TL: SOUTH PACIFIC COMMISSION SO: Greenpeace New Zealand (GP) DT: 1991 Keywords: politics south pacific new zealand gp greenpeace background / The South Pacific Commission (SPC) is an international organisation which functions as an advisory and consultative body on regional development and technical matters relating to social, economic and cultural development. The SPC's broad areas of interest are: Work Programme includes: Tuna Billfish Assistance Programme, Women's issues, Health and Sanitation, Agricultural Development, Plant Protection, Community Education and Training, Rural Development (including energy), and Media training. Members of the SPC are: American Samoa Northern Mariana Australia Islands Cook Islands Palau Federated States of Micronesia Papua New Guinea Fiji Pitcairn Islands French Polynesia Solomon Islands Guam Tokelau Kiribati Tonga Marshall Islands Tuvalu Nauru Vanuatu New Caledonia Wallis and Futuna New Zealand United Kingdom Niue United States Western Samoa The area covered by the SPC Programme and activities includes the Exclusive Economic Zones of the 22 Pacific island country members and amounts to about 30 million square kilometres. Mandate - An Agreement establishing the SPC was signed in Canberra in 1947 by the six colonial powers in the Pacific at that time, ie, Australia, New Zealand, France, the Netherlands, the UK, and the USA. The purpose, at the time, was to ensure economic and social stability and good relations among governments. As Pacific Island countries achieved independence, they joined the SPC as members in their own right, gradually changing the composition and outlook of the SPC. The Netherlands withdrew its membership when it ceased to administer its former colony of New Guinea. Over the years the independent countries of the South Pacific moved towards establishing their own regional body to deal with political matters and to provide a forum where they could tackle common problems from a regional perspective. Membership would be limited to the independent countries of the South Pacific, including Australia and NZ. They did not want the metropolitan powers fiddling in their affairs. In 1971 the South Pacific Forum was established to fulfil this role. The role that the SPC plays in the region has over the years changed and its influence diminished. The establishment of the Forum Fisheries Agency (FFA) 1979, has meant that the fisheries work done in the region (part of which is carried out by the SPC e.g. tuna and billfish assessment programme) is more and more being brought under the responsibility of the FFA. The South Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP) established in 1980, was established in partnership with the SPC, the SPF, UNEP and ESCAP. It was housed and for all intents and purposes considered a programme initiated within the SPC in Noumea. In 1991 SPREP was granted independent status and now reports to the SPC and SPF and in 1992 moved out of the SPC to W. Samoa. So the role of the SPC has declined as its functions have slowly moved under separate regional organisations, run and directed by the Pacific Island countries themselves. The South Pacific Conference is the annual meeting of SPC members to examine and adopt the SPC's work programme. In between full Conference meetings the CRGA - Committee of Representatives of Governments and Administrations (government officials), meet biannually to consider and recommend a budget and draft work programme for the SPC. Structure - Secretary General is the Director of Programmes with a minimum term of 3 years and maximum of 6 years. Position as of June 1992 is filled by Jacques Iekawe from New Caledonia. The Head of the South Pacific Commission attend the South Pacific Forum each year as an observer and presents a report. In the past it used to also report on behalf of SPREP but since 1990 the Head of SPREP also attends and makes their own separate report. For the past four years Greenpeace has had observer status at the South Pacific Conference meetings. Guam, who is a member of the SPC and for which the SPC probably represents the most "political" body it is a member of in the region. SOUTH PACIFIC FORUM The South Pacific Forum was legally established by an Agreement in 1973. It was then known as the South Pacific Bureau of Economic Cooperation (SPEC). This name was changed and a new Agreement signed in 1991 establishing the Forum as the South Pacific Forum Secretariat. The 1991 agreement states the purpose to be " to facilitate, develop and maintain cooperation and consultation between member governments on economic development, trade, transport, tourism, energy, telecommunications, legal, political, security and other matters as the Forum may direct." The South Pacific Forum (SPF) is the annual gathering of the Heads of Government of the independent and self-governing countries of the South Pacific. (see description below of Forum meeting). There were seven founding members in 1971 and now in 1992 there are 15. The members of the SPF includes: Papua New Guinea Cook Islands Republic of the Marshall Islands Solomon Islands Federated States of Micronesia Fiji Tonga Kiribati Tuvalu Nauru Vanuatu Western Samoa Niue Australia New Zealand The formation of the SPF arose from dissatisfaction among South Pacific members of the South Pacific Conference, that politics could not be discussed at the SP Conference. Although the membership of Australia and New Zealand was initially resisted by some Pacific Island countries, they were invited to join, as their cooperation and assistance is considered essential for changing the trade patterns and economic dependence of Pacific Island countries. There is a Secretary General of the Forum Secretariat that is appointed by the Forum for a term of three years. S/he is eligible for reappointment for one consecutive term. The Secretary General communicates with countries through the Ministers of Foreign Affairs. The Secretary General manages the Forum Secretariat. The current Secretary General is Ieremia Tabai (ex President of Tabai) and very sympathetic to environment/development issues. The functions of the Secretariat staff are: a. prepare studies to promote opportunities for a modification of present trade patterns in the South Pacific region and between the region and other countries. b. prepare studies on political, security and legal issues affecting the Forum. c. carrying out investigations in connection with development of free trade among the Forum Island Countries. d. prepare studies of the development plans and policies of member govts. in an effort to promote cooperation in the region; and investigate the scope for regional development planning aimed among other things at a rationalisation of manufacturing and processing industries and the achievement of economies of scale in certain regional enterprises. e. be an advisory service on technical assistance, aid and investment finance, f. undertake studies of regional transport, as necessary, and help coordinate action in this sector g. advice on regional trade and tourism h. provide means of communication between Forum countries on the regions import requirements. i. act as clearing house for info. on trade, production and economic development in the region and outside j. carry out research and statistical studies on production and trade on a continuing basis. k. establish means for the collection and dissemination of info and statistics. 1. cooperate and coordinate work with international and regional organisations The Secretariat maintains strong links with other organisations and regional agencies through the Forum Institutional Network. Its focus is the South Pacific Organisations Coordinating Committee (SPOCC) an annual meeting of heads of all regional organisations. The Forum Secretariat has an Executive Committee known as the Forum Officials Committee and is composed of one representative of each of the members. This committee gives general policy directions to the Secretary General and makes reports to the Forum. They approve the interim budget for the Secretariat. The Committee meets prior to the Forum in a meeting known as the Pre- Forum Officials Meeting. They go through the agenda for the Forum Meeting and deal with a substantial part of it. They make reports to their heads of State who make the decisions in the Forum. However, many issues are worked out at the pre-forum officials meeting. FORUM MEETINGS Structure - The Forum meetings actually encompass three meetings: a Pre-Forum Officials Meeting, the Heads of Governments Meeting, and a Post-Forum Dialogue with trade and development partners from outside the region (France, UK, USA, Canada, Japan, China and the European Community). Mandate - No formal rules or international agreements govern SPF activities, membership, conduct or functions. Decisions are reached by consensus rather than by voting. The Forum officials meeting is approx. five days compared to the Forum, which usually lasts for two. The time of the Forum officials meeting is much more low key and once all the agenda has been worked through the officials prepare reports for the arrival of their Heads of State. The Heads of all the regional organisations e.g. SPREP, FFA, PIDP, SPC, SOPAC attend the Officials meetings and the Forum as observers and also present a report. No other observers are allowed. Earlier Forum meetings focused on regional trade and economic issues which continue to be major areas of concern. In the late 1970s emphasis shifted to transport and fisheries leading to the establishment of the Pacific Forum (shipping) Line and the Forum Fisheries Agency. Since the 1980s political issues such as the decolonisation of New Caledonia, have received more attention. Other Forum achievements include the creation of a united Pacific presence and opinion block at international fora, most recently in climate change convention negotiations and input into the UNCED process. In 1989 environmental issues and their impacts on regional economies emerged as a focus of real concern at the SP Forum. The impacts of climate change, and sea level rise were stressed by several Pacific Island countries most likely to be affected. The Tarawa Declaration on driftnetting was produced and was the forerunner to a regional ban on driftnets. In 1990 the Forum saw a heated debate on the Johnston Atoll Chemical Agents Disposal System. Australia supported the US line, arguing that it should be seen as a positive step in the disarmament of chemical weapons rather than in an environmental context. The Pacific countries stood their ground and the debate lasted for the whole day. The Communique, the Forum's statement at the end of the meeting, stressed that it should not become a permanent disposal facility for the world's toxic waste. The Australians position on Johnston only served to reinforce some Pacific countries notion that they are playing big brother in the region. Officials of both Australia and NZ are both reluctant to be too pushy at the Forum but their leaders are often the opposite. The 1990 Forum also decided to look at ways to strengthen the South Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP) and invited SPREP to report annually to the Forum. It also called on industrialised nations to institute obligatory greenhouse emission reduction standards. The 1991 Forum expressed continued opposition to French nuclear testing and agreed to look at an expanded programme of opposition to it; it repeated its call for industrialised countries to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and for an international convention enforcing emission reductions; support for decisions made at the last London Dumping Convention meeting. SPREP was also invited to act as the Secretariat to the Forum on environment issues. The Forum Secretariat in 1991 hired an environmental liaison officer (David Esrom, Vanuatu) , and the officer that they had hired to deal with climate change (Chalapan Kaluwin) was seconded to SPREP. The Forum can make political decisions and statements and take action on many of the environmental issues, such as nuclear testing, climate change and Johnston Atoll. SPREP on the other hand is prevented from taking too radical a line on such issues as climate change and nuclear testing due to the fact that their membership includes the US and France. The Forum has enormous strength because of the degree of regional cooperation that exists on issues that are perceived as regional threats. They number 15 countries, which at an international level counts. The Chair of the meeting is the Head of the host country. The leaders that participate/dialogue with the Post Forum Dialogue partners include the Chair of the Forum past, the present chair and the future chair. Important regional agreements negotiated by the SPF include: The Forum Fisheries Agency Convention, based on conserving and deriving optimum economic benefit from marine resources; the US/Forum Fisheries Agency Pacific Tuna Treaty, providing for payment by the American Tuna Association for the right to catch tuna in the EEZs of FFA member countries; the Convention for the Prevention of Fishing with Long Driftnets in the South Pacific (Wellington Convention), banning driftnets in Forum EEZs; the South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone Treaty, affirming the Forum's stand against nuclear testing and dumping of radioactive waste at sea with the region. Although.the USSR and China have signed the Protocols open to them, France, the US and the UK have not. Greenpeace has attended South Pacific Forum meetings as accredited media, for the last four years. This has allowed valuable access to designated media that is "around" during the time of the Forum. We have for most years been the only ngo that attends any of the Forum meetings and have had reasonable access to the officials and some Heads of Govt. Pacific govts. are not used to ngos lobbying, it is not a common activity for ngos in the Pacific and it takes some care and sensitivity to do it without creating a backlash. We are now a fairly accepted presence during the time of the Forum and in some cases are sought out for information. The role of media we have to be very careful about as we do not want to create competition or bad feelings amongst the rest of the media. THE SOUTH PACIFIC REGIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMME The South Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP) is the principal regional environment programme in the South Pacific. It is carried out on behalf of the 22 Pacific Island members of the South Pacific Commission, with the support of the other SPC members: Australia, NZ, France, the UK and the USA. The programme is a recognition of the need for a comprehensive and coordinated approach to South Pacific environment problems. The area covered by SPREP is the same as that of the South Pacific Commission. Mandate - SPREP represents the first joint SP Commission/SP Forum cooperative programme. It was established in 1978 under the auspices of the United Nations Environment Programmers Regional Seas Programme and the South Pacific Commission, with the support of the Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP). In 1982 a Conference on the Human Environment in the South Pacific provided an integrated picture of environmental problems in the region as well as an Action Plan (AP) for future SPREP activities. The legal framework of the AP was developed through several meetings of legal and technical experts from the South Pacific Region. In 1986 The Convention for the Protection of the Natural Resources and Environment of the South Pacific (otherwise known as the SPREP or NOUMEA CONVENTION) was adopted and finally ratified in July 1990 by 10 countries: Australia, Cooks, FSM, Fiji, France, Marshall Islands, PNG, NZ, Solomon Islands and Western Samoa. The Convention is basically an agreement covering marine dumping. It covers the 200 miles EEZs but not the archipelago waters of: American Samoa, Australia (East Coast and Islands to eastward including Macquarie) Cook Islands Federated States of Micronesia Fiji French Polynesia Guam Kiribati Marshall Islands Nauru New Caledonia and Dependencies New Zealand Niue Northern Mariana Islands Palau Papua New Guinea Pitcairn Islands Solomons Islands Tokelau Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu Wallis and Futuna Western Samoa This represents yet again a different grouping of countries than the membership of SPREP and the area in which the SPREP AP is implemented. The Convention obliges Parties to protect the ocean from pollution arising from sea or land based activities, atmospheric discharges, storage of toxic wastes, nuclear testing, and mining and coastal erosion. Two protocols are attached to the Convention: a Protocol Concerning Cooperation in Combating Pollution Emergencies in the South Pacific Region; and a Protocol for the Prevention of Pollution of the South Pacific Region by Dumping. No State may become a contracting party to the convention without also becoming a party to at least one protocol. The secretariat functions of the Convention were delegated from the SPC to the SPREP secretariat at the 1991 IGM, until such time as a Treaty establishing SPREP as a separate legal identity is negotiated. Structure - The governing body of SPREP is the Intergovernmental Meeting (IGM) made up of delegates from each of the 27 member countries, rather than to the Parties to the SPREP Convention because not all member countries are signatories to the SPREP Convention. The IGM meets annually to consider project proposals submitted under the SPREP AP by member govts. The SPREP AP was reviewed in 1990 and a new one submitted to the 1992 ministerial level meeting in 1992 for approval. The AP covers a broader range of issues than the Convention. The AP is divided into 10 areas of work: Conservation of biological diversity; global change; environmental management and planning; coastal management of pollution; planning and response to pollution emergencies; environmental education and training; environmental information; regional environmental concerns. SPREP Secretariat - SPREP decisions and programmes are implemented by the SPREP Secretariat, which has been relocated from Noumea, New Caledonia in facilities shared with the SPC to Western Samoa. This was agreed at the 1991 IGM and represented quite a coup for the Pacific countries. Having the SPREP located inside the SPC meant that its identity was subsumed by the SPC. Politically Noumea is a difficult place for a major regional organisation to be located and create its own credibility in the region. The 1991 IGM also agreed to developing a separate legal agreement to establish SPREP as an entity distinct from the SPC and a comprehensive independent financial system is also being developed. The secretariat is projected to grow from 12 in mid- 1991 to just over 30 in the course of 1992. Other important functions carried out by the SPREP Secretariat include: identification of experts and institutions with expertise to assist Pacific Island countries in solving environmental problems, continual monitoring of the environment for the early detection of potential problems, facilitating information exchange between member governments, developing regional expertise through training, and providing secretariat function for the implementation of the SPREP and Apia Conventions. SPREP provides a regional structure within which international organisations can contribute to environmental protection in a coordinated way, however the number of NGOs working in the region and the current capacity of SPREP means that although communication is good amongst the ngos and SPREP it is impossible for SPREP to coordinate all environmental work in the region. The funding of SPREP comes from its members and increasingly from MDBs such as the Asian Development Bank, the Global Environment Facility (GEF) from which they received in 1991 $10 million for biodiversity work. SPREP has good relations with ngos and is interested in developing cooperative relationships with them. SPREP prepares a Work Programme for endorsement at the IGM. It reports in an information capacity to the SPF and SPC. Because the membership of SPREP includes the US and France, on issues such as climate change, Johnston Atoll and French nuclear testing, SPREP's position is often weaker than the majority of members would like. It is difficult therefore for SPREP to give clear directions in terms of policy to the SPF on these two issues. They are not a political body, but deal with issues that are often politically charged. The relationship and communication between the SPF and SPREP gets clearer and better daily. SPREP has a clear role in coordinating and providing information on environmental issues to Forum members and the Forum members then can take the political action, if necessary to address the issues. SPREP is the coordinating body for climate change work in the region. They have coordinated the region's attendance at international climate change meetings but when it comes to developing policy lines-to take to the negotiation table it is the SPF, or national govts. if anybody that will give direction to Pacific members of the Association of Small Island States (AOSIS) The 1991 SPF request for SPREP to develop an expanded programme of action addressing the nuclear testing issue in the region, has resulted in SPREP visiting Paris and now preparing together with the environmental officer at the SPF a monitoring programme at Moruroa. Greenpeace has had observer status at SPREP IGMs since 1986 and at the first Meeting of Parties to the Convention held in 1991.