II - ACTIVITIES AND PROGRAMMES OF THE ORGANIZATION (continued)
II - ACTIVITES ET PROGRAMMES DE L’ORGANISATION (suite)
II - ACTIVIDADES Y PROGRAMAS DE LA ORGANIZACION (continuación)

CHAIRMAN: We will continue this morning the debate on items 9 and 10 and I would suggest that we move on as early as possible to the debate on the individual chapters of the Programme of Work and Budget.

KYO-EUN KIM (Korea, Rep. of): On behalf of the Korean Delegation I would like to introduce my Government’s view on the FAO Work Programme. First, the Government of Korea is very happy to note that the main almost overwhelming emphasis of FAO activities for the next biennium is placed on helping low-income and food-deficit developing countries in making all possible efforts to increase their domestic food production. Unfortunately my Government is also not in a situation to give sufficiently high priority to food and agricultural development either in terms of long-term investment or of current budgetary allocations. The requirements of a great population for better jobs and better living standards is now giving us greater pressures, resulting in the allocation of an even higher proportion of investment resources to rapid industrialization. On the occasion of the first World Food Day, however, the President of Korea reaffirmed his strong political will to achieve self-sufficiency in the supply of major food grains in the 1980’s. To achieve this goal, we are going to implement a seven-year plan for achieving food self-sufficiency from next year.

Secondly the Korean Government believes that no country would oppose the proposal of the Director-General of FAO that much greater efforts should be devoted, especially through FAO, to African problems in the next biennium. Improvement of food self-sufficiency in Africa could, in my view, contribute largely to strengthening world food security and also to realizing successfully the objectives of the new International Development Strategy for the third United Nations Development Decade.

Third, on behalf of my Government I would like to emphasize the importance of crops and livestock development, especially for the small farmers in Asia and the Pacific region. Our past experience tells us that real success in agrarian reform and rural development cannot be achieved without the generation of sufficient income for small farmers. Integrated development of crops and livestock including improvement of the crops system may, I believe, be one of the most effective strategies in helping small farmers secure adequate income. In this regard my Government also welcomes FAO activities in Asia and the Pacific which have small farmers as the target group and give high priority to crops and livestock development.

I would also like to make a brief comment on the priorities for the FAO medium-term activities. The overall priorities on development of crops, livestock and fisheries which you may find on pages 8, 9 and 22 of document C 81/9, Medium-Term Objectives, are, in my view, most essential, imperative and indispensable and thus all of them are acceptable in principle. However, the following two points should be given due consideration.

The first point is the establishment of optimum production systems of crops and livestock. Another point is the promotion of a joint-use system for large farm machinery. From our experience it may not always be easy to improve cropping systems or to develop an integrated production system of crops, livestock and fisheries, without an effective means of maintaining agricultural production at the optimum level. In recent years many Korean farmers have been exposed frequently to a wide fluctuation of agricultural prices largely due to the vicious circle of over- and under-production.

The result is obvious: the income of the small farmers can easily deteriorate even more in a growing economy. The need for an optimum production system of crops and livestock cannot, I believe, be overemphasized even in developing economies.

Another major difficulty lies in the process of farm mechanization. On the one hand, the growing shortage of farm labourers requires a speedy implementation of farm mechanization; on the other, the rising cost of farm machinery requires a slow-down in that regard. Avoiding the need to maintain costly large farm machinery by all the farmers can be one of the effective solutions.

The Government of the Republic of Korea is therefore planning to give more emphasis to the promotion of joint-use of large farm machinery at the village level in the next five years, for the Fifth Economic and Social Development Plan.

Another point to be made concerns fisheries. One of the most effective ways to strengthen the capabilities of the developing countries to develop and manage fishery resources is, I believe, the promotion of inter-country collaboration. In particular, for the effective management and development of fishery resources in the Exclusive Economic Zones, technical and economic cooperation among developing countries should be encouraged more and more.

J.O. ALABI (Nigeria): The Programme of Work and Budget for 1982/83 before us is a carefully prepared document which has been evolved over a period of time after searching analysis and heated debates. It has passed through the scrutiny of the Programme and Finance Committees and the Council has had a thorough debate of its content. It is not surprising therefore that what I have heard so far since debate started on this subject is that of support for the programme.

We made our views known on the programme during the debate in the Council. Listening to speaker after speaker since this Conference started, one cannot but sympathise with the Secretariat on the way they have laid emphasis on the various programmes.

Only two days ago, we unanimously re-elected the Director-General for a second six year term. This, we see, as a vote of confidence on the way he ran the affairs of the Organization in the past six years and we have called on him to carry on a work well done for another six years. The Programme Committee, the Finance Committee and the Council in their previous meeting have commended the Programme of Work and Budget. But how do we want the Director-General to carry on his work? It is by providing him with the tools to work. The tool he needs is money. If you want a good thing, you have to pay for it because nothing is free. It is for this reason that we support the level of the budget.

We should remember that the FAO budget is like seed money which is supposed to generate further investment. We are told by the Director-General that as much as $3 billion investment per annum can be attributed to the budget. This is a measure of efficiency. Judging by the gigantic task ahead of the Organization, if we must help the hungry and the poor, if we must bail out the countries which are constantly in need of food, we should support the level of the budget and that is why my delegation supports the level of the budget which we commend to this Commission for unanimous support. Let us trust in the Director-General’s usual efficiency to make savings when possible; let us not tie his hands and make operations difficult by cutting the budget.

We reserve the right to come back again on this important topic.

A. H. ELSARKI (Egypt) (original language Arabic): My delegation would like to express their support, as expressed during the two Council sessions and would like to give our views on the budget and the work to be done in 1982/83. We believe that the Organization’s role in the field of food and agriculture is constructive. We also support the priority given to the programmes of work done in Africa. We would like to encourage Technical Cooperation Programmes between developing countries at a regional and local level. My country would stress the importance of the special regional programmes because these are very important and very similar.

We are very satisfied with the work done by the field experts from developing countries and the progress achieved in the implementation of the Agrarian Reform work programme. We want all requests from countries to be examined quickly.

My delegation will discuss the details of all projects submitted later and this will be submitted to the committee concerned but we would like to give a few ideas on a few subjects. We attach a great deal of

importance to the FAO’s initiative of giving a momentum to the negotiations on food and agriculture taking place in the United Nations and the elimination of trade barriers. We want to look at the forestry programme and we want to stress the importance of preventive afforestation and the control of desertification and land degradation. We think things have to be done here and I would pledge the help of Egypt in refusing the zero growth and support the budget level proposed.

P. KANGA (Angola): Qu’il nous soit tout d’abord permis de vous présenter à vous, Monsieur le Président, et à vos deux vice-présidents nos vives félicitations pour votre élection à la tête de ce Comité. Le problème dont nous sommes en train de débattre semble à notre délégation le plus important de nos travaux. Je ne voudrais pas répéter tout ce qui a été dit ici par les diverses délégations qui m’ont precede. Les pays en voie de développement se trouvent en ce moment dans des situations difficiles. qu’elles soient provoquées par la nature ou par l’homme. Nul d’entre vous n’ignore les difficultés que traversent nos pays. C’est un problème d’actualité dans toute la presse international.

Comme nous l’avons affirmé lors des 79ème et 80ème Sessions du Conseil, ma délégation se range parmi les partisans les plus tenaces et les plus enthousiastes du programme de travail et budget pour ce biennium. Nous approuvons sans réserve les orientations proposées par le Directeur général dans tous leurs aspects, ainsi que le niveau du budget fixé à 414 millions de dollars.

Nous tenons à déclarer, comme l’ont déjà fait de nombreuses délégations, que cette augmentation est très modeste en soi, et qu’il nous semblerait irréaliste de la réduire. Beaucoup d’entre nous ont l’intention de la réduire, voire de supprimer le montant de la contribution de leur pays aux organisations internationales. Les raisons invoquées sont diverses, mais il faut reconnaître qu’elles relèvent de considérations politiques et financières.

Nul ne saurait ignorer, depuis six ans, les efforts constants et couronnés de succès du Directeur général, en vue de résoudre les problèmes de l’alimentation au niveau mondial.

Quant à l’austérité financière, la FAO n’a jamais cessé de restreindre ses dépenses de fonctionnement et ce, malgré l’accroissement parallèle du programme approuvé; des postes permanents des services généraux ont été supprimés et le nombre de réunions et publications a été réduit.

En ce qui concerne les bureaux régionaux et les representations dans nos pays, ils jouent un rôle très important au niveau de chaque région et pays et il ne serait d’aucune manière utile de les réduire. D’ailleurs, mon pays attend impatiemment l’ouvertured d’une représentation de la FAO pour l’accompagnement et le contrôle des projets qui entreront bientôt dans la phase d’exécution.

Enfin, pour terminer, ma délégation demande à ceux qui n’ont pas encore approuvé le Programme de travail et budget de la FAO de le faire sans hésitation.

D.H.J. ABEYAGOONASEKERA (Sri Lanka): This morning I do not wish to go into details of the item under discussion as there is ample oopportunity for us to intervene later and mine would be a general statement.

The brief introduction which was given to us by the Director-General last afternoon and the introduction given to the document under discussion forms the background under which we are asked to discuss the Programme of Work and Budget for the biennium 1982-83. The world background needs no further amplification; it is quite clear that the world continues to be plagued with the problems of poverty and hunger; food shortages continue particularly in the Third World countries where, due to recurrent drought as well as poverty, malnutrition and hunger continues to be the greatest problem. Although an expected growth rate of 4 percent in food and agricultural production was to be maintained by Member countries, the performance so far of an aggregate of 3.3 percent in the growth of agriculture and food production does not meet the requirements and is far from being satisfactory. We know for certain that a food surplus during one year, could very well turn out to be a food deficit the next year. Overdependence on a few countries which are able to supply food to the food deficit countries is, by itself, a dangerous trend when we realize that the wheat surplus countries, particularly in North America, are dependent on rain-fed cultivation and are, therefore, equally vulnerable.

Coming to the Programme of Work and Budget and the Medium-Term Objectives I would like to preface my remarks by saying that here we see a document well prepared, precise and clear. The format according to which it has been prepared is useful and easily readable. What I fail to see in the text of Programme of Work and Budget, is an indication of the cost, incurred by this Organization on the printing of literature which is distributed to Member countries. Like in all other books, there should be a tag somewhere that this book costs so much, I am sure it would make everyone realize what expenditure is incurred in providing this literature.

Sri Lanka has had the opportunity to participate in the previous Council meeting held this year. We are privileged to be members of the Finance Committee of this Organization as well. During those discussions the position of Sri Lanka has been made quite clear. Unequivocal support to the Programme of Work and Budget has been amply expressed and at this particular moment I wish to reiterate the same stand that we had taken from the very inception, that we do support the budget.

Finally, there has been a certain view expressed by some countries that we should keep the budget of the international organizations also under the same restraint as those of the national governments. The fear of recession in certain developed countries has prompted them to say that in international institutions as well there should be a measure of restraint and caution in expenditure. No one would argue against this. It is something one would like to see in all organizations; but when we consider the problems that this Organization has to tackle, the level of the budget, the increase that has been proposed, I would say, are no where near the problem nor the targets that one should set if we are to solve the problem of food and agriculture in the world. In that sense any expenditure that goes towards agriculture and food development should be given unstintedly. In fact we are the one Organization that talks of agriculture. What we do in this regard will affect the future of society and whatever investment is made in the sector will pay dividends for humanity. In that sense I think eventually all of us if we are true to our conscience will support the budget and see that this programme is implemented. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the right to come in later on in the debate as and when it becomes necessary.

J. PILANE (Botswana): Botswana has already spoken in favour of the Programme of Work and Budget, including the level of the Budget suggested in the Council.

The trend of debate on this issue can always be predicted irrespective of the level of the Budget suggested. Arguments on the so-called zero growth are not therefore surprising. It is easy to conceptualize when problems of hunger are beyond one’s boundaries. The paradox or the irony of the present situation is that although we are all agreed about the gravity of the food situation we seem to be at variance on almost every point as to how this problem can be tackled. In theory multilateral and bilateral aid are complementary but in practice they seem to be competing. Those who provide aid clearly seem to prefer bilateral aid, while those who receive aid seem to prefer multilateral aid. It is probable that bilateral aid does not always go where aid is most needed.

Again talking about Programme of Work and Budget, so far the specific issue mentioned in opposing the Programme of Work concerns that of FAO representatives. Again we seem to be at variance here, since those who receive aid have strongly supported the decentralization process. There has always been talk on cost effectiveness of FAO programmes. Again the Director-General’s report is an apt one.

If we agree on the seriousness and the urgency of the food situation in developing countries and if we ourselves sincerely believe in the role of FAO or the role that FAO must play in tackling this problem we can only be unanimous in supporting the level of the Budget suggested. But how can support the Programme of Work, which we have done at the June session of the Council, and not support the level of Budget proposed? It is our sincere hope that we will not have to vote on this issue.

If we really believe in cost effectivness this Conference could be cut short with consequent financial saving for our poor countries. If I were to leave Rome a week earlier I would save enough money to provide two small roads according to our arable lands development programme.

On the Budget, on behalf of the delegation of Botswana I would like to urge those countries that have reserved their position to reconsider their position and support the level of the budget suggested by the Director-General.

C. THOMSEN (Denmark): The Danish delegation would like to join others in congratulating you, Mr. Chairman, and the two vice-Chairmen on your election to these importants tasks.

With your permission I would like to make a combined statement on the Programme of Work and Budget, that is to cover both the general remarks on the introduction of the Director-General as well as some more specific comments on some of the individual chapters of the Programme. At the same time I will refer to the document on Medium-term Objectives in accordance with the procedure suggested, particularly in regard to the relative order of priorities beyond the period of the next biennium as we find it indicated in this document under each programme.

First, in regard to the format of the document I would just like to say briefly that we consider that there is no ideal solution to this complicated issue but we would value a certain amount of continuity and uniformity of presentation which facilitates the task of those who try to get an overall impression of the activities of the Organization and we find that this has been in fact the case for some time now.

Our general remarks on the introduction of the Director-General would be mainly limited to the sections dealing with strategies and priorities for 1982-83. Here we would first to pay tribute to the efforts made to reduce the number of established posts at Headquarters as well as the number of meeting and documentation. We realize that this has not been as easy task.

We have also noted with satisfaction in connexion with the section on priorities that there is an acknowledgement of the inputs provided inter alia by the Council committees, and here I mention in particular not only in my own case the Committee on Agriculture but also the Committee on Forestry and Fisheries, although again we realiza that it may not be so easy to accommodate all the input from these Committees within a limited programme. The crux of the matter is, as stated in paragraph 57, that FAO cannot of course hope to resolve all the agricultural problems of the world. There is inevitably a need for setting priorities in order to concentrate on the areas in which the Organization has its comparative advantages. This is always important, but it becomes particularly compelling in times of economic hardship to exercise some of these harsher judgements that are needed in order to eliminate obsolete and marginal activities and concentrate on more essential and effective activities - and again I am quoting the document.

As regards the paragraphs on the thrust of priorities, we would like to make a few more detailed comments, admittedly of a selective nature. On the paragraph on International Data Base, we would emphasize the importance of the work on the Fifth World Food Survey which is under way. This will provide highly needed and more up-to-date basic information for all of us. On the other hand, we question the relative importance of the proposed Fertilizer Data Bank for reasons that time does not allow us to elaborate here but we will take adavantage later with the people concerned.

As regards Agriculture and Rural Energy, which has been referred to under Techinical Advice and Assistance to Member Governments, there will be an opportunity to comment further on this under another item on the Conference Agenda. Here we would only like join in supporting that emphasis is given to energy aspects in the FAO programmes as a whole and avoid starting new separate initiatives and activities in this very topical subject.

Our next comment is related to the Technical Cooperation Programme which has proved its value in meeting the needs for which it was established. We have noted that it is not intended to increase its proportion of the total Budget, although it would appear from the table on the programme changes that in fact the TCP has received a somewhat larger share of these proposed programme changes than would correspond to its previous proportion. We would only like here to caution against any risk of changing the nature and scope of this programme as it: was originally envisaged. This might lead to more distinct increases or marked increases in its share of the total Budget in the future.

With regard to the paragraphs on FAO Representatives, we agree that they can provide valuable means of decentralizing the activities of the Organization providing there is, as it is stated, a progressive delegation of authority at the same time. We also in this connexion consider the question of quality to be of prime importance and for that reason alone we would plead for a gradual expansion of the numbers so as not to move faster than the availability of qualified candidates will permit.

We also hold the opinion that this proposed expansion of the number of Country Representatives should lead to an alleviation of the burden or the task of the operating divisions of the Organization in their dealing with projects in the field, and we cannot help feeling that it should have consequences for the tasks of the Regional Offices in the future. But this is obviously a complicated issue which needs careful consideration. We wish it to receive such careful consideration.

Let me finish this part of my remarks by again commending the efforts which have been made to eliminate obsolete and low priorities and redistribute resources so as to ensure more effective use of resources. If I may repeat, this is a necessary continuing feature of any well managed organization but it becomes particularly necessary in times of shrinking resources. I would also like to express our satisfaction that the action or the intention of the Organization has been consistently pursued as appears among other places from the decreasing proportion of the staff expenditure compared to the total Budget as well as from the information on the level of the Regular Programme on the field programmes.

I would then like, with your permission, to make some more specific comments on two chapters on some of the programmes, and again I have to refer to both documents - that is, the Programme of Work and Budget and the document on Medium-Term Objectives, where we have listed these relative priorities for the medium term.

Under the chapter on agriculture, with regard to the Programme on national resources, which is page 77, just for my own perusal, we support the relative importance to be given also in the Medium Term for a more efficient use of fertilizers as well as recycling of organic waste, and with regard to the fertilizer programme, we welcome the continued efforts to integrate these activities and the general extension activities of the countries concerned as part of their agricultural development.

Under crops, we have a comment on seeds. We feel that more emphasis should be given to promotional activities relating not only to seed utilisation but to the organization of seed production which we sometimes feel got lesser attention than it deserved, and here we would mention forage seeds in particular.

Under livestock I would just like to say that we fully support the intention as referred to in connection with dairy training for this programme of training to become an integrated part of dairy development with more emphasis on the national training institution, and we would like to offer our assistance in the further move toward development in this direction.

On the other hand, referring to the relative priorities given in the Medium-Term Document we question whether also in the Medium-Term it is justified to give such outstanding priority to the control of the African animal disease trypanosomiasis compared to the other activities there.

Under rearch support, I would give our remarks later in relation to the document circulated, but I would like here to say that in connection with the priorities listed in the Medium-Term Document, we feel that more importance should be given to what has been called the research extension linkages and application of research results so that they could move higher up in the list.

Under rural development, I would just like to repeat that we alwavs emphasise the importance of the work of the Organization on agricultural extension, and there is a reference in the document to the Inter-Secretariat Working Group between FAO, ILO and Unesco, and we believe those will get sufficient attention to promote the continued collaboration between the organizations in this important field.

The Conference on Agrarian Reform and Rural Development will be commented on under a separate item of the Agenda, so I would just like to say briefly that we support the priority given in the Medium-Term Document to the role of peoples’ organization in this regard.

Then nutrition: my country considers that this area of the Programme deserves more attention in the total of the activities of the Organization. I have two specific comments; one is that we consider that the work of assessment is the most important and should get higher priority, and the second one is related to the World Food Programme feeding projects where the collaboration of nutritionally adequate programmes seems to us to be something deserving attention, and this we uould like to see also reflected in the Medium-Term Document where you have the relative priorities for this Programme and where the item I refer to about the World Food Programme has received a rather low priority.

This ends my comments on the agricultural chapter, and if I could be permitted just to make one quick remark relating to Chapter 5, Support Services, it deals with information and documentation, documentation systems, what is called AGRIS. We would like just to say that we find the development around thesaurus AGROVOC very valuable, but on the other hand, we question the desirability of setting up a pilot project to include extension materials under this service. We feel that this would lead to an undesirable dilution of the coverage system, and we consider that the documentation under document called Agrindex or however you pronounce it is perhaps not necessary but could be replaced quite adequately by the availability of what is called the microfiching, but I do not want to go into details here, I just want to say that we would like to contact the person concerned in the Organization about this.

I have come to the end of my statement, and I thank you for your patience. I would have to say that the Danish position on the budget level will be indicated at a later stage.

M.A.M. IBRAHIM (Sudan): (original language Arabic): My delegation supports the Programme of Work and Budget for the 1982-83 biennium as presented by the Director-General. We believe that the level of the budget proposed by the Director-General for the two coming years is a very low one if we wish to have the Organization cope with the situation all countires have to face. In developing countries we need aid and technical assistance. We also require other forms of assistance so as to be able to guarantee development in our countries, and we feel that the Organization has a very important role to play by means of the various projects it implements, and it should have the necessary resources to do so.

The Head of our delegation at the Plenary stated that the Programmes implemented are of great interest to those developing countries that have an urgent need for foreign aid, considering the economic situation in the world, we cannot ask for an increase in the budget, but at least this budget should not be reduced. We feel that it is our right to say so, and some Heads of delegations have spoken of the Regional Offices, they have asked for cuts in the budget of these regional offices. This was discussed a number of times, and we reached an agreement in 1977 on the activitiy of these Regional Offices. I do not think anything new happened since then to start this discussion again.

As regards representation in individual countries, it is definitely very useful. At least this what we in Sudan believe. The FAO Representative in our country has helped us receive technical assistance and there are now closer ties between the Ministry of Agriculture of Sudan and the various departments of the Organization, and therefore we feel that Country Representatives play a very important role. Of course, these Country offices should be first requested by the Member country itself.

With reference to the allocation of the financial resources required for this project, we agree with the priority that has been given to agriculture. We also endorse the special programmes, such as the Desert Locust Control Programme, the Trypanosomiasis Programme, and we also endorse all those schemes and projects for forestry development. We believe that these special programmes should be pursued and should have all the necessary resources.

We wish to go along with other speakers in saying that we are against zero growth for the budget of our Organization. We cannot accept this principle in this general statement. I shall just confine myself to these brief remarks and I am sure that my points may be of some use in your discussion.

A. AZEEZ (Maldives): The Maldives associate themselves with the good wishes expressed to our officers here. I also thank you for giving me the occasion to present the views of Maldives on the Programme of Work and Budget presented before us at this Commission by the Director-General.

In so doing I wish to thank first of all the Chairman of the Programme and Finance. Committee for their detailed reports to us on this very important subject. Their reports are realistic and respond to the problems of food and agriculture as perceived by Member Governments.

My country therefore fully supports the Programme of Work and Budget proposed by the Director-General. Given the seriousness of the problems, this is the barest minimum with which we can get by.

We also note that once again in the name of efficiency and cost cutting there are calls for the review of the work of the regional offices. Everyone is for efficiency, but in all humility may I suggest that perhaps those best qualified to comment on this proposal are the recipients of these services.

In the case of the Maldives, a sealock country, I wish to put on record our sincerest appreciation for the prompt, effective and useful work done by the regional offices in Bangkok and providing us with useful services. The very proximity of the offices to us makes these services cost-effective. Furthermore, we have also benefited from the Technical Cooperation Programme in terms of its quick response to our short-term needs.

On the budget level, we recall our Conference has repeatedly reaffirmed the principle of full budgeting to cover the total cost of the Programme of Work and Budget. Given the currency rate of inflation and the currency cost-effectiveness, it is obvious that the budget prsented to us in the document will be seriously eroded.

My delegation asks the Commission to fully support the Programme of Work and Budget as proposed. We think it should be levelled at the rates prevailing at the present time.

I. MOSKOVITS (Malta): First of all, I would like to congratulate you, Mr. Chairman and the Vice-Chairmen, for this very important function which was entrusted to you. I am sure under your guidance this Commission will do really valuable work.

May I remind you, Mr. Chairman and this Assembly, that in the first period of the life of FAO we had annual conferences, and the conferences were preceded by technical panels. At that time, of course, a certain rigidity of the programme work was a possibility, but it was not a very great difficulty to overcome this drawback.

The situation now is completely different, and what is needed for the Programme of Work and Budget is a certain flexibility. This flexibility is ensured in the present Programme of Work and Budget through the inclusion of the Technical Cooperation Programme, the Special Action Programmes, and decentralization - three aspects which I would like to single out as extremely important to the life of the Organization.

They are in themselves not enough, as our colleague from Nigeria pointed out a few minutes ago. We elected the Director-General unanimously, and we should give him a free hand in managing the programmes. There will certainly be some shifts in the programmes during the biannual period, and this will be done, and must be done, of course, by the Director-General who can always consult the Council and the Council Committees on financial matters and on programmes.

If I am speaking about flexibility as a very important item, it already included my remarks concerning the budget. The zero growth is an impossibility for an organization dealing with agriculture matters. The changes are extremely rapid, both in the economic field and also in the technical field, and we must give very important consideration to these two aspects.

I do not wish to go into the details of the various programmes, Mr. Chairman. If you give me the right, I will come back later when we are discussing the individual chapters, but I would like nonetheless to point out now that FAO needs flexibility, and this Programme of Work as it is presented to us should be regarded as a whole. It is like a mosaic composed of small and larger stones.

It is not possible now for the coming two years to change very much on this composite issue, and I must congratulate the Director-General and his very able staff for presenting to us a whole which I think is satisfactory to all countries. We should not forget that in the membership of FAO it is always growing, and to satisfy other countries and to give a certain service to each of them it is necessary to have the flexibility which I have just described.

This is what I would like to say in general. There are some items on which we would have liked some changes and shifts. For instance, we consider the increase of the Technical Cooperation Programme much too small, and we would like to have had a much larger increase, but we accept the explanation of the Director-General when he said that he did not wish to give more for the Technical Cooperation Programme, although this programme proves of very, very great utility to the Organization just now with complicated changes of the importance in the situation. The TCP can finance FAO programmes, but we accept the level now as indicated by the Director-General, commenting, however, that this chapter is relatively small.

A.R. SIAFFA (Sierra Leone): The Sierra Leone delegation wishes to assocciate itself with the congratulatory sentiments expressed in the Committee on your election to conduct the affairs of the Commission. My delegation attaches very great importance to the subjects of our discussion.

We are heartened to observe that provision has been made in the Director-General’s Programme of Work and Budget for 1982-83 to support research aimed at increasing food production. This item is expected to benefit many of our developing countries in both the crop and livestock sectors.

We note with satisfaction that the crop programme is specially geared to increasing agricultural production in order to meet food needs. We particularly wish to endorse the plan of action under the following sub-programmes: - genetic resources, crop protection, agricultural engineering, prevention of food losses and food and agricultural industries.

On rural development, in some of our countries there is a serious communication gap on the transfer of technology from research stations to the fields used by farmers, who sometimes can neither read nor write. In order to be successful the world food development programmes need the participation of the people who are expected to benefit from them.

In the plan of action for rural development programmes we support the emphasis placed on the sub-programmes of development support communication; agricultural education, extension and training; home economics and social programmes; marketing and credit. My delegation wishes to emphasize the fact that development support communication is particularly relevant and important to most developing countries because it is especially capable of participating in education, training, and extension activities.

Technical Cooperation Programmes (TCP) are welcome because they play a vital role in rescuing unexpected situations, which left unattended, might lead to instability.

In conclusion we strongly support the Programme of Work and Budget for 1982-83 and the medium-term objectives which were so ably introduced yesterday by the Director-General.

I must hasten to add that we support the level of the budget as proposed by the document under review.

Finally, we do not subscribe to the idea or concept of zero growth in respect of FAO activities. We believe that the need to increase or intensify the activities of this Organization - particularly in the area of food production or food security programmes - is greater today than ever before. It can hardly be otherwise, in view of the repeated warnings from responsible bodies such as FAO about the dangers ahead if greater urgent efforts were not exerted to improve the fast deteriorating food situation.

H. REDL (Austria) (original language German): First of all I should like to congratulate you, Mr. Chairman, and your two Vice-Chairmen on your election. It is a particular privilege for my delegation and a great pleasure for us that you have been elected Chairman of this very important Commission, and so we would like to wish you and your Vice-Chairmen all the very best of luck.

Basically, on the Programme of Work and Budget for 1982-83, I would like to note that it has been presented in a very clear, lucid fashion according to the priorities, and the possibilities of solution are enumerated. It shows us how we can attain our goals. From the Austrian point of view this is a very good and balanced programme and I would like to give particular thanks to the Secretariat for its presentation.

As our Minister said yesterday at the Plenary Session in his keynote speech, Austria can agree to the Programme of Work and Budget for 1982-83: no increase in staff, cuts to be made in certain areas and the deficiencies which are going to be cut by the Director-General, are things which we can support. The fact that 302 posts in Headquarters are going to be cut and that 479 are going to be created in the field seems to be a very balanced approach to the Programme. We trust that the Members will be able to sunport this Programme and that it can be implemented as soon as possible.

These were just a few remarks to the Programme and the Austrian delegation will of course come back in detail when we examine the individual items of the budget.

M. SALAMEH (Syria) (original language Arabic): First of all I would like to congratulate you, Mr. Chairman, on your election as Chairman of this Commission. I would also like to extend our congratulations to the two Vice-Chairmen. I wish to congratulate the Director-General on his unanimous election as Director-General of the Organization. I also wish to congratulate him for this document which we are studying at the moment. This is a very concise document and very clear indeed. We all know the vast knowledge of the Director-General in the activities of this Organization and his long experience, without leaving aside the fact that he has been in the driving seat for six years. We believe that our support for this Programme should be expressed in the same way that we supported the re-election of the Director-General.

We would also like to say here and now that we do appreciate the Council’s work, and that of the Finance Committee as well as that of the committees on agriculture; they all helped to prepare this Programme of Work and Budget and adopted it. You all realize that this Programme took into account a number of studies, a number of Conferences such as the World Conference on Agrarian Reform and Rural Development, and the Lagos plan of action, and the Third Decade for Development. This also takes into account the technical and economic co-operation between developing countries.

We do support this budget. We think that as regards food in the world at the moment the situation is deteriorating. The objectives that have been agreed upon by the WFP and the World Food Security Strategy have not been reached. We have not yet achieved a reasonable level of prices that were requested for fertilizers. The prices of imported goods are not at the level recommended by developing countries, as has already been said by some delegations, in particular Kenya.

The present budget level is needed because this Organization’s activities are very important so that we can bridge the gaps between rich and poor countries. This will help the Organization to carry out its tasks which are becoming more and more complex.

My delegation supports the activities of this Organization; this attitude can be explained by one will, to improve the world situation, both socially and morally. It must be possible for the Organization to overcome difficulties, particularly those faced by the developing countries. History has taught us

many lessons. Certain countries have insufficient food and these countries were in the past very rich in food production. Nowadays, some of the developing countries could produce more food if they were given the necessary resources.

My delegation believes that this budget increase is modest and we do support it, and we are against zero growth, for the following reasons. We think food problems affect all countries of the world and that we have to face up to the challenge represented by the deficit in food production and the increase of population and natural catastrophes. Moreover, we must be able to solve other difficulties as well but this cannot be done without the support of this Organization. That is why we support the budget increase. We also support decentralization through increasing Regional Offices and Country Representatives, for the following reasons. We think decentralization has proved its worth in a number of areas. It is also getting more and more important and more pressing if we look at present trends.

We also believe that decentralization would allow the Organization to reduce red-tape. We have to take account of all these facts. Decentralization would mean that the relationship between developing countries and the Organization would be closer.

As regards nutrition, we think the Organization has a more deep role to play. An effort should be made because after all this Organization is called “Food” and Agriculture Organization. Activities should be extended particularly in those areas which fall within the Organization’s jurisdiction, i.e. Nutrition. Even this is done by other specialized organizations such as WHO, Unicef. We therefore support this role of the Organization as regards food and nutrition and we believe that the Nutrition Division of this Organization should be raised to the level of Department.

As regards medium-term objectives, we think that what is given here is adequate, but that there has to be a greater increase, particularly in the following areas to which we attach great importance: (a) remote sensing, this is given in paragraph 35; (b) the early warning systems in paragraph 46; (c) CARIS System in paragraph 59; (d) environmental pollution control, paragraph 143; (e) the implementation of the international strategy for cooperation between Unesco, UNICEF and FAO, paragraph 138; (f) updating statistical information for developing countries, support for agricultural research in the developing countries to give researchers and policy makers more confidence, paragraph 57; (g) giving priority to the monitoring of food imports by developed countries. The necessary experts need to be found to do this work; (h) setting up national, regional and international systems for food security; this is in paragraphs 90 and 91.

D. DYER (Jamaica): On behalf of the Jamaican delegation may I add our congratulations to you, Mr. Chairman, and to your Vice-Chairmen on being elected to your respective positions. We know, Sir, that under your inspired leadership, things will proceed smoothly and with the utmost expedition.

May I, by way of a general comment - and that is all it is, at this stage - say that the Jamaican delegation supports and endorses the developmental strategies and priorities which have been so eloquently articulated and spelt out in the Director-General’s introduction to the Programme of Work and Budget for the 1982-83 biennium and also the document on the Medium Term Objectives. We believe that the documents faithfully reflect the genuine and felt needs of the majority of the member countries of this Organization. We believe that they address the fundamental and basic issues and we believe that they focus on the realities of agriculture in the decade of the 1980s. May I take the opportunity to congratulate the Director-General and his staff and, without being invidious, the Assistant Director-General in the Office of Programme, Budget and Evaluation, Mr. West and his staff for the excellent contents and presentation of the budget.

We support the level of expenditure proposed. As we move into a more detailed discussion of the budget there may be room for minor adjustments here and there within the Programme of Work and Budget but even at this stage we would like to make an impassioned and emphatic appeal for retaining the integrity of the Technical and Economic Programme, of the Development Support Programme and particularly the Technical Co-operation Programmes.

WANG SHOU RU (China) (original language Chinese): In his introduction to the Programme of Work and Budget for 1982-83, the Director-General, basing himself on the world economic development, has made a clear, concise and logical analysis of the main objectives and work of the Organization. The Chinese delegation is in agreement with these basic views and would like to express our appreciation. In our view the major objectives of the Organization for the next biennium should continue to be the changing of the Third International Economic Order as referred to in Document C 81/3, as well as the promotion of food production in developing countries.

The minimum global programme for food and agriculture as set out in paragraph 27 of the same document can be realized through efforts on the basis of current international negotiation. In this connection we would like to stress one more point, that is the question of raising, in a more effective way, the level of agricultural production, technology, and scientific research work in the developing countries.

As we all recognize, to increase food production the developing countries rely mainly on the appropriate policies by their own governments and by the mobilization of their farmers’ initiative in production. The World Conference on Agrarian Reform and Rural Development has already made some relevant proposals in its declaration and programme of action. In the meantime, FAO in recent years has effectively organized some financial assistance and investment activities in agriculture. All these are obviously of vital importance. Furthermore, we also consider the raising of the developing countries’ level in agricultural technology to be an important factor. By intensifying the training of technical personnel in developing countries through various means and by strengthening their national agricultural research aiming at disseminating appropriate agricultural technologies to farmers according to the specific conditions of their own countries and regions, in so doing the utilization of national resources and funds and the objective of increasing production can be realized. Therefore we strongly support FAO in its work in this field in the future.

As regards the budget of the Organization for the next biennium we feel that in the context of the current world food and agricultural situation support should be given to increasing those activities that are truly necessary in this Organization with a corresponding increase in the budget so as to promote food and agricultural production in developing countries. Therefore, in spite of the fact that China is now in a period of readjustment and therefore tight financially, my Government decides to endorse the budget level proposed by the Director-General. At the same time we hope that the Organization will, as always, continue to practice economy in its administrative costs, improve and coordinate the work of the internal units and improve efficiency. We also hope the Organization will give full play to its special technical competence, avoid duplication in the work of the various international agencies and have a better division of labour and cooperation among agencies so as to make a greater contribution towards the promotion of the development of the food and agricultural production in all member countries.

The activities of the various regional offices carried out in harmony with the regional characteristics are of great help in promoting the exchange of experience and cooperation among the countries of the region. We hope that the work of these offices will continue to be reinforced.

As for the specific details of the Programme of Work we will reserve our right to express our opinion later on.

A. KADIRI (Maroc): Tout d’abord la délégation du Maroc vous exprime, Monsieur le Président, ses félicitations pour votre élection. Elle les exprime également à Messieurs les vice-présidents.

La délégation du Maroc a déjà fait connaître, lors de la soixante-dix-neuvième session du Conseil de la FAO, son point de vue sur le Programme de travail et de budget pour le biennium 1982-83, ainsi que sur le point de vue de certaines délégations sur l’objectif éventuel d’un développement à croissance zéro.

Je ne puis ici que confirmer le soutien total de ma délégation aux objectifs à moyen terme, aux priorités et au plan d’action qui se dégagent de ce budget, qui représente à nos yeux un minimum minimorum par rapport aux besoins immenses de l’agriculture et de l’alimentation dans le monde.

Nul n’ignore la situation précaire de dizaines de millions d’êtres humains, et les études prospectives pour l’agriculture “Horizon 2000” nous montrent l’immensité des problèmes de la FAO reconnue comme source d’aide multilatérale, de coopération technique et comme agent efficace d’exécution pour des projets de développement. Elle sera appelée à jouer un rôle déterminant dans la mise en oeuvre de la stratégie du développement pour la troisième décennie pour la partie intéressant l’agriculture en particulier, cette stratégie au sujet de laquelle il existe d’ores et déjà un accord général concernant certains de ses points fondamentaux, comme la production alimentaire, la sécurité alimentaire et l’aide alimentaire.

Dans ce contexte, la FAO, et à travers elle l’agriculture et l’alimentation, mérite de recevoir une aide financière soutenue. Les discussions autour du budget de la FAO, quxquelles nous avons assisté lors de la tenue de la soixante-dix-neuvième session du Conseil et auxquelles nous avons assisté au cours de cette présente session, nous laissent rêveurs. Car comment pourrions-nous être d’accord sur la gravité de la situation alimentaire mondiale, sur les dangers que cette situation fait courir à l’humanité toute entière, et en même temps lésiner sur les moyens financiers à fournir à la FAO pour lui permettre d’aider à la solution des problèmes de la faim dans le monde avec plus d’efficacité?

L’analyse du document C 81/3 montre les efforts déployés en vue de répondre aux préoccupations des uns et des autres: -la compression des charges d’administration. Le Directeur Général vous a expliqué l’augmentation des fonetionnaires des terrains par rapport à ceux du Siège. - Le choix opéré pour dégager les priorités essentielles malgré l’ampleur des tâches à accomplir. - La prise en considération de la situation économique et financière de tous les Etats Membres.

Tout cela montre les efforts déployés qui sont le témoin du soin méticuleux avec lequel ce document a été préparé.

S’il est vrai que les pays riches fournissent la plus grande partie des crédits budgétaires, il n’en reste pas moins vrai, comme l’a souligné le Directeur Général et certaines délégations, que les contributions versées par les pays pauvres représentent pour eux une charge proportionnellement aussi lourde, sinon plus, que pour les pays riches.

La délégation du Maroc se réserve de préciser ultérieurement sa position sur les différents chapitres du budget présenté.

MAI LUONG (Viet Nam): Permettez à notre délégation de presenter ses sincères félicitations au Président et aux deux vice-Président spour cette importante présidence et pour les résultats positifs de notre Commission II.

Dans le cadre d’une déclaration générale, sans entrer dans le détail, sur le document C 81/3 présenté à notre Commission et la présentation faite par le Directeur Général lui-même hier ici, notre délégation renouvelle son appui au niveau du budget proposé pour l’accomplissement du Programme de travail de la FAO durant le biennium 1982-83.

Nous avons apprécié jusqu’ici l’aide positive de l’Organisation des Nations Unies pour l’alimentation et l’agriculture, la qualité des services assurés aux gouvernements des Etats Membres, le souci d’économie et d’efficacité dont elle a fait preuve dans l’exécution de ses activités.

La confiance que les pays du monde ont donnée à Monsieur Saouma, dirigeant cette importante organisation des Nations Unies, pour sa réélection à presque 100 pour cent des voix, est une des preuves de l’efficacité de l’Organisation, du résultat positif de ses activités, de la popularité grandissante parmi les pays en développement et les pays développés.

L’examen détaillé du Programme de travail et du niveau modeste du budget 1982-83 a montré qu’on a déjà tenu compte des difficultés économiques mondiales actuelles de tous les Etats Membres, développés ou en développement -mais surtout ces derniers-, qu’on a le souci d’une politique d’austérité dans l’Organisation: réduction du nombre de postes au Siège, des réunions, de la documentation, souci de la décentralisation.

Cet examen a montré aussi que les priorités sont choisies sur une base très sélective, efficace et économique et que l’on a concentré le Programme sur des activités indispensables, conformes aux quatre rôles fondamentaux de la FAO: formulation et discussion des strategies et politiques, rassemblement des données, aide consultative et de coopération technique, agents d’exécution pour les projets de développement financés par d’autres sources et par le Programme ordinaire lui-même.

C’est un programme et un budget modestes et minimums pour une organisation qui doit faire face à une demande grandissante des pays membres et devant la campagne actuelle lancée contre la faim dans le monde. La croissance zéro du budget risquerait de limiter l’activité positive de l’Organisation au profit des pays en développement.

Nous terminons notre brève intervention en vous renouvelant notre appui pour le Programme et budget 1982-83 et ce qui a été dit d’ailleurs par notre délégation à la soixante-dix-neuvième et quatre-ving-tième session du Conseil.

Vous nous permettrez Monsieur le Président de reprendre la parole plus tard sur le sujet qui nous concerne.

P. OLMOS MORALES (Uruguay): En primer lugar, mi delegación desea expresar su calurosa felicitación por vuestra elección que hago extensiva a los Sres. Vicepresidentes. En nuestra primera intervención general en este Comité, nos vamos a referir fundamentalmente a lo establecido en el documento C-81/3 y, en particular, a la presentación del Sr. Director General que nos fuera ampliada en la tarde de ayer, al inaugurar los trabajos de este Comité.

Nuestra delegación comparte los fundamentos de la estrategia de desarrollo y prioridades establecidas en el documento. Consideramos que la producción de alimentos constituye el objetivo básico de esta estrategia y constituye una respuesta a las necesidades del mundo, que fueron generalizadas a través de la celebración del Día Mundial de la Alimentación, el 16 de octubre próximo pasado. En ese sentido, reafirmamos, como país en desarrollo y exportador de alimentos, nuestra vocación a contribuir a atenuar la incidencia de este flagelo universal.

No obstante también estimamos oportuno señalar, compartiendo lo expresado por el Director General en los párrafos 18 y 19 de la Introducción del Programa de Labores y Presupuesto, que la producción debe estar acompañada también en los aspectos que se refieren al comercio internacional de producciones agrícolas, y en particular de alimentos.

Vemos con inquietud que pese a todas las Conferencias, a todos los encuentros en los cuales se ban condenado las prácticas de proteccionismo, de barreras arancelarias y no arancelarias y de otras formas que inciden en la colocación de productos agrícolas y, en especial, de productos alimenticios de países del tercer mundo, aún no se ban logrado avances positivos. En ese sentido, exbortamos nuevamente a que los efectos del proteccionismo sean debidamente analizados, como se menciona en el propio documento, a nivel de Comité de Problemas de Productos Básicos debe merecer especial atención.

En líneas generales, nuestro país comparte los lineamientos propuestos por el Sr. Director General en lo que tiene que ver con el Programa de Labores y Presupuesto para el bienio 1982-83. Interesa señalar algunos rasgos que se ban introducido y que merecen un énfasis especial en lo que tiene que ver con el Programa de Cooperación Técnica. Consideramos que es un instrumento muy valioso y que debe ser incrementado para la ayuda y la asistencia técnica en los países en desarrollo.

La experiencia de mi país, en los últimos años, ha sido sumamente positiva en este campo, destacándose las actividades que se ban logrado aun en casos de emergencias o de situaciones excepcionales, como fue la amenaza de peste porcina africana en nuestro país en los últimos años, y el apoyo y la colaboración brindadas por la FAO a través del Programa de Cooperación Técnica.

También nos merece especial atención la incorporación dentro de las actividades, de los programas de cooperación técnica y de cooperación económica entre países en desarrollo. Constituye, a nivel de nuestra Organización, un apoyo efectivo al Plan de Acción de la Conferencia de Buenos Aires de 1978. En ese sentido abre oportunidades y nuevas dimensiones a la cooperación técnica y económica entre países en desarrollo que, efectivamente, redundará en beneficio para su posterior evolución y ampliación de esta cooperación.

También deseamos referirnos a la política que se ha seguido por parte del Director General en cuanto a la descentralización de los servicios de la FAO. La experiencia recogida en los últimos tres años en mi país, por la integración de un representante de FAO, a nivel nacional, ha repercutido efectivamente en una cooperación mas estrecha, en una realización de programas con mayor efectividad y mayor rapidez. En ese aspecto, y si bien las limitaciones y los incrementos de presupuesto deben ser moderados, nuestro país apoya la decisión de una mayor descentralización, de una mayor participación dentro del esquema de organización de la FAO, de los representantes a nivel nacional. Consideramos que ése ha sido uno de los aspectos más importantes en la gestión de nuestro Director General y ha llevado a mi país, justamente, a considerar en ese sentido unos de los aspectos fundamentales de nuestro apoyo.

En lo que concierne a los aspectos presupuestales, mi delegacion considera que dicho aumento resulta moderado, y si bien pueden existir dificultades por algunos países, sobre todo aquéllos que tienen una mayor carga en las contribuciones, el incremento que se plantea no desequilibra, evidentemente, la situación fiscal o presupuestal de ninguno de ellos y, además, desde el punto de vista de lo que pueda ser una política general, la trascendencia del problema de la alimentación y de la agricultura en el mundo, creo que son causas suficientes para que exista una excepción a normas de política general que puedan haberse adoptado. Son respuestas a la cooperación internacional, como bien lo señalaba el Director General en su discurso a la Conferencia. Evidentemente, los aspectos del hambre y de la malnutrición constituyen, en este momento, una de las metas prioritarias por encima de todos aquéllos aspectos políticos o filosóficos que puedan separarnos.

Desde este punto de vista, nuestro país desea expresar públicamente el apoyo al Presupuesto presentado en el documento C 81/3 y ratificar los lineamientos que en aspectos generales se ban planteado. No obstante, nos reservamos el derecho de intervenir en el desarrollo de nuestros trabajos sobre aquéllos aspectos particulares que merezcan el análisis de cada uno de los programas propuestos.

ABUL AHSAN (Bangladesh): Allow me first of all to extend our warmest felicitations to you, Mr. Chairman, and the other members of the bureau on election to this important Commission.

My delegation has listened carefully to the statements that have so far been made by the delegates of the different Member Nations on this item, Programme of Work and Budget 1982-83 and Medium-term Objectives. As all of us are aware, the subject has earlier been discussed at some length in the Governing Bodies of this very Organization.

The deliberations made one point abundantly clear: the Member states unanimously commend and endorse the strategies and priorities set out in the proposal. A few Member states have, however, suggested that efforts should be made to cut administrative costs and to improve the efficiency of the Organization. My delegation fully respects these views. We have no doubt that the suggestion has been made with the best of intentions. The Director-General himself is fully committed to such a course, as is evident from his efforts, which have already resulted in a substantial reduction in Regular Programme established posts.

We have also noticed that during 1982-83 the proportion of the Budget earmarked for administration will go down to 9.1 percent and common services to 3.9 percent. The total expenditure on administration and common services as a proportion of total funds is only 6.5 percent, among the lowest in similar organizations. This in our view is indeed a commendable performance, particularly at a time when most national governments and international agencies have experienced rapid escalation in such expenditures. It also merits a special mention that apart from providing direct technical cooperation assistance, the Regular Programme generates and supports a field programme which currently runs at about $3 billion per annum.

The valuable and universally acclaimed contribution of the Technical Cooperation Programme and the field centres in providing prompt and effective assistance to the developing countries are but two other examples of the use of the Regular Budget funds. Furthermore, the FAO regional and representative offices in our view serve as a vital step towards decentralization and are an important instrument geared to develop national and regional capabilities.

Lastly, the point has also been made that currently the donor countries are passing through a difficult economic situation. As a consequence, the level of the proposed Budget is not in accord with the prevailing economic realities. Frankly, it is not easy for my delegation fully to grasp this argument, especially when the proposed real increase in the Budget is very modest. The donor countries, we should like to think, must have grossly underestimated the resiliance of their own economies. My delegation also requests them to consider the matter in the light of their own renewed commitments recently at Cancun and earlier at Ottawa to accord the highest priority to food and agriculture.

Finally, my delegation urges them to appreciate that the relative sacrifice that the proposed increase in the Budget may impose on them is only marginal compared with the benefits that would accrue to the developing nations.

In the light of the above, my delegation joins others that spoke before us in requesting the donor countries who may still have reservations to support the level of the proposed Budget and thereby demonstrate their renewed commitments further to strengthen FAO, the lead Organization in the United Nations System in the field of food and agriculture.

V.E. DLAMINI (Swaziland): On behalf of the Swaziland delegation, I also wish to join my colleagues in congratulating you, Mr. Chairman, on your election to the chairmanship of this Commission. I also wish to extend my congratulations to the two Vice-Chairmen on their appointments. I do trust that you will execute your duties accordingly.

Allow me to comment on some of the Director-General’s introductory remarks. Indeed, throughout his comments, he demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt a high skill of eloquence and clarity and has also shown a great wealth of experience on global problems, more especially on the world food situation.

Hungry people are an angry community. I therefore wish to reciprocate our appreciation on the section dealing with food security. Swaziland is at present implementing a project on grain silos. History has taught us, especially those of us from the continent of Africa, that food production and security is of highest priority in our developing nation. The importance of food reserves cannot be overemphasised. The need for research should not be overlooked. Research linked with adequate extension is one of the vehicles that convey agricultural development.

Trade and reasonable terms of trade facilitate the transformation of rural societies from subsistence to semi-and commercial farming.

Flawed international economic order has put the international community in disarray. Therefore, a new international economic order is a necessity.

Coming to the Programme of Work and Budget, FAO activities are well recognized. Swaziland does realise that quite a great deal of skill, time and labour have gone into the preparation of this document, and some economy has been exercised. As a result of this, we wish to express our appreciation of this document, and it is on this basis that we take into account this budget level.

I do hope that I may have some other points to raise as we continue with our deliberations.

A. BERE (Haute Volta): La Haute Volta a demandé la parole pour une brève intervention d’ordre général, mais auparavant, je voudrais vous féliciter, Monsieur le Président, ainsi que les vice-présidents, de votre élection à la tête de cette Commission. Nos félicitations s’adressent également au Directeur général et à son Secrétariat pour l’effort qui a été accompli en vue de soumettre à l’Assemblée des documents clairs.

La Haute Volta se joint aux autres délégations de l’Afrique pour apporter son appui au programme de travail et budget, présenté par le Directeur général, programme qui a déjà reçu la sanction favorable du Conseil. Nous appuyons ce programme car il contient la stratégie clé du plan d’action de Lagos adopté par l’OUA.

Nous appuyons ce programme parce qu’il reflète les orientations contenues dans les discours-programmes des représentants de l’Etat voltaïque présentés le ler mai 1981.

Nous appuyons enfin ce programme parce que la Haute Volta, située au sud du Sahara, est le siège de plusieurs organisations sous-régionales dont les ambitions se résument toutes à l’élévation du niveau de vie de nos populations, à la lutte contre la faim, la misère, la malnutrition, à la recherche permanente de l’autosuffisance alimentaire des populations.

Qu’il nous soit néanmoins permis d’insister particulièrement sur certains points qui, dans notre pays, demeurent des priorités et qui méritent, de la part de la FAO, une attention plus particulière.

Il s’agit, dans le domaine du développement rural, du problème de la securité alimentaire, de l’équipement des petits exploitants, de la maîtrise de l’eau, de l’amélioration du rendement des cultures, des actions portant sur la conservation des sols, l’amelioration de l’environnement, l’énergie domestique, le bois de chauffe, les crédits aux paysans, l’organisation du monde rural, la recherche agronomique, l’élevage et la production animale, et plus particulièrement la lutte contre la peste bovine, la trypanosomiase et les actions portant sur l’amélioration des pâturages, l’alimentation animale, l’amélioration de l’exploitation du cheptel.

En dépit de la coherence et du réalisme de ce programme, nous éprouvons cependant une certaine inquiétude quant à sa réalisation, vu la modestie du budget propose pour son exécution.

C’est pourquoi, tout en appuyant ce programme et encourageant le Directeur général, nous regrettons l’insuffisance de ce budget face au programme qui lui est soumis.

Telles sont les remarques d’ordre général que nous voulions formuler sur ce programme de travail et budget.

A. RACHMAN (Indonesia): Allow me first of all to join the previous speakers in expressing our satisfaction in seeing you presiding over our deliberations in the Commission II meeting of the Twenty-first FAO Conference. I would also use this opportunity to congratulate you, Sir, and our Vice-Chairmen for the unanimous support obtained from the Conference.

My delegation has already had an opportunity to examine Document C 81/3 which we have under discussion now, and we found it to be of great interest, while we are satisfied with its method of presentation and analysis.

During the last Council meeting, the Indonesian delegation conveyed its support for the Programme of Work and the level of the Budget as submitted by the Director-General. Given the seriousness of the problem at hand, the modest increase proposed may only barely cover the needs. This position is consistent with my country’s observation with regard to the food outlook during the coming biennium. Therefore we would like to reiterate our support here.

In assessing the world food situation, a review of the adequate production and food stocks are important factors, and it is necessary to obtain an objective and balanced view of the overall situation. The discouraging progress of world food production, the downward trend of the world carry-over stocks are very important indicators. In this connexion, my delegation wishes to underline the assessment made by the Director-General that early action is needed to implement a minimum global food programme for the rest of the decade in order to ensure sound actions commensurate with the objectives of the International Development Strategy.

Turning to some of the specific items mentioned in the Document, my delegation realizes that there is still room for improvement. For example, the Technical Cooperation Programme which was designed to respond quickly to emergency situations or provide bridging activities, those projects are limited in time span to one year and have a cost ceiling of $250 000. My delegation holds the view that TCP projects meet with needs of developing nations, since in addition to the above-mentioned functions, it also provides an opportunity to maximize the utilization of available small resources with the emphasis on reaching the poorest among the poor.

But even then, it is occasionally observed that administrative routine procedures of TCP applications still need to be improved, since every single project has to be referred to FAO Headquarters for approval, no matter how small the project is. In order to speed up the implementation of TCP projects, which were in the first place designed for quick action, my delegation would like to suggest that FAO should consider entrusting the decision-making for approval of TCP’s to the FAO Country Representative with a commitment project cost limit up to $50,000. Decisions taken on the spot are essential features of timing and effectiveness.

In relation to the decentralization aspects of FAO activities, my delegation believes that the existence of and efforts carried out by FAO Regional Offices are desirable because they are nearer to reach and very accessible to Member Nations. On top of that, these Offices provide effective service at a lower cost rate.

Therefore, we support the decentralization policy of FAO, including the expansion of the number of Country Representative Offices because it responds to the needs and aspirations of Member Nations with total understanding and comprehension.

J.L.F. BUIST (United Kingdom): Others have congratulated you and your colleagues on your election. I do so too, but I add my commiserations for all the extra work this causes you.

Unlike my Danish colleague I will speak entirely on the budget issue. We shall take up separately in due course important questions of priority and substance in each sector of action.

I have noted in this discussion a pleasing range of agreement on certain points. We concur in most of these. We believe that the problem of hunger and the development of renewable natural resources is the main issue which confronts our conscience after peace and war. We believe that while short-term prospects have improved, the balance is still perilous. We see much progress made, but far greater challenges ahead. We are particularly worried about the prospects in Africa. We applaud the role FAO has so far played in helping the world to exercise the fearful spectre of famine, and we accept FAO’s special central role in the UN system on food and agriculture issues. But where we part company from many of the previous speakers is this. They believe acceptance of this draft budget is an essential step. I quote what seems to be a rather peculiar litany: i.e. “the barest minimum to maintain and increase the past momentum of agricultural advance.” We do not share that view.

They also, on the whole, endorse the budget in the apparent belief it contains no necessary fat, and that it fully reflects the agreed priorities and strategies of Member states. We believe the budget is not itself flawless and immaculate in every detail. Nor would it be so even if it were accepted as it stands. It does certainly, on the whole, reflect agreed priorities, but there are also, equally certainly, points on which it does not.

I will now argue these points in a little more detail.

First, 1 must make it plain that for Britain every pound that we have to pay towards the regular programme comes from our overseas aid programme. That reflects the great and happy bias in the Organization’s history towards solving the problems of the developing world. But it also means that every pound going to FAO means a pound off our ability to contribute to other important multilateral channels or bilateral aid projects.

Those who have here urged us to accept the budget as it stands must accept in their turn, and pledge their governments to accept, that the extra cost to us may have to be found in the rejection, the reduction, or the postponement of the help we want to give to their own countries for schemes which they desperately want us to support. Many of these schemes are directly for agricultural and food production support. I shall be happy to discuss bilaterally in the corridors with any delegate, who feels particularly strongly that the budget should be accepted as it stands, how we might accommodate the consequences by adjusting our bilateral programme to his own country accordingly. Alternatively, if there are no volunteers, it may be less painful and less unfair simply to reduce further our contribution to other multilateral agencies like the World Food Programme. If that has to happen, it will be no use other delegates here wailing and beating their breasts. They will have forced these consequences upon us, and they should face up them squarely now.

Our guiding concern is to get real operational value for our aid. From this point of view the size of the real increase in the FAO’s budget and its distribution between regions and between operational and back-up spending are both of critical importance. The Director-General rightly drew attention to the fact that a lower apparent cost in dollars does not relieve the extra burdens of those, like Britain, who have to find an assessed contribution in another currency.

As is well known, we believe the calculation of basis for the real increases in this draft ought to be the cost of the budget at the 1980-81 price, and this yields a real increase of some 8 percent. The staff take another basis yielding a real increase of about 6 percent, but either way the total cash increase at 1175 lire to the dollar is about 32 percent. A call for restraint, as other agencies and parts of the UN systems are accepting, does not have to be based merely on a philosophical prejudice; it is a simple counsel of practical common sense.

Then, does the draft budget actually represent the best possible deal we could get for the money? There are some areas in which we feel it falls short of what could be done. I heard some speakers, among them the Yugoslavian delegate, yesterday point to some of these weaknesses. I entirely agree with what he said about meetings. Let me, too, give four or five examples.

First, does the draft budget give a special priority to Africa and other worst affected areas? I am afraid their difficulties are not properly reflected in the distribution of activities proposed. Table B on page 199 shows that of the $368 million we are asked to approve, $143 million are for global activities. Dividing the rest, we find that Africa has only 35 percent of the whole, and Asia and the Pacific where the vast bulk of the poor and malnourished people live has only 25 percent. Forty percent or more goes to the three remaining wealthier regions. That simply cannot be right, as I think the Korean delegate said. It contrasts starkly for instance with the distribution of the UNDP and virtually all multilateral soft funds supported by the taxpayer in rich and poor countries alike. On this test alone, money spent by us on FAO is a far worse bargain for the poorer countries.

Second, does the draft budget give us the greatest possible administrative efficiency? Once again there are doubts. For instance, in major programme 2, Agriculture, we see that the overall percentage rise in the programme is between 8 percent and 9 percent, but the cost of management of the same programmes goes up by 13.7 percent at Headquarters and over 22 percent if we include both the Headquarters and the regional offices.

Third, the distribution of spending between the regional offices is skewed even more unfavourably than the overall figures I quoted earlier. I have the figures, but to save time I will not quote them. More generally, we wonder if those delegates who have specifically supported these offices have thought properly about the effects of extending field representation. We think regional offices should be strictly confined to what can and must be best done on a regional basis, for example, in fisheries. We are not’ content with the Director-General’s wish to push this question off into the cloudy future.

Fourth, I am shocked - there is no other word for it - to see from Table C on page 26 the extent to which FAO is now providing support for investment and technical cooperation by other organizations from its own resources. If FAO can do the job effectively in fair competition in the market place with

private consultants and others, it should be paid the rate for the job. In this context, I welcome the new arrangement with the Asian Development Bank which I heard about last week when I was in Manila. I must also say that we think the UNDP 13 percent is a perfectly adequate figure on which to operate. For example, it is much more than the 10 percent which the Asian Bank, a highly efficient institution, charges the European Community in similar circumstances. We do not, therefore, accept the Director-General’s suggestion that the Regular Programme must find extra.

Finally, amongst my examples, I mention the rising cost of publications, and the common services, travel and consultancies. Publications should be more market-oriented and charges made according to the sales or subscription value of many. We also note at this point the concern of the Sri Lankan delegation about the cost of these publications. Common services, despite what is said in C 81/INF/20 to which our Bangladesh colleague drew attention, shows the largest percentage increase after the TPC and Field Representatives, of nearly 24 percent.

Column B in Table G on page 41 is based on assumptions which are not apparent to us, and so for the moment at least must remain questionable.

I risk overrunning my time; I am not entering the detailed debate now. We must come back to these points and many more over the next few sessions. But these few examples show that there is scope for readjustment and for reductions.

I hope I have also shown that there is behind our stance on the budget sound sense and real sympathy for the cause of effective and faster agricultural aid on the ground to many of the governments represented here. I hope they will all consider very carefully the substance of these points, for as the Director-General said, we must approach them on their merits and not from the pre-determined principle that this draft budget “is the barest minimum” and has to be passed lock, stock and barrel.

Finally, to conclude, when I lived in Africa I learnt a lot from my many friends there, and they have many useful proverbs. One was: “Simba akikutanaye njiani, asimpige kama ng’ombe” - which means, “If you meet a lion on the road, do not make the mistake of treating it like a cow.” That has several layers of meaning here, and I commend all of them to your attention.

A. L. TANIS (Haîti): La délégation d’Haîti profite de l’opportunité qui lui est offerte pour vous presenter ses chaleureuses felicitations à l’occasion de votre élection à la présidence de cette importante Commission. Ces felicitations s’adressent egalement aux vice-présidents de cette Commission.

Tous les responsables des pays se doivent de relever un défi affligeant, celui de la déterioration des conditions écologiques de la planète, de combattre la misère, l’ignorance et la malnutrition, et de fournir de l’alimentation à plus de 800 millions d’individus qui vivent actuellement dans les affres de la misère et de la malnutrition.

Nous pensons que la FAO, qui est l’Organisation des Nations Unies spécialisée dans la lutte contre la misère rurale, a un role essentiel à jouer dans ce combat que nous menons pour que tous les individus vivant sur cette planète puissent manger, non pas à leur faim, mais manger tout court, car le droit à manger constitue un droit fundamental de l’homme.

La délégation haîtienne a eu l’opportunité d’étudier le Programme de travail et budget ainsi que le document intitulé “Objectifs à court terme” qui est soumis à l’attention de cette Commission. L’examen de ce document révèle qu’il constitue une partie d’un plan général combinant la croissance de structure des différents élements de la stratégie globale de développement dans un ensemble bien coordonné, tout en reconnaissant à chaque secteur ses particularités propres de production et de commercialisation.

Nous sommes particulièrement heureux que le document embrasse les différents éléments de l’activité socio-économique du développement, car en agriculture plus que partout ailleurs on ne peut toucher à un élément du secteur sans provoquer des bouleversements dans l’ensemble du programme.

Cet examen nous a permis de constater que le Programme de travail, ainsi que le budget et les objectifs à court terme, tels qu’ils ont été sounds à l’Assemblée, révèlent le soin qui a été porté à leur élaboration par la direction générale ainsi que par le secrétariat. Nous profitons de cette occasion pour les féliciter de la qualité du travail qui est soumis à l’Assemblée.

La délégation haîtienne voudrait formuler quelques remarques en ce qui concerne le contenu de ce document de travail. Pour excellent qu’il soit, il n’en demeure pas moins vrai que nous avons relevé ce que nous pourrions appeler quelques faiblesses sur lesquelles nous voudrions attirer l’attention de cette Assemblée.

D’abord, en ce qui concerne la décentralisation des activités et du terrain, contrairement à l’opinion émise par quelques délégués, nous pensons que pour prudente que soit l’évolution de ce Programme, il demeure un point essentiel dans la stratégie globale des activités de la FAO, car nous demeurons convaincus que ses représentations, et particulierement celle qui existe en Haīti, a grandenent facilité les rapports entre la représentation de la FAO et les diverses agences gouvernementales et internationales engagées dans la bataille du développement agricole d’Haīti.

En ce qui concerne les relations entre le PNUD et la représentation de la FAO, je pense qu’une attention toute particulière devrait etre accordée à ce chapitre, étant donné qu’il y a, pour ainsi dire, un antagonisme entre les programmes proposés par la FAO, qui le plus souvent répondent à des besoins pressants et urgents, et le financement accordé par le PNUD, Je crois que le problème ne dépend pas uniquement de la FAO et du PNUD, mais je pense que les gouvernements nationaux ont également leur rôle à jouer, étant donné qu’en principe ils demeurent les utilisateurs du chiffre indicatif du Programme proposé par le PNUD.

En ce qui concerne l’ensemble du Programme, je pense que si l’on veut arriver vraiment à un développement harmonieux de l’activité rurale, il faut que l’on tienne compte de l’amélioration de l’élément primordial de cette activité, c’est-à-dire l’homme, et plus particulièrement l’homme rural. Je pense que dans cette intervention conjointe de la FAO et des gouvernements nationaux en vue d’améliorer le niveau de vie des populations rurales, une attention particulière devrait être accordée à la promotion de l’homme rural. Cette intervention nécessite une organisation et une technique solides. Mais cet objectif ne saurait être atteint seulement par ces deux moyens. Ceci exige un certain élan du coeur, une certaine vocation à la fraternité universelle, et malgré toutes les déclarations qui ont été faites dans les différentes organisations internationales, et récemment au Sommet de Cancún, rien n’a été vraiment fait pour arriver à une amélioration, c’est-à-dire à une formation de l’homme rural.

En ce qui concerne l’élevage, une attention particulière devrait être accordee à l’amélioration de la zootechnie, et plus particulièrement au dépistage de certaines maladies infectieuses comme la peste porcine africaine qui actuellement menace l’hémisphère américain et qui représente un véritable fléau pour l’élevage porcin de la plupart des pays de cette région.

Le gouvernement haītien est en train de conduire avec efficacité un projet d’eradication de la peste porcine africaine, avec l’appui technique et financier des Etats-Unis d’Amérique, du Canada, du Mexique et de l’Institution de la cooperation agricole. Mais j’attire l’attention sur le fait que ce programme qui était censé être patronné par la FAO a beaucoup traîné en longueur.

En ce qui concerne les activités de la recherche et de la vulgarisation agricole, la recherche constitue un travail d’équipe qui nécessite certainement des techniciens d’un certain calibre en ce qui concerne leur formation economique et technique, et la recherche est égalenent coûteuse. Je pense donc qu’une attention particulierement soutenue et régulière devrait être accordée à la vulgarisation, dans certains pays tropicaux, de certaines recherches qui ont été faites ailleurs dans des conditions similaires, écologiques et économiques. Cette vulgarisation de l’information contribuerait dans une large mesure à alléger le budget de recherche proposé par certains pays.

Quant à la vulgarisation, je pense que son contenu devra être défini parce que dans la plupart des pays on parle de développement en vue d’aider le petit paysan à améliorer ses rendements, mais le problème qui se pose parfois est le suivant: que doit-on vulgariser en l’absence de toute recherche de base et de toute donnée statistique?

En ce qui concerne la nutrition, je pense qu’elle devrait occuper une place beaucoup plus importante dans les objectifs à court terme. Mais le problème qui se pose parfois est qu’il existe un certain dualisme du problème de la nutrition. La nutrition, dans la plupart de ces pays, relève de la compétence du Département de l’agriculture ou de la compétence du Département de la santé publique et de la population. Je pense que c’est un problème que la FAO devrait approfondir avec les gouvernements intéressés.

En ce qui concerne l’utilisation des engrais, on devrait apporter une emphase tout à fait particulière à la relation coût/rendement ainsi qu’aux quantités appropriées d’engrais àutiliser, à une certaine rotation des cultures qui permettrait d’utiliser plus valablement les différents éléments contenus dans les engrais complets.

En ce qui concerne le stockage, là encore on devrait approfondir un peu plus en détail cette question étant donné que meme lorsqu’on arrive à améliorer considérablement les rendements des cultures, il n’en demeure pas moins vrai qu’en l’absence de toute infrastructure de stockage les pertes continuant à être grandes. Le stockage devrait se réaliser non pas au niveau individuel mais plutôt au niveau collectif, dans le cadre des coopératives, des groupements d’élevage ou des groupements agricoles.

Au terme de cet exposé, quoique la délégation haītienne se réserve le privilège d’intervenir dans le débat au moment de la discussion des problèmes dans le détail, je voudrais formuler les remarques suivantes en ce qui concerne le budget tel qu’il a été proposé par le Directeur général.

Un auteur a dit que l’argent constitue le nerf de la guerre. Nous pensons vraiment que les pays en voie de développement sont en guerre permanente contre des ennemis communs qui s’appellent l’ignorance, la malnutrition, la misère et la pauvreté rurale. Si l’on veut vraiment engager une croisade et la mener jusqu’à ce que l’humanité rejoigne les vastes idéaux de paix et de justice qui fermentent dans toutes les couches sociales, qui constituent la fin suprême de l’humanité, il faudrait mettre à la disposition de la direction générale les crédits qui lui permettront de conduire à bien le Programme de travail tel qu’il a été préconisé.

C’est dans cette optique que la délégation haītienne appuie le budget et le programme de travail soumis à cette Assemblée.

O. RAMADAN (Tchad): Pour l’honneur qui vous a été fait en vous confiant la responsabilité de notre Commission, la délégation du Tchad vous présente ses compliments ainsi qu’à vos collaborateurs.

A propos du travail contenu dans le volumineux document présenté par la direction générale, je pense qu’il est le résultat d’un compromis, la direction ayant étudié la réaction des uns et des autres pour établir ce document volumineux. C’est également le résultat de l’intelligence de l’homme qui qu’on le veuille ou non, a ses limites.

La délégation du Tchad donne son agrément à ce travail effectué par la direction générale.

Le Tchad a connu une rebellion armée qui a duré plus de dix ans, et qui a abouti à des guerres civiles en 1979-1980, qui ont eu lieu dans la capitale. A la suite de ces guerres, un plan de reconstruction a été demandé par le gouvernement aux différents services, la Direction de l’élevage et la Direction de l’agriculture qui font partie du Ministère du développement rural. Les points contenus dans le volumineux document de la Direction générale de la FAO reflètent exactement ce que nous avions fait pour le gouvernement tchadien, c’est-à-dire que l’on a mis l’accent sur la santé animale, la production animale, les productions agricoles, sans oublier les stocks de semences pour les paysans.

Le seul point du document de la Direction sur lequel la délégation du Tchad voudrait attirer l’attention de l’Assemblée est la croissance économique zéro.

La délégation du Tchad pense que c’est ignorer totalement la réalité actuelle. C’est aussi, qu’on le veuille ou non, une sorte d’égoîsme.

La délégation du Tchad appuie le Programme de travail et budget 1982-83 sur tous les points.

Monsieur le Président, je ne voudrais pas vous retenir trop longtemps. En espérant pouvoir intervenir dans les discussions ultérieures, la délégation du Tchad vous remercie pour lui avoir donné la parole.

G. IJIGU (Ethiopia): Pressed for time, I am going to be very brief in making my statement with regard to Items 9 and 10 of the Agenda. We shall, however, participate fully as the debate develops in the course of the Commission’s proceedings.

The topics I am going to touch upon fall into three categories. The first concerns our firm overall support for both the Programme of Work and Budget for 1982-83, and the Medium-Term Objectives. The Director-General’s conception of the Work Programme and Budget for the next biennium is eccletic and realistic. In it have been incorporated all the elements that elicit concern with regard to prevailing anomalies that impinge upon both the actual and potential food and agricultural production in the developing countries. The Medium-Term Objectives too constitute an assembly of well-chosen goals.

I feel that the general remarks I have made so far in support of the Director-General’s proposals must be buttressed by some concrete merits that are enshrined in those proposals. One example, among many, is that only a modest increase in the level of the budget for the coming biennium has been asked for rather than a large increase which the prevailing problems could have justified. Another good thing is the proposed policy of pragmatic decentralization. The idea of a graduated, controlled expansion of FAO Representative Offices is, in our opinion, highly desirable. Solving problems on the spot is preferable to operation by remote control in the face of myriad kinks associated with such a control.

The second category of my remarks pertain to what we vehemently oppose. Whereas the apostles of the concept of zero-growth would have liked the Conference to adopt it, and with it their policy of condemning the developing world to a stand-still, we the opponents of that sinister thought appeal to all men and women of goodwill here as well as everywhere else to join forces and arrest the theory of zero-growth in any aspect of FAO’s activities.

The third category of my comments may be termed a humble proposal. Inasmuch as there is no static society, that is, since all nature, and therefore, man and his society, is subject to irreversible change, the low-income, food-deficit countries of today can be producers of surpluses tomorrow. In the lives of nations, two decades or fifty years or more do not constitute a long time. Therefore, my humble suggestion is that, starting here and now, it would be much the wiser for us all to work together for “growth with equity” so that we may all prosper together.

May I repeat, in concluding, that assuming that the debate may get more stimulating, we shall ask for your kind permission for us to intervene should we find it to be useful to do so.

U KHIN MAUNG LATT (Burma): Since 1976 under the dynamic leadership of the Director-General, Dr. Saouma, FAO has pursued with vigourous economy in administration costs and efficiency. Available small resources were used effectively to benefit countries to the maximum extent possible. During 1976 to 1981 regular programme posts both at headquarters and regional offices were reduced by 302 and personnel in field programmes were increased by 449. This is the right step taken by FAO and therefore our delegation would like to support this brilliant policy of decentralization, administrative efficiency and economy.

I would like to mention here the important role played by the regional offices of FAO. These regional offices are nearer to member countries and are easily accessible. They provide cost effective services and assist in developing field programmes in the countries in collaboration with field officers. In our region, Asia and the Pacific, the regional office at Bangkok is an exemplary unit of FAO, providing efficient and cost effective services at short notice to member countries. It is the focal point in the region for FAO activities. The regional offices maintain close contacts with member countries, stimulates and catalyzes field action. By virtue of its central location within the region and composition, outlook, attitudes of the professional team, there is preeminent rapport beween RAPA and the member countries. Moreover, being familiar with the cultural, socio-economic, political and institutional features of the countries, RAPA responds to the needs and aspirations of the countries with total understanding and identification. The regional office complements and supports the skeleton staff at the FAO country offices with technical expertise, which can be drawn upon at much less cost to the FAO than any other alternative.

The regional office provides technical and logistic services in developing field programmes. They assist member countries in identification, formulation, implementation and evaluation of field projects. They provide technical backstopping to ongoing projects. The regional office plays a vital role in meeting emergencies, executing the TCP of FAO and promoting technical help among the developing countries of the region.

Every other United Nations agency had decentralized its activities and established regional offices which are much bigger and staffed by greater numbers than RAPA. The budget on all regional offices together is less than 10 percent of the total FAO budget which is modest when compared with the effectiveness and services provided by them.

Now I would like to switch over to support the establishment of FAO country offices. They are at hand to the country, they are accessible. They facilitate direct contact and easy exchange of information and views. FAO representation in the countries was established: - for the Organization to be at hand and provide quick and direct communication between the Organization and the member country; to respond to their needs and serve them with a sense or urgency; to identify and design the field programmes realistically; to render direct technical cooperation through TCP; to provide technical, logistic supports services and support agricultural development projects.

In conclusion, for the efficient and effective running of FAO, our delegation would like to suggest that FAO regional offices may be strengthened financially as well as in personnel staffing and establish the country offices as much as possible.

R. SCHIFFNER (Germany, Fed. Rep. of) (original language German): I would also like to associate myself with previous speakers in congratulating you on your election. Last week at the 80th Council session the German delegation reserved its final opinion on the budget. We have in the Council made a number of

comments on the Programme of Work and Budget 1982-83 and we have announced the conclusion drawn there from. I would like to refer to what we said in the Council because I do not want to go into all the details again today because we are very short of time.

The food situation in the world is very serious at the moment and this requires, we believe, immediate and effective help from all sides. A lot of delegates from developing countries have referred to this and I cannot improve on what they have said. Many of these delegates will wonder though, how, in the light of the situation, it is possible that a Member State makes objections to the budget as submitted by the Director-General. As my delegation is one of those that is going to vote against this budget I would like to give you the reasons which have caused my Government to take this position.

I would like first and foremost to tell our friend from the developing countries what this decision means and what it does not mean; that is very important to us. I set great store by making this clear. I would like to make three remarks to this end. First of all, I have to say something about the situation in the Federal Republic of Germany. Currently we can no longer speak of a real growth in the public aids in our country. On the contrary, the government has had to make decisions to the effect that all policy areas and almost all sections of the population have felt the effects of cuts. For example, national agricultural expenditure had to be reduced nominally in the current year by 7.8 percent and for 1982 a further reduction of 1.8 percent is planned. I am talking about the nominal reductions here, so if you look at it in this context the FAO budget also, without a growth in real terms, already has a priority position.

The second point: so that we can tackle the problems in the coming years we believe that numerous bilateral and multilateral activities are necessary. FAO activities are important in this effort but they represent in no way the financial priority of our aids for the developing countries. This is a point referred to on numerous occasions by our delegation in the Council. Minister Ertl when he spoke to the Plenary on Tuesday said quite expressly that the portion of agricultural development in our overall development aid increased from 13 percent in 1979 to 20 percent in 1980. This year DM 1.3 billion will be made available by our country for aid to developing countries. This is more than one third of all our development aid. We have gained the impression that this contribution is recognized by recipient countries. We therefore hope that these countries will understand our position. I would however also liíce to appeal to all Member States, please do not misunderstand our attitude to the FAÓ Budget. The Federal Government gives the utmost priority to questions of world food security and agricultural development.

My third comment refers to the structure of the Budget. As we have said in the Council, we have certain criticism thát we would like to raise here. Not everything that is included in the Budget directly serves to fight hunger in the world. The yardsticks that were set by Willy Brandt in his opening speech for the World Food Day here in Rome on 16 October 1981 are only partially and to a limited extent covered by the document before us.

This morning the delegate of Botswana made a proposal that we could save money by shortening this conference by one week. Perhaps some people did not take this as a serious proposal. But if you look at the Budget you will note that this Organization is spending more than $12 million for sessions and work-ing. meetings and the documents needed for them. I think we have to ask ourselves very seriously indeed whether some of this expenditure could be curbed and used elsewhere.

We would also like to criticize the fact that the Director-General in his proposed budget suggests a real growth for general policy and direction and support services.

My delegation does also not believe that the work of FAO can be improved by upgradings. These examples -and I could add a lot more to the few that I have given - show that a lot of work has still to be done if the structure of the Budget and the efficiency of the Organization are to be improved. The Director-General has already made some achievements here and we recognize these and we want to encourage him to continue in his efforts.

I would like to stress in this connection that we are not in principle against all expansions of the Programme but we are sorry that only 5 percent of the real programme growth of 23.7 million should be financed by a reduction of current programnes. In this context we have a lot of sympathy for the proposals made just now by the United Kingdom delegate.

To conclude, I would like to make a few comments about our future cooperation in the Organization. If my suppositions are correct, the 1982-83 Budget will gain less broad agreement than the Budget did two years ago. We find this very unsatisfactory and we are very worried about it. This must lead to misunderstandings and public criticism. We think it is quite normal that Member States have different opinions on the rate of increase and budget priorities. It is the task of the Director-General to mediate here. We regret that the Director-General has so far not taken account sufficiently of our

considerations and ideas, ideas which are shared by other delegations. We believe that in the two forthcoming years the Director-General has to dedicate himself more to this task to avoid possible confrontations. Such differences of opinion would have an extremely negative effect on international solidarity in the fight against hunger in the world and the role that FAO has to play in this struggle. I would like to stress once again that we agree with the objectives which serve the work of the Organization. Even though we sometimes have different opinions on the course to follow and the effectiveness of individual measures, this can only be fruitful for our future discussions. We are prepared to scrutinize in the course of deliberations all suggestions and proposals from Member States or from the Secretariat as regards the Budget and we will include them in our considerations.

To end, perhaps, I could add one comment on the Medium-Term Objectives. We welcome the efforts of the Secretariat in that field. We agree to the document submitted. We would like FAO to continue to present this important paper in the present form, because this makes the work of the Organization more trans-parent. It should be tried to identify already in the medium-term objectives realizable priorities and to highlight them accordingly.

The meeting rose at 13.00 hours
La séance est levée à 13 h 00
Se levanta la sesión a los 13.00 horas