 |
Second meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Rotterdam
Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain
Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade
Rome, Italy | 27-30 September 2005
| 
|
| |
|
|
|
Nigerian Minister of Environment Addresses COP-2
Noting that African countries are net importers of chemicals, Nigeria's
Minister of Environment, Iyorchia Ayu, called for an effective financial
mechanism with new and additional financial resources which are
sustainable, predictable, and sufficient. He said such mechanism would
provide the technical skills and infrastructure needed for African
countries to handle chemicals safely.
|
|
|
Wednesday, 28 September
|
|
Plenary
|
Delegates met in Plenary during the morning to start deliberations on,
among others: report of the open ended ad-hoc group on non-compliance,
proposals by the CRC to COP including risk evaluation and clarification
on the meaning of trade names, and implementation of the Convention.
In the afternoon the plenary addressed: financial report by the
Secretariat, the programme of work, the 2006 budget and options for a
financial mechanism. In the evening, contact groups on non-compliance
and budget met.
|
Anne O'Toole, Canada, said risk evaluations from other Multilateral
Environmental Agreements (MEAs) were useful,
but that it was important for countries to indicate prevailing national
conditions.
|
Kyunghee Choi, Republic of Korea, supported the use of risk evaluation
from other MEAs for the purposes of the Rotterdam Convention.
|
George Krhoda, Kenya, warned against repeating assessments done under
other MEAs.
|
Yue Ruisheng, China, said the Convention requires that risks be
evaluated in light of prevailing national conditions.
|
Adama Cham, the Gambia, said that parties were not equal with respect to
global risks.
|
Mohammed Khashashneh, Jordan, said that since the Montreal Protocol and
the Stockholm Convention are milestones in the integrated management of
chemicals at the international level, their work on risk evaluations
should not be repeated by the Rotterdam Convention.
|
Michael Morelli, CropLife International, stressed the need to clarify
whether the use of "trade names" was intended to refer to a brand name,
or a company name.
|
Barbara Dinham, Pesticide Action Network, suggested governments indicate
not only reduction of a product's availability or of its uses, but also
the reduction of exposure to people or the environment.
|
Arturo Correa, Chile, supported the EU's proposal that the Secretariat's
paper on DGD scope investigate alternative ways to make information
available other than including them in DGDs.
|
Yun Zhou, Secretariat, presented a report on the activities of the
Rotterdam Convention Secretariat.
|
Jill Hanna, EU, looked forward to pursuing the "nitty-gritty" of budget
details in the budget contact group.
|
Georg Karlaganis, Switzerland, said its contribution to the voluntary
special trust fund was earmarked, and encouraged parties to submit
projects focusing on synergies among the Stockholm, Rotterdam and
Basel Conventions.
|
Mona Aarhus, Norway, said keeping the status quo of funding was not
acceptable.
|
Marcus Abbo, Cameroon, asked that the contact group on financing take
into account the views of developing countries.
|
Bademba Sow, Guinea, said that maintaining the status quo of funding
would lead the Convention up a blind alley.
|
|
|
The Contact Group on Non-Compliance, chaired by Denis Langlois, Canada,
discussed the non-paper on non-compliance.
|
The Contact Group on Finance, chaired by Jean-Louis Wallace, Canada,
addressed: the budget increase; FAO's contribution in kind, namely
three Secretariat staff posts; and the amount of the capital reserve
for the 2005-2006 biennial budget and the costs of the proposed
Compliance Committee.
|
|
