CHAIRMAN: The meeting is called to order. We go on with Item 16.
John Bruce SHARPE (Australia): Australia is pleased to see you, Mr Chairman, in the Chair again at the start of another day. I am sure that, under your direction, the business of today will proceed as efficiently as it did yesterday.
Our statement on the item before us is a reiteration of what we have already said under this item in the Council. The views we hold and expressed there we continue to retain. Our position is support for a consensus budget based on maintaining the current level of the budget in real terms and containing cost increases to the maximum extent possible.
We are, therefore, pleased with the efforts that have been made in this direction in the proposed budget. Another element with which we agree is the emphasis placed on establishing priorities, including some which we strongly support, such as environment and sustainable development, Women in Development and policy advice.
While we are pleased with efforts made to date, there do remain some areas of reservation for us in the budget. They include the level of cost increases, the lapse factor and the TCP. We would have wished them to be otherwise.
From their statements it is fairly obvious that the vast majority of members present would wish to see the unanimous endorsement of a Programme of Work and Budget for 1992-93. We certainly do. We must encourage those with strong views in the matter to work together towards achieving this.
Non-payment of contributions by many members of the Organization has had a detrimental effect on the financial position of the Organization. We must have these funds if the Organization is to operate effectively, meet its potential and carry out the many areas of work to which, collectively and individually, member countries attribute priority. Rather than remonstrating with those who have not paid, we should be making every effort to encourage them to do so. It would be in all our interests and in the interests of the Organization.
Non-payment has been given as the reason for the Organization borrowing, which is something many countries, including Australia, do not favour. If all countries met their financial obligations to the Organization, there would also not be a need to increase the Working Capital Fund and to replenish the Special Reserve Account.
As a country which meets its financial obligations, Australia does not wish to pay again, whether it be by way of interest on borrowing or additional assessed contributions in order to contribute to offsetting the non-payment by others. I am sure there are many other countries in a similar situation.
Therefore, we appeal again for all members who have not paid their contributions and arrears to do so. We feel that any efforts which can be made by this Organization and its members to encourage and bring this about, even though it may involve compromise, would help to facilitate the attainment of the Consensus Budget we are hoping for.
As requested by you yesterday, Mr Chairman, we will comment on the Programme Budget process, including the Outline, on a separate occasion, and we wish to reserve the right to do so.
Winston R. RUDDER (Trinidad and Tobago): My delegation speaks in the name of the 13 Member States of the CARICOM. We also share the concerns of all small developing countries, in particular small island states. The matter under consideration in this Agenda Item is the very life-blood of the Organization, for it not only reflects what will be done over the next biennium in response to poverty, concerns about poverty alleviation, abatement of malnutrition, improving rural life, agricultural development, including the very process of development itself.
Moreover, it also reflects decisions about the means to do so. That is why our interests are so high. For small developing countries FAO represents a lifeline because it is an institution with which we have been accustomed to dealing, which is sensitive and responsive to our concerns and needs and ever willing to cooperate in mutual respect, to hammer away at loosening the constraints which attend the process of agricultural development.
That is not to say that we are not concerned or we do not care about the need for prudence and transparency in the way the resources of the Organization are managed.
Let it be clearly understood that developing countries are as vigilant as any others, and perhaps more so than many, in this respect, for we know about scarce resources. We understand what it means to make ends meet.
Therefore, nothing we have done or said so far in the debates on the Programme of Work and Budget should be construed to be an abrogation of our responsibilities in this regard. However we would assert that the process of preparation and formulation of the 1992-93 Programme of Work and Budget has been marked by an unprecedented degree of transparency, full participation and guidance of the membership since January of this year. It reflects an extraordinary accommodation made on the basis of significant investment of time, intellectual energy and no small measure of goodwill, on the part of the membership of the FAO community.
In the process many of us have had to compromise significantly on some long-held principles. In particular the many reluctantly gave way to the few who held fast to the concept of zero growth, in circumstances where the needs and requirements for development assistance have neither abated nor stabilized, but indeed have increased. But generally we are willing to
compromise in the expectation that we will not have a hung budget for the 1992-93 biennium, so that the 1992-93 biennium will not, like its forerunner 1990-91, become a lost biennium.
The fact is that a compromise has been struck: we have before us a budget posited within the context of a strategic framework, the 1992-97 Medium-Term Plan, which has been accepted as being useful, significant and responsive to the concerns of the independent review.
Therefore, let the rhetoric and the pious platitudes about concerns for development now give way to decisive action and let us, therefore, recommend unanimously to Conference that the 1992-93 Programme of Work and Budget be adopted by consensus.
I would now like to make a few brief observations in some specific areas of particular interest to small countries like ours. We agree with the Programme priorities as outlined in the Programme of Work and Budget and we are particularly pleased at the increases proposed in the area of environment and sustainable development, biological diversity, agricultural data development, Women in Development, policy advice, the Technical Cooperation Programme, nutrition and forestry.
We would wish to indicate, however, that in the Programme area of natural resources we in the small developing countries have particular concerns about the question of land resource inventories and evaluations and the application of land-use planning methods to the concerns of small island states. We would wish to see that reflected in the way in which the Budget is implemented.
We are also concerned with, and we note in particular, the points made in respect of research technology and development, and we support in particular paragraph 302 where reference is made to a proposed consultation with respect to research management in small and least-developed countries, a matter of particular concern in so far as institutional arrangements for research management, particularly sub-regional in scope.
We also support the views expressed in paragraph 304 with respect to the need for examining and validating the traditional technologies used by farmers in small developing countries.
The programme for rural development also is of interest to us. In particular, we would wish to advocate that the issue of agricultural education extension and training be linked to the issues related to research and technology transfer, particularly institutional arrangements which would be appropriate in the context of small island states and small states generally.
Risk management is another area where the small countries have a particular interest, for we are very conscious of the situation which requires us now to attract more investment to the area of agricultural development. Risk management has, in fact, had to be put in place in order that private sector investment be made more available.
Food and agriculture information and analysis: our interest here is to see the extent to which the whole process of data management, data exploitation, particularly the agricultural census arrangements, can be
more fully integrated in national food and agricultural information systems. We look forward to the efforts being made by the Organization to assist us in that regard.
Policy analysis: this is a matter of particular concern to us in the area of commodity policies and trade and agricultural planning assistance. The particular focus we would like to see here relates to issues related to trade liberalization within the context of structural adjustment programmes which many of us are continuing to follow now, and the role and future of agriculture within that context.
Of great concern, too, is the integration of environmental policy considerations in the whole matrix of agricultural policy formulation and planning, and how small countries can accommodate within the processes such environmental policies.
The area of fisheries is of particular interest to small island states as you would expect. In this regard, we are very grateful for the assistance already provided by the institution. We look forward to more focused and targeted assistance in the area of fish stock assessment and assistance in the development of management and surveillance systems over our marine resources.
Forestry is no less important. We are grateful for the fact that some small funds have been added to the Forestry Programme. We would have liked to see a greater resource flow in that direction but we understand that the budgetary arrangements could not accommodate them.
With respect to the Technical Cooperation Programme, we support the attempt by the Director-General to accommodate the concerns of the developing countries. We note with satisfaction the extent to which that Programme has increased. We are disappointed, however, that the decisions of the last Conference have not been carried out fully. We would hope that this would, in fact, be reflected in what could be done in respect of the next biennium. We would merely wish to indicate on this particular item that we are not in favour of a rigid process of allocation of TCP resources such as has been indicated using the UNDP formula. That was a particular set of circumstances and a particular purpose which, in fact, are not reflective of the concerns for which the TCP has been established.
The essence of the TCP is its own programme; it is flexible and is extremely responsive, and it would be a very divisive process if we were to entrench a rigid mechanism by which TCP funds are to be allocated.
We sincerely hope, with the comments we have made on the Programme of Work and Budget, that the membership will see their way to accept the budget by consensus.
David SHERWOOD (Canada): I should like to take this opportunity to express a special vote of thanks to Mr Shah for his very clear introduction yesterday.
Canada, as a member of the Programme Committee, has had the opportunity to provide our views on a regular basis, and we have been highly involved in this process. We appreciate the efforts that have been made by the Director-General to present a Programme of Work and Budget that has been
drawn up on the basis of no real programme growth. Canada is prepared to support this principle and is pleased that a consensus achieved at this point has been maintained.
The overall growth in the budget as a result of cost increases will have a significant impact on the assessment levels of Member Nations, and we share the concerns that have been raised over the magnitude of the increase. Canada also shares the concerns of others that savings should be made where possible. We believe this can be done in a way which promotes good management. We believe this can be done in a way which promotes good management of the UN system organizations, and will be helpful, particularly, in an organization faced with financial difficulties. We would warmly support the move towards consensus and compromise in order to seek productive solutions.
With respect to the programme, we should like to make the following points. My delegation supports the global priorities as outlined in the programme framework. In particular, we attach high priority to the FAO's work in relation to the environment and sustainable development, including the contribution FAO is making to the preparation process for the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development and its follow-up to the FAO/Netherlands Conference on the Environment and Agriculture.
Similarly, we are pleased with the increased emphasis on information collection, analysis and dissemination reflected in agriculture data development, including in particular efforts to develop the World Agricultural Information Centre, WAICENT.
Canada continues to attach high priority to the role of women in development and to the need for FAO to continue to focus on implementation of the Plan of Action.
We recognize the importance that developing countries accord to the Technical Cooperation Programme. However, we do not share the view that substantial additional resources should be allocated to that particular programme. We remain concerned over the extent to which the Major Technical Programmes are being weakened as a result of the redirection of resources from the other programmes in FAO to the Technical Cooperation Programme.
Forestry is another area that was identified as a priority. However, it is scheduled to receive an increase of only US$110 000, although we are aware of the immense challenges that we are facing in that sector. This increase is marginal in relation to the challenges faced by this programme. We welcome the changes in the budget format to highlight the support that is being given, or proposed, to the Tropical Forest Action Programme. The Programme Committee report highlighted the need to provide a consolidated presentation of FAO's support to this programme in the future.
My delegation continues to attach importance to FAO's contributions to the UNCED process in relation to the forestry sector.
Under Major Programme Agriculture, we acknowledge the important work of FAO under Programme 2.1.1 in relation to Natural Resources and the linkage of these activities to the promotion of sustainable agricultural practices. Similarly, under Programme 2.1.2, in close cooperation with other organizations, in particular the Plant Genetic Resources, FAO has an important role to play in the area of plant genetics, including follow-up
to the proposals stemming from the Commission on Plant Genetics. Canada attaches importance to these proposals to establish a Secretariat of the International Plant Protection Convention and hopes that this will be implemented early in the new biennium. Information exchanges on the prior informed consent clause of the Code of Conduct on the Use of Pesticides, along with such areas as crop protection, integrated pest management, the formulation and implementation of realistic plans for plant health, the preservation of plant and animal genetic resources, biotechnology and the setting of food standards in the context of global trends and the GATT, are of major importance. We should particularly like to stress the work of the FAO/WHO Codex Alimentarius Commission.
Under the Fisheries Programme we attach particular importance to FAO's role in the area of fisheries information, including the collection, analysis and dissemination of information, as well as its role in the promotion of sustainable development in the fisheries sector. In general, we believe that the proposals put forward in this Major Programme are appropriate. Canada reaffirms the importance which it attaches to the full and timely implementation of Resolutions 44/225 and 45/197 adopted by the United Nations on driftnet fishing.
Canada is opposed to external borrowing to implement the Programme of Work and Budget. We appreciate the difficult financial situation that FAO is placed in when Member States do not come forward with their regular assessed contributions, which would do much to reduce the array of measures that the FAO has felt it necessary to take to maintain its operations. We believe that this would facilitate the kind of budgetary consensus we all seek. On the Programme Budget Process, Canada supports the proposal put forward by the Director-General, including in particular the implementation of an Outline of the Programme of Work and Budget on a permanent basis.
In conclusion, Canada supports the Programme of Work and Budget priorities for the next biennium and very much appreciates the opportunity to have registered these observations.
António MAGALHAES COELHO (Portugal): Les documents que le Secrétariat nous a préparés pour discussion, appréciation et décision sont riches, profonds et contiennent sous une forme très condensée un ensemble très vaste d'informations qu'il ne nous est pas possible d'aborder dans le détail, comme leur contenu le mériterait, notre intervention dans cette session devant être limitée au temps disponible.
Cependant, nous n'en avons pas une grande préoccupation, car elles ont déjà été évoquées pendant les réunions du Conseil dont le Portugal fait partie.
La délégation portugaise pense qu'elle ne doit pas revenir à la discussion de la "croissance zéro". Toutes les délégations reconnaissent certainement qu'un tel niveau de budget résulte d'un consensus de difficiles négociations.
Ma délégation voudrait appeler votre attention sur les quatre points suivants :
Nous considérons que les moyens destinés à la représentation régionale de la FAO pour l'Europe sont pratiquement symboliques. Il est très difficile de dynamiser quelques activités intéressant plusieurs pays européens; quelques-uns continuent à avoir besoin de l'appui de la FAO.
Nous apportons un grand intérêt aux activités de la FAO, au niveau de la formation et de la promotion de la femme rurale et des études sur les énergies alternatives pour le milieu rural.
La délégation portugaise se félicite de la préparation de la Conférence mondiale sur la nutrition et de la Conférence mondiale sur l'environnement qu'elle estime très importantes car elles permettront de faire une rétrospection, une analyse et des recommandations vers le futur sur des aspects importants pour la survivance de l'humanité. Cependant, nous souhaitons que les frais concernant la réalisation de ces importantes activités soient supportés selon un pourcentage plus élevé par les fonds extrabudgétaires, permettant ainsi de renforcer les moyens destinés à d'autres programmes.
Nous nous félicitons de l'intérêt croissant que la FAO porte à la protection des ressources et au développement, ainsi qu'à l'application du concept de l'agriculture durable.
Tout le monde reconnaît que les pays en développement devront se préoccuper de l’autosuffisance alimentaire, mais nous ne pouvons pas oublier la conservation des ressources.
Le Programme accorde une grande importance à la conservation et à la mise en valeur de la forêt tropicale. Nous pensons qu'une telle procédure est correcte, nécessaire et urgente, mais nous ne devons pas négliger d'autres types de forêts, notamment les forêts des zones tempérées gravement affectées par les incendies et par les pluies acides. De plus, il convient d'apporter beaucoup d'attention aux grandes régions de savane et de forêt ouverte où se réalise la plupart de l'activité agricole de subsistance, et aussi les zones arides et subarides où les phénomènes de désertification se manifestent sous une forme très intensive.
Le Comité d'agriculture à la onzième session du 22 au 30 avril 1991 a reconnu la participation insuffisante d'experts techniques des pays en développement situés, pour leur grande majorité, à des distances importantes de Rome.
Le rapport du COAG a été approuvé à la quatre-vingt-dix-neuvième session du Conseil faisant l'objet des paragraphes 64 et 65 du rapport du Conseil.
Au paragraphe 65 le Conseil a demandé au Directeur général d'examiner la possibilité de la création - je cite - "d'un fonds fiduciaire destiné à faciliter la présence d'experts techniques dans les délégations de pays en développement aux réunions des comités techniques du Conseil".
La délégation portugaise aimerait savoir si cette demande du Conseil a été prise en compte dans ce budget.
- 151 -
Jovan TEGOVSKI (Yugoslavia): At the very outset I should like to express the deep appreciation of my delegation to the FAO Secretariat for the outstanding work carried out on the preparation of document C 91/3, as well as to Mr Shah for his introductory statement.
As we are all aware, the international economic crisis continues to exert an adverse influence on all countries in general and on developing countries in particular.
We therefore think that international organizations should invest maximum efforts to adjust their budgets to the actual possibilities of member countries with respect to payments of contributions.
The Yugoslav delegation is exceptionally pleased with the Proposed Budget envisaging a zero budget growth. Over the past years we supported the increases, confident that they would contribute to an improved quality of the Organization's work. However, having in mind the great financial difficulties many countries are facing and the will expressed by many countries aimed to reach consensus on this subject, Yugoslavia fully supports the present proposal. We find that the Director-General's approach towards this issue is an appropriate one and we are sure that under his wise guidance the efficiency and quality of the Organization's work will not be threatened.
We have also thoroughly examined the proposed cost increases, paragraph 87, in the amount of almost US$83 million, which means US$4 million less than in the budget proposal reviewed at the June session of the Council and we welcome this approach. Nevertheless, we think that in the course of this Conference the possibility for additional reductions may be examined. A half of that amount is linked to the increase due to inflation and, understandably, that is something that can hardly be changed. However, the fact that it will cause a significant increase in contributions by the member countries (for Yugoslavia, for example, that will imply an additional US$200 000 a year) forces us to ask that this issue be reconsidered once again.
With regard to external borrowing, I would briefly like to point out that even though we are fully aware of the adverse financial position of our Organization, we think we should first of all examine the possibility of cost reductions rather than opt for borrowing.
Before I turn to the proposed Programme, allow me to emphasize once again that Yugoslavia is not advocating a reduction of the effective Programme of the Organization. However, we think that it would be possible to achieve a certain reduction of administrative and staff costs, re-allocation of assets through different programmes, reduction of the number of technical meetings, re-evaluation of the current programme of meetings, shortening of their duration rather than increasing the costs.
Mr Chairman, allow me to make a few comments on the proposed Programme of Work. In our view, the list of the priorities given in the proposed Programme of Work was made in line with the actual needs of FAO, so I am expressing our support of the list of these priorities. I would like to refer in particular to the Technical Cooperation Programme. It enables FAO to provide developing countries with the indispensable technical assistance. That Programme has for years played an important role in the field of agricultural development of many developing countries, Yugoslavia
among them. This Programme enabled Yugoslavia on a number of occasions to ensure initial resources and technical assistance before launching very important activities. We are looking forward to continuing our cooperation along those same lines. We therefore fully support its inclusion among the FAO priorities.
Yugoslavia attaches great importance to the work of FAO in the field of environment and in particular development, including the contribution of FAO in the process of preparations for the UN Conference on Environment and Development. We welcome the strengthening of the Sub-Programme on the Environment, Energy and Sustainable Development. We are also glad to see an increased interest in promoting agricultural data, particularly the special efforts being exerted in order to develop the World Agricultural Information Centre. In this particular area we see a highly important role which FAO can play specifically in developing statistical data on the environment and sustainable development.
Yugoslavia attaches a high priority to the role of women and the need for FAO to continue its activities on the implementation of the related Plan of Action.
We fully support the convening of the International Conference on Nutrition. As far as the proposed budget for this purpose is concerned, we wonder whether it would be possible to reduce it on account of additional funds from external sources.
In conclusion, we wish to point out that it is highly important that forestry be included among priorities of the future Programme of Work. World forestry now, and even more so in the future, will be faced with huge tasks. We believe that at the global level FAO will have an important part to play in this area. Thank you, Mr Chairman.
C.B. HOUTMAN (Netherlands): This Agenda Item, the Programme of Work and Budget, is always a very central topic in the Conference. My delegation is of the opinion that this year, however, it looks to be even more the main issue of the Conference done for many years before.
The Programme of Work is more than just an Agenda Item on its own. It is very much connected with the result of developments inside and outside FAO and should therefore reflect all these. Before going a little more into detail I would like to dwell a moment on some important factors which are affecting our work programme for the next biennium. My Minister already mentioned two days ago that our work is changing more rapidly than ever before. Political ideologies which were a fact of life for some decades, have disappeared from one day to another and in many countries processes of democratization have started to develop. At the same time we see a worldwide trend to move from government to private initiatives.
In the UN system, and in the policies of the major donor countries too, more and more the awareness is emerging of the necessity for the developing countries themselves to play a major role in the development process of their countries. So far, those are developments outside FAO. Now for some developments inside FAO. Mr Chairman, the Twenty-fifth Conference adopted a Review Resolution which started a process to make our Organization more effective and better prepared to face the problems for the coming years. In a separate Agenda Item we deal with the implementation of the Review, as we
did already with the Medium-Term Plan which was one of the results of it. Today, we are discussing the first Programme of Work and Budget in which the outcome of the Review is reflected. It is also the first Programme of Work and Budget which reflects the necessity of inter-agency cooperation and a multi-disciplinary approach.
Mr Chairman, my delegation, as I have just explained, is of the opinion that this Programme of Work and Budget is an extremely important one in the history of FAO and it is far from easy to produce such a Programme of Work and Budget these days while facing financial problems for so long. These financial problems hamper the introduction or delay the development of new activities.
It is against this background that my delegation would like to discuss the Programme of Work and Budget 1992-93. I will start first with the priorities; in this Programme of Work and Budget we see not only clear priorities but posteriorities as well. We would like to compliment the Secretariat on that. It has been a very crucial point in our discussions with regard to the Programme of Work and Budget over the last biennia and the demand for it was reflected in the Review. Priority setting also is a good remedy while facing financial constraints. Whereas everybody seems to agree on that, it appeared to be much more difficult to formulate posteriorities. My delegation is very satisfied to see a Programme of Work and Budget with both and we think it is courageous to indicate reductions. It is courageous because it is not attractive to indicate posteriorities. Undoubtedly, these are not to everyone's satisfaction.
The next point is decentralization. The strengthening of Country Offices is a point the Netherlands pleaded for years. The basis for this idea was the enhancement of the interaction between the Regular and the Field Programme and the improvement of the quality of the field work. Better identification and monitoring should be possible. With the increasing importance of national execution the importance of Country Offices will increase accordingly. The accompanying reduction of Regional Office's activities looks almost like a logical consequence. We can well imagine that this will be partly offset by sub-regional activities of the larger Country Offices.
The next point is cooperation with other organizations. The emphasis on this cooperation with other organizations, within and outside the UN system and with governmental and particularly with non-governmental organizations, is welcomed very much. In an earlier intervention I said extensively more about this.
With regard to agriculture, the budget for agriculture as a whole decreases, but here a choice between higher and lower priorities have been made. Resources for agriculture increase as well as for sustainable development and environment. In this context I would like to remind you of what my Minister said on Tuesday in his statement on the use of external inputs. He stated that where the application of chemical fertilizers and agro-chemicals may have to be limited in certain areas, the individual situation of the country or the region should be decisive. That is why he talked about adequate external input agriculture and that is why we can very well understand the concern expressed especially by African countries on the reduction of resources related to fertilizers and soil depletion. We welcome the increased attention to FAO/WHO activities in the framework of
the Codex Alimentarius. The modest increase for subjects related to policy analysis and advice is welcomed but a less modest increase would have been welcomed even more.
With regard to forestry, the increase is welcomed. Our views in TFAP were extensively expressed during preceding Councils. We will closely follow the activities around TFAP and wish to be involved in the activities that are ahead shortly as a result of the Council decision.
On TCP, the TCP discussion has been difficult during the last biennia. The Netherlands has always favoured a sound and transparent TCP. We have always stated that an increase of TCP funds would only be favoured if and when the management of TCP was more transparent. We can however understand that the Director-General proposes this relative standstill of 11.9 percent of the budget given the various other priorities in the budget. We find his proposals for country allocation interesting if this would really add to transparency. We will judge this on its own merit. And if this would add to more transparency I could imagine that pleas for reduction or resistance to increase TCP resources would diminish. The chapters on TCP mentioned by Mr Shah in his introduction proposed "Programme Implementation" and "Programme Evaluation" reports should contain extensive information on the results of country and regional allocations.
This reference of the excellent introduction of Mr Shah brings me, Mr Chairman, to the last part of my intervention, the Budget. We can agree with the zero growth and even with the cost increases of US$83 million, through still high with 14.6 percent. We know technically everything can be explained, most of the time financially as well and, Mr Chairman, we can even imagine that a low lapse factor in financially difficult circumstances is a welcome source for financial stopgapping. That is why we do not ask to explain the low lapse factor of 3 percent since that would be too difficult.
It will be clear Mr Chairman, that we, after having said all this, approve the Programme of Work and Budget 1992-93 and we sincerely hope that with all the different difficulties the various countries have with the proposals, this Programme of Work and Budget will be seen as a compromise; a compromise that should result in an adoption by consensus.
V. NIGHIPONDOKA (Namibia): I would like to congratulate you upon having been elected as Chairman of this Session. You are now chairing the third session on this matter and you have shown your leadership, and we hope this session will have as good results as we did then. Our delegation would also like to congratulate the Director-General for the enormous work done in producing the PWB as contained in document C 91/3. The content of the PWB indicates to us the farsightedness of the Director-General and his staff on the existing global financial problems which enormously have affected the budget and the FAO Programme of Work and Budget.
Mr Chairman, whilst applauding the· enormous work, also the farsightedness of the Director-General and his staff, the Namibian delegation wishes to join other delegations who have registered their dissatisfaction and disappointment on the issue of zero growth, as being advocated. We hope this is only a temporary measure.
As a young nation we are learning with bitterness how to get ahead with agricultural development in our underdeveloped areas, where the people had hoped to have the situation bettered under the new circumstances. We had, and still have, the hope to get some of the required resources from organizations like FAO.
Being a country which is well-endowed with sea fisheries and marine resources, Namibia had hoped to see more resources allocated to that sector. We are, however, thankful to FAO in conjunction with other donor countries who have helped us bring the situation of overfishing to a certain degree under control. This is by way of conservation management and patrolling of our seas.
Mr Chairman, on the priority areas as contained in document C 91/3, the Namibian delegation fully supports the Director-General. As I have stated earlier, we are now faced with the enormous task of developing the underdeveloped areas of our country. Most of the priority areas proposed in the document have as well been identified by the Namibian Government as areas which will need immediate attention if sustainable development is to be achieved in our country.
On the TCP, Mr Chairman, much has been said by other delegations. We also would wish to have seen Resolution 9/89 fulfilled at least by a minimum. At this junction, however, the Namibian delegation wishes to call upon and encourage the Director-General to do his utmost in securing more resources, if possible, in order to change the situation in regard to the TCP, which is important to countries like Namibia.
Lastly, Mr Chairman, I would like to be brief. Just after achieving our independence, the Government of the Republic of Namibia organized a donors Conference in New York, which was aimed at selling our programmes of development. During that Conference we received a lot of pledges from donor countries and organizations but, Mr Chairman, the actual delivery of donors is just trickling in. This has taught us that we are living in a world of financial difficulties.
Looking at the whole PWB, the same message transpires. We believe that it is also time for us as Member States of the FAO to re-look at our priorities and programmes and at the changing circumstances and adjust accordingly.
With these few words, Mr Chairman, the Namibian delegation wishes to propose the adoption of the PWB by a consensus.
Elias REYES BRAVO (México): Gracias, señor Presidente, y gracias a la Secretaria por este documento tan importante, el cual reviste un interés particular para mi pais por cuanto refleja el panorama presupuestal y la disposición operativa de la FAO para el próximo bienio. Sus capítulos responden tanto a las necesidades de la FAO en sí como a los objetivos que perseguimos los Estados Miembros en los ámbitos de la agricultura y la alimentación.
México ha estado atento a los trabajos realizados en la elaboración del Programa 1992-93 de la FAO, al haber participado como miembro del Comité del Programa. Asimismo, el Gobierno de México ha logrado cubrir oportunamente su cuota anual a la FAO este año. Esto representa un
ejercicio de congruencia de mi Gobierno, ya que sustentamos nuestro interés programático precisamente en el cumplimiento de los compromisos presupuestales con esta Organización para cuya Secretaria brindamos asi un voto de confianza.
Compartimos la propuesta del Director General sobre las prioridades globales establecidas para el próximo bienio, ya que con ella se combinan temas significativos y medios relevantes para la acción concreta. Entre los temas encontramos el Medio Ambiente, el Desarrollo Sostenible, la Mujer en el Desarrollo y la Silvicultura. Entre los medios ubicamos los sistemas de datos, el PCT y la Conferencia Internacional sobre Nutrición. Las prioridades advierten además ciertos mecanismos que permitan avanzar a los temas con los medios disponibles. Los mecanismos que establecen los documentos son las representaciones de la FAO en los paises y una mayor coordinación con otras organizaciones internacionales.
Es, en ese contexto de necesidades, posibilidades y responsabilidades, como apreciamos, un documento de la dimensión como el que nos ocupa y cuya estructura constituye une referencia fundamental para que los paises actuemos en los ámbitos regionales y nacionales. Por su magnitud programática y presupuestal el Capitulo 2 del documento referido a Programas Técnicos y Económicos, merece una particular atención asi como los Capítulos 3 y 4, relativos, respectivamente, a programas de apoyo al desarrollo y al Programa de Cooperación Técnica. Asimismo, el Capitulo 5 relativo a servicios de apoyo ofrece un sustento fundamental para los capítulos que citamos inicialmente.
Podemos referirnos brevemente a algunos puntos de interés particular para México contenidos en el Programa Presupuesto 1992-93. En relación con el Programa de Cultivos existe interés por ampliar las acciones en materia de recursos genéticos y prevención de pérdidas de alimentos. Reafirmo el interés de mi pais en el desarrollo y la aplicación de la Convención Internacional de Protección Fitosanitaria, cuyo Secretariado de la FAO debe fortalecerse. Llama nuestra atención el Programa de Fomento de la Investigación y la Tecnologia y en particular lo referente a la Biotecnología. Alentamos una mejor vinculación con los sistemas AGRIS y CARIS.
El Programa de Desarrollo Rural es importante a la luz del proceso actual de modernización del campo en mi pais y la implementación politica en el ámbito de las instituciones. El proceso de concertación social ampliado y las nuevas disposiciones en los servicios de apoyo.
Sobre el Programa de Nutrición, puede precisarse que mi pais prevé ser sede, en marzo del próximo año, de la Reunión Regional Latinoamericana y del Caribe, preparatoria de la Conferencia Internacional de Nutrición. Reiteramos nuestro interés por los trabajos de normalización que se realizan conjuntamente con la Organización Mundial de la Salud a través de la Comisión del Codex Alimentarius.
El Programa Principal de Montes lo consideramos muy valioso y las actividades que se realizan por la FAO en el marco de este Programa reciben una atención considerable por las instituciones forestales de mi pais. Una expresión al respecto lo constituye el esfuerzo que se realiza actualmente en la sólida formulación del Programa de Acción Forestal Tropical de México.
A mi delegación le causa cierta preocupación ver que la reasignación de recursos no ha dejado de afectar a Programas como el de Agricultura y Pesca, este último muy sensible a cualquier disminución. Urge una reacción, cada vez más favorable, de los Estados Miembros para el cumplimiento de los compromisos contraidos en el marco de la FAO de manera que se alcancen los objetivos con la participación de los países en proporción a sus posibilidades de contribución.
Señor Presidente, la posición de mi Gobierno, en principio, es de no aumentar su cuota al presupuesto organización para el próximo bienio, lo cual responde a disposiciones presupuestales y a severas restricciones en el gasto público. Sin embargo, con el propósito de que haya consenso en la elaboración del Programa de Labores y Presupuestos para 1992-93, mi Gobierno aprueba la propuesta de Programa y Presupuesto de la Secretaría de esta Organización para dicho período. De esta forma expresamos el rechazo al principio del crecimiento cero y reafirmamos la importancia que mi Gobierno concede a la cooperación internacional como instrumento para el desarrollo. En la cruzada para el desarrollo, la corresponsabilidad obliga a mayores esfuerzos.
Ray ALLEN (United Kingdom): I would first like to thank Mr Shah for his very detailed introduction to the document. We have already given an outline of the United Kingdom position at the Council but I would like to elaborate on some of the comments I made there now. My first substantive comments relate to the presentation of the document itself.
This is by far the best presentation of the Programme of Work and Budget that I have so far seen, and I would like to thank the Secretariat for all the efforts that they have put into its preparation. My delegation sincerely hopes that these improvements in the presentation of the Programme of Work and Budget will continue and that the document continues to become, for want of a better expression, more "user-friendly".
My delegation is extremely pleased to see that the proposed budget represents no real growth over the last biennium. We are all acutely aware of the difficult choices that have had to be made, and in this respect we think that the Director-General has taken a brave and pragmatic approach to the Budget level, and the affects that any real increase would have on members' assessed contributions. We are fully confident that the efficiency and effectiveness of FAO's operations need not be adversely affected by this restraint. We therefore hope that a consensus can be achieved on the Budget.
The inclusion of detailed explanations of the cost increases provided in paragraphs 65 to 109, including the effects of biennialization and expected inflation, are very welcome. We are, however, disappointed that paragraph 75 gives no justification for retaining the lapse factor at 3 percent. I will return to this point later, Mr Chairman. The reduction in cost increases by US$4 million since the Summary Programme of Work and Budget was presented to the Council in June is particularly welcome. A significant number of members are having difficulty in fulfilling obligations. Those cost increases that have not been absorbed have an impact on members' assessments for the next two years. We therefore urge that these cost increases be absorbed to the maximum extent possible.
The Director-General has pointed out in his introduction to the PWB that the Italian lire/US dollar exchange rate is another important aspect. As he says, clearly this rate can move in either direction between the time of preparation of the document and the time this Conference will vote on the Appropriations Resolution. This, together with its repercussions, needs to be borne in mind by all members.
We have noted the concerns expressed in the document about the level of support costs income which FAO can expect to receive during the 1992-93 biennium and likewise the references to the close interaction between the Regular and Field Programmes. Continuity is important in most activities, and is the essence in many aspects of the Regular Programme such as GIEWS and Codex Alimentarius. We would urge that in the medium- to long-term the quality and scope of the Regular Programme be maintained, although inevitably this will mean making painful decisions elsewhere.
The document highlights areas where resource changes are proposed. My delegation welcomes the increased emphasis on forestry, the environment, sustainable development, agricultural data and policy advice as well as women in development. We are however concerned about the lack of progress on improving coordination of the TFAP, but we are confident FAO will fulfil its role in active involvement in the preparation and follow-up to UNCED and in AGRIS and CARIS. We regard all these areas as ones where FAO has a core role as coordinator and where it has a comparative advantage.
My delegation welcomes moves towards prioritization in the programme. However, by and large the changes proposed involve quite small amounts; I have taken due account of Mr Shah's comments in his introduction regarding the areas specified for lower priority. Nonetheless, Mr Chairman, the United Kingdom delegation feels that FAO could have used this opportunity to make even more radical shifts, set even clearer priorities and to focus its resources on activities where the Organization really does have a comparative advantage. The linkage between the Medium-Term Plan and the Programme of Work and Budget is pertinent here.
While on the subject of comparative advantage, we hope two references in paragraphs 504 and 566 to the FAO role in the coordination of international fisheries research, as a follow-up to the Inter-Agency Study of International Fisheries Research Needs for Developing Countries. The United Kingdom delegation is aware that a detailed plan for coordinated action following this study must await the proposed Third Fisheries Donor Consultation in October 1993. As we said at the Ninety-ninth Session of the Council in June, and notwithstanding the response at the time when the Secretariat stated that it was appropriate and that they saw an important coordinating role for FAO, we remain of the view that the FAO Fisheries Department may not be ideally structured to take a new and leading role in the international coordination and direction of fisheries research and that comparative advantage may well lie with other organizations. The Committee on Fisheries did not offer a clear mandate to FAO for these activities.
The United Kingdom delegation recommended at COFI that finances allocated to the international research coordination should be redirected to the support of Technical Assistance and Extension in Aquaculture, which is identified as a priority but subjected to reduced funding. Paragraph 527 of C 91/3 explains the background to this and we welcome this indication that the Secretariat has taken due account of the debate at COFI.
I would therefore nonetheless like to reiterate the point I made at the June Council regarding priority setting and comparative advantage, Mr Chairman. My delegation would like to see concentration in priority areas and not the diffusion of funds to activities for which FAO may not have a clear mandate from its membership nor a comparative advantage, I have also taken note of the Secretariat's comments at the June Council, that if there are any doubts at all about FAO's role in this area, that role could be re-examined.
We note with some concern that both GIEWS and the Food Standards Programme are scheduled to suffer cuts - albeit small ones - in their budgets, since we regard both these as vital core functions of FAO, and we hope that efficiency savings can ensure that these activities are protected.
I would now like to turn to the Technical Cooperation Programme. We have indicated on numerous occasions that we are not opposed to the TCP per se. We accept that a technical agency like FAO can benefit from managing its own well-constructed TC Programme. We do not however accept that this is where FAO's comparative advantage rests and, although the Director-General has taken a pragmatic approach to Resolution 9/89, we remain concerned that, as stated in paragraph 30 of the document, the proposal before us means that the greatest net increase in the budget is assigned to the TCP. We simply cannot go along with this, Mr Chairman. We have long advocated that FAO should concentrate its limited finances to areas of priority and where FAO has a comparative advantage - as I said earlier we do not think that FAO has a comparative advantage in this area.
We welcome the additional information provided on the TCP in both the Budget document and the Review of the Field Programme and we are pleased to see this move towards greater transparency. We do however consider that there is still some way to go if we are to achieve full transparency. As the Secretariat will be aware, Mr Chairman, we have long championed the need for individual project evaluation of TCP projects and I have taken due note of the comments made in paragraph 740 of the Budget document, which refers to the fact that the results of 58 project evaluations are reported in the Review of the Field Programme. We will consider this further when we come to discuss document C 91/4.
Regarding the proposals put forward for the distribution of TCP resources along the lines of UNDP, IPF's, we have some misgivings about the proposal to allocate the TCP as proposed.
We consider that the Outline Budget Process has been a very valuable tool in giving member countries advance notice of proposed levels in the Budget, and we particularly welcome the recommendation made by the joint meeting of the Programme and Finance Committees that this become an established feature of FAO's Programme Budget Process. My delegation would like to endorse this recommendation.
We fully recognize the financial difficulties the Organization has experienced, particularly in the current year. However, I reiterate my Government's attitude to external borrowing by the Organization. We believe that all governments should meet their assessed contributions but, if necessary, ways should be found to reduce expenditure rather than resorting to external borrowing. We have taken note that the Director-General proposes to meet the interest payments accrued on these external loans from Miscellaneous Income, obviating the need to levy any charge on Member
States. It is not however that straightforward and at the end of the day Member States - including those who have paid on time - will be contributing to this interest. In adopting the Programme of Work and Budget, members' assessments are arrived at by taking the full cost of the PWB, adding an element for the Tax Equalization Fund and subtracting estimated Miscellaneous Income. It is the figure that is left that members are assessed on.
By meeting interest payments from Miscellaneous Income, this will reduce the figure subtracted from the Budget, thus increasing members' assessed contributions. I would be grateful if the Secretariat could confirm my understanding of this - or not - as the case may be.
I would now like to return to the issue of the lapse factor. Mr Chairman, my delegation still finds it difficult to understand the rationale behind this. I have noted from documentation before us that the Finance Committee was not unanimous in their agreement to continue at the 3 percent level. Concern still remains. My delegation would like to add their voice to these concerns. In our view, the lapse factor should not be used as a supplement, due to the inadequacy of overall resources, but that it does have a direct bearing on the vacancy rate. That's what it's there for. We strongly urge that the level be increased to more correctly reflect the actual vacancy rate.
Mr Chairman, as you suggested in your introduction to this item, we will address the proposal for change in the calendar of events separately if necessary, but I would like to indicate now that my delegation supports the Director-General's proposals.
We note that the issues relating to the Working Capital Fund and Special Reserve Account will be dealt with in Commission III and we will address them there. Finally, Mr Chairman, I would like to support the Austrian delegate's suggestion to include expenditure tables in the documentation.
Sra. Mireya DURAN ROSALES (Bolivia): En nombre de mi delegación deseo sumar nuestras felicitaciones a las ya expresadas por los oradores que me antecedieron, por su elección como Presidente de esta Comisión. De la misma manera, felicito al Sr. Shah por la excelente presentación del documento que nos ocupa.
Ante la difícil situación financiera de la FAO, mi delegación considera que habria sido imprescindible proveer a la Organización con un marco presupuestario positivo y estable para que pueda estar en condiciones de dar el aporte que esperamos de ella.
Sin embargo, y a pesar de que el Programa de Labores y Presupuesto para 1992-93 no contempla estas consideraciones, creemos que el enfoque real del mismo nos lleva a aceptar el nivel del presupuesto previsto, y esperamos que se apruebe por consenso.
Por otra parte, deseamos expresar nuestra conformidad enform a general con las prioridades propuestas para el bienio, esperando queen lo que se refiere al Programa de Cooperación Técnica se reitere lo enunciadoenla parte dispositiva de la Resolución 9/89.
- 161 -
Ms Melinda KIMBLE (United States of America) : We wish to express our appreciation for the opportunity to present the views of the United States delegation on the Director-General's proposed Programme of Work and Budget for 1992-93. The Director-General's energetic and creative leadership in the development of this PWB has been vital to the achievement of zero real growth, or no net programme increases, and some cost containment. We also would like to convey our thanks to Mr Shah for his extensive, introductory comments. The United States was privileged to participate in the debates on the budget level and program priorities which began in January that have led up to the Conference discussions today. We remain hopeful that a consensus on the budget will yet be achieved.
The budget before us will be implemented at a time of profound political and economic changes in the world. Secretary Madigan, in his speech on Tuesday, mentioned just a few of these dramatic changes. At the same time, we cannot fail to acknowledge the challenges facing us in the areas of environment, drug control, human rights and peacekeeping, to name a few. They are not insurmountable. FAO must do its part in playing a more active and complementary role to alleviate human suffering in its area of expertise. The UN system organizations must work together cooperatively and effectively.
The United States recognizes the enhanced importance of the United Nations and its specialized agencies in the better world to which we all aspire. We commend FAO for its efforts and achievements. President Bush unequivocally is committed to strengthening and restoring the financial stability of international organizations, including FAO. To meet this strong commitment, we paid nearly US$50 million to FAO last month. Of this amount, US$13.7 million was allocated toward arrears. We intend to work constructively and cooperatively with all Member States in the coming days to reach an acceptable consensus solution on this budget, as we have done throughout the UN system.
Given the cost containment standards applied system-wide, and the general difficulties of Member States in meeting assessments, the United States believes a lower budget level reflecting a 13.5 percent nominal increase from the 1990-91 biennium would be both sustainable and supportable. If adopted, we consider that this growth rate would establish the level against which the next biennium would be calculated.
Reaching a consensus would enable the United States to make a prompt and essentially full payment of its regular assessment and to move quickly on reducing our arrears even further, as part of the President's overall efforts to pay arrears over the next several years. This restoration of United States financial support will contribute most directly to rebuilding FAO's financial and fiscal viability.
For many years, the United States has been a strong supporter of the Budget Outline Process, since it allows Member States to participate at an early stage in a dialogue on FAO's major policy priorities and an overall budget level. Early agreement, by consensus, on broad programme objectives and an overall budget level, enhances forward planning of resource allocations. We welcome the support of other Member States in seeking to ensure the continuation of this process as a permanent feature of FAO's budget formulation procedures.
Turning to the programme proposals, Secretary Madigan, in his speech on Tuesday, highlighted a number of programmes to which we attach high priority. Foremost among them are Codex Alimentarius and the International Plant Protection Convention. We believe FAO should devote more of its Regular Programme resources to these activities. We would also like to see FAO expand its technical capacity, as it plays a critical role in supporting, through sustainable agricultural reform, the profound political and economic changes that are taking place throughout the world. Having said that, with this dramatic transformation under way, we believe too few resources in the proposed 1992-93 budget were allocated to private sector development in the food and agricultural industries and hope FAO will seek opportunities to target this area in the future.
In paragraph 131 of the budget document, we were pleased to note the strengthening of the programme planning, budgetary and evaluation service. Increased attention to sound management practices and ongoing evaluation of both the Regular Programme and field activities must be central components of FAO managerial operations in the years ahead. We applaud the sustained efforts to improve budget formulation and performance monitoring. Concurrently, we believe that the establishment of linkages between this function and the financial results of operations would further improve operational efficiency.
In the past, the United States and other Member States have requested and obtained information during the Conference on actual cash expenditure data in assessing the budgetary performance of the Organization. We seek clarification on whether this information will be circulated. In our judgment, such information enhances the transparency of the Organization's operations and greatly improves Member States' understanding of FAO operations and performance. It would also contribute in a positive manner to the upcoming debate in Commission III on the proposals for special assessments.
As we have stated on numerous occasions, FAO must focus on implementing programmes where it has a clear, comparative advantage. We welcome the steps taken to make shifts, review and consolidate programmes, and devote fewer resources to those activities that have not achieved desirable results. We also favour the complete elimination of programmes that no longer serve a useful purpose. Though not an easy task, this process is essential, particularly in an era of shrinking resources. To achieve this goal, we believe more impact evaluations of FAO activities are needed.
With respect to the Technical Cooperation Programme (TCP), the views of my delegation are well known. As at least one other member country has mentioned, we believe FAO's comparative advantage lies elsewhere.
We appreciate the Secretariat's initial efforts in paragraphs 757 through 766 to make the TCP funding allocation more transparent, but more needs to be done, and we would expect future presentations to do so.
With respect to the budget, the United States is committed to the principle of zero real growth and maximum absorption of non-discretionary cost increases for the assessed budgets of international organizations, such as FAO. In June, we entered a reservation in the Council's report that proposed cost increases were too high. We repeated that reservation at the just concluded Council session. We are confident that further steps can be taken to reduce the budget level, which would enable us to join consensus
in adopting the budget later this month. An increase in the lapse factor to reflect the current staff turnover and vacancy rate is an available option to achieve budget reductions.
Finally, we note with satisfaction FAO's proposals to reduce the number of established posts in the Regular Programme. In the past, FAO has provided very useful information on expenditures on established posts as a percentage of the total budget. It would be helpful to my delegation if the Secretariat shared this information with the Conference.
We wish to underscore our strong and fervent desire to move forward rapidly in regularizing our payments to FAO. We look forward to working with the FAO Secretariat and other Member States in the days ahead to adopt a budget, by consensus, that takes into account the fiscal realities confronting all of us.
Jürgen OESTREICH (Germany) (Original language German): First of all, I should like to thank Mr Shah for his excellent introduction to this item on the Agenda.
In the last biennium FAO completed an important Review of its activities. The objective was the strengthening of the Organization and greater effectiveness. This concern must also be taken into account by the Programme of Work and Budget for the next two years to be adopted by the Conference. This means inter alia that the authority and credibility of FAO with respect to its members require goals for activities which can start from a clearly-stated financial basis. For this reason, my Government supports, in principle, the proposed budget before us.
With regard to the planned adjustment to cost development, my Government understands that the utmost will be done by the FAO Secretariat to absorb these cost increases, as far as possible, in the budget. This is also true of the rate of cost increase to 14.6 percent as stated in the document.
As regards further increases, the budget document refers to a real zero growth. In the light of the great expectations and requirements of many developing countries, this is certainly unsatisfactory for many, and we are very clear about that.
By consistently fixing appropriate priorities, we believe it is possible, even with a real zero growth rate, to react flexibly to group requirements.
Document C 91/3 proceeds, as I say, from a real zero growth.
However, there are various points to be considered here. The actual net vacancy rate within FAO is at least 5.5 percent. Accordingly, for 5.5 percent of authorized posts there are no salary costs arising. If the lapse factor is assessed too low, then the salary costs will be budgeted for that do not accrue. The Organization thus has unearmarked resources available, which relativize the statement of real zero growth. This observation takes into consideration cost increases occurred subsequently during the current budget. Such so far non-budgeted staff costs are incorporated through the so-called biennialization into the envelope of the budget for 1992-93. So the lapse factor is not a necessary means of off-setting currently underbudgeted staff costs.
For that reason I emphasize once again our request that the lapse factor should be increased to a realistic level of at least 5.5 percent. This request by my Government is nothing new. We consider the lapse factor as a serious instrument of calculation for an as realistic as possible budgeting of accruing staff costs, and logically it must also be geared to the real vacancy rate. Accordingly, it should not be used for other purposes.
The draft budget before us is naturally only realistic - this is a point that I emphasize again - if all Member States meet their assessed contributions. So long as this is not the case, steps are necessary to bring the tasks of the Organization into line with the effective income. I must put the word "unfortunately" into that statement.
In this context, my delegation would like once again to stress that an approved FAO budget, like any other budget, represents an authorization but not an obligation to engage in expenditure. Thus, in Financial Regulation IV.4.1(a) we find an explicit reference to authorization.
We have always spoken out clearly against internal and external borrowings, and our attitude is unchanged here. We are against the planned increase of the Working Capital Fund and we cannot agree to the replenishment of the Special Reserve Account either. We shall be returning to these last three points in more detail under Item 31 of the Agenda.
As regards the individual sub-programmes of the Programme of Work and Budget for 1992-93, these largely do justice to the demands of the FAO Review and the requirements of the Medium-Term Plan 1992-97. This programme also establishes what we see as the recognized priorities, and it follows the essential recommendations of the FAO governing bodies.
Like other Member States, we should have liked to see a greater increase for the Forest Programme, especially the Tropical Forest Action Programme. We believe it is important to strengthen the liaison and coordination functions in the reorganization of the TFAP.
As regards the agricultural reform processes in the countries of Eastern, South East and Central Europe, we think that the 2.2 percent of the Regular Budget for FAO activities in Europe is low, particularly so when we consider that this Conference has just welcomed the membership of Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia.
We believe that here again the Organization should have a major advisory role.
Finally, we still have problems with the inclusion of the Technical Cooperation Programme in the FAO Regular Budget, and thus financing through assessed contributions. Let me explain this. Our delegation has already made the following point that, in terms of the general consensus on central financing of development work in the UN system, it is the policy of my Government to finance such programmes only through voluntary contributions. Programme financing via assessed contributions should give accordingly each individual Member State a possibility for monitoring activities. This is not sufficiently the case with the TCP. Generally, however, we are aware of the positive response of successfully implemented individual programmes within the framework of the TCP. Nevertheless, you will understand that our basic concerns vis-à-vis programme financing through assessed contributions remain unchanged.
In conclusion, I should like to thank the Secretariat for the work it has done in providing us with these comprehensive and instructive document. The new procedure for the preparation of the Programme of Work and Budget of FAO has proved its worth and we are in favour of this being institutionalized in accordance with the Draft Resolution on the amendment of the corresponding Financial Regulations. We now look forward to further discussion on this point of the Agenda, and we very much trust that we shall all be able to find a common road that will lead us to consensus on this important issue.
CHAIRMAN: As I said at the beginning, the Drafting Group will meet right after the end of the Plenary meeting this afternoon. There is one change in the composition of the Drafting Group which I read out yesterday. Instead of Cameroon, it will be Algeria. The Chairman of the Drafting Group will be Mr Carandang from the Philippines.
The meeting rose at 11.00 hours.
La séance est levée à 11 heures.
Se levanta la sesión a las 11.00 horas.
