R. RAMPERSAD (Trinidad and Tobago) Thank you Mr. Chairman. Allow me first of all to join with the distinguished delegates who proceeded me in congratulating you on your election to such an important office. Our delegation has every confidence that under your inspired leadership our deliberations shall be immensely fruitful.
My delegation also would like to place on record its compliments to the FAO secretariat for the very excellent document it has prepared and presented to us. We have had some minor difficulties for instance with the last paragraph of page 2 of the document C/79/2- Sup. I where it is stated, Mr. Chaiiman, "Most prices are higher than a year ago, but those of sugar and dairy products have continued to be depressed by structural surpluses. " We find this somewhat inconsistent with the statement in the second paragraph of page 16 where in reference to milk and milk products there is the following statement, "There was thus a further increase in international prices, especially for skim milk powder. "
There is perhaps a conceptual problem of classification on our part, but we hope that this matter will be clarified in due course. Despite this, Mr. Chairman, we are very impreseed with the quality of presentation and commend the FAO secretariat for it.
In view of the elaborate coverage that has already been given to the state of food and agriculture and in order to comply with your request for interventions to be brief I shall confine my remarks to the area of commodity trade problems.
Μr. Chairman, the share of developing countries in world agricultural trade is decreasing when it ought to increase. It has decreased not because of an inherent lack of capacity on the part of developing countries to expand production, and secure for themselves a more equitable share of benefits, but rather because efforts to expand production have been frustrated by deliberate policy of the developed industrialized countries. It is decreasing because of the inability of developing countries to overcome the trade barriers erected by the developed countries, because of their inability to compete successfully against highly subsidized exports, and because of their inability to demolish the rigidities of a trading system characterized by quantitative restrictions, deliberate attempts to depress demand and increased use of synthetics and similar substitutes.
But, Mr. Chairman, the share of the developing countries in world trade in agriculture ought to increase. It ought to increase because these countries need to be afforded an opportunity through access to an expanded market to develop their economies with the use of modern technology, and so be in a position to provide the employment opportunities and the welfare services which the people have been legitimately demanding. It ought to increase, because developing countries need a more reliable and assured source of foreign exchange in order to finance their imports of capital goods, technological inputs and other supplies which they must purchase from the developed countries. It ought to increase because this is justified on grounds of comparative advantage.
It is appropriate, Mr. Chairman, to make reference at this point to the observations made by the Director-General in his address to the Committee of Commodity Problems as reported in Document C 79/Lim/19 where it is stated, "it would be the height of cynicism to encourage developing countries to increase their production for export if, in the end, they would be unable to find remunerative markets. " At almost every international forum at which economic development is an issue, the need is stressed for the introduction of policies and procedures which would facilitate the efforts of developing countries to expand their foreign trade. This has been stressed at almost every FAO Conference held during the current decade and it is a cornerstone of the discussions for a New International Economic order. There seems, however, to be a strong reluctance to translate words into action.
The trade position of developing countries continues to deteriorate and shows no sign of an early reversal. The statistics reproduced in the FAO Document "Agriculture Towards 2000" paints a picture that is not only gloomy but indeed frightening. Cereal imports by developing countries almost doubled between 1963 and 1975 while the exports showed only a marginal increase, averaging about 1 percent per year.
Paragraph 115 of the Document C 79/2 also states "inter alia":
"As a consequence, the share of developing countries in total exports of agricultural, fishery and forestry products dropped from 35% during the early 1960s to 32% at the beginning of the present decade, and to an average of 30% in 1975-77·"
The International Food Policy Research Institute has estimated that on the basis of current trends, by 1990 the developing market economics will have a food production shortfall of between 120 and 145 million tons of cereal equivalent. One wonders, Mr. Chairman, whether these countries will ever have the foreign exchange resources to finance such imports, or whether they would have the capacity to cope with the transportation, storage and distribution logistics that would be involved in handling such massive quantities of food.
The trade imbalance is not only alarming but it is getting worse. And one is unable to perceive on the horizon even a glimmer of hope of improvement. Access to the markets of developed countries is becoming increasingly difficult.
One gets the impression that the slow rate of growth of the world economy during the last few years is being advanced by the developed countries as an excuse, if not a justification, for the growing wave of protectionism that is becoming a dominant characteristic of their trade policies. But protectionism will aggravate rather than ameliorate the situation. Unless developing countries are assisted in developing their economies-and access to a wider market for their agricultural commodities is an essential prerequisite for this-they would be unable to earn the foreign exchange with which to buy the very commodities for which the developed countries have a production comparative advantage. Protectionian isa self-defeating process and is at best a vector for the spread of economic malaise.
It is conceded that current world economic conditions require some structural adjustments which call for a degree of sacrifice. We feel that the developed economies have the resources, the flexibility and the resiliance to make the adjustment with the least possible cost. Furthermore we feel that the benefits which would accrue from such a sacrifice would more than justify the price.
Mr. Chairman one of the central elements in the package of proposals for bringing about a New International Economic Order was liberalization of trade. Yet the possibility of this becoming a reality is getting increasingly remote. at the dawn of the Third Development Decade the New International Economic order seems to be unable to dethrone the old, which in fact is getting more finally entrenched, much to the chagrin of those who eagerly look forward to the promised change.
P. C. DE CLIVEIRA CAMPOS (Brazil): Mr. Chairman, as this is the first time I have addressed this Commission I would like to join the Brazilian Delegation to those which have congratulated you on your election as Chairman of this Commission. Document C 79/2 presents us with the exact dimension of the world food problem. The Secretariat has prepared a very useful document.
In the last five years the world did not succeed in achieving the target of 4 percent for increase in food production. We did not achieve the objectives established in the World Food Conference. Hunger and insufficient increase of food production remains a serious problem.
The Brazilian delegation believes that the role of the present Session of the Conference is to review ways and means of achieving the targets and objectives of the international community concerning food production.
After reading document C 79/2 and Supplement 1 and after hearing the Director-General in his opening statement it is really useless to add words about the incipient world food situation.
Concerning paragraph 56 of document C 79/2 my delegation would like to say that Brazil has already given data to FAO about the outbreaks of African swine fever in our country. We have made all efforts to avoid a spread of that disease and with the help of some friend countries in FAO we have succeeded. Now African swine fever is under complete control in some quite limited areas of the Brazilian territory and we are taking measures for a definite eradication of that disease.
Finally, I would like to say that Brazil fully supports the draft resolution contained in document C 79/LIM/29 concerning commodity trade, protectionism and agricultural adjustment. This subject is fundamental for a definition of a political will towards a real progress in international trade and in the international food situation. We have seen a growth of protectionist measures which are assuming new forms. Therefore these new forms are not more favourable to developing countries than the former ones. On the contrary, they are more severe and are inhibiting the efforts of developing countries to increase food production. The only issue for the present severe and hungry situation is, as says the Director-General, to double food production in the next 20 years. But this aim cannot be an individual task. All countries should cooperate in that, some working at increasing production and productivity and some assuring that the increase of production will find the appropriate market.
A. I. MENENDEZ (México): Como es la primera ocasión en que nuestra delegación hace uso de la palabra, aprovecho la ocasión para unirnos a las congratulaciones por su elección como Presidente de esta Comisión, deseándole el mejor de los éxitos y brindándole nuestro apoyo.
Nuestra delegación desea intervenir para ratificar la posición que México ha venido sosteniendo en los últimos meses en esta Casa, tanto en el Comité de Problemas de Productos Básicos, como en el Consejo de FAO y como ahora lo hace ante la soberanía de esta Conferencia. México, como otros países subdesarrollados del Grupo de los 77, sufre las perniciosas consecuencias que acarrea el proteccionismo que en materia de productos agrícolas y otros rubros del comercio de productos básicos han impuesto sobre sus fronteras las economías de los países industrializados del área de economía de mercado. Debe esta tribuna instar a los países industrializados a suprimir las medidas proteccionistas en materia de comercio internacional, arancelarias o no, y nos hacemos eco de los innumerables llamados, no solo en FAO, sino de otras agencias especializadas del sistema de las Naciones Unidas, incluyendo la UNCTAD 5 celebrada recientemente en Manila, cuyo tema de debate principal. fue justamente el del proteccionismo.
Subrayamos que la crisis por la que atraviesan las economías industrializadas en resultado de su propia dinámica de acumulación a escala global en la que las empresas trasnacionales tienen una función determinante en la agudización de la crisis que repercute con mayor violencia en la economía del Tercer Mundo al transferir masivamente sus ganancias a los centros financieros mundiales incluyendo los rubros alimentarios y de productos básicos de cuyo porvenir economico dependen las masas rurales de los países en desarrollo, incluyendo el nuestro, y una buena parte de nuestra economía en su conjunto.
En efecto, en el sector agrícola las corporaciones trasnacionales han contribuido a distorsionar la estructura productiva de muchos países en desarrollo al orientar una buena parte de sus mejores tierras de cultivo con riego infraestructural y subsidios estatales hacia cultivos de exportación, sustituyendo la producción de productos básicos para la alimentación popular.
Por lo anterior, y apoyado en instrumentos normativos, alentados por la enorme mayoría de los países del mundo, como son la Resolución del Nuevo Orden Economico Internacional y la Carta de los Deberes y Derechos Económicos de los Estados, nos permitimos ratificar la propuesta de establecer un mecanismo de estudio y vigilancia dentro de FAO, que nos informe veraz y oportunamente de las variaciones que en materia de proteccionismo realicen los países industrializados y paralelamente a ello realizar una vasta campaña informativa a nivel mundial sobre las consecuencias, a los países desarrollados señalando las graves consecuencias del proteccionismo en las economías de los países subdesarrollados, y en ellos mismos, como lo ha recomendado el Consejo Mundial de la Alimentación en su ultima sesión de Otawa.
Nuestra posición, señor Presidente, no es fruto de la suerte, sino de la difícil convivencia y de nuestras experiencias de trato y relaciones con las mayores potencias agrícolas y económicas de nuestro tiempo y de la comunidad de intereses estructurales con otros países en desarrollo.
Por ello nuestra delegación propone a la FAO que apoye y recomiende a los países en desarrollo a sustituir la actual política agrícola basada en las ventajas comparativas y los precios diferenciales, por otra basada en los intereses nacionales que aseguren la protección de básicos alimentarios en un volumen suficiente para el consumo interno.
Mexico no solicita prerrogativas ni privilegios, sino desea ver reducidas las diferencias entre el mundo avanzado y su periferia mediante el trato justo y no discriminatorio en el comercio internacional de productos agrícolas y otros productos estratégicos para el desarrollo. El pueblo de Mexico está convencido, y así lo ha manifestado su Presidente, de que casi todo se ha dicho y muy poco se ha hecho; por lo que proponemos la aprobación en esta Conferencia de la Resolución del Comité de Productos Básicos enriquecida en el ultimo Consejo y que refleja el mínimo aceptable para la enorme mayoría de los países asistentes a esta Conferencia.
Tenemos confianza que este foro contribuirá a reducir la brecha entre los países afluentes y los que luchan por hacer valer el derecho inalienable de los pueblos al desarrollo.
A. B. CAWTHORN (United Kingdom): Mr. Chairman, I would like to join the previous speakers in congratulating you on your election to the Chair. I would also like to congratulate the Secretariat on its preparation of the detailed and comprehensive document, C 79/2.
I wish to make a few comments on the content of this paper and in so doing I hope to highlight one or two apparent weaknesses of omission, the inclusion of which in our opinion would have made it an even more valuable document.
I refer chiefly to the lack of sufficient reference to the extent to which problems are currently being faced and also the lack of reference to the importance of recognizing the problems associated with population growth.
Document C 79/2 is in our opinion basically factually accurate, but while it identifies problems which must be faced to avoid a major regression, it does not provide a systematic analysis of the extent to which these problems are being faced at the present time. The only encouraging trend to be noted is that an increasingly large proportion of aid to agriculture is being channelled to the poorest countries, but total assistance to agriculture has shown signs of declining. The depressing world picture of food production increasing more slowly in the poorest developing countries, and of a longer-term general decline in the rate of production, must stimulate FAO to make the most effective action possible and to ensure that the funds available are used to trie fullest extent. We are confident that they will endeavour to do so. It should not be necessary, and I am sure that it is not necessary to remind this Commission that the main purpose of agricultural production is to feed people, to provide fibres and forest products for industry, clothing, shelter, and so on, and to provide incomes for the majority of the world's population who have to earn a living from agricultural industry. There is unfortunately no overall assessment of agriculture in this context in the documentation provided.
There are three main problems to be faced in the race to continue to ensure that we progress rather than regress in meeting these objectives. First, and we consider it very important, the geometric growth rates in population, combined with a reducing area of new land to open up and increasing ecological damage. Secondly, the increasing costs of oil-based energy making it ever more difficult and expensive for the least developed countries and the most seriously affected countries to meet these objectives and they, and also the developed countries whose growth is essential if markets. for LDC produce is to expand, are faced with further cost increases.
Thirdly, static or falling per caput food production in many of the least developed countries along with dangerously high population growth rates in the majority of the LDCs, means that world food security increasingly depends on a handful of food exporting countries whose capacity to provide surpluses at prices that the world’s poor can afford to pay is, itself threatened by inflationary pressures, largely attributable to increasing energy costs.
With the continuing need to intensify production as population increases and cultivation is pushed to the margin, the marginal energy cost of producing additional food and distributing the surplus is alarmingly high. A gradual increase in the relative cost of oil over the next 20 years is arguably necessary and even beneficial, but ad hoc unpredictable increases of an arbitrary nature are highly damaging to agriculture.
The report touches at various places upon the particularly low growth rates for agriculture in Africa, but it does not attempt to analyze the reasons or to prescribe any remedies. It does not even amplify the need for greater effort in the LDCs themselves. It may well be that the Secretariat recognizes that it has not been able to do a great deal for the most seriously affected countries in the current climate of restricted funding and it sees this document as no more than a statement of the present situation. If so we congratulate the Secretariat for highlighting in the paper disturbing trends such as the comparison of production between 1978 and 1979, which shows food production increasing more slowly in the poorest countries, and the longer-term trends showing an overall decline.
I would now like to make a few brief references to the detailed content of the paper. Looking at paragraphs 17 to 23, Production in 1978, the biggest production increases were in the developed countries in 1978 and this appears to be the same in 1979.
On the other hand the best results in the Near East were obtained in 1978 as indicated (paragraph 19) and are also being achieved there in the long term (paragraph 30). No real explanation for the latter feature is provided and the Conference might wish to know whether any lessons are to be learned from these trends and, if so, how are they being utilised for the future.
In addition, Mr. Chairman, no comparative data is available or comment made on the increasing use of grain as livestock food, the types of livestock involved and whether or not the grain produced could have been used more beneficially for human consumption, especially when it is noted in paragraph 60 that by 1977 the most seriously affected countries had 8 percent less than their food supply and nutrition requirements, while other countries, presumably those who were able to feed grain to livestock, had 5 percent more than their requirements. Emphasis should therefore be place on utilization of "unconventional" feeds for livestock.
On the longer term trends (paragraphs 24-30) attention has already been drawn to the fact that production targets are not being achieved in developing countries as shown in paragraph 24, while paragraph 27 indicates that the production increases in most seriosly affected countries are lower than in other developing countries. This raises the question of whether this is due lo lack of basic resources; a lack of organization or management ability; a lack of planning experience or a lack of skill in attracting overseas aid and investment. But several countries, as indicated by Table 4, have reached a satisfactory point of development. The reason why some have, and others have not, is not discussed in the paper, and perhaps it ought to nave been.
Paragraph 28 and Table 4 are particularly interesting in that they give the rate of change of agricultural production by individual countries during the period 1970-1978. Some countries are notable league leaders, but it is not clear what sections of the community have, in fact, benefited. Generally the Far East countries top the league, perhaps due to a combination of adequate resources and basic peasant industry and skills. Latin America differs in the sense that large-scale enterprises predominate but not necessarily in all countries. The same paragraph also indicates that in no less than five countries out of 106 agricultural production has failed to match population growth. Perhaps concentration of international effort should be directed towards these specific countries. There have been dramatic production increases including yields in the Near East, paragraph 30, but the explanation of this is not given, though it may be massive financial inputs. If, on the other hand, the increase can be attributed to technology the lessons learned could well be applied elsewhere, especially in Africa which exhibits the lowest yield increase of all.
I would like to refer briefly to pests and diseases (paragraphs 54-56). Here FAO can be congratulated on the manner in which they have coordinated control action and arranged for funds to finance the operations on desert locusts that had reached plague proportions in the latter half of 1978, and had rapidly been brought under control by 1979. The Centre for Overseas Pest Research has been closely involved with this work and this is an excellent example of the way in which international cooperation is being mobilised to tackle pests and disease problems. At the same time, however, it is worrying to record that specific crop production in certain countries is affected by non technical factors, such as insecticide shortages. A vague reference is made to integrated pest control in paragraph 91 without indicating the likelihood of success in developing such techniques and how various institutions can become involved.
The delegate for Angola made reference to paragraphs 57-61 dealing with food supplies and nutrition. These make apparent the disadvantageous position of the poorest countries to the extent that by 1977 the most seriously affected countries had 8 percent less than their requirements, while the others had 5 percent more than their requirements. There is clearly a critical problem emerging in Africa as per caput food production actually declined by 1. 2 percent per year in 1970-1978. While this information in itself is quite depressing it does also suggest that individual national efforts to develop agriculture, in spite of assistance given, is having little if any effect especially in any attempt to increase food supplies by stemming the rise of population. This may well suggest that a critical review is needed to try and discover why international and domestic efforts of development across the board in Africa are not successful. While this forum may not be the place to raise such an issue, with its strongly emotional and political overtones, clearly this question must be considered by major donors and the multilateral organizations.
On cereal stocks and world food security (paragraphs 70-78), I would also like to refer briefly to the reference made to food losses at farm or village level. The figures reported in the FAO paper are somewhat lowet than those previously reported and this downward reassessment seems correct. It would appear that farmers using traditional production and storage methods are relatively efficient. It is perhaps too early to generalise with confidence but in general only small losses are found. When the system is altered by either increased production or the use of new varieties the system can fail and serious losses may occur. This must always be borne in mind.
The section on Fertilisers (paragraphs 87-90) mistakenly omits any reference to the need to develop non-chemical means of maintaining fertility. In the case of nitrogen this is particularly important in the face of the effect of rising energy costs and oil as a feedstock to which no reference is made. Whether fertiliser will be adequate by the year 2000 matters more than whether LDCs are able to produce 25 percent of it by that date. Potash and phosphate depend not only on the building of new capacity but also on the location of additional sources of supply at acceptable prices.
It is surprising that the conclusions of the COAG session on mechanization are not summarized in the section on farm machinery, nor has any account been taken of the fact that tractor size is increasing, and so horse-power per hectare should also be increasing. Mention in made of tractor numbers increasing in the Near East faster than elsewhere. This may be an area of smaller farms using smaller tractors, which would affect the horsepower involved, but this horsepower itself might also be increasing.
On forestry (paragraphs 100-107), the considerable increase in prices which has taken place in recent years is apparently affecting all forms of product. It is estimated that there will be a deficit of wood products by the end of the century and this must surely contribute to further increases in relative price. The importance of wood as a fuel is also stressed in the report although there is no reference to its use as charcoal. All of these points underline the importance of taking steps now to meet the anticipated increase in demand.
In conclusion, looking at development assistance for agriculture, paragraph 138 raises an important issue that LDCs often lack the resources to meet the recurrent costs involved in maintaining and operating certain projects and programmes, more especially so after donor support has been withdrawn. Unfortunately, FAO does not appear to have a convincing answer.
For both donor countries and multilateral agencies, particularly those with a poverty focussed aid programme, Table 19 may be interpreted as a measure of the problem-the inadequacy of targeting to date and/or the fact that it is this group which is most in need of help with family planning. For example, $1. 35 per caput of aid, or a supplement of about 1 percent of income is not likely to transform the lot of people on the breadline or below it but a similar sum spent on family planning backed by food aid in the case of famine or for vulnerable groups, might achieve a significant reduction in growth rates which would be a laudable contribution to agriculture by the year 2000.
I feel that I have criticized the FAO Secretariat perhaps in my earlier comments, but it was not intended as destructive criticism. We feel that the paper is an excellent document but it could have been improved with further amendments and additions.
R. S. MA'ARUF (Iraq) (interpretation from Arabic): First of all and before discussing the subject itself, I would like to congratulate you, Sir, on your election as Chairman of this important Commission, and I would also like to congratulate the Secretariat for this document on the State of Food Agriculture in 1979.
Having studied the document before us and having listened to other representatives, it appears to us that there is a unanimous view that the situation is not brilliant and that the future is not very promising. There is a shortage of cereals, prices are going up, and the developing countries are those which are suffering most-although most of them have an agriculture potential which is very great. But these countries need aid, need technology which can be offered by the developed countries in order to make the best possible use of their resources, and to produce the necessary amounts of food. A large number of developing countries have a great agricultural potential. They can produce a great deal and could thus help to solve the food crisis of the world; but they can only do it if they get sufficient technical assistance. This is why I feel that we have to stress the development of agricultural resources in the developing countries themselves, especially in those countries which have immense agricultural potential but limited human and financial resources, because if aid is offered to these countries the result will be efficient and rapid. No doubt, FAO can play an important role in this respect.
Iraq is a developing country. It is a country which has chosen to try and reach self-sufficiency in food. We have given priority to cereals, especially to rice and maize, in our present Five-Year Plan. In order to reach those objectives we have adopted the Five-Year Plan, because considerable investments had to be made for land reform and land improvement, which will lead to greater grain production. Our next Five-Year Plan will lay emphasis on irrigation of new lands and increased grain production. We will be able to increase the rice and maize area, and also increase production from non-saline land. We will be increasing yields of cereals in Iraq and will thus be able to help alleviate the world food crisis; also this would increase the aid which we are giving internationally and regionally to developing countries.
Then there is a Draft Resolution on Commodities and Food Production in document C 79/LIM/29.
D. CONSTANTIN (Roumanie): Je voudrais premièrement vous féliciter pour votre élection comme Président de cette importante réunion. Je voudrais aussi m'assoier aux délégués qui ont pris la parole avant moi et qui ont apprécié de manière positive les efforts du Secrétariat d'avoir élaboré et de nous avoir présenté une documentation pertinente sur la situation mondiale de l'agriculture et de l'alimentation.
En effet, on peut constater en analysant le document C 79/2 et son supplément que la situation alimentaire mondiale, notamment dans les pays en développement, ne s'est pas améliorée dans le passé récent.
Ainsi que l'on l'a déjà relevé ici, l'objectif des 4 pour cent par an de l'accroissement de la production alimentaire dans les pays en développement n'a pas été réalisé. L'assistance internationale pour la réalisation de cet accroissement fixée par la Conférence mondiale de l'alimentation n'a été atteinte que pour moitié.
II y a encore de gros obstacle: le protectionnisme dans le commerce international tend à s'intensifier et empêche l'accès des produits agricoles des pays en développement sur les marchés des pays développés, d'où la nécessité d'entamer des actions urgentes aussi bien au niveau national qu'international pour changer cette situation qui est tout à fait contraire aux objectifs du Nouvel ordre économique international.
En ce qui nous concerne, nous considérons que l'attention doit se concentrer premièrement sur l'accroissement de la production agricole, et par conséquent alimentaire, tout d'abord dans les pays en développement, cela constituerait à notre avis-ainsi que mon ministre l'a révélé hier à la plénière-les conditions fondamentales de l'élimination de la faim et de la malnutrition et permettrait d'assurer la sécurité alimentaire.
Evidemment, cela implique des efforts particuliers de la part de chaque pays. Dans le même temps, la coopération internationale doit apporter une contribution accrue, notamment en appuyant les pays en développement pour qu'ils puissent créer des capacités de production moderne correspondant à la nécessité d'accélérer la production agricole.
Nous sommes tout à fait conscients de l'importance du commerce international des produits agricoles pour l'économie des pays en développement, aussi bien en ce qui concerne l'export que l'import. Nous savons bien que les exportations de produits agricoles constituent la source principale des devises nécessaires au processus de leur développement. Or, le protectionnisme et les obstacles mis dans la voie des exportations s'accentuent. Nous considérons donc comme absolument nécessaire de libéraliser le commerce international.
Nous espérons que cette Conférence permettra dfarriver à des résultats concrets dans ce sens et c'est pour cela que la délégation roumaine donne son appui au projet de résolution qui nous a été soumis par l'intermédiaire du Conseil sur le commerce, le protectionnisme et l'ajustement agricole international.
Pour terminer, le voudrais appuyer l'idée exprimée ici par le délégué du Pakistan que, dans l'avenir, en préparant la situation alimentaire mondiale, la FAO s'exerce de faire des recommandations d'actions concrètes à entreprendre.
E. K. SERWANGA (Uganda): The delegation of Uganda joins other delegations in congratulating the Secretariat on producing document C 79/2 as a basis for discussion on the state of food and agriculture.
We find the conclusions of the document quite disturbing in the sense that after the improvements of 1978, and despite the efforts and resources put into food and agricultural production, the 1979 prospects appear grim and the food situation remains uncertain.
It is even more worrying to note that those who can least afford to import food and where production has increased slowest are the ones most affected.
Document C 79/2 clearly shows that for most of these countries investment in agriculture has been minimal and inadequate relative to investment in other sectors.
The situation has been made even worse by the rising costs of imported agricultural inputs, notably farm machinery, fertilizers, fuel and petrol byproducts.
On fertilizers, it is sad to note that less and less is being channeled through the International Fertilizer Supply Scheme, thus denying the recipients the benefit of this important programme.
It is our considered opinion that improvements in agricultural production among the food-deficit countries will only be realized when permanent solutions to the prevailing bottlenecks are found.
We wish to report that the situation of food and agriculture in Uganda is worrying. Eight years of economic mismanagement followed by the effects of the war are responsible for the present sad food shortage and the agricultural situation.
Already general food shortages in many parts of the country are causing concern and it is likely that the outlook for 1980 will be even more grim as the rains have been rather erratic from 1979.
Production of major export industries has reached low levels which can no longer sustain our economy, which gravely affects our productiive capacity within the sector. In the beef sector the population has dropped from 5. 1 million heads of cattle in 1971-72 to an estimated 4. 5 million heads of cattle now. Coffee production has dropped from 213. 8 thousand tons in 1972-73 to 137 000 tons now; cotton from 46. 7 thousand bales in 1969-70 to an estimated 40 thousand bales forecast for 1979-80; and tea has dropped from 21. 9 thousand tons to 7. 8 thousand tons. Notable increases in fish production have not met the expected targets.
What all this means is that Uganda's food import needs have increased at a time when its export earning capacity has declined drastically.
I would like to conclude on an encouraging note, that Uganda with its natural resources of virgin land, good soil, abundant water and a good climate is capable of reversing this gloomy trend in a very short time, given favourable conditions.
At the moment there is a political will to develop to a level where the country can be self-sufficient in food and agriculture.
We do emphasize, however, that political good-will and resources alone will not reverse this trend. Substantial financial and technical assistance will be required especially in view of the increased import crisis and the country's reduced capacity to earn foreign exchange.
Given such basic assistance in time and in sufficient quantities, Uganda's outloook for food and agriculture will brighten in the not-too-distant future.
Β. SUSSMILCH (Observateur pour la CEE): Comme tous les collègues qui m'ont précède, permettez-moi de vous féliciter pour votre élection comme Président de cette importante Commission.
Je me bornerai dans ma déclaration aux sujets pour lesquels la Communauté est responsable dans le cadre de la politique agricole commune. Un de ces sujets principaux est les échanges agricoles entre la CEE et les pays en voie de développement.
La CEE est d'avis que le commerce peut apporter une contribution importante à la solution des problèmes qui se posent aux pays en voie de développement.
A cet égard, il faut noter que la Communauté est le premier importateur mondial de produits agricoles et, qu'en 1978 ces produits représentaient plus de 24 pour cent de ses importations totales en provenance des pays en voie de développement.
Entre 1973 et 1978, les importations agricoles de la CEE en provenance des pays en voie de développement sont passées de 10 milliards à 17 milliards d'unités de comptes, ce qui représente une augmentation de plus de 71 pour cent. Avec ces chiffres, les pays en voie de développement sont de loin les premiers fournisseurs de produits agricoles de la Communauté, et au cours de cette même période, leur part dans les importations agricoles de la CEE est passée de 41 à plus de 47 pour cent.
La Communauté ne perçoit aucun droit d'entrée sur certains produits comme les graines oléagineuses, les tourteaux, le thé, les bois tropicaux et les fibres végétales. Les droits de douane perçus sur un certain nombre d'autres produits importants pour les pays en voie de développement, tels que le café, le cacao et les épices, ont été progressivement réduits et se trouvent actuellement à un niveau modeste, surtout si l'on tient compte de la mise en oeuvre, a partir du ler janvier 1977, de l'offre que la Communauté a présentée dans le cadre des MTN pour les produits tropicaux.
Dans le cadre du Système des préférences généralisées, qu'elle a introduit en 1971, la Communauté a également accordé des tarifs préférentiels pour de nombreux produits agricoles en provenance des pays en voie de développement. Ce système a été constamment amélioré et couvre en 1979 plus de 300 produits agricoles transformés, pour un montant d'importations qui peut être évalué à un milliard 700 millions de dollars.
Il faut rappeler à cet égard, que dans l'esprit de la déclaration de Tokyo, la Commuanuté a consenti, dans le cadre des MTN, un effort supplémentaire en faveur des pays en voie de développement les moins avances. En effet, -. à partir du ler janvier 1979, elle a introduit un régime spécial aux termes duquel tous les produits agricoles figurant dans la liste S. P. G. et provenant de ces pays peuvent être importés en exemption totale de droits.
D'autres avantages importants en matière de régime à l'importation ont été accordés aux produits agricoles en provenance des pays associés à la Communauté au titre de la Convention de Lomé. En fait, l'essentiel de ces importations-qui pour l'année 1978 représentent un volume de commerce de 5 milliards 500 millions d'unités de compte, et qui de 1973 à 1978 ont plus que doublé-entre dans la Communauté en exemption de droits. En outre, dans le cadre de cette même Convention, la Communauté garantit aux Etats ACP la stabilisation de leurs recettes provenant de l'exportation vers la Communauté d'environ vingt produits agricoles, bien connue sous le nom de Système STABEX.
Cette politique a pour résultats une libéralisation accrue des échanges de produits agricoles de la Communauté avec les pays en voie de développement. De tous les produita agricoles importés par la Communauté en provenance des pays en voie de développement, plus de la moitié entrent à droit nul et sans aucune autre restriction non tarifaire.
La Communauté estime également avoir apporté une contribution positive aux Négociations commerciales multilatérales dans le secteur agricole. A cet égard, elle a pris un certain nombre d'initiatives et elle s'est notamment engagée à participer aux arrangements internationaux de produits qui ont été convenus respectivement sur les produits laitiers et sur la viande bovine, dans le but de permettre une expansion des échanges et une meilleure stabilisation des marchés mondiaux.
Enfin la Communauté a également participé activement aux négociations relatives à un nouvel accord international sur les céréales. Elle considère que la mise en vigueur d'un tel accord pourrait apporter une contribution majeure à la sécurité alimentaire mondiale et à la stabilisation des marchés et comporter des avantages importants, notamment pour les pays en voie de développement. Aussi, la Communauté regrette que ces négociations n'aient pas encore pu aboutir.
En conclusion, les éléments ci-dessus permettent de faire le point de la siuations dans le domaine des échanges agricoles et témoignent des efforts accomplis par la Communauté dans ce domaine.
Please allow me some remarks about the Resolution of the Group of 77 on Commodities, Trade Protectionism and Agricultural Adjustment submitted by the Group of 77 at the 52nd Session of the CCP and transmitted at the 76th Session of the Council to the Conference.
Mr. Chairman, the Community and its Member States have enjoyed fruitful cooperation in the framework of FAO. It strongly supported in particular FAO’s work on commodities which was the basis for deliberations in other international for a such as the General Assembly of the United Nations and UNCTAD.
With regard to the last Session of CCP the Member States of the Community and the Commission of the EEC have very thoroughly examined the draft resolution on commodities, trade protectionism and agricultural adjustment submitted by the Group of 77 during the last meeting of CCP in October this year. The Community has come to the conclusion that the draft resolution in its present form is not acceptable. However, the Community would be prepared to enter into discussions about modifications of the text, but such discussion would only be worthwhile if undertaken on a realistic basis.
M. R. LEAR (New Zealand): Mr. Chairman, we would like to join others in congratulating you on your election as Chairman of this Commission. We would also like to join other delegates in commending the document before us as a succinct and useful analysis of the state of food and agriculture. It is disappointing that it is not a very encouraging picture which is presented. The number of hungry and malnourished in the world remains appallingly high, and it is of concern, as Dr. Islam noted in his introduction to this item, that the world food security situation appears to be deteriorating. We were however pleased to learn from Dr. Islam that recent figures indicate that the level of investment in agriculture made by the developing countries seems to be increasing in real terms.
New Zealand remains convinced that the main solution to the problem of hunger and malnourishment, and to world food security, is increased food production by the developing countries themselves. We also remain convinced that it is essential, if the developing countries are to achieve this objective, and if long-lasting and genuinely based genuine world food security is to be achieved, that the world establishes a trading system for agricultural products which is conducive to and encourages increased production by the developing countries and by other efficient agricultural producers. This will require the adoption of a more positive approach to agricultural adjustment by the industrialized developed countries, and more liberal trading policies by the centrally planned developed countries. Over recent years New Zealand has observed a growing contradiction between the acknowledgement by the industrialized countries of the need for greater world food security, and the simultaneous strengthening of access restrictions to agricultural trade. The maintenance-and, in some cases, development-of high-cost, high-price agricultural industries has been encouraged in those countries. At a time when most governments acknowledge the threat posed to the world economy by persistent inflation, such uneconomic policies appear positively harmful.
The expansion of production which this new protectionism has encouraged has resulted in the accumulation of large surpluses of some agricultural commodities. The disposal of excessive stocks now poses a serious threat to the stability and growth of legitimate trade in agricultural products by those countries which seek economic growth through the exploitation of their comparative advantage as agricultural producers and exporters. These countries, which are vulnerably dependent on agricultural exports, are mainly developing countries, but they include more developed countries like New Zealand. Agricultural protectionism and trade disruption constitute a wasteful use of international resources. Investment, and production are being discouraged in the countries which have the capacity to develop efficient agricultural industries. If we are to achieve world food security and feed the world's rapidly increasing population, this situation cannot go unchecked.
I should mention here Mr. Chairman that we are unable to accept the view expressed by some industrialized countries, here, and in plenary, and in other fora, that their high-cost production of surpluses, produced behind high protectionist barriers, and then disposed of on world markets at heavily subsidized prices, contributes in any useful or productive way to long-term world food security. While in the short-term these high-cost surplus production and disposal activities may contribute to the food security of some countries, in the longer-term these policies discourage trade and often help discourage food production in the needy countries. In the medium-to long-term, therefore, these policies have a negative effect, we believe, on world food security.
Mr. Chairman, the Tokyo Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations concluded this year after nearly six years, without fulfilling all its goals. The Tokyo Declaration of 1973, inter alia, gave a mandate to participating countries to secure growth in world trade, to liberalize trade in agriculture, and to tackle the particular trade problems of developing countries. While the various codes and agreement, negotiation in the MTN, should help provide a potentially improved framework for the conduct of
international trade, the major objectives of the Tokyo Round were not met in full. Agricultural protectionism remains as intractable as ever, and the principle of comparative advantage is still being denied in the market place.
In an interdependent world economy in which trade is the engine for growth, New Zealand is unable to accept the continuance of trading patterns operating on two sets of rules-one set of rules for industrial products and another for agricultural produce. Agricultural protectionism is practised by virtually all industrial countries to the detriment of their own economies, to the disadvantage of their consumers, to the damage of the economic and social development of developing countries, and to the frustration of internationally efficient producers such as New Zealand. We sympathise with those developing countries who, in endeavouring to diversify and develop their economies, find their efforts frustrated by trade barriers of various kinds in the industrialized nations who should be leading by example.
The responsibility of this generation is to establish an efficient production base for feeding the next-seventy percent of whom will be living in eight developing countries by the year 2000. This stark fact demands new approaches based on comparative advantage and the principles of free multilateral trade in food as well as other products.
For these reasons, Mr. Chairman, New Zealand wishes to indicate its support for the draft resolution on commodity trade protectionism and agricultural adjustment forwarded to us by the CCP and the Council.
In indicating this support however we would note that our preference would be for greater reference to be made in the resolution to the need for liberalized market access for the agricultural exports of all countries, including countries like my own which are dependent on agricultural exports as well as for the developing countries.
We would also like to reiterate our concern that FAO in the work of the resolution recommends it undertakes in assessing the impact of the MTNs and reviewing developments in protectionism, should not duplicate the work done in other fora, especially GATT and UNCTAD. This point is, of course, already covered in the resolution and we would recommend that due note be taken of it.
P. ELMANOWSKY (France): Je voudrais tout d’abord, Monsieur le Président, commencer, et c'est véritablement un plaisir pour moi, par vous féliciter pour votre élection. Il y a déjà longtemps que nous nous connaissons; nous nous sommes rencontrés dans plusieurs groupes, nous n’avons pas toujours été d'accord, mais néanmoins nous sommes toujours heureux de vous retrouver et encore plus de vous voir à ce poste.
Je voudrais également remercier le Secrétariat pour le travail fort utile et fort intéressant fait dans le document C 79/2 et son supplément N° 1, documents qui portent sur la situation mondiale de l'alimentation et de l'agriculture. Il s'agit en fait des photographies, des panoramas de la situation. Comme toute photographie, elles peuvent être plus ou moins éclairées, suivant que le projecteur est braqué sur tel ou tel point, et également comme toute photographie, suivant le profil que l'on présente. Je ne dirai pas que la FAO est une vedette de cinéma, mais vous savez que les vedettes ont toujours tendance à présenter un certain profil pour se faire photographier. C'est ainsi que l'on pourrait dire que notre document se présente par moments selon certains profils que d'aucuns trouveront agréables et d'autres désagréables. D'autre part, le sujet ainsi abordé était fort vaste et de nombreuses questions évoquées seront reprises à d'autres points de l'ordre du jour, que ce soit l'aide alimentaire, la sécurité alimentaire, que ce soit l'évolution des progrès accomplis dans l'ajustement agricole; tout cela figure, je le répète, sous d'autres points de l'ordre du jour.
De même on a parlé dans les documents des recommandations et on se réfère à certainesd'entre elles relevant de la Conférence et portant sur la Réforme agraire et le développement rural. Cela aussi est un autre sujet, mais un autre sujet est traité au fond longuement dans ce document et ne relève pas d'autres points de l'ordre du jour. Il s'agit d'une part de l'énergie, de ses répercussions sur le développement de l'agriculture, du commerce et du protectionnisme. Sur l'énergie, il est évident que le renchérissement des coûts de l'énergie, des coûts pétroliers que personne ne peut nier, car si l'on peut discuter peut-être des causes de ce renchérissement, le fait lui-même est là, a des répercussions certaines, je dirai malheureusement néfastes sur divers aspects de l'économie agricole. Je n'ai qu'à penser aux industries des engrais, aux carburants pour les machines et à tous les produits chimiques dérivés du pétrole, je pense aux insecticides et autres; donc cette situation sera dommageable pour l'économie agricole.
Comme le déclarait ce matin encore la Délégation française en séance planiere, il est évident qu'il faut, en matière d'énergie, faire extrêmement attention aux conséquences qui pourront en découler pour le monde, pays producteurs et pays consommateurs, si on ne manifeste pas un esprit de responsabilité suffisant.
La deuxième partie concerne le commerce et le protectionnisme. Tout à l'heure, le représentant de la CEE, par la voix de l'observateur de la Commission, a indiqué qu'en cette matière le projet de résolution n'était pas acceptable sauf à en rediscuter. Il s'agit bien, je le précise, du projet de résolution sur le protectionnisme, le commerce, etc. Bien évidemment, j'appuie à fond cette position mais mon propos est de faire quelques réflexions sur ce que nous entendons. Tout d'abord, je dirai que j'entends parler constamment d'un renforcement du protectionnisme agricole. En toute bonne foi, pour mon pays, celui-ci étant membre de la Communauté, je dois dire que sur l'ensemble de la politique agricole de la Communauté j'ai essayé de trouver un soi-disant renforcement depuis ces dernières années. Or, je dois dire que je ne vois nullement un renforcement du protectionnisme agricole mais, même si cela doit surprendre beaucoup de monde, une diminution de ce protectionnisme. Je dis diminution du protectionnisme agricole. Chez nous, cela s'est manifesté par les réductions tarifaires intervenues dans les négociations commerciales multilatérales, que ce soit pour un certain nombre de produits agricoles de base, ou que ce soit pour des produits tropicaux. Il y a eu, qu'on le veuille ou non mais les faits sont là, un abaissement qui n'a pas été compensé par un rétablissement ou une augmentation par de nouvelles mesures non tarifaires dans d'autres domaines agricoles. Il y a eu aussi diminution du protectionnisme agricole mais évidemment, me dira-t-on, cela ne touche qu'un certain nombre de pays en développement, dans les améliorations consenties par la nouvelle Convention de Lomé.
Enfin, je dirai qu'il y a eu diminution du protectionnisme agricole par l'extension au cours des dernières années, encore l'année dernière, et encore en ce moment même; on se préoccupe de cela dans la Communauté pour le schéma des préférences pour l'année 1980. Il y a eu amélioration des préférences généralisée dans le domaine agricole.
Voilà quatre domaines où le protectionnisme agricole a été en réduction. Pour le reste, à ma connaissance, je ne vois pas de mesures de renforcement. Il y a la politique agricole commune que l'on connaît, elle n'a pas changé depuis son origine. Le système des prélèvements n'est pas une nouveauté, il est connu depuis le départ. Vous comprendrez dans ces conditions que je sois surpris d'entendre parler de renforcement du protectionnisme.
D'autre part, quand on parle de protectionnisme, on a aussi tendance à assimiler au protectionnisme les politiques de soutien, et à l'instant même, on en parlait pour les producteurs. Mais les politiques de soutien s'analysent dans un ensemble d'une économie générale. Il y a des décennies que l'on explique cela, dans un ensemble de politique économique d'un pays considéré. Le prix d'un produit agricole doit s'analyser en fonction des conditions économiques générales du pays, mais je ne m'étends pas sur ce sujet, on le connaît.
Je rappelerai enfin une chose qui a son importance. On nous dit que si on libérait complètement le marché, ce serait à l'avantage véritable des pays en développement. Je rappellerai simplement un point: une libération portant sur la plupart des produits agricoles, que ce soient les céréales, les produits laitiers, la viande, les oléagineux, profitera beaucoup plus aux producteurs d'autres pays développés qu'aux pays en développement eux-mêmes. Il suffit de se reporter aux statistiques de production, aux statistiques d'exportation, et on verra facilement quel en serait le résultat.
CHAIRMAN (interprétation from Arabio)s I had hoped that we Bight hare finished the list of speaker. for this afternoon hat it would appear now that this hope dwindle. as further delegates asked to he inscribed in my list. We now hare 14 speakers on the list I have before me-India, united States, Senegal ι Japan, Portugal, Sri Laaks, Australia, Panama, Austria, Algeria, Cuba, Italy, Guinea-Bissau and the Observer of the International Agricultural Producers-and I would like to say that some delegates such as the delegates from Rwanda very kindly, instead of speakingf have given us their texts so that these will be built into our reports. This is how we stand at present and I will give the floor to the delegate of India now.
R. C. SOOD (India):Mr. Chairman, may I on behalf of the Indian delegation add my congratulations to you on your election to this important office.
May I congratulate also the FAO secretariat on the presentation of their very able and comprehensive document on the state of food and agriculture in 1979·
It is a matter of regret that the overall picture Drought out in the report is not satisfactory. It has been brought out that in no less than 58 countries agricultural production failed to match the population growth in the period 1970-1978· Indeed a further disquieting aspect of the trend during the 1970s so far is that production has generally increased slowest in the poorest developing countries.
I would like in this context to bring out very briefly the Indian agricultural situation during this period.
India has over the last few years been making substantial strides in food production, rising from 111 million tonnes in 1976/77 to 125 million tonnes in 1977 /78 and 131. 4 million tonnes in 1978/79. This is due largely to gradual strengthening of agricultural infrastructure, including irrigation, both surface and ground, on the one hand, and to large expansion in regard to use of inputs like fértilizers and improved seeds. Our country has unfortunately suffered a most unprecedented drought during the current year-assessed as the worst since 1919-which is likely to cause a set-back to our efforts in increasing production. We fortunately have adequate stocks of about 21 million tonnes and hope by and large to take the drought in our stride.
I should like to mention here that in addition to the calamity resulting from the drought, agricultural development effort in our country is being punished as a result of a high rise in prices of fertilizers. An effort appears to be afoot on the part of the fertilizer industry to boost the prices of fertilizers out of all proportion to the rise of raw materials etc. We imported 4. 11 million tonnes of fertilizers in 1978-79 at a cost of Is. 4, 586 million. For the same quantity the cash would be Rs. 1, 260 million higher. The price of DAP has gone up from $160 per tonne in June 1979 to I 250 per tonne in October 1979-within a period of four or five months.
The Consultative Working Group of the Fertilizer Commission, the Joint Session of the Programme and Finance Committees of the FAO Council and the Group of 77 have all endorsed the suggestion that the next meeting of the Fertilizer Commission should be held on a yearly basis early in January 1980· We would like the Conference to press for an urgent meeting of the Commission,
The overall picture brought out in the FAO document is disquieting. The Indian delegation, while agreeing with the overall assessments, would like in this context to lend its wholehearted support to the measures proposed by FAO for dealing with the situation. We would like to emphasize in particular the need for a stepping-up of external assistance to the stipulated level of $8. 3 billion as against the level of only about $4. 6 billion achieved so far, and other measures for ensuring world food security.
The Indian delegation would like to support strongly the call for an early resumption of negotiations for an international grains arrangement and the implementation of the Director-General's Five-Point Plan of Action of World Food Security.
The Indian delegation would like further to lend its support to the proposed action on commodity trade, protectionism and agricultural adjustments, for ensuring a fair deal for the developing countries.
M. KRIESBERG (United States of America): Mr. Chairman, let me first add my congratulations to those of others in congratulating you on your election to the Chair of this important Commission.
I should like to keep my comments to as brief as I can, in view of your comments about the pressures of time.
My Government commends the FAO Secretariat on its report covering the state of food and agriculture for 1979 and its useful up-dating in the supplement before us. We are in general agreement with the data as reported and with much of the analysis provided. On the whole it is a balanced report. We welcome particularly the increased reporting on food consumption and nutrition and FAO’s efforts to report more fully on public investments in the food and agriculture sectors, particularly in developing countries. We share the views of the delegate of Hungary that FAO should do more of this kind of reporting in its periodic studies. We also associate ourselves with the comments made by the delegate of the United Kingdom on the effect of rising oil prices on food production.
While over all we cannot be, and should not be, complacent about the situation particularly as it pertains to the poorest food-deficit countries, we should none the less take note of some positive aspects in the world situation. Improvements in the world food situation are the responsibility of governments, individually and collectively, and in this respect my Government feels that it has shaped its policies to act responsibly in line with all of our concerns to assure greater food supplies and more stable prices for basio food grains.
The performance of the United States farm and food sector is one of the brighter aspects of this years food and agricultural situation. Let me cite a few evidences of that.
Large reserve stocks carried over from last year and bountiful harvests in food and feed grains this year mean that total availability at record levels is here to meet our very large commercial demands as well as our full food aid commitments. We still have large reserve stocks to carry forward into next year. Moreover, as publicly announced by Secretary Bergland, the United States will continue to encourage food production for the 1980 crop year.
I migit cite just a few figures that we have put together in this connexion. Although world grain production is expected to fall about 4. 5 percent in the 1979-80 period, the United States has been favoured by larger grain crops. Total United States grain production will be almost 6 percent above the 1978-79 period. United States food grain production-that is wheat, rye and rice-is now forecast at 64. 4 million metric tons or 16 percent above last year. Feed grain production-that is maize, sorghum, oats and barley-is expected to total a record 224 million metric tons, fully 3 percent more than last year.
It should be noted that this means that we are fully able to meet our commercial and concessional food export commitments and to help stabilize prices in the event of any further crop short-falls.
The Secretariat has drawn our attention, and appropriately so, to transportation constraints on international movements of grain that exist in some major grain exporting countries, and how such restraints might compound a problem of undue concentrations of food reserves in a few countries. I should make some assurances here. Although we are experiencing some complications with the movement of crops on some portions of our domestic transportation system, we believe that we can meet our anticipated exports without major difficulty.
The United States Government shares the concern of the Secretariat and of other governments about the concentration of the world's food reserve stocks. We do not relish carrying so much of the burden. We have consistently urged an international system of nationally held reserves-widely held-as an essential part of a world food security system. Hence we were disappointed that the international wheat negotiations adjourned without establishing a realistic system of reserve stocks. We hope that it will be possible to meet again at some time to rectify that.
We do now-and we have indicated as much in other forums-welcome the increased efforts of FAO and the world Bank to help low-income countries establish food reserve systems and the infrastructure necessary for that purpose.
I turn now to some comments about trade in food and agricultural commodities.
First, as Secretary Bergland cited in addressing the Plenary Meeting the other day, the United States is the largest single importer of agricultural commodities from developing countries and the level of our imports now stands in excess of US$10 billion. For the last year for which we have data, 1978, our imports of food and agricultural commodities from developing countries exceeded our exports to them of these kinds of food and agricultural commodities by some $500 million. As an efficient producer of grains will continue to seek an expansion of our trade, both ways and more liberalized trade, in commodities of special interest to developing countries, through our own national policies, and through international negotiations such as in the MTH.
I should take note of a number of références to the draft resolution on commodity trade, protectionism and agricultural adjustment, referred to the Conference by the CCP. It should be noted that the United States and other industrialized countries did not fully agree with the draft resolution in the CCP and expressed some reservations on it. We have continued to look at the draft resolution with concern, but with interest, and we are willing to enter into discussions which might lead to a concensus resolution on this subject of importance to us all.
Finally, let me point out one aspect of trade that is not dealt with in the Secretariat's report. On this point I shall be quite candid: if there is serious economic dislocation in the United States and other industrialized countries, as a result of forces beyond our control, trade among countries will inevitably decline despite our best efforts here or in other forums. This is indeed a world of growing interdependence. Increasing trade for developing countries, we believe, can best be assured in a thriving, expanding world economy that benefits both developed and developing countries. Let us work together, then, towards that end.
L. N'DIAYE (Sénégal): Tout d'abord, je voudrais, au nom de la délégation du Sénégal, vous féliciter de votre élection ainsi que vos collaborateurs. Une fois de plus, nous remercions le Directeur général de la FAO ainsi que le Secrétaire général de la FAO et leurs collaborateurs d'avoir bien voulu nous donner des documents si bien élaborée et si bien conous.
Comme le document C 79/2 l’a bien mostré, les importations au niveau des pays en développement sont inquiétantes. En effet, ces importations sont passées de 2. 7 pour cent l'an au cours de la déoennie s'achevant en 1971 a 6. 9 pour cent entre 1970 et 1977· Pour ce qui est du Sénégal, les importations alimentaires annuelles représentent une part importante dans le déficit de la balance commerciale de notre pays. Cette année, des pluies précoces et des pluies mal réparties vers la fin de la saison des pluies occasionneront des pertes de l'ordre de 30 pour cent. Bans cette situation et dans le cadre de la stratégie d'exécution du Plan alimentaire du Sénégal, un accent particulier a été mis sur le financement accru dans le secteur agricole, notamment au niveau des projets hydro-agricoles touchant la maîtrise totale de l'eau eu égard aux aléas climatiques et compte tenu également des rendements importants que oes systèmes d'aménagement peuvent procurer et aussi sans négliger les projets touchant les cultures sèches.
Tout cela doit être combiné, en tout cas c'est la politique du Sénégal, avec l'utilisation rationnelle des facteurs de production, une mécanisation bien adaptée, l'utilisation de variétés sélectionnées à haut rendement, des prix incitatifs aux producteurs, l'intégration agro-sylvo-pastorale, la colonisation de nouvelles terres fertiles naguère inoccupées et, parallèlement également, pour cette augmentation de production, il convient de mettre l'aocent sur la formation de cadres compétente et consciencieux, je veux diredes cadres de la vulgarisation.
Un autre point mérite d'être souligné pour l'augmentation de la production alimentaire, il s'agit de la lutte contre la désertification et de la régénération des sols par le reboisement. Pour ce faire, nous attirons l'attention des sources de financement sur la nécessité impérieuse de faciliter les conditions de reboisement et de dotation de ce projet que certaines sources de financement considèrent comme des projets sociaux.
Mon gouvernaient a mis un accent particulier sur une politique complémentaire pour la sécurisation alimentaire en prenant la décision ferme de réaliser des infrastructures de stockage pour cela. A cet effet, nous remercions les pays amis qui nous ont aidés à réaliser ces infrastructures. Par nos propres moyens ι nous avons réalisé plus de 13 pour cent de nos objectifs. Je signale qu'à court terme, l'objectif est de 230 000 tonnes d'infrastructures à réaliser, depuis le niveau central jusqu'au niveau du village.
Une fois de plus, nous apprécions le programme de la FAO sur les pertes avant et après récolte, et remercions la FAO ainsi que tous les systèmes des Nations Unies pour la sécurité alimentaire afin que la réalisation de plane alimentaires nationaux s'impose.
CHAIRMAN: (interpretation from Arabic): I would like to draw attention to the fact that the representative of Sri Lanka has handed in the text of his statement, in order to make sure that it will be taken into account. This will be duly included in the VerButim Report.
I. TAO (Japan): First of all my delegation would like to extend its cordial congratulations, Mr. Chairman, on your election to the chairmanship of this important Commission.
As has been precisely shown in the excellent analysis by Professor Islam and his staff, the growth of world food and agricultural production remains very modest, and the cereal production is estimated to fail substantially in 1979. My delegation shares with other delegations an uneasiness at the fact that the world food situation is becoming precarious, after some years of comparatively favourable crops. As one of the major importing countries of agricultural products Japan cannot help but have a deep concern in these trends in other food deficient countries. These uncertain situations call for substantial measures to be taken, maintenance of protectionism of production by major cereal producing countries, increase of production by food deficient countries, and adequate stock-holding are needed.
In this connection the Director-General’s Plan of Action on World Food Security is a timely proposal, and I hope that the Plan will be an important basis of world food security. In this regard, my Government continues to expand its assistance to the utmost possible for developing countries, to enhance their food production. In 1979 it budgeted approximately 100 million dollars for these objectives as part of the official development assistance.
I would like also to mention some specific aspects of Japanese agriculture. Rice, which is the staple food of the Japanese, is the most important product of Japanese agriculture. However, this production in 1979 is estimated to be the second highest because of favourable weather and because of the application of highly sophisticated technology by small farmers. At the same time this means the consumption of energy in Japanese agriculture has inevitably been increased. Thus, the recent uncertain oil
situation has caused concern to Japanese agriculture. It is becoming difficult for farmers to maintain their income because of the unfavourable market situation and also the increasing cost of input in their farms.
On the international trade issues. I would like to comment very briefly. The HTM negotiations were concluded this year after long consideration. We know of their different views on the evaluation of the results achieved at the Tokyo Round among the developed countries as well as developing countries. However, since it is too early to discuss the result of the MPM, we think that it would be more advantageous at this point to do our utmost to see that the fruits of HTM are implemented.
Concerning the Draft Resolution on Commodity, trade, productivity and agricultural adjustment, I regret that there are some points which we cannot accept. They render our support difficult unless they are modified. My delegation, however, eagerly hopes that we will obtain a fruitful conclusion in constructive discussion.
Mme L. DE AZEVEDO (Portugal): Avant tout, M. le Président, nous voulons vous féliciter pour votre élection. Nous voulons en ¿eme temps remercier le Secrétariat de la FAO pour l'élaboration du document C 79/2 que nous discutons en ce moment et qui nous a permit d'avoir une connaissance aussi complète que possible de la situation mondiale de l'alimentation et de l'agriculture en 1979·
Nous avons demandé la parole également pour appuyer la proposition de la Norvège au sujet de lfinclusion d'une politique nutritionnelle pour les nourrissons et tous les enfants d'une façon générale dans les politiques nutritionnelles globales établies aux niveaux national et international.
Nous savons tous l'importance fondamentale d'une alimentation correcte au point de vue protéique et énergétique vis-à-vis du développement des enfants et tous les enfants du monde ont droit à cette alimentation, si nous désirons que l'égalité et la fraternité soient des réalités pour toute l'humanité.
Nous désirons aussi rappeler l'importance d'une distribution équitable des aliments à tous les niveaux: familial, national et international. Il peut y avoir des aliments en quantité suffisante, mais, si leur distribution n'est pas équitable, il y aura des gens qui ne pourront pas satisfaire leurs besoins nutritionnels.
Nous ne devons pas non plus oublier l'importance de l'éducation nutritionnelle à tous les stades de consommation des aliments (familiale ou collective) pour le meilleur profit des ressources alimentaires disponibles.
L'importance également de l'établissement de l'égalité entre hommes et femmes dans tous les processus de formation et d'éducation agricoles et non agricoles, car l'inégalité entre les deux sexes est normalement en relation avec le sous-développement et se présente comme le résultat d'un système économique injuste qui, en aucune manière, n'est favorable au développement.
Au sujet des programmes d'aide alimentaire, nous appuyons la délégation de la Suède quand elle dit qu'il faut les renforcer, mais nous voulons rappeler qu'il faut aussi aider les pays qui reçoivent cette aide à résoudre les problèmes nationaux de transport, d'entreposage des aliments offerts, d'éducation alimentaire et nutritionnelle à tous les niveaux, auprès des consommateurs afin qu'ils puissent en tirer le meilleur profit.
Les questions de l'augmentation de la production et de la prévention des pertes de denrées alimentaires sont très importantes pour le Portugal, étant donné qu'il est un grand importateur d'aliments-à peu près 50 pour cent des aliments qu'il consomme-surtout des céréales (et le mais en premier lieu).
Le Portugal cherche à résoudre cette situation par la mise en oeuvre de programmes visant surtout l'élargissement des zones irriguées, l'emploi de semences améliorées, l'augmentation de l'emploi des engrais, la formation professionnelle adéquate pour tous les techniciens et les agriculteurs des deux sexes, etc.
Nous étudions maintenant la possibilité de l'établissement d'un programme d'aide bilatérale au sujet de la prévention des pertes de denrées alimentaires. Nous avons préparé un accord avec le CIMYT pour l'établissement au Portugal d'un Centre pour l'amélioration des céréales destiné à servir toute la région mèditeranéenne, basé sur une station d'améliorations des plantes installée depuis longtemps au sud du Portugal.
En ce qui concerne les forêts, c'est là un secteur de production très important chez nous parce que le Portugal est davantage un pays forestier. Nous avons besoin de profiter au mieux des terrains marginaux qui sont actuellement réservés à la culture ceréalière en les remplaçant par la foret.
Κ. JONES (Australia): Firstly I should like to mention that the Australian delegation joins with others in congratulating you, Mr. Chairman, and the Vice-Chairman on your election to the important positions on this Commission.
We in the Australian delegation have listened very attentively to, and taken careful note of, the statements of those delegations which have preceded us on this item. We feel that the document which the Secretariat has produced as a basis for discussion, C 79/2, provides an acceptable and comprehensive over-view of the state of world food production and agriculture for 1978. The indications of the prospects for 1979 are also noted and we lend our general support to the analysis found in that document. Although per caput dietary energy supplies have improved since 1974, Australia is very much aware that there are no grounds for complacency since in many regions the food available is inadequate to ensure the good health of the population. Continued efforts must be made to increase food production in developing countries. An increasing proportion of Australia's development asistance is devoted to this end. We believe, however, that success in this basic area depends primarily and fundamentally on developing countries themselves.
While accepting the essentially catalytic and supporting role of external assistance and cooperation, we must not overlook that the major mobilizations of human and material resources that accelerate food production are targeted to come from within the developing countries'own resources.
As a major exporter of agricultural commodities, Australia readily appreciates the importance of focusing on the major international policy issues such as those identified in document C 79/2.
At this point I would like to reflect back to the statement made by the delegate of New Zealand, and I nave to say that we find ourselves very closely associated with the points which the delegate of New Zealand made in that statement.
I do not propose to repeat those in any detail. But with regard to the commodity and trade related problems raised within the document and in particular concerning the draft CCP resolution, the nature of the draft which this Conference has before it on commodity trade, protectionism and agricultural adjustment is, we feel, not unlike; many similar types of resolutions which originate within this Organization in that it clearly does not fully reflect the full aspirations of all those countries which clearly have a concern with the subject matter of that resolution. I think we must recall that not only the general thrust of that draft but also its detailed content in its present form have been the subject of extensive discussion within the CCP and considerable effort was made in that context to produce the draft that we now have before us. My delegation had hoped that that draft would have proved acceptable to the Conference. However, that is clearly not the case and I would like to conclude my remarks by saying that we in the Australian delegation would be very pleased to participate in the on-going discussions which are clearly necessary on this particular draft resolution.
A. ACUÑA (Panamá) Señor Presidente : En la primera intervención de la delegación de Panamá en esta Comisión deseamosexpresar nuestra felicitación por su elección.
Sobre el tema que debate actualmente esta Comisión I de esta 20 °Conferencia de FAO referente a la seguridad alimentaria mundial y en especial a la producción de productos básicos y sobre comercio, la delegación de Panamá desea precisar los siguientes señalamientos:
Panamá, contrariamente a lo que se puede pensar, mantiene actualmente el 50 por ciento de su población en el sector rural. Este hecho nos obliga a adelantar una serie de políticas, planes y programas que logren un desarrollo de este sector primario y contribuir así a la seguridad alimentaria, tanto interna como externa. Así es como con la asistencia y ccoperación de la FAO y del PNUD se ejecuta actualmente un importante programa de planificación agrícola que encuentra su materialización en el primer plan trienal de desarrollo agropecuario 1979-81 y del cual se desprenden planes operativos anuales y programas especiales.
Igualmente atestigua este esfuerzo de Panamá el haber incrementado las inversiones agrícolas en un 120 por ciento tal y como se lee en el párrafo 140 del documento C 79/2. Pese a los serios obstáculos internos y externos que la implementación de esta medida conlleva, las mismas se llevan adelante.
En torno al comercio exterior Panamá promueve en el ámbito interno un mayor control productivo nacional en rubros de exportación como el banano y en el ámbito internacional promueve, apoya y estimula la gran iniciativa que representa la union de países exportadores de banano, UPED, constituido por Honduras, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Colombia, República Dominicana, Nicaragua y Panamá; e igualmente apoyamos todos sus órganos constitutivos y en especialla Comercializadora Multinacional de Banano (COMUNBANA) que es un interesante caso en el cual un grupo de países en desarrollo se reúnen para comercializar conjuntamente un producto básico y constituve un hecho que en la medida que tenga éxito podrá repetirse en otra áreas del mundo.
Es por todo esto que la delegación de Panamá apoya el proyecto de resolución que el Consejo de la FAO acorde someter a la Conferencia para su examen y decisión y que trata sobre comercio de productos básicos, proteccionismo y reajuste agrícola.
P. ROSENEGGER (Austria) (interpretation from German): Thank you Mr. Chairman. Since this is the first time that I have had the opportunity of speaking in Commission I, I would like to congratulate you on your election, although it may be a bit late to do so. My delegation would like to wish you the best possible success in the next few days and weeks.
Like many of the preceeding speakers, I also, on behalf of my delegation, would like to express the view that document C 79/2 and Supplement 1 to this document gives an excellent picture of the present situation with regard to the food situation in the world and the agricultural situation as well, and in order to be brief and since it is late I would just like to say that we agree in principle with this document and that we do not have any specific comments to make beyond those which have already been made by other speakers, and that we can accept this document. I would just like to add my thanks to the Secretariat for this very precise and excellent document.
Concerning the draft resolution which was proposed to the CCP by the Group of 77 and which is contained in document C 79/LIM/29. I would just like to say that the Federal Minister for Agriculture and Forestry stated in plenary yesterday that the views expressed by a number of developing countries in CCP and the wish they expressed to have better access to the markets of industrialized countries, is a wish that is fully comprehensible for us. Of course we in Austria understand that a great deal more will need to be done in this respect in future and this is the reason why the Austrian delegation in those fora which are responsible for international trade has always had a very understanding attitude. It is known that the multilateral trade negotiations in the framework of the Tokyo Round have only been completed recently, and the results of these negotiations will start to come into effect very soon. A number of measures have been adopted with regard to tariffs in the interest of developing countries and on the basis of consultations we have had with developing countries, Austria on 1 July 1977 has given redemptions of preferential tariffs for more than 60 topical products. According to the calculations made by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade Secretariat, the industrialized countries represented at these negotiations gave preferential treatment which represents something like $15 billion taking 1966 as a reference year.
The Austrian delegation feels that the draft resolution which we have before us refers to matters which have been dealt with and are continuing to be dealt with by GATT. Practically all developing countries are represented in GATT. Practically all developing countries are represented in GATT and thus have an opportunity for stating their wishes in that particular forum. The adoption of the Resolution which has been presented to us here and which deals with matters for which other international bodies are responsible, does not seem reasonable to us. We continue to believe that such customs and trade questions should be dealt with by GATT. Unfortunately, therefore, and for the reasons I have given, we could not agree to the adoption of a resolution in this form. But of couse we will always be ready to participate in any further constructive debate on this subject.
M. MOKHTARI (Algérie): Permettez-moi, Monsieur le Président, de m'associer aux nombreuses délégations qui ont pris la parole avant moi pour vous transmettre les chaleureuses félicitations de la délégation algérienne pour votre élection. Connaissant votre expérience, nous sommes convaincus que nos déButs seront toujours dirigés avec talent et efficacité.
Ma délégation voudrait apporter son appui total à la déclaration du représentant de la Libye relative au document C 79/2 sur la situation mondiale de l'alimentation et de l'agriculture en 1979. Le représentant de la Libye a mis l'accent sur certaines conclusions du rapport soumis à notre examen, conclusions qui n'ont pas manqué de provoquer chez nous la même réaction. En effet, de nombreuses références sont faites au prix du pétrole; dans un souci de coopération, et pour ne pas prolonger les déButs en raison de l'heure tardive, je ne reprendrai pas en détail l'analyse de cette question qui vient d'être faite par mon collègue libyen. Néanmoins il convient de souligner que l'approche du problème soulevé dans
le document soumis à notre examen présente un caractère que je qualifierai de nuisible dans la mesure où il semble qu'une distinction soit faite entre pays en développement. C'est en quelque sorte l'arbre qui cache la forêt dans la mesure où nous assistons à une montée générale des prix. Dans ce contexte, il faut faire remarquer que le taux d'accroissement des prix du pétrole est sensiblement plus faible que celui des produits exportés par les pays développés. De nombreuses études significatives ont été faites sur la détérioration des termes de l'échange, et tous les pays en développement sans distinction souffrent de cette situation.
J'ai dit que j'allais être bref, mais vous me permettrez avant de terminer d'appuyer le projet de résolution contenu dans le document C 79/LIM/29 concernant le commerce des produits, le protectionnisme et l'ajustement agricole.
J. ARIAS CAMPOS (Cuba): Ya que esta es la primera vez que tomo la palabra, deseo, aunque quizá algo tarde, en nombre de la delegación de Cuba, felicitarle por su elección a la Presidencia de nuestra Comisión, así como a los distinguidos colegas de Hungría, Indonesia y Granada por su elección como Vicepresidentes.
Estamos seguros de que bajo su sabia dirección nuestros trabajos se desarrollarán exitosamente y daremos un paso adicional hacia la solución de los importantes problemas en presencia. Me apresuro a prometerle el más decidido apoyo de mi delegación en su ingente tarea.
Señor Presidente, en el Informe del Director General que estamos examinando, se señala claramente, tal como se ha reconocido en otros foros internacionales la imposibilidad de alcanzar el objetivo fundamental de crecimiento fijado para los países subdesarrollados durante el actual decenio, que ya está pràticamente terminado. La ayuda alimentaria no ha alcanzado la meta fijada por la Conferencia Mundial de la Alimentación, a pesar de que el numero de personas subnutridas, en especial los grupos más vulnerables, siga aumentando. Es preocupante la insuficiente respuesta de la comunidad internacional respecto del logro de los dobles objetivos de rápido desarrollo agrícola en los países subdesarrollados y la liberalización progresiva del comercio internacional de productos agrícolas de interés para los países subdesarrollados.
Este aspecto no solamente no se ha logrado en la forma esperada, sino que algunos países capitalistas desarrollados amenazan con utilizar los alimentos como arma contra países subdesarrollados y los someten a bloqueos económicos, que en el caso de mi país tenemos una larga experiencia.
Tal como se desprende del Informe del Director General acerca de las cuestiones que examinamos ahora, los países desarrollados continúan descargando sus problemas de inflación, desempleo y desequilibrio de balanza de pagos sobre las espaldas de países subdesarrollados. Datos recientes demuestran que tampoco en 1978, ni en lo que va de 1979, la economía internacional ha podido brindar incentivos sustanciales para el crecimiento y desarrollo de los países pobres. La brecha entre aquéllos y éstos se ha ampliado considerablemente. La participación relativa de estos últimos en el caudal productivo mundial ha descendido notablemente durante las dos últimas decadas.
El constante incremento de los precios de las manufacturas, los bienes de capital y de producción, los productos alimenticios y los servicios importados por los países subdesarrollados y el estancamiento y las fluctuaciones de los precios de los productos primarios que éstos exportan, han tenido por consecuencia el empeoramiento de las relaciones de intercambio de los países subdesarrollados.
Es por ello que no debe sorprendernos que la situación actual y perspectiva de la agricultura y la alimentación en los países subdesarrollados sea inquietante, como expresa en su Informe el Director General.
Y esto es así, básicamente, porque se les impide obtener los recursos necesarios, fundamentalmente a través de sus ingresos procedentes de sus exportaciones de productos básicos, para adquirir los medios de producción precisos al desarrollo de sus agriculturas y para importar los productos alimentarios que requieren sus poblaciones.
Lamentablemente, señor Presidente, consideramos que no podemos esperar que esta situación mejore en un futuro próximo. La crisis del sistema económico internacional que padecemos, no es simplemente un fenómeno de naturaleza cíclica, como quieren hacernos ver los defensores del estado actual de cosas, sino que es el síntoma más evidente del desajuste estructural existente, caracterizado, entre otras cosas, por desequilibrios y desigualdades crecientes que redundan en detrimento de los países subdesarrollados.
Ante esta situación, los países capitalistas desarrollados no sólo tratan de justificar el statu quo imperante, sino que obstaculizan los esfuerzos que realizan los países subdesarrollados para que en los foros internacionales se adopten medidas que al menos alivien la situación que hoy confrontan. Un ejemplo reciente de esta actitud lo constituye el fracaso de la UNCTAD V, como resultado de la posición inflexible, poco negociadora y poco constructiva de la mayoría de los países que integran el Grupo B, actitud que confirmó una vez más lo que se ha dado en llamar falta de voluntad política y que en realidad responde a la imposibilidad de aceptar las demandas por lo que a crítica profunda del sistema actual de relaciones económicas internacionales significaría, con el reconocimiento, además, de la incapacidad de sus mecanismos para darles solución a los problemas del comercio internacional y, en particular del subdesarrollo económico.
Otra muestra de la intrasigencia de los países capitalistas desarrollados lo es el resultado de las negociaciones comerciales multilaterales, en las que tampoco se han tenido en cuenta los intereses de los países subdesarrollados al haberse dejado de tratar muchos temas de importancia capital para nuestros países. Es necesario que las negociaciones continúen con el objeto de que se cumplan los compromisos contraídos por los países capitalistas desarrollados en la Declaración de Tokio.
La agudización de las medidas restrictivas tradicionales y la aparición de nuevas modalidades de proteccionismo impuestas por los países capitalistas desarrollados al comercio de productos primarios básicos dañan indudablemente en gran medida la capacidad importadora de los países en desarrollo. Los países subdesarrollados productores de materias primas tienen el derecho inalienable de ejercer plena soberanía sobre sus recursos naturales, tanto en la producción, en el modo de explotación, como en la comercialización de los mismos. Los países de economía de mercado tienen el deber de garantizar el acceso de estos productos a sus mercados.
Al examinar los resultados de la puesta en práctica de los principios que contienen el programa integrado para productos básicos, de la UNCTAD, tenemos que enfrentarnos a otro fracaso. Ni las negociaciones individuales por productos, ni las negociaciones para la creación del fondo común han arrojado los resultados esperados y necesarios; esto ha sido en realidad extremadamente pobre. Aún más, si examinamos la situación que confronta el convenio internacional del azúcar tenemos que repetir que la ya citada falta de voluntad política ha venido también obstaculizando el pleno funcionamiento del único convenio internacional completo sobre un producto básico que ha entrado en vigor desde la aprobación de la resolución 93 (IV) de la UNCTAD.
A casi dos años de su entrada en vigor, aún los Estados Unidos no han ratificado su aceptación del convenio y, en consecuencia, las disposiciones relativas al fondo de financiación de existencias especiales no han sido puestas en operación. Para los países exportadores, la mayoría de los cuales son países subdesarrollados, la no puesta en vigor de estas disposiciones constituye un pesado sacrificio que viola el balance de derechos y obligaciones que aceptaron durante la negociación del convenio en 1977. La ratificación de la participación de los Estados Unidos en el convenio ha sido vinculada en ese país a la aprobación de su legislación azucarera interna, de índole altamente proteccionista.
Por otra parte, la Comunidad Económica Europea se ha negado a participar en el convenio azucarero, y a partir de la negociación del mismo ha incrementado considerablemente sus exportaciones de azúcar, fuertemente subsidiadas, deprimiendo los precios en momentos en que los exportadores miembros se han estado sometiendo a una rígida disciplina a fin de mejorarlos.
Las exportaciones de la CEE crecieron, de un promedio en 1971/75 de 295 000 toneladas, a 3, 3 millones de toneladas en 1978. En este último año la CEE destinó más de 600 millones de dólares para subsidiar esas exportaciones.
En nuestro criterio no existe justificación de orden alguno para tal política.
Señor Presidente, como usted bien sabe, el azúcar es uno de los productos básicos exportados por un mayor número de países subdesarrollados, y posiblemente es el mejor ejemplo de cómo los países capitalistas desarrollados, en general, proclaman una política en los foros internacionales y después aplican una política totalmente distinta en la práctica.
Uno de los mecanismos en manos de los países subdesarrollados para ejercer su legítimo e inalienable derecho a fijar los precios de sus productos primarios, con miras a obtener precios justos y remunerativos, así como proteger y mejorar el poder adquisitivo de sus exportaciones, lo constituyen las asociaciones de países productores y exportadores.
Entendemos que las actuales asociaciones deberían ser fortalecidas y crear nuevas entidades a estos fines.
La FAO debe jugar un papel importante en estos esfuerzos. Es necesario su pleno apoyo a las medidas acordadas en la UNCTAD, así como que continúe desarrollando su labor de complernentacion con ella.
Señor Presidente, por todo lo que hemos dicho hasta ahora, mi delegación apoya decididamente el establecimiento de un mecanismo permanente en la FAO para vigilar y estudiar las políticas proteccionistas que ponen en peligro las exportaciones de los países subdesarrollados, así como el establecimiento de un programa encaminado a eliminar las medidas proteccionistas que afectan a los productos agrícolas y alimentarios.
Aunque consideramos que no les satisface totalmente las aspiraciones nuestras, estamos dispuestos a apoyar decididamente el proyecto de resolución sobre comercio de productos básicos, proteccionismo y reajuste agrícola, que será examinado en la Conferencia.
G. DAL MONTE (Italie): L'examen du document 79/2 et de son supplément sur la situation mondiale de l'alimentation et de l'agriculture représente toujours un des moments les plus importants de la Conférence et le Secrétariat, comme dans le passé, nous offre aujourd'hui une excellente quantité de renseignements et de données dans une forme très claire mais, sous certains aspects, vraiment inquiétante.
Malheureusement, nous devons constater qu'en dépit d'une diffusion toujours croissante des nouvelles méthodes scientifiques et d'instruments toujours plus perfectionnés, et bien que les financements soient à niveau multilatéral comme bilatéral qui augmentent d'un façon continuelle, la production agricole n'arrive pas à tenir le pas avec l'augmentation rapide de la population mondiale.
Si, en 1978, on a obtenu, dans la production agricole mondiale, des résultats remarquables, on doit néanmoins constater que c'est surtout dans les pays encore en développement, qu'on n'est pas arrivé à augmenter la production alimentaire de façon telle qu'ils puissent nourrir suffisamment et mieux leurs populations toujours croissantes. D'autres difficultés dérivent, pour les pays en développement, du fait que les négociations sur les différents aspects du commerce international n'ont pas progressé beaucoup.
Dans cette situation déjà très grave, on doit constater l'accentuation de l'augmentation vertigineuse des coûts de production en étroite connexion avec une croissante inflation qui est en train de produire des effets déstabilisateurs sur les économies des pays industrialisés, dans le même moment que les pays émergents voient s'affaiblir leurs ressources avec l'aggravation ultérieure de leurs difficultés structurelles. Sur l'augmentation des prix de production-imputables en grande partie à l'augmentation du pétrole et des engrais, -il aurait été opportun, selon l'avis de la délégation italienne, de disposer d'un examen plus approfondi qui prenne en considération aussi la viscosité des prix des produits agricoles. En effet, les prix de ces produits reflètent toujours, avec un remarquable retard, l'augmentation des coûts de production en causant ainsi une aggravation des conditions des producteurs agricoles concernés.
Je voudrais encore formuler certaines remarques d'ordre particulier sur des points spécifiques.
Au paragraphe 14, la délégation italienne a vu avec intérêt la référence faite aux investissements publics dans certains pays en développement. A ce propos, on peut constater que l'Organisation dispose de données seulement pour certains pays et que ces données sont souvent pauvres et assez peu significatives. En exprimant le souhait que la FAO puisse obtenir des renseignements majeurs dans l'avenir, la délégation italienne souligne le fait que ces renseignements peuvent constituer un élément essentiel pour la programmation des nouvelles aides à insérer dans les projets en cours et dans ceux qui sont à l'étude.
Je voudrais aussi me référer au paragraphe 56 dans lequel il est fait mention de la présence de la fièvre porcine en Italie. En effet, ce phénomène, qui s'est manifesté seulement en Sardaigne, a eu une portée très limitée, et aujourd'hui on peut dire qu'il est tout à fait dominé. Les autorités compétentes sont en train d'effectuer des plans organiques capables de résoudre ce problème dangereux a la racine en diffusant la pratique du "vide biologique limité" et d'autres mesures de prévention.
Enfin, la délégation italienne voudrait exprimer sa vive appréciation pour ce que la FAO a su réaliser dans le domaine du programme d'action pour la prévention des pertes de denrées alimentaires, programme établi en 1977, à l'occasion de la dix-neuvième session de la Conférence.
La délégation italienne appuie la décision prise par la FAO de concentrer ses efforts dans la première période sur la protection des céréales stockées, en donnant la priorité aux projets des pays en voie de développement dont la situation alimentaire est particulièrement critique.
Afin de trouver une solution valable au problème des pertes des denrées alimentaires de base après récolte il faut y songer, non seulement en termes de disponibilité de moyens techniques, mais aussi et surtout de préparation d'hommes, d'informations et de formation de personnel qui, sur place, sachent ce qui, en ce domaine, peut et doit être fait. C'est la condition sine qua non pour obtenir des résultats non éphémères. Cela est vrai non seulement pour les pays émergents mais aussi pour les pays développés.
A ce sujet, qu'il me soit permis de dire que l'Italie, qui possède une remarquable expérience scientifique et technique en la matière, a eu l'occasion dans le dernier biennium de fournir sa concrète collaboration dans le domaine de la défense des intérêts alimentaires en offrant l'hospitalité à quinze experts tanzaniens qui, pendant sept mois, ont suivi un cours de spécialisation au frais de l'université de Piacenza. Ces experts, maintenant, travaillent dans leur pays comme responsables de la conservation des céréales dans les magasins d'Etat. Il s'agit ici d'un genre de collaboration internationale dans lequel l'Italie a foi et qu'elle est toujours prête à offrir.
J. A. SANTOS OLIVEIRA (Guinée-Bissau): Je voudrais m'associer à tous les délégués qui m'ont précédé pour vous féliciter de votre élection à la présidence de la Commission I.
Le rapport C 79/2 sur la situation mondiale de l'alimentation et de l'agriculture en 1979, que le Directeur général nous a soumis, est un excellent document de travail et nous l'avons beaucoup apprécié.
C'est vrai que l'agriculture africaine continue à être confrontée à la nécessité de produire assez de nourriture pour une population croissante, et, de plus, l'Afrique n'a pas encore comblé son retard par rapport à d'autres régions en développement. Au contraire, la production alimentaire de 1978 par habitant a diminué de près de 10 pour cent par rapport à 1969-71. Nous sommes confrontés aux grands problèmes de production agricole et à leur prix. A ce sujet, nous voudrions manifester notre inquiétude devant l'augmentation constante du prix des engrais et appuyer la déclaration de la République de la Libye sur l'augmentation des prix en raison du pétrole.
Nous nous félicitons des mesures découlant de la cinquième session de la Commission des engrais ainsi que de toutes celles prises par le Directeur général auprès des producteurs exportateurs pour l'accroissement des quantités d'engrais promises avant de permettre, à travers des programmes d'engrais, aux pays en développement les plus gravement touchés, de mettre en action des projets de développement, en particulier concernant les cultures vivrières, cela en faveur des petits exploitants.
M. Antoine NDEGEYA (Rwanda): Monsieur le Président, ma délégation est heureuse de vous adresser ses félicitations pour votre élection à la tête de cette Commission.
La délégation rwandaise est très préoccupée par la faiblesse de la production alimentaire mondiale, et spécialement dans les pays en développement. Nous sommes encore bien loin de l'objectif de 4 pour cent par an souhaité comme accroissement de la production agricole.
En ce qui concerne mon pays, et malgré l'arrivée tardive des pluies, nous pouvons affirmer que la situation alimentaire n'est pas trop défavorable. Cependant, je dois souligner le fait très particulier que jusqu'ici l'agriculture rwandaise, surtout axée sur la production vivrière, n'utilise presque pas de fertilisants chimiques pour maintenir et accroître la productivité des sols. Seule l'application des engrais organiques est courante dans mon pays. Le Gouvernement rwandais aide les agriculteurs à réaliser l'association cultures-élevage au sein des exploitations afin de préserver les capacités du sol et d'aboutir à une utilisation raisonnable de la terre qui est notre capital le plus précieux.
Aujourd'hui, l'absence de fertilisants chimiques pour notre agriculture s'avère être un frein puissant à l'augmentation de notre capacité de production alimentaire. La pression démographique est telle que les sols cultivés presque sans répit et l'engrais organique ne suffisent plus dans ce type d'exploitation intensive.
Nous sommes donc arrivés à un stade où l'utilisation des engrais chimiques est devenue indispensable. Malheureusement, étant donné notre position géographique et nos ressources limitées, l'importation d'engrais chimiques risque d'être un poids insupportable pour notre économie.
Devant cette situation, nous espérons trouver aide et compréhension au sein de la FAO et des autres organisations internationales.
Pour terminer, nous appuyons le projet de résolution sur le commerce des produits, protectionnisme et ajustement agricole.
A. M. F. FERNANDO (Sri Lanka): We have read with great interest document C 79/2 outlining the World Food and Agriculture situation and note with great apprehension the dismal situation prevailing in the world food situation and the need for both developing and developed countries to make every effort to achieve
the production rate of growth target of 4% required to meet this situation. We share the general disappointment about the failure to establish the International Agreement on Grains. However we think that one constructive suggestion in this general atmosphere of gloom has been that made by the Director-General of the FAO. I refer to the Five-Point Plan of Action enumerated by him.
Due to the disturbing trend of long-term consumption requirements exceeding production targets, some timely device as suggested by the Director-General is an appropriate point from which member nations should make a start at least at this late hour. We wish to commend particularly the proposal made by the Director-General concerning the IMF which has been invited to consider within the context of its financing facilities the feasibility of providing additional balance of payments support in meeting food import bills of low income food deficit countries particularly in the event of domestic food shortages and rising import prices.
I do not wish to repeat what most members have been emphasizing so far on other urgent prerequisites, such as the stabilization of fertilizer prices and the need for developed countries to give better prices for commodities of primary products which developing countries export at present, since all these are vital if these countries are to achieve any progress in this direction.
We for our part in Sri Lanka have given the highest priority for food and agricultural development in the last two years. While it is true that the performance of the 1970s has been poor after the present government came into power in 1977 the policies in relation to agriculture which are being implemented now have resulted in enabling production to reach a growth rate higher than most other countries of Asia.
The establishment of appropriate price incentives and the strengthening of agricultural support services such as Agricultural Extension, Research, Credit, Crop Insurance, Provision of Seed and above all, the improvement of irrigation systems more particularly, the commitment of my Government to accelerate the major river development programme of the Mahaweli, will no doubt enable us to reach self-sufficiency within the next few years. Of course, the achievement of the above goals are dependent to a great extent on solutions being found to the stabilization measures in respect of energy costs and fertilizer, and international financial assistance for major development works to hand being ensured.
Like all members who spoke before me my delegation wishes to recommend the adoption of the Resolution before the Conference.*
CHAIRMAN (interpretation from Arabic): Today we have heard 43 speakers who have referred especially to the State of Food and Agriculture in 1979. It is my feeling that this subject has now been sufficiently debated Dr Islam will in due course reply to the points raised and the questions asked. Following that we shall come to the question of Commodity and Trade Problems.
From the views expressed in this debate it would appear that there are certain differences on this matter. Nevertheless I have noted that there has been a positive note, that the various representatives who have expressed differing views have said that the door was not completely closed and that we might well reach a concensus of agreement. That was a very positive note and I am particularly grateful to all colleagues here who adopted it.
We are fully aware that time is short, especially as item 6. 2 and 6. 3, on fertilizers and forestry, have still to be dealt with. We really do not have enough time to continue a discussion of the protectionist measures in the way we have done so far. What is the answer? May I make the following proposal?
First we should consider that we have ended the debate on document C 79/2 and its supplement. Tomorrow, first thing, we should hear the reply from the Secretariat. Dr. Islam will reply to the points raised along with any proposals made or questions asked. Then we can go on to item 6. 2. That is the first aspect of my proposal.
The second aspect is that we should continue our discussion of the draft resolution on commodity trade and protectionism in a narrower framework. That would mean our arranging for unofficial consultations between Members. I personally would hope for direct consultations and I think we should go ahead with
__________* Statement inserted in the verbatim records on request
that in order to try and achieve a satisfactory result. I will report to the Commission on the consultations that I shall be having. Of course I cannot guarantee that these unofficial consultations will be completed when we come to the end of item 6. It might take a day or two for us to reach a result but I shall report the results of the negotiations at the earliest opportunity, which might even be Monday morning. I would then be the happiest of men. If I am able to announce good tidings tomorrow then I will be even happier.
If delegates agree to go along with this proposal I should be very grateful if you would arrange for the unofficial consultations to be launched this evening as soon as we adjourn. If necessary, we can have a meeting tomorrow and the day after, because I myself am determined to arrive at a result which will satisfy everyone, which is something which lies in your hands if you want us to achieve a satisfactory result.
If there are no objections to that proposal, we shall meet tomorrow morning at 09. 30 and hear the Secretariat's report following today's debate on the State of Food and Agriculture and if we are convinced by the Secretariat's replies we can go on to item 6. 2, fertiliwers. The question of protectionist procedure is something on which I am sure we shall all reach a satisfactory conclusion-God willing.
The meeting rose at 17. 55 hours
La séance est levée à 17 h 55
Se levanta la sesión a las 17. 55 horas
