Como lo ha dicho el señor Sylla, y usted mismo, señor Presidente, este documento no contiene muchas novedades; nosotros así lo constatamos y, sin ánimo de reabrir de nuevo el debate, sino con el solo propósito de dejar una constancia porque somos fieles a nuestros puntos de vista, creemos que, en realidad, de las tres novedades que podrían sobresalir en este documento, dos a nuestro juicio no van a ser prácticamente aplicables y una tercera podría ser contraproducente, aunque debo confesar de antemano que me ha convencido en parte el argumento anticipado y expresado por el señor Sylla.
La primera novedad consiste en disminuir de veinte a quince minutos el tiempo concedido a los jefes de delegación para sus intervenciones en el debate general, y todos sabemos que esto no será aplicable. La segunda novedad se refiere a la recomendación que aparece en el párrafo 18, donde se recomienda que los oradores se concentren en unos puntos específicos, que omitan referencias a la situación de sus propios países y que se abstengan de felicitar repetidamente a los miembros de la Mesa y al personal. Esto estaría bien, y ojalá que se cumpla, pero tenemos dudas sobre su aplicación.
La tercera novedad, podría ser, no tenemos una opinión firme en este momento, tenemos un aire muy sereno ahora, consiste en que, si mi recuerdo es fehaciente, desde 1957 se había tenido en esta Organización la costumbre de sugerir uno o dos temas como base para la declaración de los jefes de delegación desde 1957, digo, antes de que se suprimieran los comités técnicos que precedían las reuniones de la Conferencia. Ahora el señor Sylla ha explicado las razones por las cuales no va a sugerirse este tema, razones que encuentro aceptables en principio.
No quiero argumentar nada más sobre el particular, sin embargo había pensado como elucubración mental, como ejercicio intelectual, que, por ejemplo se habría podido sugerir un tema que consistiría en la impor-tancia de la agricultura, en la Estrategia Internacional para el Desarrollo. Pensamos que esto hubiera sido un tema de interés tal vez para los ministros y jefes de delegaciones. La próxima Conferencia se-rá la primera que la FAO va a celebrar después de que la Asamblea General de Naciones Unidas adoptó la Estrategia Internacional para el Desarrollo; pero ésta no es una proposición firme, no somos tan optimistas como para pensar que la delegación de Colombia va a poder modificar este documento, sólo quere-mos manifestar nuestro deseo y nuestras esperanzas muy sinceras de que se mejore el ambiente en el que se celebra la Conferencia y que estas medidas y estas observaciones puedan contribuir a que no se repita ese ambiente desapacible en el cual los ministros realizan monólogos ante una sala relativamente desierta. Eso es todo.
CHAIRMAN: I think I would like to point that this document in front of you contains the decisions of Council. If you remember, Council debated at great length the idea that I brought up at the last Conference, that the method of Conference should be looked at. This has been looked at, and what Council decided is what is reflected in this document, not what I want, and I am sure when Mr. Bula Hoyos was the chairman he did not get what he wanted either. It is what Council wants, and when as I go back as a delegate to the Conference I will again speak against anything I dont't like that Council rules against, so all the things that Council wanted are reflected here, and there is no point in going back on it. Therefore, the suggestion that this would have been done, that etcetera, will only take us back now, because the Secretariat have reflected what you decided on at your last meeting.
W.A.F. GRABISCH (Germany, Federal Republic of): We welcome the fact that the Agenda is relatively short and concentrates on important topics as well as on the mandatory institutional items.
As to the Agenda and the timetable, my delegation would like to make the following remarks:
Firstly,the heading chosen for agenda item 7 has quite an appeal as a catchword, but what does it mean? As we see it, the important thing is how to fill the framework which has been established for food and agriculture within the International Development Strategy for the Third Development Decade. This frame-work is the result of the formulation of objectives of the UN Member States. We feel that the exchange of ideas and experience about national food and agricultural strategies should be the first and main topic of the discussions under this agenda item. Because the sum and the interaction at national level finally brings about the world strategy for food and agriculture. Strategies and measures at regional level would be the second stage before speaking about the worldwide food and agriculture strategy.
As to the sub-items: of agenda item 7, we would therefore like to make the. following suggestion: 7.1, National Food and Agricultural Development Strategy; 7.2, Regional Food and Agricultural Strategies; 7.3, UN International Development Strategy for the Third Development Decade, particularly food and agriculture.
Secondly, Agenda item 8 has to be seen very closely in connection with Agenda items 6 and 7. The topic "Energy in agriculture and Rural Development" is nevertheless of such great importance that a special Agenda item has rightly been suggested. We agree with it. This item we feel, however, relates more closely to the World Food Situation, that is, to agenda item 6. For this reason, agenda item 8 should be dealt with after agenda item 6, that means in any case before agenda item 7, because item 8 is a decisive contribution to the strategy discussion.
We assume that neither in the documentation nor in the discussion a repetition is intended of the discussions which have already taken place before adopting the International Development Strategy for the Third Development Decade.
Thirdly, according to the suggested timetable, Commission II should begin its work with the discussion of the Programme of Work and Budget for 1982-1983, together with the Medium-Term Objectives, that means with agenda item 9. My Delegation holds the view that it would be useful to deal prior to the discussion of the future Programme of Work and Budget for 1982-1983 with agenda item 11, "Review of the Regular Programme", as well as with agenda item 12, "Review of the field programme".
From the discussion of the current Programme of Work and the Field Programmes, we particularly expect from developing countries important suggestions, proposals and the results for the future Programme of Work and Budget for 1982/83. Fourthly, the concentration of the Agenda on a few main items leads to the fact that important sub-topics have not been shown in detail. My delegation assumes that the Secretariat will take care that the documentation shows clearly under each agenda item such important sub-topics that will be dealt with. Only then an overlapping in the documentation and discussions will be avoided.
Fifthly, at this point we would like to suggest again would it not be possible in the first week of the Conference to have a few informal round-table talks to give ministers the opportunity for an informal exchange of experience on important food and agricultural issues. These arrangements should not cause great difficulties to the Secretariat. It would only be necessary to announce the topic, the time and the meeting room as well as the participation of a representative of the Secretariat.
Whether the ministers will make use of this offer is difficult to foresee. We feel, however, it deserves a trial. We are prepared to help select or propose topics for discussion.
DIRECTOR-GENERAL: I wish to thank the representative of the Federal Republic of Germany for his thoughtful statement regarding the arrangements for the Conference.
His proposal that meetings for Ministers be arranged in parallel with the official sessions of the Conference has been considered before. I must frankly say that it is not very feasible. The Conference has a heavy Agenda. In the circumstances, I do not very well see the purpose or practi-cality of an informal meeting. Of course, if Ministers wish to meet informally, they can always do it of their own free will. Similarly, if representatives of a group of countries would like to get together, and request a meeting room for the purpose, we can supply a room if one is available. However, I cannot respond positively to the suggestion made.
I will now leave it to Dr.Islam to explain how we intend to deal with Item 7 of the Provisional Agenda of the Conference and then to Mr. West to comment on the suggestion about the order of discussion of Items 9, 10 and 11.
N. ISLAM (Assistant Director-General, Economic and Social Policy Department): This item, World Food and Agricultural Development Strategy, has been considered by the Secretariat as follows: in Item 7.1 we thought we would give a broad view of the United Nations International Development Strategy for the Third Development Decade which has already been approved, and by the time of the Conference it will be more than a year gone. This will offer an opportunity to have an over-view of the salient features of the International Development Strategy relating to the food and agricultural sector.
The international strategy has different limits, both regional and national strategies, relating to the food and agriculture section, so 7.1 is conceived as an over-view.
7.2 follows from there on to discuss regional and national strategy relating to food and agriculture sectors.
The order seemed to us to be logical, following from the over-view of the strategy and going on to discussions of regional and national matters. On these strategies we thought we would also discuss some of the implications at the regional level of some of the studies we have already undertaken. For Agriculture Towards the Year 2000 we had Regional consultations, and the last one over two years, and the conclusions of these regional consultations were highlighted and the problems were mentioned specifically. The ideas which emerged from these consultations would be included in this paper.
As far as Regional strategies are concerned, these will be composed of regional strategies with the countries concerned in each region. We think regional and national strategies should therefore go together, but in the paper itself we will discriminate. There is no need to have any items or sub-items on the Agenda. You will recognize from our Programme of Work that the national studies are very concise. It will be difficult to produce strategies for 147 countries, so we will only consider broad issues and strategies. Yesterday we conceived the inter-relationship between the special items.
E.M. WEST (Assistant Director-General, Office of Programme, Budget and Evaluation): The distinguished delegate of the Federal Republic of Germany was referring to the idea we should consider Items 11 and 12 before 9 and 10. I think he first raised the idea when he was a member of the Programme Committee several years ago, and it was not accepted then nor on any subsequent occasion. He shows great courage and determination in reverting to it on a following occasion, and this is because he has a very logical mind which we can see in many interventions. There would also, of course, be logic in considering a number of other items before considering the Programme of Work and Budget - the world food and agri-culture situation, developments in the United Nations system, even the World Food Programme, followed up by the World Conference on Rural Development and Agrarian Reform, and, for example, energy on this occasion. So the logic is not confined just to these items.
The main reason why the Conference has always, at least in the last dozen years, taken the Programme of Work and Budget first is an intensely practical one. It is in fact the only item on the Agenda of the Conference which always requires a vote, and a two-thirds vote by member governments. There may be constitutional amendments, but these are not on this occasion of significance, but this is al-ways the case with the Programme of Work and Budget and of course it is the most important item for many of the member governments because it affects their financial applications. They come with ministers looking to make statements on the subject; they do not stay for very long. Then there may have to be consultations between the member governments. These consultations take place sometimes in the course of the debate or sometimes when the Draft Report is being produced, or sometimes after the Drafting Committee. There has to be time for those things as well as preparing for the eventual vote.
Being the most important subject requiring high level attention and requiring time, it comes first, and that is the reason for the place in the Agenda, which has always been found by member governments to be more commanding in its power than the power of mere logic in relation to the order.
There are other reasons which perhaps are less important to some delegations. The fact is that in the past delegations have tended to spend considerable time on the review of the field programme in particular, as I am sure they will on this occasion. What they have to say about the field programme tends to be of a general level - a specific character. I hope this will not be the case on the review of the Regular Programme which has several topics in it, but either way it does not seem to be of great significance to delegates in relation to their position on the budget level, so I am afraid the Report would not seem to suggest that if many delegations supported the Programme and said they wanted more resources this would in fact affect the work of the Programme of Work and Budget.
W.A.F. GRABISCH (Germany, Federal Republic of): I am glad to note that the Director-General said there would be no difficulties if Ministers wished to informally exchange views and information, providing them with a room, so that they could get together to do so. I think that would help to understand each others problems better.
My second point is I could not quite understand what Mr. Islam said about dealing with point 7 and that the first thing to do would be to set:out the general framework again so that everybody knew what they were going to talk about. I think that goes without saying and that we might have already a clear idea at home, once we see the documentation, if we look at the documentation which we already have in hand, about the new International Development Strategy for the Third Development Decade. I have no problem with that but I still have some doubts as to whether it would not at least be better, under 7.2, to revise the order and start with the national development strategies which is, after all, the core of development in food and agriculture and in our self-reliance concept. So still I am. not quite sure whether this would cause difficulty to others around the table if at least we would revise the order. We heard already that the documentation from Mr. Islam would start with the national action, with the national strategy and then go to regional strategies. This at any rate would be at least some improvement.
I do not wish to take up my proposal on the timing of agenda item 9 again about what Mr. West qualified as being logic. If others feel that it should be left as it is, I suppose we would have no difficulties. We would have preferred it otherwise but I do not wish to dwell on that point any further.
There is still one point open and that is: we suggested that Point 8, Energy in Agriculture and Rural Development, should preferably be dealt with after Point 6 in order of time because we do feel that Energy in Agriculture and Rural Development relates very much to the analysis of the world food and agriculture situation and that, as such it is one of the important components of the strategy discussion, That would be no change in substance; it would ,ean only a slight revision in the timetable and I personally, at least, cannot see any great difficulty in doing so.
A.Y. BUKHARI (Saudi Arabia) (Interpretation from Arabic): I have some very minor comments to make concerning the provisional agenda and the tentative timetable. I would like to ask about the item Election of the Director-General. Here we have a voting procedure to be followed. We know that voting takes place if we have more than one candidate. Now, do we have more than one candidate? If we have only one candidate, there is no need for a vote. The matter becomes very clear. Voting would only lead to perhaps wasting a lot of time.
My second point concerns Item 15. Is it not more desirable to move this item and discuss it in Commission III which deals with constitutional, legal and administrative matters? There are relations and consultations and so forth and I think this can be referred to Commission III, at least so as togive it some of the work.
My final point concerns the meetings of Commission III: I note that Commission III will only meet in the last two days. What is the reason for this? Why does not Commission III meet in the early days of the Conference? This could facilitate many matters as well as the task of the delegations and members who will be attending and who may wish to sit on Commission III, rather than have them come to Rome and remain without any work to do.
E.M. WEST (Assistant Director-General, Office of Programme, Budget and Evaluation): On Item 8, the suggestion of moving the item seems not only logical but also appealing, and it is really up to delegates to decide. However, there is one snag that dictated putting it in this order, at least in the timetable. We try to keep in mind the agenda and the timetable. The agenda can be changed without changing the timetable, of course; but we felt this was an item in which senior members of delegations, or specialists, particularly on those on the Programme side, might want to participate. So we try to avoid it clashing with the review of field programmes and especially agricultural investment, in Commission II. If this judgement about the interests of delegations and their manning is wrong, then of course it can be changed. We have in mind particularly the majority of delegations which are small and have only two people, or even one person, who has to try to cover all the important meetings. As I have said, we can change the numbers on the agenda without affecting the timetable, but it is up to members to decide.
As regards Item 15 which at present is scheduled to be going on at the same time as the discussion on development strategy, it is not really concerned with constitutional or administrative or financial issues. It is much more political, concerning such issues as coordination - one of my favourite subjects - rather than matters which are normally dealt with by Commission III. But if there are within the items under discussion, within Item 15, points of relationships in the legal sense, then they could and would go to Commission III; we cannot foresee that now, but it could well happen and there would be no hesitation about transferring such aspects to Commission III if necessary. We are envisaging subject matters such as you discussed under one of your agenda items today, and that would be more germane to the work of the Organization under Commission II.
As for Commission III, I think Mr. Sylla is more expert in this than I am, but we have tried - in fact, I think it is impossible for us to run more than three meetings together, and therefore we cannot really start Commission III while we have a general discussion going on in the Plenary, and both Commission I and Commission II working; so we try to fit Commission III in when we would have available rooms and interpreter teams and so forth. And I regret if this means that people who are coming primarily for Commission III will either have to come later or waste their time wandering around Rome until the items come up.
LEGAL COUNSEL: As regards the mode of election, I would like to quote very simply Rule XII.9 (a) of the General Rules of the Organization. The first sentence of Paragraph 9 (a) reads as follows: ''The appointment of the Chairman of the Council and of the Director-General, the admission of additional Member Nations and Associate Members, and the election of Council Members shall be decided by secret ballot''. You see from this provision that a secret ballot is mandatory in the case of the election of the Director-General, irrespective of the number of candidates.
CHAIRMAN: I think this explanation is probably sufficient, but I will still ask the Secretary-General about why Commission III cannot meet, because Mr. West did not quite give a definite answer.
LE SECRETAIRE GENERAL: La raison me paraît très simple. C'est parce qu'au début de la Conférence nous avons un certain nombre de manifestations qui nécessitent la présence de toutes les délégations à la plénière; je pense par exemple aux différentes nominations à la Conférence, la déclaration du Directeur général, etc.. et ensuite le débat général. Nous ne pouvons pas organiser également la réunion de la Commission III plus tard car son rapport ne sera pas prêt et ne sera pas disponible à ce moment-là pour être inclus dans le Rapport de la Conférence, ce qui pourrait retarder l'adoption de ce dernier, et ainsi nous faire courir le risque de prolonger la durée de la Conférence.
C'est simplement pour cette raison que nous avons regroupé les réunions des 3 Commissions ensemble à un certain moment du projet de calendrier.
M. ZJALIC (Yugoslavia): I had raised my flag before the explanation of the Secretariat was given. I would just like to express our full agreement with the arguments expressed by Mr. Islam, Mr. West and the Director-General.
Just briefly to comment on the arrangements for the agenda, point 7 of the agenda, I think that it is in proper order that we are supposed to deal with the Implementation of Development Strategy in the Third Development Decade, that there are regional and national aspects of this implementation. Our feeling is that National Development Strategies should be a subject of constant review of this Organization. And I think that besides that we should make an attempt to find the proper place of this Organization in the implementation, both in the international level and the national level.
As for arrangements for Plenary, I think that the Plenary Session is the best place for Ministers to meet and to listen to each other and that the provision for 15, let us say maximum 20 minutes, which gives an opportunity for a written speech of 5 to 7 pages, depending on the speed, is quite sufficient space to express a country's position or a government's position on the most important issue.
As for the rest of the arrangements for re-arrangement in the original agenda and timetable we do not feel that strongly but we think the proposed sequence of items and agenda items is quite acceptable for at least the major part of the delegations.
J.M. SCOULAR (United Kingdom): I would like to address myself to paragraphs 18 to 22 of the paper about the Heads of Delegations' speeches particularly. Now I plead a personal interest here because at the last Conference I had the privilege of hearing 76 of these speeches myself. According to my memory they were a little short on human drama and not all action packed, so I welcome anything that will reduce the 15 minute rule which I hope will be applied. I also think we should insist on statistical analysis being presented in written form and hope that this will be applied.
P.A. MORALES CARBALLO (Cuba): Yo me quería referir a estos temas 6, 7 y 8. A nuestra delegación, con toda modestia, nos parece que el orden que tiene es un orden muy lógico por lo siguiente. Porque en el tema 6, digamos se nos da una fotografía de la situación en que se encuentra la situación alimenta-ria y agrícola en el mundo. Luego de pasar revista a esa situación, que es siempre de una gran impor-tancia y algo muy relevante para todos, entonces pasamos a un documento que es un documento de extra-ordinaria importancia, como el documento de la tercera década. El documento que pudiéramos decir, tal vez no sea la palabra mas adecuada, que regirá las actividades en esta década. Es el documento de la Nueva Estrategia aprobada por la Asamblea General de las Naciones Unidas. Es decir, que. aquí seguimos una secuencia lógica, que a mí me parece que la Secretaría ha aplicado una lógica común y de mucha fuerza.
Y en el tercer lugar, en el punto 8, tendríamos un caso particular de la situación agrícola y de la situación en el mundo, como en energía y desarrollo agrícola. Es decir, nosotros iríamos de los aspectos más generales para entrar al final en el tema 8, en un tema particular también de importancia. Por eso nosotros apoyamos esta idea de que se mantenga este orden de 6, 7 y 8.
Igualmente, en el calendario nos parecía que este tema 8 seguía igualmente en el tratamiento a los temas 6 y 7. Eso era lo único que nosotros queríamos decir, y también apoyar a aquellas delegaciones que se han manifestado en cuanto al orden de la parte 2, en lo referente a tener el tema No. 9 como primer punto de esa parte específicamente.
CHAIRMAN: There are no more speakers on this item. It is difficult to sum up because only Mr. Grabisch for Germany raised a concrete proposal on item 7.2 which has been objected to, or not agreed to by Yugoslavia. I do not know if the Federal Republic of Germany insists? No, In that case then we have concluded this item with the discussions we have had.
Now we can go on to the next item which is 10.3
LE SECRETAIRE GENERAL: Ce document (CL 79/12) concerne la présentation des candidatures au poste de Président indépendant du Conseil. Vous y aurez remarqué que le secrétariat propose que la date limite du dépôt des candidatures soit fixée au vendredi 4 septembre 1981, à 17 heures, et au vendredi 11 septembre 1981 la date limite de notification desdites candidatures aux différents gouvernements.
CHAIRMAN: There is a document before you CL 79/12. If there are no comments then I take it that this paper is accepted and can go in our records. We now go on to item 16 which, although it says Other Programme, Budgetary, Financial and Administrative Matters, is mostly in the field of the Finance Com-mittee. I will therefore call on the Chairman of the Finance Committee to introduce the item.
M. BEL HADJ AMOR (Président du Comité financier): Le premier point qui nous concerne (il s'agit du point 16) est la nomination du Commissaire aux comptes, paragraphes du rapport du Comité financier y relatifs 3.108 à 3.110. Comme vous le savez, le Conseil, à sa soixante-quinzième session a nommé au poste de commissaire aux comptes de l'Organisation le Contrôleur et vérificateur général des comptes du Royaume-Uni. Le mandat est de deux ans et l'échéance est prévue pour fin 1981. Normalement, le Con-seil est appelé à recommander une nomination du Commissaire aux comptes pour le biennium 1982-83.
Le Comité des finances a examiné cette question. Il a noté le travail positif et les services rendus par le Contrôleur et vérificateur général des comptes du Royaume-Uni en sa qualité de commissaire aux comptes de l'Organisation et, de ce fait, il recommande qu'il soit reconduit à ce poste pour une période ultérieure de deux ans. A cet égard, il y a une résolution au paragraphe 3.110 qui fait mention de cette recommandation et le Comité des finances souhaiterait voir le Conseil adopter ce projet de résolution,
G. BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Espero que no se interprete mal mi intervención. En primer lugar quiero decir-le al distinguido Presidente del Comité de Finanzas que su breve intervención sobre este punto es muy acertada, así como los párrafos 3.108, 3.109 y 3.110 del Informe del Comité que él preside; sin embargo, y solo con ánimo de aclarar mi curiosidad que va más allá de la curiosidad de mi delegación, ya que recoge también la de otros colegas del Consejo, creo convendría que antes de adoptar un proyecto de resolución, el Consejo pocas veces adopta una resolución, se nos informara un poco sobre la decisión que vamos a tomar. Según el texto del proyecto de resolución; "nombrar al Interventor de Cuentas y al Auditor General del Reino Unido", según esto, al menos en español da la impresión de que es una persona; nosotros posiblemente pensamos que no; pero convendría que se explicara al Consejo para que pudiéramos actuar. No se trata de una intención de oposición, sino de clarificación, ya que podría ser conveniente que el Consejo supiera cómo se ejercita esa función, si es en el Reino Unido o si tiene oficinas en Roma; si es ella misma la que se ocupa de estos asuntos desde la fundación de nuestra organización y desde cuándo; si ha habido en el pasado intento de modificar esa situación. Creo que hace seis o siete años un miembro del Comité de Finanzas planteó algunos interrogatorios semejantes a éstos, con la diferencia de que mi intervención conlleva en primer lugar el apoyo al proyecto de resolución, y, en segundo, desea disipar todas estas dudas que están dirigidas para que los miembros del Consejo conozcan más detalles sobre este proyecto.
Para poner punto final a la discusión quiero decir que agradezco la aclaración y que sé que es una orientación prudente, y espero que en adelante seguiremos trabajando dentro del mejor espíritu de cooperación.
M. BEL HADJ AMOR (Président du Comité financier): Je voudrais remercier le représentant de la Colombie pour l'attention qu'il apporte à cette question et j'estime tout à fait légitimes les questions qu'il a posées. Personnellement, avec les autres membres du Comité, je pense que nous ne manquerons pas dorénavant d'allonger le rapport. Ce n'est pas un problème, et nous pourrons y mettre tous les détails que le Conseil pourrait estimer utile d'avoir.
Je vais essayer de répondre aux questions posées et, certainement, le secrétariat pourra avoir quelques commentaires à ajouter.
Je tiens à dire qu'il y a également le délégué du Royaume-Uni qui s'apprêtait peut-être à répondre, directement ou indirectement, à certaines des questions.
Se référant au Commissaire aux comptes de l'Organisation - c'est exactement le même terme en français -M. le délégué de Colombie a demandé s'il s'agissait d'une personne ou de quoi. Je ne sais pas ce qu'il entend par là. Bien sûr, il s'agit d'une personne puisqu'on dit "le Commissaire". En l'occurrence, c'est M. Henley, mais M. Henley ne travaille pas tout seul, il y a tout un bureau, toute une organisation.
Deuxième question: Y a-t-il un bureau ici? Oui, il y a des représentants du Commissaire aux comptes qui sont détachés auprès de l'Organisation et qui sont payés par le bureau du Commissaire aux comptes et ils suivent justement la vérification des comptes de l'Organisation au jour le jour. D'ailleurs, ils ont des contacts très étroits non seulement avec le secrétariat mais également avec le vérificateur intérieur de l'Organisation.
Pour le troisième point, je précise que le Commissaire aux comptes de l'Organisation est également le contrôleur-vérificateur général des comptes du Royaume-Uni et je peux ajouter que ce Commissaire aux comptes n'est pas seulement désigné pour la FAO mais, si mes souvenirs sont bons, il couvre également d'autres organisations. Malheureusement, je n'ai pas mes notes, relatives aux débats que nous avons eus sur cette question, devant moi, mais je suis certain que l'Organisation pourrait nous donner les noms des autres organisations dont les comptes sont vérifiés par le Commissaire aux comptes de notre Organisation.
Le quatrième point concerne, je crois, la durée. Je tiens à préciser que le Commissaire aux comptes, contrôleur et vérificateur général des comptes du Royaume-Uni, a servi de commissaire aux comptes pour l'Organisation depuis plusieurs années et, jusqu'à présent, nous n'avons eu qu'à nous féliciter de ses services.
J 'espère avoir répondu aux points soulevés par M. le délégué de la Colombie et, de toute façon, je suis prêt à reprendre la parole s'il le juge nécessaire.
P.J. SKOUFIS (Assistant Director-General, Administration and Finance Department): I think our Chairman of the Finance Committee has answered very adequately indeed the questions relating to the role of the External Auditor. Just to elaborate on the point that he mentioned, the External Auditor of the Organization also performs similar functions at Unesco, ILO and WHO, among several other United Nations Agencies.
CHAIRMAN: Then we go back to the resolution on page 45 of the English text of document CL 79/4, paragraph 3.110. If there are no more comments, then that resolution is adopted.
It was so decided.
Il en est ainsi décidé.
Así se acuerda.
M. BEL HADJ AMOR (Président du Comité financier): Monsieur le Président, il s'agit des questions concernant le personnel. Ces questions comportent plusieurs volets, je les soumets au Conseil beaucoup plus pour information que pour décision. Il s'agit des paragraphes du rapport du Comité financier 3.80 à 3.92.
Je vais essayer de résumer les principaux éléments de renseignements que l'on voudrait fournir au Conseil.
On relève tout d'abord des renseignements ayant trait à l'ajustement de poste à Rome d'octobre 1980 à octobre 1981, ainsi que les modifications apportées au traitement du personnel des services généraux, et par voie de conséquence aux primes linguistiques. Il s'agit des paragraphes 3.80 à 3.82.
Des informations sont également fournies à cet égard pour les bureaux sur le terrain. Il est à noter que cet élément a été introduit à la demande du Comité financier.
A l'annexe E le Conseil voudra bien trouver le sixième rapport de la Commission de la fonction publique internationale. Il faudra noter en particulier les points essentiels suivants de ce rapport:
Premièrement, les modifications qui sont apportées au calcul des pensions et du traitement soumis à retenues pour pension.
Deuxièmement, l'incorporation à partir de janvier 1981 de 30 points d'ajustement de poste dans le traitement de base sans conséquences financières ni pour le personnel ni pour l'Organisation.
Troisièmement, les nouvelles dispositions pour le remboursement au titre de l'indemnité pour frais d'étude.
Quatrièmement, les mesures prises pour améliorer les conditions d'emploi hors siège.
Ce sont les principales recommandations de ce rapport.
Il reste entendu que les spécialistes du secrétariat pourront expliciter tous les détails qui pourront être sollicités, à l'instar de ce qui a été fait lors des débats sur cette question au Comité des finances.
Par ailleurs, le Comité, toujours dans le cadre des questions concernant le personnel, s'est penché sur l'application, à partir de janvier 1981, des normes communes de la Commission de la fonction publique internationale, à propos du classement des postes du cadre organique au siège et dans les bureaux extérieurs. Il s'agit des paragraphes 3.90 à 3.92.
Le Comité a exprimé une certaine préoccupation quant aux conséquences de cette décision de la CFPI et aux difficultés de sa mise en oeuvre. En effet, le Comité estime que cette Norme-cadre pourrait entraîner l'inflation des classes. De même, le choix d'une méthode d'application soulèverait plus de problèmes qu'il n'en résoudrait. En outre, la mise en oeuvre s'avérerait ainsi plus difficile qu'on ne l'imagine et serait coûteuse. Les recommandations de la CFPI, à propos des procédures de recours, ne semblent pas améliorer l'efficacité de celles déjà en pratique à la FAO.
A la lumière de ces éléments, le Comité estime que le Conseil pourrait recommander au Directeur général de recourir à l'application de cette Norme-cadre avec prudence, en fonction de certains cas déterminés, et, en tout état de cause, de ne pas adopter pour le moment un plan d'application global ou fractionné.
J. SCHERER (Germany, Federal Republic of): I have only a few remarks on the implementation of the classification standards put forward by the International Civil Service Commission. My Delegation fully agrees with the concern of the Finance Committee as expressed in paragraph 3.91 of document 79/4. We join in recommending that the Direetor-General should proceed with caution in implementing the ICSC Master Standards so as to avoid grade inflation of professional posts. My Delegation would be very pleased if the Secretariat could examine in detail the impact that the implementation of the ICSC Master Standards would have on the overall established post structure in FAO before taking final decisions.
CHAIRMAN: There is a word on page 42 of the English text in paragraph 3.91, third line: the word before "inflation". I am told it is "grade''.
M. BEL HADJ AMOR (Président du Comité financier): Est-ce que c'est une question que vous me posez?
CHAIRMAN: There is a comment by Germany in which he mentioned something about the implementation of the "Master Standards".
M. BEL HADJ AMOR (Président du Comité financier): Si j'ai bien compris, je crois que M. Scherer est d'accord avec la proposition du Comité des finances. Je voudrais l'en remercier. Il ne me semble pas qu'il ait posé de questions.
P. J. SKOUFIS (Assistant Director-General, Administration and Finance Department): With regard to the intervention by Germany, it is the Director-General's intention following the recommendation of the Finance Committee in this regard to exercise caution as he proceeds with the implementation of these Master Standards and to bring to the attention of the Finance Committee his plans for its implementation. We do agree with the observations that have been made. The Director-General has accepted the recommendations of the Finance Committee in this regard.
CHAIRMAN: If there are no more comments, then I will ask the Chairman of the Finance Committee to go on.
M. BEL HADJ AMOR (Président du Comité financier): Troisième volet de cet ensemble de questions, il s'agit des locaux du Siège. Les paragraphes y relatifs dans le rapport du Comité des finances vont de 3.93 à 3.100.
Comme vous le savez, la question des locaux du Siège n'est pas nouvelle pour le Conseil. Le Comité a pris l'habitude d'en saisir le Conseil presque à chaque session, et en tout cas, chaque fois qu'il estime utile et nécessaire d'attirer son attention sur les faits nouveaux intervenus, vu l'importance de cette question pour l'organisation.
Malgré une certaine amélioration due à la mise en fonction du bâtiment D, les locaux restent insuffi-sants, malgré l'effectif stable de l'Organisation. Le Directeur général a informé le Comité des pré-occupations que cette situation suscite, tant du point de vue travail que du point de vue finances, Le Comité financier partage cette inquiétude et il a étudié avec soin les mesures proposées par le .Directeur général pour affronter le problème à court et moyen terme, en attendant une solution définitive pour les locaux qui pourrait être fournie par la construction du nouvel ensemble de bâtiments, objet des rapports antérieurs du Comité. Ces mesures, appuyées par le Comité, figurent au paragraphe 3.96 de ce rapport et leur mise en oeuvre sera à la charge du pays hôte.
Conscient de l'acuité de cette situation, le Comité financier recommande vivement au Conseil ce qui suit: demander au Directeur général de prendre d'urgence les mesures provisoires indiquées au para-graphe 3.96, et d'insister auprès du Gouvernement italien pour leur mise en oeuvre rapide; prier le Directeur général de poursuivre son effort auprès des autorités compétentes en vue d'accélérer la concrétisation de la proposition visant le nouvel ensemble de bâtiments; prier le Directeur général d'entreprendre ces deux actions parallèlement et simultanément; demander au Directeur général de le tenir au courant de l'évolution de la situation.
Je tiens à préciser, et ce pour apaiser certaines inquiétudes, que les mesures provisoires ne serviront peut-être - on l'espère - qu'à "loger", si je peux employer ce terme, le personnel actuel. Le fait - et cela a été précisé d'ailleurs dans nos discussions avec le secrétariat - de demander le nouvel ensemble de bâtiments ne constitue pas et ne constituera pas, bien sûr, un encouragement pour augmenter le personnel. Mais on a pensé aux autres organismes de la famille des Nations Unies ici à Rome qui pourraient être logés avec la FAO.
J'espère que le Conseil appuiera les recommandations du Comité des finances.
A. CONTE MAROTTA (Italy): First of all, I want to underline once again the firm intention of my Government to take all the possible political and administrative steps to facilitate the construction in Rome of a new Agricultural Centre of the United Nations for the benefit of all the agencies serving from Rome against world hunger. Having in mind this final aim, in 1980/81 my Government has advanced very much to locate a solution which has been judged by the various ministerial authorities the more effective under the financial point of view and time requirements.
As you know, in these weeks in which my Government is facing a political crisis, the very important matter of an Agricultural Centre of the United Nations in Rome will certainly not disappear from the affairs of the different ministries which are still collaborating in the new cabinet. Thinking of the fact that the struggle against world hunger has been for the last years a political priority for the Italian Government, I can easily foresee the same procedural attitude of the new cabinet towards the Centre of the United Nations in Rome. This is why, referring to a suggestion made by the Finance Committee to try to facilitate the negative space reality of many offices, my Delegation would like to support a temporary solution which should be referred only to the time necessary to wait for the construction of the Centre. At the same time, my Government would go ahead with contacts with FAO to give its possible support or its support to a temporary solution.
M. BEL HADJ AMOR (Président du Comité financier): Je voudrais, Monsieur le Président, si vous le permettez, poser une question au Secrétariat. La position que j'ai présentée au Conseil remonte au 8 mai. Je voudrais savoir si depuis cette date jusqu'à ce jour, il y a eu une certaine évolution et s'il y a des éléments nouveaux. Est-ce que M. Georgiadis pourrait nous aider à ce propos? Cela compléterait le tableau que nous avons trace pour le Conseil.
CHAIRMAN: Actually, he did want the floor, but I gave you priority, so I call on Mr. Georgiadis now.
A.G. GEORGIADIS (Director, Administrative Services Division): I would like to inform the Council of the latest developments of this critical issue since the last session of the Finance Committee. No sooner had the Finance Committee adopted its report than the Director-General sent a copy to the Permanent Representative of Italy, so that the proposal for an interim solution of the accommodation problem, as outlined in that report, could be pursued without delay while continuing of course our efforts for the construction of a new building complex. The matter was discussed at a meeting with representatives of various ministries and municipality of Rome, where the Organization was also represented. That meeting was held on the 12th of June. The Chairman of that meeting, who is the Economic Advisor to the Prime Minister, reiterated the political will of the Government as expressed repeatedly by the Prime Minister and the Foreign Minister about constructing a new building complex in Rome for accommodating FAO and possibly other agencies such as IFAD, the World Food Programme and the World Food Council.
We are also told, however, that the current situation did not allow the Government to initiate concrete steps before this current session of the Council but that hopefully some action could be reported to the Conference next November.
I should also indicate that the Director-General received a letter last week from the Permanent Representative of Italy referring to the mentioned inter-ministerial meeting and advising that - I am translating literally from Italian - "the Italian Government is taking action at the highest level and with maximum flexibility with a view to realizing the UN World Centre for Agriculture, " as it is commonly referred to in our discussions with the Government. However, the letter goes on to say, "Although the recommendations of the Finance Committee for an interim solution were considered positive, it was emphatically stated at the meeting that such interim solution could only be temporary and should not involve a large financial commitment".
The Director-General does not doubt the good will of the Italian authorities as expressed at the highest level of Government, but he is also of the opinion that such expressions do not represent any progress in the implementation of the project. Only when the necessary legislation and allocation of funds are approved by Parliament can it be said that the project is under way, and even then we all know the time it takes to undertake any sizeable construction; the preparatory work alone, that is, the issue of tenders, the preparation of designs, etc. for a large complex destined to accommodate all the staff of FAO and other bodies may take several years in itself. The Director-General therefore not only wishes to emphasize this protracted inactivity - - I should say here that this question of a new building complex has been on the agenda of the Finance Committee for the last five years -- but he now issues a formal warning to the Council about the serious consequences on the efficiency of the Organization and its programmes if we have to continue operating in two different locations indefinitely.
Certain Member Nations may perhaps fear that the construction of a new building complex would eventually lead to an expansion of staff at Headquarters. Well, it can immediately be stated here that any such fears are not justified. Firstly, the Director-General has given evidence in the past five years of his policy of decentralization involving zero growth of staff at Headquarters. Secondly, any new complex of building would mainly aim at accommodating present numbers - - I repeat present numbers - - in one location, with only a small margin to cover contingencies and basic facilities which are lacking today.
This autumn the Director-General proposed an interim solution to cover the immediate needs. The permanent solution, of course, would be required in 15 years, that is why we have to start planning now. The present dispersion of the organization into two locations has been causing and will continue to cause a tremendous waste of time which in essence means a waste of money - the member nations' money. If any of the distinguished delegates would like to pay a visit to Building F, they would soon recognize the magnitude of waste in the inevitable movement of staff between the two locations.
But I can state here an even more serious problem which is fast becoming critical. Within the main building here in this location we have a prefabricated four-storey called Building E. It was put up in 1965, and it is near the end of its expected life. Urgent major repairs are needed - the plumbing, the floors, the air conditioning, the heating, all need to be replaced to a major extent, but we cannot undertake most of the repair work because we would need to evacuate the building and we have no space in which to put the staff who are now working in it.
Again, delegates are invited to visit Building E if they wish to see for themselves the difficult condi-tions under which the staff are working there.
In conclusion, we wish to thank the Italian Government for having made Building D available to the orga-nization, which is located in this complex. This was only to release another building some distance away from here, Building G, and save the rent on it and put together the outposted staff in that Building G.
However, the organization has a moral obligation to provide a headquarters for its staff in accordance with the Headquarters agreement. We are thankful to the Italian Government for the arrangements made since 1975 which cover rental for Building F now amounting to $550,000 a year, half being paid by the organization.
The distance between the two locations, the overcrowding, the problem of Building E, which can be set out indicate that such a situation cannot be continued indefinitely. The Director-General therefore proposes that the great concern of the organization should be expressed to the Government of Italy, and it should be requested that measures be taken for an interim and long-term solution, and this has been endorsed by the Finance Committee.
CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much, Mr Georgiadis, for this explanation, which brings us up to date.
M.W. MOORE-WILTON (Australia): Australia, as a member of the Finance Committee, fully supports the recommendations of this Committee in regard to this very important item of Headquarters' accommodation. We all realise that there are serious inadequacies with the present accommodation. That is quite obvious to anyone who walks through this accommodation. Equally we realise the difficulties which national governments have in providing the significant items of expenditure for new building projects.
However, I am sure it would not be the wish of the host Government that the provision of adequate facilities for FAO should be delayed, and we feel it is essential that very urgent attention be given to the interim proposals being put forward by the Director-General.
It may well be that as indicated by the Secretariat it may be 15-20 years before a new building complex will be available. The Secretariat and the host authorities should therefore give serious and urgent attention to measures to enable the Secretariat to continue to function efficiently and effectively, and in that we fully agree with the Director-General, that the Council at its next session - and indeed, if needs be, the Conference itself - should give urgent consideration to briging these views to the attention of the host government if there is no meaningful development in the meantime.
R.A. SORENSON (United States of America): I would like to associate myself with the views just expressed by my colleague from Australia. We know that this matter is divided into two approaches, an interim approach and then a search for a permanent solution.
We fully share the concern of the Finance Committee, and wish to affiliate ourselves with the search for a solution, and ask for an examination of the financing of the permanent solution.
Paragraph 3.99 recommends that the Director-General also pursue the suggestion with the Italian authorities with a view to finding a permanent solution to the question, and we associate ourselves fully with that suggestion of the Finance Committee but on the basis there will be no cost to the regular budget of the organization. We assume any agreement between FAO and the host country would be submitted to the Council for approval - but I expect that will be many years down the road.
J.M. SCOULAR (United Kingdom); I have two questions on Paragraph 3.96. 3.96 (a) was the question about the extra office accommodation. I would like to know whether the extra offices are on a fully load-bearing floor area, or whether a limitation is to be placed on the weight of the structure to be put upon it? On 3.96 (b), has the Secretariat an alternative in mind for the office accommodation?
CHAIRMAN: Would you answer the specific question, Mr. Georgiadis?
A.G. GEORGIADIS (Director, Administrative Services Division): On the first question the roof of Building D would take the load, but it is a question of getting the right permits from the authorities, including the Municipality of Rome. It would only give us 60 rooms or offices and not more, and this would be totally inadequate.
On the second question, if it had in mind a building behind this complex it would not be queried, but we would rely on the Italian authorities to find something for us. Everything around here is full, and there would have to be an expropriation of land on which to construct something.
A. CONTE MAROTTA (Italy): I would like to thank the delegates of Australia and the United States and would like to assure them it is the greatest interest of my Government to solve the problem of FAO, as they have seen how FAO in Rome is very important. That is why we would say to Mr. Georgiadis and the Director-General that we wish to try to find a way, it is just a question of the matter of working. That is why I am sure that in the next few days, or the next week, we could certainly be able to present to the new government these two major questions, the permanent one and the interim one.
CHAIRMAN: I think we have discussed this enough. We thank the Government of Italy for what it is doing, and also take note of the explanation of the delegate of Italy that there are some problems with the Government just now, but that speedy action will be taken.
At the same time, Council has also approved the recommendations made by the Finance Committee in Paragraphs 3.98-3.100.
With that we conclude this particular aspect of the Finance Committee's explanation. I would call on the Chairman of the Finance Committee to carry on.
M. BEL HADJ AMOR (Président du Comité financier); Le quatrième et dernier point du calendrier du jour concerne la suppression des comptes provisoires. La référence à ce point se trouve dans le Rapport du Comité financier aux paragraphes 3.72 à 3.79. Le Conseil sait qu'en application du Règlement financier actuel, le Secrétariat est tenu de remettre aux vérificateurs extérieurs des comptes provisoires annuels. A la lumière des renseignements fournis au Comité à ce propos, il s'avère que cette pratique ne revêt pas toute l'utilité voulue et impose des contraintes aux ressources administratives de l'Organisation. En effet, le Comité a été informé qu'il faut environ trois mois pour préparer les comptes détaillés et reporter les soldes sur l'année suivante. On a attiré son attention sur le fait qu'avec la préparation de ces comptes détaillés il y a une interruption de communication des informations financières à la direction de l'Organisation, Pour tous ces détails et raisons pratiques, il est proposé, à l'instar d'autres organisations qui ont un cycle budgétaire biennal, la suppression de cette obligation pour les raisons qui sont évoquées notamment au paragraphe 3.73 du Rapport du Comité financier.
Le Comité recommande l'approbation de cette proposition,étant précisés cependant les éléments suivants: premièrement, le vérificateur extérieur a appuyé cette proposition. Deuxièmement, des comptes provisoires vérifiés pourront être établis dans des cas exceptionnels et cela est déjà prévu par le Règlement financier. Je me réfère en particulier aux cas de la mutuelle de crédit et du groupement d'achat du personnel qui font partie intégrante de la FAO et qui sont soumis au Règlement de l'Organisation; pour ces deux éléments, on recommande que les comptes soient préparés et vérifiés chaque année. Troisièmement, le Comité financier est assuré que la discipline financière et administrative demeure rigoureuse. De même le Comité peut demander au vérificateur extérieur des rapports sur certains points particuliers. Le vérificateur lui-même peut présenter des rapports au Comité si le vérificateur le juge nécessaire. Par ailleurs, pour que le Comité financier soit tenu parfaitement au courant de la situation financière de l'Organisation, le Secrétariat lui présente à la fin de la première année de chaque exercise, outre le rapport sur l'exécution du budget, un rapport détaillé sur la situation financière avec un état du fonds général, des avoirs et des engagements. Par cette suppression, le Secrétariat espère pouvoir rationaliser l'emploi du personnel administratif, rationaliser et améliorer les procédures de clôture pour les comptes provisoires et, peut-être, se trouver dans une meilleure position pour fournir des comptes financiers plus précis, plus à jour, à la direction.
C'est pour cela que le Comité recommande l'approbation de cette proposition. Je tiens à préciser que la même proposition a été présentée par le Directeur exécutif du Programme alimentaire mondial et pour les mêmes raisons le Comité recommande son approbation. Il est à préciser à propos du Programme alimentaire mondial, que cette proposition sera également soumise au CCQAB et ensuite au CPA,
CHAIRMAN: Are there any comments? The proposal is to abolish interim audited accounts. I see no objections to it and therefore this recommendation of the Finance Committee is accepted.
It was so decided.
Il en est ainsi décidé.
Asi se acuerda.
This brings us to the end of today's work, I wish to thank you very much for your cooperation.
The meeting rose at 17.20 hours.
La séance est levée à 17h 20.
Se levanta la sesión a las 17.20 horas.
