IFCS/FSC/06.22 rev1
18 May 2006

67th Forum Standing Committee Meeting

27-29 March 2006

Budapest, Hungary

FINAL MEETING REPORT

1.0Opening

The IFCS President, S. Wilbulpolprasert, welcomed participants[1], and thanked the Government of Hungary for hosting the meeting. He noted that this is a particularly important meeting, as the Forum Standing Committee (FSC) must finalize the agenda and programme for Forum V.

Dr Gabor Kapocs, Deputy Secretary of State, Ministry of Health, welcomed participants on behalf of the Hungarian Government. He emphasized Hungary's commitment to chemical safety stressing the importance of prevention of negative impacts from the use of chemicals while enjoying their advantages. He paid tribute to the work and accomplishments of the IFCS and expressed high appreciation for the contribution that Prof Gyorgy Ungvary has made nationally, regionally and internationally.

2.0Adoption of Agenda

The proposed agenda (Document: IFCS/FSC/06.12 rev1) was adopted. The President requested J. Katima to serve as co-chair of the meeting and to chair a session should the President be unable to attend. J. Katima agreed to the arrangement.

3.0Acceptance of Record of 66th Meeting

The record of the 66th meeting (IFCS/FSC/06.11 rev1) was accepted.

4.0Forum V- Theme: Chemical Safety for Sustainable Development

4.1Local arrangements/organization - update

Chemol Travel, the conference organizer engaged by the Government of Hungary, made a presentation on the conference facilities, BudapestCongress & WorldTradeCenter, and provide information on conference hotel arrangements, local transportation and other related matters.

4.2Agenda and programme

The President stated that the FSC must consider and take final decisions on plenary/decision items during the meeting so that the preparations for Forum V could be successfully completed.The Secretariat reviewed the procedures and process for preparing the agenda for sessions of the Forum referring to the following IFCS documents:

  • IFCS Terms of Reference (IFCS/FORUM III/ 23w Annex 1)

14.Agenda

The Secretariat, in consultation with and under the guidance of the President of the Forum, shall prepare a Provisional Agenda for each session of the Forum, including a recommendation for the meetingrapporteur. Any participant in the Forum may request the Secretariat to include specific items in the Provisional Agenda prior to its distribution. The Provisional Agenda shall be communicated to allparticipants in the Forum at least two months before the opening of the session. After the communication of the Provisional Agenda and beforethe adoption of the Agenda by the Forum, participants may propose onlyitems of an important and urgent nature.

  • Forum Standing Committee Terms of Reference (IFCS/FORUM III/23w Annex5):

Role and responsibilities

The Forum Standing Committee will guide the process ofdevelopment of meeting materials and documents following the practice of lead country/sponsor/organization approach to preparing materials for agenda items.

The Secretariat also reviewed the types and structure of official Forum meeting documents that have been established by the FSC ( IFCS/FSC/01.63rev2).

4.2.1Plenary/Decision items

4.2.1.1Forum V Plenary Open Information/Discussion Sessionon Applying Precaution in the Context of Chemicals Safety( IFCS/FSC/06.08 rev2)

The Secretariat introduced the proposal providing background information on its origin. The idea was put forth by the Secretariat in response to the difficulties encountered in the SAICMnegotiations and the number of developing and CEIT country delegatesthat had contacted the IFCS Secretariat for information as they did not understand what the substantive issues and obstacles in the debate on precaution were that blocked agreement and action. The Secretariat explored the idea of an open information/discussion session on the topic at Forum V with a number of IFCS participants and receiving positive support prepared a proposal which the FSC had considered at its previous teleconference. The FSC had established a Working Group (Co-Chairs J. Stober and J. Tickner) to finalize the proposal and agreed to consider the final draft at its meeting in Budapest 27-29 March 2006.

J. Tickner provide information on the content of the proposal and the process the WG undertook to prepare the paper. He presented the rationale and proposed objectives and organization of the sessionhighlighting the major areas to be discussed and resolved.

FSC input on the "objectives" included the following points:

  • Relationship to science/based on scientific evidence - note science always contains a degree of uncertainty
  • Cost effective socio-economic considerations
  • Terminology - use the term "precaution" as it avoids the difficulties with the terminology of precautionary principle/approach
  • Major issue for trade unions who, recognizing the lack of understanding and clear explanations aim for agreement and common understanding
  • Address issue of what the difficulties are in the opening presentationsetting the scene but not as a legal analysis; address issue of complexity of topic but focus on how to take action
  • Avoid definitions/defining
  • Useful to have a dialogue how applied in practice and tools used; case examples would be constructive and a dialogue to overcome difficulties that block positive action
  • focus on commonalities in case studies
  • prepare global guidelines - harmonize use of precaution at global level
  • cite SAICM OPS text on risk reduction and ICCMM Resolution requestingthat IFCS play role in the implementation of SAICM

FSC provided the following input on the structure of the Forum V plenary session:

  • G. Karlaganis offered F. Perrez, Switzerlandto make the opening overview presentation
  • Include case study examples of lessons learnt when things do not go as planned (ref. Late lessons from early warnings: the precautionary principle 1896-2000 EEA Environment issue report No 22)
  • Examples helpful but not sufficient - focus on national implementation for better common understanding how to use
  • Reflect regional diversity and balance of issues

The FSC agreed to include the topic in the Forum V plenary agenda and to prepare two documents for the Forum V session: a Thought Starter based on the FSC meeting document and a Background Information document comprising a compilation of information, examples and tools submitted by countries and other stakeholders in response to a written request and interviews. The FSC agreed Goals/Objectives, workplan and potential session topics/case examples are presented in Annex 2. The WG was charged to undertake the preparation of the documents and the organization of the plenary session. Additional members for the WG should be communicated to the Secretariat by the end of the week.

4.2.1.2MDGs as levers for advancing international chemicals management

P. Silkavaute informed the FSC on the President's communications with Jeffry Sachs. Jeffry Sachs is unavailable to participate in Forum V or to contribute to the preparation of a meeting document of the topic of MDGs and chemicals management. The Secretariat raised the question whether or not given the short time remaining prior to Forum V if work could be undertaken to adequately prepare a substantive and valuable plenary item?She recalled previous FSC meeting discussions where the FSC had acknowledged the necessity of involving other experts. In the absence of a positive response from J. Sachs - can any of the FSC recommend another person to prepare the paper?

M. Dreyer offered to assume the leadership to prepare item for Forum V assuming the role previous undertaken by Matthias Kern. He expressed the view that the topic should be broader than MDGs as the indicators agreed for these are narrow and do not relate directly to health and environment.

FSC had an open discussion on the development of the topic and offered a number of suggestions including the following:

  • Focus should relate strongly to SAICM implementation and the statements and commitments of governments to integrate chemicals management into development assistance
  • Previous draft of paper had attempted and failed to quantify issues. Any revision should be more general.
  • Need for input from development assistance agencies
  • Linkages should be made to poverty reduction strategies

In response to a question, M. Gubb stated that the SAICM secretariat had not yet considered what guidance materials for countries may be provided on the issue.

The FSC agreed to include the topic "The Sound Management of Chemicals and Poverty Reduction" on the Forum V plenary agenda. The session will focus on:

  • How unsound use of chemicals undermines development goals
  • How sound management of chemicals contributes to fighting poverty

A WG chaired by M. Dreyer was established to prepare the Forum Thought Starter paper and organize the session. R. Visser agreed to provide contact names of IOMC partners at the World Bank and UNDP to M. Dreyer and inform other IOMC partners of an open invitation to participate if they so wished. FSC members were asked to forward to M. Dreyer and the Secretariat names of others interested and available to contribute to the WG.

4.2.1.3Consolidated International Data Base on Hazardous Properties of Substances

The Secretariat presented the background and status of discussion on the proposal for a Forum V plenary agenda item on the topic of a Consolidated International Data Base on Hazardous Properties of Substances. The organization of a side event to inform on existing and planned publicly available sources of information on hazard data/hazardous properties of substances is being considered. The side event is being considered to respond to the need for information on how existing efforts respond to the Forum IV recommendation. If present efforts do not completely respond to the recommendation - are there practical ways to suggest that the Forum IV recommendation be more fully addressed to meet the needs particularly of developing countries and CEIT? The Secretariat has proposed to the US EPA, a lead sponsor of the OECD Global HPV Portal Project, that they organize such a side event together with Dr Phil Wexler, NIH, USA who is organizing a side event on his project World Library of Toxicology, Chemical Safety and Environmental Health. J. Shoaff informed the FSC that he discussed the request with P. Wexler and P. Wexler was open to broadening the scope of his planned side event and will organize it to address the broader issues.

B. Erikson requested that the side event in addressing the important topics of availability and accessibility consider the availability of MSDS. MDSDs were often the only sources of information for workers and the quality of the information provided was in many cases questionable. Making them available would provide the opportunity to comment and hopefully result in improved quality. K. Kunzer was requested to provide information from industry on how MDSD are made available. S. Clarkson was requested to contact the UNECE GHS SC Canadian Chair for information on how the issue of MDSD, which are integral to GHS, are taken up in the GHS implementation efforts and how the topic is being addressed in the UNITAR/ILO GHS Capacity Building Programme. This information will be considered with the side event presentations.

The FSC agreed that this topic would be addressed in a side event to be organized by the USand not scheduled as a plenary decision item.

4.2.1.4Future of IFCS (IFCS/FSC/06.14)

G. Karlaganis presented the draft Thought Starter on the Future of the IFCS that had been prepared by the FSC WG. He informed the FSC on the process used to prepare the draft and reviewed the contents of the paper highlighting points and items he considered important. A draft decision for Forum V was presented in Annex 3 . The decision was drafted to include proposed revised terms of reference (TOR) to be prepared by the FSC. Other IFCS adopted guidelines concerning Officers, the FSC and NFPs as well as elections needed to be reviewed in conjunction with the discussion on revised TOR for IFCS. G. Karlaganis then led a section by section review of the document.

Sections 1., 2. and 3.1 received no comments and were accepted as drafted.

Section 3.2 Possible future role of IFCS

FSC members made the following observations and points:

  • consider in the future what would be discussed by IFCS, why these issues, how results used and added value of that result vs SAICM process or similar process in IGOs
  • issues identified in SAICM OPS and GPA for future discussion such as: PBTs, vPvBs, CMRs, heavy metals;
  • many issues in GPA are in need of further examination and discussion to support implementation
  • reports will be made available to ICCM and other international chemical regimes
  • Section 3.3 covers added value
  • ICCM held an open discussion and made a clear conscience decision (Resolution 3) to request IFCS to continue a unique role
  • concerning open brain storming process and connecting issues relevant to SAICM, need to consider efficiencies of procedures and back to back meetings are one option
  • paper should specify clearer link with SAICM process - issues where IFCS has a unique role to play;
  • period until ICCM2 is a critical time as the it is the period beginning SAICM implementation - SAICM ICCM intersessional work limited to regional meetings and Quick Start Programme (QSP) Executive Board Meetings - for at least next 3 years these are important reasons for IFCS to continue, need to keep stakeholders talking to each other which IFCS has a proven track record of achieving; should define role for this period and then judge future after ICCM2
  • consider options including sun setting IFCS
  • include what the ramifications of sun setting of IFCS would be i.e. what would not be done;

elements in section 3.2 are things not done elsewhere - if IFCS does not exist then these functions will not be done

  • openness of discussions, collective brainstorming among all stakeholders
  • open dialogue on difficult questions;
  • ability to get partners to sit together and hash out problems/issues
  • discussion not blocked by political positioning
  • opportunity to discuss emerging issues and trigger innovative ways of working at national and other levels
  • capability to create working groups to bring stakeholders together - only fora where this capability exists

M. Gubb provided the following information on SAICM intersessional work:

  • Regional group meetings - the secretariat envisions to have 2 rounds before ICCM2
  • Regional Focal Points - remains to be seen what can be made of network
  • QSP Executive Board - responsibilities are potentially wide ranging as the scope of the QSP
  • ICCM rules of procedure: open ended working group will be convened prior to ICCM2 to draft - probably 6 months before

The President observed that no members disagreed with or challenged the possible role presented in section 3.2.

Section 3.3 received no comments and was accepted as drafted.

Section 4.0 Actions requested by Forum V

G. Karlaganis requested FSC guidance on the structure and content of revised Terms of Reference (TOR) and related guidelines on Officers, FSC and NFP.

FSC made the following observations and points:

  • TOR must link to SAICM process
  • TOR must continue to provide existing flexibility in process and procedures
  • TOR para 1.4 should correspond to section 3.2 in Thought Starter
  • the type of credentials or accreditation of government representatives should be considered in light of the proposed future role and functions; one possibility was to establish a system similar to that used by OECD e.g. designation through UN Mission in Geneva
  • decision making process - should this remain the same
  • scheduling of sessions - include options, flexibility
  • streamlining and more efficient ways of working - less costs and bureaucracy - should be considered; e.g. smaller meetings, no officers
  • VPs important to maintain as link with region group members provides representation and legitimating mechanism
  • IFCS experience with ISG meetings - fundamental operating procedure of openness and transparency of meetings resulted in minimally smaller participation in meetings; resources required for preparations of ISG meetings were on the same scale as full Forum sessions
  • FSC - important component to drive process
  • recent experience showed scheduling of IFCS meetings back to back with other international meetings resulted in only small cost savings

On Wednesday morning, G. Karlaganis presented a revised draft Thought Starter and proposed revisions to the FSC Terms of Reference and Guidelines for NFP. No revisions were proposed for the guidelines on the Role of the President or Regional Roles and Responsibilities for Vice Presidents. The revision incorporated the comments and suggestions of FSC members. He highlighted the particular sections in the text where the link and relevance of the future IFCS work to the SAICM process was expressed. He did not see his mandate to include the option to sun set IFCS. His vision for the next 3 years was to continue with FSC teleconferences, convene 2 face to face FSC meetings and Forum VI in the late 3rd quarter or early 4th quarter of 2008 preferable in Africa. He noted the offer of Senegal at Forum IV to host Forum VI and offered the Geneva Conference Centre as an alternative location should it not be possible to convene Forum VI in Senegal or another African country. This work schedule would allow the Forum to uniquely contribute in the intersessional period before ICCM2 and to provide timely contributes to ICCM2. In response to the previous day's discussion, he proposed that the Forum V agenda include a discussion session on possible future topics for the Forum. He said the Swiss government would be happy to host one FSC face to face meeting during the period and the President agreed that Thailand would be willing to host a second FSC meeting in the Spring of 2008 outside Bangkok.

U. Schlottmann and other FSC members expressed support for the 3 year vision presented by G. Karlaganis. U. Schlottmann expressed the view that in the end ICCM and IFCS should come together, but time was needed to analyse how this should be achieved.

M. Gubb said that future ICCM meetings were proposed to be held back to back with IGO governing body meetings and the planning for ICCM2 was proceeding for it to be held back to back with the World Health Assembly in 2009. He observed that it may be more practical to schedule FVI in the 3rd or 4th quarter of 2008 as suggested by G. Karlaganis. The President asked the FSC if could accept G. Karlaganis's proposal for Forum VI. No objections were raised.

Concerning the sustainability of financing for IFCS, FSC members made the following observations: