(a) Fourteenth Report on the Activities of the JIU (July 1981 - June 1982)(continued)
(a) Quatorzième rapport sur les activités du Corps commun d' inspection (juillet 1981 -juin 1982)(suite)
(a) 14° informe sobre las actividades de la Dependencia Común de Inspección (julio de 1981 -junio de 1982)(continuación)
(b) Personnel Policy Options and Career Concept (continued)
(b) Les choix possibles en matière de politique du personnel et la notion de carrière (suite)
(b) Posibles opciones en materia de politica de personal y el concepto de carrera (continuación)
(c) Organization and Methods for Official Travel (continued)
(c) Organisation et méthodes pour les voyages officiels (suite)
(c) Organización y métodos respecto a viajes oficiales (continuación)
(d) Communications in the UN System (continued)
(d) Les communications dans les organismes des Nations Unies (suite)
(d) Comunicaciones en el sistema de las Naciones Unidas (continuación)
(e) Status of Women in the Professional Category and Above (continued)
(e) Situation des femmes dans la catégorie des administrateurs et des catégories supérieures (suite)
(e) Situación de la mujer en el cuadro orgánico y las categorías superiores (continuación)
(f) Economic Commission for Africa (continued)
(f) Commission économique pour l'Afrique (suite)
(f) Comisión Económica para Africa (continuación)
CHAIRMAN: We continue our discussions this afternoon on item 9.2.
J. GORMLEY (United States of America): I would like to direct a few remarks to the JIU report on the Status of Women in the Professional Category and Above. The United States delegation generally finds itself in close agreement with the various delegates that have spoken on this subject. I would like to say the intervention by the distinguished delegate of Pakistan was especially well-prepared and comprehensive, and the United States delegation wishes to associate itself with the recommendations made by the Pakistani delegation.
J. MAJCHER (Poland): My delegation would like to present its comments on point 9.2(b) - Personnel Policy Options and Career Concept.
We fully realize the importance of personnel policy options and career concept taking into account the role of the Secretariat in the overall functioning of the Organization. The implementation of decisions of the Conference or of this Council or of other organs of the Organization depends among other things on the Secretariat and the competence of its staff.
The point of departure for considering all aspects of the personnel policy options should be the fulfilment of the Organization's tasks and purposes. It means that primordial importance has to be given to serving the Organization and its member countries. For this reason it is important that Member States submit their best candidates for employment in the Secretariat and such candidates only ought to be accepted. Poland does its best to abide by this principle and presents the
candidates with very high qualifications, capable of making an effective contribution to the work of the Secretariat and then, upon their return to Poland, of being able to use properly their skills and experience acquired while serving the FAO. We would like that candidates submitted by us be considered with due attention. Article VIII, paragraph 3 of our Basic Texts says: "In appointing the staff, the Director-General shall, subject to the paramount importance of securing the highest standards of efficiency and of technical competence, pay due regard to the importance of selecting personnel recruited on as wide a geographical basis as is possible."
My country attaches great importance to the principle of equitable geographical distribution of staff of international organizations. The Secretariat incorporating staff members from different countries with different experiences and cultural backgrounds can better understand and interpret the common interest of Member countries and therefore of the organizations. We realize that the report of the Joint Inspection Unit pays close attention to this aspect. We also know the Director-General attaches great attention to it and has instructed his services accordingly.
NeverthelesG, it seems to us that there is still a lot to be done in this field. Of course, we appreciate the effort even if it falls short of our legitimate expectations. We would appreciate precise information from the personnel services as to which countries are still over-represented, not represented or under-represented. We must express our concern that my country for many years has been under-represented in the FAO Secretariat. It seems that at present we are below half of what we might expect. We are sure that with some goodwill it would be possible to correct this unsatisfactory situation. We are ready to cooperate fully in this direction.
For example, we would be in favour of a solution whereby, for an unlimited period of time, 50 percent of all available vacancies be earmarked for recruitment of candidates from unrepresented or under-represented Member States, and that a candidate from an over-represented Member State should be appointed only when no equally qualified candidate from an unpresented or under-represented State is available.
We fully share the opinion of the Joint Inspection Unit that the agreement on the method of calculating desirable ranges unquestionably has the merit of clearing the political climate surrounding personnel questions and of showing that a harmonization of views on an extremely political subject is possible.
We should also like to say a few words on the subject of permanent contracts versus contracts of limited duration. We are in favour of contracts of limited duration. There are many arguments in their favour: first, the need to recruit for limited periods of time those staff members having specific knowledge; secondly, the need for changes in programmes. The predominance of permanent contracts makes it much more difficult to reduce or to cut the programmes with low priority or those which already have achieved their purpose and there may therefore be a tendency to extend the duration of already dead wood. On the contrary, the contracts of limited duration facilitate for the Director-General the adaptation of the staff qualifications to the needs of the Organization. Or course, this does not exclude for efficient staff members with contracts of limited duration the possibility of staying a long time in the Secretariat. The examples of the International Atomic Energy Agency, WHO, Unesco confirm this,
Thirdly, respect for georgraphical distribution of staff; this makes it possible to reduce the proportion of staff members from over-represented countries and to increase the number of staff members from under-represented countries. One additional argument in favour of contracts of limited duration is that it would provide more staff members in the various national institutions and universities with a good practical knowledge of the Organization. This would be very useful for further development of cooperation.
Taking the above into account, we were sorry to see that FAO is the only major organization of the United Nations family to have such a low percentage - less than 30 percent - of fixed appointments. We are preoccupied that during the period 1975-1980 the percentage of fixed-term contracts was declining. In the meantime it seems to us that in nearly all organizations of the United Nations family the proportion of staff holding permanent appointments has decreased markedly in recent years.
These conclusions result from the table in Annex IV on page 45 of the document of the United Nations General Assembly A/36/432. We would be happy to refer to the FAO updated document but unfortunately such documentation has not been provided to the Council.
Señora M.E. JIMENEZ ZEPEDA (Observador de El Salvador): Nuestra delegación, al igual que han hecho otras, se referirá únicamente al documento CL 83/14. La información que éste nos proporciona es en extremo importante y nos permite contemplar la situación de la mujer en el cuadro orgánico y las categorías superiores en los organismos de las Naciones Unidas, la cual, por cierto, en algunos aspectos no es muy alentadora, sobre todo cuando observamos las categorías P-4, P-5, D-l y D-2.
Vemos, no obstante, una mejoría entre 1976 y 1981; esperamos continue esta tendencia y se eliminen gradualmente algunos prejuicios que impiden una participación más activa de la mujer en estos estratos.
Nuestra delegación considera realmente importante y de justicia permitir una participación más activa de la mujer en los puestos de decisión; así como lo hicimos notar en su oportunidad cuando analizamos el papel que la mujer desempeña en el desarrollo rural de los países lo ratificamos hoy en este campo. Esa participación es importante a todos los niveles; por ello los Gobiernos tenemos la responsabilidad de lograr su incorporación y una manera de hacerlo en el contexto que estamos analizando es la de presentar candidatas cualificadas.
Estamos completamente de acuerdo con lo manifestado por la distinguida delegación de Colombia en el sentido de que las medidas que se sugieren en la parte 3 del documento no son muy concluyentes y necesitarían reforzarse. No debemos solamente tomar nota, debemos actuar; por ello apoyamos lo mencionado en el párrafo 11 de la parte primera del documento en el cual la Comisión de Administración Pública Internacional convino en que los problemas relativos a la promoción de las perspectivas de carrera y la capacitación de la mujer deberían formar parte íntegramente de los programas generales de las Organizaciones en ese área. Una adecuada oportunidad de capacitación para la mujer a todos los niveles permitirá poco a poco ocupar el puesto que le corresponde, no sólo en los estratos superiores de los organismos, sino dentro de la sociedad misma.
Por último, nos hacemos eco de la propuesta hecha por la distinguida delegada de Mexico en el sentido de que se informe cada dos años sobre los progresos logrados en la contratación de mujeres en las Organizaciones del régimen común de las Naciones Unidas.
A.G. NGONGI NAMANGA (Observer for Cameroon): I have a few brief comments as an observer to make on some of the JIU reports on personnel policy matters and the status of women on the Economic Commission for Africa. First of all, on the personnel policy options in the Unites Nations system, I do believe that most delegations who have spoken on this have stressed the fact that there would be well qualified and dedicated persons to serve the United Nations wherever it is needed. I thing that also there is a well based principle of broader geographic representation whereby you can find people of equivalent qualifications, and I think I would not be out of order if I said that the staff of the United Nations system should, as much as possible, reflect the membership of the United Nations. I do think we want to interpret that very strictly, but I am sure that we all know of a particular region which has a very large membership of FAO but has a very small representation in the FAO staff or in the United Nations system.
I have heard some statements made that the positions in this Organization and in other organizations of the United Nations system should be on the basis of population. I rather think it should be on the basis of membership in the Organization but, if it were on the basis of population, I would venture to say that we could hand over the Organization to one of the most populous countries here which has been quiet on the issue; or, when we have any residual post, that we could hand it over to the most populous country and we would have no problem in having geographically balanced policies, but I think the geographical representation policy which has been adopted by the United Nations system and by FAO is very called for and should be taken even further so that countries which are not yet represented or not well represented should be able to be represented in the Organization.
I should also point out it is not a matter of geographical representation but also a reflection on the activities of an organisation such as FAO which is quite titanic and therefore can change from time to time.
The employment policy should not only be based on geographic representation but should also represent as much as possible the changing dynamics in FAO or the United Nations problems which have to be faced because we all realize that in the 1950s the problems concerned one particular region; in the 1960s they concerned another region and in the 1970s another region again. It would therefore be a little ridiculous to ask that it should be just people from one particular region who should be helped in solving the problems of, say, Africa for instance. This should also be taken into consideration; but I do not wish to belabour that point.
On the question of the status of women, I think it goes without saying that in the 1980s one would be called really afar out conservative if he did not say that he wanted an increased representation of women in the UN system. But that is not really the point. The point is that if we wanted an effective approach which is of interest to women and addressed itself to women, therefore we should as much as possible hire qualified women wherever possible.
I also wish to bring out that in the Joint Inspection Unit report, CL 83/14, which we have before us, as far as I can detect there were only two African women - I say two - in FAO in the professional category and above, out of 290. I think that is well worth noting.
The last point is on the report of the Economic Commission for Africa. My delegation believes that Economic Commission for Africa could play a very important role if it were strong enough to carry out its mandate. I only hope that the United Nations system will give the ECA the resources it requires to carry out its leadership responsabilises in the region. My delegation strongly supports the observations of the Programme Committee that there should be not only a relationship between FAO and ECA but a tripartite cooperation between FAO, ECA and OAU, the latter being a political organization which is trying to bring closer cooperation on the Continent.
B.N. SEQUEIRA (Angola): Just a short statement before because we would like to endorse the statement which has been made by the Observer from Cameroon. Indeed, the staff of the United Nations Organization should be on the basis of geographical representation reflecting the membership of the United Nations. To suggest that other criteria, for example, population, should be taken into accounts we consider as being an indication to have the United Nations Organization to be run by one, two of three countries, which is unacceptable to us, of course. Or maybe we should also start with those countries which have the highest population maybe they should pay higher dues to the United Nations system. That is one of the criteria which should also be taken into account if the basis of geographical distribution in the United Nations system is not enough which according to us is a system which satisfied all the parties and has been in force for quite some time and I do not think we can accept the suggestion that the population of a country should be taken into account.
M. BEL HADJ AMOR (Directeur, Division du personnel): Je voudrais d'abord remercier le Conseil pour les commentaires et les suggestions présentés à propos des rapports du Corps commun d'inspection, à savoir la situation des femmes et la question du concept des carrières. Il faut dire qu'il n'y a pas eu de questions précises qui aient été posées, mais disons des commentaires émanant des délégués qui appelent d'autres commentaires. C'est en ce sens que j'ai décidé de prendre la parole.
Concernant d'abord la question de la situation des femmes, cela a été largement débattu, cela a suscité énormément de commentaires que je trouve bien sûr intéressants. Cela a été exactement le cas quand cela a été discuté au Comité des finances et au Comité du programme, et j'ai bien peur de ne pouvoir répondre qu'avec les mêmes commentaires que j'avais présentés à ces deux Comités.
Pour le principe, l'Organisation est d'accord sur la nécessité d'améliorer la représentation des femmes au sein du secrétariat. Au point de vue pratique, c'est autre chose. Cela ne veut pas dire que nous ne sommes pas en train de déployer des efforts pour le faire. Cependant, il est quelquefois difficile d'allier à la fois, et la représentation géographique, et la représentation du pourcentage des femmes dans cette représentation géographique elle-même. Après tout, le secrétariat est aux mains des Etats Membres, lesquels présentent les candidatures. Aussi puis-je espérer que les Etats Membres nous présentent davantage de candidatures de femmes afin que le secrétariat puisse les considérer, je dirais, avec bienveillance. Donc, je crois que c'est une responsabilité partagée: d'abord les Etats Membres, ensuite le secrétariat.
Je voudrais maintenant faire un commentaire beaucoup plus spécifique que j'avais déjà présenté dans d'autres occasions, à savoir les compétences dont l'Organisation dont vous faites partie, c'est-à-dire la FAO, a besoin.
S'il nous est facile de trouver de très bonnes candidatures dans l'administration générale, ce n'est pas du tout le cas pour certaines activités techniques spécifiques dont a besoin notre Organisation, et je peux vous assurer que pour certaines vacances de postes, il n'y a pas une seule candidature de femme. Donc c'est à vous délégués, à vous Etats Membres, de susciter plus d'intérêt pour les vacances de postes de la FAO.
Concernant la politique du personnel, et notamment les remarques qui ont été présentées par l'honorable délégué de la Pologne, il a parlé tout d'abord d'un certain objectif. Il a dit: pourquoi ne pas fixer un objectif de postes qui doivent être remplis par les pays non représentés? J'estime que dans la politique du personnel, il est très difficile de manquer de flexibilité. Fixer des objectifs très rigides n'est pas souhaitable, et je dirais n'est pas faisable. Autrement, nous allons tout bloquer. On essaiera, dans la mesure du possible, et à la lumière des candidatures qui nous sont présentées, de faire en sorte qu'une meilleure distribution géographique ait lieu. Nous essayons également de susciter l'intérêt de certains pays qui ne présentent jamais de candidatures, donc qui ne sont pas représentés ici, ou bien qui présentent des candidatures qui n'ont pas les compétences nécessaires; nous essayons également de les encourager à présenter des candidatures et à postuler des postes. Mais cela ne signifie pas automatiquement que ces candidatures sont
prises. N'oubliez pas que le système de sélection à la FAO est très sérieux et très sévère. Nous sommes obligés de prendre les meilleures compétences pour les postes dont nous avons besoin, surtout pour satisfaire les besoins des Etats Membres et pour faire face à nos activités. Donc, nous ne pouvons pas sacrifier la compétence uniquement pour le plaisir de satisfaire une distribution géographique. Le délégué de la Pologne l'a dit lui-même: il faut de très hautes compétences pour remplir les postes.
Concernant les contrats permanents et les contrats à durée limitée, je tiens à dire qu'actuellement nous avons une étude en cours qui est considérée par le management pour essayer de rétablir cette situation disons sous un meilleur visage, à savoir moins de contrats permanents et un peu plus de contrats à durée limitée. Néanmoins, je vous précise que certaines natures d'activités exigent qu'il y ait toujours des contrats permanents. De même, le fait d'assurer une carrière aux fonctionnaires exige également qu'il y ait un certain nombre de contrats permanents. Cela ne signifie pas que nous sommes pour avoir 90 pour cent de contrats permanents et le reste de contrats à durée limitée. Nous sommes pour un "turn over" assez flexible de façon à avoir un certain équilibre entre les deux et nous espérons que la politique que nous sommes en train d'étudier nous mènera à cet objectif.
Je crois, Monsieur le Président, avoir répondu aux points qui appelaient une réponse ou un commentaire de ma part. Je suis à la disposition du Conseil si d'autres éclaircissements sont nécessaires.
M. TRKULJA (Chairman, Programme Committee): There is only one item which has obviously attracted the greatest attention of the Council and most of the debate. I am obviously referring to CL 83/14 and it is not necessary to explain why the Programme Committee felt and indeed reiterated that as far as FAO was concerned the target would not be suitable to adopt, for the time being at least.
I have to say firstly that we appreciate the progress made. It was mostly after 1976. Women in the professional category increased by 2 percent but still are far below the target of 22 percent to 25 percent as suggested in the first report of the Inspectorate and again recommended in the progress report. We felt and we indeed encouraged the Director-General to take every possible step to improve the situation and to pursue the line already undertaken and make sure that progress is speedy enough but we had also in mind that in certain cases, in certain fields of FAO competence the problems really existed as a reflection by and large of the situation in member countries. We specially realize that in the case of fisheries, forestry, crops, various disciplines, livestock and so on and so forth, indeed in our government, in most of the membership I would say women are not very well represented and it is a reflection of our educational system and the overall attitude. So in that case, basically having this in mind, we thought that the target would not be suitable to establish for the time being but I have to say again that we encouraged the Director-General to make every possible progress. I think the Committee almost concluded, and almost included in its report, to recommend to the Council the principle of positive discrimination this time in favour of those that are obviously discriminated against. That means whenever two equally qualified candidates are available, then the preference should be given to a female candidate and I hope the Members of the Council may wish to agree with such a principle, which we apply in a number of instances.
Again but in the same context, the role of governments, we felt that the Inspectors placed too much weight on that aspect. Of course it is realized that governments should play their proper role in submitting well qualified candidates but we also felt that it was an issue that FAO itself had to address and very seriously indeed. We felt that especially FAO representatives should play a special role in making sure that an adequate number of candidates is included in the FAO rostrum.
D. H. J. ABEYAGOONASEKERA (Chairman, Finance Committee): Much has been said on the JIU reports, particularly the one on the status of women in the professional category. I wish to make only one comment in response to a comment made by Mexico. Reference was made to a reporting frequency of every two years. In our Committee, which also has a female member, when we discussed the reporting of progress on this aspect we felt that we should be governed by two things - one, the period of reporting must not be too short, because then there would not be much to report on; two, neither should it be too long, because the subject would be completely forgotten. So we felt that a suitable time would be something like 4 years, not 2 years.
CHAIRMAN: Since these items on the agenda were for information and discussion only I think we can leave it to the Drafting Committee correctly to reflect the nuances of the debate.
I would just sum up by saying that the issue of the status of women in the UN system obviously received our overwhelming concern. It strikes me that the report of the Committee and this Council should reflect the fact that FAO has made progress, particularly since 1976, better progress, if I remember correctly during our discussion in the Programme Committee, than a good many other UN agencies. So while being cognizant of that I think the report should reflect the fact that it received a good many expressions of concern here and the Organization is of course urged to do even more.
CHAIRMAN: The next item on the agenda is Item 16, the Reports of the Forty-forth Session of the Programme Committee and the Fifty-first Session of the Finance Committee, including five specific items, which we will take up now.
D. H. J. ABEYAGOONASEKERA (Chairman, Finance Committee): Concerning Item 16.1, which appears under Any Other Matters. We reviewed this item under GRO XXVII-7 and recommended to Council the appointment of an External Auditor for the period 1984/85. The Secretariat provided the Committee with information regarding the present incumbent. After careful consideration of the explanations provided by the Secretariat, the Committee recommended the reappointment of the present External Auditor for a further period of two years, as appearing in the Draft Council Resolution in paragraph 3.26 of the report. It also considered that it would be in the interests of the Organization to give an opportunity in the future to Member Nations who considered that they possessed the competence, experience and knowledge required for this appointment and recommended to the Council to request the Director-General to formulate and submit for its consideration suitable alternatives for future appointments.
F. G. POULIDES (Cyprus): Is it possible that the Chairman of the Finance Committee could comment also on another subject so that we could concentrate on more than one subject and be quicker?
CHAIRMAN: Perhaps in treating this it would be better to go through all five items.
D. H. J. ABEYAGOONASEKERA (Chairman, Finance Committee): As pointed out by the distinguished delegate of Cyprus, it is customary for the Chairman of the Finance Committee to introduce the report in general, drawing the attention of the members to the particularly important items. I take the floor this time to highlight the important items that should be considered by delegates.
The matters requiring the attention of the Council for discussion and/or decision are listed on pages ix to xii in document CL 83/4. They have been grouped separately under Budgetary, Financial and Organizational Matters. Since we have already dealt with items 9 and 12 it remains for me to highlight only those points pertaining to the remaining items considered by the Finance Committee With reference to Items 13.1 and 13.2 on Budgetary Matters, both as regards performance in 982 and programme and budgetary transfers, these items will be taken up when the substantive items listed in your agenda are taken up. The information given in this report is mainly for your information.
In considering item 14 under Financial Matters,regarding the Status of Contributions by Member Nations and Voting Rights, your attention is drawn to paragraphs 3.61 to 3.65. We will be dealing with this item perhaps tomorrow afternoon when item 14.1 is taken up. I would like to mention that this is also for information and the Secretariat will be providing further information on the latest position regarding particularly payment of contributions.
On item 14.2, which we will be dealing with tomorrow afternoon, relating to the scale of contributions for 1984/85, under GRO XXVII-71, the Committee is required to keep under review the scale of contributions and to make recommendations to the Council on any modification of the scale of contributions. The Committee is informed that in the past the FAO scale had been derived directly from the UN Scale of Assessments. Since there were no compelling reasons to deviate from this procedure the Committee recommended the adoption of the UN scale. The Finance Committee recommends to Council the approval of the resolution which is referred to in paragraph 3.73 of its report.
Regarding item 15 on Headquarters Accommodation, I would like to draw your attention to paragraphs 3.84 to 3.92 of the Committee's report. The Secretariat will no doubt provide the most recent information regarding the progress made on this question when the item is taken for discussion on Wednesday morning.
I wish to draw your attention to item 16.1, to which I referred earlier regarding the appointment of the External Auditor, on which I have already given you the latest position.
There is one more matter which was dealt with not only by my Committee but by the Programme Committee and at a joint session of both committees regarding the procedure for dealing with JIU reports. You may recall that at the last session of the Council some concern was expressed by certain members regarding the volume of JIU documentation, the cost of processing and distribution, and on the time the Council had to spend in considering the number of reports. The Council had also suggested that the feasibility of a system of periodic reporting on follow-up of JIU reports to Council should also be considered. In response to this request the Committee discussed this issue on the basis of a Secretariat document which described the manner in which JIU reports were dealt with in other major UN institutions. It also enumerated the amounts which would have to be spent if certain options were adopted. Both the Programme Committee and the Finance Committee discussed these programmes individually and together at a joint session. The report of the joint session is before you in document CL 83/4, pages 1 and 2. The procedure for dealing with JIU reports was agreed by both committees together and our joint recommendations appear in paragraphs 1.7 to 1.13.
In order to assist Council members in the discussion at this stage I would like to repeat very briefly some of the points which we took into consideration. The present FAO practice is to submit all JIU reports to the Programme Committee and the Finance Committee together with the comments of the ACC and/or with the comments of the Director-General as applicable. They are then submitted to the Council together with the comments and observations of the two committees as Council documents. Once the Council report is available the sections dealing with the JIU reports and the sections in the Committee's report dealing with JIU are sent to JIU and the participating organizations. Under the prevailing practice the processing, distribution, including translations, costs, we are informed, some $80 000 per biennium. We were also informed that the practice in other major UN organizations differed. For example, in some the JIU reports were sent directly to governing bodies with no prior review by subsidiary bodies. In some only the comments of the executive head or the ACC were sent to the subsidiary bodies, which then sent their observations direct to the governing bodies.
The Committees were also informed of difficulties in implementing recommendations. There were recommendations which are directly relevant and others which are not, those which are unacceptable, those which do not call for progress reports, and so on. The Committees felt that the relevant applicable and accepted recommendations would in any case be covered by FAO's own day-to-day activities and as such no additional progress reports would then be necessary.
After very careful consideration of all the options presented to us the two Committees recommended to Council the following: (a) JIU reports would be submitted in their entirety as now to the two committees with the comments of the Director-General and/or the ACC; (b) as at present, the comments of the two committees would be submitted to Council as part of the report to Council; (c) JIU reports would be available to Council as information documents only. The adoption of this procedure, we were told, would result in a saving of approximately 50 percent of the present cost per biennium.
This is all I have to say by way of highlighting the main items which we will be looking at when we take up other items under the substantive items.
M. TRKULJA (Chairman, Programme Committee): I have only one point to introduce. That is, Special Account on the Prevention of Food Losses. The Programme Committee was fully informed of the situation with regard to the Special Action Programme, Special Account, as well as the voluntary contributions under Trust Fund arrangements. We wanted to inform the Council first that as far as the Special Account is concerned the overall resources of $18.3 million and 72 projects requiring $40.5 million had already been approved.
Secondly, in addition to that, 21 projects have been funded at a cost of $9.5 million, and that pipeline of 69 projects requiring $44 million was awaiting financing. In light of these basic figures, and we had much fuller information provided by the Secretariat, first we expressed our full satisfaction with the efficiency of the programme. We also very much welcomed the information of the Secretariat with regard to some changes within the programme which are related to evaluation, but particularly with respect to the increased emphasis on socio-economic aspects and project duration, and we also decided that project duration should be extended.
Finally, we are painfully aware that additional resources were urgently needed, and we appealed again to the Council to pronounce itself this issue to ask all traditional as well as new donors to provide the necessary funds for the execution of the projects already in the pipeline which require, as I said, $44 million.
T. AHMAD (Pakistan): Actually, I have very little to add after the very brilliant and lucid introduction by the Chairmen of the Programme and Finance Committee. However, only on one issue, that is, the External Auditor, do I have a procedural question, so to speak. My delegation thoroughly endorses the recommendations of the Finance Committee that the Director-General be requested with respect to consideration of alternatives, including the present External Auditor, for future appointments. We think it is a very wise request and a very wise suggestion.
I was only wondering whether this part should also be incorporated in the Resolution which the Council is supposed to adopt regarding the reappointment of the External Auditor. I believe the Secretariat would be more aware of the procedures of these issues. I was also wondering whether this should be part of the Resolution which we are to draw up.
K.A. BABIKER (Sudan) (Original language Arabic): First of all, I regret that I have spoken about the procedures for dealing with JIU Reports and the question of the appointment of the External Auditor before the item was due for discussion. Now that the item is under discussion, allow me to comment on the report of the 44 session of the Programme Committee, and that of the 51st session of the Finance Committee. I think I should first thank and congratulate the Chairmen and members of the two Committees on the excellent work they have carried out.
Having considered the reference in both reports to the JIU, we feel that the very large volume of the JIU Reports really does not make it possible for Council members to study these documents thoroughly or even to consider the recommendations therein. You no doubt agree that the large volume of these JIU Reports is in most cases a factor which certainly does not encourage thorough and careful reading. I am not saying this to underestimate the value of these Reports. They are very important and useful indeed and I would like to extend my thanks and appreciation to the JIU, for since its inception it is no doubt offering commendable services to the FAO. However, on the other hand I would like to endorse what was said by the two Committees, first the financial burden which the Organization has to bear because of the volume of the JIU documentation, and this financial burden is not offset by the benefits accruing to the FAO. The delegation of the Sudan feels that there should be a better way, like the practice followed in other UN agencies, to reduce this financial burden.
Secondly, we feel that it would be much more useful and economical - as has been stated by the Chairman of the Finance Committee - that it would be sufficient to present these JIU Reports to the Finance and Programme Committees and then to the Council for information and to draw the attention of the Council to the essential and important points in the JIU Reports.
Therefore we feel that the Council adopt the proposal contained in the Report of the Programme and the Finance Committees, because it serves the interests or the Organization and Member countries.
With regard to the appointment of the External Auditor, my delegation would like to strongly commend the present External Auditor for his competence.
At the same time, and for reasons we may state later, we deem it appropriate that the Director-General be authorized to submit alternative solutions for the appointment of the External Auditor; including the practice followed by the United Nations, namely the recruitment of a group of auditors including the present auditor.
The External Auditor should be chosen from among this group.
F.G. POULIDES (Cyprus): First of all I would like to say that I am really happy to see you in the Chair.
As usual, the Programme and Finance Committees have been very thorough in their work and my delegation wishes to record its appreciation for the manner in which the two Committees are assisting the Council.
We have had occasion to refer to the views of the two Committees on the Summary Programme of Work and Budget for 1984/85. Under this agenda item, there are two specific subjects on which Council decision is required, and I wish to address myself to these.
Firstly, the question of the appointment of the External Auditor: not only the Council but also the Conference has traditionally expressed its satisfaction with the work of the External Auditor, who is presently the Controller and Auditor General of the United Kingdom. While we have the highest respect for the present External Auditor, we are nevertheless very forcefully struck by the fact that this function has been fulfilled by the same External Auditor since 1951. This certainly is an evident and fitting tribute to the present holder of the office. We also understand that the same External Auditor acts for some of the other larger specialised agencies in the United Nations system. However, we can only fully agree with the Finance Committee that it would be in the interests of the Organization to have the opportunity to consider the appointment of an Auditor General from another Member nation. A number of other Member nations provide for the office of External Auditor. For example, the United Nations system itself has a panel of External Auditors drawn from a number of Member nations. We would therefore agree that the Council should request the Director-General to submit alternatives for future appointments.
The second issue on which we need to decide concerns procedures for dealing with the report of Joint Inspection Unit. The Unit has done some valuable work, and over the years we have expressed our appreciation for it, but we also realised at our last session how the demands made on our own time by the consideration of JIU Reports have grown out of all proportion. Let us frankly consider what action the Council has found it necessary to take on the basis of the recommendations of the JIU. Almost invariably we found it sufficient to endorse the views of the Director-General of the Programme and Finance Committees. Let us also frankly question ourselves as to what extent we have taken the trouble to study the voluminous documentation submitted to us at each session. This documentation, while interesting and relevant, is several times in volume the documents that we have to consider on weighty matters of direct relevance to the Organization which are submitted to us by the Director-General on all subjects ranging from policy issues on food and agriculture to the Programme of Work, Constitutional, Financial and other matters.
My delegation therefore accordingly fully endorses and welcomes the suggestion put to us jointly by the Programme and Finance Committee. We should accept this suggestion wholeheartedly. There is nothing to prevent the Programme and Finance Committees from drawing any particular JIU Report to our specific attention in its entirety should it be of such monumental importance to the Council.
J. MAJCHER (Poland): With regard to point 16.2, Procedures for Dealing with JIU Reports, my delegation would like to express its appreciation for the Reports of this Joint Inspection Unit and to stress the relevance of the subjects studied by the JIU to the Organization, to the whole UN system as well as the thoroughness of the analyses done. The Reports of the JIU are very useful and helpful for a better understanding of the problems we are dealing with. Considering the value of the Joint Inspection Unit Report we are of the opinion that they should be available to the Council as documents and not only information papers. In our understanding, we as a Member of the Council cannot deprive ourselves of such an important work instrument as the JIU Report.
We would appreciate clarification as to how it is possible to reduce the present processing and distribution costs from about $80 thousand to about $40 thousand per biennium for the same documents if the same languages are supposed to be available to the Council. The only change, according to the recommendation, would consist of changing the qualification of the Reports, adding the indication that they are information documents only.
M.D. METELITS (United States of America): We have listened to the introduction of these items by the Chairmen of the Finance and Programme Committees, and we cannot help but remark that a great deal of our work is facilitated and smoothed out by the enormous amount of work that the Programme and Finance Committee do for us. In this respect we turn to agenda item 16.2 and note that the recommendation we get is that these Committees should shoulder the burden for us of poring the Joint Inspection Unit Report.
The United States delegation supports the Joint Inspection Unit's activities and we agree that the FAO Council should be able to focus attention on those aspects of the JIU Report that require specific action by the FAO membership. The new procedure recommended should, in fact, make the work of our Council much more efficient in view of the important role that the JIU has for the entire UN system.
However, in supporting the recommendation my delegation would like to raise two questions, two provisos. First we feel somewhat reassured by the introductory remarks of the Chairman of the Programme Committee. We would hope that under the new procedure there would be a guarantee that in following the procedure we would comply with Article XI of the JIU Statute. In other words, the comments of the Director-General on the JIU Report would be given to the Council for information as well as the reports themselves.
Second, my delegation would hope that it would be clearly understood that any delegation would still retain the right to raise independently in the Council specific issues with respect to any JIU Report, whether or not the Programme or Finance Committee has made recommendations on that Report.
With regard to the agenda item 16.1 on the Appointment of an External Auditor, my delegation supports the recommendation of the Finance Committee.
W.A.F. GRABISCH (Germany, Federal Republic of): At this juncture of our proceedings I wish to make three points on the agenda item before us. First, my delegation wishes to thank the Chairmen of the Programme and Finance Committees and their members for the valuable services they have been rendering to the Council, and as such to the whole Organization.
My second point refers to agenda item 16.2, Procedures for Dealing with JIU Reports. You will recall, that my delegation favoured at the last Council Session a change in the procedure dealing with JIU Reports to save money and time, and we see the action taken by the Programme and Finance Committees as a follow-up to these ideas which were supported by other delegations.
It was however our understanding at the last Council Session that the recommendations of the JIU Reports together with the comments of the Director-General and/or the ACC would be made available as short, concise documents to the Council. This is slightly different to what we have here before us as a recommendation. We feel, that by making the recommendations of the JIU Reports together with the comments available as Council documents, which could then be studied like the other Council documents in capitals, this would better meet the needs of Member States. Of course, the Council would continue to rely on the comments of the Programme and Finance Committees which are anyhow contained in their reports.
Having listened to the interventions so far made, and also with regard to the concern raised by the distinguished delegates of Poland and the United States, we would like to know whether a compromise solution which covers both alternatives, while saving time and money, could not be found. After all the Joint Inspection Unit Reports are available at home and they will be available here at the documentation desk, giving Governments, if they wish to do so, a possibility to state their positions on the relevant issues.
My third point with your permission concerns 16.3, Personnel Matters. My delegation would be grateful to the Secretariat if it could have some information about how far the fully computerized personnel data system which also the Programme and Finance Committees had mentioned in connection with the overall assessment of the personnel situation in the Organization, has progressed and when we can expect that it is being fully used.
G. FRADIN (France): Je voudrais revenir sur le deuxième point abordé par le représentant de la République fédérale dAllemagne. Nous avions également abordé lors du dernier Conseil ce point des rapports du Corps commun d'inspection et dans le souci d'économiser du temps, de l'argent et de l'énergie, nous souhaiterions appuyer la solution transactionnelle proposée par notre collègue et nous demandons que les réglementations du Corps commun soient soumises au Conseil en même temps que les observations faites par le Directeur Général et le document du CAC.
P. GOSSELIN (Canada): I would like to make a few points under this item, the first having to do with the Auditor General. As indicated by a number of my colleagues this afternoon, over the years we have recognized and appreciated the excellence of service we have received from the current auditor. While we have no objection to transferring the auditor's job to another country, and we certainly see no reason why that should not be from a developing country, we would of course hope that the excellence of service would be continued over the years and that the tradition established by a succession of British auditors can be maintained.
On the second question, the procedure for dealing with JIU Reports, as we said this morning we attach a great deal of importance to these documents and have made efforts over the years to give them the consideration and the study that they deserve. Mr. Chairman, we would have preferred to see the current procedure maintained as we believe the importance of the documents so warrants and we are not convinced by the argument of the economies involved which I believe are rather small.
Should this not be possible, should the Council decide to do otherwise, we would like to support the position put forward by our United States delegate colleague and.obtain an assurance that these documents would be entirely available to those delegations who wish them in an early and timely fashion so that they have an opportunity to study them, and also should delegations wish to raise items that are not those recommended by the Chairmen of the Finance and Programme Committees they would have the opportunity to do so.
J.M. SCOULAR (United Kingdom): First of all I would like to thank the delegates who have spoken for the tributes they have paid to the present Auditor General. I need hardly say that we ourselves have the greatest confidence in him. Indeed if we did not, the Council would have cause for alarm and despondency. We therefore support his employment for the next two years and agree with the recommendation of the Finance Committee.
The second point is the question of the JIU Reports. On this we have looked, as have other delegates, for ways in which we can simplify dealing with what is a very large amount of documentation, and I am really looking for clarification of this point because I had thought that these documents could be dealt with as normal documents; that is to say we could, if we wished, raise the questions put to us by these documents. As the Canadian delegate has just said, provided they are available and we can talk on them, I think we have no problem with the Programme and Finance Committees in this regard.
R.C. GUPTA (India): I would make a brief comment on only one point, and that is regarding the appointment of the External Auditor. As we know the Auditor General of the United Kingdom has been the auditor of the Organization for over two decades now, and it speaks volumes for the competence of the incumbent of that office that the accounts of the Organization have been properly audited all the time. While we have the highest confidence in the competence of the Auditor General of the United Kingdom in discharging this responsibility, we feel that the FAO should also have a panel of External Auditors as the UN has, and we feel that some of the auditory systems in the developing countries are fairly well developed and there should be absolutely no apprehension on this account, that auditors and controller generals from developing countries can provide an equally good service to the Organization. So we would strongly urge that the Council recommend to the Director-General maintaining a panel of external auditors and to give a chance to controller/auditor generals from developing countries to act as external auditors of the Organization.
J. BELGRAVE (New Zealand): I will be very brief, because I think the issue has been well covered by other distinguised delegates. I think on the JIU issue it seems to my delegation that there is a lot of sense in the complete document not having to be addressed in entirety as part of the Council debate, but that the proposal put forward by the United States that the documents could be available if required - and I think he said quoted from if necessary - seems to me to probably cover the position in that it will not be mandatory for delegations to have to wade through the wealth of material.
Secondly, I do not think my delegation has seen any problems or any criticism of the United Kingdom Auditor-General; quite the contrary, I think, as has been said by many delegates this afternoon. But there again it is up to the Council to consider what the Director-General comes up with à propos the report of the Finance Committee. But we certainly would reinforce or restate the confidence in the United Kingdom Comptroller and Auditor-General, as has been mentioned by the other delegates.
M. TRKULJA (Chairman, Programme Committee)i I am very grateful to my colleague and friend Mr. Abeyagoonasekera, the Chairman of the Finance Committee, for having so brilliantly presented all the procedure dealing with JIU reports. However, you will certainly recall that we in the Programme Committee discussed at length the whole matter and said that since it happened somehow that we discussed it after the Finance Committee, we did not actually want to make an impression that we differed in our views from those expressed by the Finance Committee. That is the reason why my colleagues authorized me to present orally to the Council one aspect with regard to the procedures, namely we in the Programme Committee felt that the best solution for dealing with JIU matters would be - if the Council agrees - to make an appeal to the JIU to prepare a very brief summary which would then precede all JIU documents. In that case there would be a brief summary prepared by JIU and we felt quite strongly that it would be highly inappropriate to ask FAO to prepare a summary of JIU matters; that should be done always by them, by the inspectors. And I personally very much hope that the JIU would go along and prepare a brief summary of the report. In that case the Council may then wish to have a brief document which would contain the summary made by the JIU and its recommendations. In that case, detailed views of the Director-General and/or the ACC would not then be included - provided that you agree - in that brief document. But certainly I think there is no doubt that the document, as we have suggested, would be always available on request, and will be here at the documents desk available to all delegations. Nor is it necessary to mention that all delegations, all members are fully entitled to raise any issue covered by the JIU report. If some delegates deem it necessary to be assured that the Council at future sessions will strictly follow that procedure, that should of course be covered by the report to the Council.
I think this would be, at least, the view of the Programme Committee - but we had no time to discuss jointly with the Finance Committee that particular aspect - so I am orally suggesting to the Council on behalf of my colleagues and I appeal to the inspectors to prepare a brief summary in the fashion that they already did, for example, when they refer to their own activities, something in that style.
My second point concerns reporting. In the Programme Committee we wished merely to draw attention of the Council to the fact that in all tentative matters inspectors usually prepare second, and even third and subsequent progress reports. And then I thitik it would be a perfect opportunity for the committees and the Council to review FAO's response with regard to the initial concept or the previous progress reports, and then the committees would offer their views and/or their advice to the Council on the action taken by FAO with regard to the previous JIU reports.
Those are the two points I wish to refer very briefly to the Council.
D. K. CROWTHER (Assistant Director-General, Administration and Finance Department): The delegate of the Federal Republic of Germany raised an issue on the current status of the personnel automated data system. Although we have not progressed a long way, the development has begun and with the limited resources we have been able to begin the development of the personnel data system, to have the outline and the system's development work is ongoing. We do intend to give a very complete report of the current status of this development to the Finance Committee at its September meeting as we had promised earlier, and we will come prepared to do that. With short resources you have competition with the number of systems being developed at one time. This is an important system, it has priority; but we will give the full report to the Finance Committee on September.
V. J. SHAH (Director, Office of Programme, Budget and Evaluation): May I reply to some of the questions that have been raised regarding the procedures for handling JIU reports. One question raised was how could the cost of documentation be reduced by making the JIU reports available as Council information documents rather than as Council documents tout court. The reason is that the print runs in each language are different for information documents and they are a much smaller number than they are for normal Councils documents. To give you specific examples, I am afraid I can only quote figures referring to the documentation you received at your last session in November 1982, but the lesson is still valid now. For example, the JIU report on public information activities, as it was, a Council document , involved 2 550 copies in English, 1 060 copies in French, 750 copies in Spanish and 400 copies in Arabic. The respective costs were $4 400 in English, $2 100 in French, $1 500 in Spanish and $450 in Arabic. The document on the Status of Internal Evaluation, similar in print runs but a much larger document, involved $5 680 in English, $2 800 in French, $2 800 in Spanish and $1 860 in Arabic.
I do not need to give further examples but I hope the point is made.
On the related question of whether an information document can receive the same attention from the Council and be commented upon, of course this is a full Council prerogative: the Council address itself to any document it receives, whether it is an information document or a document for discussion and/or decision; so there would be no problem on that score.
A question was also raised as to whether the Organization would fulfill its observance of the JIU statute under article 11 of the statutes which requires each organization which has accepted the JIU statute to send the comments of its executive head and the comments of the ACC, where it concerns more than one organization, to its governing bodies. Well, the wording in the statute is to refer to the "competent organs of the Organization". In 1968 when the Council decided upon the procedures for the handling of the JIU reports, the Council at that time decided that the "competent organs" were to be itself, through the Programme and Finance Committees. It is hence entirely a matter for the Council decision now to say that we designate the competent organ as the Programme and Finance Committees to receive the views of the executive head of FAO and of the ACC, as applicable.
A number of delegations also referred to other possible compromises, in particular by having as a Council document a summary of each JIU report and of the recommendations together with the views of the Director-General and/or of the ACC. I should point out that summaries of JIU reports are already available in the annual report of the activities of the JIU which is itself issued by the JIU and is presently a Council document. For example, document CL 83/16 now before you gives the summary of each JIU report issued between July 1981 and June 1982. This is one source of summary. Each JIU report also contains a summary of conclusions and recommendations. This is the case with each of the reports which are presently before you and have been commented upon this morning and this afternoon.
Therefore, if the Council were to ask the Secretariat to make a separate summary of the conclusions and recommendations, this can only result in additional costs; and, as the Chairman of the Programme Committee said, it would be a particularly unenviable task for the Secretariat to summarize a JIU report, either in the conclusion or the recommendations.
I believe these were the three points which were raised in the debate. I hope I have answered them faithfully.
CHAIRMAN: We still have the question raised by the delegation of Pakistan asking whether the Resolution with respect to the External Auditor could not be rephrased so as to include a request to the Director-General to formulate and submit alternatives and would someone on the Secretariat wish to deal with that?
K. MEHBOOB (Chief, Office of Internal Audit and Inspection): In fact the delegate of Pakistan wanted to know whether there was any precedent for such a recommendation to be included in the Resolution. In fact we have only one precedent before, four years ago we did submit alternative proposals and at that time the recommendations did not go into the resolution but if the Council wishes it that way it can be done.
CHAIRMAN: Are there any other questions of interest with respect to this question? In summing up then, with respect to the appointment of the External Auditor I take it that the Council has approved the recommendation for the Resolution as forwarded by the Finance Committee and since I did not hear anyone object to the proposal by Pakistan and since there appears to be precedent for doing it, unless I hear some profound objection I see no reason why we should not do it once again.
With respect to the procedures for dealing with the JIU reports, I must confess that I am at a loss to try and find some solution to the various positions that have been taken and I would like to throw out the following as a possible solution and I would welcome the views from my colleague from, the Programme Committee if he has any profound disagreeement with what I propose and that is to take his proposal that we ask the JIU to prepare a summary of each of their reports and that we rely on the Programme Committee to prepare a report on the progress made and to include in their report summary comments of what the Director-General and the ACC have said. This I think would perhaps meet the comments made by the Federal Republic of Germany, France and others, and that it be understood that the full report be available if required and that the members of the Council could comment on them if they so desired. If that is agreeable we will declare that that is our decision on that.
I am just informed that I made a slight error. I did not quite understand Mr. Mehboob, in fact there is no precedent for including this request in the Resolution as suggested by our friend from Pakistan but nevertheless, since no one disagreed with my summing up, I do not see why we should not establish a precedent.
T. AHMAD (Pakistan): I was in fact very pleased with your summing up because if you did make a slight error it was in favour of our proposal and we again want to reiterate that that is an important part of the recommendation of the Finance Committee so it should be no problem if that is included as part of the Resolution so we will leave it to the Secretariat to incorporate that in the Resolution and we appreciate that.
J. BELGRAVE (New Zealand): Just a very small point for the drafters. I am sure we all want the Resolution to be phrased so that It did not criticise the United Kingdom Auditor General.
CHAIRMAN: It was certainly not my intention to imply any criticism of the present Auditor and I would think in fact that it should be so phrased so as to give him every chance to continue as this Organizations External Auditor.
Now with respect to the remaining items or sub-item under item 16, Personnel Matters, other financial questions and import licences for equipment for official use, in my notes I do not have any expressions of concern that differ markedly, if I remember correctly from the views expressed by the Finance Committee and the Programme Committee and so I take it that this Council adopts their views.
It was so decided
Il en est ainsi décidé
Así se acuerda
CHAIRMAN: We will continue on and take up other budgetary matters, item 13.
V.J. SHAH (Director, Office of Programme and Evaluation): The subject of programme and budgetary transfers was submitted to the Finance Committee and appeared in paragraph 3.38 of the Report of the Finance Committee in document CL 83/4. This is a matter which is only for the information of the Council. The Finance Committee itself noted the two within-chapter budgetary transfers, one for the amount of $78 400 from programme 5.2.4 on Personnel Services to 5.9.1 Programme Management and the other of $30 600 from programme 5.2.2 Financial Services to Programme 5.2.1 Administrative Services. The explanations provided by the Secretariat were acceptable to the Finance Committee and are included in their reports.
If I may go on to the next item which you have also mentioned and that is the annual report of budgetary performance to Member Nations. This is also an item for information of the Council. The Finance Committee did receive a report on budgetary performance in 1982 which is attached as Appendix A of the report of the Finance Committee in document CL 83/4. This information document gives figures which are still subject to the audit of the account but it provides the overall situation of budgetary performance in 1982. The Finance Committee noted that expenditures and commitments were in line with the forecast, that the expenditures are normally higher in the second year of the biennium than in the first year for the usual reasons which it has specified in this report. It might interest the Council to note in particular that because of the favourable currency factor the amount of $4 902 700 was credited to the special reserve account.
The views of the Finance Committee are fully explicit in its report and I believe I have nothing further to add unless any Member of the Council should wish for clarification.
CHAIRMAN: Item 13 is now open for discussion. Is there any delegation that wishes to take the floor? This item is for information only so if there is no delegation which wishes to ask any question or whatever we will simply accept the documents as they have been presented to us.
D. K. CROWTHER (Assistant Director-General, Administration and Finance Department): I would call your attention to document CL 83/LIM/1, which has recently been distributed and sets out the contribution position at 15 June 1983. The updating information is contained in the report of the Finance Committee at paragraphs 3.56 and 3.66. We have received some additional contributions since 15 June, quite small, but the 15 June statement that you have in front of you is quite accurate. As a consequence, the percentage of current assessments collected for 1983 through May has been 45.58 percent. While this rate of receipt of contributions this year is considerably better than in 1982 or 1981, it still does not compare favourably with the rates of receipts in 1980 and several prior years. It will be observed from the appendix to the LIM document that you have that several of the large contributors, including the largest, have made no payment against their 1983 assessed contributions. While s some Member Nations are known to have at present very critical financial situations it is disappointing that these Member nations which could meet their obligations have not yet done so within the time prescribed by the regulations of the Organization. It will be. noted from paragraph 6 of the LIM document that nine Member Nations continue to be in danger of losing their right to vote at the Conference. The Council may wish to make a special appeal to these Member Nations to regularize their positions as far as possible and to communicate to the Organization their intent to honour their financial obligations.
CHAIRMAN: Item 14.1 is now open for discussion. Does any delegation wish to take the floor? If not, we will simply regard this as an information document, we will simply take note of it.
Then we have concluded all the items on the agenda that we can cover today. Thank you very much. With that I conclude this day's session.
The meeting rose at 16.30 hours
La seance est levée à 16 h, 30
Se levanta la sesión a las 16.30 horas
