1

Newsletter 24 June 2011

G77 Consultants, Editors Office: A-129 bis G77 Chair, Adviser Phone: 06-5705-4882 © www.fao.org/g77 email: G77-Consultants@fao.org

N. 04N. 04N. 04N. 04

2

G77 NEWSLETTER – Electronic version

Available at: www.fao.org/g77 Edition N. 04 : June 2011

In this edition:

Handover for the Chairmanship of G77- 2011

Main issues raised within the Group of 77 and China-2011

Rotation for the G77 Chairmanship of G77, 2012 – 2019

Increasing the number of seats at the Council

European Group Chair’s Proposal regarding the appointment of the DDG

Shared Service Centre

G77 Special Session for the presentation of Candidates for the post of DG

Programme Committee issues in spring 2011

The Annual Executive Board session of the World Food Program (6-11 June 2011)

Committee on Constitutional and Legal Matters (7-9 March 2011)

Interview with Mr. Ibrahim Abu Atileh- Chairperson of G77-2010

www.fao.org/g77

3

Handover for the Chairmanship of the

Group of 77 and China 2011 Rome chapter

By G77 Consultants

After the regular plenary meeting of the G77 on 26th of January 2011, the handover ceremony was held in a jubilant and warm manner in FAO headquarters to handover the chairmanship of G77 from the outgoing chairperson Mr Ibrahim Abu Atileh, Deputy Permanent Representative of Jordan, to H.E Hassan Abouyoub, Permanent Representative of Morocco.

Mr. Abu Atileh delivered a warm speech underlining that the spirit of cooperation and solidarity amongst the Group through his chairmanship in 2010 has helped the G77 in consolidating its ranks and defending its common strategic interests. He extended his heartiest congratulations to the delegation of Morocco who will Chair the G77 for 2011. He also commended the work done by the Secretariat of the G77 and the G77 Consultants for their continued valuable support, dedication and commitment to the work of the G77.

The incoming Chairperson, H.E Hassan Abouyoub, extended his thanks to all the members of the Group for the trust they placed in Morocco to Chair the G77 for 2011. He then commended the remarkable work done by the outgoing Chair, with skill, competence and devotion. He underlined that 2011 will be a difficult year considering the world wide economic situation, and stressed that the Group should keep in

Chairmanship handover for 2011 H.E Hassan Aboyoub (left) and Mr Ibrahim Abu Atileh (right) Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan mind natural catastrophes which will have an impact on world food supply. He stressed that he will listen to the G77 members proposals to take inspiration for encountering all matters in the coming year.

On 3 February 2011, the Chairs of Regional Groups have signed the gentlemen agreement on the rotation for G77 Chairmeanship 2012-2019 (8-year cycle). Following this agreement, H.E Doña Gladys Francisca Urbaneja Durán , Ambassador of The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, was nominated as the Vice-Chair of G77 and China by GRULAC.

4

Main issues raised within the Group of 77 and China

requiring the Group’s common position

Year 2011

By G77 Consultants

Rotation for the Chairmanship of G77, 2012 –

2019

From the beginning of the first G77 Plenary meeting, the rotation process for the Chairmanship of the G77 for the year 2012 - 2019 was approved. Following the 8 year cycle Agreement of Rotation for the G77 Chairmanship, signed by the four Regional Groups’ Chairpersons and the Chairperson of the G77 on 8 March 2004, Chairmanship of the G77 would be rotating among each Regional Group. It was agreed to continue following this principle, with some flexibility, taking into consideration that all the Regional Groups should be able to assume Chairmanship in a year that coincides with FAO Conference year.

Click here for Agreement of Rotation for the

G77 Chairmanship, 2012 –2019

5

Increasing the number of seats at the Council

On 23 February 2011, the G77 Chairperson sent a letter to the Director General of the FAO, on behalf the G77 and China and the Kingdom of Morocco, to reiterate the G77 position to see an increase of 12 seats at the Council, under Article XX, paragraph 3 of the Constitution, that an amendment to the Constitution be considered by the forthcoming Thirty-seventh session of the Conference, as follows: Article V, paragraph 1 of the Constitution is to be amended to read as follows:

A council of the Organization consisting of forty nine sixty-one Member Nations shall be elected by the Conference. Each Member Nation on the Council shall have one representative and shall have only one vote. Each Member of the Council may appoint alternate, associates and advisers to its

representative. The Council may determine the conditions for the participation of alternates, associates and advisors in its proceedings, but any such participation shall be without the right to vote, except in the case of an alternate, associate and advisor participation in the place of a representation. No representative may represent more than one Member of the Council. The tenure and other conditions of the office of the Members of the Council shall be subject to rules made by the Conference. The Director General of the FAO addressed the Chairperson of the G77 by writing, on the 11 March 2011, informing him that the Secretariat had already notified the Members of the Organization the proposed amendment so that it can be considered during the next session of the FAO Conference in June-July 2011.

6

Main issues raised within the Group of 77 and China

requiring the Group’s common position

Year 2011

European Group Chair’s Proposal regarding

the appointment of the DDG (Operations)

In March 2011, the European Regional Group drafted a letter to be submitted to the Director General, concerning the appointment of the Deputy Director General, on behalf of all the seven Regional Groups. The European Regional Group asked for the G77 support on this issue. The different Regional Groups of the G77 examined the letter and stressed that the G77 will not support the European Region initiative, underlining that the G77 expressed its appreciation of the DG’s efforts and work, and share his determination to take all the necessary measures to ensure a sound functioning of the Organization. However, the G77 highlighted that it could envisage the extension of the term of office of the current Deputy Director-General for operations by waiver until the end of 2011, as a compromise.

Shared Services Centre

The establishment of the three SSC hubs to serve three different time zones had originally been proposed by the Secretariat and approved by the governing bodies in 2005, after very careful examination. In January 2008, the Bangkok and Santiago hubs became fully operational while the Budapest hub opened with a first complement of about 25 staff. Then, in the same year, the idea of consolidating the three hubs was launched, which seemed to put into question the judgment of the Secretariat and the Governing Bodies as it was a complete reversal of the original policy on SSC hubs. The 138th Session of the Finance Committee discussed the in-depth review on the SSC which was provided in line with the request of the 140th Session of the Council.

7

It acknowledged that the recommendations made by the 2010 Regional Conferences varied between regions but had broadly been addressed in the report. Some members of the Committee felt they were unable to endorse the proposal due primarily to findings in the report with regard to higher quality of services provided by the hubs in Bangkok and Santiago in a survey conducted in 2009, as well as the relatively marginal savings associated to the proposal. The Finance Committee recommended submission of two proposals to the Council: 1. Consolidation of the hubs in one

Centre in Budapest as detailed in the Management Report; and

2. Maintaining status quo of two hubs in

Santiago and Bangkok with the Centre in Budapest.

In April 2011, a joint statement of the Asia and the GRULAC Group was distributed amongst all G77 Members. The document contained the position of the respective Regional Conferences concerning the proposal on the consolidation of a Single Shared Services Centre in Budapest, and reaffirmed the support of both groups of proposal number 2. All G77 Regional Groups supported this statement and the Chair of the G77 submitted this position as a G77 declaration at the 141st Session of the Council. Click here for the intervention of G77 and China at the FAO Council.

8

Main issues raised within the Group of 77 and China

requiring the Group’s common position

Year 2011

G77 Special Session for the presentation of

Candidates for the post of Director General

In March 2011, one of the Candidates for the post of Director General requested an opportunity to make a presentation of his candidacy to the G77. The G77 Chairperson underlined that all the Candidates for the post of the DG should be treated on the same basis of fairness and neutrality, and suggested that a meeting dedicated for the six Candidates could be organised between the FAO Council and the FAO Conference, to give each one of them an opportunity to give their presentations. The G77 Members welcomed the principle of holding this meeting on the 20 May 2011. The Candidates were given 15 minutes each to make their statement, followed by 10 minutes of questions from the G77 Members; 2 minutes

were given to each Regional Groups to ask a maximum of 2 questions to each candidate, and finally the Candidates were allotted 20 minutes to answer the questions. The entire meeting was held in English, as the lingua franca. Non-G77 Members’ participation to this Special Session, as silent observers, was welcomed by the G77 Members, stressing that the future Director General will serve the whole Membership and that sharing the concerns of the G77 with the non-G77 Members is of great importance. All four Regional Groups focused on issues that were particularly relevant to their Regions when addressing their questions to each Candidate.

9

FAO Director General candidates (clockwise from top left):

1. Mr Franz Fischler (Austria)

2. Mr José Graziano da Silva (Brazil)

3. Mr Indroyono Soesilo (Indonesia)

4. Mr Abdul Latif Rashid (Iraq)

5. Mr Miguel Ángel Moratinos (Spain)

6. Mr Mohammad Saeid Noori Nasini (Iran)

10

Programme Committee issues in spring 2011

By Laatu Riikka chairperson of the PC

In 2011, the main part of the Programme Committee has been the proposed Medium Term Plan and Programme of Work of FAO. It has been discussed on various occasions, starting with informal meetings with the strategy teams on their priorities, based on views expressed by member countries in the Regional Conferences and Technical Committees, and continuing with the formal session in April. The management proposal was commended in its results based approach, and increased focus on areas of emphasis. The Committee Members were particularly interested in the prioritization process, and counting the informal meetings, spent close to a full working week discussing the priorities. With the additional information received from the secretariat, it became clear that a large part of the proposed resource shifts were due to transferring activities from one strategic objective to another where the activity would better fit. The additional information also

revealed that real prioritization (i.e. doing more of something and less of something else) still seemed to be rather limited.The Committee ended up suggesting two changes in the formulation of the Organizational Results, and suggesting more funding to FAO’s gender work and evaluation activities. A number of other suggestions were made, as well. At the same time it was accepted that the whole prioritization exercise was still work in progress, and that during the next PWB round, the process needs to be strengthened. Particularly the regional conferences are going to play an increasing role in this process. As the name suggests, the Programme Committee’s work focuses on FAO’s programme of activities. The PC is involved in the programme planning, in monitoring the programme of work, and in its evaluation. In 2011, the PC has also looked into the Mid-term Review Synthesis Report of 2010 which was the first such report under the new results-

11

based reporting system. The Committee therefore made a number of suggestions on how to improve the format in the next report. The general impression of the Committee was that FAO is performing well against the Organizational Results. However, there is a need to ensure that extra budgetary resources are better aligned, and to focus more attention to risks and impediments, to achieve optimal results. The Committee has been very actively reviewing various FAO evaluations during its term. In the two meetings in April and May alone, three evaluation reports and management responses were reviewed, covering FAO’s work in emergencies, FAO’s work in the Near East Region, and FAO’s work in India and Brazil. Finally, the Programme Committee has been developing its own working methods in line with the FAO reform. It was the first

governing body to complete its Multi Year Programme of Work (MYPOW), and in themay meeting, it spent some time reviewing its own results as defined in the MYPOW, and made a number of recommendations on how results could be further improved as the next Committee members take over after July. I would like to warmly thank all the Programme Committee members for their contributions. I think that we have made a difference by the active involvement and positive spirit of everyone. We have all made great efforts in finding compromise solutions, and have succeeded in making a large number of consensual recommendations. Everyone has contributed, from their regional background and from their experience on substantive items. Everyone was also keen to contribute to the review of our own work, and the next team will inherit a number of ideas from us on how to organize their work, together with the other governing bodies, to further improve the results.

12

The Annual Executive Board session of

the World Food Program

By Fatma Hussein Saber

The Annual Board session of the World Food Program Executive Board took place from 6 to 11 June, 2011. The session was chaired by H.E. Agnes van Ardenne, Permanent Representative of the Netherlands, and Mr. Peter Bakker, WFP Ambassador for Hunger gave the keynote speech. H.E. Josette Sheeran, Executive Director of the WFP gave an opening statement focusing on the expansion of the Programme’s activities and the challenges to world food security. Representatives from 36 countries attended the session, which witnessed an active participation by the G77 member States. The Board discussed items on the Financial and Administrative management of the Programme, including the audited accounts, the report of the Inspector General, and the report of the Audit Committee for 2010 which included recommendations by the Committee on improving its work. The Board decided to revise the Terms of Reference of the Committee till when a working group composed of Bureau and Secretariat reviewed the work of the Committee. The Board also endorsed a change in the management plan to make it on a 3 year cycle approved each year on a rolling basis. The Board also approved a document on WFP policy formulation, allowing for more clarity on how policies are set and which require

approval. Many of the policy documents presented to the Board were updates on the implementation of previously approved policies, including on the use of cash and vouchers and on school feeding. The documents highlighted the number of tools available to WFP to carry out its mandate and to respond to the diverse variety of needs related to food security which exist, and were welcomed by all developing countries. The debate on the document on climate change and hunger reflected the ongoing hesitation by some members of the Board for WFP to play a role in the fields of adaptation and mitigation to climate change, although it was supported by many developing countries. Concerning operations, the Board approved a number of Country Programs and Protracted Relief and Recovery Operations for Member States of the G77, including Honduras, Mauritania, Ghana, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Bangladesh, Senegal, Ethiopia, Kenya, Indonesia, Niger. Finally, the Board bid farewell to H.E. Agnes van Ardenne, in her capacity as President of the Board, and expressed their appreciation for her dedication to enhancing the work of the Board and WFP. Ambassador Van Ardenne has been replaced with H.E. James Harvey, the Permanent Representative of the United Kingdom as President of the Board.

13

Committee on Constitutional and Legal Matters

7-9 March 2011

By Mr. Yohannes Tensue

The CCLM reviews and examines matters referred to it by the FAO Council or the Director General of the Organization. The 92nd Session of the CCLM was held from 7-9 March 2011. During this Session the officials of the Finance Division presented a document entitled “Amendments to the Financial Regulations for the Implementation of International Public Sector Accounting Standards” (IPSAS). The CCLM reviewed the document and noted that IPSAS would bring improvements to the Organization’s accounts. The adoption of IPSAS and its implementation would introduce the following changes: the biennial accounts currently used would be annual financial statements; the biennial audit would be changed to annual. The biennial budgetary cycle and funding obligations of members would remain the same. The timely submission of the report of the External Auditor is a critical element of the oversight system of the Organization. The CCLM recommended that the timing of the submission of the report of the External Auditor be kept under review. As for the Disclosure of Internal Audit Report, the CCLM felt that this issue should be looked at by the Finance Committee at its forthcoming session. The Whistleblower Protection Policy had been implemented in other Organizations of the United Nations and the policy was reproduced in the Administrative Circular of

FAO and concerned bodies were consulted on the policy. The CCLM and the Audit Committee recommended that the Whistleblower Protection Policy could be adjusted as necessary, after a year of its implementation. The Conference had requested the establishment of the Ethics Committee as part of the IPA but many members are not fully convinced as to its merits, terms of reference and its composition. Following a debate on the matter and the doubts of some members, the CCLM endorsed a proposal that the Ethics Committee be established for a trial period of four years beginning in January 2012 and its members would be composed of three external and two internal staff, one DDG and the Legal Council. Preparation of the Provisional Agenda of the Regional Conferences- Rule XXXV while the common practices were that the provisional agendas are prepared by the secretariat in consultation with the Chairpersons of the concerned bodies, the Council at its 140th Session recommended that the Rules of Procedures for the Regional Conferences be further reviewed by the Regional Groups during 2011 and 2012. The CCLM also noted the proposed change of the Official Name of FAO in Spanish which would be referred to the Conference for approval with phased implementation in view of its financial implications.

14

Ibrahim Abu Atileh

Ibrahim Abu Atileh:

“Our Power is in Our Unity”

By G77 Consultants

In this exclusive interview with

Mr. Ibrahim Abu Atileh, the

Chair of G77 for the year 2010,

he talks about the Group of 77

highlighting the major role,

achievements and obstacles.

How do you evaluate the role of G77 in UN-Rome based agencies? The G77 and China tackles a number of multilateral issues in all the related activities to UN Rome based agencies. I am proud to say that we had always been in clear, strong and constructive positions reflecting our mutual interests for the benefit of our countries. What were the main obstacles facing the G77 during 2010, your Chairmanship year? While you are working always you face some obstacles and I will start by the major obstacle which is the number of G77 representations. We have only 81 out 131 countries having a presentation in Rome. So we should keep reflecting the interests of other 50 countries. This needs coordination with other different governing bodies

like regional conferences seeking for their priorities and interests. The financial status of the Trust Fund Project was another serious difficulty. What were the main achievements facing the G77 during 2010, your Chairmanship year?

I think having a consensus amongst the four regional groups, Asia, Africa, Near East and GRULAC, was the main cause of all the achievements of the year. We have experienced the unity

of the G77 in the Shared Service Centre and we had a united position that guarantees and satisfies the interests of Asia and Latin America regions, where they did the same on the matter of expanding the membership of FAO Council. The solidarity sense has paved the way to achieve our goals. How do you see the importance of the Trust Fund in the context of Capacity Building? I assure that, the main objective of the trust fund is the capacity

building for both, the people who are representing their countries and the G77 consultants themselves. I would say that we should work for giving the new generations and fresh graduates the chance to work and gain experience.

Would you tell us about the Trust fund Project 2011-2013? As I said I started my chairmanship term with a deficit in the Trust fund and during my term I got a total of $95,359. I have invited the representative of donors to Trust fund to express our thanks and gratitude for their governments and I have also invited the representative of the countries which I had asked for donation, on the base that I believe that this Trust Fund is essential to our group and it was and will continue as a helpful tool for all of us. I believe that the rogramme is also intended to give a valuable experience for young people coming from both G77 and non-G77 countries.

On the occasion of his Farewell (Mr. Ibrahim Abu Atileh, Deputy Permanent Representative

of Jordan to FAO, G77 Chair for 2010), The G77 and China- Rome Chapter acknowledges

his valuable work and outstanding performance during the years 2007-2011

15

www.fao.org/g77