Download - Delegation statements

Delegation Statements The following excerpts from formal

statements made at the Sixth Session illustrate the wide spectrum of environmental concerns and perceptions which received c,onsideration during Council proceedings.

Japan:

It has often and rightly been said that Man's sojourn on this planet can be likened to a voyage upon the success of which our very survival depends. We are all, as it were, passengers on the "Space- ship Earth". Because the resources avail- able on the ship are limited, we must share and protect them so that all aboard may enjoy a better quality of life. If pollution contaminates the ship, environmental catastrophe may await us all at any moment. Poverty, with its filth and disease, degrades man; affluence with its flood of industrial wastes degrades his environment.

We are all facing socioeconomic diffi- curies throughout the world. The ex- plosive growth of world population, shortage of food, an energy crisis and other crucial problems do still exist.

In this context, Mr. President, we fully share the views, expressed by the Executive Director in Paragraph 26 of GC6/2, that there is an urgent need for constructive cooperation among all countries to evolve new patters of development and life-styles that will ensure the well-being of present and future generations.

I think the problem of toxic chemical substances might be one of the most important subjects in the field of environmental protection. The production and consumption volume of chemical substances is rapidly increasing, as men- tioned in Paragraph 9 of the report. The existence of more than four million chemical substances has been identified and more than 30 thousand chemical substances are said to be commercially produced at present. Moreover, hun- dreds of chemical substances are newly marketed every year.

Our country has suffered from serious adverse effects in the course of the development and utilization of chemical substances. The most remarkable examples are those of Minamata Disease, Itai4tai Disease and the disease caused by the residual organic mercury contained in pesticides. As a country having under- gone such bitter experiences, our country is only too aware of the importance

Environmental Policy and Law, 4 (1978)

Photo: UNEP 6GCi A view of the presidium. From right to left: Mrs, Hedia Baccar (Tunisia), Rapporteur-General; Secretary (UNEP); M. A. Velarde (Spain), President of the Governing Council; M. Tolba (UNEP), Executive Director; Sveneld Evteev (UNEP), Director of Programme; Horet-Peter Oltnianns, Director of the Fund and Administration.

of paying attention to the risk of chemical substances.

In this respect, Mr. President, we greatly appreciate the effort of the UNEP and other international organizations such as WHO, FAO, and OECD to control chemical substances. We attach a great significance to, among others, IRPTC, which aims at filling the knowledge gap that exists concerning the toxic substances and make it easier for each country to have access to reliable information by registering toxic chemical substances under the auspices of UNEP.

I should like to refer to the question of the geographical distribution of UNEP's projects. My delegation holds a deep concern for the fact that in 1977, UNEP's expenditure for Asia was only 7% of the expenditure for regional projects. Needless to say, Asia, with its huge and ever growing population, is facing a great number of and a variety of socioeconomic problems. On top of that, we have serious environmental problems, all of which means that our Asian governments are struggling against overwhelm- ing difficulties. It is for this reason that we urge the Executive Director of UNEP to hire more Asia staff members and

consultants who will have adequate knowledge and experience in Asian environmental problems. Under present c i r - cumstances, I wish to state that this important region is attracting less attention from the UNEP Secretariat in terms of staff members and also in terms of the usage of Fund.

Austria My delegation is conscious of the

difficulties facing the Executive Director, the Secretariat and the staff of UNEP in the accomplishment of their tasks. In the present difficult and uncertain climate of world economy, national policies tend all too often to relegate environmental considerations to second place whenever they may conflict with requirements of providing and safeguard- ing jobs, securing a country's energy supply, improving its balance of pay- ments, or maintaining an adequate mar- gin of profitability in industrial, mining, agricultural, touristic and other operations. An ever increasing number of concerns of the international community require voluntary contributions from member states who themselves battle in most instances with budget deficits of

59

growing magnitude. Recurrent upheavals in the international monetary scene are adversely affecting the availability oL funds for international organizations and the efficacy of their commitment.

It is the view of my delegation that future activities of UNEP should keep within its present framework, avoiding further expansion except where dictated by objective and compelling reasons.

Commission of The European Community

The Community countries, Mr. Presi- dent, perhaps as much as any other region of the world are conscious of the urgent need for programmes of energy conservation and, in general, for the need to fight against the waste of resources in all forms. We will make avail- able to UNEP the results of studies we have recently undertaken on the impact of alternative energy strategies, undertaken between now and the year 2000, on the environment. We are also in the process of establishing a high-level panel on low-energy growth which may help to identify realistic options for the Com- munity in this field. This too, like toxic chemicals, has been identified as a prior- ity area of concern for this session of the Governing Council and we look for- ward to learning much from observations which may be made in this debate and in the sessional committees.

I would like finally to speak of the need, which Dr. Tolba referred to in his introductory remarks, to take full account of environmental implications in all development planning. The EEC Council in May 1977 gave the Commis- sion a mandate to consider to what extent environmental impact assessment procedures might be introduced on a Community basis and this we are now doing. The EEC Council also referred to the need for the development cooperation efforts of the Community which are being undertaken, particularly within the framework of the Rome Convention, to take appropriate account of environmental consideration. We have been very interested to hear the comments that have been made on this subject in the course of this debate. It is clear that the view of the EEC Council is one which is amply shared by the participants in this meeting andwe hope to find appropriate means of carrying out the task with which we are charged. In this context, the studies on development and environment which are at present being made by UNEP will be of great interest and value.

60

Kenya:

Recognizing that development and environment are inter-twined calls for a new approach in planning and decision-making. More specifically it entails the incorporation of environmental parameters into the planning ma- chinery. This is best done by a multi- disciplinary and integrated approach in project planning and implementation. Such a concept will ensure that all the consequences of programmes both in the short-term and long-term are care- fully analysed and environmental hazards averted at the planning stage. In this respect, we would like to record our satisfaction with UNEP/UNCTAD joint programming activities aimed at harmo- nising environmental enhancement with development.

In the field of natural resources we strongly urge that ways and means must continue to be sought by which these resources can be exploited more ratio- nally. We do not advocate that they be preserved intact simply as sacrosanct monuments but that the rate exploita- tion must be balanced with the rate of replenishment, with possibly the latter rate excelling the former.

A recent Presidential ban has been imposed in Kenya on the sale of game trophies, to supplement an earlier Gov- ernment directive prohibiting all man- ner of hunting in this country. As these measures are really an attempt on our part at balancing short-term gains with long-term environmental objectives they have been described and criticised in some foreign quarters as harsh, inappro- priate and even unnecessary. The Kenya Government will continue to stand firm in the belief that our heritage must be preserved. We do realise that to get maximum benefits of these measures, our neighbours, near and far, should take similar or comparative measures to curb trade in game trophies. We also appeal to the appropriate UN Agencies to en- hance regional cooperation and coordi- nation in these matters pertaining to wildlife conservation.

We are also concerned that as of De- cember last year, 1977, voluntary contributions to the United Nations Habi- tat and Human Settlements Foundation were very small indeed; of all member countries of the U.N. System only 22 pledges had been received for the Foun- dation. This is probably understandable in view of the uncertainties of institutional arrangements for Human Settle- ments. Now that these uncertainties

have finally been resolved, it is hoped that member countries as requested by the General Assembly will give serious consideration to making their contributions as soon as possible to the Founda- tion without which it will be difficult to develop any meaningful programmes in this critical area. Indeed, according to the documentation before the Coun- cil, inadequacy of financial resources is the major constraint on the expansion of the programme operations.

We must, however, always bear in mind that UNEP leads the way in environmental matters through its catalytic and coordinative roles in the U.N. Sys- tem. UNEP as it were, is held responsible for achieving all-round co-operation of environmental activities throughout the U.N. family. It is our hope that the Executive Director will continue guiding us in defining more operationally, environmental objectives and also in formu- lating environmental programmes thus ensuring that the wishes of Governing Council are amply fulfilled:

Cyprus:

It is the view of this Delegation that perhaps the time has now come to re- consider the frequency of Governing Council Meetings. When this matter was discussed in the past, 2 or 3 years ago, we stood against any change from hold- ing Governing Council Meetings annually, but it is now our view that UNEP, six years after its establishment, has reached the point where bi-annual Governing Council Meetings are not only possible, but also desirable. We feel that with the constant relationship established between the Secretariat and Permanent Represen- ratives and Focal Points, it would be possible and advisable to have the Gov- erning Council meet every second year whilst Informal Consultations could be held during the year when the Govern- ing Council will not be meeting. This will relieve the enormous pressure on the Secretariat in having to prepare for the Governing Council every year. As we are making this suggestion, we also have in mind the institutional arrangements proposed for the Habitat - Centre for Human Settlements. It may well turn out that ultimately we will have a meeting of the Commission of the Habi- tat one year and of the Governing Coun- cil of UNEP the next year. If sufficient interest is shown by Member States to such an arrangement Cyprus will be pleased to support a relative draft decision.


Italy:

I wish here to point out that the Italian Government on this occasion stressed once again its particular interest for the role of UNEP in co-ordinating initiatives for the safeguard of the Medi- terranean Sea and the relative Plan of Action, but at the same time expressed its deep concern for the intention shown in recent meetings in Monaco for a pro- gressive disengagement of UNEP in that field.

The progress of the programme and the political conditions characterising that particular and delicate area would not advise, in our opinion, such disengagement which would entail negative consequences for the future of one of the most successful and concrete actions achieved by UNEP in its recent activities. This seems to be the correct interpreta- tion of the catalytic role of UNEP and could serve as a useful guideline for similar initiatives in other areas. A reduction in UNEP's assistance also in the financial field would no doubt hamper a harmo- nious development of the efforts per- formed by all interested Countries.

The Netherlands:

My delegation agrees with those who said that environment and development are inseparably interrelated. It shares the view of Minister Kiano of Kenya that environment policies should support development and that environment and development are no natural enemies.

We in the developed countries should be aware of the implications of our industrial development as well as of our environment policies for the Third Word. Industrialization and consumption pat- terns in the developed world can be con- ductive to pollution, waste and exhaus- tion of natural resources. In developing countries the deterioration of the environment, be it in the form of inadequate use of natural resources or otherwise, is often due to poverty, underdevelopment and lack of financial resources. The re- quired strict environmental measures in developed countries can create trade barriers, which would hamper exports from developing countries not yet in a position to introduce the same strict regime. We in the developed countries should be aware of these difficulties and assist in finding solutions for them.

It has always been our view that environmental protection should go hand in hand with and form an integral part of development. What is needed is an eco- logically sound management of the scarce


natural resources recognizing the outer limits and at the same time a more just and honest distribution of the social and economic benefits of our common heritage.

It is against this background that my delegation strongly supports the conti- nuation and further intensification of UNEP's activities in the field of the relation between environment and development.

My delegation strongly favours the establishment and further development

The Sixth Session in progress.

of international rules and regulations on environmental law.

We note with great satisfaction that the working group of experts on shared natural resources has been able to com- plete its difficult task with an agreement on the formulation of 15 draft principles. Although in our opinion the principles are still suceptible of improvement we agree with their present formulation. It is our hope that, from now on, the principles will be used by Governments as a guidance for the formulation and conclusion of agreements. Accordingly, my delegation would like to support what has been proposed by the Executive Director in his introductory statement, namely that the Governing Council re- commends to the General Assembly to adopt the principles of conduct and call upon states to respect them.

Federal Republic of Germany: We consider the Global Environmen-

tal Monitoring System to be one of the most important activities of UNEP. This system should continuously be improved.

The Expert Meeting on Climate Moni- toring which tool place in Geneva in April this year wets a very useful contri- bution to this end.

The development of new conventions in the sphere of environmental protection is necessary. For this reason we declared our willingness to support the adoption of a world-wide convention on migratory species of wild fauna. For this purpose, a conference of plenipoten- tiaries is expected to take place in Bonn by mid 1979.

Photo:WEB

However, the adoption and ratifica- tion of conventions is just one step. Their successful implementation is another and sometimes more difficult step. It depends on full compliance of states and organizations with obligations assumed. In his introductory statement, the Executive Director has referred to the difficulties in fulfilling the obligations he has assumed. According to Article XII of the Washington Conven- tion [on international trade in endan- gered species of wild fauna and flora] "a secretariat shall be provided by the Executive Director of the UNEP". This obligation was endorsed by the Govern- ing Council of UNEP at its 1st session [Decision No. 1 (I)].

The Governing Council at its 5th Ses- sion [Decision No. 86 (V)] further re quested the Executive Director "to provide further secretariat capabilities based on the analysis presented in the resolu- tion concerning the secretariat of the Convention adopted by the first Confer- ence of the Parties to the Convention". We regret that this decision was not satis-

61

factofily implemented by the Executive Director. Obviously, there is a problem that calls for discussion at this session.

USSR:

Considering the problems of environmental protection in the over-all context of the struggle for the normalization of political climate on our planet, we are of the opinion, that international organizations, including UNEP, can not stand aloof in the actions aimed to put an end to the arms race and, first and foremost, to the weapons of mass destruction, to prohibit the production of new types of weapons, to prevent the danger of an outbreak of a new war.

Speaking of the proposed automa- ticity in the financing of the Plan of Action to control desertification through international taxation and similar arrangements, we would like to emphasize the unacceptability of any such mecha- nism for the USSR. These proposals are inconsistent with the principle of volun-

tary funding of international projects which is well established in the UN system. Furthermore, the international taxation schemes proposed in the docu- ment GC. 6/9/Add./1 do not seem ef- fective. Additional funds for the environmental protection including desertification control should be provided by switching the resources that are wasted. By this waste of capital we mean first and foremost the enormous sums spent for the development and production of modern means of destruction and anni- hilation. As you know back at the XXVIIIth Session of the UN General Assembly the Soviet Union has suggested that an agreement should be reached to reduce by 10 per cent the military budget of States - permanent members of the UN Security Council and utilize the funds thus saved to provide assistance to developing countries in the resolving of many urgent economic problems including such goals as protection of the environment, control of desertification, etc.

[]

Material Remnants of Wars A survey of member Governments

showed no clear consensus among the relatively small number of States which responded regarding the feasibility and desirability of convening an intergovernmental meeting concerning material remnants of wars and their effect on the environment 1. The survey was taken by the Executive Director at the request of the Governing Council at its fifth session, which was acting in response to a similar UN General Assembly request.

An analysis of the 36 replies received and the views expressed during the fifth session indicate that Governments generally agreed that affected States should discuss the question of remnants of wars among themselves. There were,however, two divergent opinions on the nature of the forum for such a discussion and the propriety of UNEP's involvement. Some Governments felt that the problem of remnants of wars concerned a limited number of States and that an intergovernmental meeting of a global nature would not be an appropriate forum for discussing the issue. In their view it would be more desirable to have bilateral discussions between those states which were responsible for the presence of the particular remnants and those which had suffered or were suffering due to such remnants. Furthermore, doubts

62

were expressed concerning the propriety of UNEP involvement in a complex problem which involved several nonenvi- ronmental issues.

Other Governments took the view that, because the problem of the remnants of wars had global implications, an intergovernmental meeting of a global nature would be appropriate. Some of the same Governments felt that UNEP is qualified to play an active role in the search for solutions because of the environmental dimensions of the problem.

In the light of the small response, the even split of opinion of Governments which did respond, and recommendations of a previous UNEP study 2, the Executive Director recommended that UNEP:

(1) urge all Governments in posses- sion of appropriate technology for deal-

Shared Natural

ing with environmental hazards caused by remnants of wars to register these sources with UNEP's International Referral System for Environmental Information (IRS);

(2) continue to gather information on methods of dealing with environmental problems created by the material remnants of wars;

( 3 ) render assistance to Governments upon request in preparing their own programmes for the elimination of mines in their territories; and

(4) carry out and promote studies, in collaboration with other UN components and possibly drawing on meetings of experts, on the environmental effects of the material remna.nts of wars, particularly mines.

Discussions at the sixth session generally reiterated the arguments and diver- gence of opinion expressed in the survey. One representative suggested that the forthcoming special session of the UN General Assembly on Disarmament was the place for dealing with the preventa- tive aspects of the problem. Such aspects include the restriction or prohibition of certain uses of military explosives in order to eliminate or reduce the risk posed to civilians, and the establishment of mine field maps to facilitate removal of mines after the cessation of hostilities. Another delegate noted that an agreement to which his Government was party prohibited it from entering into any obligations in respect to claims related to the material remnants of wars, but that it was willing to provide information on means of dealing with environmental problems created by such remnants.

Delegations generally supported the recommendations of the Executive Director and on 15 May 1978 the Gov- erning Council took the action of re- questing him to proceed in accordance with the recommendations. []

1 UNEP/GC. 6/18. 2 UNEP/GC/103, paras. 26 and 27. See also

Environmental Policy & L., 3 (2) (1977) pages 63 - 64.

Resources

The final report of the Intergovern- mental Working Group of Experts on Natural Resources Shared by Two or More States 1, which includes the draft principles of conduct 2 adopted by the Group at its fifth session in Nairobi 3,

was discussed by the Governing Council on May 12 and 15, 1978. The report of the Group had been submitted to the sixth session with the recommendation that it be approved and forwarded to the next UN General Assembly. Delega-
