Final Report

MEDRAP II THIRD STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING
CONGRESS PALACE - TIRANA, ALBANIA
10–11 DECEMBER 1992

THURSDAY 10.12.92

OPENING SESSION

AGENDA ITEM 1

1. The 3rd Steering Committee Meeting of MEDRAP II was held from 10–11 December 1992 in the Palace of Congress in Tirana, Albania.

2. The Meeting was attended by the National and Sub-Regional Coordination of Albania, Algeria, Croatia, Egypt, France, Lebanon, Malta, Morocco, portugal, Tunisia, Syria and Turkey. Also present were Representatives of UNDP, FAO, IFREMER, CIHEAM and the Coordinator of MEDRAP II.

3. The meeting was opened by the President of the previous cycle, Mr. A. Shinawy who welcomed all present and passed the floor as has become customery, to Mr. A. Flloko, the National Coordinator of Albania.

4. Mr. A. Flloko on behalf of the Ministry of Agriculture and Food and the Directorate General of Fisheries welcomed all participants wishing them a memorable stay.

5. Mr. H. Akrout, the MEDRAP II Project Coordinator, thanked all the countries present, the our host in the person of Mr. L. Korra, Vice-Minister of the Ministry of Agriculture and Food. He asked the UNDP and FAO Representatives present to convey to their respective organisations our thanks for their continual support. He stressed the importance of UNDP contribution to RER budget.

6. Mr. R. Ziesler, Representative FAO, thanked the hosts and expressed FAO appreciation and gratitude to the organisers. He wished the meeting success highlighting the fact that sustainability will ultimately rest on the countries of the region.

7. Mr. Y. Ibrahim, representing UNDP highlighted the importance of MEDRAP II to the region particularly in relation of food production. He said further development is considered important by UNDP and that UNDP will continue to support financially this activity, and will assist governments in this important area.

8. Mr. L. Korra, Vice-Minister of the Ministry of Agriculture and Food, thanked all present in the name of his Minister. He highlighted the importance of environmental considerations in relation to sound and sustainable development. He wished all a fruitful and constructive meeting.

9. The officials of the meeting were unanimously designated as follows:

10. Agenda was adopted as presented.

AGENDA ITEM 2 MEDRAP II ACTIVITIES REPORT

1. The Coordinator, Mr.H. Akrout introduced document. 1, describing briefly major activities. Action has followed recommendations of the previous Steering Committee Meeting except for 3 activities that were postponed upon the request of the host countries where these activities would have been held. He also referred to the recent supportive letter received from the EC Directorate General of Fisheries. Additional information on accomplished activities were provided by Ph. Ferlin, B. Tritar, D. Stephanou, G. Kadari, C. Agius, and A. Berraho in their respective capacities of Coordinators of these activities or representing the host countries where these activities were held.

AGENDA ITEM 3 NATIONAL, SUB-REGIONAL AND NETWORK REPORTS 1992

1. The following sub-regional coordinators presented concise reports about their respective regions.

All speakers stressed the importance of adhering to past recommendations, and in planning for the future, taking into consideration these reports.

2. Other speakers from Tunisia, Croatia, Syria and Albania gave additional information about their respective countries particularly in relation to environmental and market considerations.

3. Individual reports on the status of MEDRAP II prepared by each National Coordinator were distributed and annexed (Annex 1).

4. Several recommendations were made. These are included at the end of the report of the meeting.

AGENDA ITEM 4 MEDRAP II BUDGET SITUATION 1992

1. Mr. R. Ziesler (FAO/FIDO) introduced Document 2, and mentioned the discrepancies between the RER and RAB allocations. He mentioned that the RER/87/009 budget Revision “i” awaits UNDP approval, and that the contribution from the French Trust Fund might balance the deficits.

2. It was also suggested to consider the presence of EC Country Representatives in discussions and negotiations with the EC.

SESSION 2

AGENDA ITEM 5 BRIEFING ON THE AD HOC COMMITTEE ON MEDRAP III

1. Mr. G. Kadari introduced Document 4 in his capacity as Chairman of the Ad Hoc Committee Meeting, and briefly presented the main recommendations of the said meeting.

AGENDA ITEM 6 MEDRAP III PROPOSED FUTURE ACTION

1. Mr. H. Akrout introduced Document 5, 6 and 7. He mentioned in particular the contacts with CIHEAM in this respect. He presented a tentative proposed on the implementation of a MEDRAP III structure, given in the information document circulated during the meeting and referred to as Annexe 1 to Document 6.

2. This was followed by a discussion session and the recommendations are given at the end of the report.

AGENDA ITEM 7 INVOLVEMENT OF THE CONCERNED PARTIES

1. The main contents of Document 7 were again mentioned by the MEDRAP Coordinator, who then invited the concerned parties or organisations for their comments.

2. Unfortunately no representative of GFCM was present for discussion and comments.

3. Mr. M. Valls reaffirmed CIHEAM interest in MEDRAP and their willingness to cooperate and contribute. However, he made the following conditional remarks:

   -   All agreements are subject to approval by CIHEAM Board of Directors.

   -   Possibility of participation of CIHEAM member countries to future MEDRAP activities.

   -   CIHEAM can not assume at this stage any budgetary allocations to future MEDRAP activities.

4. On behalf of the Director of PAP/RAC, Mr. A. Benovic (Croatia), highlighted the important aspects of Document 7, Annexe 1. He asked the Project Coordinator to clarify officially the interrelation of PAP/RAC and the Tunis Environment Network Centre.

5. Mr. B. Tritar (Tunisia) expanded on SIPAM projected activities and welcomed collaboration with all concerned. He reaffirmed the commitment of the Tunisian Government to host the SIPAM Project and to ensure its local operating costs.

6. Following these presentations, Mr. Ph. Ferlin (France) invited all to be practical. He said that all concerned parties including GFCM, CIHEAM, SIPAM, etc. must initiate quick action for a definitive resolution of their commitments to MEDRAP III, by April 1993.

   The Network Steering Committee was informed about the measures taken for the implementation of SIPAM which will become operational on April 1st, 1993 in Tunisia. The NSC approves the proposed Project and the budget including the Funds from the general MEDRAP budget. The budget include the contribution from the French Trust Fund and from Tunisian Authorities.

7. Mrs. D. Stephanou (Cyprus) said that she accepts in principle the proposed structure as having potentials of being successful, however, this could not be binding at this stage as she considers certain important elements are missing.

8. Mr. Menezes (Portugal) mentioned the accomplishments of MEDRAP II. He mentioned, however, that there were still unresolved problems like marketing that needed attention.

9. Mr. H. Kouyoumjian (Lebanon) mentioned the sad reality that a group of countries are still today where they were at the beginning of MEDRAP. Of course, this is mainly due to the absence of major aquaculture related activities in these countries. However, in the case of Lebanon the promises of various representatives, particularly those of UNDP representative have never been materialised even though Lebanon did follow the suggestions made by UNDP respresentatives assisting Steering Committee Meetings. In this respect, Lebanon has requested a small assistance in acquisition of communication equipment.

10. Mr. C. Agius (Malta) said the presence of UNDP at such a critical turing point is important. Various aspects of the budget could be unacceptable to government. The way forward is to complete the various sub-networks that will make concrete proposals which then need to be prioritised by the Steering Committee before a final proposal is put forward.

11. Mr. H. Akrout responded to the points raised by saying that he is fully sympathetic to these problems, and that no major commitments from governments are requested at this stage. He said that the search for financial sources are of paramount importance.

    As regards countries that are not CIHEAM members, Mr. Akrout said ways and means of collaboration must be looked into eventually.

12. Mr. J. Menezes (Portugal) raised several questions about the proposed structures and expressed his reserve. He is willing to propose alternative structures.

3RD SESSION

AGENDA ITEM 8 GLOBAL ACTIVITY PROGRAMME 1993

1. Mr. H. Akrout introduced Document 8, and gave additional information on most activities. The following remarks were made:

   1. Mr. Shinawy (Egypt) asked to postpone the Workshop on Fresh Water Aquaculture to May.

   2. Mr. Katavic (Croatia) concerning the Network Seminar on Aquaculture and Environment, said in principle he accepts the proposition provided the participation of Croatia to MEDRAP is legalised. He also said that the fresh water culture workshop could be held in Hungary in May.

   3. Mrs. Stephanou (Cyprus) supports the idea of holding activities in non MEDRAP countries. Timing of such activities is very important.

   4. Mr. Menezes (Portugal) said courses and seminars are two different things. You can hold a course only in countries where there is local expertise. In this respect, he supports the suggestion of Croatia. He said it is better to hold the training course on diagnosis in winter because of accomodation problems.

   5. Mr. Agius (Malta) said it will be appropriate to consult Network Coordinators before final decisions are made. He asked the Coordinator to give some information on the seminar on constitution of aquaculture and environment network. He suggested Spain could be an alternative venue for the training course on Bact. diagnosis.

   6. Mr. Akrout said there are always budget restrictions, and that MEDRAP can be more effective in developping aquaculture in Member Countries when manifestations are held in Member Countries. There can be no question of spending money on non-Member Countries.

   7. Mr. Flloko (Albania) supports the suggestion that courses should be held in advanced countries within the MEDRAP region.

   8. After further debate on the matter when representatives of Algeria, Malta, Portugal and Croatia took the floor, Mr., Akrout gave additional information and prioritised the activities. Finally the compromise suggestion of Lebanon to ensure an effective participation of the Szarvas Institute in technical aspects of the workshop was accepted.

   9. Mr. Ferlin (France) referred to their contribution to SIPAM and said in principle he has no objection to hold the workshop on engineering in another venue, which they can then support to a certain degree.

   10. Finally, Document 8 was reviewed and revised. MEDRAP II Coordination Centre will revise the document including prioritisation, and send it to National Coordinators. At this stage, unfortunately, the venue of several activities could not be finalised. The Project Coordinator was authorised to negotiate and finalise.

       As regards the workshop on Artemia, the Project Coordinator is asked to discuss with Algeria and Libya 2 Sub-regions the possibility of organising a specialised meeting.

AGENDA ITEM 9 PREVISIONAL BUDGET 1993

1. Mr. Akrout introduced Document 9 and explained the various headings. Minor modifications were introduced by the participants. The budget will be reviewed together with Mr. Ziesler and all modifications reflected in the new version.

AGENDA ITEM 10 RECOMMENDATIONS

The following recommendations were made:

1. The decision taken in Cairo meeting as regards countries not advanced in aquaculture: Lebanon, Syria, Albania and Bulgaria, is reaffirmed. These countries are targetted for special attention and the Project Coordinator was invited to seek means and methods of special assistance particularly whenever some action towards aquaculture development is initiated.

2. The Project Coordinator was asked to follow up the question of the legal membership of Croatia to MEDRAP. The National Coordinator of Croatia was asked to follow up the matter also with his authorities.

3. There can be no question of introducing new administrative set-ups for the future development of MEDRAP. Existing infrastructures such as GFCM, CIHEAM and PAP/RAC should be considered while setting up perennial structures in this context.

4. In the discussions and negotiations as regards activities the relevant Network Coordinators must be consulted a priori. Priority should be given to organising all activities in MEDRAP countries where relevant expertise and facilities exist.

5. As regards future MEDRAP structures, the following recommendations were adopted:

   1. The GFCM will ensure the General Coordination of the future activities and will have to establish a Committee on Aquaculture for the purpose.

   2. The PAP/RAC should carry out the Aquaculture and Environment Network activities, the CIHEAM to be in charge of the Research and Training Network, and the Tunisian Government to host the SIPAM Project.

   3. For each project, a draft proposal have to be elaborated, by MEDRAP, beginning of 1993, in collaboration with the concerned institutions, and, if necessary, with a consultant's assistance.

   4. A seminar should be organised to review and adopt the draft proposal early in 1993. All interested countries and other parties concerned will attend.

   5. MEDRAP will be responsible for the elaboration of the final version of each Project Document, and the identification of funding sources, in collaboration with the concerned institutions.

   6. The adoption of the Project by the respective councils of the concerned institutions should be made by mid-93.

   7. By the end of 1993 the Project will be submitted to the Committee on Aquaculture for advice then to GFCM for adoption.

6. Concerning 1993 activities a number of changes and revisions were introduced before adoption. The Project Coordinator will introduced the changes and send a new version to the National Coordinators by the end of January 1993.

7. The budget was adopted with minor changes that reflect the changes in the Activities Programme, and the availability of funds. The Project Coordinator is invited to look for additional sources of finance.

AGENDA ITEM 11 MISCELLANEOUS

No items were discussed.

SESSION 4 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The draft report was read and approved after the introduced modifications.

AGENDA ITEM 12 ADJOURNEMENT OF THE MEETING

At the end of the meeting all the Steering Committee Members reaffirmed their commitment to MEDRAP and their full support to the Project Coordinator. MEDRAP, not only supports aquaculture development in the region but also contributes to the elaboration of a network of human resources.

All the National and Sub-Regional Coordinators and the Project Coordinator take this opportunity to convey their special thanks to the Albanian Authorities and the National Coordinator Mr. A. Flloko who spared no efforts in making this meeting a fruitful and a memorable one.

NEXT STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING IN BEIRUT, LEBANON EARLY NOVEMBER 1993.

Meeting adjourned 14.30, December 11th, 1992.