This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

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