PLANT GENETIC RESOURCES TREATY PASSES

UNCLAS ROME 001417

SIPDIS

STATE FOR E, EB, OES/ETC - NEUMANN, EB/TPP/BTT - MALAC
AND IO/EDA - KOTOK
USDA FOR DHEGWOOD, FAS - BRICHEY LREICH AND RHUGHES
AND ARS - BRETTING AND BLALOCK
USAID FOR EGAT/ESP - MOORE AND BERTRAM

FROM U.S. MISSION TO THE UN AGENCIES IN ROME

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: EAGR ETRD EAID SENV KIPR AORC FAO
SUBJECT: PLANT GENETIC RESOURCES TREATY PASSES
RATIFICATION THRESHOLD FOR ENTRY INTO FORCE BUT LACKS
FUNDS FOR CRUCIAL PREPARATORY MEETINGS

REF: (A) ROME 1057; (B) ROME 0280;
(C) 03 ROME 5197; (D) 03 ROME 2210


1. FAO announced on March 31 that 48 countries had
ratified the International Treaty (IT) for Plant Genetic
Resources for Food and Agriculture (see ref A).
Simultaneous submission of instruments of ratification at
the end of March by 12 EU countries and the European
Community carried the IT over the threshold of 40
ratifications that will trigger entry into force 90 days
later.


2. Alternate Permrep discussed latest IT developments
with Jose Esquinas-Alcazar, Secretary of the FAO
Commission on Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture,
on April 8. We conveyed USG concern about the repeated
postponement of the Expert Group meeting to discuss a
standard Material Transfer Agreement (MTA),and urged FAO
to convene the meeting as soon as possible. We noted
that, until the MTA is adopted, transfers of plant
genetic resources under the IT's Multilateral System
cannot occur; neither facilitated access nor benefit
sharing could take place until the MTA is adopted by the
IT Governing Body. We urged that FAO make the MTA Expert
Group meeting a high priority and if necessary use its
own funds for this purpose if the shortfall in voluntary
donor contributions persists.


3. Esquinas replied that he completely shared the USG
view of the importance of moving forward with the MTA
meeting and with our interpretation of the legal
ramifications of inaction on the MTA. He explained,
however, that plans for the MTA Expert Group meeting
(including reservations of rooms and interpreters for a
fixed date) could not be finalized under FAO internal
rules until the necessary funding had been received. He
explained that the FAO Secretariat's proposed Program of
Work and Budget for 2004-2005, under a Zero Real Growth
(ZRG) scenario, allocates $180,000 from the regular
assessed budget, but this would be for meetings of IT
statutory bodies only. The rest would have to come from
voluntary contributions. As matters currently stand,
there are still tentative reservations for an MTA meeting
in July 2004, but the FAO's Conference Affairs Division
cannot guarantee that slot for much longer, in which case
the meeting would shortly have to be rescheduled for the
autumn.


4. The FAO official handed us a sheet (faxed to OES/ETC)
with the following accounting: The meeting cost of the
MTA Expert Group is $228,250, plus 13,695 (6% project
service cost),plus $150,000 for participation of
developing countries, for a total of $391,945. As of
April 8, FAO had $232,684 in voluntary contributions on
hand. Esquinas explained that an additional $22,000 in
2003 money from Canada (which was unspent by FAO and
therefore withdrawn) would be made available again in

2004. Also, he noted that FAO has recently received a
pledge from Germany. (The German Permanent
Representation in Rome confirmed to U.S. Mission that
this pledge is in the amount of 85,000 euros, or about
$102,000 at current exchange rates, but could not predict
exactly when the money would be available.) U.S. Mission
calculates that all received and pledged voluntary
contribution amount to $356,684, which is still about
$35,260 less than required.


5. Comment: FAO's Esquinas seems to share USG concerns
about the urgency of moving ahead with discussions of a
standard MTA, but his hands are tied by FAO budgetary and
administrative regulations. In the short term, the issue
could be resolved by a small but timely voluntary
contribution from one or more donors; but in longer run
the constraints on IT-related meetings are part of a
larger budgetary picture in which the Plant Genetic
Resources Treaty is just one political football. The FAO
Conference in November 2001 requested the Director
General "to ensure that appropriate resources, including
human resources, are available to the Secretariat of the
Commission on Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture,
acting as the Interim Committee [of the IT]." The
Director General's proposed Program of Work and Budget
for 2004-5 initially called for $360,000 for an Interim
Committee meeting. Under the ZRG scenario, this was
scaled back by the FAO Secretariat to $180,000, leaving
the rest to voluntary extrabudgetary contributions. FAO
member governments meeting as the FAO Conference in
November-December 2003 adopted an overall budget for 2004-
5 that is in fact less than ZRG, so there may be further
proposed cuts for IT-related activities. The FAO Finance
Committee (on which the U.S. sits) will meet in May to
discuss how to implement the Program of Work and Budget
under the more stringent financial constraints mandated
by the Conference, and one of the challenges will be to
ensure that activities we consider essential are built
into the regular program budget, and not left to the
vagaries of the extrabudgetary process.

Hall


NNNN
2004ROME01417 - Classification: UNCLASSIFIED