About Me

My photo
Live for today but work for everyone's tomorrow! Any views expressed here are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of any organisation/institution I am affiliated with.

Friday 28 October 2016

IWC 66 Friday Part one

Early morning in the Great Hall of IWC 66
In which many things are agreed.

Welcome to the last day of IWC 66, 

It is sunny again come the dawn but, even before the sun has risen, EU delegates and others have moved to their various coordinations.

We open in plenary with the report of the Finance and Administration Committee (F&A) chaired by Ryan Wulff.

He comes to the microphone to speak about IWC Communications – its future work plan is endorsed.  and then we hear that more IWC materials from the extensive archive are to be put on line.

Simon Brockington, the IWC Executive Secretary, tells us there will be a feedback-form from this meeting which he will take very seriously.

Guidelines for the use of voluntary funds during the intersessional periods are discussed. These funds average £300,000-500,000 annually. There was discussion about the value of the British Pound. Contingency plans are being put in place (regrettably for the IWC and not the UK).

Changes to the Commission’s rules of procedure are approved. This includes the proposal that responses to proposed resolutions should be circulated.

Argentina notes that Greenland’s takes when they did not have a quota were regarded as an infraction by the BAG [Buenos Aires Group of countries]. This must not set a precedent.

Commission Chair Bruno says we are all agreed that we must do everything to ensure that this does not happen in the future. Can we eliminate the square brackets? There is silence and we can….

But Argentina asks for clarification on the matter of Greenland’s whaling. Would there be a statement in the record?

Denmark: In relation to the remarks just made – she points to the report of the Working Group on Operational Effectiveness to which this matter had been referred. They replied that they did not have the expertise to look at the matter.

The USA Commissioner says that these concerns have already been recorded in the record. Do we need to repeat this here.

The Chair says there is no simple way out – this has been discussed in other parts of our meeting and we need to ensure that this shall not happen again. The remarks were included in the report. Can we move on?

Argentina nods.

Anything more under agenda 19.2.2?  The report is endorsed and he thanks Belgium.

We move to the report of the group set up during this Commission meeting to work on options for governments of limited means. Moronuki of Japan is thanked for his work in guiding the group.

Guidance on the management of the IWC website is presented.

We move on through the report. The financial statement for the year will be affected by the decision of the Commission to buy its HQ in Cambridge, UK. The general fund has a balance of £1.1 million. There is mention here of accrued dilapidations. [I think I may have a touch of this.]

We move to the consideration of the SC budget.

There are square brackets around the costs of the review of special permits [scientific whaling] meetings. Japan would like these brackets removed. New Zealand says that she and Australia in the spirit of cooperation shown around the special permits review process are happy to have these removed. [The issue here was a debate about whether the proponents of special permits should pay the costs of review meetings.]

Two initiatives – strandings and bycatch are noted – no funding is allocated. These items will have to be met by voluntary funding. There is a pause. No one volunteers any money…. We move on.

A vice chair for F&A is sought. No volunteers rush to the microphone.

The last agenda item here is the Scientific Committee working methods…. Does the Chair of the Scientific Committee have anything to add. No she does not and there are no comments.

Two new intersessional working groups are struck – one on special permits and the other to appoint the review team that will deal with the IWC governance review agreed yesterday.

New Zealand, Australia, Costa Rica and the USA join the second working group.

We move back to the resolution on governments of limited means … or do we. Apparently this matter is not ready to be voted on and Japan asks if we can return to this after coffee break. There is a new version online Doc 66/13 REV.

We return to the vaquita resolution [passed yesterday]. Chair Bruno asks if  the list of the countries that did not block consensus but wanted to make a statement is ready. Yes says Japan.

The Chair says others may wish to comment on this, so we shall keep it open.

We return to the next steps of the ASW working group. The Chair asks if a way have been found go forward.  The USA says the four ASW countries and others have discussed this. The way forward with the goal of improving process – the commission endorsed the process as described in table two of the report; the pilot use of the table is welcomed with the following the changes – and he lists these and these include encouragement of additions to the voluntary fund.

Bruno says there have been extensive discussions on this, are there any comments? Can we endorse?

Japan speaks to the vaquita issue again. He offers to save time by reading out the short statement.

Bruno says please go ahead but not to confuse the issue just presented – we have closed the issue presented by the USA on ASW.

Japan offers to read the statement from countries and he does at speed. He lists the countries that have signed on which include Antigua and Barbuda and Kenya and many others. The Statement says something like  - all countries listed are deeply concerned and associate with the concerns raised by other countries and hope that this species will recover. The ICRW has authority over 13 species of great whale and no authority over small cetaceans. The resolution is only of limited and symbolic significance to the vaquita and provides no further protection. [This will presumably appear on the 
IWC website in due course.]

Japan says that he hopes this makes things clear.

Several small cakes and much intense negotiation around tables with small cakes on follows.... also there is some fruit.

We return to the issue of Japan’s request for a discussion around STCW [Small Type Coastal Whaling] – this seems to revolve around putting comments from countries on a website. [Perhaps an app could be developed?]

Japan says that he would like a virtual exchange in a more structured manner with some limitations of intervention – no sudden posting of documents – we need some more time and he will continue to talk to interested people about how we might do this.

We move on/back to agenda 14.1 – no we don't, New Zealand needs more time.

Mr Moronuki’s drafting group had finished Doc 13 REV 2: Resolution on the Creation of a Fund to “Strengthen the Capacity of Governments of Limited Means to Participate in the Work of the IWC”.

However, he says, with a smile, others may have other view and we may like to hear from them.

Togo tells us this is important.

St Vincent and the Grenadines says it is unfortunate that we have to have a debate …. Small countries should not be treated in this matter…. He also mentions colonialism and neo-colonialism  and that we are the drums of Africa, and asks for support in good faith.

Colombia speaks for the BAG and thanks all for the hard work on this. They still have some concerns and would like to continue work on this intersessionally.

Chair Bruno says he hears the request to work on, but how would Japan like to continue. He says he hopes or consensus at this meeting but he hears different views, he would like to know how to proceed from this point from some of the members. He repeats – he hopes for consensus at this meeting.

 Bruno says so there are some slight differences  but based on the huge progress made this week can we adopt by consensus. If no one takes the floor can it be adopted –REV2 would be adopted … 
Argentina?

Argentina – as Colombia said a few moments ago, we still have questions and I reiterate that this commission should continue work intersessionally so we can clear up some of the items and achieve consensus.

Bruno – thank you it is quite clear that the version presented will not get to consensus. Japan a vote or more intersessional work.

Japan: It is unfortunate, but we will go to the vote.

Netherlands (for the EU) asks for the floor. He requests ten minutes for coordination.

Bruno says We have had a week to look at this, we prefer to proceed. 

Simon is returned to the microphone and reminds us how to vote – Panama has had its voting rights returned.

The first country called will be Belgium.

Votes are sampled here:

Belgium – abstains –as do all EU nations, including the UK, and likewise Mexico, Monaco, Switzerland, USA and the members of the Buenos Aires Group.

South Africa, Kenya and many other developing nations support as does New Zealand and Australia.

With 30 in favour; 0 opposed and 31 abstentions, it is passed.

Explanation of vote follows:

Japan says this is important for all of us. We do recognise there are questions and clarifications required.

The Netherlands for the EU says that they wanted this resolution adopted by consensus and since no time was given for coordination they had to abstain.

New Zealand voted in favour because they believe in the full participation of all. They would like to see the fund used to build participation in the SC and CC and to facilitate [sponsored individuals] taking on chair and vice chair roles of working groups. 

Australia says - we voted yes on the merits of the resolution. We note that it allows further review when implemented.

USA associates with Australia and NZ and supports implementation – we did think it was important to adopt by consensus. We are fully supportive of the idea of this fund and that it provides assistance to these countries.

Argentina does not oppose taking the necessary steps to help here – our abstention was because there are still some doubts that exist. There seems to be conflict with 3.5 of the convention. We would have preferred intersessional work. So we abstained.Adoption of Committee Reports.

Bruno says we have to adopt reports, so I will go one by one.

First the report of the Scientific Committee...

Denmark offers a 'small comment of a general nature', we note some inconsistencies in the ways in which interventions are reported. This does not stop adoption – we wish to see government interventions reflected before observer interventions.

Bruno this is probably something that can be done.

The SC report [which contains no interventions by observers] is adopted.

Whale Killing Methods etc. Report and all its recommendations – adopted.

Infractions Sub- Committee Report and all its recommendations  - adopted
Budgetary Sub-Committee Report and all its recommendations– adopted
Conservation Committee Report – including recommendations on new workstreams on strandings and bycatch workstreams - adopted
Aboriginal SW Sub-Committee report and all its recommendations– adopted
Finance and Administration sub-committee Report and all its recommendations– adopted

[This little process is important because it means all those recommendations that have been worked on so hard are now safely in the bag unless, of course, they have been modified or deleted.]

We take an early break for lunch and will return for elections.  


But first we have some information from Simon Brockington, Executive Secretary of the IWC – there is a document being produced that will give an overview of the results of the Commission meeting and this will be available soon for approval. 

[Well if they had told me earlier I might not have had to bother with this blogging malarkey!] 


The British Commissioner's meerkat mascots (this is mum and dad meerkat)

No comments:

Post a Comment