UNESCO. General Conference; 30th; Records ... - unesdoc - Unesco

the dark. And the truth is that we have sometimes leapt in the dark in the past. Therefore, yes, we are for change.
I think we also need caution when we consider change.
57.2 We applaud the initiative taken by New Zealand and Canada. I think this is very useful, for it has also
called our attention to another aspect of UNESCO that needs looking into, but very, very carefully. Nigeria sees
two separate issues: the idea of review and looking into the possibility of change is one thing and we will fully
cooperate with anybody who wants to do anything about that. But there is a second aspect, the question of
applicability: when should this be applied? I come from a football playing country - we love football in Nigeria -
and some of us would be astounded if suddenly, in the middle of a match, somebody picked up the goalposts and
put them somewhere else. What we are trying to say now, without getting into legalistic arguments for or against,
is that we invited candidates and we invited them, not under false pretences, but on perfectly constitutional terms:
they knew that they had six years to do the work in the first instance.
57.3 Now the point is this: while they may know about the likelihood of change, this likelihood was not a
reality, and at this moment is still not a reality. What Nigeria will take on board is the preoccupation of those who
have asked for change. But we would like to take this on board very seriously, and allow ourselves the necessary
time to study the question. In the meantime we should leave the status quo and allow a six-year mandate for the
new Director-General.
57.4 It should not be forgotten that at the end of six years you can decide that all the Director-General will
have is six years. If you are bold enough to do it, it is possible to stop him at the end of six years. But in the
meantime, let us study this very carefully. We have had less important matters laid before us and we have refused
to look into them because we have not had the time, we have not had the studies, we have not looked at all the
ramifications.
57.5 We must separate the idea of a review from the idea of when its outcome should be applicable. We think
fairness dictates that such a measure should not be applied until after a study has been carried out. Thank you
very much.
58. The PRESIDENT:
I should like to thank the representative of Nigeria. I now call upon the representative of Australia.
59.1 Mr SPYROU (Australia):
Madam President, thank you very much for the floor. I will be brief on an issue which seems rather clear
to me. I recall discussion in the Commonwealth group of the need to notify everybody well before the elections
were held so that they knew that they were running for a four-year term or a six-plus-two year term. There is no
question in my mind that all candidates knew. On the question of hard information, proof, that four-plus-four
years work, which is the scenario we support, this experiment has already been conducted, and I might say very
successfully, by the United Nations itself, and I would remark that the Secretary-General of the United Nations,
Mr Kofi Annan, is in fact on a four-plus-four year contract. We agreed to that then; we should agree to this now.
This is essentially a question of reform of carpe diem, of seizing the day, of - as our colleague from Nigeria said -
if we are bold, doing something.
59.2 If we are going to move the goalposts, if that is the will of this General Conference, let us do that before
the whistle has been blown to start the game. Let us do that right now. And if we do not do that, let us explain to
ourselves, as States parties to a convention and Members of this Organization, why we wish to deprive ourselves
of the sovereign right that we have to reform this Organization, to direct the Director-General, to focus our work
and to do what is necessary to make this place work the way we all want it to. Thank you.
60. The PRESIDENT:
I thank the delegate of Australia. The representative of Jamaica has the floor.
61. Ms CAMPBELL (Jamaica):
I am among those who think that a six-year tenure for the Director-General is too long, and the Jamaican
Government, too, is of this view and has instructed me to express its support for the Canadian proposal for a term
of four years with a possibility of a four-year extension. I think we have heard very cogent arguments by
Denmark, Trinidad and Tobago, and also Saint Lucia. I think the Constitution in its wisdom provided that
amendments should be sent to Member States a fairly long time in advance. And if a number of Member States
feel that the time is not long enough, one is tempted to ask: how long is a long enough time? Because probably if
the present period of notice for submitting a constitutional amendment is not thought to be long enough, what we
should also be considering is a change in the Constitution to extend the deadline for submitting such
576