Resources for:
  Governments
  Scientists
  Journalists
  Civil Society
  Business Persons
  Children and Youth

Thematic Areas


 
 Printable Version
 

Programme matters (decision 11/7)

Assistance to the South Asia Co-operative Environment Programme (decision_11/8) Regional programmes in Latin America and the Caribbean

(decision11/9)

71. Decisions 11/7 to 11/9 were adopted on the recommendation of Sessional Committee I. Except as indicated below, the decisions were approved

in the Committee and adopted by the Council, at the 10th plenary meeting, on 24 May 1983, by consensus and without comment. In the Committee the Assistant Executive Director, Office of the Environment Fund and Administration, responding to a request that the financial implications of each draft

decision be indicated, warned that no additional implications over and above those contained in the programme budget document (UNEP/GC.11/7 and Corr.1), as approved by the Council as an overall framework for activities, could be entertained.

Programme matters (decision 11/ 7)

71. Sessional Committee I was informed by its Chairman that all the draft decisions before it, except for those on assistance to the South Asia Co-operative Environment Programme and on regional programmes in Latin America and the Caribbean (decisions 11/8 and 11/9) would be amalgamated under the above heading.

Part one: Programme budget and general matters

72. In Committee I the draft decision, proposed by the Chairman, was approved by consensus as amended by the delegations of Algeria, Brazil, India, the Netherlands, Pakistan on behalf of the Asian Group, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America.

73. In plenary, the Council approved a proposal by the representative of France for the deletion of a paragraph reflecting a request to the Executive Director made in the Committee (see chap. VI, para. 184 below) on the grounds that it was superfluous to remind the Executive Director of his

responsibilities in that respect.

Part two: Environment and development

A. Industry and environment

75. Committee I considered the draft decision, submitted by Egypt, France, India, Mexico, the Netherlands and the United revised by the expanded Bureau. Following the incorporation by an informal drafting group composed of the delegations of Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and the United States of decision was approved by consensus.

B. Environmental law

76. Committee I considered the draft decision, submitted by the delegations of Canada, the Federal Republic of Germany, Finland, India, Kenya, Mexico, the Netherlands, Norway, the Philippines, Spain, Sweden and Yugoslavia, as revised by the expanded Bureau. The draft decision, as revised by the Netherlands and amended by the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America in section I, amended by Egypt on behalf of the African Group in section III, and amended by Brazil on behalf of the Latin American and Caribbean Group in section IV, was approved by consensus. The delegation of Pakistan reserved its position with respect to the amendments incorporated in section IV' A representative of the Office of the Environment Fund and Administration noted that provision for holding

future meetings of the Ad Hoc Working Group of Legal and Technical Experts for the Elaboration of a Global Framework Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer could be accommodated within the programme budget.

77. In plenary, the Executive Director requested Governments willing to provide financial resources and/or facilities for the meetings referred to in sections I and 11 of the decision to communicate their willingness to the secretariat before the end of July 1983.

Part three: Environmental awareness

A. Environmental education and training in the Asia and thePacific region

77. Committee I considered the draft decision, submitted by the Asian Group, as revised by the expanded Bureau. A representative of the Office of the Environment Fund and Administration said that the decision could be implemented within available resources. The draft decision was then approved by consensus.

78. In plenary, the Executive Director said he intended to provide the assistance called for in paragraph I of the decision in consultation and co-operation with relevant organizations of the United Nations system. Regarding the meeting referred to in paragraph 2, as well as various other meetings called for in the decisions recommended by Sessional Committee I, he pointed out that the Environment Fund was not in a position to support Expert’s participation.

B. Environmental education and training in Latin America and the Caribbean

80. In Committee I the draft decision, submitted by the Latin American and Caribbean Group and revised by the expanded Bureau, was approved by consensus.

C. Information

81. In Committee I the draft decision, submitted by the delegations of Australia, Canada, the Federal Republic of Germany, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America, was reformulated, following considerable discussion, by a

small working group consisting of the sponsors and the delegations of Egypt and Malaysia, and then approved by consensus. A representative of the Office of the Environment Fund and Administration noted that the cost of one consultant to undertake the proposed review, approximately $50,000,

could be accommodated within existing financial resources.

82. In plenary the Executive Director, responding to queries by the representative of the Netherlands concerning when any recommendations which the cost-effectiveness study might yield regarding mazingira could be implemented, said that the UNEP Contracts Committee had recommended that a

contract be concluded for publication of the magazine until 1985, with a review by the -Editorial Board in August/ September 1983 designed to reduce the costs at the time of that review, he would recommend that the contract not be extended beyond the end of 1984, pending the Governing Councils decision on the matter.

83. The representative of the Soviet Union, supported by the representative of Brazil, proposed that the project reports referred to in paragraph 6 of the draft decision should be distributed only to Governments, which in turn would distribute them to scientific institutions and non-governmental organizations. The representative of Canada expressed serious concern at that proposal, which he said would place unwarranted restrictions on the dissemination of information by UNEP. Following a discussion in which the delegations of Argentina, Brazil, Canada, the Federal Republic of Germany, Malaysia, the Netherlands, Pakistan and the United States of America took part, the Council agreed to a proposal by the President that the paragraph be amended to read as in annex I below. The decision was then adopted by consensus. The Executive Director said that the secretariat would seek an

indication from Governments as to the institutions and organizations in their countries to which the reports should be distributed .

D. Public information in Africa and Asia and the Pacific

84. In Committee I the draft decision, submitted by the African Group under the title "Public information in Africa", was approved by consensus in revised form, with the Asian Group and the delegation of France as additional sponsors.

85. In plenary a subparagraph relating to distribution of project reports was deleted on the grounds that it was covered by section C, paragraph 6.

Part four: Oceans

A. Global marine environment: Co-operation between The United Nations Environment Programme and the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission

86. In Committee I the draft decision, submitted by the Latin American and Caribbean Group, was approved by consensus as revised in the expanded Bureau and amended by the delegation of the Netherlands.

B. Expansion and implementation of the regional seas programme

87. In Committee I the draft decision, submitted by the Asian and Latin American and Caribbean Groups and revised by the expanded Bureau, was approved by consensus as further revised by the delegation of Sri Lanka. A representative of the Office of the Environment Fund and Administration said that the decision could be implemented within the existing budgetary allocation for regional seas.

Part five: Water

88. In Committee I the draft decision, submitted by the African Group, was approved by consensus as amended by the delegations of Pakistan

and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

89. In Plenary the representative Of Egypt, speaking on behalf of the African said that the allocations for the water programme in the 1984-1985 program budget should be Increased.

Part Six: Terrestrial Ecosystems: Genetic Resources

90. In Committee I the draft decision, submitted by the delegations of Australia, Belgium, Kenya, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States Of America and revised by the expanded Bureau, was adopted by Consensus after further revision by the delegation of the United Kingdom Of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Part Seven: Arid and semi-arid land ecosystems and desertification control: Desertification in Africa

A. Implementation of the plan of action to Combat Desertification

B. Implementation of the Plan of Action to Combat Desertification in the Sudano-Sahelian region

91. In Committee I the draft decision, submitted by the African Group and revised by the expanded Bureau, was approved by Consensus as further revised by the delegation of Egypt on behalf of the sponsors, following a suggestion by the representative of the United Nations Sudano-Sahellan Office,

and amended by the delegation of the Netherlands. General Assembly, which by resolution 32/172 of 19 December 1977, had established the terms 92.

In Plenary the Executive Director Pointed out that, since It was the General Assembly of reference of the Consultative Group for Desertification Control, the expansion Of the Groups Mandate implied in part A, paragraph 2, of the draft decision would require a decision of the Assembly. He also requested clarification concerning what Policies, programmes and projects it was envisaged the Group graduate, and Pointed out that the review Of Progress in the implementation of the Plan of Action to Combat Desertification was the responsibility of the Governing Council.

93. At the Suggestion of the representative of Egypt, speaking on behalf of the African Group, paragraph 2 was divided into two paragraphs so worded as to indicate clearly the responsibility of the General Assembly for expanding the Mandate Of the Consultative Group, and omitting the

reference to evaluation by the Group of specific Policies, programmes and projects undertaken in implementation of the Plan Of Action. The representatives of the Netherlands and the United States of America said they could accept the deletion of that reference, which had deliberately been left unspecific, on the understanding that the Issue could be raised again either at the thirty-eighth session of the Assembly or at the Governing councils twelfth session In the context of the review of progress In the Implementation of the Plan Of Action. In their view, it was Important to seek ways of strengthening the role of the Consultative Group and enabling It to assist the Council’s deliberations by Providing an element of Policy guidance.

Part eight: Regional, activities

A. Regional programmes in Africa

94. In Committee I the draft decision, submitted by the African Group, was approved by consensus as amended by the delegation of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

B. Regional activities in Asia and the Pacific

95. In Committee I the draft decision, submitted by the Asian Group and revised byte expanded Bureau, was approved by consensus on the understanding, and stated by a representative of the Office of the Environment Fund and Administration, that no additional financial implications could be absorbed within the 1984-1985-programme budget in respect of paragraph 3.

C. Year of the Trees (1988) for Asia and the Pacific

96. In Committee I the draft decision, submitted by the Asian Group, was approved by consensus as revised by the delegation of Pakistan.

97. In plenary the representative of Jordan stated that the two decisions under regional programmes relating to the Asia and Pacific region should be understood as covering also the Arab countries in Asia.

D. Regional activity in Europe

98. In Committee I the draft decision, submitted by the delegations of the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Hungary, Poland, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, and amended by the Bureau, was approved by consensus.

Part nine: Implementation

99. Part nine of the draft decision was adopted by consensus in plenary.

Assistance to the South Asia Co-operative Environment Programme (decision 11/8)

100. In Committee I the draft decision, submitted by the Asian Group and revised by the expanded Bureau, was adopted by consensus.

Regional Programmes in Lain America and the Caribbean (decision 11/9)

101. In Committee I the draft decision, submitted by the Latin American and Caribbean Group, was approved by consensus as amended by the delegation of the Federal Republic of Germany.